Felix Vallotton Verdun 1917
Big as it gets
NOW – Trump Teases One of the “Most Important Announcements in Years” — Coming Within Days
Something massive is coming and President Trump just dropped the teaser live on camera.
During a sit-down with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump hinted at a historic announcement… pic.twitter.com/quurkXuZaJ
— Overton (@overton_news) May 6, 2025
Carney
NEW: “You’re a Transformational President” — Canadian PM Stuns Media With Praise for Trump After Months of Anti-Trump Rhetoric
Turns out it was all campaign talk.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney just did a complete reversal by changing his tone on President Trump during a… pic.twitter.com/QxL3btzz9k
— Overton (@overton_news) May 6, 2025
WATCH: Trump just gave the Canadian Prime Minister a BRUTAL reality check in front of the world.
"We don't really want cars from Canada, and we put tariffs on cars from Canada, and at a certain point, it won't make economic sense for Canada to build those cars. And we don't want… pic.twitter.com/ppXO9ItPxM
— George (@BehizyTweets) May 6, 2025
Donald Trump pulled out a masterclass in trolling today.
Knowing Mark Carney is 100% woke,
Smashes WOKISM for 4 MIN straight.
Right to Carney’s face.Trump knew exactly what he was doing.
And Carney looked like he’d swallowed a lemon. pic.twitter.com/wcpu0m7UOC— Marc Nixon (@MarcNixon24) May 6, 2025
Ritter
https://twitter.com/SMO_VZ/status/1919507173295718879
Orban
❌ Leaving the EU? Not a chance.
⛔ United States of Europe? Not our path.
🇪🇺 We’re taking over Brussels w/ @PatriotsEU. pic.twitter.com/K6VLaf9Exq— Orbán Viktor (@PM_ViktorOrban) May 6, 2025
Levine
Bye loser ✌️ https://t.co/jEQQ7gp8Ak
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) May 6, 2025
Sharia
Ban Islam in Europe. Worth listening to. Swedish MP Beatrice Timgren: "Islamism poses a direct threat to women in Europe, and it’s time we took this threat seriously. We need to stop importing women’s oppression; stop normalizing and legitimizing this anti-woman religion.” pic.twitter.com/OihGX4wJXj
— RadioGenoa (@RadioGenoa) May 6, 2025
Fico
https://twitter.com/GlobalDiss/status/1919724917135646990
Catherine Austin Fitts talked about it
Former Bush aide claims $21 Trillion has been spent on infrastructure & construction of around 170 major underground establishments, some verging on the size of a small City, across America & even under the sea.
Here a truck driver films himself entering & driving through one In… pic.twitter.com/igkKFOhG2Q
— Concerned Citizen (@BGatesIsaPyscho) May 5, 2025
We don’t really have a $36 trillion debt. What we have is $21 trillion of our money pumped into underground infrastructure, secret tunnels, and black budget projects the public will never see. The debt? That’s just the distraction they feed you while the real empire gets built… pic.twitter.com/9NIhVohqDK
— Restricted Daily (@Restricted_on_X) May 6, 2025
“I would be surprised if we don’t have more than 80% or 90% of those wrapped up by the end of the year,” he continued. “That may be much sooner. I would think that perhaps as early as this week, we will be announcing trade deals with some of our largest trading partners.”
• Bessent Says US Is Negotiating With 17 Out of 18 Major Trade Partners (JTN)
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Tuesday testified to Congress that the United States is in the process of negotiating with 17 of its largest trading partners. The secretary told the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government that they have received good offers from the countries they are currently negotiating with, in the wake of President Donald Trump’s tariffs. Bessent did not give a specific timeline for when trade deals would be reached, but said he expects most deals will be reached by the end of the year, according to Fox Business.
“There are 18 very important trading relationships. We are currently negotiating with 17 of those trading partners,” Bessent said. “China – we have not engaged in negotiations with as of yet. “Approximately 97% or 98% of our trade deficit is with 15 countries, 18% of the countries are major trading partners, and I would be surprised if we don’t have more than 80% or 90% of those wrapped up by the end of the year,” he continued. “That may be much sooner. I would think that perhaps as early as this week, we will be announcing trade deals with some of our largest trading partners.”
Bessent did not specify what countries they expect a deal with soon, or what the details of those deals would be. But he did state he believes the U.S. will see a reduction in the tariffs it’s charged by other countries. Hours after his testimony, officials indicated that formal trade negotiations with China could take place as early as Thursday, when the secretary travels to Switzerland. U.S. trade representative Jamieson Greer is also expected to meet with Chinese trade officials in Switzerland. The testimony also coincided with Trump’s meeting with new Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. Canada and Mexico are two of the U.S.’s largest trading partners, along with China, Germany and Japan.
India
https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1919798852426858673
A chance meeting! It allows everyone to save face…
• Bessent and USTR Greer Will Meet Chinese Trade Counterparts in Switzerland (CTH)
The media have been going bananas wondering when President Trump will begin negotiations with China. President Trump has been very clear that there is no need to open negotiations with China, but all discussions are welcome. Essentially the point is that tariffs will remain in place until Beijing gets to a point where they acquiesce to the reality of President Trump’s terms for reciprocal trade. The goal is to bring manufacturing back to the USA, not generate terms where manufacturing remains in China. The Chinese trade delegation is scheduled to be in Switzerland at the same time as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer are scheduled to be there. Both Bessent and Greer announced today they will meet with their Chinese counterparts on the sidelines of their travel to Switzerland.
USTR Press Release – […] “At President Trump’s direction, I am negotiating with countries to rebalance our trade relations to achieve reciprocity, open new markets, and protect America’s economic and national security,” said Ambassador Greer. “I look forward to having productive meetings with some of my counterparts as well as visiting with my team in Geneva who all work diligently to advance U.S. interests on a range of multilateral issues. ”While in Switzerland, Ambassador Greer will also meet with his counterpart from the People’s Republic of China to discuss trade matters.”
Treasury Secretary Press Release – “During Secretary Bessent’s visit to Switzerland, he will meet with President Karin Keller-Sutter of Switzerland, during which the Secretary will follow up on their recent meeting on the sidelines of the recent World Bank Group (WBG) – International Monetary Fund (IMF) Spring Meetings. While in Switzerland, Secretary Bessent will also meet with the lead representative on economic matters from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). (link) As we previously noted, the Swiss are very interested in resolving their trade status quickly. The Swiss Franc is now at the highest point against the U.S dollar in decades. One franc is worth 1.21 dollars. This makes their exports cost even more. The Swiss government desperately needs to lower the value of their currency. The Swiss central bank has already dropped interest rates to 0.25% and is now contemplating negative interest rates as a result.
Xi can’t deny knowing about it.
• Chinese Exporters Dodging US Tariffs – FT (RT)
Chinese exporters are using various methods to avoid steep US tariffs, including shipping goods through third countries to obscure their origin, Financial Times reported on Sunday, citing trade consultants, customs officials, and social media posts. The practice, known as “place-of-origin washing,” involves rerouting goods through countries such as Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, and South Korea, and re-exporting them to the United States with new certificates of origin. The administration of US President Donald Trump recently imposed steep tariffs of up to 145% on Chinese goods, citing national security and trade imbalance concerns.
Chinese exporters fear that the tariffs will deprive them of access to one of their most important markets. According to the outlet, Chinese social media platforms are awash with ads offering “place-of-origin washing.” “The US must know of it,” one Malaysian salesperson has told FT. “It cannot get too crazy so we are controlling the amount [of orders we take].” According to FT, authorities in Malaysia, Vietnam, and Thailand are looking into the alleged practice and are implementing measures to tighten origin checks. Chinese exporters typically sell goods “free on board” (FOB), transferring liability to buyers once the goods leave China, which complicates enforcement efforts, the outlet added.
The other reported circumvention method is mixing high-cost items with cheaper goods, so exporters can underreport overall values of shipments, the FT quoted a cross-border trade consultant as saying. There are intermediaries who reportedly offer “grey area” tariff workarounds to small- and medium-sized enterprises. Beijing has accused Washington of “economic bullying,” retaliating with 125% duties on all US imports and implementing export controls. The Chinese Commerce Ministry said last week that it was evaluating the possibility of trade negotiations with the US but reiterated that Washington must show “sincerity” by canceling its tariffs if it wants meaningful dialogue.
“China’s social safety net is practically nonexistent. When Chinese workers lose their jobs, they’re completely on their own: no unemployment benefits, no food stamps, nothing. That’s why we’re seeing increasing unrest as workers demand back pay and protest unfair dismissals.”
• China May Cave to Trump on Tariffs Soon (Matt Margolis)
President Donald Trump’s tough stance on China is already producing results, and the evidence suggests that Chairman Xi Jinping will have no choice but to back down. The Chinese economy, long propped up by unfair trade practices, is starting to crumble under the weight of Trump’s strategic 145% tariffs on Chinese imports. Protests from furious factory workers in China demanding back pay are spreading across the country after President Trump’s tariffs on Chinese imports began impacting the communist nation’s economy. Unrest has been reported across the country as workers have taken to the streets protesting unpaid wages and challenging unfair dismissals following the closures of factories squeezed by US tariffs, according to Radio Free Asia.
Chinese industry leaders, meanwhile, are “extremely anxious” about the steep duties, with many telling factories and suppliers to halt or delay supplies, Wang Xin, head of an industry group representing more than 2,000 Chinese merchants told the Financial Times. The scale of the crisis is staggering. Goldman Sachs’ analysis indicates that 16 million Chinese jobs are at risk due to Trump’s tariffs. Chinese industry leaders are reportedly “extremely anxious” about the steep tariffs, which is likely an understatement given the mounting evidence of economic turmoil. “It’s not easy at the moment,” a 26-year-old toy factory worker told the FT. His employer, in the Chinese city of Zhejiang, mostly sells to the US, and management recently forced workers to take two weeks off unpaid in the face of the tariffs.
Last month, construction workers threatened to throw themselves off the buildings they were working on unless they received their unpaid wages in the northeastern city of Tongliao, Radio Free Asia reported. Elsewhere, a sporting goods factory in southern Hunan province also shut without warning last month, offering no compensation or social security benefits, leading hundreds of workers to go on strike, the outlet said. But here’s the key point that the mainstream media keeps missing: China’s social safety net is practically nonexistent. When Chinese workers lose their jobs, they’re completely on their own: no unemployment benefits, no food stamps, nothing. That’s why we’re seeing increasing unrest as workers demand back pay and protest unfair dismissals.
The Chinese Communist Party maintains its grip on power through economic growth and iron-fisted control. But when millions of workers take to the streets, even totalitarian regimes start to sweat. History shows that no government, not even one as powerful as China’s, can ignore the fury of its people indefinitely. Last month, Kevin O’Leary predicted that China’s economy would face serious pressure if the U.S. got tough on trade, which it has. He pointed out that millions of Chinese factory workers rely on American demand, and without access to it, China risks internal unrest or potentially economic collapse if the government prints money to keep people employed. This vindicates what Trump has been saying all along: China needs us far more than we need them. While some American companies are feeling the pinch from the tariffs, our diverse economy and robust worker protections provide a crucial buffer. China enjoys no such luxury. If Xi wants to stay in power, he’ll have to cave sooner rather than later.
” It’s getting pushback from the European Parliament, but the fact is Ursula can do it anyways with minimal support from EU governments. She’s likely just waiting for the right moment.”
• The EU Zombie Uses Trump as Cover to Further Feed on Citizens (NC)
Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving for the western misleadership class. Any anti-democratic swindle on the EU wish list is now being sold as a remedy to the Orange Man. (And if it’s not Trump, it’s Russia). The US is no longer a reliable defense partner, they say. We must give more power to Brussels and send untold billions to weapons companies. The US is no longer a reliable economic partner, they say. We must increase competitiveness by weakening labor and empowering finance. The UK voters may have opted for Brexit, but London and Brussels are “defying Trump” with a “free and open trade” declaration that includes negotiations ‘on defense and security, fishing and energy, as well as a “common understanding” of which topics will be covered by intensive Brexit reset negotiations this year.’
The strange thing about these plans, however, is that they include reliance on US weapons and energy and alignment with US geopolitical and geoeconomic goals. Let’s focus here on how the EU is pressing ahead with plans to dramatically increase defense spending due to Trump Abandonment Syndrome. The EU Jazz Band Recent commentary by Rosa Balfour, director of Carnegie Europe, perfectly sums up these arguments. In a piece titled “Europe Tried to Trump-Proof Itself. Now It’s Crafting a Plan B” she explains why the EU has no choice but to redirect social spending towards the arms industry. Balfour’s romantic version of recent history starts on February 28. That’s when “the televised humiliation of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky” took place, and “Europe realized it could no longer rely on its longtime ally, the United States.” And here she is on the jazzy wreckage:
“The shocking depth and breadth of this realization cannot be overemphasized. Political leaders in European states, the European Union, and NATO displayed composure and coordination, but behind the scenes, the soundtrack was a frantic free jazz jam session with dramatic thuds and a long pause—the silence at the realization that the European comfort zone was over. And now, what are these composed and coordinated “political leaders” doing? They announce that Ukraine is Europe’s first line of defense, make grand plans for a “coalition of the willing,” and declare that Ukraine will become a “steel porcupine”. The coalition of the willing has fallen apart. The steel porcupine was ridiculed. And while those in the Kremlin likely aren’t losing any sleep, Europeans should be. That’s because, as Balfour writes, the European Commission “can play supporting roles by mobilizing financial resources and handling complicated in-house horse trading.”
That’s one way of putting it. The Commission is inching its way towards invoking emergency powers to push through parts of its rearmament slush fund. It’s getting pushback from the European Parliament, but the fact is Ursula can do it anyways with minimal support from EU governments. She’s likely just waiting for the right moment. Let’s look at the status of the European militarization billions. On March 19, the Commission introduced a 150 billion euro proposal — a first installment of what’s to be at least $900 billion— for establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) through the reinforcement of European defence industry Instrument. It wants to move forward with it under Article 122 emergency powers which need only a qualified majority in the Council —as opposed to the usual consensus— which allows Ursula and friends to get around pesky vetoes from member countries.
The procedure for 122 is as follows: 1) the Commission proposes a Council measure; following which 2) the Council adopts the measure in line with [qualified majority voting]. No additional elements or participants are envisaged. This article allows the proposal to bypass parliamentary negotiations and go straight to the Council for negotiation and adoption. The Parliament’s role is reduced to submitting suggestions and requesting debates. How’s that for your democratic rules-based order? In an April 23 secret vote, the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affair unanimously backed a legal opinion rejecting the Commission’s attempt to bypass it on a 150 billion euro rearmament fund. While it is a non-binding vote, it does signal opposition to Ursula’s plan, but it’s not some principled stand for the will of the people or any romantic notion like that.
No, it’s more about dividing up slices of the pie as European weapons industry lobbyists are increasingly active in Brussels and are trying to make sure their clients are rewarded. And so much of the feeble opposition is over getting a stronger “buy European” clause in SAFE (it currently requires 65 percent of war consumables and complex systems to come from within the EU, Ukraine, or EEA/EFTA states, which includes Turkiye and Norway. Why must Ursula’s commission sideline the Parliament and some member states in order to spend 900 billion on military purchases? They lay it out in their proposal. There’s the usual nonsense about Russia:
The EU and its Member States now face an intensifying Russian aggression against Ukraine and a growing security threat from Russia. It is also now clear that this threat will persist in the foreseeable future, considering that Russia has shifted to a war-time economy enabling a rapid scaleup of its military capabilities and replenishment of its stocks. The European Council therefore underlined, in its conclusions of 6 March 2025, that “Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and its repercussions for European and global security in a changing environment constitute an existential challenge for the European Union”. There’s also the Trump abandonment syndrome: At the same time, the United States, traditionally a strong ally, is clear that it believes it is over-committed in Europe and needs to rebalance, reducing its historical role as a primary security guarantor.
” The disconnect between rulers and ruled has never been wider. The elites, ensconced in their Brussels bubble, continue to govern as if the people are an inconvenience, as if democracy means compliance rather than choice. The social contract is broken, and the backlash will only intensify.”
• The Death of Old Europe (von Hoffmeister)
The European Union, that grand and failing dream of technocrats, is dying. Its decline is not sudden or dramatic but a slow unraveling, a bureaucratic collapse in which every policy designed to sustain it only hastens its demise. It starves itself on the thin gruel of ideology – open borders dissolving nations into contested spaces, green mandates suffocating industry under the weight of unattainable standards, and a moralizing anti-Russian fervor that has left it isolated and energy-dependent. Once, Europe was the center of empires, the birthplace of civilizations that shaped the world. Now, it is a patient refusing medicine, convinced that its sickness is a form of enlightenment, that its weakness is a new kind of strength. The architects of this experiment still speak in the language of unity, but the cracks in the foundation are too deep to ignore.
Immigration was the first act of self-destruction, the point at which Western Europe’s ruling class severed itself from the people it claimed to govern. The elites, intoxicated by the rhetoric of multicultural utopia, flung open the gates without consideration for cohesion, for identity, for the simple reality that societies require more than abstract ideals to function. Cities have fractured into enclaves where parallel societies thrive, where police hesitate to patrol, where the native-born learn to navigate their own streets with caution. The promise was harmony, a blending of cultures into something vibrant and new. The reality is a quiet disintegration, a thousand unspoken tensions simmering beneath the surface. Politicians continue to preach the virtues of “diversity,” but the people – those who remember what it was like to have a shared history, a common language – are beginning to revolt. The backlash is no longer confined to the fringe. It is entering the mainstream, and the establishment trembles at what it has unleashed.
Then came the green delirium, the second pillar of Western Europe’s self-annihilation. Factories shutter under the weight of environmental regulations, farmers take to the streets in protest, and the middle class is squeezed between rising energy costs and stagnant wages. The climate must be saved, the leaders insist, even if the cost is economic ruin. Germany, once the industrial powerhouse of the continent, dismantles its nuclear infrastructure in favor of unreliable wind and solar power, only to return to coal when the weather turns unfavorable. There is a madness in this, a kind of collective hysteria where dogma overrides pragmatism, where the pursuit of moral purity blinds the ruling class to the suffering of ordinary citizens. The rest of the world watches, perplexed, as the EU willingly cripples itself for a cause that demands global cooperation – cooperation that is nowhere to be found. China builds coal plants, America drills for oil, India prioritizes growth over emissions, and the EU alone marches towards austerity, convinced that its sacrifice will inspire others. It will not.
And Russia – the great miscalculation, the strategic blunder that may yet prove fatal. Europe had a choice: to engage with Moscow as a partner, to integrate it into a stable continental order, or to treat it as an eternal adversary. It chose the latter, aligning itself fully with Washington’s confrontational stance, severing ties that had once provided cheap energy and economic stability. The pipelines are silent now, the ruble flows eastward, and Western Europe buys its gas at inflated prices from distant suppliers, enriching middlemen while its own industries struggle. Russia, spurned and sanctioned, turns to China, to India, to those willing to treat it as something other than a pariah. The Eurasian landmass is reconfiguring itself, and Europe is not at the center. The EU is on the outside, looking in, a spectator to its own irrelevance. The Atlanticists in Brussels believed they could serve two masters: their own people and Washington’s geopolitical whims. They were wrong.
In this unfolding drama, America and Russia emerge as twin pillars of Western civilization – different in temperament but united in their commitment to preserving sovereign nations against globalist dissolution. America, the last defender of the West’s entrepreneurial spirit and individual liberty, stands firm against the forces that would destroy borders and identities. Russia, keeper of traditional values and Christian heritage, guards against the cultural nihilism consuming Europe. Both understand that civilizations must defend themselves or perish; neither suffers the death wish that afflicts the Western European elites. And of Western Europe? It is a ghost at the feast, clutching its empty wineglass, muttering about “norms” and “values” as the world moves on without it. The European elites still cling to their illusions, still believe in the power of rhetoric over reality.
They speak of “strategic autonomy” while marching in lockstep with Washington’s wars, of “diversity” while their own cities become battlegrounds of competing identities, of “democracy” while silencing dissent with bureaucratic machinery and media censorship. The voters sense the decay. They rebel – in France, where Marine Le Pen’s supporters grow by the day; in Italy, where Giorgia Meloni’s government rejects the EU’s dictates on immigration; in Hungary, where Viktor Orbán openly defies the liberal orthodoxy. Yet the machine grinds on, dismissing every protest as populism, every objection as fascism. The disconnect between rulers and ruled has never been wider. The elites, ensconced in their Brussels bubble, continue to govern as if the people are an inconvenience, as if democracy means compliance rather than choice. The social contract is broken, and the backlash will only intensify.
“Carney’s globalist net-zero platform will be sufficient to bring Canada to its knees without ever having to confront a political adversary.”
• Canada’s War on… Canada (Solway)
Canada is walking down a dangerous path. In a recent episode of “The Winston Marshall Show,” Steve Bannon has warned that “Canada could become ‘the next Ukraine’ if Russia or China presses territorial claims in the Arctic. “There’s no money there to defend anybody,” Bannon said, arguing that the United Kingdom, Canada’s historic security partner, “can’t defend itself.” Bannon suggested that Ottawa has only “two, maybe three years to act before external pressures harden.”
Bannon’s warning about Canada becoming a second Ukraine seems a gross exaggeration. Yet we recall that both Trudeau père and Trudeau fils were enamored of Communist China, that China has interfered in Canada’s elections favoring the Liberals, that Mark Carney is beholden to China to the tune of hundreds of millions in loans and “over $3 billion in politically sensitive investments with Chinese state-linked real estate and energy companies,” and that Canada hosted the Chinese military for tactical training in cold-weather warfare. Carney, a man of no charisma and less common sense for all his parenthetical savoir faire and encapsulated expertise, has already said that Canada’s friendly relationship and customary economic partnership with the U.S. is at an end. Meanwhile, an impoverished Canada will need generous amounts of foreign aid and may conceivably get it from China, in exchange for military bases and Canada-China cooperation in the Arctic.
As of this writing, Carney is in Washington for talks with Donald Trump. (Note, Trump is not in Ottawa for talks with Carney.) As Managing Editor for the Saskatchewan Standard, Christopher Oldcorn reports, Carney warned that any new deal “must be negotiated on our terms.” Trump was not impressed, telling Fox Business, “I’m not sure what he wants to see me about, but I guess he wants to make a deal.” Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick added, “They have their socialist regime, and it’s basically feeding off of America.” Carney is out of his depth, and Canada is in for a shock. Should a deal eventually emerge, it will not be on Carney’s terms.
At present, Canada reminds me of that preposterous knight in the Monty Python classic “The Holy Grail,” who continues pugnaciously challenging his antagonist even after he has lost both his arms and both his legs in the fight. This does not suggest that Canada is not a dangerous stump, and that it does not pose a threat to the U.S., for its alignment with China might conceivably mean a fentanyl-producing, militarily powerful, economically belligerent antagonist encroaching on its Arctic perimeter and entrenched along the 4,000-mile undefended border with the U.S. I would not put such recklessness past Carney as he labors diligently to turn Canada into a plebiscitarian sinkhole, deprived of political virility, reduced to penury and dependent for its survival on a foreign enemy.
I don’t see the U.S. engaging in open warfare with Canada, which Bannon considers a possibility. The scenario is far-fetched. Canada is not Ukraine; it is Lower Slobbovia. If you run a podcast called a “War Room,” you are prone to flights of fancy. This is not 1812, and America does not need to fire a single shot. It can batter Canada economically into submission with a stroke of the president’s pen despite China’s axial influence. America needs nothing that Canada has to offer, says Trump, neither cars, energy, lumber, etc. But it is also clear that the U.S. will not tolerate a Chinese presence on its northern border. For all his absurd bluster and his putting a Canadian slant on things, little man Carney will have to listen up.
Regrettably, Canada has become what Christopher Rufo, applying a well-known psychological personality concept, calls a “Cluster B society,” where “ideology replaces competence as a marker of distinction,” focusing on emotional excess, self-image, and dramatic posturing and leading to what psychologist Andrzej Lobaczewski calls a “pathocracy.” In a syndrome of this nature, Rufo laments, “The spontaneous life and beauty that are the fruits of a more balanced society will be snuffed out by grim commissars administering a Cluster B pathocracy. Our self-governing regime would be over.” Welcome to Canada and its preening prime minister.
Indeed, Canada is now foolishly engaged in a costly, surreptitious, self-harming skirmish with the U.S, which it could have avoided with a soupçon of maturity. The issue was never in doubt. To begin with, Canadian unity is fractured. There is little to no chance of gluing the pieces back together again and presenting a united front as a negotiating partner. It is at a distinct economic disadvantage in the so-called tariff war should Trump move to erase Canada’s $200 billion trade rip-off that helps to keep the country afloat, as Justin Trudeau himself admitted. Carney’s globalist net-zero platform will be sufficient to bring Canada to its knees without ever having to confront a political adversary. For the truth is that Canada is at war with itself. And it does not matter if it wins or loses, since it amounts to the same thing.
“What Canada was, is not as important as what Canada is, and what it is becoming.” —Jason Stephan
• Canada: A Post-Election Autopsy (Solway)
As a result of the Liberal victory and the installation of Mark Carney as prime minister of Canada in the April 28, 2025, election, the country is now speeding down the Trans-Canada highway to certain destruction. Carney, of course, is a global financier, a promoter of centralized government control, a lover of censorship, and a climate change apostle who doubles as a trustee of the World Economic Forum and the United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Change and Finance. He carries three passports, Canadian, Irish, and British, and has spent the last decade out of Canada, which obviously makes him the ideal candidate for the prime ministership, Canadian to the bone. He is, in fact, the spitting image of the Canadian psyche, a small man, slack-faced, awkward in comportment, grim and humorless, rag doll-like in his person. The fit is almost providential.
As one commenter put it, “Carney looks the part… the funeral director of Canada.” The question that is making the rounds is how the Liberal Party managed to erase a 20-point deficit in the polls and shrug off three terms of social and economic devastation that have seen the country plummet toward third-world status while at the same time elevating the most unprepossessing choice possible to the prime minister’s office. Is the nation brain-dead? Does it have a death wish? Is it merely greed for government largesse? What are the factors that have contributed to Canada’s accelerating decline? There are several possibilities, acting singly or in concert. Donald Trump: When Trump began trolling Canada with his 51st state bagatelle, he proved once again that Canadians have no sense of humor.
Canadians, by and large, with thank-the-Lord saving exceptions, are an earnest, priggish, self-massaging, unexciting people of limited intelligence who, like most of a leftist bent, cannot recognize a joke, especially when brandished by an American. What former New York Post correspondent Emma Jo-Morris says of the media seems largely true of the Canadian electorate: “The media isn’t biased because it’s liberal; it’s biased because it has no concept of reality. The people who make media content are incapable of separating their own self-worship from objective truth.” Of course, being Liberal and having no concept of reality amount to the same thing. So Canadians took Trump seriously and got their hackles up, huffing and puffing and strutting and posturing. But when Trump launched his tariff fusillade, this was a bridge too far.
Canadians girded themselves for war like a mighty gnat prepared to crush an elephant rather than adopt the grown-up approach of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, who visited Trump and proposed a negotiated settlement. This was Mark Carney’s and the Liberals’ gold-plated opportunity to rally a subfusc Canadian electorate to a losing cause and scrub the Conservatives’ favorable poll numbers, leading ultimately to an electoral victory that will likely destroy the country. Indeed, Canada is more ragged than it ever was. What was once a Hudson Bay blanket is now a patchwork quilt. The New Democratic Party: After years of propping up the Liberals, leader Jagmeet Singh and the NDP came crashing down. The Party lost not only its longtime leader but also its official party status.
Its 25 parliamentary seats were reduced to seven. It is likely that many of the lost 18 seats defected to Carney’s Liberals, putting them over the top, good enough for a minority government, just three seats short of a majority. There is speculation that some or all of the remaining NDP rump may follow suit, giving the Liberals the majority government they desperately crave. Biased Coverage: The Canadian media and paper press are basically no different from their Pravda-like American cousins, trafficking in lies, innuendoes, suppressions, and outright interference in the electoral process. This is their stock-in-trade. With only a few outliers like Rebel News, the Western Standard, and two or three others, the press has become a vast and undifferentiated propaganda network for the Liberal machine, flush with Liberal plugola. Canada’s public broadcaster, the CBC, is supported by an annual $1.4 billion grant, which Carney has promised to inflate and Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre had threatened to eliminate. The sequel was predictable.
Can’t conquer Iran, Victor. Start there. Or Yemen.
• The Trump-Iran Deal, Explained (Victor Davis Hanson)
Just recently, the Houthis, that is the terrorist organization that controls half of Yemen and has been hit hard by the United States for its interruption of maritime commerce in the Red Sea and its serial attacks on Israel, has been—I guess you would say—neutered. Its port facilities, its airport, a lot of its missile depots, its command and control have all been neutralized. But yet, here they are with a vestigial force. They just sent a missile, not just into Israel, but into Israel’s international Ben Gurion Airport. It almost hit one of the terminals. Didn’t kill anybody. But it made a huge crater right on the periphery of the airport grounds. And for some reason it was not intercepted by Israel’s tripartite missile defense system. Let me add another incident. Just recently, almost at the same time, four more terrorists were arrested in the United Kingdom for organizing Iranian-inspired terror against citizens of Britain. And of course, we remember that Iran was involved in an effort to assassinate President Donald Trump.
What am I getting at is, we’re right in the middle of negotiations with Iran. Donald Trump feels that they are historically vulnerable. The Assad regime, their lifeline to the Arab world, is gone. Kaput. Vanished. They can’t use the Damascus airport to airlift weapons for Hezbollah. Hezbollah has been reduced dramatically in its effectiveness. Hamas is—I don’t know what you’d call Hamas. It’s living underground among the rubble of Gaza. And then, of course, the Houthis, as I mentioned, have been attacked. Israel has demonstrated that it can penetrate, at will, the supposedly formidable air defenses of Iran. The United States, in addition, is building up its strategic bombing force—in Diego Garcia and in areas that can reach Iran—with the capability of dropping these 20,000 to 30,000-pound bunker busters. We have two carriers that will soon be assembled near there.
What am I getting at again? The pressure is all on Iran. Militarily. Diplomatically. Economically. Socially. Culturally. What do I mean by that? Culturally, there is about 30% to 40% of the country are non-Farsi Persian speakers. And they’re very restive, angry. Power outages. The regime is unpopular. It’s diverted billions of dollars to these terrorist appendages that now didn’t pay off, that they’re defunct. And so, Donald Trump thinks that he, with this maximum pressure, putting this crushing oil embargo—which by the way, former President Joe Biden lifted—that he can bring them to negotiations one last time. Personally, I don’t think he can. Nothing that that regime has ever said is accurate. Nobody in the MAGA movement wants an optional war in the Middle East. But they will have nuclear weapons, perhaps in a year. So, what is the likely scenario? The likely scenario is they will lose face if they negotiate away their nuclear weapons.
That is the only lever they have over Western powers now that their terrorist children are all gone. So, I don’t think they’re gonna make a deal. They’re gonna delay, delay, delay; lie, lie, lie; use the Houthis. And they are playing with fire because once Donald Trump gives them an opportunity for a peaceful way out of their dilemma—that is they can negotiate an end to their nuclear program. They don’t need nuclear power. They have the fourth-largest fossil fuel reserves in the world. They have enough energy for themselves and for export for an endless amount of time. And yet they still are working on this nuclear project, not for peaceful energy generation, but to have a nuclear deterrent. And so, what we should look for in the next few months is that an exasperated Trump administration will finally throw up its hands and say, “You can’t deal with these people, but they’re not gonna get a nuclear weapon.”
At that point, one of two things will happen—I should say one of three things. Israel will hit back because of the Houthis’ attack on its airport. And that could come sooner or later. Or the United States will intervene. I don’t think it’ll intervene on its own. Or there’ll be a joint Israeli-American operation. But by the end of the year, I don’t think Iran will have a nuclear deterrent. And then we’re gonna be watching a mystery unfold. If it should be hit, and if it should lose its nuclear potential, what will be the reaction of the Iranian people? Will they be angry that their national sovereignty has been attacked? Or will they be delighted that this 50-year hated regime is now gone and they don’t have to spend money on these Arab terrorist groups that have brought them no profit? That’ll be something to see. And I think we’ll see it at the end of the year.
“Decades after the civil rights movement, academia is obsessed with fixating not on intelligence, qualifications, or content of character, but rather on skin color..”
• $373M in DEI Funding at US Universities in Four Years (Salgado)
Educayshun has become mere propaganda at hundreds of American schools and universities. In fact, Defending Education has identified a staggering $373 million in DEI funding since 2016 across more than a hundred institutions of higher learning. Defending Ed investigated 130 colleges and universities across 44 states and Washington, D.C. to date, identifying 281 diversity, equity, and inclusion funds (DEI). These include scholarships and programs based around race and sexual “identity.” Defending Ed warned that, while many universities and colleges have now officially ended DEI programs under Trump administration pressure, in many cases, the programs have simply been renamed or gone underground for the time being. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln, for example, simply retitled its “Office of Diversity and Inclusion Fund” to be the “Community and Belonging Support Fund.”
Just add more pablum for a surface-level makeover. From the Defending Ed website: “To date, we have been able to track down over $373,344,424 in donations to fund institution DEI programs, scholarships, and offices. While some of the funding has been tracked down via “Day of Giving” style campaign webpages, the vast majority of the money has been traced through university announcements, webpages, and reports. The information contained in this report primarily covers the years from 2021 to present with one or two exceptions noted below. Decades after the civil rights movement, academia is obsessed with fixating not on intelligence, qualifications, or content of character, but rather on skin color.
This is a vast disservice to students of all ethnicities, and has turned our institutions of higher learning into little more than propaganda machines. Defending Ed also provided examples of some of the DEI projects and funds. The University of Michigan “raised over $98,665,269 for a wide range of DEI initiatives and funds, including scholarships for first-generation students” and established a “George Floyd Memorial Scholarship.” According to a 2023 University of Delaware report, the university was able to raise $21 million to expand its diversity, equity, and inclusion programming.
One of the funds included in the donor haul was it’s “Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, or JEDI, Fund” which states that support “helps provide programs, resources and opportunities to cultivate educated and empowered individuals who not only understand the origins of societal challenges related to equity and social justice but also have the tools to create solutions to address them.”… The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) School of the Arts and Architecture includes its “Anti-racism Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion” program which includes the UCLA Arts Racial Equity Fund. Meanwhile, the University of California, Berkeley fundraised $186,420 for “Increasing Diversity and Opportunity at Cal” during a 2025 campaign. These universities need to be exposed and their federal funding cut off so long as they continue to promote racist DEI.
Altman doesn’t dare to go up against Musk? it’s not just them anymore. It’s people seeing endless profit vs people seeing endless trouble.
• OpenAI Blinks: Scraps For-Profit Plan After Outside Pressure (ZH)
In a blog post overnight, the OpenAI Board revealed that its nonprofit arm would retain control of the chatbot company following backlash over its attempt to restructure into a for-profit business. “We made the decision for the nonprofit to retain control of OpenAI after hearing from civic leaders and engaging in constructive dialogue with the offices of the Attorney General of Delaware and the Attorney General of California,” the OpenAI Board wrote in a blog post. Last fall, OpenAI’s Sam Altman was preparing to overhaul the company’s structure and transition to a for-profit business—an effort that sparked a heated legal battle with co-founder Elon Musk, who sought to keep OpenAI ‘open’. The board provided new details about OpenAI’s evolving structure:
OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit, and is today overseen and controlled by that nonprofit. Going forward, it will continue to be overseen and controlled by that nonprofit. Our for-profit LLC, which has been under the nonprofit since 2019, will transition to a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC)–a purpose-driven company structure that has to consider the interests of both shareholders and the mission. The nonprofit will control and also be a large shareholder of the PBC, giving the nonprofit better resources to support many benefits. Our mission remains the same, and the PBC will have the same mission.
“We want our nonprofit to be the largest and most effective nonprofit in history that will be focused on using AI to enable the highest-leverage outcomes for people,” Altman wrote in a letter to employees. He also provided details about OpenAI’s evolving structure: OpenAI’s nonprofit will remain in control of the organization after discussions with civic leaders and attorneys general from California and Delaware. The for-profit LLC will convert to a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC)—a mission-aligned model also used by other AI labs like Anthropic and X.ai.
This move replaces the old capped-profit structure with a simpler equity-based model, but does not represent a sale. The nonprofit will retain oversight and become a major shareholder in the PBC, giving it more resources to advance AI for broad societal benefit. A new nonprofit commission will help guide efforts to ensure AI supports public good in areas like health, education, science, and public services. OpenAI says this new structure will enable it to make faster and safer progress toward its mission of democratizing AGI. Meanwhile, Marc Toberoff, lead counsel for Elon Musk in the ongoing lawsuit against OpenAI, told Bloomberg via email that Altman’s decision to scale back for-profit plans “changes nothing.”
“OpenAI’s announcement is a transparent dodge that fails to address the core issues: charitable assets have been and still will be transferred for the benefit of private persons, including Altman, his investors and Microsoft,” Toberoff said. In March, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers blocked Musk’s request to stop Altman from restructuring OpenAI into a for-profit company. This led the judge to expedite a trial for this fall. Given “the public interest at stake and potential for harm if a conversion contrary to law occurred,” Rogers said, adding that an expedited trial later this year would be on “core” claim that OpenAI’s structure conversion plan is unlawful and “potentially the interrelated contract-based claims.” Earlier this year, a Musk-led group offered to purchase OpenAI for around $100 billion, a bid that was quickly rejected.
“Now, at long last, we can see the fruit of the corrupt tree sprouting in our court system, where judges help illegal immigrants escape through the back door of the courtroom, where other judges demand the return of deported gang members or halt the deportation of antisemitic radicals, and where every effort to put America first is ruled unconstitutional..”
• (None Dare Call It) Treason of the Judiciary (Miele)
Thursday, April 24, was a day like any other day—the sun came up, the sun went down, and President Donald Trump was hit with at least three nationwide injunctions by federal district court judges. That’s just the way it goes if you are a president who wants to take back America from the entrenched left-wing bureaucracy and restore common sense to government before it is too late. The danger of the bureaucracy was predicted by Julien Benda in his 1927 book “The Treason of the Clerks,” which warned of the danger of the intellectual class adopting political passions that had previously been the sole domain of the masses. We see this most distinctly today in the federal bureaucracy, which I dare say has the greatest concentration of degree-holders from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia (and the like) of any sector in the nation, other than the incestuous universities themselves.
The treason that Benda described was the loss of independence of thought and dispassionate reason by intellectuals, and the accompanying subservience of intellect to political passions. During Trump’s first term, I wrote a column describing the danger that Benda had foreseen: Benda wrote at the beginning of the age of mass communication, and yet he already saw that “political passions have attained a universality never before known. … Thanks to the progress of communication and, still more, to the group spirit, it is clear that the holders of the same political hatred now form a compact impassioned mass, every individual of which feels himself in touch with the infinite number of others, whereas a century ago such people were comparatively out of touch with each other and hated in a ‘scattered’ way” …
It seems that we are now living out Benda’s worst nightmare—an age of manipulation of the masses by those who think they know better—whether you call them the “deep state,” the “opposition party,” “the national elite,” “the entrenched bureaucracy,” or just “the establishment.” And for the past 10 years, they have turned their hatred on Donald Trump. Without rhyme or reason, they fight him on every reform and arm themselves with invented scandal and fake news. Now, in Trump’s second term, we see that the bureaucracy has a close ally in the judiciary—not one judge, but multitudes that aim to preserve the status quo of liberal governance. If that wasn’t clear before April 24, there was no room for doubt after the day was filled with one court ruling after another telling Trump to “stand back and stand by” rather than to exercise his lawful power as president.
Here’s what tumbled out of the judicial branch that day: – A federal district court judge in California blocked Trump’s executive order that would have denied federal funds to so-called sanctuary cities that limit or forbid cooperation with federal immigration authorities. – A Washington, D.C., judge blocked the Trump administration from following through on the president’s executive order requiring that voters in federal elections show proof of citizenship when registering. – A district judge in New Hampshire blocked efforts to defund public schools that utilize diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Not to be outdone, judges in Maryland and Washington, D.C., essentially issued the same order, giving added protection to one of the least popular programs ever shoved down the throat of American citizens. At the time, those were the latest of more than a dozen nationwide injunctions issued by unelected federal judges who appeared more interested in preserving and protecting left-wing shibboleths than the Constitution.
Also in courts across the nation that week were attempts by judges to reject Trump’s authority as commander in chief to ban transgender participation in the military, to deny Trump the right to strip security clearances from law firms that he says put national security interests second to political partisanship, and stop the administration’s efforts to eliminate federal news services such as Voice of America that engage in anti-American propaganda. Those are all in addition to the several injunctions issued relative to Trump’s promised reform of the immigration system to expedite deportation of illegal immigrants, especially those who have a criminal history or are members of international gangs. If that seems normal, it isn’t. There were only six nationwide injunctions during the eight years of the George W. Bush presidency, and only 12 during the Barack Obama presidency. That increased to 14 under President Joe Biden, which was surpassed by Trump in the first nine weeks of his second term when 15 such injunctions were issued.
Of course, Trump should be accustomed to such judicial abuse. In his first term, there were 64 injunctions against his policies, a staggering 92.2% issued by Democrat-appointed judges. Julien Benda would have clearly recognized the “political passions” that had supplanted the disinterested intellectual rigor we once expected of our judges. Yet because of our habituated respect for the separation of powers, none dare call it the treason of the judiciary. That of course is a reference to the 1960s tract “None Dare Call It Treason” by John A. Stormer. Stormer took on the country’s intellectual elites, blaming them for working against the interests of the nation by tolerating or quietly promoting communism. The left-wing elites of the day laughed it off as another right-wing conspiracy theory, but as time has passed it’s become clear that there was indeed a long-range effort to corrupt our institutions with Communism 101—reducing social acceptance of religion, turning education into indoctrination, and infiltrating government with the intelligentsia that thinks American values are outdated.
Now, at long last, we can see the fruit of the corrupt tree sprouting in our court system, where judges help illegal immigrants escape through the back door of the courtroom, where other judges demand the return of deported gang members or halt the deportation of antisemitic radicals, and where every effort to put America first is ruled unconstitutional. Fighting back against the overreach of the judiciary must be Trump’s No. 1 priority as he seeks to restore sanity to the federal government. Because the most important principle of constitutional law that is being decided in the next few months is whether the president is truly the chief executive or whether he serves at the pleasure of left-wing judges who put political passion ahead of national interests. In the ultimate irony, the case must be decided by nine men and women in black robes, the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. The fate of the nation’s future hinges on whether they will seek justice impartially or be swayed by partisan rancor. Unfortunately, it’s an open question.
“After Trump’s triumphant return to the White House, he appointed Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense. Since then, recruitment numbers have exploded, after years of the number of recruits tumbling..”
• SCOTUS Rules On Trump’s Ban On Transgenders In The Military (Downey Jr)
The Supreme Court issued a brief order on Tuesday allowing the Trump administration’s ban on transgender people in the military to proceed. Though the order was unsigned, the usual suspects, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, locked arms and said they would have denied the Trump administration’s request to pause the lower court’s order. Several years after the Biden administration chased warriors away from the military by mandating the COVID vaccine and also encouraging transgender people to join through DEI initiatives, the Supreme Court paused a decision by U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle, located in Seattle, who suggested that Trump’s decision to ban transgender soldiers was unconstituional, claiming that it was “unsupported, dramatic and facially unfair.”
“A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member,” Trump’s decree stated. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, located in San Francisco, refused to put a hold on Judge Settle’s decision. The ruling is sure to set off a dumpster fire of liberal whining, crying, and protests, not to mention another reason the left will complain that “Trump hates the LGBTFBI crew.” Shortly after taking back the White House, Trump issued a directive stating that people with a history or diagnosis of gender dysphoria would no longer be allowed to serve in any branch of the U.S. military. Under the Biden administration, many transgender people chose to join the military, some of whom opted for costly gender reassignment surgeries. Trump also released a directive stating that federal funds would no longer be spent on such surgeries.
Another important factor to keep in mind regarding Trump’s decision to keep out transgenders, the woke, and people hired and promoted through DEI initiatives is the very real notion that woke military members would be more likely to fight fellow Americans when told to do so, as some news media pundits are inclined to believe. It is unknown how long it will take to purge the military of transgender service members who pretend to be a gender other than that which science deemed them at birth. Left-leaning news sites, like Reuters, are reporting the story and suggesting that it is an attack against people who do not agree with the “gender they were assigned at birth.”
The decision is just the latest in a wave of Supreme Court victories for President Trump. The exact number of service members currently suffering from gender dysphoria is unknown, but some believe there are as many as 14,000 transgender people throughout all five branches of the military, though a senior-level member of the Defense Department suggested that there may be only 4,240 who are currently serving. After Trump’s triumphant return to the White House, he appointed Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense. Since then, recruitment numbers have exploded, after years of the number of recruits tumbling during Joe Biden’s single four-year presidential term.
“..If the nomination is not successful by May 20th, there is a scenario where DC Judge James Boasberg could appoint the U.S. attorney. Mary McCord is smiling.”
• President Trump Sends Message of Support for Ed Martin as DC Attorney (CTH)
President Trump has sent a message of support via Truth Social on behalf of Ed Martin to be confirmed as U.S. Attorney for the important Washington DC office. Multiple ‘republican’ members of the Senate do not support the nomination. If the nomination is not successful by May 20th, there is a scenario where DC Judge James Boasberg could appoint the U.S. attorney. Mary McCord is smiling.
PRESIDENT TRUMP – “Ed Martin is going through the approval process to be U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia. According to many but, in particular, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., his approval is IMPERATIVE in terms of doing all that has to be done to SAVE LIVES and to, MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN. This is a passion for Ed, more so than for almost anyone that I have seen. One of the reasons that I was so successful in winning the 2024 Presidential Election is my commitment to Health, and helping to Make America Healthy. The Cost of the Chronic Disease Epidemic has gotten out of control over the past four years of the Biden Presidency. We are going to take our Country BACK, and FAST. Ed Martin will be a big player in doing so and, I hope, that the Republican Senators will make a commitment to his approval, which is now before them. Ed is coming up on the deadline for Voting and, if approved, HE WILL NOT LET YOU DOWN. When some day in the future you look back at your Vote for Ed Martin, you will be very proud of what you have done for America and America’s Health. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”
The Republican opposition group to Ed Martin is the traditional element of the party who stand against the basic principles of what the MAGA movement is all about.
“Via CNN – […] Trump and his allies have a short window to get Martin over the finish line. If Republicans don’t confirm him by May 20 when his interim position expires, there would be a new process to play out in picking a new nominee. One option could be US District Judge James Boasberg appointing someone to become DC’s top prosecutor. Boasberg, a Barack Obama appointee, has presided over a number of high-profile cases challenging Trump policies, drawing the ire of the president and his allies. After this story published on Monday evening, Trump posted about Martin’s confirmation battle on Truth Social writing that his “approval is IMPERATIVE.” Top Justice Department officials, who had preferred another candidate for the job, have had to caution Martin about some of his public activities since taking on the job on an interim basis, sources briefed on the matter told CNN.
Despite growing blowback on the nomination, allies of Trump and Martin have made clear that the president has so far been thrilled with Martin’s job performance. “Martin is President Trump’s favorite US Attorney,” one source familiar with his nomination process previously told CNN. . On top of Trump’s direct calls to GOP senators, 23 Republican state attorneys general sent a letter to Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley and Senate Majority Leader John Thune on Monday urging them to move forward on Martin’s confirmation, according to a copy shared with CNN. Trump ally Charlie Kirk also posted on X over the weekend about the need to successfully confirm Martin. DOJ officials who may have wanted someone else for the job have come to terms with the fact that he is Trump’s pick and are doing everything they can to help get him confirmed, sources briefed on the matter told CNN.
Martin has successfully implemented Trump’s “law and order agenda” and been a “fantastic U.S. Attorney for D.C.,” said Alex Pfeiffer, White House principal deputy communications director. “The White House looks forward to his continued success in the role. Ed has shown he is the right man for the job.” Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are expected to keep Trump’s nominee on track, despite diminishing odds Martin will advance to see a full Senate vote.”
Let us not pretend amongst ourselves…. In basic truth, both the democrats and republicans lost in the 2024 election. Donald Trump defeated the republican candidate, Ron DeSantis, and Donald Trump defeated the democrat candidate, Kamala Harris. As the second term of President Trump continues, the republican party will show increasingly obvious opposition to all of the policies and results coming from the MAGA agenda. In the background of our political dynamic the Republican apparatus is already having conversations about what comes next, after the MAGA infection identified as President Trump is removed. When we ask ourselves why President Trump’s agenda hasn’t been codified by congressional action, the honest answer is, because the MAGA policy is not supported by the Republicans in congress. Nothing about this dynamic is likely to change. The republican resistance is simply wearing a mask right now, and there are certain times when that mask slips. It has always been thus….
Boasberg rules!
• This One Judge Keeps Getting Trump Cases, and It’s No Accident (Matt Margolis)
In a development that should send chills down the spine of every American who cares about the rule of law, Judge James Boasberg — you remember this guy, right? — has somehow ended up with case after case involving President Donald Trump’s second term. The D.C. swamp’s judicial machine continues its relentless assault on our duly elected president, with Boasberg emerging as its not-so-secret weapon. The so-called “random” assignment system has produced results that defy probability and reek of deliberate manipulation. The good news is that House Republicans are fighting back. Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Darrell Issa (R-Calif), and Chip Roy (R-Texas) are demanding answers from Angela Caesar, the court clerk who oversees this suspicious case assignment system.
In a letter that Townhall obtained on Monday, they are demanding explanations for what any rational observer would recognize as a coordinated effort to undermine the Trump presidency. “Many of these nationwide injunctions have raised concerns that Article III judges are exceeding their constitutional authority by replacing the policy decisions of the duly elected President with their own preferences, eroding public trust in the integrity and fairness of our judicial system. Many high-profile cases challenging policy decisions of the Trump Administration have been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (District Court),” the letter states. “As Congress considers potential legislative reforms to address the abuse of nationwide injunctions and adjust the national distribution and local assignment of cases challenging Executive Branch policy decisions, we write to request information about the District Court’s assignment of cases.”
Boasberg has been handed several significant cases within a remarkably short timeframe relating to the Trump administration. His docket now includes cases challenging the administration’s implementation of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations, as well as matters concerning administration officials’ use of the Signal app, both assigned less than two weeks apart. But that’s not all. The judge is also overseeing cases involving the Department of Government Efficiency and disputes over federal funding for programs allegedly violating civil rights laws (though the latter was dismissed at the plaintiff’s request). While the D.C. District Court’s local rules govern case assignments, the concentration of such politically sensitive matters under one judge has sparked legitimate questions about the process. The timing and clustering of these assignments demand closer scrutiny.
Last month, the House passed critical legislation aimed at restraining these activist judges who have abandoned their constitutional role in favor of political warfare. But is it too little, too late? The Left’s judicial assault continues unabated while the mainstream media yawns or actively cheers it on. The American people deserve to know: Who is pulling the strings behind these courthouse doors? How deep does this corruption go? Furthermore, will anyone be held responsible for the misuse of our judicial system against the President of the United States?
“America First Legal, led by Trump’s powerhouse advisor Stephen Miller..”
• America First Legal sues Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (JTN)
The President Donald Trump-aligned legal group America First Legal Foundation on Monday sued Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, accusing him of acting beyond his scope as head of the U.S. Judicial Conference. The lawsuit was also lodged against Robert Conrad, who serves as the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, according to Fox News. The legal action accuses the men of operating beyond their scope of resolving cases or controversies, citing their cooperation with Congress in helping them investigate Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, and a willingness to create or adopt a code of ethics for the court.
“Under our constitutional tradition, accommodations with Congress are the province of the executive branch,” the foundation said. “The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are therefore executive agencies,” which would be overseen by the president and not the courts. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden will preside over the case.
Complex. Given their history and their nuclear status, they should never be allowed to come even this far. Call Xi.
“By Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retired), an Indian Air Force veteran fighter test pilot and is the former Director-General of the Center for Air Power Studies in New Delhi.”
• The Treaty That Kept India And Pakistan In Check Is Gone. Now What? (Chopra)
India launched ‘Operation Sindoor’ on the night of May 7, targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan in retaliation for a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgram, Kashmir last month. New Delhi stated that it hit at least nine targets. “Our actions have been focused, measured, and non-escalatory in nature. No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in the selection of targets and method of execution,” the Indian government said in a statement. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif descried the strikes as a “cowardly” attack and said Islamabad “has every right to respond forcefully to this act of war imposed by India, and a forceful response is being given.” Tensions between India and Pakistan escalated to military actions following the killing of 26 innocent vacationers in Pahalgam, Kashmir by Pakistan-backed terrorists in a Hamas-style terror attack.
Pakistan Army and Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) links were established by India’s National Investigation Agency days after the mass killing. The public was angry, and sought appropriate revenge. A wide range of diplomatic and economic measures were announced by both nations following the attack. Remarkably, India has put the 1960 Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in abeyance for the first time since the pact was inked by the two neighbors. Rejecting India’s move to suspend the IWT, Pakistan warned that any diversion of water will be treated as an ‘Act of War.’ Islamabad also said that it would hold “in abeyance” its participation in all bilateral agreements with India, including the landmark 1972 Simla Agreement.
Pakistan pledged a full-spectrum national power response to any threat against its sovereignty, put its armed forces on high alert, and began selective mobilisation. Most measures were quite expected. But by suspending the Shimla Agreement, Pakistan unwittingly handed over big advantage to India. What is the Shimla Agreement? The Shimla agreement between India and Pakistan was signed on July 2, 1972 at Barnes Court (Raj Bhavan) in the town of Shimla in the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh, between then-Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her Pakistani counterpart Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. It was ratified on July 15, 1972 (by Pakistan), and August 3, 1972 (by India), and became effective the next day. The agreement had come in the wake of Pakistan’s comprehensive defeat in the 1971 war that split the country and created independent Bangladesh.
The agreement stated:“The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the promotion of a friendly arid harmonious relationship and the establishment of durable peace in the sub-continent, so that both countries may henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the welfare of their peoples.” The document was meant to lay the foundation of a peaceful and stable relationship between the two nations. It was decided that the two countries are resolved “to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.”
The treaty mandated that the two countries resolve issues bilaterally, and superseded the United Nation’s resolution on Kashmir. Perhaps more importantly, under the agreement, India and Pakistan established the Line of Control (LoC), previously called the Ceasefire Line, making it a quasi-border between the two nations. New Delhi succeeded in persuading Islamabad to change the name of the ceasefire line to the Line of Control (LoC), thus delinking it from the UN-imposed 1949 ceasefire line and highlighting that Kashmir was now a purely bilateral matter between India and Pakistan. The treaty clearly stated that Indian and Pakistani forces must be withdrawn to their respective sides of the “international border.” That in Jammu and Kashmir, the LoC resulting from the cease-fire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice toward the recognised position of either side.
Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. India returned around 13,000 square kilometers of land taken in battle on the western border but retained some strategic areas, including Turtuk, Dhothang, Tyakshi, and Chalunka in Chorbat Valley, covering more than 883 square kilometers, so as to facilitate lasting peace. Both sides further agreed to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of the LoC. The fact that there has only been one limited war since the agreement was signed reflects its effectiveness. Some Indian bureaucrats later argued that a tacit agreement to convert this LoC into a international border, was reached during a one-on-one meeting between the two heads of government. Pakistani bureaucrats have denied any such thing. Nor was that acceptable to Indian public.
Green
https://twitter.com/SteveLovesAmmo/status/1919731269673365609
Spike
Are these shots responsible for permanent immune system damage? pic.twitter.com/fbgaz5vTGp
— Mary Talley Bowden MD (@MdBreathe) May 5, 2025
OMG
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1919702279579455976
Elephant
The evolution of elephants
pic.twitter.com/1mYcLgAimP— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) May 6, 2025
Baby
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1919766603157406118
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
