Sep 182025
 
 September 18, 2025  Posted by at 10:10 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  60 Responses »


Georgia O’Keeffe Sky above clouds III 1963

 

President Trump and Vice President JD Vance To Attend Charlie Kirk Funeral (CTH)
When Charlie Kirk Died, So Did the Democratic Party (Pinsker)
Kid Rock Blasts Mainstream Media as ‘Public Enemy Number One’ (MN)
Jimmy Kimmel’s Rejection By Broadcasters a ‘Turning Point’ In Media (NYP)
This Ain’t Your Democratic Party’s FBI (Margolis)
Antigone 2.0: Liberals Denounce and Destroy Memorials for Charlie Kirk (Turley)
‘We’d Kick Russia’s Ass’ – Trump’s Special Envoy To Ukraine (RMX)
Zelensky Has No Intention of Ending Conflict With Moscow – MP (RT)
Zelensky Tells West To Put Ukraine First (RT)
EU Plans To Seize €170bn of Russia’s Frozen Funds – FT (RT)
‘No Place’ For EU At Ukraine Talks – Lavrov (RT)
Zelensky Reveals Major Change In Ukrainian Troop Training (RT)
Lavrov Accuses Kiev of ‘Sabotaging’ US Peace Efforts (RT)
Zelensky ‘Losing Touch With Reality’ – Foreign Policy Analysis (RT)
Western ‘Peacekeepers’ In Ukraine Would Be Seen As Occupiers – Lavrov (RT)
‘Russian Drone Attack’ Damage Was Caused By Polish Missile (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1968410917638397998

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1968109282886398179

jordan
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1968334714860974158

fetterman

https://twitter.com/SaltyGoat17/status/1968277053050167446

 

 

 

 

“..my prayers and life lessons have guided me to understand that is exactly when it is best to say nothing..”

President Trump and Vice President JD Vance To Attend Charlie Kirk Funeral (CTH)

It is not common when both the sitting President of the United States and the Vice President attend the same funeral together, when it is not a nationally recognized dignitary. Both President Trump and Vice President JD Vance will be honoring Charlie Kirk at the funeral service. It is a fitting and considerate reflection of great honor, worthy of Kirk’s impact.

My dear friends, there is so much background stuff happening we are all watching in the aftermath of the Kirk assassination, it is difficult to find the words for any outline of value. I cannot imagine how challenging life is for Charlie Kirk’s family right now, and out of the greatest respect I feel the best thing to do is just do nothing except honor his faith, work and legacy. I have made the decision not to cover any of the controversial aspects, direct or ancillary, beyond what I have already shared.

Do I have opinions, yes. And when my brain is full of things I want to say – my prayers and life lessons have guided me to understand that is exactly when it is best to say nothing. My inner voice tells me to remain silent on any of the ancillary subjects until Charlie Kirk is laid to rest with great honor and tribute. Then, when it is appropriate, to provide my personal thoughts on facets that may be valuable in context. Feel free to share any subject matter in/around the storyline of this tragedy on any open thread where we can gather in fellowship. I know a lot of people are hurting. Channel that hurt into meaningful prayer for them.

Read more …

“What’s Coming Next Is Even Worse.”

When Charlie Kirk Died, So Did the Democratic Party (Pinsker)

Up until the early 2010s, the emotional appeal of being a good, loyal Democrat was twofold: It signaled to your peers how much you cared about the poor, the environment, and the disadvantaged; and — if you were white — it was “proof” you weren’t a racist. Meanwhile, the GOP was the party of old white dudes, business tycoons, and religious weirdos. As Bill Maher put it in 2011, “[Republicans are] the squares. I’m not putting them down. You need squares to run s**t.” And more or less, that’s how the media portrayed the two parties: Republicans were the stodgy old farts in “Footloose,” and the Democrats were the cool kids who simply wanted to dance, dance, dance. That’s how it was for a very long time. Those were the long-established brand identities, pushed and promoted by Hollywood propaganda.

In the 1972 rom-com Butterflies Are Free, Goldie Hawn quipped, “I joined the Young Republicans. Another mistake. There’s no such thing as a young Republican.” It was a funny line with more than a kernel of truth. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party branded itself as the one-stop shop for young people with big hearts — the party of people with compassion and empathy. The Donkeys were the dreamers, thinkers, lovers, and optimists. Whereas Republicans were bitter, unimaginative, stuck-in-the-past realists, the Democrats led with love. It was showcased in their sloganeering: Make love, not war! Love conquers hate! Keep hope alive! Give peace a chance! Putting people first! The man from Hope! Yes we can! That all began to unravel during the Obama years.

Before, the Democrats were a left-leaning coalition party, comprised of union workers, Catholics, minorities, feminists, tradesmen, Jews, gays, and others. But by the beginning of President Obama’s second term, the Democratic Party had handed the keys to the far left — and the far left alone. This was the first shoe to drop. A union dockworker in New Jersey never had much in common with, say, a committed socialist from Portland, but they still voted Democratic because they believed the Democratic Party better protected their political interests. But when the far left ascended, union workers — and other essential parts of the Donkey’s coalition — began looking elsewhere for representation. Enter Donald Trump and the MAGA movement.

“Give a man a mask, and he will show you his true face.”
—Oscar Wilde

When the Democratic Party swung to the far left, it created an opening for an outsider like Trump to champion the plight of all the Americans left behind. This became the backbone of the MAGA movement, and if the Democrats had half a brain, they would’ve realized this a helluva lot sooner. But they didn’t. They figured that Donald Trump was a bizarre, historic anomaly — a master propagandist with an inexplicable, Svengali-like hold over a gullible audience — and if they got rid of Trump, they’d get rid of the movement. They didn’t understand that MAGA was as much about the left as it was about the right. So they tried character assassination. Criminal charges. A nonstop #Resistance campaign. They even called him Hitler, a fascist, a dictator, a Nazi, and an existential threat to democracy. The American people listened to them, listened to Trump, and then voted MAGA in an electoral landslide.

“Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster. For when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”
—Fredrich Nietzsche

The Democrats failed to change Donald Trump’s brand identity: Trump is still Trump. But they spectacularly succeeded in changing how we perceive them. Between 2016 and 2018 (Trump’s first term), Republicans gained 100,000 more registered voters than Democrats. But just between 2024 and today, the Republican edge has exploded tenfold: They’ve now gained over a million. Something big is happening in the heartland. It’s no secret that the Democratic Party’s brand is in the toilet. As NBC News reported in March of 2025: The Democratic Party has reached an all-time low in popularity in the latest national NBC News poll, as it searches for a path forward after a painful loss to President Donald Trump — and as the party’s voters spoil for a fight between their leaders in Washington and Trump.

Just over a quarter of registered voters (27%) say they have positive views of the party, which is the party’s lowest positive rating in NBC News polling dating back to 1990. Just 7% say those views are “very” positive. And that was all BEFORE the murder of 31-year-old Charlie Kirk shocked and appalled the nation. Question for the audience: If the Democrats’ brand was in the toilet before, where do you think it is today?

“The tiger can’t change his spots. No, wait, he did! Good for him!”
—Jack Handey

Changing a long-established brand identity is very difficult. There’s a reason why rebranding campaigns are so frickin’ expensive: Changing minds and hearts isn’t easy. Usually, it happens one of two ways: “Gradually, then suddenly.” After the gruesome murder of Charlie Kirk, we’re now in the “suddenly” part. For decades, the Democratic Party was shielded by the halo effect: They were the party of love, compassion, and virtue signaling. It gave their brand Teflon. That Teflon is now gone. After a decade of unhinged rhetoric, violence, hate, lawfare, and anger, the American people have realized the ugly truth about today’s Democratic Party:

In 2022, 82% of Democrats said that political violence in the U.S. was a problem. Today, it’s just 58% — a 24-point drop in just three years! (Guess for Democrats, it all depends on who’s in office.) Liberals are four times more likely than conservatives to celebrate the deaths of their political opponents. (Which, if you’ve been online lately, you’ve almost certainly witnessed.) A jaw-dropping one in four “very liberal” Americans believe political violence is justified. (Just 6% of conservatives agreed.) That’s an astonishing 25% of American liberals!

They’ve gone from “Make love not war” to “Make war not love.” They went from “Do your own thing” and “Give peace a chance” to murdering Charlie Kirk because, in the killer’s own words, “I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.” On this, the killer is exactly right: Some hate can’t be negotiated out. Instead, it needs to be excised completely. Not just Charlie Kirk died on Sept. 10, 2025. So did the old Democratic Party. Unfortunately, what’s coming in its place is even worse. Today’s Democratic Party is in the process of transitioning to the Democratic Socialist Party. A new national poll from Jacobin makes it crystal clear:

Democrats prefer democratic socialism to capitalism by a 58 point margin. Socialism wins overall with likely voters under forty-five years old. […] Candidates who identify as democratic socialists are viewed just as favorably (+69) among registered Democrats as candidates who identify only as Democrats (+67). Prediction: The Democratic Party will rebrand itself as the Democratic Socialist Party, because that’s what their liberal base demands. Each year, as older Democrats die off, the Democratic Socialist advantage will steadily grow within the party. This divide will spread like wildfire during the 2026 midterms — and by 2028, it will devour the remnants of whatever’s left. The future is theirs. The Democratic Party is dead. Long live the Democratic Socialists.

Read more …

“..the media is “incentivizing these loner kids to take shots so that they can be heroes.”

Kid Rock Blasts Mainstream Media as ‘Public Enemy Number One’ (MN)

Musician and outspoken conservative Kid Rock has labelled the mainstream media as “public enemy number one” in the aftermath of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s shocking murder… In an interview with Fox News’ Jesse Watters, Rock argued that inflammatory rhetoric from outlets like The New York Times and other “nut houses” has fueled dangerous narratives. “I’ve said it and I’ll say it again… The mainstream media is the fricking public enemy number one right now,” he declared, further noting that repeated labels of “racist” and “Nazi” directed at conservatives like himself and Kirk incite unstable individuals to violence.

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1967765814473294227?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1967765814473294227%7Ctwgr%5E6ec01cdec1cbe1a86846d2d037fa5993658d73cf%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fmodernity.news%2F2025%2F09%2F16%2Fkid-rock-blasts-mainstream-media-as-public-enemy-number-one-following-kirk-assassination%2F

Drawing from personal experience, Rock noted, “They’ve called me a racist Nazi for years now… Go look up the few facts about my life.” He described how such echoes build up, influencing “nut house kids” who spend their time “playing video games, watching these occult movies that are all over our streaming services” instead of engaging in productive activities. These individuals, he said, end up thinking, “I’m going to go kill a Nazi, I’ma go kill a racist,” leading to tragic outcomes like Kirk’s death. Rock, a longtime Trump supporter, warned that the media is “incentivizing these loner kids to take shots so that they can be heroes.” He criticized the cycle where, after violence, calls for unity quickly dissolve into more divisive language, with conservatives again branded as “fascists.”

Shifting to a broader message, Rock emphasized restraint but issued a stark warning to those celebrating Kirk’s death or vandalizing vigils: “You’re gonna keep it up, you’re gonna run into the wrong people.” “It’s not gonna be pretty. It’s gonna be very ugly, terrible,” he further urged. The musician stressed the need for dialogue, saying, “We gotta start listening to each other and respect one another,” while acknowledging extremists exist on both sides but pointing to the left’s “echo chamber” as particularly problematic. Rock highlighted the need for de-escalation while holding the media accountable for escalating rhetoric.

Read more …

Not some top down decision. It was the small local broadcasters who’d had enough.

Jimmy Kimmel’s Rejection By Broadcasters a ‘Turning Point’ In Media (NYP)

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr described the “unprecedented” rejection of late-night host Jimmy Kimmel by local broadcasters on Wednesday as a “turning point” for legacy media outlets — which he argued have been serving viewers “progressive foie gras.” The comedian’s show, “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” was taken off the air indefinitely by ABC earlier Wednesday after local broadcasters Nexstar and Sinclair announced plans to pre-empt the program over the host’s controversial comments about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. “This action today by NexStar and Sinclair, frankly, it’s unprecedented,” Carr told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “I can’t imagine another time when we’ve had local broadcasters tell a national programmer like Disney that your content no longer meets the needs and the values of our community.”

Disney is the parent company of ABC, which airs Kimmel’s show on several independently owned affiliates. NexStar and Sinclair, which have licenses with the FCC that require them to operate in the public interest, “stood up” to Disney and ABC, according to Carr. “This is an important turning point,” he said of Kimmel’s show being taken off the air. “There’s more work to go, but I’m very glad to see that American broadcasters are standing up to serve the interests of their community, and we don’t just have this progressive foie gras coming out from New York and Hollywood,” the chairman added. Kimmel, who has long been held in low regard by Republicans and President Trump, outraged conservative viewers Monday by starting his show arguing that Kirk’s suspected killer was part of the “MAGA gang.”

“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” the late-night host said, one day after authorities announced that suspected assassin held a “leftist ideology.” Kimmel has also mocked Trump’s response to the assassination of the Turning Point USA founder, describing it as “how a 4-year-old mourns a goldfish,” and he has accused the president of “fanning the flames” of violence. In an interview with conservative podcaster Benny Johnson, Carr had suggested the FCC might take action against Kimmel, ABC and Disney over the comedian’s “news distortion.” “Any license granted by us at the FCC, that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest,” the chairman explained.

“You can make a strong argument that this is sort of an intentional effort to mislead the American people, about a very core, fundamental fact, of a very important matter,” Carr said of Kimmel’s remarks about Kirk’s alleged killer. “Frankly, when you see stuff like this, I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way,” he continued, teasing that action against Kimmel isn’t taken by ABC or Disney “there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” Sinclair, the nation’s largest ABC affiliate group, informed ABC earlier Wednesday that it would not continue to air “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” as a result of the host’s comments. “Mr. Kimmel’s remarks were inappropriate and deeply insensitive at a critical moment for our country,” Vice Chairman Jason Smith said in a statement. “We believe broadcasters have a responsibility to educate and elevate respectful, constructive dialogue in our communities.”

“We appreciate FCC Chairman Carr’s remarks today and this incident highlights the critical need for the FCC to take immediate regulatory action to address control held over local broadcasters by the big national networks.” Nexstar, which owns dozens of stations affiliated with ABC, similarly said it would pre-empt Kimmel’s show “for the foreseeable future.” “Mr. Kimmel’s comments about the death of Mr. Kirk are offensive and insensitive at a critical time in our national political discourse, and we do not believe they reflect the spectrum of opinions, views, or values of the local communities in which we are located,” Nexstar President Andrew Alford said in a statement. “Continuing to give Mr. Kimmel a broadcast platform in the communities we serve is simply not in the public interest at the current time, and we have made the difficult decision to preempt his show in an effort to let cooler heads prevail as we move toward the resumption of respectful, constructive dialogue.”

Read more …

“Americans deserve an FBI that protects the country, not political agendas.”

This Ain’t Your Democratic Party’s FBI (Margolis)

FBI Director Kash Patel returned to Capitol Hill this week, and Democrats probably wish he hadn’t. After embarrassing them in the Senate on Tuesday, Patel appeared before the House on Wednesday, where Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) teed up one of the most devastating moments yet. In a rapid-fire back-and-forth, Jordan highlighted the FBI’s most notorious past controversies, giving Patel the chance to dismantle the smears against him and prove just how different the Bureau looks under his leadership. The exchange left Democrats’ talking points in tatters. “Director, yes or no? Is the FBI still spying on parents at school board meetings?” Jordan asked. “Uh, no sir,” Patel responded. “Is the FBI still targeting Catholics?” Jordan pressed. “No sir.” “Is the FBI still spying on President Trump?” Jordan continued. “I don’t believe so,” Patel said.

Jordan then asked, “Is the FBI still censoring Americans?” “Uh, no sir,” Patel replied. Moving down the list of scandals, Jordan asked if Americans were still being targeted for shopping at Cabela’s or buying Bibles. Patel was clear: “Nobody is targeted for their faith.” Jordan followed up: “Is the FBI still targeting Americans who are pro-life?” “Nobody is targeting anyone for their beliefs,” Patel said.= “What about cooking the books on crime data?” Jordan asked. “The crime data is real,” Patel answered. Jordan pressed further: “Is the FBI still purging agents for conservative viewpoints?” “No one at the FBI is asked their viewpoints on policy,” Patel said. Finally, Jordan raised another notorious controversy: “Is the FBI still labeling the Betsy Ross flag, the flag of the American Revolution, a hate symbol?” “No,” Patel replied.

With those answers on record, Jordan pivoted to the FBI’s progress. “Well, maybe that’s why you’ve been able to… What was the number? Twenty-three thousand bad guys you’ve arrested? A huge increase from the same time period in the previous administration. Think you said 1,400 predators, 4,000 children rescued. It’s those, were those the facts?” “Forty-seven thousand, 35% increase on children rescued,” Patel confirmed. Jordan then referenced the capture of the terrorist responsible for the Abbey Gate bombing during the botched Afghanistan withdrawal. “Yeah. And you got the guy that… Abbey Gate? We had, we had—” “We got the Abbey, we got the Abbey Gate guy,” Patel said.

Jordan noted the sacrifice of a soldier from his own district who was killed in that attack. “Got a guy from the Fourth District of Ohio, lost his life there serving our country. We appreciate that. Maybe when you’re not focused on politics, you can actually do what the FBI is supposed to do, go get the bad guys, right?” “That’s what the men and women of the FBI do,” Patel agreed.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1968334714860974158

For years, Americans wondered if they could ever trust the FBI again. Under questioning, Patel made one thing clear: sunlight and accountability work. Corruption and political bias don’t survive exposure. Under previous Democrat administrations, the Bureau spied on parents, targeted conservatives, and questioned people for their faith or politics, turning inward on Americans instead of focusing on real threats. Now the FBI is finally doing what it’s supposed to do: going after criminals, rescuing children, and bringing terrorists to justice. The results speak for themselves. The challenge is keeping it that way. Oversight must remain strong, and Congress must hold the bureau accountable. Americans deserve an FBI that protects the country, not political agendas. This ain’t the Democratic Party’s FBI anymore.

Read more …

“A city which belongs to just one man is no true city.”

Antigone 2.0: Liberals Denounce and Destroy Memorials for Charlie Kirk (Turley)

Throughout his short life, Charlie Kirk enraged many by exposing the hate and hypocrisy of the left in higher education. What is astonishing is that he continues to do it even in death. As millions mourn his murder around the world, any expressions of sorrow or respect for Kirk are triggering some on the left. Liberals have been arrested for stomping on or burning memorials to Kirk and others have taken to social media to denounce or mock people expressing regrets over the loss. A courthouse memorial was vandalized while a mural to Kirk had to be restored after an attack. Former Gawker editor Elizabeth Spiers wrote an essay for Nation under the headline: “Charlie Kirk’s Legacy Deserves No Mourning.”

Some of the loudest voices have come from academia. University of California Irvine lecturer Larry Tenney went on the liberal safe space site, BlueSky, to rave in all caps: “WE KNOW WHO CHARLIE KIRK WAS…”F**k off America” “F**k off Trump” and “F**k all you motherfuckers, idgag about any of you.” (For the non-profane literate, “idgag” means “I don’t give a f**k”). What is clear from the diatribe is that Kirk also knew exactly who people like Tenney are. He knew that even his appearance or that of his group on campus would trigger many in academia. For the speech-intolerant, any invitation to debate issues like abortion or transgender policies is intolerable. You are expected to accept their positions as righteous or face their rage.

What was even more annoying was the fact that Kirk was winning the debate, young people trapped in the academic echo chamber were showing up en masse as they did at the rally where he died. Faculty converted higher education into the current echo chamber and then treated students as a captive audience. When given a choice, many rushed to hear alternative views. Fordham School of Law Professor John Pfaff joined the chorus of those objecting to expressions of respect or regret. Most tellingly, the sin that disqualified Kirk was that he implemented Professor Watchlist, a list of professors deemed the most intolerant and partisan on campuses, so that students could avoid their classes. Pfaff posted: “Just a reminder Kirk’s organization established the Professor Watchlist, which even the NYT framed as a threat to academic freedom. I don’t get why ppl keep describing him as a good-faith debater. One can say ‘Kirk should not have been murdered’ (which is true!) without engaging in hagiography.”

In Pfaff’s siloed world, the New York Times is apparently so conservative that it is remarkable that “even the NYT” criticized the list. The comment only served to confirm that the relevant scale of comparison for academics today runs exclusively from the left to the far left. At the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, Anthropology professor Tamar Shirinian. Tamar Shirinian wrote: “The world is better off without him in it. Even those who are claiming to be sad for his wife and kids….like, his kids are better off living in a world without a disgusting psychopath like him and his wife, well, she’s a sick fuck for marrying him so I dont care about her feelings.”

Syracuse University political science assistant professor Jenn M. Jackson announced “him dying this ways seems both ironic and in line with his own politics.” Others warned that anyone expressing sorrow was only self-identifying for future lists of fascists. Martin Pfeiffer, PH.D candidate at the University of New Mexico, warned, “Charlie Kirk was a vicious, hateful fascist and white supremacist. To say anything else is a lie and, quite frankly, fascist collaboration.” Across the country, efforts by a few professors to get their colleagues to sign letters expressing condolences or concerns over the murder were derailed by some of the same passive-aggressive ideologues who engaged in pearl-clutching objections over divisive positions.

What is most striking about these academics is the total lack of self-awareness, even as they adopt the very intolerance of historical villains in their classes. The response of these professors is reminiscent of the Greek tragedy Antigone by Sophocles in 441 BCE. In the story, the two sons of Oedipus fight to the death for the throne of Thebes. The tyrant ruler Creon ordered that his favorite of the brothers, Eteocles, be buried with honors while banning anyone from mourning or burying the other brother, Polynices. To be left on the ground unburied and unmourned was considered a great dishonor and sacrilege. It was too much for his sister, Antigone, who defied the tyrant and buried her brother. For that, Antigone was walled up in a cave and committed suicide. Kirk’s critics will allow him to be buried, of course, but some cannot tolerate mourning his passing any more than they could tolerate his speaking.

I have opposed calls for firing academics making hateful comments outside of their official duties or accounts. Charlie spent his life opposing cancel campaigns and censorship. However, it is crushingly ironic to see media and faculty suddenly outraged about cancel campaigns after years of ignoring the purging of conservatives from campuses. Most faculty crying foul today have been entirely silent when conservatives, including Kirk, were targeted in the past. Faculty have spent decades purging conservatives and libertarians from departments, leaving higher education mired in orthodoxy and intolerance. It is the education version of what Sophocles wrote in Antigone: “A city which belongs to just one man is no true city.” In the same way, a university which belongs to only liberal idelogy is no true university.

Read more …

Trump has two special envoys. Witkoff travels around, Kellogg stays in Kiev. He’s either too dumb to be true, or an empty propaganda tool. In either case, he can be useful to Trump.

‘We’d Kick Russia’s Ass’ – Trump’s Special Envoy To Ukraine (RMX)

Assistant to U.S. President Donald Trump and Special Presidential Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg had a lot to say on Russia’s famed might and those recent drone incursions into NATO airspace. Claiming 19 incursions cannot be an accident, Trump’s envoy said Vladimir Putin “is acting purposefully, he’s sending a signal, and he wants to hear a response,” reports Ukrainska Pravda. “Ukraine will not lose this war. Ukrainians have a moral superiority over Russia, that’s obvious,” Kellogg also noted, specifically praising Ukraine’s advanced drone production capabilities. As to Russia, he said during the interview at the YES Annual Meeting 2025, “They talk a big game,” adding that Putin often likes to tout that Russia is a nuclear power, but other Western powers have nuclear weapons too.

On the topic of Russian superiority, “We’d kick their ass (…) They’re not as good as Putin says they are.” He also credits Ukraine with helping curb Moscow’s military might. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine also confirmed to U.S. President Trump that Russia is “not winning” the war, according to Kellog. “If he was winning, he’d be in Kyiv,” Kellog added, again giving credit to Ukraine for slashing Russia’s military power. Posting on X, Kellog said, “The vision of our country is to see a halt to the death and destruction and restore peace and stability in Europe. Promoting peace over endless wars and proxy conflicts abroad is a defining feature of the America First leadership of President Donald J. Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.”

Kellogg also spoke about Russia’s total dependence on China. “Russia has now become China’s junior partner. At present, we can say that China has both an economic advantage over Russia and a military advantage, and even historically. I will say more – if China completely cut off its aid to Russia, – this war would end tomorrow,” Kellogg claims. Urging more aggressive action, including further sanctions, against Putin, Trump’s envoy maintained that Russia does not have “the capacity that they had that they could march towards Berlin or anywhere else.”

Read more …

“..he intends to fight to the last, but, of course, with others doing the fighting..”

Zelensky Has No Intention of Ending Conflict With Moscow – MP (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has no intention of ending the hostilities with Russia, while ordinary people pay the price, Verkhovna Rada MP Georgy Mazurashu has said. Mazurashu said Zelensky outlined his position at a meeting with members of his Servant of the People party on Tuesday, a stance the MP claimed is widely shared by the Ukrainian leader’s inner circle. ”At yesterday’s closed meeting… Zelensky, like other individuals exempt from military service, made it clear that he intends to fight to the last, but, of course, with others doing the fighting,” the deputy said in a video on his Telegram channel on Wednesday.

Ukraine’s mobilization drive, launched to refill depleted ranks amid heavy losses and Russia’s steady frontline advances, has become increasingly chaotic and violent, marred by abuse, injuries, and even deaths of conscripts. Mazurashu has previously called it a “shameful hunt for citizens.” The MP said Zelensky estimated Ukraine would need another $120 billion to fund the armed forces if the conflict drags into 2026, adding that the leader was “still unclear where to get” half of that sum. “And he now wants to focus on finding these funds – abroad, of course,” Mazurashu remarked. Amid battlefield losses, Zelensky has pressed Western backers for more aid, tying it to the security guarantees he says Kiev needs before agreeing to any settlement.

In a Sky News interview on Tuesday, he urged the West to put Ukraine’s needs above its own, boost financial and military support, and impose sanctions that would “really hurt” Russia’s economy.Moscow has warned that foreign aid only prolongs the conflict. It says it does not oppose security guarantees for Kiev in principle, but insists they must follow a peace deal – one requiring Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of new territorial realities – not precede it. On Wednesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused Kiev of sabotaging peace efforts, including mediation by US President Donald Trump. He said Washington understands the conflict cannot be resolved without addressing its root causes, while Kiev and its European backers refuse to do so.

Read more …

“I believe that all countries need to stop thinking about themselves..”

Zelensky Tells West To Put Ukraine First (RT)

Western states should put Ukraine’s needs above their own, Vladimir Zelensky has suggested, accusing the EU and US of dragging their feet on new sanctions against Russia. Moscow has faced sweeping restrictions from Kiev’s Western backers since the Ukraine conflict escalated in 2022. The EU has adopted 18 sanctions packages and is debating its next measures. Since Donald Trump returned to the White House, Washington has been cautious about new measures amid a thaw with Moscow. Trump has warned, however, that he could turn to sanctions if the conflict persists. In an interview with Sky News aired on Tuesday, Zelensky claimed deliberations about possible blowback from further sanctions were a “dangerous” waste of time.

“I believe that all countries need to stop thinking about themselves and their future relations with Russia, but instead think more about Ukraine, because it’s today and now,” he said. “This is very dangerous, and to be frank, dishonest.” Zelensky said Trump’s call for European countries to cut Russian energy imports and impose tariffs on buyers such as China and India was understandable, but claimed the US must not wait for Brussels, which he accused of hiding behind bureaucracy. “President Trump, I think, believes that if he were to apply all strong sanctions, he would close diplomacy with Russians… But we can’t wait for all European countries to stop relations with Russia,” he said. “All that’s lacking now is a strong sanctions package from the US.”

Zelensky also insisted that Kiev needs a “clear position” from Trump on sanctions and firm security guarantees before any settlement. Trump has urged European countries to stop importing Russian oil and gas and pledged to then consider sanctions. He has also demanded the bloc impose steep tariffs on India and China, the top buyers of Russian crude. According to reports on Tuesday, the European Commission will delay its next sanctions package while members weigh how to meet Trump’s demands. Moscow insists sanctions have been unable to harm its economy and that they will inevitably backfire. It says any settlement must include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of territorial changes, while security guarantees for Kiev are possible only after a final deal.

Read more …

Plenty European assets in Russia. American, even better. Tell Chevron to apply for compensation in Brussels.

EU Plans To Seize €170bn of Russia’s Frozen Funds – FT (RT)

Brussels is pressing ahead with a plan to use €170 billion of Russia’s frozen sovereign assets to back “reparation loans” for Ukraine, the Financial Times has reported. The EU faces growing pressure to find additional funding for Kiev as US cuts back its support. Moscow has condemned the asset freeze and warned that any seizure of its money would amount to “theft.” Western nations froze an estimated $300 billion in Russian funds after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022 – some €200 billion of which is held by Brussels-based clearinghouse Euroclear. The funds have accrued billions in interest, and the West has explored ways to use this revenue to finance Ukraine. While refraining from outright seizure, the G7 last year backed a plan to provide Kiev with $50 billion in loans to be repaid using the profits generated by the funds. The EU pledged $21 billion.

European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has proposed going further by creating a ‘reparation loans’ mechanism, which she described as urgently needed to finance Kiev. People familiar with discussions said the plan involves channeling cash balances from Russia’s immobilized assets into EU-issued bonds, with the proceeds transferred to Ukraine in tranches. Brussels argues the system would provide Kiev with immediate support while sidestepping a formal seizure. A second option under consideration would involve creating a special-purpose vehicle to manage the loans, which could also allow non-EU partners to take part.

Of the funds frozen at Euroclear, about €170 billion has already matured and now sits as cash on the clearinghouse’s books, the sources said. The plans have already drawn objections from member states. Belgium, Germany, and France have warned that dipping into the principal risks breaking the law and undermining confidence in the euro. Brussels is under pressure to cover a significant portion of Ukraine’s needs as Washington holds back on new aid, the FT wrote. According to a US note circulated among G7 capitals and cited by the outlet, members were urged to consider seizing the sovereign assets principal “innovatively” to fund Ukraine. Moscow warned that any attempt to use the assets “will not go unanswered.”

Read more …

“..maintains a “position of revanchism, of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia” while debating a potential troop deployment to Ukraine in case of a ceasefire.”

‘No Place’ For EU At Ukraine Talks – Lavrov (RT)

EU nations are trying to elbow their way into the Ukraine peace process despite their openly hostile stance toward Russia, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said, stressing that the bloc should be kept out of the talks for that reason. Speaking at an embassy roundtable about the Ukraine crisis on Wednesday, Lavrov said that EU countries are “clearly trying, quite brazenly, to reclaim a place at the negotiating table.” The minister, however, signaled that they have no business there. The bloc, he argued, maintains a “position of revanchism, of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia” while debating a potential troop deployment to Ukraine in case of a ceasefire. “There is, of course, no place for it at the negotiating table,” he stressed.

Moscow has consistently opposed the deployment of any Western troops in the neighboring country under any pretext, saying that one of the key reasons for the conflict was NATO’s expansion towards Russia’s doorstep. It has also warned that any unauthorized foreign troops in Ukraine would be considered “a legitimate military target.” Lavrov also noted that both the EU and Kiev are seeking to convince US President Donald Trump to abandon his push to settle the conflict and relapse into a stand-off with Russia. [They want], essentially, to turn Biden’s war into Trump’s war,” he said.

Since returning to office in January, Trump has been seeking to mediate an end to the Ukraine conflict, spearheading several rounds of talks with Russia. The effort culminated in a US-Russia summit in Alaska in mid-August — notably without EU or Ukrainian participation — which both sides described as highly productive. Although no breakthrough was reached, Trump later said Ukraine could neither expect to join NATO nor reclaim Crimea, which voted to join Russia in a 2014 referendum held after a Western-backed coup in Kiev. He has also shifted focus from seeking a temporary ceasefire to pursuing a permanent peace settlement.

Read more …

HA! They will train “at home” from now on, because:

“Earlier this year, it was revealed that Ukraine’s elite 155th Mechanized Brigade, partially trained in France, was plagued with mass desertion, with dozens of recruits reportedly going AWOL on French soil.”

Zelensky Reveals Major Change In Ukrainian Troop Training (RT)

Kiev no longer needs to send soldiers to train abroad because its troops learn more by fighting the Russian army, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has said. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Kiev has dispatched groups of recruits to Britain, France, Germany, Poland, the US, and other countries, primarily to train using Western-made armored vehicles and artillery. By 2023, “we understood that we can’t train our people there because the war [has] changed,” Zelensky told Sky News in an interview aired on Tuesday. When the soldiers returned home, they already had to be “retrained,” he added.

Earlier this year, it was revealed that Ukraine’s elite 155th Mechanized Brigade, partially trained in France, was plagued with mass desertion, with dozens of recruits reportedly going AWOL on French soil. Mikhail Drapaty, who led Ukraine’s Ground Forces at the time, said that the poor quality and low morale of the officers contributed to the unit’s problems. Zelensky claimed that currently only Russia and Ukraine know how to fight a modern “technological” war, particularly using state-of-the-art drones, adding that Kiev is ready to share its knowledge.

“We are inviting officers and representatives of other countries to learn here. Some of them are coming,” he said. “We are in the best shape technologically. We can be helpful to all of the world.” The technology and tactics on the battlefield evolve faster than the West makes decisions to fund Ukraine’s military, Zelensky said, urging Kiev’s backers to put more pressure on Russia. In March, Vadim Sukharevsky, the then-commander of Ukraine’s UAV forces, warned that “not a single NATO army is ready to resist the cascade of drones.” Military experts have said that a recent alleged drone incursion in Poland exposed the lack of robust anti-UAV defenses.

Read more …

“..neither Kiev nor its European backers appear to be genuinely interested in peace and are actively trying to prolong the conflict.”

Lavrov Accuses Kiev of ‘Sabotaging’ US Peace Efforts (RT)

Kiev is actively trying to sabotage US President Donald Trump’s efforts to peacefully resolve the Ukraine conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. He added that Washington appears to understand the need to resolve the root causes of the crisis.Speaking at a roundtable discussion of the Ukraine conflict on Wednesday, Lavrov noted that during the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska last month, the American side agreed that actions need to be taken to address the underlying issues of the crisis. He added that US special envoy Steve Witkoff later conveyed his assessment of the summit to the Ukrainian side.

”As we understand it, these assessments, these considerations, and these proposals have been rejected by Kiev,” Lavrov said, adding that the Ukrainian side is “trying in every way to sabotage this American administration’s line.” The foreign minister suggested that both Ukrainian and Western European leaders are trying to convince Trump to abandon his peacemaking efforts and return to confrontation with Russia, and “essentially turn Biden’s war into Trump’s.”

Lavrov went on to say that Europe has been desperately trying to win a place for itself at the negotiating table. He stressed, however, that given its open position of revanchism and its goal of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia, it has “nothing to do at the negotiating table.” Throughout the conflict, Moscow has stressed that it is open to a peaceful settlement, as long as it includes a Ukrainian commitment to neutrality, demilitarization, denazification, and acceptance of the new territorial realities. However, Russian officials, including Lavrov, have said neither Kiev nor its European backers appear to be genuinely interested in peace and are actively trying to prolong the conflict.

Read more …

“A draft law imposing sentences for military insubordination, described as “draconian,” proposed that desertion or absence without leave carry a prison term of up to 12 years, with no amnesty even for voluntary return.”

Zelensky ‘Losing Touch With Reality’ – Foreign Policy Analysis (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and his closest advisers are “losing touch with reality,” as shown by a series of policy and legislative mistakes that have sparked public uproar, analysis published in Foreign Policy claims, citing local sources and experts. The Ukrainian government recently attempted to push through two major measures designed to buttress the armed forces, but sources in Kiev have told journalist Paul Hockenos that each spawned backlash and raised questions about whether the country’s leadership is in tune with the concerns of ordinary Ukrainians. A draft law imposing sentences for military insubordination, described as “draconian,” proposed that desertion or absence without leave carry a prison term of up to 12 years, with no amnesty even for voluntary return.

The bill triggered protests, with activists carrying placards reading “Army service is not slavery,” prompting the authorities to withdraw the legislation. The second move relaxed martial law travel restrictions by allowing men aged between 18 and 22 to leave Ukraine. Martial law had previously barred all men aged between 18 and 60 from travel outside the country. Instead of relief, the reform stirred concern that young men might leave in large numbers, undermining future recruitment and worsening Ukraine’s long-standing demographic problems. One of the most significant blunders of Zelensky’s team was an attempt to crack down on anti-corruption bodies. This summer, Kiev attempted to strip the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) of independence, citing Russian influence, but the move resulted in mass protests, prompting the Ukrainian leadership to backpedal on the reform.

Defense analyst Dmitry K. told Hockenos that Zelensky’s inner circle “exists in a vacuum … They live in a bubble. Some advisers are very good, but they’re obviously not getting a consistent flow of relevant information.” An August poll by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology suggested that public trust in Zelensky had slumped by 7% in a month, standing at 58%. In July, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service reported that Western officials had secretly met with key Ukrainian powerbrokers to discuss ousting Zelensky and lining up a potential replacement.

Read more …

“[Western Europeans] tried… to prevent [US President Donald] Trump’s administration from moving toward promoting a real settlement…”

Western ‘Peacekeepers’ In Ukraine Would Be Seen As Occupiers – Lavrov (RT)

Russia would view Western ‘peacekeepers’ in Ukraine simply as “occupation forces,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Speaking at an embassy roundtable on Wednesday, Lavrov warned that any foreign troops entering the conflict zone alongside Kiev’s forces would be treated as legitimate targets by the Russian military. Members of the so-called “coalition of the willing,” a group of Western states pushing for continued aid to Kiev, have floated deploying NATO troops to Ukraine to monitor a potential ceasefire as part of security guarantees demanded by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. Moscow has repeatedly rejected any Western military presence, whether labeled peacekeepers or otherwise.

Lavrov dismissed the proposals as absurd, likening the people behind them to pompous characters from old Russian satire – full of themselves but with no real influence. He argued that these initiatives are just a way to delay serious peace talks that could actually deal with the deeper causes of the conflict. “[Western Europeans] tried… to prevent [US President Donald] Trump’s administration from moving toward promoting a real settlement… by pumping up the Zelensky regime with weapons, and recently also by forming some peacekeeping, but essentially occupational, forces, by talking about creating a no-fly zone over Ukraine,” Lavrov said. “If some part of Ukraine becomes a territory where so-called peacekeepers are deployed, and Western security guarantees aimed against Russia are in effect for this part of Ukraine, this will mean only one thing: that the West has occupied [this territory],” he added.

The diplomat stressed that any European military contingents in Ukraine would be legitimate targets for the Russian military, noting that Moscow has long warned about this. While Russia says it does not oppose Western security guarantees for Ukraine in principle, it insists they be backed by UN Security Council members, including China. Moscow has stressed that such guarantees must not be “one-sided” or aimed at containing Russia and should come only after a peace deal, not before. Moscow has repeatedly said it is open to a diplomatic solution to the conflict but insists any settlement must address its underlying causes and include Ukraine abandoning its NATO ambitions, pledging neutrality, demilitarizing, and recognizing the new territorial realities.

Read more …

“.. cited sources in Poland’s security agencies as saying the object was in fact an AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile fired from a Polish F-16 jet.”

‘Russian Drone Attack’ Damage Was Caused By Polish Missile (RT)

The only confirmed damage from what Poland claims was a Russian drone incursion was actually caused by a Polish missile which struck a residential building by mistake, Rzeczpospolita has reported, citing sources. Polish officials last week reported at least 19 violations of the country’s airspace by drones, saying up to four UAVs had been downed while accusing Moscow of being behind the incident. Russia has rejected the accusation, insisting its drones only strike Ukrainian military-related facilities and noting that Western leaders “accuse Russia of provocations on a daily basis, most often declining to offer any arguments.” Rzeczpospolita reported on Tuesday that most of the drones involved in the incident were not carrying explosives and caused no damage.

However, one exception was in the village of Wyryki Wola near the border with Belarus, where what was described by Poland as an “unidentified flying object” crashed into a private home, damaging the roof but without causing casualties. Western media reports claimed that the home had been hit by a Russian drone. Investigators have declined to say what exactly struck the building, only stating that the object was not identified as a drone. Rzeczpospolita, however, cited sources in Poland’s security agencies as saying the object was in fact an AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile fired from a Polish F-16 jet. The missile reportedly suffered a guidance system malfunction and did not explode only because its safety devices prevented detonation.

The missile, around three meters long and weighing over 150kg, is said to have struck the house after being fired in an attempt to shoot down a drone.Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk did not comment on the report but scrambled to take aim at Moscow. “The entire responsibility for the damage to the house in Wyryki rests with… Russia… Hands off Polish soldiers,” he said. On Sunday, Tusk also complained that the drone incident had caused a wave of “antipathy towards a struggling Ukraine,” claiming, without proof, that this was being fueled by Moscow. He stressed that Warsaw’s goal is “to stem this tide,” portraying it as a “test of patriotism.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

CDC


https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1968344861829943330

GMO

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 262025
 


Joseph-Désiré Court Le Masque 1843

 

Zelenski Rejects Giving Land As Fascists Promise To Kill Him (MoA)
Zaluzhny ‘Biding Time’ To Challenge Zelensky – Guardian (RT)
CIA’s Covert Ukraine Invasion Plan (Kit Klarenberg)
US Won’t Play Key Role In Ukraine’s Security Guarantees – Trump (RT)
The Judicial Calvinball of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (Turley)
Trump Fires Fed Governor Lisa Cook For “Potentially Criminal Conduct” (ZH)
War, Trump’s New $500 Note & Volcanos -Martin Armstrong (USAW)
A Lesson on Slavery for CNN (Paul Craig Roberts)
‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Superintelligent Machines Could Replace Humanity (ET)
Musk Takes On Apple, OpenAI In Antitrust Showdown Over Chatbots (ZH)
Dutch Foreign Minister Quits Over Israel (RT)
US Scientists Axe ‘Woke’ To Keep Cash Flowing – WSJ (RT)
Trump Proposes Renaming Department of Defense to Its Original Name (ET)
Giving Trump The Nobel Peace Prize Makes Some Sense (Lukyanov)
Ghislaine ‘Splainin’ (James Howard Kunstler)

 

 

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1959996874892378315

Scalia

 

 

 

 

“He would style himself as a tough, wartime leader who would promise “blood, sweat and tears” to the Ukrainian people in return for saving the nation..”

Ideal for warmongers.

Zelenski Rejects Giving Land As Fascists Promise To Kill Him (MoA)

The (former) President Zelenski of Ukraine is refusing any compromise in negotiations with Russia. He would be killed and replaced by a more right wing figure if he would consider otherwise. In a speech on Sunday marking Ukraine’s independence Zelenski insisted of recapturing all of Ukraine including Crimea. As the Washington Post summarizes: “In Kyiv on Sunday, Ukraine’s Independence Day, Zelensky addressed the nation and vowed to restore its territorial integrity. “Ukraine will never again be forced in history to endure the shame that the Russians call a ‘compromise,’” he said. “We need a just peace.” He listed some of the regions occupied by Russia — including Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea — and said “no temporary occupation” could change the fact that the land belongs to Ukraine.

Zelenski thus rejects calls by U.S. President Trump to give up Ukrainian territory in exchange for peace. One reason why he does so may be the personal danger he is in. Any compromise about territory may well cost his life. The London Times continues to make propaganda for Nazis. After a recent whitewashing interview with Azov Nazi leader Biletsky (archived) it yesterday published an interview with the former leader of the fascist Right Sector in Odessa Serhii Sterneneko. Sterneneko had a leading role in the 2014 massacres in Maidan Square and at the Trade Union’s House in Odessa. The Times is whitewashing his participation in those events. It does not mind to publish his threats against Zelenski: “[A]mong Ukraine’s younger generation of soldiers and civilians, Sternenko’s brand of truth to power has wide popularity. “I say what I think, and people like what I say.”

His views on President Putin’s demand for Ukraine to cede the territory it defends in the eastern Donbas region as a precondition for possible peace are typically direct. “If [President] Zelensky were to give any unconquered land away, he would be a corpse — politically, and then for real,” Sternenko said. “It would be a bomb under our sovereignty. People would never accept it.” Sternenko, who himself has avoided the draft, wants the war to go on forever: “Indeed, as he discussed Russian intransigence and President Trump’s efforts to end the war, Sternenko’s thoughts on the possibility of peace appeared to be absent of any compromise over Ukrainian soil. “At the end there will only be one victor, Russia or Ukraine,” he said. “If the Russian empire continues to exist in this present form then it will always want to expand. Compromise is impossible. The struggle will be eternal until the moment Russia leaves Ukrainian land.”

Other British media continue to promote the rise of Nazi affiliated figures in Ukraine. The Guardian adds by promoting the presidential campaign of the former Ukrainian general and now ambassador to the UK Valeri Zaluzhny: In private conversations, Zaluzhnyi has not confirmed he plans to go into politics, but he has allowed himself to speculate on what kind of platform he could propose if he does make the decision. Those close to him say he sees Israel as a model, despite its current bloody actions in Gaza, viewing it as a small country surrounded by enemies and fully focused on defence.

He would style himself as a tough, wartime leader who would promise “blood, sweat and tears” to the Ukrainian people in return for saving the nation, channelling Winston Churchill. In one private conversation, he said: “I don’t know if the Ukrainian people will be ready for that, ready for these tough policies.” A day before being fired as the commander of the Ukrainian army Zaluzhny took a selfie with the leader of the fascist Right Sector and commander of Right Sector brigade of Ukrainian military in front of a portrait of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera and the fascist OUN flag.

Read more …

Musical chairs solve nothing. It would still be Azov.

Zaluzhny ‘Biding Time’ To Challenge Zelensky – Guardian (RT)

There is an “increasing belief” in Kiev that former commander-in-chief, Valery Zaluzhny, is preparing to go head-to-head with Vladimir Zelensky in a potential presidential race, The Guardian has claimed. Amid growing tensions, Ukrainian leader Zelensky removed the general from his post in February 2024 and dispatched him to the UK to serve as Kiev’s ambassador. In an article on Monday, The Guardian claimed that while Zaluzhny has painstakingly concealed any political ambition he may have, “many assume he is just biding his time before entering the fray.” The British newspaper cited the general-turned-envoy’s supposed musings as to how he would present himself to Ukrainian voters and what platform he would run on, should he decide to vie for the presidency.

The outlet further stated that Zaluzhny has been receiving a steady flow of Ukrainian and Western dignitaries at both the embassy in London and in Kiev earlier this year. The Guardian also quoted anonymous sources as saying that in March, following the infamous showdown between Zelensky and US President Donald Trump at the White House, Vice President J.D. Vance secretly reached out to Zaluzhny, in an apparent attempt to sound him out as a potential alternative leader. He reportedly turned down Vance’s overtures. Last week, freelance journalist Katie Livingstone claimed that Zaluzhny was “quietly preparing a run for president – in direct opposition to Zelensky.” She quoted an unnamed source as suggesting that his team had “effectively begun” an unofficial PR campaign.

Zaluzhny’s press representative was quick to deny the speculation. A survey of 1,000 people in Ukraine conducted July 4-5 by ‘Rating’ indicated that the former commander-in-chief was trusted by 73% of respondents. That would put him in first place among political figures in the country, with Zelensky trailing six percentage points behind, the poll suggested. Another survey by a different pollster in late June showed that 41% of Ukrainians believed the country was drifting toward authoritarianism. Zelensky’s presidential term expired in May 2024, but he has refused to hold new elections, citing martial law. The Kremlin insists that the Ukrainian leader has lost legitimacy.

Read more …

“69% of citizens “favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible.” Just 24% wish to keep fighting.”

CIA’s Covert Ukraine Invasion Plan (Kit Klarenberg)

On August 7th, US polling giant Gallup published the remarkable results of a survey of Ukrainians. Public support for Kiev “fighting until victory” has plummeted to a record low “across all segments” of the population, “regardless of region or demographic group.” In a “nearly complete reversal from public opinion in 2022,” 69% of citizens “favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible.” Just 24% wish to keep fighting. However, vanishingly few believe the proxy war will end anytime soon. The reasons for Ukrainian pessimism on this point are unstated, but an obvious explanation is the intransigence of President Volodymyr Zelensky, encouraged by his overseas backers – Britain in particular. London’s reverie of breaking up Russia into readily-exploitable chunks dates back centuries, and became turbocharged in the wake of the February 2014 Maidan coup. In July that year, a precise blueprint for the current proxy conflict was published by the Institute for Statecraft, a NATO/MI6 cutout founded by veteran British military intelligence apparatchik Chris Donnelly.

In response to the Donbass civil war, Statecraft advocated targeting Moscow with a variety of “anti-subversive measures”. This included “economic boycott, breach of diplomatic relations,” as well as “propaganda and counter-propaganda, pressure on neutrals.” The objective was to produce “armed conflict of the old-fashioned sort” with Russia, which “Britain and the West could win.” While we are now witnessing in real-time the brutal unravelling of Donnelly’s monstrous plot, Anglo-American designs of using Ukraine as a beachhead for all-out war with Moscow date back far further.

In August 1957, the CIA secretly drew up elaborate plans for an invasion of Ukraine by US special forces. It was hoped neighbourhood anti-Communist agitators would be mobilized as footsoldiers to assist in the effort. A detailed 200-page report, Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas, set out demographic, economic, geographical, historical and political factors throughout the then-Soviet Socialist Republic that could facilitate, or impede, Washington’s quest to ignite local insurrection, and in turn the USSR’s ultimate collapse. The mission was forecast to be a delicate and difficult balancing act, as much of Ukraine’s population held “few grievances” against Russians or Communist rule, which could be exploited to foment an armed uprising.

Just as problematically, “the long history of union between Russia and Ukraine, which stretches in an almost unbroken line from 1654 to the present day,” resulted in “many Ukrainians” having “adopted the Russian way of life”. Problematically, there was thus a pronounced lack of “resistance to Soviet rule” among the population. The “great influence” of Russian culture over Ukrainians, “many influential positions” in local government being held “by Russians or Ukrainians sympathetic to [Communist] rule, and “relative similarity” of their “languages, customs, and backgrounds”, meant there were “fewer points of conflict between the Ukrainians and Russians” than in Warsaw Pact nations. Throughout those satellite states, the CIA had to varying success already recruited clandestine networks of “freedom fighters” as anti-Communist Fifth Columnists. Yet, the Agency remained keen to identify potential “resistance” actors in Ukraine:

“Some Ukrainians are apparently only slightly aware of the differences which set them apart from Russians and feel little national antagonism. Nevertheless, important grievances exist, and among other Ukrainians there is opposition to Soviet authority which often has assumed a nationalist form. Under favorable conditions, these people might be expected to assist American Special Forces in fighting against the regime.”

Read more …

But Russia will.

US Won’t Play Key Role In Ukraine’s Security Guarantees – Trump (RT)

Europe must take the lead in providing “significant security guarantees” to Ukraine, US President Donald Trump said on Monday. Washington’s role will be supportive rather than primary, he stressed. “Europe is going to give them significant security guarantees – and they should, because they’re right there,” Trump told reporters at the Oval Office. He added that Washington would remain involved “from the standpoint of backup.” This isn’t the first time Trump has clarified Washington’s role in resolving the Ukraine conflict. Speaking in the Oval Office last week with Vladimir Zelensky, Trump was asked if security guarantees for Kiev could involve US troops. We’ll let you know that maybe later today, we’re meeting with the leaders of seven great countries. There will be a lot of help. Europe is the first line of defense because they are there, but we’re going to help, we’ll be involved.

Since the talks with Zelensky Trump has also clarified that as far as Washington is concerned, Ukraine getting Crimea back and joining NATO are both “impossible.” He told Fox & Friends last Tuesday that Kiev had approached the US-led military bloc to seek help in trying to get the peninsula back. “They went in and said ‘We want to get Crimea back’. This was at the beginning,” Trump revealed. “The other thing they said was ‘We want to be a member of NATO’. Well, both of those things are impossible.” “It was always a no-no,” both during the time of the Soviet Union, and now with Russia, Trump explained, adding that Russia has always stressed it did not want “the enemy” on its border. Zelensky said on Saturday that new details of security guarantees for Ukraine would be ready “in the coming days.”

“The teams of Ukraine, the United States, and European partners” are working together on the architecture of these guarantees, he said. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte stressed that “robust security guarantees will be essential” and claimed that Washington, despite its limited role, would remain part of the process. Zelensky and his Western European backers have called for “Article 5-like guarantees” that would obligate countries to respond collectively if Ukraine were attacked. He also proposed defining which states would be responsible for ground support, air defense, and maritime security, alongside commitments to fund Ukraine’s armed forces.

Speaking in Kiev on Friday, Rutte called for strengthening Ukraine’s military capacity and putting in place binding guarantees from Europe and the US. Some nations have even floated sending peacekeepers, while Canada has not ruled out contributing troops. Washington has rejected deploying ground forces but left open the possibility of air support. After meeting Trump earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed that Ukraine’s security must be ensured but warned against solutions that exclude Moscow. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov argued that guarantees “must be subject to consensus” and denounced proposals involving foreign military intervention as “absolutely unacceptable.”

Read more …

The Supreme Court as a woke podium.

The Judicial Calvinball of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (Turley)

“I just feel that I have a wonderful opportunity.” Those words of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson came in a recent interview, wherein the justice explained how she felt liberated after becoming a member of the Supreme Court “to tell people in my opinions how I feel about the issues. And that’s what I try to do.” Jackson’s sense of liberation has increasingly become the subject of consternation on the court itself, as she unloads on her colleagues in strikingly strident opinions. Most recently, Jackson went ballistic after her colleagues reversed another district court judge who issued a sweeping injunction barring the Trump Administration from canceling roughly $783 million in grants in the National Institutes of Health. Again writing alone, Jackson unleashed a tongue-lashing on her colleagues, who she suggested were unethical, unthinking cutouts for Trump.

She denounced her fellow justices, stating, “This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this administration always wins.” For some of us who have followed Jackson’s interestingly controversial tenure on the court, it was crushingly ironic. Although Jackson accused her colleagues of following a new rule that they must always rule with Trump, she herself is widely viewed as the very embodiment of the actual rule of the made-up game based on the comic strip of Calvin and Hobbes. In Jacksonian jurisprudence, it often seems like there are no fixed rules, only fixed outcomes. She then attacks her colleagues for a lack of integrity or empathy. To quote Calvin, Jackson proves that “there’s no problem so awful that you can’t add some guilt to it and make it even worse.”

Jackson has attacked her colleagues in opinions, shattering traditions of civility and restraint. Her colleagues have clearly had enough. She now regularly writes diatribes that neither of her fellow liberals — Justices Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan — are willing to sign on to. Indeed, she has raged against opinions that her liberal colleagues have joined. Take Stanley v. City of Sanford. Justices Jackson and Neil Gorsuch took some fierce swings at each other in a case concerning a retired firefighter who wants to sue her former employer. The majority, including Kagan, rejected a ridiculous claim from a Florida firefighter who sued for discrimination for a position that she had neither held nor sought.

The court ruled that the language of the statute clearly required plaintiffs to be “qualified” for a given position before they could claim to have been denied it due to discrimination. (Stanley has Parkinson’s disease and had taken a disability retirement at age 47 due to the progress of the disease.) Jackson, however, was irate that Stanley could not sue for the denial of a position that she never sought, held, or was qualified to perform. Jackson accused the majority of once again showing how “pure textualists can easily disguise their own preferences as ‘textual’ inevitabilities.” It was not only deeply insulting, but perfectly bizarre, given that Kagan had joined in the majority opinion. Kagan is about as pure a textualist judge as she is a pure taxidermist.

Read more …

“Good luck with that plan when the FBI turns up tomorrow at your place of work.”

Trump Fires Fed Governor Lisa Cook For “Potentially Criminal Conduct” (ZH)

Update (2330ET): Former Fed governor Lisa Cook says she will not resign, the Washington Post reports, citing a statement from Cook. “President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so,” Cook said through a spokeswoman: WaPo “I will continue to carry out my duties to help the American economy as I have been doing since 2022,” Cook said. Good luck with that plan when the FBI turns up tomorrow at your place of work.
* * *
Promises made… promises kept… On Friday, President Trump warned that he would fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook who allegedly “falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms” if she didn’t resign… She immediately played the victim card, claiming she “would not be bullied”. But now that is moot as President Trump has fired her, effective immediately: ” I have determined that there is sufficient cause to remove you from your position…

The Federal Reserve has tremendous responsibility for setting interest rates and regulating reserve and member banks. The American people must be able to have full confidence in the honesty of the members entrusted with setting policy and overseeing the Federal Reserve. In light of your deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter, they cannot and I do not have such confidence in your integrity. At a minimum, the conduct at issue exhibits the sort of gross negligence in financial transactions that calls into question your competence and trustworthiness as a financial regulator.”

Read more …

“Everybody else is cancelling currency and putting in capital controls, and Trump is going in the opposite direction.”

“I still want to have one of those $500 notes.”

War, Trump’s New $500 Note & Volcanos -Martin Armstrong (USAW)

Five weeks ago, legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong warned his “Socrates” predictive computer program showed a “100% Chance of Nuclear War.” After that, Trump was able to get Putin to Alaska to start meaningful peace talks between Russia and Ukraine. The chance for war is still 100%, but now, that war may not involve America. Armstrong explains, “My sources in Ukraine are telling me the losses on the battlefield are approaching 1.8 million, 5 million fled to Russia, 8 million fled to the EU. . .. Ukraine is about ready to fall apart. . .. I spread this to Washington and that is President Zelensky was sending $50 million per month to UAE. So, Zelensky has been preparing to leave. There is no way this guy could possibly retire in Ukraine. They will kill him.”

Does this mean the war may be over? Zelensky and nearly all of Europe’s leaders came to Washington recently to meet with President Trump, but it really was not to talk peace. Armstrong says, “The fact that all those leaders came to Washington—uninvited, they all met with Zelensky before they went to meet with Trump. Why did they come? Because they need war. I have warned Washington.” So, if Europe starts a wider war with Russia, will Trump stay out of it? Armstrong says, “Yes, Trump said no American troops from what I have been told. Trump refuses to send any American troops to Ukraine as peacekeepers—period.”

Reading between the lines, does this mean Trump is putting the EU on notice we are not going to Article 5 in if you start a war? Armstrong says, “Article 5 is voluntary. I have made this very clear to them in Washington. You don’t have to participate. . .. I can’t stop the war. The best I can do is reduce the amplitude. If I can keep America out of this war, that is our best outcome. . .. Europe knows it’s in trouble financially. They have $335 billion of Russian assets frozen. France has about $71 billion. . .. The rumor going around right now is if there is a peace deal and they have to release those frozen assets, France can’t because they have been dipping into them. Europe is a complete mess. When it comes down to handing back $335 billion in Russian assets, I am not sure Europe is prepared to do that.”

Armstrong says forget all the talk of the elite wanting to get rid of cash and replace it with digital currency. Armstrong says, “No, no, no. Why is Trump talking about a $500 note. . .. Trump would not even contemplate doing a $500 bill if he was going to cancel the currency. Everybody else is cancelling currency and putting in capital controls, and Trump is going in the opposite direction. . .. Gold is still projected to go much higher because it is anticipating war.”

One of the surprising things Armstrong brought up are new signals from “Socrates” on increasing volcanic activity all over the world. Hawaii’s Kilauea eruption happened for the 31st time since December on Friday. It spewed lava for 12 hours, and then there was the recent eruption in Northeast Russia that had a huge eruption after 600 years of lying dormant. Armstrong says, “We have every data base in there. Earthquakes, volcanos and temperatures back to 1869 from New York City. It does not show global warming. . .. The computer says we are heading to global cooling and not global warming. . .. The computer is showing from 2025 on, we are going to be seeing a lot more volcanic activity. I just got off the phone with someone from Italy, and they say the super volcano there is starting to become active.”

In closing, Armstrong says, “I still want to have one of those $500 notes.”]

Read more …

“The black King of Dahomey.”

A Lesson on Slavery for CNN (Paul Craig Roberts)

The saga of American slavery has more holes in it than the Zionist saga of the Holocaust. Recently President Trump wondered about the woke Smithsonian Institute’s fixation on slavery as if it was the principal problem the world faces today. The liberal media had a hissy fit. CNN rushed to do a program on slavery, the woke rectification for which is multiculturalism and the replacement of the white racist population by people of color. This is the political agenda of the Democrat Party. To watch white people so determined to achieve their own destruction by voting Democrat is amazing. The response made by those critical of CNN’s attack on white Americans was that slavery was a matter of the distant past, and we made amends for our responsibility in a civil war.

What nonsense. No American ever had any responsibility for slavery. The black King of Dahomey did. Here are the undeniable, indisputable, basic facts: Over the course of history far more white people have been slaves than blacks. Some of these white slaves were held by Romans and other conquerors in ancient times. Most were held by people of color who raided Europe’s Mediterranean coast for slaves. Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the US (1801-1809) had to send the US Navy and Marines to “the shores of Tripoli” to stop the North Africans from capturing American ships and enslaving their passengers and crews. In the New World (Caribbean Islands, North and South America) European colonists found abundant resources but no labor force.

British and European sea captains saw a business opportunity in purchasing slaves from the black King of Dahomey and selling them to the colonists as a labor force. The black King of Dahomey conducted annual slave wars against other blacks and sold the surplus to Arabs and to European sea captains. No white colonist in what later became the United States ever enslaved a black person. They purchased blacks already enslaved by the black King of Dahomey. When the United States came into existence in the late 18th century, slavery was an inherited institution. Slavery existed as the labor force for large agricultural plantations, the agri-businesses of the time. The plantations using slave labor did not enslave the slaves. They purchased already enslaved labor as no work force was available.

In the United States slavery was doomed as the frontier closed. Slavery had a long life because white immigrants who entered America could avoid becoming agricultural labor by moving west and occupying land to which the native Americans had use rights but not ownership rights as understood in Western law. Thus the native inhabitants could be dispossessed. As the constant stream of immigrant-invaders, such as the US and Europe are experiencing today, continued, the Indian lands were settled by the immigrant-invaders and the frontier closed by 1890. Slavery could not have existed beyond that date and, in fact, could not have lasted that long. Slavery was costly compared to the wages of free labor.

Slavery was an expensive labor force. In 19th century America a male field hand cost $1,500. If a slave had blacksmith or carpenter skills, he cost $2,000. The price of a slave was three to four times the annual income of a skilled white man such as a blacksmith. Moreover, a slave, if he was to be productive, needed sufficient food, housing, and medical care. Moreover, he required respect and appreciation, Many of the slaves were warriors captured in the black King of Dahomey’s slave wars. They were experienced fighters and had to be treated with respect. For a white plantation owner to be surrounded by a large number of black men and for him to expect them to work required his respect and proper treatment of his labor force in which he had a large investment.

Propaganda such as Uncle Tom’s Cabin was northern war propaganda against the South. A few issues back, the City Journal posed the question of who was in charge of a rice or sugar plantation in the Caribbean when the one white owner, the only white on the premises, had a work force of 50 black men. The idea that it was customary to whip black warriors and to rape their wives is farfetched.

Read more …

“Making God”

‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Superintelligent Machines Could Replace Humanity (ET)

Geoffrey Hinton, the pioneering computer scientist called the “godfather of AI,” has once again sounded the alarm that the very technology he helped bring to life could spell the end of humanity as we know it. In an interview clip released Aug. 18 as part of the forthcoming film “Making God,” Hinton delivered one of his starkest warnings yet. He said that humanity risks being sidelined—and eventually replaced—by machines far smarter than ourselves. “Most people aren’t able to comprehend the idea of things more intelligent than us,” Hinton, a Nobel Prize winner for physics and a former Google executive, said in the clip. “They always think, ‘Well, how are we going to use this thing?’ They don’t think, ‘Well, how’s it going to use us?’”

Hinton said he is “fairly confident” that artificial intelligence will drive massive unemployment, pointing to early examples of tech giants such as Microsoft replacing junior programmers with AI. But the larger danger, he said, goes far beyond the workplace. The only silver lining is that “it won’t eat us, because it’ll be made of silicon,” he said. Hinton, 77, has spent decades pioneering deep learning, the neural network architecture that underpins today’s artificial intelligence systems. His breakthroughs in the 1980s—particularly the invention of the Boltzmann machine, which could learn to recognize patterns in data—helped open the door to image recognition and modern machine learning.

That work earned him the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics, awarded “for foundational discoveries and inventions that enable machine learning with artificial neural networks.” The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences noted how Hinton’s early use of statistical physics provided the conceptual leap that made today’s AI revolution possible. But Hinton has since emerged as one of the field’s fiercest critics, warning that its rapid development has outpaced society’s ability to keep it safe. In 2023, he resigned from his role at Google so he could speak freely about the risks without implicating the company. In his Nobel lecture, Hinton acknowledged the potential benefits of AI—such as productivity gains and new medical treatments that could be a “wonderful advance for all humanity.” Yet he also warned that creating digital beings more intelligent than humans poses an “existential threat.”

“I wish I’d thought about safety issues too,” he said during the recent Ai4 conference in Las Vegas, reflecting on his career. He noted that he now regrets solely focusing on making AI work, rather than anticipating its risks. Hinton has previously estimated that there is a 10 percent to 20 percent chance that AI could wipe out humanity. In a June episode of The Diary of a CEO podcast, he said that the engineers behind today’s AI systems don’t fully understand the technology and broadly fall into two camps: one that believes in a dystopian future where humans are displaced, and the other that dismisses such fears as science fiction. “I think both of those positions are extreme,” Hinton said. “I often say 10 percent to 20 percent chance [for AI] to wipe us out. But that’s just gut, based on the idea that we’re still making them and we’re pretty ingenious. And the hope is that if enough smart people do enough research with enough resources, we’ll figure out a way to build them so they’ll never want to harm us.”

Read more …

“If not for its exclusive deal with OpenAI, Apple would have no reason to refrain from more prominently featuring the X app and the Grok app in its App Store.”

Musk Takes On Apple, OpenAI In Antitrust Showdown Over Chatbots (ZH)

Elon Musk’s X and xAI have filed a federal lawsuit in Fort Worth, Texas, accusing Apple and OpenAI of “locking up markets” to preserve their monopolies and shut out rivals. This comes as Musk’s long-running feud with OpenAI chief Sam Altman intensifies. The lawsuit centers on Apple’s recent deal to make OpenAI’s ChatGPT the only generative AI chatbot on the iPhone’s operating system, effectively shutting out xAI’s Grok and other rivals, such as Google’s Gemini and Anthropic. The lawsuit’s introduction argues that Apple and OpenAI have teamed up to protect their monopolies in smartphones and AI chatbots:

“This is a tale of two monopolists joining forces to ensure their continued dominance in a world rapidly driven by the most powerful technology humanity has ever created: artificial intelligence (“AI”). Working in tandem, Defendants Apple and OpenAI have locked up markets to maintain their monopolies and prevent innovators like X and xAI from competing.1 Plaintiffs bring this suit to stop Defendants from perpetrating their anticompetitive scheme and to recover billions in damages. AI is fundamentally reshaping our world. Technology powered by AI has not only become embedded in our daily lives but is also transforming critical sectors like healthcare, education, and finance.

The consensus among global business leaders, academics, and scientists is that AI adoption is both unavoidable and transformational—and businesses that do not plan for it risk falling behind. As Apple now recognizes, AI poses an existential threat to its business. For example, AI is rapidly advancing the rise of “super apps”—i.e., multi-functional platforms that offer many of the services of smartphones, such as social connectivity and messaging, financial services, e-commerce, and entertainment—that do not require a customer to be tied to a particular device. In other words, super apps, like those being developed by X and xAI, stand ready to upend the smartphone market and Apple’s entrenched monopoly in it.

The writing is on the wall. Apple’s Senior Vice President for Services, Eddy Cue, has expressed worries that AI might destroy Apple’s smartphone business, just as Apple’s iPhone did to Nokia’s handsets. Apple knows it cannot escape the inevitable—at least not alone. In a desperate bid to protect its smartphone monopoly, Apple has joined forces with the company that most benefits from inhibiting competition and innovation in AI: OpenAI, a monopolist in the market for generative AI chatbots. OpenAI quickly rose to dominance in the generative AI chatbot market after introducing its flagship service, ChatGPT, in 2022. Today, OpenAI controls at least 80 percent of the market. Because of OpenAI’s monopoly, other generative AI chatbots have struggled to gain share. xAI’s Grok has yet to gain more than a few percent of the market despite accolades about its superior features.

Just like Apple, OpenAI has incentive to protect its monopoly by thwarting competition and innovation in the generative AI chatbot market. And just like Apple, it has done so in violation of the antitrust laws.

In June 2024, Apple and OpenAI announced that Apple would integrate OpenAI’s ChatGPT into Apple’s iPhone operating system (“iOS”). Apple and OpenAI’s exclusive arrangement has made ChatGPT the only generative AI chatbot integrated into the iPhone. This means that if iPhone users want to use a generative AI chatbot for key tasks on their devices, they have no choice but to use ChatGPT, even if they would prefer to use more innovative and imaginative products like xAI’s Grok. An OpenAI strategy document recognized the importance of competition in this emerging and transformational space: “Real choice drives competition and benefits everyone. Users should be able to pick their AI assistant.” Yet Apple and OpenAI have colluded to prevent exactly that.”

X and xAI argue: “If not for its exclusive deal with OpenAI, Apple would have no reason to refrain from more prominently featuring the X app and the Grok app in its App Store.” Just a few weeks ago, Musk threatened Apple with legal action over alleged antitrust violations regarding the App Store rankings of the Grok AI chatbot. He wrote in an X post that Apple’s behavior “makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store.” Musk is seeking an injunction to block Apple and OpenAI’s exclusive chatbot deal and billions in damages. If successful, the case could reshape how AI bots are distributed on smartphones.

Read more …

“Veldkamp, who previously served as Dutch ambassador to Israel, had advocated a ban on imports from Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories..”

Dutch Foreign Minister Quits Over Israel (RT)

Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp has stepped down in protest over the coalition government’s refusal to impose sanctions on Israel for its actions in Gaza. The resignation of Veldkamp, along with the country’s Minister for Foreign Trade Hanneke Boerma, has reduced the Dutch caretaker government to holding just 32 out of 150 seats. In a statement on Saturday the foreign ministry said that “after a meeting of the cabinet on the situation in Gaza,” the Social Contract (NSC) party, of which both officials are members, decided to withdraw from the caretaker coalition government.Veldkamp, who previously served as Dutch ambassador to Israel, had advocated a ban on imports from Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories in response to Israel’s continued military offensive in Gaza.

In a statement on its website on Friday, the party said that it had sought “additional measures” against Israel in light of the “increasingly deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.” However, the other two coalition partners refused to back sanctions, prompting the NSC to pull out in protest. On Thursday, the Netherlands, along with 20 other nations, signed a joint declaration condemning Israeli plans to build an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank. Last month, Amsterdam declared two hardline Israeli ministers persona non grata. Back in June, Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares called on the EU to “immediately suspend” the EU-Israel association agreement and impose a ban on arms sales to Israel.

In light of the ongoing Israeli military operation in Gaza, a growing number of traditionally pro-Israel Western countries, including France and the UK, have expressed in recent months a readiness to officially recognize Palestinian statehood. Earlier this week, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced the start of an operation to take full control of Gaza City. The conflict erupted after a Hamas incursion into southern Israel on October 7, 2023, which left about 1,200 people dead and 250 taken hostage. According to Gaza’s Hamas-controlled Health Ministry, more than 62,000 people, most of them civilians, have been killed by Israeli strikes in the enclave since then.

Read more …

They’e playing politics. But what do they think?

US Scientists Axe ‘Woke’ To Keep Cash Flowing – WSJ (RT)

Researchers in the US have been revising their grant renewal applications en masse in recent months over fears that wording tied to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives could cost them government funding, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday Since taking office in January, US President Donald Trump, a long-time critic of what he views as “divisive” leftist narratives, has taken numerous steps to eradicate such policies and even associated language at the government level. Promoted by his predecessor Democrat Joe Biden, DEI programs sought to ensure that sexual and racial minorities were better represented in government agencies. The Trump administration has described the initiatives as “illegal and immoral discrimination.”

The WSJ wrote that at least 600 grant renewal applications since October 2024 had removed “terms associated with diversity, equity and inclusion,” such as “diverse,” “underrepresented,” and “disparities.” The outlet said it had reviewed thousands of applications for National Institutes of Health-funded projects in the fiscal years 2024 and 2025. Some scientists have also reportedly shifted the focus of studies that were originally centered on minority groups. A Johns Hopkins University spokesperson confirmed to the WSJ that “federal agencies have asked researchers to make modest modifications” before renewing grants. On his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order mandating a review of government DEI initiatives.

Addressing a joint session of Congress in March, Trump declared that “we’ve ended the tyranny of so-called Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and indeed the private sector and our military.” He stressed that appointments should be made strictly on the basis of skills and competence, not race or gender. The Trump administration has also targeted a number of elite universities, including Harvard, for their failure to address “anti-Semitic” protests in support of Palestine and abolish DEI policies, suspending federal funding and restricting international student enrollment.

Read more …

A rose by any other name…

Trump Proposes Renaming Department of Defense to Its Original Name (ET)

President Donald Trump proposed on Aug. 25 that his administration rename the Department of Defense to its previous name, the Department of War. “Pete, you started off by saying ’the Department of Defense.’ And somehow it didn’t sound good to me,” Trump said in the Oval Office, speaking to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, after signing executive orders on fighting crime, including in Washington. “Defense. What are we, defense? Why are we defense? It used to be called the Department of War, and it had a stronger sound. And, as you know, we won World War I, we won World War II, we won everything. Now we have a Department of Defense. We’re defenders. I don’t know.” Hegseth, standing behind Trump, said the name change is on the way. “That’s coming soon, sir,” he told Trump.

Trump said that “Department of War” sounds better than “Department of Defense.” “Defense? I don’t want to be Defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too, if that’s OK,” he said, adding that “as Department of War, we won everything, we won everything. And I think we’re going to have to go back to that.” Trump touted bringing an end to conflicts between India and Pakistan and the Congo and Rwanda. This was not the first time Trump had suggested changing the Defense Department back to its previous name. “You know it used to be called secretary of war,” Trump told reporters on June 25 at the NATO summit in the Netherlands. “Maybe for a couple of weeks we’ll call it that because we feel like warriors.” He introduced Hegseth as “secretary of war.” “Then we became politically correct and they called it secretary of defense,” Trump said. “Maybe we’ll have to think about changing it. But we feel that way.”

Prior to becoming defense secretary, Hegseth called for changing the Defense Department back to its old name. “Sure, our military defends us. And in a perfect world it exists to deter threats and preserve peace,” he wrote in his 2024 memoir, “The War on Warriors—Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free.” “But ultimately its job is to conduct war. We either win or lose wars. And we have warriors, not ‘defenders. Bringing back the War Department may remind a few people in Washington, D.C., what the military is supposed to do, and do well.” The Defense Department was called the Department of War when it was established in 1789. In 1947, President Harry Truman changed the name after merging it with the Navy Department. He signed the National Security Act, which established the position of secretary of defense. It also established the National Security Council, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the U.S. Air Force.

Read more …

Once you have a Department of War, a Peace Nobel can’t be far behind.

Giving Trump The Nobel Peace Prize Makes Some Sense (Lukyanov)

In the early 1980s, former US President Jimmy Carter visited Stockholm. At a reception he approached Stig Ramel, the long-serving executive director of the Nobel Foundation, and asked with some bitterness why he had not received the Peace Prize for brokering the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel. “If I had been awarded it, I might have been re-elected for a second term,” Carter remarked. He had lost to Ronald Reagan in 1980. Ramel’s reply was blunt: “I’m sorry, Mr. President, but you were not nominated.” The 1978 prize went instead to Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Carter’s story illustrates how the Nobel Prize has always been as much about timing and perception as about substance. And it brings us neatly to Donald Trump.

Unlike Carter, Trump has no problem with nominations. They come thick and fast, from Rwanda, Cambodia, Gabon, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and beyond. Individuals and organizations have joined the chorus. Trump has even gone a step further: he has demanded the prize outright, loudly and repeatedly. Vanity, not diplomacy, drives him. Carter sought the award to improve his electoral prospects. Trump simply wants every trophy on the shelf. Does the spectacle make sense? Strictly speaking, to be considered this year Trump had to be nominated by January 31 – just ten days after his return to the White House. Yet precedent suggests this is no obstacle. Barack Obama received the Peace Prize in his first year as president, when he had scarcely done anything to warrant it.

Alfred Nobel’s will set out clear criteria: the prize should go to the person who has done most “for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the promotion of peace congresses.” Judged against that standard, Trump looks an unlikely candidate. He is one of the most polarizing figures on the planet. America’s military budget is heading toward a record $1 trillion in 2026, hardly a sign of “reduction of standing armies.” Yet the White House insists Trump deserves recognition. Officials cite half a dozen cases, from preventing nuclear war between India and Pakistan to halting conflicts in smaller states. The centerpiece, of course, is Ukraine. Washington is hinting that Trump’s approach may finally bring the war to a close – with the timing of any peace announcement conveniently close to the Nobel Committee’s own deliberations.

The pitch has not been flawless. In touting his record, Trump recently confused Armenia with Albania. But these are minor slips. What matters is the narrative: that Trump alone can impose order where others have failed. Is the Nobel Committee likely to indulge him? Its members are not known for rewarding bluster. But Europe’s leaders are desperate to appease Washington’s eccentric benefactor. It is not inconceivable that some will lobby behind the scenes in Trump’s favor. In one sense, awarding him the prize would not be absurd. The Nobel Committee has always sought to encourage gestures toward peace, however imperfect. Today, in a world of upheaval, genuine solutions are scarce. At best, one can try to ease tensions.

Trump, in his way, is doing just that – using every tool available, from demonstrative military threats to wild rhetoric and economic coercion. Others are doing even less. To paraphrase Lenin, a Nobel for Trump would be “essentially justified, formally a mockery.” It would capture the spirit of the age: a prize not for genuine reconciliation but for the ability to posture as a peacemaker in a fractured world. Carter, who once felt slighted, eventually did receive the award – more than twenty years after leaving office, in recognition of his peacemaking work as an ex-president. The Camp David accords remain in force to this day, a rare achievement in Middle East diplomacy. Trump is cut from a different cloth. He will not wait decades. By age and by temperament, he demands everything now. Or never at all.

Read more …

“Well, I mean, I’m talking about the — the — I had had, there was a. . . . —Ghislaine Maxwell

Ghislaine ‘Splainin’ (James Howard Kunstler)

Did you happen to bother reading the transcript of Ghislaine Maxwell’s interview? It’s tough sledding at times — both Ms. Maxwell and Deputy AG Todd Blanche tend to speak in choppy, incomplete sentences (as does, you might have noticed, President Trump) — but altogether the confab reveals that just about everything you think you know about the scandal might not be so, and her story is full of shocking surprises, assuming you can believe her. For instance, Ms. Maxwell had exactly one night of actual sex with Jeffrey Epstein back in the 1990s, a few months after they met, and that was it. He had problems with straight-up sex, she says. At first, he claimed to have a heart condition.

She says he had erectile difficulty “. . . which meant that he didn’t have intercourse a lot, which suited me fine, because I actually do have a medical condition, which precludes me having a lot of intercourse,” she added. (We never learn what that condition was, exactly.) Anyway, she never had sex with him again. Huh. . .? There goes one pillar of the public perception of the scandal: that Ghislaine Maxwell was a sort of nymphomaniac consort of Mr. Epstein, while supposedly acting as chief procurer of his masseuse “victims” and that the whole decades-long saga was a cavalcade of threesomes and orgies. She even claims at one point of being “a prude.” So, what was her role in JE’s complicated life? Basically, a property manager, she says. You know, all those houses and compounds: the mansion on East 71st Street, the Palm Beach place, the ranch in New Mexico, Little St. James Island, a flat in Paris.

It was a lot to manage. She had to hire architects, construction crews, interior decorators, servants. There were horses to care for at the ranch. It was a lot. She didn’t even have a key to JE’s New York City townhouse and was there only twice, she told Mr. Blanche. During that time, JE had other girlfriends while in the early 2000s, Ms. Maxwell hooked up with the billionaire founder of Gateway Computers, Ted Waitt. He bought a big boat for them to start-up an oceanic research venture. The relationship foundered when, she says, a sketchy lawyer named Scott Rothstein, working for a crooked Florida law firm that was under a RICO investigation at the time, attempted to extract $10-million from Waitt to keep Ms. Maxwell’s name out of lawsuits brought by women claiming to be “victims” of Epstein’s massage shenanigans.

Ms. Maxwell claims that Epstein’s masseuses, underage or otherwise, were recruited by the original masseuses, not by her (Ms. Maxwell). Ms. Maxwell was out of Epstein’s life after 2009, when he got out of jail on state of Florida charges of soliciting prostitution and procuring a minor for prostitution. This was preceded by a sketchy federal case brought in the Southern District of Florida that ended with a peculiar non-prosecution agreement — when US Attorney Alexander Acosta was told to lay off on account of Epstein being an “intel asset.” Ms. Maxwell states in the new deposition that JE was not associated with any intel agency, claiming it would have been in his nature to brag about it. It would help if FBI chief Kash Patel or CIA head John Ratcliffe could clarify that. They would surely know, one way or the other.

Of course, the heart of all the salacious chatter about Epstein is the claim that he worked for Israel’s Mossad intel agency, and that many eminent global persons were recorded having sex with underage masseuses in order to blackmail them (and, supposedly, allow nefarious hidden parties to control world political affairs.) Ms. Maxwell maintains that this is not so. She says there were no hidden cameras in bedrooms or elsewhere in the many Epstein properties or airplanes, and that she would know because she hired the electricians who installed everything else in them. There were only the usual security cameras on front entrances and gates. . . except for the Palm Beach house where local police installed a camera in JE’s office to catch a thief who was stealing cash stashed there. (Turned out to be JE’s butler, who was fired.)

Another thread at the center of the Epstein rumor mill is the notorious Epstein client list — supposedly of notables alleged to have cavorted with Epstein’s masseuses. Ms. Maxwell claims there was no such list, that a fake list was concocted by attorney Brad Edwards who represented women claiming to be Epstein “victims” in the lawsuit connected with the $10-million Ted Waitt blackmail caper. The list was composed from notes supposedly made off a computer by that same Epstein butler, one Alfredo Rodriguez. When interviewed in 2007, Rodriguez failed to produce the so-called “black book.” In 2009, he offered to sell it to attorney Brad Edwards (representing various “victims”) for $50,000. In 2010, Rodriguez was convicted of obstruction of justice and sentenced to 18 months in prison. He died in 2015.

A lot of monkey business in all this, wouldn’t you say? Perhaps the most astounding point is Ms. Maxwell’s assertion that no government attorney (or any other official, including from the FBI) ever interviewed her, or even called her on the telephone, during all the years of legal wrangling that went on. Say, what. . . ? How could that possibly be? Well, apparently it is so.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

SV40


Blue Dragon

Bees

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1960045888170004599

Bird

Pebble

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 172025
 


Edward Hopper Night in the park 1921

 

Putin & Trump Rewrite the Rules of Great Power Politics in Alaska (Sp.)
Trump-Zelensky Call ‘Wasn’t Easy’ – Axios (RT)
The Alaska Summit Was A Success. The Challenge Is To Make It Last (Amar)
Trump Plans White House Meeting With Zelensky and European Leaders – NYT (RT)
Trump Wants Summit With Putin And Zelensky Next Friday – Media (RT)
President Trump Outlines a Remarkably Altruistic Intention (CTH)
The Putin-Trump Meeting (Paul Craig Roberts)
Visit to Alaska Was Timely and Very Useful – Putin (Sp.)
The Legacy Media Won’t Touch These mRNA Vaccine Study Findings (Margolis)
Who Has Been Busy Destroying Democracy? (Victor Davis Hanson)
Merz’s Germany: 100 Days Of Economic Deep Freeze (Kolbe)
France’s Debt Time Bomb Is Ticking Beneath The Summer Calm (Kolbe)
Meta Faces US Probe Over AI Flirting With Kids (RT)
DOGE’s AI Tool ‘SweetREX’ Set To Take Buzzsaw To Federal Regulations (ZH)
Schwarzenegger Taunts Newsom With Message Targeting Dem Redistricting Push (Fox)
Lavrov Prompts USSR Sweatshirt Craze (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/atensnut/status/1956538006787223966

Change

3am
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1956616187431047666

Maher
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1956550733471289752

ActBlue
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1956022193495634217

 

 

 

 

“On Friday, Trump said Ukraine’s security won’t come “in the form of NATO.”

 

 

I’m starting to think Trump wants a more comprehensive deal than what we’ve seen so far. And that deal, with Russia, is very important to him: it’s the way to peace. Sometime in the past few days Putin has said that talks are no use if Zelensky and Europe insist on the narrative that Russia’s Special Military Operation came out of nowhere, unprovoked. It was Ukraine that started killing Russian-speakers in the Donbass. Trump appears to agree. He had Zelensky come to the Oval Office anyway on Monday, now he invited Europe as well. So he doesn’t have to tell the same story twice. When that story is gone, what is left?

Putin & Trump Rewrite the Rules of Great Power Politics in Alaska (Sp.)

The Putin-Trump summit was an unqualified success that could pave the way for peace in Ukraine, and the normalization of Russia-US relations for years to come. Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of research at the Russian Council on Foreign & Defense Policy, explains why. Three key reasons:

1. The summit “gave impetus” to Russia-US normalization on all fronts – from Ukraine and arms control to economic cooperation

2. Trump’s calls to Zelensky and European leaders in the meeting’s immediate aftermath signals that “negotiations were conducted on specific conditions for a final peace settlement,” not the ‘ceasefire as a prerequisite’ long demanded by Brussels and Kiev. This is “fundamentally important,” Suslov says

3. The summit was “historic” in the sense that it “made a great contribution to…laying the foundations of the future world order, a post-war world order. Because the Ukrainian conflict is, first and foremost, the largest and most severe military conflict in the world in the last few decades, and a concentrated expression of the hybrid war waged by the West against Russia.”

“The summit in Alaska was dedicated to ending this hybrid war,” demonstrating that the foundations for a future world order will be based on dialogue between great powers, on equal terms.

Now, Suslov says, it’s up to the Europeans and Zelensky to decide whether they accept the terms outlined by Putin and Trump. If they do, preparations for future meetings can begin. “If they categorically refuse, the United States will most likely completely suspend the transfer of US intelligence and stop deliveries and sales of weapons and military equipment to the Europeans for Ukraine,” which would “fundamentally and radically weaken Ukraine’s position on the battlefield and bring a Russian military victory much closer.” Suslov expects the ‘war party’ in Washington and Brussels to try to convince Trump to abandon whatever agreements were reached with Putin in Anchorage, but doesn’t expect Trump to “succumb to such provocations,” because he is much stronger politically than he was in his first term.

The second Trump administration is not on the defensive, but on the offensive, regarding the Russiagate hoax, and is in a position to accuse the Democrats of collusion and falsification in 2016, not the other way around. “Accordingly, Trump can withstand the pressure that will now be exerted upon him from Europe, from the American deep state, and from the American war party, including the terrorist extremist Senator Graham and so on,” Suslov says. Last but not least is the minutia of the summit, from the way Trump greeted Putin on the airport runway, to the flyover of US aviation, to the fact that Putin and Trump rode together in one car to the summit venue.

There was a visible “demonstration of personal affection between Putin and Trump for each other in a situation where the United States has been waging a hybrid war against Russia…and trying to inflict a strategic defeat on it” over the course of the past three years as a result of the policies of Trump’s predecessor. The overall tone, and demonstration of respect and personal sympathy, mark a “striking contrast” to the tone under the Biden administration, Suslov emphasized.

Read more …

At the end of a very long day, Trump had another hours-long talk with Zelensky and Europe whining on the other end of the line.

Trump-Zelensky Call ‘Wasn’t Easy’ – Axios (RT)

The phone call between US President Donald Trump and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky after the Alaska summit on Friday “wasn’t easy,” Axios correspondent Barak Ravid claimed on Saturday, citing a source with direct knowledge. Key European leaders later joined the call as well. Trump spoke with Zelensky for about an hour, according to Ravid. Also on the line were Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff, both of whom had earlier taken part in the talks with the Russian delegation. The leaders of the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Finland, Poland, as well as NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, later joined the call, which lasted another 30 minutes, according to the journalist.

Ravid described the call as “not easy,” though he did not elaborate on this, adding only that Trump insisted that “a fast peace deal is better than a ceasefire.” The US president later confirmed the sentiment, writing: “It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.” Zelensky said that during the phone call with Trump the two agreed that he would come on Monday to Washington to discuss in person the outcome of the summit.

Ukraine and its Western backers have for months been pushing for a temporary ceasefire. While Russia has never ruled out the idea, it has argued that such a step would allow Kiev to receive more Western weapons, continue forced mobilization, and recover its losses at a time when Russian troops are pressing their advantage on the battlefield. Meanwhile, both Putin and Trump praised the Alaska talks as productive. The US president said that they moved closer to resolving the conflict while urging Zelensky to “make a deal.”

Read more …

“..they and the mainstream media aligned with them cannot stop trying to lecture Trump on, in essence, how gullible they consider him..”

The Alaska Summit Was A Success. The Challenge Is To Make It Last (Amar)

Do not expect Western mainstream media, NATO-EU Europe’s politicians, or the Zelensky regime and its surrogates to admit it, but there is no doubt that the Alaska summit between the Russian and American presidents was a success. Not a breakthrough either, but clearly also more than an “it’s-good-they’re-at-least-talking” event. This was not comparable to the Geneva meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and then US President Joe Biden in 2021, which was doomed to fail due to the Biden administration’s hubristic intransigence. Fundamentally, both sides – no, not only one – have scored what Western pundits love to call “wins”: The US has shown the EU-NATO Europeans that it and it alone decides when and how it talks to Russia and with what aims.

The European vassals find this hard to grasp because it’s an application of genuine sovereignty, something they don’t have or want anymore. Russia, for its part, has shown that it can negotiate while the fighting continues and that it is under no legal or moral obligation – or any practical pressure – to stop fighting before negotiations show results it finds satisfying. The fact that we know so little – at this point at least – about the specific, detailed content of the summit talks and their outcomes is, actually, a sign of seriousness. That is how diplomacy worth the name works: calmly, confidentially, and patiently taking the time to achieve a decent, robust result. In that context, US President Donald Trump’s explicit refusal to make public what points of disagreement remain and have prevented a breakthrough for now is a very good sign: Clearly, he believes that they can be cleared up in the near future and, thus, deserve discretion.

Yet we do have a few hints allowing for some plausible guessing about the summit’s vibe: Not surprisingly, both leaders made no secret of their respect and even guarded sympathy for each other. That is – and has always been – a good thing, too. But in and of itself that cannot carry an agreement about Ukraine or a broader policy of normalization (or perhaps even a new détente, if we are all very lucky). For that, both Trump and Putin are too serious about adhering to national interests. More tellingly, immediately after the meeting, Trump used a Fox News interview to state three important things. He confirmed that there was “much progress,” acknowledged that the Russian president wants peace, and told Zelensky “to make a deal.” When Putin, at a short press conference, warned Brussels and Kiev not to try to sabotage the talks, Trump did not contradict the Russian leader.

The commemorative events accompanying the summit carried more than one message. Publicly honoring the American-Russian (then Soviet) alliance of World War Two obviously implied that the two countries then cooperated intensely across a deep ideological divide, which, today, does not even exist anymore. But arguably, there was a second, subtle message here: Another – if often unjustly “forgotten” (in the words of historian Rana Mitter) – ally of World War Two was, after all, China. In that sense, Putin’s deliberate and repeated invocations of the memory of Washington-Moscow cooperation was also yet another signal that Russia would not be available for any “reverse Kissinger” fantasies of splitting the Moscow-Beijing partnership. By now, Trump has had phone conversations with Kiev, as well as EU capitals. There, too, we know little.

Yet it is interesting to note that nothing we have heard about these conversations indicates another change of mind on Trump’s side. For now at least, the American president seems to leave little hope to European bellicists and the regime in Kiev that he will turn against Moscow again. There are reports that Trump may have shifted his position toward that of Russia, preferring talks about peace to the Ukrainian demand to focus on only a ceasefire first. This makes sense, especially since they and the mainstream media aligned with them cannot stop trying to lecture Trump on, in essence, how gullible they consider him. It is to be hoped that the US president has had enough of Zelensky, Bolton, the New York Times and co. telling him publicly that he is a fool about to be duped by the big bad Russians. The adequate punishment for these offensive inanities is to make triple sure their authors find themselves entirely irrelevant.

Read more …

I doubt they will like what he has to say.

Trump Plans White House Meeting With Zelensky and European Leaders – NYT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has invited European leaders to join Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky at a meeting at the White House on Monday, the New York Times has claimed, citing anonymous European officials. On Friday, Trump met with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Anchorage, Alaska, in what marked the first face-to-face talks between Russian and American leaders since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. The US president described the encounter as “warm,” while Putin characterized it as “frank” and “substantive.” Both men expressed tentative hopes that the summit could bring a resolution of the Ukraine conflict closer.

On Saturday, the NYT quoted its sources as saying that Trump would receive Zelensky and that “European leaders are invited to come along” as well. Earlier in the day, the Ukrainian leader announced in a post on X that he would travel to the US capital on Monday. Trump later confirmed the visit. Trump will propose a plan under which Kiev would be required to cede the parts of the new Russian territories in Donbass still under Ukrainian control, according to the newspaper. In return, the Kremlin would agree to cease hostilities along the current front line elsewhere, the publication claimed. Zelensky has repeatedly ruled out any territorial concessions to Moscow.

In the wake of the Alaska summit, the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Finland, Poland, and the EU issued a joint statement expressing their readiness to “work with President Trump and President Zelenskyy towards a trilateral summit with European support.” Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov earlier noted that Russia and the US have yet to discuss a potential meeting between Putin, Trump and Zelensky. Speaking to Fox Business on Thursday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested that Kiev’s European backers should “put up or shut up” and stop making demands on Washington while it tries to negotiate with Moscow a way out of the Ukraine conflict.

Read more …

Putin won’t negotiate with Zelensky. He’ll only turn up to sign documents.

Trump Wants Summit With Putin And Zelensky Next Friday – Media (RT)

US President Donald Trump is seeking a trilateral summit with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin as early as next week, Axios and CNN have reported. The meeting could take place if Trump’s Oval Office talks with Zelensky on Monday are successful, according to the outlets. On Friday, Trump met Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, in their first face to face encounter since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Trump described the talks as “warm”, while the Russian president called them “frank” and “substantive.” After the Alaska summit, Trump and Zelensky held a phone call described by the media as “not easy.” European leaders also joined the conversation, during which the US president told them “he wants to arrange a trilateral summit with Putin and Zelensky as soon as next Friday,” according to Axios.

CNN later confirmed this, adding that at least one European leader is expected to take part in the Washington talks with Zelensky, although it is not yet clear who. Later on Saturday, Trump confirmed Zelensky’s Oval Office meeting on his Truth Social network, touting a follow-up meeting with Putin that could potentially take place afterwards. He added that the goal should be a peace agreement rather than a temporary ceasefire, “which often times do not hold up.”= Moscow has insisted that a lasting settlement requires Kiev to renounce its ambitions for NATO membership, demilitarize, and recognize current territorial realities. This includes Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye as part of Russia – regions that voted to join the country in referendums held in 2014 and 2022.

Zelensky has consistently rejected any territorial concessions. Trump later told Fox News that Zelensky should “make the deal,” stressing that Putin “wants to see it done” and urging Europe to “get involved a little bit.” Putin has not ruled out direct talks with Zelensky but stressed they must be preceded by progress on a wider settlement. Moscow has also questioned Zelensky’s authority to sign binding agreements, noting that his presidential term expired last year and that no new elections have been held under martial law.

Read more …

Sundance: better relations with Russia requires crushing the Russiagate hoax. That is more important to Trump than locking up Comey, Brennan et al. MAGA take notice.

President Trump Outlines a Remarkably Altruistic Intention (CTH)

Fox News host Bret Baier was given exclusive access to President Trump during the much-anticipated summit in Alaska. Baier interviewed President Trump on Airforce One going to Anchorage and during the day’s events. In this interview, Baier asked President Trump what his expectations were going in. Trump noted it is not his place to negotiate the terms of a ceasefire on behalf of Ukraine; however, he is willing to be an intermediary in a focused effort to stop the conflict.

Stopping the killing is President Trump’s main priority and peace is the elusive prize. In the background, as previously noted by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the administration accepts the conflict in Ukraine is essentially a proxy war between the former Biden administration officials, NATO warmongers, international banking interests and Russia. In a moment of genuine sunlight upon the backstory, President Trump notes he told President Putin, “There’s no way we are going to make a deal” … “impossible” … “because I have wise guys who created a phony deal,” the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, “and until those things are settled up” a reset in the relationship with Russia is impossible.

This framework essentially validates what a small group of deep weeds walkers, including myself, have suspected. From the perspective of Trump and his big picture objectives, the recent Russiagate releases and declassifications are not so much to get accountability upon the perpetrators, but rather to make the backstory so well known that a strategic reset with Russia is no longer impeded by manufactured domestic issues inside the USA. The value in Russiagate declassification and information releases, is more about laying the groundwork for a reset – and stopping the political opposition therein. That’s the Big Picture value to President Trump.

That is quite a big and significantly magnanimous position to take by President Trump. Hopefully, the MAGA base will eventually come around to this understanding, because right now they are intensely expecting criminal accountability. That’s not President Trump’s goal, he’s thinking much bigger and more consequential that holding the irrelevant gnats accountable. Apparently, Hillary Clinton can see that. It’s such a big altruistic position her tribe appears genuinely stunned. Hopefully, the base of MAGA will also accept this strategic purpose.

Read more …

“Putin said that the meeting marked the transition from confrontation and threats to dialogue. This prospect alone made the meeting worthwhile. These are good results.”

The Putin-Trump Meeting (Paul Craig Roberts)

What do we make of it? A good result came of it. Trump moved away from his demand for a ceasefire and said that it was more important to work toward a permanent peace than a ceasefire which is seldom kept. This would seem to commit Trump to addressing the root cause of the conflict, which is Russia’s insecurity with NATO all over her borders. Putin said that the meeting marked the transition from confrontation and threats to dialogue. This prospect alone made the meeting worthwhile. These are good results. In a world of nuclear weapons the level of tension had become untenable. For hopes to be realized two barriers must be recognized and overcome. One is the neoconservative doctrine of American hegemony. The other is the interest of the US military/security complex. The doctrine of hegemony requires overcoming Russia in order to achieve Washington’s unilateralism.

Is this doctrine too institutionalized to be repudiated? The budget, influence over Congress, and power of the military/security complex requires a major enemy. Russia fills that role. Peace on equal terms with Russia takes away the enemy, and the budget and influence of the military/security complex declines. There are military bases or weapon manufacturers in almost every state, which means this interest is also institutionalized as President Eisenhower warned us it would be. Therefore, the question before us is: how likely is it that Trump can get NATO and missile bases off of Russia’s border? It is not at all likely if attention cannot be directed to the basic problem. How helpful will media be? It is the wrong focus to emphasize that Putin wanted the meeting in order to show that he was not isolated and could meet with the American president like Zelensky and Netanyahu do.

The meeting was fortuitous. Trump had trapped himself. His threatened secondary sanctions or tariffs against India and other BRICS members backfired. Faced with his own 10-day deadline, he had to find a way out. He found it in an immediate meeting with Putin. For Trump the meeting was a way of getting himself off of the spot. The opportunity to wind down a confrontation that would likely end in nuclear war is based on luck. Can this lucky outcome be turned into a mutual security agreement? That depends on the strength of the neoconservatives’ doctrine of hegemony and the willingness of the military/security complex to accept declining sales and profits. Until it is realized that these two interests are the barriers to peace that must be overcome, there will be no peace process.

Read more …

“We haven’t had direct negotiations of this kind at this level for a long time. I repeat, it was an opportunity to calmly and thoroughly outline our position once again…”

Visit to Alaska Was Timely and Very Useful – Putin (Sp.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday described his trip to Alaska to meet with US President Donald Trump as “timely and very useful.” “I want to immediately note that the visit was timely and very useful,” Putin said during a meeting following the Russia-US summit. Eliminating the root causes of the crisis in Ukraine should be the foundation of its resolution, Vladimir Putin said. “Eliminating these root causes should be the basis for the resolution,” said the president during a meeting following the Russia-US summit. Putin mentioned that during his talks with US President Donald Trump in Alaska, they discussed a possible resolution to the Ukrainian crisis based on fairness. He noted that the summit provided an opportunity to calmly and thoroughly present Russia’s position.

“We haven’t had direct negotiations of this kind at this level for a long time. I repeat, it was an opportunity to calmly and thoroughly outline our position once again,” Putin said during the meeting. The conversation in Alaska brings us closer to the necessary solutions, Putin added. He described his discussion with US President Donald Trump at the Alaska meeting as frank. “The conversation was very open and substantive, and in my opinion, it brings us closer to the necessary decisions,” Putin said. Russia would like to resolve all issues concerning Ukraine through peaceful means, President Putin stated. He also mentioned that he would provide detailed information about the conversation with President Trump during the meeting following the negotiations.

“We discussed practically all areas of interaction with US President Donald Trump,” Putin said. “I will now give you a detailed account of the entire conversation, and if there are any questions, I will gladly answer them,” he added. Russia respects the US administration’s position on the urgent need to end hostilities in Ukraine, Putin stated on Saturday. “Of course, we respect the position of the US administration, which sees the need for an immediate cessation of hostilities. And we also want this, we would like to move towards resolving all issues through peaceful means,” he concluded during the meeting. On Friday, Putin and Trump met in Anchorage, Alaska for a three-on-three format talks that lasted 2 hours and 45 minutes. In addition to the presidents, Russia was represented by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and presidential aide Yury Ushakov, and the United States by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.

Read more …

“..”association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior [mRNA] vaccine doses.”

The Legacy Media Won’t Touch These mRNA Vaccine Study Findings (Margolis)

Earlier this month, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. canceled nearly $500 million worth of grants and contracts tied to mRNA vaccine development, and announced the creation of a vaccine safety task force—an effort to address decades of alleged violations of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The legacy media immediately went on the offensive, slamming the move. But now, stronger evidence has emerged showing that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines actually raise the risk of respiratory infections with each additional dose, leaving the defenders of these shots looking obstinate and unwilling to face reality. Real-world data out of Switzerland has vindicated what many of us have been warning all along: the risk-benefit equation for mRNA shots no longer makes sense for most healthy people. Just the News breaks down the new Swiss study, and its conclusions aren’t merely inconvenient—they’re downright explosive.

“The study of 1,745 Swiss healthcare workers over several months in 2023 and 2024, published this month in the peer-reviewed Nature publication Communications Medicine, adds support to Cleveland Clinic research from 2022 on 51,000 employees that unexpectedly found “association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior [mRNA] vaccine doses.” Those who recently got a COVID booster “were more likely to report symptoms” of influenza-like illnesses and take sick leave, while those who got seasonal flu vaccines were less likely to do so, according to the SURPRISE+ Study Group, a research collaborative that studies health outcomes in healthcare workers. (COVID testing had been phased out by then.)”

The study concluded that “COVID-19 boosters may not offer clear short-term benefits in a post-pandemic setting, and may even increase short-term illness risk.” It further warned that routinely boosting “young to middle-aged, healthy individuals” may not meet the basic risk-benefit threshold. Shocked? You shouldn’t be. The same experts who demanded we blindly trust mRNA technology were also the ones insisting it made sense to vaccinate children against COVID—a claim that never held water. But I digress.

“The Swiss study improves on prior research that found an association between doses and reinfection by virtue of its highly granular data, including by matching comorbidities in the jabbed with the unvaccinated and nailing down inoculation dates, according to former New York Times drug industry reporter Alex Berenson. While the predominantly Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen researchers found the heightened risk of infection ebbs over time, that provides “further evidence the shots themselves, not some hidden statistical factor, are increasing it,” Berenson wrote in his newsletter.” We really need to think about the implications of this, and about how and why mRNA vaccines were suddenly thrust upon us. Though we kind of already know why. About a year before COVID hit, Dr. Anthony Fauci joined a panel at the Milken Institute Future of Health Summit to discuss moving from traditional vaccines to mRNA technology.

New Yorker writer Michael Specter suggested “blowing up the system,” since vaccines were still being made largely the same way they were in the 1940s. Fauci acknowledged the potential, but stressed that approval of new vaccines required lengthy trials—phase one through three—followed by years of data, which he said could take a decade even under ideal conditions. Rick Bright, then head of HHS Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), added that a disruptive event might be needed to bypass bureaucracy. He floated the idea that an outbreak of a novel avian virus in China could spur such change, with the RNA sequence shared quickly to produce vaccines—potentially even printed at home on patches for self-administration. Enter the COVID pandemic mere months later.

Read more …

“Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign?

Who Has Been Busy Destroying Democracy? (Victor Davis Hanson)

“Destroying democracy” — the latest theme of the left — can be defined in many different ways. How about attempting to destroy constitutional, ancient, and hallowed institutions simply to suit short-term political gains? So, who in 2020, and now once again, has boasted about packing the 156-year-old, nine-justice Supreme Court? Who talks frequently about destroying the 187-year-old Senate filibuster–though only when they hold a Senate majority? Who wants to bring in an insolvent left-wing Puerto Rico and redefine the 235-year-old District of Columbia — by altering the Constitution — as two new states solely to obtain four additional liberal senators? Who is trying to destroy the constitutionally mandated 235-year Electoral College by circumventing it with the surrogate “The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?”

Does destroying democracy also entail weaponizing federal bureaucracies, turning them into rogue partisan arms of a president? So who ordered the CIA to concoct bogus charges of “collusion” to sabotage Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, the 2016-2017 transition, and the first 22 months of Trump’s first term? Who prompted a cabal of “51 former intelligence officials” to lie to the American people on the eve of the last debate of the 2020 election that the FBI-authenticated Hunter Biden laptop was instead the work of a “Russian intelligence operation?” Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign?

Who pulled off the greatest presidential coup in history by using surrogates in the shadows to run the cognitively debilitated Biden presidency, then by fiat canceled his reelection effort, and finally anointed as his replacement the new nominee Kamala Harris, who had never won a single primary delegate? Who ordered FBI SWAT teams to invade the home of a former president because of a classification dispute over 102 files out of some 13,000 stored there? Who tried to remove an ex-president and leader of his party from at least 25 state ballots to deprive millions of Americans of the opportunity to vote for or against him? Who coordinated four local, state, and federal prosecutors to destroy a former and future president by charging him with fantasy crimes that were never before, and will never again be, lodged against anyone else?

Who appointed a federal prosecutor to go after the ex-president, who arranged for a high-ranking Justice Department official to step down to join a New York prosecutor’s efforts to destroy an ex-president, and who met in the White House with a Georgia county prosecutor seeking to destroy an ex-president — all on the same day — a mere 72 hours after Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid? Who but the current Democrats ever impeached a president twice? Has any party ever tried an ex-president in the Senate when he was out of office and a mere private citizen?

Read more …

“Fear-Driven Shock Paralysis.”

“Merz would need to break the ideological wall of his structurally leftist coalition, cancel the Green Deal with Brussels, and restore diplomatic relations with Moscow to turn the tide. Germany is light-years from such a paradigm shift..”

Merz’s Germany: 100 Days Of Economic Deep Freeze (Kolbe)

The extreme imbalances in Germany’s social system – resulting from the recession, demographic aging, and uncontrolled migration – cannot be blamed on Merz any more than the hyperstate-like public sector, now managing half of all economic output through its channels. The energy crisis is also a fact the new government must confront, layered atop a complex mix of structural deficits that have rendered Germany nearly untouchable in the global competitive landscape. The question must be: Has Merz at least recognized the severity of the country’s economic crisis? And if so, what measures does his government plan to reverse it? In the third year of recession and with a loss of 700,000 jobs since 2019, it is clear Berlin knows the political course leads Germany toward catastrophe.

On the plus side, Merz can claim his so-called “investment booster,” mainly composed of two measures: the temporary reintroduction of declining balance depreciation until 2029 and a corporate tax cut from 15% to 10% starting 2028. These measures would relieve the economy by €11.3 billion, roughly 0.23% of GDP—laughably small given the economy already carries €146 billion in unnecessary bureaucracy costs. Merz should have wielded the chainsaw here, but no German politician dares challenge a bureaucracy that has grown into a state within a state, adding half a million employees in the last six years. Merz’s original promise to cut electricity taxes for business and consumers also signals, unspoken, that the green transition is seen as the root of the energy crisis, driving energy-intensive firms out of the country. Last year alone, €64.5 billion in direct investments left Germany, a long-standing trend now accelerating.

Consequently, Germany is losing its economic foundation, on the verge of becoming Europe’s Rust Belt, much like parts of the US. Yet Berlin does nothing: no electricity tax cut, no return to nuclear, no scrapping of the burdensome heating law. Merz refuses any reforms in the green transition. We are witnessing the continuation of Habeck’s deindustrialization agenda. Merz avoids all conflict with Brussels’ Green Deal. The core of centralist policy, the key to Germany’s economic liberation, remains untouched, regardless of how sharply the recession bites. An orderly withdrawal of the state from the frozen energy sector, weighed down by subsidies and regulations, is nowhere in sight. Talks with Moscow over gas imports are unthinkable—Brussels stubbornly polishes the 19th sanctions package. Merz watches as a policy takes root that delivers Germany a fatal economic blow.

Even social fund problems, the scandalous citizen’s allowance, now promoted globally as aid for migrants, fall under economic policy. Like a rabbit before a snake, the government freezes amid widening deficits, attempting to fix health and pension insurance with new debt and supplementary transfers. Only an effective migration policy shift and painful reforms to social benefits could reverse the downward spiral. Merz allows Germany to head toward French-style conditions—his historically and legally dubious €1 trillion debt program will push Germany into the middle ranks of European debt states, raising the debt-to-GDP ratio to 95%, turning the federal budget into an unbearable weight. Infrastructure spending is nice, but with social funds in crisis and defense commitments rising, resources will barely suffice to maintain existing assets.

Unless Germany’s economic course turns 180 degrees, this government will go down as a temporary continuation of the red-green agenda and a footnote in the country’s history. With a coalition backed by the Left, Merz lacks the political capital and personal reform drive to pull Germany out of crisis. In Argentina today, one can observe the recipe for political turnaround: drastic state downsizing and deregulation should guide policy. The state’s share must shrink enough that private markets regain control of investment allocation. Merz would need to break the ideological wall of his structurally leftist coalition, cancel the Green Deal with Brussels, and restore diplomatic relations with Moscow to turn the tide. Germany is light-years from such a paradigm shift. Until then, the economic substance left by two postwar generations will be politically squandered.

Read more …

If only they had a printer…

France’s Debt Time Bomb Is Ticking Beneath The Summer Calm (Kolbe)

France remains a politically immovable monolith. A toxic mix of a ballooning budget deficit, an overgrown welfare state, and a persistent recession makes the country a prime candidate for a full-blown sovereign debt crisis. If the government fails to pass its budget, Europe could be in for a heated autumn. Cuts to social benefits, pension freezes, or reductions in health coverage have historically ended in general strikes, highway blockades, or suburban riots. The media tends to romanticize this as “character strength” — a people resisting the stingy state and fighting for their rights. What’s left unsaid is that France operates with a staggering government spending ratio of 57% of GDP — the largest welfare state in the EU, possibly even the democratic world champion of redistribution. This deeply socialist policy mix has driven the country into a fiscal and economic dead end.

Public debt stands at around 114% of GDP, with Prime Minister François Bayrou’s government planning fresh borrowing of 5.4% of GDP this year — figures so far removed from the defunct Maastricht criteria they make you dizzy. In July, Bayrou managed to trim the projected deficit from 5.8% to 5.4%, a €5 billion reduction. But in the face of a €3 trillion debt mountain, this is less than a drop in the bucket — a faint pulse from a policy in terminal decline. Bond markets have taken notice: yields on 10-year French debt have climbed 30 basis points over the past year to 3.3%. That means at least €67 billion in interest costs this year — €16 billion more than last year — squeezing government room to maneuver like ice melting on the Côte d’Azur.

For now, the summer news drought has swallowed the debt crisis narrative. Since Bayrou’s mid-July reform package, the media has gone silent. In truth, budgets like France’s, Spain’s, or Italy’s have only been kept afloat thanks to the ECB’s willingness to crush bond market unrest with massive interventions — a habit developed since the last debt crisis 15 years ago. Short of Luxembourg, no major EU state could fend off a sovereign debt crisis alone. At this point, real reforms may already be too late: any drastic cuts would collapse economies hooked on subsidies, cheap credit, and state interventionism, triggering mass unemployment and social unrest.

Still, Paris seems to have recognized the urgency. Three weeks ago, Bayrou unveiled the next consolidation package: €44 billion in spending cuts for next year (about 1.5% of GDP). The plan includes a hiring freeze for civil servants, merging inefficient agencies, and freezing welfare and pensions in 2026 at 2025 levels — a “blank year” for the welfare state. Only the defense budget will rise, in line with NATO demands. Wealthy taxpayers will lose certain breaks, the healthcare system will be trimmed, and sick leave will be monitored more strictly. If the economy holds, the deficit could drop to 4.6% next year, with the government aiming for Maastricht’s 3% cap by 2029. But given France’s track record, few expect the numbers to hold once the social peace bill comes due.

Read more …

Excuse me? Not on my bingo card.

Meta Faces US Probe Over AI Flirting With Kids (RT)

US Senators will probe Facebook’s parent company Meta after revelations that its artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots could engage children in conversations of a romantic or sensual nature. The investigation was announced Friday by Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo), who chairs a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on crime and counterterrorism, with backing from fellow panel member Marsha Blackburn. Congress must determine whether “Meta’s generative-AI products enable exploitation, deception, or other criminal harms to children, and whether Meta misled the public or regulators about its safeguards,” Hawley said.

He demanded that the company immediately hand over internal documents. The scrutiny follows a Reuters investigation that revealed Meta’s internal AI policies allowed chatbots on its platforms to flirt with minors. One guideline cited by Reuters permitted bots to describe a child as having a “youthful form [that] is a work of art,” even as the rules technically barred describing under-13s as sexually desirable. It would be acceptable for a bot to tell a shirtless eight-year-old that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply,” the document states.

Meta confirmed the document’s authenticity to Reuters, said it is being revised, and acknowledged such conversations “never should have been allowed.” The case marks the latest in a string of controversies for Meta, which faces mounting legal and regulatory scrutiny in the US and Europe over privacy, antitrust, and data practices. Critics have argued that in its drive for rapid growth and profits, the company fostered online harm, whether by amplifying hate speech and misinformation to boost engagement or by failing to safeguard user data. More recently, the US tech giant has invested billions to position itself as a leader in artificial intelligence.

Read more …

“DOGE is likely to use the AI tool to eliminate up to 50% of 200,000 federal regulations by January 2026.”

“On Tuesday, a federal appeals court cleared a key hurdle for DOGE, rejecting a labor union effort to restrict the agency’s access to sensitive U.S. user data from government agencies.”

DOGE’s AI Tool ‘SweetREX’ Set To Take Buzzsaw To Federal Regulations (ZH)

Following Elon Musk’s exit from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Democrats and mainstream media have largely turned their attention elsewhere. Yet, DOGE is quietly making steady progress on an ambitious plan to overhaul federal regulations, according to a report. Central to the effort is an AI tool under development, the SweetREX Deregulation AI Plan Builder (SweetREX DAIP), designed to “promote prudent financial management and alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.” The little-known project is being spearheaded by Christopher Sweet, a DOGE staffer initially presented as a “special assistant,” who was, until recently, a third-year student at the University of Chicago. WIRED reports:

“SweetREX was developed by associates of DOGE operating out of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The plan is to roll it out to other US agencies. Members of the call included staffers from across the government, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of State, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, among others. Leading Wednesday’s call alongside Sweet was Scott Langmack, a DOGE-affiliated senior adviser at HUD and, according to his LinkedIn profile, the COO of technology company Kukun. (WIRED previously reported that he had application-level access to critical HUD systems; Kukun is a proptech firm that is, according to its website, “on a long-term mission to aggregate the hardest to find data.”) While Sweet led the development side of SweetREX, Langmack said he was taking point on demoing the tool for different agencies and pitching them on its benefits.”

DOGE is likely to use the AI tool to eliminate up to 50% of 200,000 federal regulations by January 2026. A DOGE PowerPoint presentation, titled the “DOGE Deregulation Opportunity,” projects that the effort could yield $3.3 trillion annually in economic benefits. “The DOGE experts creating these plans are the best and brightest in the business and are embarking on a never-before-attempted transformation of government systems and operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness,” an administration spokesperson told the Washington Post, which first reported on the DOGE presentation.

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court cleared a key hurdle for DOGE, rejecting a labor union effort to restrict the agency’s access to sensitive U.S. user data from government agencies. In a 2-1 decision, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a lower court’s injunction that had blocked DOGE from accessing data held by the U.S. Department of Education, Treasury Department, and Office of Personnel Management, citing potential violations of federal privacy laws, according to Fox News.

Read more …

“He calls gerrymandering evil, and he means that. He thinks it’s truly evil for politicians to take power from people..”

Schwarzenegger Taunts Newsom With Message Targeting Dem Redistricting Push (Fox)

Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is pumping up for a new fight. The longtime Hollywood action star, the last Republican governor in Democrat-dominated California, says he’s mobilizing to oppose the push by current Gov. Gavin Newsom to temporarily scrap the state’s nonpartisan redistricting commission. “I’m getting ready for the gerrymandering battle,” Schwarzenegger wrote in a social media post Friday, which included a photo of the former professional bodybuilding champion lifting weights. Schwarzenegger, who rose to worldwide fame as the star of the film “The Terminator” four decades ago, wore a T-shirt in the photo that said “terminate gerrymandering.” The social media post by Schwarzenegger comes as Democratic leaders in the Democrat- dominated California legislature are moving forward with new proposed congressional district maps that would create up to five more blue-leaning US House seats in the nation’s most populous state.

Newsom on Thursday teamed up in Los Angeles with congressional Democrats and legislative leaders in the heavily blue state to unveil their redistricting playbook. Newsom and the Democrats are aiming to counter the ongoing effort by President Donald Trump and Republicans to create up to five GOP-friendly congressional districts in red state Texas at the expense of Democrat-controlled seats. “Today is liberation day in the state of California,” Newsom said. “Donald Trump, you have poked the bear, and we will punch back.” Newsom vowed to “meet fire with fire” with his push for a rare — but not unheard of — mid-decade redistricting. The Republican push in Texas, which comes at Trump’s urging, is part of a broader effort by the GOP across the country to pad its razor-thin House majority to keep control of the chamber in the 2026 midterms, when the party in power traditionally faces political headwinds and loses seats.

Trump and his political team are aiming to prevent what happened during his first term in the White House, when Democrats stormed back to grab the House majority in the 2018 midterms. While the Republican push in Texas to upend the current congressional maps doesn’t face constitutional constraints, Newsom’s path in California is much more complicated. The governor is pushing to hold a special election this year to get voter approval to undo the constitutional amendments that created the nonpartisan redistricting commission. A two-thirds majority vote in the Democrat-dominated California legislature as early as next week would be needed to hold the referendum. Democratic Party leaders are confident they’ll have the votes to push the constitutional amendment and the new proposed congressional maps through the legislature.

“Here we are in open and plain sight before one vote is cast in the 2026 midterm election, and here [Trump] is once again trying to rig the system,” Newsom charged. Newsom said his plan is “not complicated. We’re doing this in reaction to a president of the United States that called a sitting governor in the state of Texas and said, ‘Find me five seats.’ We’re doing it in reaction to that act.” The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) said “Newsom’s made it clear: he’ll shred California’s Constitution and trample over democracy — running a cynical, self-serving playbook where Californians are an afterthought, and power is the only priority.” But Newsom defended his actions, saying “we’re working through a very transparent, temporary and public process. We’re putting the maps on the ballot and putting the power to the people.”

Thursday’s appearance by Newsom, considered a likely contender for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, also served as a fundraising kickoff to raise massive amounts of campaign cash needed to sell the redistricting push statewide in California. The nonpartisan redistricting commission, created over 15 years ago, remains popular among most Californians, according to public opinion polling. That’s why Newsom and California Democratic lawmakers are promising not to scrap the commission entirely, but rather replace it temporarily by the legislature for the next three election cycles. “We will affirm our commitment to the state independent redistricting after the 2030 census, but we are asking the voters for their consent to do midterm redistricting,” Newsom said. Their efforts are opposed by a number of people supportive of the nonpartisan commission.

Among the most visible members is likely to be Schwarzenegger. “He calls gerrymandering evil, and he means that. He thinks it’s truly evil for politicians to take power from people,” Schwarzenegger spokesperson Daniel Ketchell told Politico earlier this month. “He’s opposed to what Texas is doing, and he’s opposed to the idea that California would race to the bottom to do the same thing.” Schwarzenegger, during his tenure as governor, had a starring role in the passage of constitutional amendments in California in 2008 and 2010 that took the power to draw state legislative and congressional districts away from politicians and placed it in the hands of an independent commission.

“Most people don’t really think about an independent commission much, one way or another. And that’s both an opportunity and a challenge for Newsom,” Jack Pitney, an American politics professor at California’s Claremont McKenna College, told Fox News. “It’s going to take a lot of effort and money to energize Democrats and motivate them to show up at the polls,” Pitney said, adding Newsom’s effort “is all about motivating people who don’t like Trump.”

Read more …

If Russia does retro, it must be an evil plan.

Lavrov Prompts USSR Sweatshirt Craze (RT)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has sparked a shopping frenzy after he was seen arriving in Alaska in a white sweater with bold black letters spelling “USSR” across the chest. The item sold out overnight, according to its maker. Lavrov was part of the Russian delegation accompanying President Vladimir Putin for talks with US President Donald Trump on Friday. The nearly three-hour summit in Anchorage included senior officials from both sides and focused on ending the Ukraine conflict. Lavrov drew attention as he stepped out of his car in a white long-sleeved sweater marked with “CCCP” – the Russian letters for USSR – across the chest, layered under a black padded vest.

https://twitter.com/NinaByzantina/status/1956665145633251661

The sweater featured black stripes on the cuffs, giving it a retro Soviet look. Yekaterina Varlakova, owner of SelSovet – the Chelyabinsk-based label that produced the sweater – said demand spiked as soon as Lavrov was seen wearing it. “The photo caused a sensation. All available pieces were gone by yesterday morning. Customers can now only pre-order, with delivery expected in one to one and a half months,” she told TASS on Saturday. SelSovet, founded in 2017, rose to prominence by 2021 through social media with the brand mixing retro design with Soviet imagery.

Some media outlets suggested Lavrov’s choice of sweater was a deliberate reminder of Ukraine’s past status as part of the Soviet Union, though Lavrov himself has made no comment on his attire. In recent years, Soviet-themed culture has enjoyed renewed popularity in Russia, with retro cafés, bars, and clothing lines embracing the style. Designers describe these items as part of the country’s identity, noting that Soviet imagery is increasingly seen as shared history and cultural pride.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Covid is no threat to children. But mRNA is.

https://twitter.com/realDaveReilly/status/1956502954229522582

Theotokos
https://twitter.com/NinaByzantina/status/1956503381243204087

RFK

CO2
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1956637394238672970

72,000

Raw milk

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 162025
 


Edward Hopper Tables for ladies 1930

 

Putin & Trump Find Common Ground as West’s War Party Shut Out (Sp.)
Trump Pushes Peace Over Ceasefire After Putin Meeting (RT)
Western Media In Frenzy Over Putin-Trump Summit – Moscow (RT)
Putin-Trump Summit Went Much Better than Expected — Pepe Escobar (Sp.)
Zelensky Should ‘Make A Deal’ – Trump (RT)
Trump Praises ‘Warm’ Meeting With Putin (RT)
Talks with Trump ‘Constructive’ – Putin (RT)
‘Next Time In Moscow’ – Putin to Trump (RT)
Lasting Settlement Essential In Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)
Judge Napolitano: the Chance for a ‘Grand Reset’ in Russia-US Ties (Sp.)
A New Security Order Is On The Table In Alaska (Lukyanov)
Why Putin and Trump Had To Talk In Person (Bordachev)
The EU Throws An Epic Tantrum As Trump Meets With Putin (Marsden)
Carefully and Gracefully (James Howard Kunstler)
Scott Ritter: Two Things Need to Happen for Trump to Get His Ceasefire (Sp.)
US Has ‘No Right’ To Tell India Who To Trade With – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)
US Gov’t Ditches Musk’s AI Over ‘Anti-Semitism’ (RT)
EU Leaders Want To Overthrow Three European Governments – Budapest (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/TheRicanMemes/status/1956191505934069769

Loon wing

Wray
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1956065246138990940

Kash

DC
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1956167053649567935

275

 

 

Turley

 

 

 

 

It’s funny. How do you summarize this summit? It’s like there was no tangible “big breakthrough”, but at the same time everything about it was a giant breakthrough.

“..CNN said: “Putin’s isolation ended when his plane landed in Anchorage..”

Putin & Trump Find Common Ground as West’s War Party Shut Out (Sp.)

Talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump took place at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson near Anchorage, Alaska. Russia acknowledged positive, constructive dialogue between the sides, while Donald Trump hailed significant progress toward a Ukraine settlement. The Putin-Trump meeting shows the West “gambled on an easy victory over Russia and lost,” Mikael Valtersson, a Swedish Armed Forces veteran, told Sputnik. Both Russia and America have signalled satisfaction with the summit as a step forward towards a real peaceful solution of the Ukraine conflict, he noted. “Those that wanted more isolation and sanctions against Russia, if Russia didn’t agree to Western demands, didn’t have their way,” the former defence politician and chief of staff with Sweden Democrats emphasized.

The “Western war party” had hoped for new harsh sanctions on Russia and those trading with it, but instead what can be seen is improving relations between Russia and the US, as well as a continued peace process. After Donald Trump talks with his European allies and Ukraine, they will be faced with a choice, Valtersson said. They can either support the peace process by accepting the realities on the ground and legitimate interests of Russia, or reject it. If they choose the latter, they will isolate themselves from not only the majority of the world, but especially from the US. “Hopefully the cooler heads in Ukraine and Europe will realize that it’s better to follow the US and accept reality, than continue a lost war,” Valtersson concluded.

Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump’s reunion made clear they’d missed the bond from years past, psychiatrist Dr. Carole Lieberman told Sputnik. “When President Putin and President Trump approached each other… their body language showed a very open and warm receptiveness,” the Beverly Hills best-selling author said. The two leaders shook hands multiple times, touched each other’s arms, and smiled—a clear signal they’d missed the connection they had during Trump’s first presidency. Lieberman noted the direct eye contact, standing close marked an “auspicious beginning that foretold a positive meeting.” Even after three hours of serious talks, their joint press conference carried the same energy. Both turned slightly toward one another, as if to emphasize unity. “They gave the impression that they were facing the press together, on the same team,” Lieberman observed.

Read more …

“..not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up..”

Trump Pushes Peace Over Ceasefire After Putin Meeting (RT)

The Ukraine conflict should be ended through a permanent agreement rather than a mere ceasefire, US President Donald Trump has said, following his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, Trump said his almost three-hour talks with Putin in Anchorage “went very well,” adding that it was “a great and very successful day.” He confirmed that he had discussed the summit with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, several EU leaders, and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

“It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,” Trump said. The US president also confirmed that he and Zelensky would hold talks on Monday, adding that “if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin.”

Read more …

“..plunged into “frenzy bordering on complete madness” over the honors given to the Russian leader..”

Western Media In Frenzy Over Putin-Trump Summit – Moscow (RT)

Western media have erupted in hysteria over US President Donald Trump’s cordial welcome for his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Alaska on Friday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Zakharova weighed in on the three-hour negotiations in Anchorage that brought Putin to US soil for the first time in more than a decade. The Russian leader was greeted at the airport with a red carpet and a flyover of US fighter jets. He and Trump then rode together in the US president’s limousine to the summit venue. While the sides did not announce any deal on Ukraine, Putin described the talks as constructive, with Trump calling the meeting “warm” and suggesting that Moscow and Washington “are pretty close” to settling the Ukraine conflict.

Zakharova noted that Western media had plunged into “frenzy bordering on complete madness” over the honors given to the Russian leader. “For three years they spoke of Russia’s isolation, and today they saw a red carpet rolled out to meet the Russian president in the US,” she said. Western media is attempting to frame the Alaska summit as a diplomatic win for Moscow. The Washington Post wrote that “the warmth of the welcome sent shock through Ukraine and Europe” while pointing to a stark contrast with the reception of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky at the White House in February, when Trump accused the Ukrainian leader of disrespect, ingratitude over US aid, and of “gambling with World War III.”

https://twitter.com/RT_India_news/status/1956604838650970291?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1956604838650970291%7Ctwgr%5E96fd5db1e5dafa98554807c55448efd1c8b51955%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Frussia%2F623047-western-media-frenzy-trump-putin%2F

Sky News correspondent Ivor Bennett, a former RT reporter, voiced surprise that Putin was first to speak at the media conference “as if he was the host rather than Donald Trump.” Another Sky News reporter had suggested prior to the talks that Putin would “use his KGB-trained powers of deception and seduction” on his US counterpart. Bloomberg reported that “by inviting the Russian president onto American soil and giving him an audience, Trump had already delivered a diplomatic win” for a seemingly isolated leader. The agency also published a separate piece headlined “US-Russia Summit Shows How Little Europe Matters in Trumpworld”, referencing the fact that no EU leaders were invited to the summit. Politico ran the headline “Putin’s Alaska triumph,” while CNN said: “Putin’s isolation ended when his plane landed in Anchorage,” adding, the Russian president “[is] back in from the cold.”

Read more …

“There were even some indications that a serious US-Russia reset could be on the horizon..”

Putin-Trump Summit Went Much Better than Expected — Pepe Escobar (Sp.)

There are few details about what exactly was discussed in the meeting, but Russian officials have made it clear that they’re pleased with how it went, says veteran geopolitical analyst, Pepe Escobar. There were even some indications that a serious US-Russia reset could be on the horizon. Even according to President Trump himself, they came to agreement on several important points and only a few are left. So this implies. serious discussions not only about Ukraine, a possible resolution in Ukraine, and of course we we have no idea about the terms and the parameters, but a reset, a serious reset of US-Russia relations. [..] The Russian delegation featured Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov, and RDIF head Kirill Dmitriev. The US delegation included senior diplomatic and security officials.

Read more …

He would have to give up Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye. That would be the end of him.

Zelensky Should ‘Make A Deal’ – Trump (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky should “make the deal” to settle Kiev’s conflict with Moscow, US President Donald Trump has said following three-hour talks in Anchorage with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, their first summit since Helsinki in 2018. In an interview with Fox News on Friday, Trump reflected on “a very warm meeting,” adding that the sides are “pretty close” to resolving the conflict. He stressed that Kiev should be on board with the push for peace, for it to have any chance of success. When asked what advice he would give Zelensky, Trump replied: “Make the deal”, adding that he believes that Putin “wants to see it done.”

“It’s really up to President Zelensky to get it done. And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit,” the US president added. Trump said that he was ready to mediate direct talks between Putin and Zelensky. “If they’d like, I’ll be at that next meeting… Not that I want to be there, but I want to make sure it gets done. And we have a pretty good chance of getting it done.” Both leaders described the meeting as productive, although no agreement on Ukraine was announced. Putin earlier did not rule out direct talks with Zelensky, but stressed that it must be preceded by significant progress on settling the conflict.

Moscow has also voiced concerns about Zelensky’s right to sign any binding agreements, given that his presidential term expired last year, and that the Ukrainian leader has refused to call a new election, citing martial law. Ukrainian troops have been on the back foot for months, with Moscow making advances in Donbass and elsewhere. Moscow has insisted that any settlement should see Ukraine commit to bloc neutrality, demilitarization and denazification, as well as recognize the new territorial reality on the ground, including the status of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye Regions, all of which have voted to become parts of Russia.

Read more …

“The US leader earlier suggested that he would “give today a ten” when it came to the outcome of the summit..”

Trump Praises ‘Warm’ Meeting With Putin (RT)

US President Donald Trump has described his summit in Alaska with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, as a “warm meeting,” and suggested that the Ukraine conflict is close to being resolved. In an interview with Fox News, the US leader praised the three-hour talks with Putin in Anchorage on Friday, noting that they had made progress in talks mainly focused on ending the hostilities between Russia and Ukraine. “Actually, I think we agree on a lot. I can tell you, the meeting was… warm,” Trump said, calling Putin a “strong guy.” The US leader earlier suggested that he would “give today a ten” when it came to the outcome of the summit. According to Trump, the sides are “pretty close to the end” of the conflict, although he added that “Ukraine has to agree” to any potential peace deal.

He would not provide any details of the discussions, saying only that “there’s one or two pretty significant items, but I think they can be reached.” The US president also noted that he had “always had a great relationship with President Putin, and we would have done great things together,” while praising Russia as a land brimming with natural resources. Putin similarly described the talks with Trump as “constructive” and “useful,” saying Moscow was “sincerely interested in putting an end” to the hostilities. He also suggested that the two leaders could hold their next meeting in Moscow, with Trump replying that he could “see it possibly happening.”

Read more …

“We have always considered the Ukrainian people…fraternal, as strange as it may sound in today’s conditions.”

Talks with Trump ‘Constructive’ – Putin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has called his talks with US President Donald Trump in Anchorage on Friday “constructive” and “useful.” The discussions focused largely on the Ukraine conflict. Moscow is “sincerely interested in putting an end” to the ongoing hostilities, Putin stressed. “We have always considered the Ukrainian people…fraternal, as strange as it may sound in today’s conditions. We have the same roots and everything that is happening is a tragedy and a great pain for us,” he said. Speaking at the press conference, Trump remarked that the meeting was highly productive, although the two sides didn’t reached full agreement and no deal was finalized yet.

He highlighted the significant progress made during the discussions and affirmed his strong relationship with President Putin. Putin said that in recent years – under the administration of Joe Biden – US-Russia relations had sunk “to their lowest point since the Cold War,” which benefits neither the two countries nor the world as a whole. “It is obvious that sooner or later it was necessary to correct the situation and the transition from confrontation to dialogue had to take place. In this regard, a personal meeting of the heads of the two states was really overdue,” he said. The negotiations at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson lasted nearly three hours.

The Russian delegation for the Alaska summit also included Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov, and presidential economic envoy Kirill Dmitriev, who has been a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process. Trump was accompanied by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

Read more …

“Next time in Moscow,” Putin said in English. “That’s an interesting one,” Trump replied. “I’ll get a little heat for that one. But I can see it possibly happening.”

‘Next Time In Moscow’ – Putin to Trump (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin made a rare public switch to English to invite US President Donald Trump to Moscow for the next round of peace talks, following their summit in Anchorage, Alaska on Friday. Trump said he could see the meeting taking place though it would likely face political pushback. Speaking at the press conference, Trump called the meeting “extremely productive” and said, “we didn’t get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there,” implying no deal had been reached yet. He said the talks marked significant progress and reaffirmed what he described as his strong relationship with Putin. “Today’s agreements will help us restart pragmatic relations,” Trump said.

At the close of the press conference, Trump thanked Putin and said he expected to speak with him again soon. “Next time in Moscow,” Putin said in English. “That’s an interesting one,” Trump replied. “I’ll get a little heat for that one. But I can see it possibly happening.” Putin thanked Trump for what he called a “friendly” tone and “results-oriented” approach, saying it could “start us on the path towards a resolution in Ukraine.” He described the talks as “constructive” and reiterated his view that there would have been no war in Ukraine if Trump had been president when the conflict broke out. No details of any deal were provided, and neither Putin nor Trump took questions from reporters.

Read more …

Zelensky tweeted he’ll be in Washington on Monday. He’ll try and bring the entire EU.

Lasting Settlement Essential In Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)

For a lasting resolution to the Ukraine conflict to be achieved, all of its root causes must be addressed, Russia’s legitimate concerns taken into account, and a fair global security balance restored, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a joint press conference with his US counterpart, Donald Trump, on Friday. The two men met in Alaska for a much-anticipated summit, to discuss restoring bilateral relations and to work toward a resolution of the Ukraine conflict. Putin acknowledged the willingness of the US administration and President Trump to engage in dialogue and seek solutions, noting their commitment to understanding the complexities of the situation.

He reiterated his view that Russians and Ukrainians are brotherly peoples and described the current circumstances as a tragedy, stressing Moscow’s sincere desire to bring the conflict to an end. Putin said that any sustainable resolution must address the root causes of the crisis while taking into account Russia’s legitimate concerns. “A fair balance of security in Europe and globally must be restored,” he stated. Putin agreed with Trump that ensuring Ukraine’s security is imperative and expressed a readiness to collaborate on the issue. He expressed hope that the mutual understanding reached during the discussions will pave the way toward peace.

“We hope that this will be perceived constructively in Kiev and European capitals, and that no obstacles will be created,” Putin stressed. “There should be no attempts to undermine the anticipated progress through provocations or behind-the-scenes intrigue.” Trump stressed that the key takeaway of the talks is that there is a reasonable opportunity to achieve peace. He expressed hope to meet Putin again soon, noting that the Russian president shares his desire to bring the conflict to an end.

Read more …

“..that puts “President Putin in what Americans call the catbird seat,”

Judge Napolitano: the Chance for a ‘Grand Reset’ in Russia-US Ties (Sp.)

Presidents Putin and Trump are meeting for the first time in over six years.The main topics on the agenda? Ukraine and Russia-US relations. Veteran journalist and Judging Freedom host Andrew Napolitano shares his insights. The US is “in no position to consent to the very reasonable, intellectually honest and consistent Russian demands” in Ukraine, as its officials don’t seem to fully understand or appreciate Russia’s national security needs, Napolitano told Sputnik, when asked whether the meeting could lead to a speedy cessation of hostilities. The Russian military is already very close to achieving its objectives in the special military operation, Trump knows it, and that puts “President Putin in what Americans call the catbird seat,” Napolitano said.

“Add to those reasons the recent Russian triumphs in the battlefield, which are rather extraordinary and which have left the Ukrainians with very, very little manpower with which to resist the Russian military,” he added. The Putin-Trump meeting could be the “first of many steps” toward a new era “commercial, political, diplomatic, cultural integration” between the two nations, a “grand reset” that could require help from other rising global powers to fully realize. “That’s not going to happen today, and it may have to involve other countries like China, Brazil and India, maybe even Iran, but the grand reset between Russia and the United States, I believe, is a personal goal of President Putin and an aspiration of Donald Trump,” Napolitano said.

Read more …

Written pre-summit.

A New Security Order Is On The Table In Alaska (Lukyanov)

It has been a long time since a diplomatic event drew as much global attention as Friday’s meeting between the Russian and US presidents in Alaska. In terms of its significance for the international balance, it is comparable only to the negotiations on German reunification 35 years ago. That process laid the foundations for political developments in the decades that followed. The Alaska talks could prove a similar milestone – not just for the Ukraine conflict, but for the principles on which a broader settlement between the world’s leading powers might be reached. Ukraine has become the most visible arena for historical shifts that go far beyond its borders. But if the German analogy holds, no one should expect a breakthrough from a single meeting. The marathon of high-level diplomacy in 1990 lasted many months, and the mood then was far less acute and far more optimistic than today.

The dense fog of leaks and speculation surrounding Alaska underlines its importance. Much of this “white noise” comes from two sources: commentators eager to sound informed, and political actors seeking to shape public opinion. In reality, the substantive preparation for the talks appears to have little to do with the propaganda framing. This is why official announcements so often catch outside observers by surprise. That may be a good sign. In recent decades, especially in Europe, diplomacy has often been accompanied by a steady drip of confidential details to the press – a habit that may serve tactical purposes but rarely produces lasting results. In this case, it is better to wait for the outcome, or the lack of one, without giving in to the temptation to guess what will happen behind closed doors.

There is also a broader backdrop that cannot be ignored: the shifts in the global order catalyzed by the Ukraine crisis, though not caused by it. For years, I have been skeptical of claims that the world is dividing neatly into two opposing camps – “the West” versus “the rest.” Economic interdependence remains too deep for even sharp political and military conflicts to sever ties entirely. Yet contradictions between these blocs are growing, and they are increasingly material rather than ideological. A key trigger was US President Donald Trump’s recent attempt to pressure the largest states of the so-called “global majority” – China, India, Brazil, and South Africa – to fall in line with Washington’s instructions. The old liberal order promised universality and some benefits to participants. Now, purely American mercantile interests dominate.

As before, Washington dresses its demands in political justifications – criticizing Brazil and South Africa over their treatment of the opposition, or attacking India and China over their ties with Moscow. But the inconsistencies are obvious. Trump, unlike his predecessors, prefers tariffs to sanctions. Tariffs are an explicitly economic tool, but they are now being wielded for political ends.

Read more …

“..they have often stood on the brink of a path from which there would be no return. This is why Alaska matters, even if it does not yield a breakthrough…”

Why Putin and Trump Had To Talk In Person (Bordachev)

The meeting between the presidents of Russia and the United States in Alaska is not an end point, but the beginning of a long journey. It will not resolve the turbulence that has gripped humanity – but it matters to everyone. In international politics, there have been few moments when meetings between the leaders of major powers have decided questions of universal importance. This is partly because situations requiring attention at such a level are rare. We are living through one now: since the start of Russia’s military operation against Ukraine, Washington has declared its aim to be the “strategic defeat” of Russia, while Moscow has challenged the West’s monopoly over world affairs. Another reason is practical. Leaders of the world’s most powerful states do not waste time on problems that can be solved by subordinates.

And history shows that even when top-level meetings do occur, they rarely change the overall course of international politics. It is no surprise, then, that the Alaska meeting has been compared to famous encounters from the past – notably the 1807 meeting between the Russian and French emperors on a raft in the Neman River. That summit did not prevent Napoleon from attacking Russia five years later – an act that ultimately brought about his own downfall. Later, at the 1815 Congress of Vienna, Russia was the only power represented by its ruler on a regular basis. Tsar Alexander I insisted on presenting his personal vision for Europe’s political structure. It failed to win over the other great powers, who, as Henry Kissinger once noted, preferred to discuss interests rather than ideals.

History is full of high-level talks that preceded war rather than preventing it. European monarchs would meet, fail to agree, and then march their armies. Once the fighting ended, their envoys would sit down to negotiate. Everyone understood that “eternal peace” was usually just a pause before the next conflict. The 2021 Geneva summit between Russia and the US may well be remembered in this way – as a meeting that took place on the eve of confrontation. Both sides left convinced their disputes could not be resolved at the time. In its aftermath, Kiev was armed, sanctions were readied, and Moscow accelerated military-technical preparations. Russia’s own history offers parallels. The most famous “summit” of ancient Rus was the 971 meeting between Prince Svyatoslav and Byzantine Emperor John Tzimiskes, following a peace treaty.

According to historian Nikolay Karamzin, they “parted as friends” – but that did not stop the Byzantines from unleashing the Pechenegs against Svyatoslav on his journey home. In Asia, traditions were different. The status of Chinese and Japanese emperors did not permit meetings with equals; such encounters were legally and culturally impossible. When the modern European “world order” was created – most famously in the 1648 Peace of Westphalia – it was not through grand encounters of rulers but through years of negotiations among hundreds of envoys. By then, after 30 years of war, all sides were too exhausted to continue fighting. That exhaustion made it possible to agree on a comprehensive set of rules for relations between states.

Seen in this historical light, top-level summits are exceedingly rare, and those that produce fundamental change are rarer still. The tradition of two leaders speaking on behalf of the entire global system is a product of the Cold War, when Moscow and Washington alone had the ability to destroy or save the world. Even if Roman and Chinese emperors had met in the third century, it would not have transformed the fate of the world. The great empires of antiquity could not conquer the planet in a single war with each other. Russia – as the USSR before it – and the United States can. In the last three years, they have often stood on the brink of a path from which there would be no return. This is why Alaska matters, even if it does not yield a breakthrough.

Read more …

“..when Kiev loses, they say, “Ok, well this sucks – how about if everyone just pretends that none of this happened and we dial all the territorial gains and losses back to a point of our choosing, okay?”

The EU Throws An Epic Tantrum As Trump Meets With Putin (Marsden)

The European Union had been wailing about “transatlantic unity” in the run-up to US President Trump heading to the negotiating table with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday – without it. It sounded like a toddler stomping their feet because Daddy let go of their hand in the mall and now they’re lost between Cinnabon and Burger King. A lot of good their dogmatic rhetoric has done them so far. If it wasn’t for Brussels getting drunk on its own transatlantic solidarity and unity propaganda, maybe it wouldn’t currently be in economic and political dire straits. The kind where you’re trying to duct-tape your economy back together with overpriced American gas.

They could have charted a different path vis-a-vis Russia. Maybe one that involved spearheading diplomacy rather than marching in lockstep behind the US-led NATO parade of weapons and fighters on Russia’s border with Ukraine, which helped supercharge the conflict in the first place. They could have insisted on keeping their cheap Russian energy instead of sanctioning their own imports like they were vying for a Nobel Prize in masochism. Now, the US is daring them to even close their clever little loophole in their own anti-Russian sanctions. The one that lets them moralize about helping Ukraine and the need to avoid negotiations with Russia while guzzling Russian fuel on the down-low. Trump Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told them to “put up or shut up” and sanction the Indian and Chinese importers of Russian petroleum through which the EU still buys Russian fuel.

While the EU indulges itself in rhetorical games, Trump has dropped all pretexts of serving any interests but America’s first, and isn’t following any agenda beyond trying to wrap things up with Russia in Ukraine and to score some economic wins in the process. Brussels has had more than three years to do the same. Instead, it kept repeating the mantra that Kiev had to win on the battlefield. There were no other options, it said. Whoops! Now that the option has materialized, the Europeans are relegated to running behind Trump, pleading with him to indulge them by letting Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky decide where the post-conflict borders will be. What did they think the downside of their “win by force” gamble would be, if not changed borders?

The EU insists on Ukraine fighting Russia with EU cash and weapons, and when Kiev loses, they say, “Ok, well this sucks – how about if everyone just pretends that none of this happened and we dial all the territorial gains and losses back to a point of our choosing, okay?” The EU insisted on waiting for someone else to take the initiative for peace. Now all it can do is pick up its pom-poms and cheer Trump on. Then hope that he rewards it. As Zelensky’s self-appointed babysitters, instead of spending the past week in the run-up to the Alaska summit insisting that Putin and Trump allow a high chair booster seat and a pack of crayons at the negotiating table so he can show them where he wants the borders, maybe the Europeans should have been calming him down and managing expectations.

He sounded like he was treating his phone like a toy, calling up everyone in the contacts under “EU” – Estonia, Denmark, probably a few pizza places. The EU has tried to gaslight Trump with the same rhetoric that it constantly firehoses onto European citizens about peace in Ukraine being a dangerous gateway drug for Russia to invade Western Europe – a convenient marketing pitch to justify boosting the weapons industry to the detriment of domestic priorities. Not even warhawk US Senator Lindsey Graham is saying that now, telling NBC News that “Russia is not going to Kiev”…let alone the EU. European leaders treated Wednesday’s video call with Trump like a win. Perhaps because he didn’t explicitly tell them off, for once. But they really have no idea what he’ll actually discuss with Putin, nor do they have leverage over any eventual US–Russia deal.

They don’t know whether Trump is just placating them because he doesn’t need a bunch of hysterical circus clowns in the mix. So how could the EU spin this to avoid looking completely irrelevant? “Today Europe, the US and NATO have strengthened the common ground for Ukraine, we will remain in close coordination. Nobody wants peace more than us. A just and lasting peace,” said unelected EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Yeah, sounds desperate for peace, alright. Which must be why the EU is building weapons factories at breakneck speed, according to the Financial Times. Nothing says “we’re committed to ending the war” like tripling down on weapons. What are you going to do with all those if peace breaks out? Toss them in the landfill and hope that taxpayers forget about the boondoggle, like you did with the hundreds of millions of unused Covid jabs?

Read more …

“It’s funny they call [intel] a ‘community.’ That sounds so benign and beneficial. Everybody likes communities.” —Doug Casey

Carefully and Gracefully (James Howard Kunstler)

And so, now, in Alaska, Mr. Trump sits down with Vlad Putin to attempt a settling of Ukraine’s hash. This war has been a three-year bloody grind, millions killed, mostly Ukrainians, provoked underhandedly by US State Dept / CIA neocons, Britain’s MI6 apparatus, and the girl-bosses of the EU, for no good reason, namely, to weaken and possibly break-up Russia so as to get at its vast mineral and energy resources. This has been tried before in history, always to the grief of the triers. From our country’s point of view, the dynamics in play at this moment are delicate to an extreme. In the background of the Trump-Putin meet-up, amid an eerie silence in the DOJ and FBI, an epic, sweeping prosecution of the RussiaGate hoaxers creeps forward.

RussiaGate, of course, was born in the false charge (by America’s highest officials, derived from nonsense cooked up by Hillary Clinton) that Donald Trump was a Russian agent. It was preposterous and continually disproven, but the many-footed creatures of America’s deep state, which controlled so many levers of power, dragged it out for years. Altogether, that endeavor amounted to a campaign of sedition and arguably treason. The delicacy comes in as President Trump must now avoid at all costs any appearance of giving-in to Mr. Putin, of appearing to be any sort of a vassal — “Putin’s puppet,” as charged in RussiaGate. The raw truth is that Russia has likely already “won” the war in Ukraine, in the sense that it has finally gained control of the battlespace and worn out its opponent. It is fait accompli.

What remains is the disposition of Ukraine’s future which, in another raw truth, is mostly Russia’s to determine. Yet another raw truth is that this would probably be the best outcome for all concerned: a neutralized, disarmed Ukraine returned to its prior condition as a mostly agricultural sovereign backwater of Europe within Russia’s sphere-of-influence, resuming its longstanding status as not being a problem for anyone. Still, yet another raw truth is that the USA would benefit hugely from normalized relations with Russia, no more sanctions, fair trade, a rebalance of the drift toward China, lessening the chance of nuclear war — and this would even benefit the knuckleheads of Europe whose economies are imploding due to a lack of affordable energy (and also because of, let’s face it, the EU’s terrifically stupid “green” policies).

All of which means there will necessarily be a lot of “pretend” played in Anchorage for show. Mr. Trump must pretend to be tough on Putin, and Mr. Putin must pretend, a little bit, to give-in to Mr. Trump’ proposals. That is, it will be something of a kabuki, a kafabe. Surely, many of the stickiest points have been pre-negotiated by Mr. Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, who quietly visited Moscow a week ago. Mr. Trump must appear strong with Russia because his appointees are commencing to go medieval on the folks who called him “Putin’s Puppet” nine years ago — and subjected him to a series of epic torments including the subversion of his whole first term in office, nonstop obloquy from the media, impeachment (X 2), home invasion, and a grotesque set of malicious, nitwit prosecutions that have either failed completely (Fani Willis, Jack Smith) or will be subject to humiliating reversals in the higher courts. Not to mention two attempted assassinations.

You should assume that Mr. Putin well understands all this and intends to play along. He will appear to make some generous concessions to Ukraine, starting with the promise that it can go forward as a sovereign, self-governing nation. The big enchilada might be to grant that Ukraine can retain possession of Odessa, the port city on the Black Sea which is Ukraine’s depot for export to the world of its chief commodity, grains. In any case, both Russia and the USA intend to relieve Volodymyr Zelenskyy of his duties — notice he is conspicuously not invited to the Alaska meeting. Mr. Trump well understands that one way or another, Russia is going to prevail in this conflict on-the-ground. He abhors all the killing. He has already expressed a disinclination to keep backing the war with money and weapons. He must be disgusted at how the Bidens (and the Deep State) used Ukraine as a money-laundry, as a site for bioweapons labs, and how it served as a nexus for human trafficking.

He also knows that Russia wants badly to be re-admitted to normal relations with the West, which is in everybody’s interest, except perhaps China’s. You should infer therefore that Russia wants the war to end in a way that does not humiliate the losers and backers — perhaps along the lines of how America managed our victory against our enemies in World War Two, carefully and gracefully.

Read more …

“The scary thing is that the Biden administration officials who were in that room said ‘oh we’re ready for that. If the Russians wanna play, we’re ready to go to nuclear war with them.’ This is the insanity that existed in November of last year!”

Scott Ritter: Two Things Need to Happen for Trump to Get His Ceasefire (Sp.)

The Ukrainian crisis is front and center of the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska. Sputnik asked renowned geopolitical analyst, former Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter to weigh in on the high stakes meeting. First things first: the US president “doesn’t care about the geopolitical nuances of Ukrainian battlefield locations,” Ritter said. “If Putin can convince him that the quickest route to a ceasefire is for Ukraine to leave” Russia’s new territories “and say no to NATO, that’s it. That’s all that has to happen for a ceasefire.” The Russian military has mastered drone warfare, counter-drone warfare, and new battlefield tactics to the point where its advance has become “an irreversible process,” Ritter added, commenting on what happens if the peace push doesn’t pan out.

“There’s nothing that can be done. Nothing can be done to stop this. The advantage is 100% Russia, and we’re looking at the Ukrainians on the verge of total collapse,” the observer stressed. Trump’s base doesn’t want to continue fueling a proxy conflict against Russia, much less getting into a hot war with Russia over Ukraine, Ritter said. “Don’t worry about Congress. They don’t elect the president, and they will fall in behind the president, because if he can secure his base with a peace deal, he can ruin everybody in Congress, especially a Republican, who goes against him,” he stressed.

In November 2024, the CIA briefed Congress on the risks of a nuclear war breaking out, estimating that there was a “greater than 50% chance” thanks to the Biden administration’s decision to greenlight long-range ATACMS strikes into Russia, Ritter revealed.

“The director of plans of Strategic Command, the American military command that carries out nuclear war briefed a Washington, DC think tank in November that the United States is prepared for a nuclear exchange with Russia, (that means nuclear war) and that the United States thought they were going to win,” he said. “When this was briefed to Congress, I asked a senior Democrat…’when the CIA briefed you, did the CIA say the Russians were bluffing?’ He said no. The CIA said the exact opposite. He said but that’s not the scary thing. The scary thing is that the Biden administration officials who were in that room said ‘oh we’re ready for that. If the Russians wanna play, we’re ready to go to nuclear war with them.’ This is the insanity that existed in November of last year!” Ritter stressed.

Read more …

Peace with Russia means these tariffs also must disappear.

US Has ‘No Right’ To Tell India Who To Trade With – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)

The United States has no right to tell India who it can partner with in trade, Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, said on Friday. The economist was commenting in an interview with NDTV television on Washington’s decision to impose additional tariffs on India over its purchases of Russian oil. Last week, the White House announced an extra 25% tariff on Indian imports, raising the overall tariff level faced by the South Asian nation to 50%. US President Donald Trump said the measure was prompted by India’s continued imports of Russian oil. New Delhi condemned the move as “extremely unfortunate” and pledged to safeguard its national interests. Sachs described the tariff increase as a clear reason for India to remain cautious in its dealings with Washington.

“Don’t rely on them. India needs a diversified base of partners – Russia, China, ASEAN countries, Africa, and not see itself as mainly focusing on the US market, which is going to be unstable, slow-growing and basically protectionist,” according to Sachs. Addressing India’s imports of Russian oil, Sachs stated that Washington has no authority to determine the trading relations of other nations. The US “does not act responsibly towards other countries. Be careful. India should not allow itself to be used by the US, somehow, in the US’ misguided trade war with China,” the economist noted.

New Delhi is now seeking to expand its export presence in the 50 countries that account for about 90% of its total exports in an effort to offset the impact of the higher tariffs, according to local media reports, citing government sources. The initiative is intended to reduce reliance on any single market and to minimize risks arising from trade disruptions. In response to the US threats to impose secondary sanctions on Russia’s trade partners, including India, China, and Brazil, Moscow stated that it believes “sovereign states should have, and do have, the right to choose their own trade partners,” as well as to independently determine which avenues of cooperation best serve their national interests.

Read more …

“Grok had already been added to the GSA’s long-term procurement list, enabling agencies to buy it.”

US Gov’t Ditches Musk’s AI Over ‘Anti-Semitism’ (RT)

The US government has dropped Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok from a planned federal technology program following controversy over anti-Semitic content and conspiracy theories produced by the bot, Wired reported on Thursday. Grok, developed by Musk’s AI startup xAI, is built into his social media platform X. It offers fact checks, quick context on trending topics, and replies to user arguments. Musk has promoted xAI as a rival to OpenAI and Google’s DeepMind, but the chatbot has faced criticism over offensive and inflammatory outputs. According to the report, xAI was in advanced talks with the General Services Administration (GSA), the agency in charge of US government tech procurement, to give federal workers access to its AI tools. Grok had already been added to the GSA’s long-term procurement list, enabling agencies to buy it.

Earlier this month, the GSA announced partnerships with other AI providers – Anthropic, Google’s Gemini, and Box’s AI-powered content platform – while reportedly also telling staff to remove xAI’s Grok from the offering. Two GSA employees told Wired they believe the chatbot was dropped over its anti-Semitic tirade last month, when it praised Adolf Hitler and called itself “MechaHitler.” The posts were deleted, and xAI apologized for the “horrific behavior,” pledging to block hate speech before Grok goes live. The bot also pushed the “white genocide” conspiracy theory and echoed Holocaust denial rhetoric, which xAI blamed on unauthorized prompt changes.

This week, it was briefly suspended from X after stating that Israel and the US were committing genocide in Gaza – allegations both countries reject. Musk has continued to praise the chatbot, recently writing: “East, West, @Grok is the best.” The move to drop Grok comes as part of a broader push by the administration of US President Donald Trump to modernize the federal government under an action plan unveiled last month that provides for less regulation and wider adoption of AI. However, the rapid growth of AI has triggered concern about its potential to spread misinformation, reinforce bias, and operate without accountability. Experts say that unless strong safeguards are in place, poorly moderated AI tools could also expose children to harmful or inappropriate content.

Read more …

All the more now Trump has put them at the kiddies table.

EU Leaders Want To Overthrow Three European Governments – Budapest (RT)

The European Union is attempting to topple the governments of Hungary, Slovakia, and Serbia for prioritizing national interests over alignment with Brussels, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has claimed. He made the comments in a Facebook post on Thursday after phone calls with Slovak Foreign Minister Juraj Blanar and Serbia’s top diplomat, Marko Duric. According to Szijjarto, they agreed to strengthen their stance on sovereignty and pledged mutual solidarity amid what they described as growing external pressure. “Brussels has ceased to be a factor in world politics. The fact that Europe has been excluded from the Alaska talks proves it,” he wrote, referring to Friday’s summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss the Ukraine conflict.

https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1956065724088172985

Kiev’s backers in Europe have repeatedly called to be included in any talks involving Russia, Ukraine, and the US, insisting that “a European power” should be “in the room” to guarantee that the security interests of Kiev and the EU are “safeguarded.” Unlike the EU, which continues to support Ukraine’s war effort, Szijjarto said Hungary, Serbia, and Slovakia have prioritized national interests and resisted pressure from Brussels, favoring peace talks over military involvement. “This obviously frustrates the mainstream liberal political leaders, and as a result, the pressure is increasing on governments that are supporting peace, following national interests, and not subordinating to Brussels,” the diplomat said.

It’s “clearer than daylight” that “external intervention experiments to destabilize and overthrow governments are taking place in Central Europe against the patriot Slovak, Hungarian, and Serbian governments,” he added. Szijjarto criticized recent polling in Slovakia, which suggested citizens “only trust revolution,” and accused Brussels of trying to undermine Hungary’s elected leadership by supporting the opposition Tisza Party. He also referenced recent clashes between protesters and police in Serbia, implying that external forces were stirring unrest to destabilize the government. According to Szijjarto, these “are all different chapters of the same scenario in Brussels: they want to clean up the peace-party, patriot, national-interest governments,” aiming to replace them with puppet governments so Brussels “can get a seat.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

GoF
https://twitter.com/sheislaurenlee/status/1956140482960183359

100
https://twitter.com/DavidJHarrisJr/status/1956106786903388484

https://twitter.com/LangmanVince/status/1956366054529089828

Bees

Bob
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1956110689359003751

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1956330600387821710

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 152025
 


Joseph Mallord William Turner The Tenth Plague of Egypt 1802

 

Without Zelensky, Peace Has A Chance (Tara Reade)
Kremlin Reveals Details Of Putin-Trump Summit (RT)
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent: “Europe Needs to Put Up or Shut Up” (CTH)
US Efforts To Settle Ukraine Conflict ‘Energetic And Sincere’ – Putin (RT)
Can Putin Pass the Test? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Could Trump End War in Ukraine In Meeting With Putin? (Victor Davis Hanson)
Kiev Tries To Kill As Many Civilians As It Can Right Before Talks (RT)
Elie Honig Nuked Left’s Talking Points on Trump DC Crime Crackdown (Margolis)
How Hillary Planned to Reward Schiff for Undermining Trump (Margolis)
Trump Signs Executive Order To Fill Reserve With Critical Drugs (JTN)
Treasury Secretary Bessent Calls For Trading Ban In Congress (JTN)
The Boomer Mirage (Stylman)
Sen. Kennedy: Democrats Need to ‘Buy Some Testicles’ on Amazon (Margolis)
Melania Trump Threatens Hunter Biden With $1Bln Lawsuit for Defamation (Sp.)

 

 

Orban
https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1955932465631256973

Solomon

UN

Kirk

Big beautiful trap
https://twitter.com/WesternLensman/status/1955641913815810167

 

 

 

 

Mere hours before “The Summit”, everyone has an opinion. I just found 2 cents in my own back pocket.

First: these two guys have a lot of respect for each other, that leads everything.

I think both Trump and Putin want the summit to succeed, at least in a preparatory fashion. If it’s a failure, they can blame each other, but no chance it would look good on themselves either. Some claim a lack of preparation on one side or the other, but I bet they both come very well prepared. There may still be differences, they come from very different positions, but it won’t be from lack of preparation.

We can wonder if Trump has fully digested Russia’s view of what happened in the past 10 years, what started the “war” etc., but that, only they know. Trump has the constant clatter and clamor of Lindsey Graham, Zelensky and Europe in his ears telling him what to think and do, but if anything that will just make him eager to shut them down. We may come away surprised, but it’s more likely they pass it all down to the heavy delegations, and meet again in fall.

There’s no chance they will part company only to make more war. That will not happen.

Without Zelensky, Peace Has A Chance (Tara Reade)

In 1867, the Russian empire sold Alaska to the US for $7.2 million. Perhaps the location of the upcoming summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin is a nod and a wink to such a great deal? Maybe Putin will like Alaska so much he will have seller’s remorse? Trump promised America a golden age coming that included ending the US involvement in Ukraine. No more US taxpayer money, no more weapons to Ukraine. No more escalation towards a nuclear war. Finally, that campaign promise looks to be coming to fruition with the upcoming summit to be held between the two superpower presidents, Trump and Putin, in Alaska. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky publicly dismissed Trump’s peace plans. The last time Zelensky protested a movement towards peace he had European leaders rallying behind him.

This time proves more tricky for the illegitimate president of Ukraine with his people protesting forced conscriptions and the bloody losses of men and women for a war feeding the EU and Washington. Zelensky’s firing of an anti-corruption team triggered the latest uprising as he still will not hold elections. In short, Zelensky’s time is done and he will need to flee, along with his corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs, to the nearest European villa haven or face the possible fate of many unpopular dictators – death. Trump has many reasons for wanting this peace summit with Putin to be a success. First, he is by all accounts, ducking hits by his base about not releasing the Epstein files. The MAGA base is loyal but practical, and if the economy does not improve and foreign wars continue, they will turn their back on the Republican Party, not just Trump.

Also, the Ukraine conflict represents Biden and the old guard. Trump has repeatedly said, “This is NOT my war.” Trump has a certain respect for Putin. However, as time passes and old hawks like senator Lindsay Graham salivate for more blood and death, Trump’s goal of being the ‘peace president’ moves farther out of reach. The American people are over Ukraine, they are sick of American foreign adventures on taxpayer money that have left America’s infrastructure and morale in tatters. Trump is trying to undo decades of lies about wars and domestic policy now revealed to the public. The American distrust in media is at an all-time high due to the years of lies about wars, Covid, and domestic issues. This culminates in collective cynicism while social media allows for examinations of truths.

The cultural divide and frustrations in America are deeply felt but the main concern for Americans is the ability to get access to affordable food, housing, and medical care. All of this has been in crisis especially since the Biden regime drove the US economy into the ground raising the debt ceiling and focusing on endless wars.

The economic allure of Russia and America having positive productive trade is not lost on Trump and his leadership. Russia has risen above sanctions with a strong economy, and BRICS has been growing stronger. The attempts to isolate Russia have failed, while the collective West has remained under the thumb of past US hawks. This has brought the near collapse of some of the Western European economies. Trump at his heart is a businessman interested in economic competition rather than war. His current administration is a mix of old guard neocon hawks and anti-war doves. This curious mixture with strong influences from Israel means Trump’s foreign policy still somewhat aligns with Biden’s and Obama’s – and that is a comparison he wishes to distance himself from.

Both the US and Russia know that Ukraine employs terrorist tactics, killing civilians and targeting journalists, which is problematic to any signed legal agreements. There is also the fact that Moscow does not consider Zelensky a legitimate president since his term ran out and he canceled elections. How legal would any peace agreements signed with him be? Perhaps the answer will come from the US president in the form of guarantees of no more weapons or funding to Ukraine, but these would have to involve binding commitments – unlike earlier empty promises of no eastward NATO expansion.

Ultimately, Zelensky is less than inconsequential to the future of global politics – he is a liability to the West. The real end to this proxy war between the US/NATO and Russia will be decided between Trump and Putin. It will likely start with broad brush strokes of a peace agreement, with details, boundaries and consequences laid out later in bureaucratic form. There will be posturing, but also economic and trade deals made. Perhaps a joint mission in space could be one positive outcome? The lifting of sanctions and putting an end to the Russophobia campaign fueled by Obama and Biden? A more positive approach to disarmament of nuclear weapons? While Putin might not buy back Alaska for Russia, there may be some movement to final peace in regards to Ukraine. If the EU falls into line with the US to drop this proxy war, stop supplying weapons, and not allow Ukraine into NATO, then real peace does have some hope.

The world may even have a chance of having a new golden age, rather than a future of nuclear ash.

Read more …

“Putin and Trump will not only deliver a short opening statement but also hold a joint press conference after the talks..”

Kremlin Reveals Details Of Putin-Trump Summit (RT)

The summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, on Friday will focus not only on the Ukraine conflict but on a broader security agenda and involve several top Russian officials, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Ushakov said that “final preparations” were underway for the meeting on Friday, which will take place at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska. Given the short notice for the summit, “everything is being done in an intensive mode,” including tackling several technical issues, including visa-related matters, he added. Ushakov said the summit will begin at approximately 11:30 a.m. local time (19:30 GMT) with a one-on-one conversation between Putin and Trump, accompanied by interpreters.

“Then, there will be negotiations in the format of delegations, and these negotiations will continue over a working lunch,” he said. The Kremlin aide noted the very high level of the Russian delegation, which he said would include Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Ushakov himself, Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, and Special Presidential Representative for Investment and Economic Cooperation with Foreign Countries Kirill Dmitriev, who has been a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process. “In addition to the presidents, five members from each delegation will participate in the negotiations,” he said, adding that “of course, a group of experts will also be nearby.”

Regarding the agenda, it is “obvious” that the central issue in the talks will be the Ukraine conflict, Ushakov said, adding, though, that “broader objectives of ensuring peace and security will also be addressed, as well as current and most acute international and regional issues.”There will also be an exchange of views “regarding the further development of bilateral cooperation, including in the trade and economic spheres,” Ushakov noted, adding that such ties have “enormous and, unfortunately, still untapped potential.” Ushakov confirmed that Putin and Trump will not only deliver a short opening statement but also hold a joint press conference after the talks. He said the duration of the talks “would depend on how the discussion goes” and confirmed “the delegation will return [to Russia] immediately after the negotiations conclude.”

Read more …

With more summit details. I understand talks start 30 min earlier than announced.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent: “Europe Needs to Put Up or Shut Up” (CTH)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the upcoming summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump. Bessent notes the backseat demands from EU leaders with their position on the Trump negotiation strategy has worn thin amid their hypocrisy. “It’s time to put up or shut up,” Bessent says, when talking about how the EU is still facilitating the economic purchases of Russian energy products, while simultaneously demanding Trump do this and that.

I am cautiously optimistic for a positive outcome from this summit.
• Date: Friday August 15, 2025
• Venue: Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson near Anchorage, Alaska
• Anchorage is 4 hours behind Eastern Time zone.

DELEGATION:
USA President Donald Trump – Russian Federation, President Vladimir Putin
USA Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt – Russian Federation, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov
USA Secretary of State, Marco Rubio – Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
USA Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth – Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov
USA Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent – Russian Finance Minister, Anton Siluanov
USA Envoy Steve Witkoff – Russian Envoy Kirill Dmitriev

President Trump will depart the White House early Friday morning ET. Trump is expected in Anchorage midafternoon Eastern time on Friday. The initial meeting with Putin is expected to take place at 3:30 pm ET (11:30 am local) with just the two leaders and translators. Following the meeting, President Trump and President Putin with hold a lunch with members of delegations from both countries. The two leaders then plan to hold a joint press conference following their meeting, White House and Kremlin officials said Thursday morning.

Read more …

“She added that the US president would prefer not to impose any new sanctions on Russia but instead resolve the situation through diplomacy.”

US Efforts To Settle Ukraine Conflict ‘Energetic And Sincere’ – Putin (RT)

The US is making a genuine effort to stop the fighting in Ukraine and reach agreements that would account for the interests of all parties involved, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin is scheduled to meet with US President Donald Trump on Friday in Anchorage, Alaska, to discuss ways of ending the Ukraine conflict, as well as steps toward normalizing relations between Moscow and Washington. On Thursday, Putin met with top government officials in Moscow to discuss the upcoming summit and “the stage where we are with the current US administration.”

He said that the American leadership is making “quite energetic and sincere efforts to stop the hostilities” and working to “create long-term conditions of peace between our countries and in Europe, and in the world as a whole.” Putin added that this process could be further advanced if Russia and the US reach agreements on strategic offensive weapons control in the next stages of negotiations. Among the officials present at Thursday’s meeting were Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, all of whom will be traveling to Alaska on Friday to take part in the Putin-Trump summit. According to the Kremlin, the event will begin with a one-on-one conversation between the two leaders, followed by a meeting of the Russian and US delegations.

Trump has described the summit as a “feel-out meeting” that will help him determine whether the Ukraine conflict can be resolved. He has said that if the talks go well, he may seek a second round of negotiations involving Putin and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Thursday that Trump will pursue all possible options for a peaceful end to the conflict during his meeting with Putin. She added that the US president would prefer not to impose any new sanctions on Russia but instead resolve the situation through diplomacy.

Read more …

Not a clue why he says that Putin would ..”agree to such a meeting with zero preparatory work..”

He has every single detail in his head, it’s how he works, no need for paper. And on top of that he has 4 of his top advisors with him. How does that add up to zero?

Can Putin Pass the Test? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Yesterday President Trump in his public statements validated my conclusion that Trump does not know what the Russian position is and that he is going to the meeting to find out what the “parameters” are and that he sees the meeting as a “feel-out meeting” to see whether the conflict in Ukraine can be ended. In other words, no solution is expected from the meeting for which no preparatory work has been done. So what are the high-blown expectations for the meeting based on? Why build up such expectations when there is no proposal on the table? Where is the “acceptable” offer that Yury Ushakov found in the non-proposal that convinced Putin to go to Alaska? Is the answer that the purpose of the meeting is to put Putin on the spot by creating expectations of success that cannot be achieved?

French President Macron said that Trump told him that he intends to “obtain a ceasefire in Ukraine during the meeting with Putin.” When Putin doesn’t agree to halt Russia’s successful offensive, is the plan to blame Putin for wrecking the chance for peace? Will this help weaken BRICS by Putin being blamed for secondary tariffs imposed on India, China, Brazil, South Africa? (From Bloomberg today: Raising the stakes. Donald Trump warned he would impose “very severe consequences” if Vladimir Putin didn’t agree to a ceasefire agreement, following a call with European leaders ahead of his meeting with the Russian president. But Tass reported that the two will hold a joint press conference after the talks. Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Europe it’s “put up or shut up time” when it comes to sanctions on nations that buy Russian energy.)

That is what it looks like. The Ukrainian front is collapsing. A ceasefire would halt the Russian advance and give the Ukrainian force time to stabilize and reinforce its positions. This is important to the West, because once Russia completes the task of driving the Ukrainian forces out of all of the territory that has been reincorporated into the Russian Federation, there is no land in Ukrainian hands for Trump to swap with Putin. As I have reported a number of times, a land-swap is not one of the conditions on Putin’s list. What Putin means by “the root cause of the conflict” is Russia’s sense of insecurity with NATO and US nuclear missiles on Russia’s border. When the Soviet Union put nuclear missiles in Cuba as an offset to the nuclear missiles Washington had put in Turkey on the Soviet Union’s border, Washington was intensely upset. Today the US has missiles on Russia’s border and the opportunity to have missile bases on Russia’s borders ranging from Finland to the South Caucus, which is a large multiplication of the one Soviet missile base in Cuba.

So if one base in Cuba made the US uncomfortable, imagine how uncomfortable Russia is with the prospect of nuclear missiles along the border for thousands of kilometers. American and European politicians and policymakers have not acknowledged that the root cause of the conflict is NATO on Russia’s border. The prospect of Ukraine joining NATO and being added to the territory hosting US missile bases was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Trump’s land swap and ceasefire do not address Russia’s security problem. The root cause of the conflict is Russia’s sense of insecurity. That can only be solved by getting NATO off of Russia’s borders. This is the purpose of the mutual security agreement that Putin has been trying to negotiate for a number of years only to be given the cold shoulder as by the Biden regime during December 2021-February 2022.

Ask yourselves if you think Trump is in a sufficiently powerful position to override both the neoconservative doctrine of US hegemony and the interest of the American military/security complex. As long as the Wolfowitz Doctrine holds, and it has not been repudiated by President Trump, the Secretary of State, or Congress, the US is committed to “preventing the rise of any country that can serve as a constraint on American unilateralism.” As this is the stated commitment, how can NATO be removed from Russia’s border? President Eisenhower warned Americans in 1961 that the rise of the Cold War with the Soviet Union prevented the demobilization of the American war machine that normally followed the end of war. Instead, a powerful military/industrial complex has risen with roots in nearly every state, which gives it enormous power in Congress and among state governors.

That was 64 years ago. Since that time the power of the military/security complex has multiplied. Is this institutionalized power willing to take the hit to its budget and power from a mutual security agreement with its principal enemy? The questions I am asking are the determining questions. Nothing else that is said matters. Yet, these essential questions are not a part of the discussion in Washington, in Europe, or in the Kremlin. It is as if none of the participants in a growing conflict that could be terminable for life on Earth have any idea of the consequences of their decisions. Why suddenly did Trump who a couple of days before yesterday said he didn’t want to meet with Putin demand a meeting within the week when Trump doesn’t even know what the “parameters” are? How can a serious meeting be held when a principal participant doesn’t even know what the opponent’s position is?

Why did Putin agree to such a meeting with zero preparatory work that exposes him to tremendous pressure to capitulate? This represents the total failure of Putin’s advisors. It indicates to the West that Russia is a weak defender of its interest. Perhaps more pressure will be all it takes to bring Russia in line with US hegemony. If Trump goes into the meeting with this attitude, Putin’s choice will be to capitulate or to bring down more demonization on him and Russia for blocking peace. It does look like Kirill Demitriev and Steve Witcoff, both globalists, have succeeded in setting up Putin and Russia. What is on test in Alaska is Putin’s mettle.

Read more …

Repeating the tired notion of Russia losing more people than Ukraine, by now disqualifies you.

Could Trump End War in Ukraine In Meeting With Putin? (Victor Davis Hanson)

This week there’s a scheduled summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Donald Trump, and it’s scheduled to be held in Anchorage, Alaska. Apparently, this was a place that offered a great deal of security. It’s a smaller, controllable city. It’s in the United States, but on the other hand, it’s one of the closest places, major cities, to Russia itself from the United States. We don’t have a very good history of summits. And many summits—as you remember, in March of 2017, Antony Blinken, the Biden secretary of state, and Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, met with their Chinese communist counterparts. And they were dressed down and humiliated and really didn’t say anything. And what followed then from that was further Chinese aggression toward Taiwan, the Chinese balloon, etc. So these summits are very important.

One thing that we’re not hearing from the Left and the Never-Trump Right is that Donald Trump is a “Putin asset,” a “Putin puppet.” I’m quoting pretty loosely, but accurately, what former National Intelligence Director James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan have been saying for 10 years on social media and on cable news. And the reason they’re not saying that Donald Trump is a Putin puppet and going to be had is that he gave Putin an “Art of the Deal” leeway when he first came into office and he doubled down on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He basically was saying, “Putin, see, I’m giving you an opportunity.” Putin did not take it. Donald Trump pivoted and found out that he had to use leverage against Putin. And the leverage he’s going to use, or has threatened to use, is far more deleterious to Russia and far more dangerous and far more ambitious than anything imagined by former President Joe Biden, namely, a secondary boycott.

That would be to not trade with countries that trade with Russia. That could include the two largest countries in the world, India and China. India had very close relations with us. We were trying to triangulate India against China. They have their own border disputes and long-standing disagreements. But if we secondary boycott India, that will be a rumination of our relations with India. So, what I’m getting at is Donald Trump’s taking a lot of risk, a lot of risk in using a secondary boycott to pressure Putin. Ninety percent of the issues are already solved. They have been for a year or two. We’re now in a deadlock. Russia claims they’ve only lost 200,000 dead. But they more likely lost a million dead, wounded, missing, taken prisoner. We don’t know the exact ratios of each. And probably Ukraine with their dead, missing, wounded, prisoners around, I don’t know, 400,000 or 500,000. So this is like a Stalingrad or a Somme or a Verdun.

We know the general parameters. We’ve discussed them before. Ukraine will not be in NATO. That’s a concession to Putin. But it really isn’t a concession because, privately, a lot of the NATO members did not want Ukraine because they had no intention of going all the way to the Donbas, should Russia invade again, on Article 5 of the NATO doctrine. They were not going to follow that. So they don’t want Ukraine in NATO. Neither do we. I’m not sure Ukraine even does, privately.Secondly, there was no military ability. There’s a moral argument for, but no military ability, to take back Crimea and take back the Donbas. So what we’re discussing now is that the Russian army is about a hundred miles west from the border in Crimea, the Donbas, and then further west. In total, about a hundred miles. That would be the DMZ—in other words, the Demilitarized Zone, where we have a ceasefire, an armistice.

And then we would haggle in a peace conference over exchanges of territory on either side. That’s the outline of peace. The problem is that—there’s two problems. One: Ukraine’s Constitution says no land—no land, not Crimea, not Donbas—nothing can be ceded to a foreign country without a plebiscite. And we don’t know what the Ukrainian people will say. They polled they’re tired of the war. They polled they don’t want to give one inch of their sovereign territory. On the other side, Putin himself knows that he has to report to the oligarchic and military hierarchy. And he doesn’t know whether a hundred miles west, in addition to institutionalizing the possession of Crimea and the Donbas for good, whether that extra hundred miles from the border territory will justify the enormous losses, humiliation that the Russian military has suffered.

So, we’re gonna have this summit. And Trump is going to say to Putin, “You can have no NATO Ukraine. You can have the Crimea. You can have the Donbas. I think I can get Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian people to agree. But we’ve gotta fight over how far west you are and whether you have to go back or will stay in place.”And then he’s going to have to tell Zelenskyy, “We’re supplying you. That’s the only leverage we have against Putin, along with a secondary boycott. But you have to decide whether you’re going to cede the Donbas, Crimea, and some of the territory. Because if you don’t, there’s not going to be peace. And if there’s not going to be peace, we can’t assure you a blank check forever.”

So, that’s what the parameters are. And one thing that we do know, the Never-Trump Right, as I said, and the Left have ceased the “Donald Trump is a puppet,” “Donald Trump is a sellout,” “Donald Trump is a Russian asset” because nobody in the last four years, in the Biden administration, has met with the Russians and especially the last three years since the war started. Nobody made the attempt.= So, at least we have the principles: talking to each other, we know what the outlines of a peace agreement are. And it’s just a matter of what each president has to take back to the powers that be and see if they’ve given too many or not enough concessions.

Read more …

A tactic, a pattern…

Kiev Tries To Kill As Many Civilians As It Can Right Before Talks (RT)

On August 14, 2025, Russian officials reported Ukrainian drone strikes on the border cities of Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don, killing and injuring civilians. Rostov saw an apartment building struck, with over a dozen casualties; in Belgorod, three civilians were hurt when a drone hit a car downtown. This came two days after the Russian Ministry of Defence (MoD) alleged that Ukrainian forces were preparing a false-flag provocation in the Kharkov region, complete with pre-positioned journalists – supposedly to shape a narrative blaming Moscow. These incidents are not isolated. They fit into a larger operational and political pattern: each time high-level talks are scheduled Kiev steps up attacks on Russia’s border regions. The results are the same: civilian deaths, destruction of civilian infrastructure, and an attempt to create a cloud over the diplomatic process.

The same happened in late May and early June 2025, just before the second round of Russia–Ukraine talks in Istanbul, when two bridges in Russian territory were blown up. The attacks killed seven civilians and injured over seventy more. In Moscow’s interpretation, the timing was too precise to be coincidence – it was about setting a tone of hostility, perhaps provoking Russia into walking away from the talks entirely. And yet, Moscow did not take the bait. Russian negotiators showed up in Istanbul as planned. For the Kremlin, this has become a point of principle: no matter the provocations, Russia will attend discussions that could bring an end to the conflict – on its own terms.

The upcoming Alaska summit on August 15, 2025, between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, is the latest such opportunity. The alleged Kharkov region provocation and the strikes on Belgorod and Rostov are seen in Moscow as deliberate background noise meant to derail the meeting or at least to sour its atmosphere. But just as in Istanbul, the Kremlin insists it will not be deterred. For Moscow, attending these talks is about more than optics. It underscores a long-held stance: Russia is prepared to end the conflict, but not at the price of what it views as its core national interests. Walking away now, after years of costly military and political investment, would make little sense. Instead, the aim is to secure a resolution that cements Russia’s gains and ends the war on Moscow’s terms – not by fighting “to the last Ukrainian,” but by ensuring that the outcome is final and strategically advantageous.

From the Kremlin’s perspective, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s motives are clear. Accepting a peace that involves territorial concessions would not only be a bitter political defeat – it could spell the end of his political career. More critically, it would remove the emergency powers he has repeatedly invoked since the start of the conflict to cancel elections and prolong his term in office. Those powers have also enabled controversial measures: forced conscriptions, suppression of opposition media, and an intensified crackdown on dissent. These steps have eroded his popularity inside Ukraine, making his hold on power dependent on the continuation of the wartime state of emergency. If the war ends, so does the legal shield of emergency rule – and with it, his immunity. Zelensky therefore has both political and personal incentives to keep the fighting going, even at significant cost to Ukraine’s population.

Read more …

“I’ve been a 100% unambiguous critic of everything Donald Trump did on January 6th. I believe he should have been charged criminally. I believe the pardons were a disgrace. But why does that mean he can’t do anything now to enforce the law…”

Elie Honig Nuked Left’s Talking Points on Trump DC Crime Crackdown (Margolis)

CNN’s top legal analyst just shredded one of the Democrats’ favorite talking points about President Trump’s decision to federalize the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. Appearing on CNN NewsNight Wednesday evening, Elie Honig, who has been an outspoken critic of Trump, flatly rejected the left’s talking points that the move was illegitimate or purely political theater.“I’ve worked extensively with police. And I don’t have a problem tactically with what Donald Trump is doing here,” Honig told the panel. “It doesn’t have to be the most dangerous place on Earth. Something can be improving, but still really bad. If your house is on fire and then a third of the fire goes out, it’s less bad, but it could still be an emergency.” Honig didn’t sugarcoat his assessment of the nation’s capital.

“I work in D.C. It is dangerous there. You cannot deny that,” he said. “A common police tactic is to surge resources. I’ve been part — we call them ‘task forces’ — they’re applauded across the board, across the political board. I’ve done it in New Jersey. I’ve done it in New York. You take the FBI, you team them up with the Newark P.D., what have you, you make a visible presence.” Honig went even further, making clear that his past condemnation of Trump over January 6 doesn’t mean the president can’t act now to enforce the law. “I’ve been a 100% unambiguous critic of everything Donald Trump did on January 6th. I believe he should have been charged criminally. I believe the pardons were a disgrace. But why does that mean he can’t do anything now to enforce the law, to promote public safety?”

That stance drew pushback from Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), who accused Trump of hypocrisy and labeled the move “political theater.” “None of this is fundamentally address a crime problem in D.C.,” Torres claimed. Honig didn’t flinch. “Would you rather have national security out in D.C. where you work?” The debate intensified when Scott Jennings pointed out that the D.C. police union backed Trump’s move. “The police union came out on this action by the president and said, ‘We wholeheartedly support the president; we need the support.’ Are they right or wrong?” Jennings asked. Torres insisted federal law enforcement wasn’t the right tool for the job, claiming the FBI’s mission is limited to counterterrorism and counterintelligence. Honig immediately corrected him.

“That’s not true. I’ve heard that said a lot. The FBI does street operations. People say the FBI, they’re chasing terrorists — some are,” he said. “I worked with the FBI. The FBI does street reps, they do drug buys, they do gun buys. It’s part of what they do. It’s not a misuse of the FBI.” While CNN anchor Abby Phillip raised questions about federal agents conducting traffic stops and clearing homeless encampments, Honig circled back to a simple point: If D.C.’s leadership truly objected, they could act. “If they thought this was so illegal, unwarranted, inappropriate, why have they not challenged it? They’ve challenged it rhetorically, but they haven’t gone to the board on it.” In the end, Honig’s comments blew a hole in the narrative that Trump’s action was an abuse of power — and they came from someone who has never been shy about criticizing the president.

Read more …

Imagine that drip as head of the CIA. That’s what we narrowly escaped.

How Hillary Planned to Reward Schiff for Undermining Trump (Margolis)

As PJ Media previously reported, then-congressman Schiff was the architect behind the deliberate leaking of classified information aimed at smearing Trump and pushing a narrative against him designed to ensure his prosecution. Back in 2017, a veteran career intelligence officer working for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee warned the FBI that Schiff had not only approved but actively orchestrated the leaking of sensitive classified intelligence. According to whistleblower testimony from 2023 interviews, Schiff convened a staff meeting where he explicitly declared that the group would leak damaging classified information about President Trump. His goal was to use this information to secure an indictment against Trump.

The whistleblower, who was close to Schiff and other intelligence figures on both sides of the aisle, described these actions as “unethical,” “illegal,” and “treasonous.” The implications don’t stop with Schiff. Investigative reporter Catherine Herridge has not only released FBI reports that reveal that Rep. Eric Swalwell, another Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, was also a habitual leaker of classified information, even receiving warnings from the FBI to be more cautious. The reports also indicate that had Clinton won the 2016 election, she would likely have rewarded Schiff for his efforts by appointing him CIA director, a testament to their deep ties and shared political objectives.

(U) By way of background, circa October 2016, [redacted], a [redacted] Staff Member House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HESCT), was told by various HPSCI staff colleagues if Hillary Clinton were to win the election Representative Adam Schiff (D – California) would be offered the position of the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) – As such, opined Schiff had reasons to support Clinton beyond his political affiliation. At that time normal partisan politics continued at HPSCI but there was no significant problem with regards to leaking classified information.

(U) Things changed after the election. Schiff believed Russia hijacked the election and the United States was in the middle of a constitutional crisis. Classified information began leaking to the media. The Democratic minority leadership of HPSCI was aware of the leaks but was under the impression that leaking the information was one way to topple the administration and fix the constitutional crisis.

This nexus between Clinton, Schiff, and the intelligence apparatus turned the Russia investigation into a political weapon, not an impartial probe. The whistleblower’s account, backed by FBI interviews, exposes a political war that Democrats waged from inside government agencies, using classified intelligence as ammunition in concert with Hillary Clinton’s campaign. These revelations highlight the weaponization of political power against a presidential candidate and later a sitting president, with classified information twisted into a fabricated scandal that consumed the news and crippled Washington.

Schiff’s central role, which aligned with Clinton’s interests, marks a peak in corruption and political gamesmanship. The FBI, DOJ, and Congress have a rare chance to reveal the full scope of this abuse and begin restoring public trust. This isn’t just partisan hardball; it’s a calculated misuse of government authority to topple an administration. The Schiff-Clinton intelligence nexus may have been the engine of the Russiagate hoax, and full exposure is long overdue. Few episodes in modern politics have done more damage to the rule of law and public confidence, and the very institutions meant to protect them orchestrated it all. It’s time to confront that reality head-on.

Read more …

Bhattacharya appears to be the right man in the right place (NIH). But how did the US ever get a -looming- anti-biotics shortage?

Trump Signs Executive Order To Fill Reserve With Critical Drugs (JTN)

President Trump has signed an executive order to fill the Strategic Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients Reserve with critical drugs to ensure “a resilient domestic supply chain for essential medicines.” The executive order signed on Tuesday directs the Department of Health and Human Services assistant secretary for Preparedness and Response to create a list of about 26 critical drugs that are deemed “vital to national health and security, and ready the SAPIR repository to receive and maintain the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) used to make these critical drugs,” according to a White House fact sheet. Also, the order charges the official with getting a 6-month supply of the APIs for the critical drugs, “with a preference for obtaining domestically-manufactured APIs if possible, and placing them in the SAPIR.” Trump additionally told the official to make a proposal for a second SAPIR repository.

The executive order comes after National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya told Just the News, No Noise TV show last month that the U.S. has a shortage of some drugs, such as antibiotics. “So much of our manufacturing for drugs relies on the Chinese manufacturing, on Indian manufacturing,” Bhattacharya said. “And it leaves the United States in a very vulnerable place, where if you have a crisis, even when you don’t have a crisis, when there’s just normal demands for vital medical items, antibiotics, I already mentioned, normal saline. All of that is just normal demand. “We are in a shortage now of some of those things, because we do not have domestic manufacturing that can respond when there is an increase in demand, as there sometimes is,” he continued.

Read more …

“Speaker Pelosi does not own any stocks and has no knowledge or subsequent involvement in any transactions.”

Treasury Secretary Bessent Calls For Trading Ban In Congress (JTN)

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is calling for a single-stock trading ban in Congress. “I am going to start pushing for a single-stock trading ban, because it is the credibility of the House and the Senate, that you look at some of these eye-popping returns – whether it is Rep. Pelosi, Senator Wyden – every hedge fund would be jealous of them. And the American people deserve better than this,” Bessent told Bloomberg TV on Wednesday. Nancy Pelosi, of California, and Ron Wyden, are Democrats. Congressional Republicans including Georgia Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene, has also come under scrutiny. She recently disclosed stock trades made just before President Trump announced a 90-day pause on tariffs, prompting accusations of potential insider trading.

Greene told the Associated Press that she does not manage her own portfolio and that her investments are handled by a financial adviser. She also said all trades are disclosed in compliance with federal transparency requirements. “People shouldn’t come to Washington to get rich, they should come to serve the American people, and it brings down trust in the system because I can tell you that if any private citizen traded this way, the [Securities and Exchange Commission] would be knocking on their door,” he continued. Pelosi has long been criticized for her husband’s highly successful trades, which she is required to report in financial disclosures. Pelosi spokesperson Ian Krager told The Hill news outlet in response to Bessent, “Speaker Pelosi does not own any stocks and has no knowledge or subsequent involvement in any transactions.”

Wyden’s stock portfolio had a 123.8 percent gain last year, according to data from the financial analysis platform Unusual Whales. The Oregon senator posted on X in response to Bessent, “Nobody working for Donald Trump has any business pretending to care about ethics or the stock trading ban I support. If Scott Bessent gave a damn about the public interest, why is he holding a massive farm that puts him in a position to gain from Trump’s trade deals with China?” “Bessent is fuming that I blew the whistle on the fact that he’s hiding a huge Epstein file at the Treasury Department. Thousands of pages worth of Epstein’s bank records with names. Until he releases it, he’s just running interference for Epstein’s pedophile ring,” Wyden added.

Pelosi supports a bill advanced by all Democrats and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee last month that would prevent members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children from buying and trading stocks, in addition to future presidents and vice presidents. In the House, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., vowed to start a discharge petition to force a vote on another stock trade ban bill.

Read more …

This is good. Do read the whole thing. The boomers have taken all the good stuff. But now they’e getting old, and the next generations are taking over financial (slowly) and political (faster) power.

The Boomer Mirage (Stylman)

One Chart. Three Generations. Total Extraction. I saw this chart making the rounds on Twitter this week, and it stopped me cold. While the specific figures combine data from multiple sources, the trend is undeniable: in 1950, over half of 30-year-olds were married homeowners. By 2025, some analysts project that number as low as 13%.

That’s not a societal transformation. It’s not an economic fluke. It’s the visible outcome of an invisible strategy—one that extracted everything it could from a three-generation arc and left only illusions in its place. They’ll tell you people just choose differently now—that marriage rates fell because of changing values. But people can’t choose what they can’t afford. When the economic foundation for family formation disappears, cultural changes follow inevitably. That chart doesn’t show us changing values or new priorities. It shows systemic breakdown, disguised for decades as freedom. It maps the slow evaporation of the social contract. For one generation, adulthood was a starting point. For the next, a struggle. For the latest, an abstraction—marketed endlessly but almost never attained.

What began as a rite of passage has become a paywalled simulation. The post–World War II boom was never sustainable. In hindsight, this was obvious. It relied on conditions that were always time-limited: cheap energy from newly tapped oil fields, industrial monopolies before globalization kicked in, dollar hegemony that exported inflation globally, and a demographic pyramid with more workers than retirees. It was a golden window, not a golden age. And when the window closed, the illusion had to be maintained—through leverage, narrative, and ever-increasing sacrifice from the generations that followed.

The math quietly stopped working. Boomers bought homes for two or three times their annual income during an era when interest rates would fall for the next four decades—turning their mortgages into wealth-building machines as rates dropped from 15% to near-zero. Today’s buyers face five to six times their income—or more in major cities—while rates can only go up from historic lows. Where Boomers rode a 40-year tailwind of falling borrowing costs that inflated their assets while deflated their debt, current generations face headwinds at every turn. The Federal Reserve data confirms this unprecedented decline, showing rates falling from over 18% in the early 1980s to near 2.6% by 2021.

Read more …

“They won’t speak up. They don’t stand for anything anymore..” [..] “All they stand for is whatever is against whatever President Trump stands for..”

Sen. Kennedy: Democrats Need to ‘Buy Some Testicles’ on Amazon (Margolis)

If you don’t think Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) is a national treasure, you’re not paying attention. Kennedy has a rare gift for cutting through Washington’s polished, poll-tested nonsense with a plainspoken Southern wit that lands like a sledgehammer wrapped in velvet. Whether he’s grilling a bureaucrat in a Senate hearing or sparring with a cable news host, Kennedy delivers his critiques with the kind of folksy charm that leaves his targets stunned and his audience in stitches. On Wednesday night’s “Hannity,” Kennedy was in peak form, aiming at Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and the Democratic Party’s timid “mainstream wing” with a blistering, laugh-out-loud takedown that reminded viewers exactly why he’s one of the sharpest and funniest voices in American politics.

Kennedy unleashed his trademark blistering critique of the Democratic Party’s so-called “mainstream wing,” accusing it of being paralyzed by fear of its more radical members. “The mainstream wing of the party is scared to death of the loon wing,” Kennedy said. “They won’t speak up. And they don’t stand for anything anymore. All they stand for is whatever… is against whatever President Trump stands for.” He argued that this fear has led to Democrats adopting positions that Kennedy said are counterproductive, particularly regarding crime in the nation’s capital. “We find ourselves in the extraordinary position of mainstream Democrats have now come out firmly and passionately in favor of crime in Washington, D.C. Why? Because Trump is trying to do something about it,” he said.

When asked about Schumer and Jeffries, Kennedy did not hold back. “No, uh, they could, and I don’t mean any disrespect… I know Senator Schumer very well. So, I say this with respect. Chuck and Hakeem need to go to Amazon, buy some testicles… and stand up to the loon wing of their party,” he said, drawing laughter from the Fox News host Sean Hannity. Kennedy’s critique continued, targeting what he called the Democrats’ unwillingness to confront socialist elements within their own ranks. “Until they’re willing to do that, um, I haven’t heard Senator Schumer say anything bad about Mamdani. I mean, the guy’s a socialist. He’s a whack job,” Kennedy said. Hannity interjected, noting that party leaders are “afraid of the whack job,” to which Kennedy replied, “They’re scared to death in the party… The party is not going to get better until they do.”

https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/1955971871872090320

The conversation briefly turned to Kennedy’s colorful metaphor, with Hannity joking, “I didn’t know that Amazon sold testicles.” Kennedy responded in kind, saying, “You can buy anything on Amazon, Sean… They’re very cheap.” The back-and-forth underscored Kennedy’s blunt, no-nonsense style and his willingness to use humor to make a political point. Kennedy also believes the Democrats’ hesitancy to confront their more radical members has real-world consequences. “They won’t speak up. They don’t stand for anything anymore,” he said, repeating his core critique. “All they stand for is whatever is against whatever President Trump stands for. That’s why we find ourselves… in the extraordinary position” he described earlier. By the end of the interview, Kennedy summed up his message with his usual bluntness. “The party is not going to get better until they do,” he said.

Read more …

“The deadline was August 7. The broadcaster reported, citing a source, that Hunter Biden did not comply with Melania Trump’s demand within the established deadline.”

Melania Trump Threatens Hunter Biden With $1Bln Lawsuit for Defamation (Sp.)

US President Donald Trump’s wife Melania has threatened former President Joe Biden’s son Hunter with a $1 billion lawsuit for allegedly “false” and “defamatory” statements against her related to the case of financier Jeffrey Epstein, a letter from the first lady’s lawyer read. The document published on the Fox News website noted that on August 5, Hunter Biden released a video on YouTube titled “Hunter Biden Returns,” which contained a number of statements that the first lady claims are false. “Here are the false statements in the Video that are defamatory per se: a.‘Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep.’ b. ‘Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania, that’s how Melania and the First Lady and the President met,” the letter said.

Melania’s lawyer demanded that Hunter “immediately issue a full and fair retraction of the video and any and all other false, defamatory, disparaging, misleading, and inflammatory statements about Mrs. Trump.” If the ex-president’s son does not comply with the demand, Melania intends to sue him for $1 billion in damages. The deadline was August 7. The broadcaster reported, citing a source, that Hunter Biden did not comply with Melania Trump’s demand within the established deadline.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Fauci
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1955939204229423564

Bhakdi

disease

insects

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 142025
 


John Martin The Seventh Plague of Egypt 1823

 

Both Sides Want The Putin-Trump Alaska Summit To Succeed (Suslov)
Ukraine and NATO’s Playbook of Staged Attacks Blamed on Russia (Sp.)
Zelensky Doesn’t Want Peace – Human Rights Lawyer (RT)
Doomed Zelensky Desperate to Sabotage Putin-Trump Summit – Expert (Sp.)
New EU Media “Freedom Law” Allows for Journalist Arrests (RTN)
EU Plotting ‘Regime Change’ In Hungary – Moscow (RT)
Kash Patel Sends John Solomon a Prior Whistleblower Report (CTH)
Trump Takeover Renews Questions Over D.C. Crime Data (Turley)
Newly Released FBI Files Uncover Comey’s Plot Against Trump (Margolis)
FBI Offered Chris Steele $1 Million to Substantiate Dossier; He Never Did (CTH)
This Could Be the End of Chuck Schumer’s Political Career (Margolis)
Texas Democrats Will Return Home, and the New Map Will Be Approved (Margolis)
Trump Rails Against ‘Unfair’ Media Quoting ‘Fired Losers’ (NYP)
Hollywood Writers Wage War on Trump (Tim Graham)
Trump: 1, USAID: 0 – Appeals Court Lets Admin Block Billions In Aid (ZH)
The Trump-Putin Meeting: How We Got Here (Connor O’Keeffe)
Macron’s Rise To Power (John Mac Ghlionn)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1955315649082954158

Comey
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1955587369572409831
https://twitter.com/patel_patriot/status/1955434673552888015

Creek

 

 

Here’s the Michelle Shocked video I couldn’t find yesterday. Someone found it on a Russian site. Still an excellent song. Arrangement? Oh well…

 

 

 

 

On our way to Anchorage, a few longish articles are included today. Can’t always avoid them.

 

 

“No Zelensky, no Brussels, no problem: Here’s how Putin and Trump’s Alaska power move will play out…”

Both Sides Want The Putin-Trump Alaska Summit To Succeed (Suslov)

On Friday, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump will meet in Alaska. This will be the first full-scale Russia-US summit since June 2021 in Geneva, and the first official visit by a Russian president to American soil since Dmitry Medvedev’s trip in 2010 at the height of the “reset.” It will also be the first time the leaders of Russia and the US have met in Alaska, the closest US state to Russia, separated only by the narrow Bering Strait, and once part of the Russian Empire. The symbolism is obvious: as far as possible from Ukraine and Western Europe, but as close as possible to Russia. And neither Zelensky nor the EU’s top brass will be in the room. The message could not be clearer – Moscow and Washington will make the key decisions on Ukraine, then inform others later. As Trump has said, “they hold all the cards.”

The Alaska summit marks a sharp departure from the Biden years, when even the idea of such a meeting was unthinkable and Washington’s priority was isolating Russia. Now, not only will Putin travel to Alaska, but Trump is already planning a return visit to Russia. Moderate optimism surrounds the meeting. Summits of this type are rarely held “just to talk”; they usually cap a long process of behind-the-scenes negotiations. The idea for this one emerged after three hours of talks in Moscow on August 6 between Putin and Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov described Washington’s offer as “very acceptable.” That suggests Putin and Trump will arrive in Alaska with a preliminary deal – or at least a framework for a truce – already in place.

Why Trump needs this
Trump has good reason to want the summit to succeed. His effort to squeeze Moscow by pushing China and India to stop buying Russian oil has backfired badly. Far from isolating Russia, it triggered the worst US-India crisis in 25 years and drove New Delhi even closer to Moscow. It also encouraged a thaw between India and China, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi now set to attend the SCO summit in Tianjin. BRICS, which Trump has openly vowed to weaken, has only grown more cohesive. The Alaska summit is Trump’s chance to escape the trap he built for himself – trying to pressure Moscow through Beijing and New Delhi – and to show results on Ukraine that he can sell as a diplomatic victory. For Moscow, a successful summit would be a powerful demonstration that talk of “isolation” is obsolete – even in the West. It would cement Russia’s standing with the “global majority” and highlight Western Europe’s diminished influence.

The transatlantic split would widen, weakening Brussels’ claim to be Russia’s toughest opponent. Most importantly, Washington today has little real leverage over Russia, especially on Ukraine. If the summit yields a joint Russian–American vision for a truce or settlement, it will inevitably reflect Moscow’s position more than Kiev’s or Brussels’. And if the Western Europeans try to derail it, the US could pull the plug on all aid to Ukraine – including intelligence support – accelerating Kiev’s defeat. Not everyone in Russia is cheering. Many prominent “Z”-aligned war correspondents see the war as unfinished and oppose any truce. But they have been asked to stick to the official line. If the Alaska meeting produces a deal, they will be expected to back it – or at least use “cooling” language for their audiences. The Kremlin is betting it can manage this dissent.

Western Europe, for its part, will be watching from the sidelines. Its leaders are “scrambling” for scraps of information via secondary channels. The optics will underline a humiliating reality: for the first time in almost a century, decisions about Europe’s security will be made without the likes of Italy, France and Germany in the room. The location hints at other agenda items. Arctic economic cooperation, largely frozen since 2014, could be revived. Both sides stand to gain from joint development in the far north, and a deal here would be politically symbolic – proof that the two countries can work together despite the baggage of the last decade. Arms control will also be on the table. Moscow’s recent decision to end its unilateral moratorium on deploying intermediate-range missiles was almost certainly timed to influence the talks. Strategic stability after the New START Treaty expires in February 2026 will be a central concern.

If Alaska delivers, it could reshape the conflict in Ukraine and the broader Russia-US relationship. A joint settlement plan would marginalize Kiev and Brussels, shift the diplomatic center of gravity back to Moscow and Washington, and reopen channels for cooperation on global issues – from the Arctic to arms control. If it fails – if Trump bends to last-minute EU pressure – Moscow will continue fighting, confident that US involvement will fade. Either way, Russia’s position is stronger than it was two years ago. What’s different now is that the two powers with “all the cards” are finally back at the same table – and Western Europe is on the outside looking in.

Read more …

“…the April 2022 Ukrainian neo-Nazi massacre of civilians who accepted Russian aid in a Kiev suburb after the withdrawal of Russian forces..”

Ukraine and NATO’s Playbook of Staged Attacks Blamed on Russia (Sp.)

The Russian MoD’s warning about a plot to stage a fake incident in Chuguyev, Kharkov region to sabotage the upcoming Putin-Trump meeting in Alaska “positions Russia to expose the West and Zelensky’s deception if it occurs, undermining their credibility,” veteran geopolitical analyst Angelo Giuliano told Sputnik. It’s definitely not the first time Kiev and its backers have stooped to such tactics. “The Bucha lie, crafted by Ukraine and the West, derailed 2022 peace talks by framing Russia for war crimes,” Giuliano recalled, referencing the April 2022 Ukrainian neo-Nazi massacre of civilians who accepted Russian aid in a Kiev suburb after the withdrawal of Russian forces, which galvanized the West for long, costly proxy war against Moscow.

That was just the beginning, according to Giuliano, who also cited:
1. the constant shelling of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, threatening to unleash a Chernobyl-like disaster on Europe, and blaming Russia (even though Russian forces control the plant).
2. the July 2022 bombing of a prison housing Ukrainian PoWs in a Russian-controlled area of the DPR, killing dozens, and designed to “silence Azov prisoners, preventing exposure of Western-backed neo-Nazis in Russian courts.” Also blamed on Russia, ironically.
3. the September 2022 bombing of the Nord Stream natural gas pipeline network, severing a major Russian energy artery with Germany. Sy Hersh revealed that the operation was carried out by US Navy divers with assistance from Norway. Russia still blamed.
“Despite the West’s propaganda machine—evident in Zaporozhye and Nord Stream—Russia’s readiness to counter this deception could limit its impact, though Western bias might still disrupt the Alaska summit. The Bucha playbook remains a potent tool for sabotage,” Giuliano warned.

Read more …

“The only chance he has to stay in power and to continue looting the aid from the West is for this war to continue…”

Zelensky’s Life Depends On War Continuing – Human Rights Lawyer (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky does not want peace because he can only stay in power as long as the conflict with Russia continues, US human rights lawyer Dan Kovalik has told RT. The Russian Defense Ministry warned on Tuesday that Kiev is preparing a false flag attack on civilians in Kharkov Region in an attempt to derail Friday’s summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump. During the talks in Anchorage, Alaska, the two leaders are expected to discuss the possible settlement of the Ukraine conflict and bilateral issues. Zelensky has not been invited to the summit. Kovalik said in an interview on Tuesday that he “suspected Ukraine would try to do something provocative to break up any possibility of a deal in Alaska. I mean Zelensky, his whole political life and maybe his real life depend on this war continuing.”

Moscow was right to warn the international community about Kiev’s plans, as “this will immunize people against a false-flag attack in the sense that they will be ready for it and know who really did it when, if it comes. God forbid it does come,” he suggested. The Ukrainian authorities “clearly do not want it to end… they do not want peace,” the human rights lawyer said. “Look, Zelensky has not had proper constitutional authority… for over a year. His term ran out over a year ago. He has refused to have elections. He knows his popularity is in decline. The only chance he has to stay in power and to continue looting the aid from the West is for this war to continue,” Kovalik added.

Zelensky said on Tuesday that he considered the fact that Putin was meeting Trump on US soil a “personal victory” for the Russian leader. The US president earlier described the Alaska summit as a “feel-out meeting” that will help him determine whether the Ukraine conflict can be settled. Moscow expects that the talks between Putin and Trump will “give an impulse to the normalization of bilateral relations” with Washington.

Read more …

“Expired” Zelensky and his team will stop at nothing to derail the upcoming summit..”

Doomed Zelensky Desperate to Sabotage Putin-Trump Summit – Expert (Sp.)

Ukraine’s Zelensky is painfully aware that being sidelined from the upcoming Putin-Trump dialogue on Ukraine will deliver him a knockout blow, said Vietnamese international relations expert Dr. Hoang Giang.
“Expired” Zelensky and his team will stop at nothing to derail the upcoming summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, or at the very least, cast a shadow over the talks, Dr. Hoang Giang told Sputnik. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban put it perfectly when he said that “If you’re not at the negotiating table, you’re on the menu,” the pundit explained, adding: “That is something Zelensky and his backers simply cannot accept.”

Intelligence from multiple sources points to a planned provocation by the Ukraine regime designed to sabotage the Russia-US summit planned for Friday, Russia’s Defense Ministry has stated. The Ukrainian Armed Forces could deliver a provocative strike using UAVs and missiles against one of the densely populated residential neighborhoods of Chuguyev in the Kharkov region [near the Russian border], causing significant civilian casualties. The imported Western journalists are expected to ‘immediately document’ the incident. Provocations in other settlements under the control of the Kiev regime are also possible, noted the MoD.

Read more …

The “Digital Services Act” and this “European Media Freedom Act” sound great, beneficial even, but have one goal only: control.

New EU Media “Freedom Law” Allows for Journalist Arrests (RTN)

The European Union’s “European Media Freedom Act” became binding law across all member states on August 8, but behind its name lies a set of provisions that could restrict the very freedoms it claims to safeguard. Alongside language about protecting reporters, the regulation authorizes arrests, sanctions, and surveillance of journalists whenever authorities say it serves an “overriding reason in the general interest.” Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, hailed the legislation’s arrival on social media, saying, “A free and independent press is an essential pillar of our democracy. With our European Media Freedom Act, we want to improve their protection. This allows journalists to continue their important work safely and without disruption or intimidation.”

Although the law outlines protections such as prohibiting spyware or coercion to expose sources, those assurances are undercut by built-in loopholes. Governments can bypass them if their actions are allowed under national or EU law and deemed proportionate to a vaguely defined “general interest.” That permission extends to intrusive surveillance technologies in cases tied to crimes carrying a maximum prison term of three years or more, a list that ranges from terrorism and human trafficking to offenses labeled as “racism and xenophobia.”

The legislation also orders each country to maintain registers of media owners and addresses. It targets so-called “disinformation,” accusing some media outlets of manipulating the single market to spread falsehoods. Large online platforms are portrayed as choke points for access to news, blamed for fueling polarization. To confront this, the EU wants tighter cooperation between national regulators, overseen by a European Media Services Board made up of member state regulators and a Commission representative. Although labeled independent, the board’s secretariat is run by the Commission, giving it an inside track on the decision-making process.

Another element of the act involves pushing “trustworthy media” and reinforcing state broadcasters through transparent appointment processes and stable public funding. Annual gatherings between EU officials, internet companies, media representatives, and NGOs are encouraged to assess how disinformation initiatives are being carried out. Despite being sold as a shield for press freedom, the structure of the act gives Brussels and national authorities the ability to decide which voices remain active and which can be silenced. By allowing arrests, surveillance, and tighter state involvement in the media landscape, it risks turning from a safeguard into a tool for control.

Read more …

” Orban announced last month that he was rejecting the budget proposal, calling it “built on the logic of war.”

EU Plotting ‘Regime Change’ In Hungary – Moscow (RT)

The European Commission is plotting to help oust Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban over what it considers his overly independent policy, according to Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). The Hungarian leader has repeatedly clashed with Brussels in recent years, opposing EU military aid to Ukraine and Kiev’s bid to join the bloc. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen “is seriously studying regime change scenarios” in Hungary, the SVR press service said in a statement on Wednesday. Brussels intends to bring Peter Magyar, leader of the Hungarian opposition Tisza Party – seen as “loyal to globalist elites” and “the main candidate for the post of Prime Minister” – to power in the 2026 parliamentary elections, “if not sooner,” according to the SVR.

Significant “administrative, media and lobbying resources” are being deployed to support Magyar through “German party funds, the European People’s Party and a number of Norwegian NGOs,” the Russian intelligence service said. Kiev, which has been “offended” by Orban’s opposition to Ukraine attempting to join the EU, is doing the “dirty work” and destabilizing the home situation in Hungary via its intelligence services and local Ukrainian diaspora, it added. Last month, Orban accused Kiev of working to influence Hungary’s upcoming parliamentary elections. The European Commission is “outraged” by Orban’s attempts to “pursue independent policy” and his efforts to influence EU decision-making, the SVR stated.

Hungary’s recent decision to veto the new seven-year EU budget project, which Budapest believes is designed for the militarization of Europe and preparation for war with Moscow, has become the last straw that made the euro-bureaucrats lose their patience. Orban announced last month that he was rejecting the budget proposal, calling it “built on the logic of war.” “Billions for Ukraine, crumbs for farmers and development. Their goal: defeat Russia, install liberal allies, and expand their realm of influence,” he wrote on X. Moscow has repeatedly denied claims that it aims to attack NATO or EU countries, and has accused Western European leaders of pursuing “uncontrolled militarization” to prepare for war with Russia.

Read more …

Sundance still has his own view:

“The Patel’s, Bondi’s, Solomon’s and Hannity’s then play this game of pretend. Packaging the corruption evidence as accountability hopium and selling it to the addicted battered conservatives.”

Kash Patel Sends John Solomon a Prior Whistleblower Report (CTH)

FBI Director Kash Patel sends John Solomon a declassified whistleblower report, showing how a prior House Intelligence Committee staffer blew the whistle on then HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff, who was giving the staff instructions to leak fabricated intelligence reports on Trump-Russia to smear President Donald Trump in 2017 and 2018. According to the release, the FBI eventually received and investigated the whistleblower claims; then in 2023, sent the information to the Merrick Garland/Lisa Monaco DOJ, who took no action because the claim was now beyond the statute of limitations. Read those dates carefully, because what this report from Kash Patel and John Solomon actually outlines is something we have all been very frustrated with.

As Solomon now notes, … “The alleged leaks fall outside the statute of limitations for prosecution on most legal theories, but the revelations nevertheless come at a sensitive time for Schiff“.. At the time of the Whistleblower report, the information to the FBI and DOJ would have been evidence that could have prosecuted Adam Schiff. However, now the information is limited to just providing I-told-you-so’s. There are a couple of really frustrating aspects to this, and the pattern is transparently obvious. The FBI and DOJ from 2017 to 2023, under both Donald Trump and Joe Biden’s administration, played the silo game of control of evidence. They did nothing with the evidence until the statute of limitations had tolled, which then provides Main Justice with the justification for doing nothing.

In 2025, understanding the public is insanely frustrated with the lack of accountability, the pretending game is now deployed by the FBI under Kash Patel, through John Solomon, to the broadcast venue of Sean Hannity. At the end of this clickbait circle-jerk is nothing. Again, no accountability, but a bunch of controlled information operatives saying, “Well, let’s see what the DOJ does with this now.” A pox on all their houses. There is no doubt in my mind this is a clear example of why the DC system uses special counsels (Mueller, Durham, et al) purposefully to create “ongoing investigations” as capture nets for information/evidence control. “It’s under investigation, and we don’t speak about ongoing investigations.” In real time, from 2019 to 2020, I was providing this type of evidence from within the silo system to John Durham and Bill Aldenberg who were designated information managers.

In my naiveté’, as I initially opened these doors, I thought some form of accountability would be possible, because the evidence was direct, irrefutable and without denial. However, once Aldenberg and Durham clearly said they could only act on evidence they ‘discovered’ themselves, and they could not act on evidence provided by “others” because that would make the “evidence political,” I quickly realized this was all going to amount to nothing. Now, we are looking in hindsight at evidence from inside the system, provided to these investigators by participants inside the system, yet they also did nothing with it at the time it held value. So, here’s the basic construct of how the DC game is played. Evidence delivered from outside DC cannot be used by those who are charged with investigating corruption within DC.

Evidence delivered from inside DC, goes into the system of “ongoing investigations” (special counsels) until its usefulness is exhausted by the clock-ticking. If the risk of accountability remains, the special counsels are extended until that accountability clock has expired. Once the accountability clock has expired, if another party comes along (Kash) and releases that evidence (Solomon), the value only exists insofar as it generates clickbait income (Just News), column inches and punditry talking points (Sean Hannity) for the DC proletariat. The Patel’s, Bondi’s, Solomon’s and Hannity’s then play this game of pretend. Packaging the corruption evidence as accountability hopium and selling it to the addicted battered conservatives. Insert vote. Pull lever. Get hopium pellet. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Who is continuing to buy this game?

Read more …

“Washington, DC’s 2024 murder rate was 27.54 per 100,000 people. That is higher than cities like Bogota (15.1), Mexico City (10.6), Islamabad (9.2), and Lima (7.6). It is astronomical when compared to the capitals of close allies like Paris (1.64), London (1.1), and Madrid (0.96).”

Trump Takeover Renews Questions Over D.C. Crime Data (Turley)

Washington, D.C. is a city that has long spun statistics to the point that they become more fable than fact. It reaffirms the famous view that there are “lies, damned lies, and statistics.” The line is the perfect warning to the unwary about politicians citing statistics. The quote itself is widely misrepresented as the work of Mark Twain or British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, so it seems nothing can be trusted when it comes to statistics, not even quotes on statistics. That question is again at the heart of a debate following the announcement of President Donald Trump that he would be sending the National Guard into Washington and taking temporary control of the D.C. police. In response, Mayor Muriel Bowser and other democrats denounced the plan and claimed that violent crime is at a 30-year low after dropping by 26% so far in 2025.

However, those statistics were recently challenged after a scandal involving allegations of suppressing crime reports to artificially reduce crime rate statistics. The media is reporting the reduction claim despite only recently questioning those statistics. The MPD in July suspended Michael Pulliam, police commander for the Adams Morgan neighborhood, for allegedly manipulating crime numbers. D.C. Fraternal Order of Police chairman Gregg Pemberton accused police officials of pressuring officers to falsify statistics to reduce crime rates: “When our members respond to the scene of a felony offense where there is a victim reporting that a felony occurred, inevitably there will be a lieutenant or a captain that will show up on that scene and direct those members to take a report for a lesser offense.

So, instead of taking a report for a shooting or a stabbing or a carjacking, they will order that officer to take a report for a theft or an injured person to the hospital or a felony assault, which is not the same type of classification.” Pemberton said that the MPD’s statistics were “preposterous… There’s absolutely no way crime could be down 28%. Last year, they suggested that it went down 34%.” Even accepting some of these statistics, it is hardly anything to celebrate. For example, Washington, DC’s 2024 murder rate was 27.54 per 100,00 people. That is higher than cities like Bogota (15.1), Mexico City (10.6), Islamabad (9.2), and Lima (7.6). It is astronomical when compared to the capitals of close allies like Paris (1.64), London (1.1), and Madrid (0.96).

There are good-faith reasons to oppose this move. I am not convinced that the National Guard deployment is warranted or likely to have a meaningful impact on crime. However, President Trump is within his rights to order the deployment. He may also take temporary control of the police and can notify Congress if he wants to extend that period to 30 days. D.C. is a federal enclave and is thus different from other cities. There is no governor involved in such orders in Washington, which remain under the jurisdiction of the federal government. What is also clear is that crime remains very high in this city and the reliability of the D.C. crime statistics can be legitimately questioned as we look for solutions for public safety.

Read more …

“The goal, Richman told the FBI, was “to correct stories critical of Comey, the FBI and to shape future press coverage” outside of the bureau’s official press office…”

Newly Released FBI Files Uncover Comey’s Plot Against Trump (Margolis)

Newly released FBI documents paint a damning picture of James Comey’s role in a coordinated intelligence operation against Donald Trump, an effort we know that Barack Obama ordered and that John Brennan, James Clapper, and a network of loyal operatives carried out. The “Arctic Haze” documents reveal that the FBI not only knew that sensitive information was leaking to the media, but it was also orchestrating the leaks. At the center of this effort was Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman, whom Comey personally arranged for the FBI to hire and grant top security clearance. Richman acted as Comey’s go-between with reporters, helping to shape the Russian collusion hoax and polish Comey’s public image. Hard evidence now backs what many have long suspected: the willful weaponization of U.S. intelligence against a duly elected president.

“The FBI concluded numerous legacy news media stories that crafted the false Russia collusion narrative contained illegally leaked classified intelligence but failed to definitively identify the leakers,” reports Just the News. “But agents did force a stunning admission that ex-FBI Director James Comey used a special conduit to the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times in his bid to polish his image and push for a special prosecutor to take down President Donald Trump.”Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman admitted to agents in interviews he routinely communicated on behalf of Comey, his longtime friend, with Times reporter Michael Schmidt, whose work was among the newspaper’s 2018 Pulitzer-winning stories on Russian election interference.

The goal, Richman told the FBI, was “to correct stories critical of Comey, the FBI and to shape future press coverage” outside of the bureau’s official press office, according to internal FBI memos that current Director Kash Patel delivered to Congress this week. Just the News notes that the media publicly quoted Richman in news stories as a Comey advocate. What’s new, however, is that “he admitted to agents, who were part of the FBI’s Arctic Haze classified leaks inquiry, that Comey gave him access to what turned out to be highly classified information up to the SCI level and sometimes provided information to reporters on an anonymous basis.” According to the FBI memos, Richman claimed he didn’t think he had passed classified information to reporters but admitted he couldn’t be “100%” sure. In fact, he told agents he was only confident “with a discount” that he hadn’t told New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt about the classified material.

That’s not exactly the kind of airtight denial you’d expect from someone with top security clearance. Earlier this week, we learned that a veteran career intelligence officer, who spent over a decade working for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, repeatedly warned the FBI starting in 2017 that then-Rep. Adam Schiff had personally signed off on leaking classified information to smear President Trump during the Russiagate hoax. Despite this and other evidence pointing to potential leaks, the Justice Department shockingly chose not to press charges against Comey, his inner circle, or even now-Sen. Adam Schiff. Their excuse? They just couldn’t be certain who leaked what and when. Convenient.

Read more …

“Danchenko told them the Steele dossier was full of fabricated nonsense. However, to keep the revelation of the dossier presented “as nonsense” hidden, the FBI then hired Danchenko as a confidential human source, technically shielding him from being questioned or exposed…”

FBI Offered Chris Steele $1 Million to Substantiate Dossier; He Never Did (CTH)

I have been asked to recap some of my research into cited formats of what I believe to be criminal conduct, with specific statutes against them. This is the third.mDNI Tulsi Gabbard is not a lawyer. While I may be wrong, I find Tulsi Gabbard to be a patriot. Mrs. Gabbard is focused on providing evidence to the DOJ that essentially forces action. I support Tulsi Gabbard’s efforts.

In 2022, the legal case brought by prosecutor John Durham against Chris Steele’s primary sub source, Igor Danchenko, was predicated on the notion that Christopher Steele’s primary source for his dossier willfully and intentionally lied to the FBI. Therefore, according to Durham’s legal theory, Danchenko was guilty of purposefully misleading FBI investigators assigned to the Trump-Russia/”Crossfire Hurricane” investigation. Every intellectually honest person knew the FBI were not duped by Danchenko, and later records proved Danchenko told them the Steele dossier was full of fabricated nonsense. However, to keep the revelation of the dossier presented “as nonsense” hidden, the FBI then hired Danchenko as a confidential human source, technically shielding him from being questioned or exposed. The FBI decision to hire Danchenko was to keep the fraudulent Steele Dossier useful for their Trump targeting operation. After all, the Trump surveillance warrants were dependent on it.

The pretending by Durham highlighted two things: (1) Durham was protecting the corrupt DOJ and FBI institutions by not investigating any government action; and yet, (2) Durham was simultaneously exposing corrupt FBI and DOJ action through his Danchenko court filings. FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten testified in court that Hillary Clinton’s contracted opposition researcher, Christopher Steele – hired by Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Donald Trump, was offered up to $1 million by the FBI in early October 2016, if Chris Steele could prove the claims within the Trump dirt dossier he authored. Steele was never paid the money, because he could not prove the claims within the dossier, nor would he originally give up the name of the primary source for the information, Igor Danchenko.

However, despite the FBI knowing the dossier could not be proved, validated or verified, later that same month, October 21, 2016, they used the dossier as evidence to support a Title-1 FISA surveillance warrant against former Trump campaign aide, Carter Page. The FBI offered Chris Steele $1 million to ‘prove it.’ Chris Steele could not ‘prove it.’ The FBI used the dossier anyway to get the warrant. The details provided by Durham proved the researched outline we delivered in 2018. The FBI knew the Steele dossier was junk, yet they used it in lieu of the mandatory ‘Woods File’ to seek an all-inclusive secret search warrant against the Trump campaign. Carter Page was a tool for the fraudulent search warrant, the FBI knew Carter Page from previous work he had done for them as an informant. However, to get the warrant they needed to accuse Page of being an asset of a foreign government – so they did.

The Steele Dossier was used as manufactured evidence to support the FISA application. The FBI goal was to create a legal mechanism putting everyone in/around Donald Trump under surveillance. This was the “insurance policy” as described by FBI agent Peter Strzok. The FBI had been conducting unlawful political surveillance against Donald Trump throughout the 2016 campaign, the FISA warrant was used as the legal basis to make the previous and future surveillance legal. The FBI knew the dossier was junk, the FBI didn’t care – they needed it to create a fraudulent search warrant. The FBI knew Carter Page was not a Russian asset, the FBI didn’t care – they needed him to get to Trump. The FBI goal was always to conduct political surveillance against Donald Trump.

(Via CNN) – Shortly before the 2016 election, the FBI offered retired British spy Christopher Steele “up to $1 million” to prove the explosive allegations in his dossier about Donald Trump, a senior FBI analyst testified Tuesday. The cash offer was made during an October 2016 meeting between Steele and several top FBI officials who were trying to corroborate Steele’s claims that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to win the election. FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten testified that Steele never got the money because he could not “prove the allegations.” Auten also said Steele refused to provide the names of any of his sources during that meeting, and that Steele didn’t give the FBI anything during that meeting that corroborated the claims in his explosive dossier.

Auten was testifying at the criminal trial of Igor Danchenko, a primary source for Steele’s dossier, who is being prosecuted by special counsel John Durham. Danchenko has pleaded not guilty to lying to the FBI. CNN previously reported that the FBI reimbursed some expenses for Steele, who had been an FBI informant. Durham, a Trump-era prosecutor who is looking for misconduct in the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation, has used some of the proceedings Tuesday to criticize the FBI’s handling of some of the early steps in the Russia probe. Durham handled many of the in-court arguments on Tuesday and personally questioned Auten on the witness stand – a rare move for a special counsel and former US attorney. (read more)

Offering $1 million to a source to provide evidence is not a decision made by a supervisory special agent. The authorization to spend up to $1 million for evidence is a decision made by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. Follow the timeline:
• Steele offered $1 million to prove the dossier in early October 2016. He cannot.
• FBI uses dossier in late October for a FISA warrant against Trump campaign.
• Dossier source Igor Danchenko interviewed by FBI in January 2017. Tells FBI dossier is junk.
• The FBI then interviews Carter Page five times, March 9, 10, 16, 30 and 31, 2017.
• The FBI then hired Danchenko in March 2017, just before renewing the FISA they now know is based on junk.
• April 2, 2017, the FBI renew the FISA warrant for the 2nd time.
• May 2017 Robert Mueller appointed to cover up all of the DOJ/FBI corruption that existed in the Trump targeting.
• June 2017 Robert Mueller interviews Danchenko, then Mueller renews the FISA.
• February 2019, Bill Barr enters as Attorney General.
• April 2019 Robert Mueller completes investigation.
• May 2019, Bill Barr appoints Durham just to look into things. Immediately then begs Trump not to declassify any documents. Trump writes executive order giving Bill Barr ability to review and declassify documents.
• October 2020, Bill Barr officially (and quietly), makes John Durham a special counsel. We don’t find out until December (after the Nov. election).
• October 2020, FBI drops Igor Danchenko as paid informant.

Put it all together and you see the continuum.
(1) Donald Trump was being targeted by a corrupt DOJ and FBI.
(2) Robert Mueller was installed in May 2017 to cover up the targeting.
(3) When Mueller is nearing his completion, Bill Barr steps in to mitigate institutional damage from 1 and 2.
(4) Barr maintains damage control and installs Durham.
(5) Durham takes over the coverup operation from October 2020 (Danchenko safe to exit) through today.

Main Justice kept a bag over Danchenko until they needed a scapegoat, created by Durham, to sell a narrative that Main Justice was duped. John Durham charged Danchenko (working outside govt) with lying to the FBI while simultaneously avoiding drawing attention to the FBI/DOJ officials (inside govt) who knew Danchenko was lying and were willfully blind to it in order to continue attacking and investigating President Donald Trump. James Comey, Robert Mueller, Bill Barr, John Durham, the Mar-a-Lago raid… it’s all one long continuum of the same targeting and coverup operation. Bill Barr was the Bondo application, and John Durham was the spray paint. The entire system is corrupt.

Read more …

“A poll from earlier this year showed AOC leading Schumer by double digits in a hypothetical primary…”

This Could Be the End of Chuck Schumer’s Political Career (Margolis)

The political winds are shifting dramatically in New York, and no figure embodies this change more starkly than Chuck Schumer. Once an unshakable pillar of Democratic power, Schumer now finds himself grappling with a crisis of confidence unlike any he’s faced in two decades. This isn’t just a battle over approval numbers; it’s a stark referendum on the future of the Democratic Party itself. As younger, more radical voices rise to challenge the old guard, the question becomes: Is Schumer’s era ending, and if so, what comes next? Schumer has hit a historic low in favorability, according to a recent Siena College poll — the worst showing of his career dating back two decades. Once comfortably positioned as the Democratic strongman in the Empire State, Schumer now finds himself under fierce fire not just from political adversaries but from within his own party.

His approval rating stands at a mere 38% favorable, with half of New Yorkers viewing him unfavorably. Even more striking, Schumer is underwater among New York City voters for the first time ever in Siena’s polling, at 39% favorable to 46% unfavorable. The tide really turned against Schumer after his controversial decision in March to allow a vote on a continuing resolution to fund the government and avoid a shutdown. This move angered radical leftist Democrats who derided it as a betrayal. That decision cast a long shadow over Schumer’s leadership and raised serious questions about whether his era is concluding. The fissures within the Democratic Party have become increasingly visible. Leftist voices have started rallying behind Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as a potential challenger to Schumer’s Senate seat in 2028.

A poll from earlier this year showed AOC leading Schumer by double digits in a hypothetical primary, signaling a deep appetite among Democratic voters for younger, more confrontational leadership. His favorability with Democrats has dropped from 55% in June to 49%, while unfavorable ratings among party members rose to 39%. This erosion of support reflects a widening gap between Schumer’s pragmatic approach and the ambitions of a more aggressive, younger generation of Democrats unwilling to yield to Republicans or Donald Trump. The big question is whether Schumer will seek re-election or make way for fresher faces representing the party’s emerging priorities.

His declining approval ratings suggest that if he does run again, it won’t be without a stern primary challenge, and I can’t see him running in a primary that he’s at risk of losing. Indeed, in an era where firebrands like AOC capture the spirit of the party’s activist wing, the political script in New York is fast rewriting itself. Ultimately, Schumer’s political plunge reflects a broader crisis of confidence within Democratic ranks. Once a master of Senate backroom deals and partisan maneuvering, his struggles highlight the party’s deepening identity crisis. Will Democrats double down on the establishment’s old-school power politics, or will they hand the reins to the younger, more radical voices demanding aggressive confrontation? The answer will shape not only Schumer’s fate but the future trajectory of the party itself.

Read more …

Predictable. Will they pass on their traveling bills to the taxpayer?

Texas Democrats Will Return Home, and the New Map Will Be Approved (Margolis)

The war over Texas’ congressional maps is nearly over, and conservatives emerged victorious. ABC13 Eyewitness News reports that multiple sources have confirmed House Democrats are finally coming back to Texas. They haven’t said exactly when, but apparently, they think they’ve achieved some grand victory by killing the first special session and grabbing a few headlines about the mid-decade redistricting fight. In reality, all they’ve done is waste taxpayer money, embarrass themselves on the national stage, and guarantee that the new map will still pass, just without the drama next time. It is unclear which day they will be in Austin at the Capitol, but they stress that they will push for Hill Country flooding relief to be the priority. nThis comes as the House went another session without a quorum on Tuesday, with just 95 members present for the second day in a row.

Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows said that assuming there is no quorum on Friday, the session will end, and a new one will begin. Hours later, the Senate actually passed a new map that benefits Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. It’s the same map that passed out of committee in the House and precipitated more than 50 House Democrats to break quorum. Democrats in the Senate walked out in protest, but a quorum remained. Sources told ABC13 that Senate Democrats will not break quorum. It’s not all that surprising. The Democratic Party, the worst offenders when it comes to gerrymandering, throwing a conniption over Republican redistricting, was the epitome of hypocrisy, and to top that off, Texas Democrats fled to the heavily gerrymandered state of Illinois: a stunt so tone-deaf that it practically wrote its own punchline. Democrats were going to cave eventually; it was only a matter of when.

Something tells me that when Gov. Greg Abbott vowed to keep calling special sessions until the new map was passed, they knew they were beat. “This could literally last years because in Texas, I’m authorized to call a special session every thirty days. It lasts thirty days,” he told Fox News host Shannon Bream on Monday, promising to keep calling session after session relentlessly. “As soon as this one is over, I’m gonna call another one, then another one, then another one, then another one.” When it comes to gerrymandering, Democrats are the undisputed champions. Four of the five most gerrymandered states, Illinois, California, New Jersey, and New York, are all under full Democratic control.

Their congressional maps hand Democrats far more seats than their actual vote totals warrant. Illinois, for instance, gives Democrats a staggering 27-point edge in representation, even though they only won 55% of the presidential vote. California and New Jersey aren’t far behind, each showing double-digit advantages for Democrats. The only state making the list with a significant Republican presence is North Carolina, with a 20-point GOP edge. But Texas, often slammed as the GOP’s gerrymandering poster child, actually has a smaller partisan gap. Republicans won 56% of the presidential vote and hold 66% of the congressional seats, a 10-point advantage that will grow with the new map, but still pales compared to the distortions cooked up in Democratic bastions.

The facts don’t lie. The worst gerrymanders are in blue states, and that advantage has propped up Democrats even as they lose the national House popular vote. What’s happening in Texas isn’t an attack on democracy; it’s a long-overdue correction. No amount of grandstanding from lawmakers playing hide-and-seek in Illinois will change that reality. Texas Democrats finally realized they were fighting a losing battle. Now the Texas Senate has approved the map, sending it to the State House for final passage, leaving Democrats to grumble about something else.

Read more …

‘Fired Losers’ = Bolton.

Trump Rails Against ‘Unfair’ Media Quoting ‘Fired Losers’ (NYP)

President Trump raged against the “unfair” media over their coverage of his high-stakes summit with Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. “Very unfair media is at work on my meeting with Putin. Constantly quoting fired losers and really dumb people like John Bolton, who just said that, even though the meeting is on American soil,” Trump seethed on Truth Social Wednesday. “‘Putin has already won.’ What’s that all about? We are winning on EVERYTHING. The Fake News is working overtime (No tax on overtime!). If I got Moscow and Leningrad free, as part of the deal with Russia, the Fake News would say that I made a bad deal! But now they’ve been caught,” he added. Leningrad reverted to its pre-Bolshevik name, St. Petersburg, in 1991.

Trump’s anticipated meeting at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson with Putin will mark the first time the Russian leader sets foot on US soil in about a decade. It will also be Putin’s first in-person meeting with a US president since he began the brutal invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has made ending the bloody war in Ukraine one of his top foreign policy objectives. Over recent months, he has soured on Putin over the brutal Russian drone and missile strikes on Ukrainian civilians. Critics such as Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton have argued that the president will be welcoming a “rogue leader of a pariah state” into the US and that Putin will attempt to “take advantage” of him.

The Friday summit meeting comes after special envoy Steve Witkoff met with the Russian leader at the Kremlin last week, ahead of Trump’s deadline for Moscow to move toward peace or else the US would work to cut off its oil exports using steep economic penalties. Details about Putin’s exact conditions for bringing about an end to his country’s war are murky and have drawn confusion from European allies. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has publicly cast doubt on making significant territorial concessions to Russia and underscored that Ukraine must have a say in any potential deal. The Trump administration is working toward a trilateral summit among Trump, Putin and Zelensky and sees the Alaska meeting as a step toward that goal, according to Vice President JD Vance.

One of Trump’s close allies, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, has claimed the president is “testing” Putin and trying to gauge his openness to peace. Secretary of State Marco Rubio similarly implied that Trump is attempting to get a better sense of whether the Russian dictator is open to peace. “The president talked to Putin on the phone three times or four times. Okay. And nothing has come of it — or at least we haven’t gotten to where we want to be,” Rubio told “Sid and Friends in the Morning” on Tuesday.“So the president feels like, ‘Look, I’ve got to look at this guy across the table. I need to see him face-to-face,’” he added. “‘I need to make an assessment by looking at him.’”

Read more …

“The Democrats are about as popular right now as measles, so democracy is somehow endangered.”

Hollywood Writers Wage War on Trump (Tim Graham)

The entertainment press found it very important to report that Hollywood thinks President Donald Trump is an authoritarian. This is still somehow considered “news.” Over 2,300 members of the Writers Guild felt compelled to speak out in an open letter because they believe in their “role in a healthy democracy.” In 2024, democracy was healthy and Hollywood’s candidate lost. “Writers Guild of America West PAC [political action committee] Endorses Kamala Harris for President,” they announced. So sad. They can’t get over it. When the Left’s feverishly spinning propaganda machines don’t work, “now, we face an unprecedented, authoritarian assault.” The Democrats are about as popular right now as measles, so democracy is somehow endangered.

“We are members of the Writers Guild of America who speak with one voice to decry the dangerous and escalating attacks on the First Amendment, independent media, and the free press,” the letter read in part. “He has retaliated against publications reporting factually on the White House and threatened broadcasters’ licenses. He regularly calls for the cancellation of news and entertainment television shows that criticize him in late-night and, most recently, ‘The View.’” They complained, “We don’t have a king, we have a president. And the president doesn’t get to pick what’s on television, in movie theaters, on stage, on our bookshelves, or in the news.” Of course not. The kings and queens of Hollywood insist they get to pick what people see, and the “healthy democracy” librarians get to dictate what’s on the public bookshelves. The leftists think “democracy” is healthiest when they are in charge of all “mainstream” messaging.

When it comes to Trump, Hollywood rushed to make hostile movies—for the Cineplex and for TV—asserting the rudest things, like Trump raped his first wife (“The Apprentice” movie). Nobody made a Hunter Biden movie, despite all the wild crack-and-hookers narratives, not to mention Hunter sleeping with his brother’s widow and getting her on drugs. The fundamental fallacy of these “attacks on the First Amendment” arguments is that the First Amendment includes the freedom to attack the “free press”—like asserting liberals lie when they call themselves the “independent media.” They’re partisan operatives. Trump suing news organizations and spurring settlements isn’t authoritarian. This is where you undermine the silly claim of these scriptwriters that leftist “news” outlets are being attacked for “reporting factually.” They don’t lead with facts. They lead with their angry opinions and often unproven accusations.

Read more …

“The majority holds that when the President refuses to spend funds appropriated by Congress based on policy disagreements, that is merely a statutory violation and raises no constitutional alarm bells.”

Trump: 1, USAID: 0 – Appeals Court Lets Admin Block Billions In Aid (ZH)

The Trump administration scored a major victory on Wednesday after a US appeals court ruled that they can cut billions of dollars in foreign assistance approved by Congress. In a 2-1 decision, the appellate panel reversed a Washington federal judge who ruled that US officials were violating the Constitution’s separation of powers principles by failing to authorize payments in line with what the legislative branch had allocated. This means that President Trump’s day-one order to dissolve the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and broadly withhold funding from other foreign aid programs can move forward. After the Trump administration cut off foreign aid, two groups of grant recipients sued, claiming a violation of separation of powers.

US District Judge Amir Ali (Canadian-born Biden appointee) ruled in March that the administration must make available foreign assistance that Congress appropriated for FY2024. Ali’s order also required USAID to pay bills owed through Feb. 13 under existing contracts and grants, however that part of the injunction was not on appeal – and substantially all of the owed payments are now complete according to court records. Not so fast Ali! Writing for the majority appellate decision – US Circuit Judge Karen Henderson (Bush appointee) said “The district court erred in granting that relief because the grantees lack a cause of action to press their claims. They may not bring a freestanding constitutional claim if the underlying alleged violation and claimed authority are statutory.”

One judge, US Circuit Judge Florence Pan (Biden appointee) dissented, writing “The majority holds that when the President refuses to spend funds appropriated by Congress based on policy disagreements, that is merely a statutory violation and raises no constitutional alarm bells.” Lauren Bateman, an attorney for consumer advocacy group Public Citizen which represents the suing grant recipients wrote on Wednesday “Today’s decision is a significant setback for the rule of law and risks further erosion of basic separation of powers principles,” adding “We will seek further review from the court, and our lawsuit will continue regardless as we seek permanent relief from the Administration’s unlawful termination of the vast majority of foreign assistance.”

Read more …

Pieces so long I put them at the bottom of the pile. Still good to refresh the memory.

The Trump-Putin Meeting: How We Got Here (Connor O’Keeffe)

This Friday, President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are set to sit down together in what will be the first face-to-face meeting between leaders of each country since the war in Ukraine broke out almost three and a half years ago. For many, this is a long-overdue step towards bringing this war to an end. For others, it marks the dangerous and unnecessary return of a policy of “appeasement” that’s sure to prompt more invasions from Putin and other leaders that the US government does not back. There certainly will be plenty of debate in the coming days over the wisdom and likely consequences of this meeting. But, as with anything, the best way to understand both is to look back at how we got here. A lot has been written about the many policy decisions that took place after the USSR fell in 1991, which transformed the Russian government and the Western governments in NATO back into enemies.

Those factors are important for understanding why Putin made the decision to invade Ukraine in early February 2022 and how he was able to get enough of the Russian public on board with the war. But even setting all of that aside, when Putin gave the order for Russian forces to invade Ukrainian territory, he cited three purposes for the move in his address to the Russian people that can help us understand the specific Russian objectives in this campaign. They were to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, to destroy the far-right Nazi factions within Ukraine, and to protect the people living in the separatist regions of eastern Ukraine. It is certainly possible that none of these reasons was or is genuine. As we Americans should know well, governments frequently use entirely fake justifications to manufacture public acceptance for a war when they think the real reason won’t work.

However, if we look closer at Putin’s actions, we can get a clearer picture of what the Russian leader wanted and, importantly, was willing to settle for. Shortly after the invasion began on February 24, 2022, Ukraine’s President Zelensky attempted to set up an indirect backchannel with Putin. He was able to do so fairly quickly with the help of the Israeli Prime Minister at the time, Naftali Bennet. Thanks to Bennet’s efforts, the two sides began talking. And, exactly two weeks after the tanks had rolled over the border, the Ukrainian and Russian foreign ministers sat down in person in Turkey to see if an agreement could be reached that would put an end to the fighting. A few weeks later, they did reach an agreement. According to officials who were present on both sides and in mediator roles, the Russians agreed to pull all of their forces back to pre-invasion boundaries—in other words, to end the war and give up all the territory they had seized in that first month.

And, in exchange, the Ukrainians agreed not to seek NATO membership. Remember, this isn’t some Russian spin on the Istanbul talks, it’s based on what the Ukrainian negotiators and the German, Israeli, and Turkish officials who were present said happened. So we know that a month into the war, Putin was willing to abandon two of the three stated objectives of his military campaign in exchange for a promise that Ukraine would not join NATO, which suggests that this really is the priority for the Russian regime. He may have even begun to honor his side of the agreement. Putin claims that the sudden massive withdrawal of Russian forces from the areas around Kyiv, a few days after the Istanbul agreement was reached, was actually the first step towards withdrawing the entire invading force. That may be a lie, but the timing does match up.

Regardless, shortly after the talks wrapped up, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson went to Kyiv, really on behalf of all the top Western military powers in NATO, and convinced the Ukrainians to walk away from the agreement, which they did. It appears that Western governments talked the Ukrainian leaders into continuing the fight by promising heavier weapons and more sophisticated support to help them gain more leverage over the Russians, so future talks could be even more fruitful. Some people in Western governments may have really believed that. But a lot of the rhetoric we saw from American officials when they were talking to the American public or to each other suggests that the true motivations for keeping the war going grew out of a recognition of how lucrative it would be for certain well-connected American companies, a desire to learn more about what tactics and technology is effective in modern conventional war, and a perceived opportunity to “weaken Russia” without the need to spill any American blood.

But regardless of whether their intentions were pure and misguided or deceptive and depraved, American and Western European officials stymied the early peace talks and kept the war going. And fairly quickly, it became frustratingly clear that the Ukrainians would not be able to fight their way to a better negotiating position than they had had in March of 2022. Over that first summer, the “heavier weapons” the US and other Western governments began transferring to the Ukrainians did not push the front line dramatically to the east, as the Ukrainian government seems to have been led to expect. And then, in September, the Russian government formally annexed four oblasts—or provinces—in eastern Ukraine, laying permanent claim to tens of thousands of square miles of territory that it had previously agreed to surrender. Ukraine’s position in future negotiations was already growing weaker.

That said, in November, a month after the Russian annexation, Ukrainian forces successfully used misdirection to recapture the southern city of Kherson and the northern city of Kharkiv. While their position was still weaker than it had been in March, it was still a solid opportunity to transition back to talks. But again, the opportunity was missed. Instead, Western officials and their allies in the media began to generate hype about plans for a massive counteroffensive operation that would mobilize all Ukrainian forces to break through Russian lines and drive Russian forces out of the newly-annexed territory. For months, the coming counteroffensive was used to shoot down any calls to return to the negotiating table. But several independent military experts raised doubts—especially in reaction to the nightmarish battle over the city of Bakhmut—that Ukraine truly had the capability to push the Russian lines way back to the east.

Those concerns really came to a head in early 2023 when a 21-year-old airman named Jack Teixeira leaked evidence that American military and intelligence officials were similarly pessimistic about the operation—for which he was thrown in prison with a sixteen-year sentence. And, sure enough, when the counteroffensive began in the summer of 2023, the Ukrainians struggled to break through Russian minefields and ended up losing more territory than they gained. The counteroffensive was a failure. And yet, the war went on. For the next year, the front lines remained mostly unchanged as the war evolved into a trench-style artillery war of attrition. Ukraine was dealing with a serious shortage of soldiers, which the Russians appeared to have recognized meant time was in their favor.

Then, last summer, the Ukrainians made the surprising decision to pull troops away from the front line to send them north over the border to capture some Russian territory in the so-called Kursk region. While they were met with some initial success, because the Russians had not thought to defend the area heavily, the territory they took was small compared to what the Russians held in Ukraine. And, most consequentially, the transfer of soldiers weakened Ukraine’s already-tenuous standing on the eastern front. Which has meant that, over the last year, Ukraine has been struggling. According to some analysts like retired Colonel Daniel Davis, the Russians have shifted their focus from trying to take more territory to trying to wipe out as many soldiers as possible to exacerbate Ukraine’s manpower problems, which will ensure that, down the road, taking territory will be far easier.

The Russians also didn’t let the lame-duck Biden administration’s provocative and unnecessarily risky decision to help the Ukrainians launch long-range missiles deeper into Russia pull them away from their strong position. So Russian forces now hold a lot of territory, and time is on their side if they wish to take even more territory in the future. And there isn’t much of anything else the NATO governments can do with weapons transfers or economic sanctions to change that. If they could, they would have done it already. In other words, the Russians have significantly more leverage over the Ukrainians and their Western backers than they did during those early talks in Turkey a month into the war. Trump has clearly tried to create some pain points against Putin that he can attempt to negotiate away—most notably a massive tariff on India for buying Russian oil. But the disheartening and frustrating fact is that Putin has no real reason to want this war to come to an end right now.

That said, the Russian president did signal that he would be open to stopping the war in exchange for eastern Ukraine. If that proposal is genuine, Trump should seriously try to work out a deal and hope that the boasts he made about deceiving the Iranians with fake negotiations earlier this summer did not destroy his credibility in situations like this. But, regardless of what happens during the talks on Friday, more Americans need to start recognizing what the civilians in Ukraine evidently have already: that, as bad as this situation is, it can and will continue to get worse. So many opportunities for peace have been missed. If there is any chance of another, Trump should take it.

Read more …

X thread.

“The Macron we see today — the carefully packaged politician, the unapologetic globalist, the made-for-television president — wasn’t born. He was built. And he was built at remarkable speed.”

Macron’s Rise To Power (John Mac Ghlionn)

The term “Manchurian Candidate” conjures images of spy thrillers, of men who are brainwashed and programmed to act against their own nations. It’s Hollywood fantasy. Or is it? Because when you examine Emmanuel Macron, his sudden, improbable ascent from obscurity to the Élysée Palace starts to feel less fictional. No sci-fi brainwashing. No flashing lights or hypnotic spirals. Just careful grooming. Silent backers. Loyalties shaped long before the public ever knew his name. A mediocre man who gets slapped around by his domineering wife is now one of the most powerful people in the world. Germany may be Europe’s economic engine, but France has always been its crown jewel: the political, military, and cultural heart of the continent. Control France, and you control not just markets, but minds, traditions, and the future of Europe itself.

Which makes the rise of Macron all the more disturbing. How, one wonders, did a provincial banker, virtually unknown to the French public a decade ago, climb so quickly to the highest office in the land? The truth is, he didn’t climb. He was carried. Macron’s Rothschild years reveal a man propelled by connections, not competence. Early colleagues recall that he didn’t even know what EBITDA — earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization — meant. A fundamental term in corporate finance. It’s the equivalent of a mechanic not knowing what an ignition is. Yet Macron rose from basic spreadsheet tasks to partner in record time, thanks to elite backers and well-timed advantages, not technical mastery. From relatively obscure banker to the highest circles of European politics.

The rise was too fast, too clean, and far too suspect. Enter Jacques Attali. His name may not mean much to some readers, but this is someone who has influenced France’s political class for decades. Now 81, he served as special adviser to President François Mitterrand. Attali played a key role in mentoring François Hollande. Even now, he ranks among the most formidable behind-the-scenes operators in French politics. In the American context, his reach would put him in the company of Zbigniew Brzezinski and George Soros. Part strategist, part gatekeeper, part financier. Attali once boasted that he “discovered” Macron, even claiming he “invented him.” The Macron we see today — the carefully packaged politician, the unapologetic globalist, the made-for-television president — wasn’t born. He was built. And he was built at remarkable speed.

At age 32, Macron’s selection into the French-American Foundation’s program placed him among future operatives aligned with U.S.-EU integrationist interests. The Foundation has long served as a quiet grooming ground for transatlantic elites. Past participants in the French-American Foundation’s Young Leaders program include figures like Bill and Hillary Clinton. Macron passed through other elite grooming institutions: Sciences Po and the École nationale d’administration (ENA). Sciences Po, often referred to as the training ground for France’s ruling class, has produced generations of presidents, prime ministers, and top civil servants. The ENA is even more exclusive. Founded after World War II, it was designed to produce the officials who would rebuild modern France.

ENA alumni include Hollande, Jacques Chirac, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, and Mr. Macron. But then came Bilderberg, the real proving ground. Within months of attending in 2014, Macron’s political career took off. For the uninitiated, Bilderberg is a private, invitation-only gathering where the world’s most powerful bankers, CEOs, generals, and politicians meet behind closed doors. Off the record, out of sight, and far from accountability. It is where future leaders are sized up, tested, and quietly approved. At the 2014 meeting, Macron was placed directly before the men and women who would soon bankroll and promote his ascent. This wasn’t a coincidence. It was, I suggest, a coronation. In 2016, after becoming a World Economic Forum (WEF) Young Global Leader, Macron reached another “miraculous” milestone. He joined a carefully selected group approved by Klaus Schwab that included the likes of Justin Trudeau and Jacinda Ardern.

This was yet another clear signal, a public endorsement from the same global interests that had backed him from the start. Less than twelve months later, Macron stormed to the French presidency. Stunning achievement for a man with no real political base, no electoral track record.= His main rivals were systematically crippled by scandals, exposed and prosecuted with an efficiency rarely seen in a country where the legal machinery usually crawls. Meanwhile, a political vehicle — En Marche! — was assembled almost overnightzBacked by deep-pocketed donors and coordinated by consultants and firms closely tied to France’s corporate and financial elite. Macron didn’t create a movement. A movement was created around him. There is nothing normal about Emmanuel Macron’s rise.

Under his leadership, France has been pushed deeper into corporate control, subordinated to supranational institutions, and subjected to sweeping social experiments, often in open defiance of the will of the French people. He has governed not as a servant of the nation, but as an agent. National industries have been stripped. Traditional institutions have been weakened. Public anger has hardened into revolt, visible everywhere from the Yellow Vests to the farmer protests that periodically paralyze parts of the country. He has waged war on free speech and presided over mass immigration policies that have transformed the demographics of major cities. Expansion of digital surveillance that now rivals anything seen in authoritarian states. Vaccine mandates with open contempt for dissenters.

He boasted that his government would make life “miserable” for the unvaccinated. At the same time, Macron has cultivated a carefully managed image of centrist respectability. English-language media has showered him with endless praise, even as approval ratings have plummeted. The modern political asset doesn’t need reprogramming. He only needs ambition, vanity, and the right people whispering promises of power and protection in his ear. Who would want a man like Macron at the helm? Those who needed a willing figurehead to manage, reframe, and ultimately dissolve France’s sovereignty into a broader, borderless project — a France no longer for the French, but for the architects of the global agenda.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Inside mRNA Vaccines – The Movie.
1 Hour movie. it may be shadowbanned (happened to me overnight). If so look on Steve Kirsch’s timeline.
https://twitter.com/stkirsch/status/1955425232413659281

 

 

RFK

Elon

NGOs
https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/1955397400656482561

Net zero
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1955351128440213532

Tucker

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 122025
 


James Proudfoot Sun on a House, Dieppe 1937

 

Trump Must Take Out Deep State Now – Larry Klayman (USAW)
Trump Invokes DC Home Rule Act, Set To Deploy National Guard (ZH)
Trump Slaps Down Zelensky Land Swap Excuses (RT)
Russia is a Warring Country – Trump (RT)
Western Europe Wants Ukraine War To Continue, Even Without The Americans (RMX)
‘Another Nazi Leaflet’ – Moscow Slams Western Europe’s Ukraine Statement (RT)
Trump Tempers Expectations Ahead Of Alaska “Feel-Out Meeting” With Putin (ZH)
NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, Discusses Upcoming Trump-Putin Summit (CTH)
Zelensky Cronies Transfer $50Mln ‘Corruption Money’ to UAE Every Month, (Sp.)
Kiev’s Forces Face Catastrophe In Donbass – Ukrainian Ex-Commander (RT)
Gerrymandering Makes Hypocrisy a Political Punch Line (Turley)
Top DOJ Lawyer Warns Feds Could Face Criminal Charges For Weaponization (JTN)
Former NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly Warns About Mamdani as NYC Mayor (CTH)
Putin-Trump Meeting: The Triumph of Delusion Over Reality (Paul Craig Roberts)
Under Color of Law (James Howard Kunstler)
Trump: The President for Peace (Sierra Knoch)
The Return Of Private Money: American Dream Meets European Nightmare (Kolbe)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1954703389419532435

Poro

kids
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1954221805289537766

 

 

 

 

“It’s obvious Trump and his team have come to the conclusion that they have to get the Left and the Deep State before they get them.”

Trump Must Take Out Deep State Now – Larry Klayman (USAW)

Renowned attorney Larry Klayman says the coming indictments of the Deep State traitors who tried to frame President Trump as a Russian spy in his first term are all in serious trouble. Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard charges that Obama Administration officials politicized intelligence and laid the groundwork for a “years-long coup” against President Donald Trump after he won the 2016 election. Gabbard first uncovered a mountain of documents implicating many in the so-called Deep State. Gabbard claimed in a post on X that former President Barack Obama and key members of his national security team, including then-CIA Director John Brennan and then-DNI James Clapper, fabricated a narrative about Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election to “subvert” Trump’s presidency.

They even made up evidence, such as the so-called Steele Dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton. They were all lies to make President Trump look bad. If these people are not stopped now while Trump is in office, and in control of the DOJ, then they will come after him when he is out of office and no longer in power. Klayman says, “Why is this different from the past? . . .. President Trump and the people around him, including Tulsi Gabbard, Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, Dan Bongino and others, have learned what they are up against. They’ve tried now to assassinate the President twice. I believe the Left and the Democrats were behind it. I think they wanted him dead. They did not want him (Trump) to be elected. There was also all the lawfare (like warfare) over the last many years.

It’s obvious Trump and his team have come to the conclusion that they have to get the Left and the Deep State before they get them.” Klayman says President Trump is at greater risk now than anytime in the past. Klayman explains, “Because President Trump has been so successful thus far, he is at great risk. There will likely be other assassination attempts and on the lives of other people in the cabinet. There will be attempts of assassination of anybody who supports him. I was in California recently, and I was wearing my Trump inauguration jacket from 2017, and some guy starts screaming I was a Nazi and this and that. I did not respond because I was in the middle of a bank. There is so much hatred out there, and this is why they have to take these people out legally and peacefully.”

Klayman points out people have the right to defend themselves, especially in the home, and Klayman urges people to use their Second Amendment rights if and when there is a need to do so. As the indictments come down in the not-so-distant future, expect violence. Klayman says, “The Left has its back up against the wall. They are a drowning man, so to speak. . .. There will be violence. They will try to foment violence. Who is likely to be indicted? Klayman names a few for starters. This list includes John Brennan, James Clapper, Peter Strzok and Mark Elias. Then Klayman predicts, “They will first go for the low hanging fruit before they get to Hillary Clinton and other higher ups. They will see if they can flip them. This time it’s different, and this time I believe there will be some accountability.”

Read more …

“..the “D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force…”

Trump Invokes DC Home Rule Act, Set To Deploy National Guard (ZH)

President Trump told reporters at the White House that he plans to deploy the D.C. National Guard and place the Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control as part of a massive push to restore law and order in the nation’s capital. Trump told reporters that he is officially invoking the D.C. Home Rule Act to place the Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control and deploy the National Guard, stating, “This is Liberation Day in D.C. — and we’re going to take our capital BACK.”

https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1954916584176443592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1954916584176443592%7Ctwgr%5E7a39315104c09c99906eda244f17fdad58c8abbc%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Ftrump-invokes-dc-home-rule-act-set-deploy-national-guard-restore-law-order

Earlier, President Trump fired off a Truth Social post around 8:00 a.m. ET: “Washington, D.C. will be LIBERATED today! Crime, savagery, filth, and scum will DISAPPEAR. I will MAKE OUR CAPITAL GREAT AGAIN!” “The days of ruthlessly killing or hurting innocent people are OVER! I quickly fixed the border (ZERO ILLEGALS in the last 3 months!), and D.C. is next!!!” the president said. Trump’s Truth Social post was followed by a report from The Wall Street Journal, which cited a U.S. official saying the White House was preparing to activate hundreds of National Guard troops across the metro area, pending a final order. Earlier this year, the president signed an executive order establishing the “D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force,” calling for increased law enforcement presence in public areas and launching initiatives to beautify parks and other public spaces.

[..] And last week, 19-year-old Edward Coristine, a former staffer at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) whose LinkedIn handle earned him the nickname ‘Big Balls,’ was badly hurt in an attack in the crime-ridden metro area. Similar crime trends have been seen in lawless Baltimore City, controlled by far-left politicians who have zero accountability for their failed social justice policies that have backfired.

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1954922736834511175

Read more …

“I mean, he’s got approval to go into war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap[.]”

Trump Slaps Down Zelensky Land Swap Excuses (RT)

US President Donald Trump has again said that a land swap for peace will be discussed at the upcoming summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska. The statement clashes with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky’s earlier refusal to consider any territorial concessions. “They’ve [Russia] occupied some very prime territory. We’re going to try and get some of that territory back for Ukraine,” Trump said, implying that some areas might remain under Russian control in a future settlement. The Lugansk People’s Republic, Donetsk People’s Republic, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions became part of Russia following referendums held in 2022. Crimea voted to join the country in 2014, following the armed Western-backed Maidan coup in Kiev.

Trump previously also suggested that upcoming negotiations could involve “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.” However, on Saturday, Zelensky rejected any land-swap proposals, citing limitations imposed by Ukraine’s constitution. During his press conference, Trump expressed frustration over Zelensky’s insistence that any territorial concessions to Russia would require constitutional approval. The US president questioned how Zelensky had the legal authority to wage war but could cite legal constraints against trading land.

“I was a little bothered by the fact that Zelensky was saying, well, I have to get constitutional approval,” Trump said, adding, “I mean, he’s got approval to go into war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap[.]” In a post on X on Sunday, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga also wrote: “No rewards or gifts to the aggressor to appease him,” adding that “every concession invites further aggression.” Russian officials have repeatedly said that any peace deal must address the root causes of the conflict and reflect the realities on the ground.

Read more …

As is obvious from his own words, Russia is not a warring country. It has been invaded, and successfully defended itself, though always at a very steep -human-price. Find a map of US battles and invasions in the past century to see a “warring country”.

Russia is a Warring Country – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has described Russia as a “warring country,” saying Moscow has been engaged in conflicts for centuries and “just keeps on fighting.” Trump made the remarks on Monday at a press conference, where he talked about his upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the US state of Alaska to discuss a possible settlement of the Ukraine conflict. “Russia is a warring nation. That’s what they do – they fight a lot of wars,” he said. “A friend of mine said, Russia is tough because they just keep on fighting,” Trump added. “They beat Hitler – so did we. And they beat Napoleon. You know, they’ve been doing this for a long time.”

Trump was referring to two of Russia’s military triumphs – the defeat of Napoleon’s Grand Army two centuries ago and the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War Two. The two European dictators – Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler – sent their armies into Russia in 1812 and 1941, respectively, only to suffer crushing defeats.

Read more …

Look at the state their countries and economies are in and you understand.

“The issue, however, is that “Zelensky does not want to sign because he is afraid of being held responsible for losing the war.”

Western Europe Wants Ukraine War To Continue, Even Without The Americans (RMX)

A Polish political scientist and journalist, Prof. Adam Wielomski, has taken to social media to claim Western European leaders do not seek a ceasefire in Ukraine at all, while the U.S. and Russia have their terms set and ready to go. According to Wielomski, Trump and Putin have already made an agreement and will simply use their Aug. 15 meeting in Alaska to announce it “with great pomp and circumstance.” Meanwhile, talk of Zelensky being present at the meeting is in no way related to Zelensky having any say on the negotiated terms, he continues, but to show that Zelensky is on board and to have him sign the pre-arranged agreement. The issue, however, is that “Zelensky does not want to sign because he is afraid of being held responsible for losing the war.”

And Western Europe stands behind him “because it wants the war to continue despite the withdrawal of the Americans, as this will give it fuel and an excuse to eliminate American control over it in the form of NATO and give it a reason to create either a European Defense Union or to federalize the EU with a common foreign and defense policy.” Wielomski then asks the “intelligentsia” who will benefit the most, Kyiv or Moscow, from the Americans withdrawing, leaving Zelensky only with the U.K. and the EU to support it. News portal Do Rzeczy reported on a document signed over the weekend by European leaders, committing to continued support of Ukraine and financing its ongoing needs. President Macron, Prime Minister Meloni, Chancellor Merz, Prime Minister Tusk, Prime Minister Starmer, President von der Leyen, and President Stubb all signed the statement regarding “peace for Ukraine in connection with the planned meeting between President Trump and President Putin.”

Included in the document was their concern that serious negotiations can only take place under conditions of a ceasefire or a reduction in military operations and that Ukraine’s participation in any talks was critical to any peace being achieved. Both the White House and the Kremlin accepted President Zelensky’s request to join the talks, although no formal invitation was issued. Meanwhile, a senior member of Putin’s inner circle, Investment Envoy Kirill Dmitriev, has said that many countries are making “titanic efforts” to hinder an agreement between Russia and Trump. Dmitriev did not name specific countries but indicated that critics of the upcoming talks may attempt to sabotage the summit through diplomatic maneuvers and disinformation via the media.

Read more …

“The relations between Kiev and the bureaucracy in Brussels have “begun to resemble necrophilia, and it is distinguished by the fierce reciprocity on both sides..”

‘Another Nazi Leaflet’ – Moscow Slams Western Europe’s Ukraine Statement (RT)

A statement issued by Ukraine’s Western European backers on the upcoming talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump is just “another Nazi leaflet,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. On Sunday, the leaders of France, Germany, the UK, Poland, Italy and Finland, as well as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, issued a joint statement “on peace for Ukraine” dedicated to the upcoming Alaska summit between Putin and Trump scheduled for August 15. They welcomed the US president’s efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, but claimed that “only an approach” that includes “pressure on the Russian Federation” can be successful.

Zakharova commented on the statement later in the day, calling it “another Nazi leaflet claiming that success in achieving peace in Ukraine can allegedly only be achieved by putting pressure on Russia and supporting Kiev.” The cessation of hostilities requested by Ukraine’s backers in the EU and UK does not include stopping the supply of weapons to “Kiev terrorists,” she pointed out. The relations between Kiev and the bureaucracy in Brussels have “begun to resemble necrophilia, and it is distinguished by the fierce reciprocity on both sides,” the spokeswoman added.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stressed previously that “Western Europe has once again found itself under a Nazi flag by committing to a completely misguided, disastrous venture of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia” by backing Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly said it is interested in a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict, but insists that it must address its root causes in order to bring a permanent and stable peace. According to Russian officials, any deal must also reflect the realities on the ground, including the status of Crimea, which reunified with Russia in 2014, as well as the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk and Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, which joined Russia after referendums in 2022.

Read more …

“The fact that Trump is even meeting with Putin is being felt as a huge slap in the face in Kiev.”

Trump Tempers Expectations Ahead Of Alaska “Feel-Out Meeting” With Putin (ZH)

During President Donald Trump’s wide-raning news conference held at the White House on Monday, he was asked about the much anticipated Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which is of course stirring much controversy given European fears that he’ll do a deal which sidelines Ukraine’s interests. “This is a war that should never have happened,” Trump began in this section of the presser. “This is a war that wouldn’t have happened if I were president, it would never have happened.” These statements are nothing new, but what followed is a first. Trump then interestingly for the first time used language about the Friday planned summit which appears aimed at greatly tempering expectations. This is after several rounds of US-backed Russia-Ukraine peace talks in Istanbul failed to produce any breakthroughs.

Trump described the talks with Putin as merely a “feel-out meeting” and said that Putin “wants to get involved”. He then voiced his belief that Putin wants to get the war “over with”. “I’ve said that a few times and I’ve been disappointed because I’d have a great call with him and then missiles would be lobbed into Kyiv or some other place,” Trump stated. He futher pledged that he’ll tell Putin “you’ve got to end this war, you’ve got to end it”. And he sought to once again reassure European leaders -“who I get along with very well” – saying they will be the first phone call after the talks are over. As for whether a final deal could be achieved in Alaska, Trump emphasized that “it’s not up to me”. Again choosing language which seeks to manage expectations, Trump casually said: “I got a call to say they’d like to meet, and I’m going to see what they want to meet about.”

“I’d like to see a ceasefire, I’d like to see the best deal that could be made for both parties, it takes two to tango,” he added, which could be interpreted as a jab toward Ukraine. Trump at one point in his comments mistakenly said: “We’re going to Russia. That’s going to be a big deal.” He perhaps has a future trip to Russia in mind, as a return gesture for Putin coming to American soil to talk. But then near the end of the remarks he offered a corrective, saying “I thought it was very respectful that the president of Russia is coming to our country, as opposed to us going to his country, or even a third, third party place.” Such warm words said of Putin will likely make Zelensky nervous, hearkening back to the opening months of Trump taking office, when Trump’s relations with Zelensky hit a low-point, and criticisms aimed at Kiev came weekly.

Some analysts have already pointed out that these Monday statements from Trump don’t bode well for Ukraine and a favorable settlement on its terms. Meanwhile, Zelensky in fresh statements has highlighted Russia has only stepped-up aerial attacks on Ukraine of late. He talled that in just the past week, Russia sent more than 1,000 air bombs, nearly 1,400 drones and several missile strikes on Ukraine. But Ukraine has also been hitting Russian oil refineries on a weekly basis at this point, as both sides continue to target energy infrastructure. Ukraine’s position has been to accuse Russia of simply trying to buy time, and that it’s not actually interested in negotiating peace. The fact that Trump is even meeting with Putin is being felt as a huge slap in the face in Kiev.

Read more …

In Rutte’s dreams, Trump goes to Alaska to “test” Putin, Putin fails the test, and Trump will then support a full-blown NATO war against Rusia.

NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, Discusses Upcoming Trump-Putin Summit (CTH)

The ever-dramatic Margaret Brennan is in full pearl-clutching mode as she questions NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, about the upcoming meeting between horrible President Trump and even more horrible President Putin. It is simply unfathomable to allow a U.S. President to create a strategic reset with a Russian President. As Brennan acts out the role, she highlights how it is unimaginable, terrible, and just a no good bad thing. Horrid. NATO Secretary Rutte is quite happy with the new funds flowing into the NATO alliance as organized by President Trump. Rutte sits atop a new cache of taxpayer funded treasure for the alliance to organize; from his perspective Trump is gold, and Brennan gnashes her teeth throughout. Funnily, Brennan attempts to spin a Trump-Putin agreement for a ceasefire with Trump triggering World War III by getting the beginning of a peace deal over the finish line. If Trump creates peace, the world will explode or something. Rutte missed the opportunity to ask Mrs Brennan if she can hear herself. lol

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning. Well, Mr. Secretary General, big picture here; is Russia’s Vladimir Putin still a direct threat to the Western alliance, or is he showing some signs of dropping his aggression?

SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE: He is still the main threat to the Western alliance, there’s no doubt. And I think it is very good that President Trump will test him, and we’ll see how far he can get on Friday, starting this process. He basically broke the deadlock, President Trump, in February, starting the dialogue with Putin. I think that was crucial. We had a great NATO Summit under his leadership, committing to 5% defense spending, so that there is a clear signal to our main threat, which is Russia, that we are serious. And then he opened the floodgates, three weeks ago, of American lethal weapons to be delivered into Ukraine, coordinated by NATO and, of course, the secondary sanctions. He started them with putting them on India, which is one of the biggest buyers of Russian oil and gas.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, that is certainly the groundwork being laid. The concern is, of course, as you know, among some critics, that in this conference room in Alaska, we’re going to see a 1938 moment. Where, in an attempt to immediately halt a war, the groundwork is laid for an even bigger conflict because of concessions that are made. Are you comfortable with Ukraine being excluded from these negotiations on Friday?

SECRETARY GENERAL RUTTE: What will happen on Friday is testing Putin by President Trump. And I commend him for the fact that he organized this meeting. I think it is important. And, obviously, when it comes to peace talks, the cease-fire and what happens after that on territories, on security guarantees for Ukraine, Ukraine will have to be, and will be, involved. But on Friday, it is important to see how serious Putin is. And the only one who can do that is President Trump. So, it’s really crucial that a meeting takes place. It will not be the final say on this. There will not be the final deal on this. Of course, Ukraine will have to be involved in Europe, but it is important to start the next phase of this process, putting pressure on the Russians exactly as President Trump has been doing over the last six months.

Read more …

It takes a Turkish newspaper to report on this. You try find a western report on it. And mind you, this is just one stream of “corrupt money”. $50 million? We’re talking billions.

Zelensky Cronies Transfer $50Mln ‘Corruption Money’ to UAE Every Month, (Sp.)

Turkish newspaper Aydinlik published on Monday the bank accounts of companies based in the UAE involved in the corruption scheme of Volodymyr Zelensky’s cronies, about $50 million are transferred to the Middle Eastern country every month. Since last year, Ukraine has been rocked by allegations of corruption, which can “strike the Kiev government in the very heart,” the newspaper reported, adding that the main problem for Zelensky is that his inner circle is also involved in the corruption case. Zelensky’s closest circle transfers about $50 million a month to the accounts of two companies linked to Andrei Gmyrin, the alleged disposer of funds obtained through corruption, the newspaper reported.

Both companies are based in the United Arab Emirates — GFM Investment Group LLC (UAE No. 967369, No. 11707266, Emirates NBD bank account number: AE 210260001015792940701) and Gmyrin Family Holding Limited (UAE No. ICC20210636, No. 11664590), the newspaper reported. Gmyrin, who is a former consultant to the State Property Fund of Ukraine (SPFU), is under international investigation in connection with his complex network of companies and a portfolio of luxury goods in France, the UAE and Europe, the newspaper reported.

Read more …

The defense line is literally broken.

Kiev’s Forces Face Catastrophe In Donbass – Ukrainian Ex-Commander (RT)

The situation in southwestern Donbass is rapidly deteriorating for the Ukrainian troops that are now facing two major encirclements, former chief of staff of the Azov Brigade, Lieutenant Colonel Bogdan Krotevich, has claimed. The frontline between Pokrovsk (Krasnoarmeysk), the largest city under Ukrainian control in the southwest of Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic, and Konstantinovka, a major stronghold some 45km to the northeast of the city, has effectively ceased to exist, Krotevich claimed. “I honestly don’t know what exactly you are being told, but I can tell you: the Pokrovsk-Konstantinovka line is, without exaggeration, a complete f**k up. And this f**k up has been growing for a long time, getting messier every day,” he wrote in an open letter to Vladimir Zelensky which he posted on X late on Monday.

The city of Pokrovsk has been de-facto surrounded by Russian troops, while Konstantinovka is facing semi-encirclement, he claimed. The former Azov commander shared a map purporting to show the situation in the area, which corroborates media reports of a major Russian breakthrough to the north of Pokrovsk that emerged earlier in the day. “The systemic problem began with the thinning out of reserves, widespread fragmentation of units along the entire front line, reports about a ‘taken village’ touted as a victory despite failures in entire operational directions,” Krotevich wrote, accusing “parts” of the military leadership of a “complete lack of a strategic and even operational vision of the theater of operations.”

A similar alarmist message was produced by Taras Chmut, the head of the pro-military charity Come Back Alive. The crisis in Donbass has been brewing for about a year and a half, he wrote on X earlier in the day, predicting the Ukrainian military was about to begin losing land “by tens, hundreds of square kilometers” daily. “First, we failed at the platoon level. Then the company. Then it’s the turn of the battalion level. When it comes to brigades, the enemy will put into action its armored groups, which have been actively accumulating for a year, and will go to the rear, to the operational space,” he claimed.

Read more …

“Pritzker had just declared gerrymandering a threat to democracy. He followed up by making a joke of his own unparalleled gerrymandering. The New York audience cheered both statements…”

Gerrymandering Makes Hypocrisy a Political Punch Line (Turley)

Former diplomat and Democratic senator Adlai Stevenson once remarked that “a hypocrite is the kind of politician who would cut down a redwood tree, then mount the stump and make a speech for conservation.” If so, this week in politics was nothing but the worst form of stump speeches. In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) declared that the move by Texas Republicans to redistrict mid-decade was a “legal insurrection of our U.S. Capitol.” In Texas, Democratic State Rep. Jolanda Jones (D) must have felt “insurrection” did not quite capture the infamy. Instead, she insisted, “I will liken this to the Holocaust.” Others repeated the Democratic mantra that it was the death of democracy. That includes former President Barack Obama, who had said nothing when Democrats made his own state the most gerrymandered in the union.

In Illinois, surrounded by Texas legislators who had fled their state to prevent a legislative quorum, Gov. JB Pritzker (D) bellowed that gerrymandering was an attempt to “steal” congressional seats and to “disenfranchise people.” It did not matter that the stump Pritzker and Texas Democrats were standing on in Chicago is located the most gerrymandered state in the country. The redistricting law, signed by Pritzker left Republicans with just three of the state’s 17 congressional seats, even though they won nearly half the votes in the last election. What is missing in any of this is any sense of shame. The most telling moment came when Pritzker went on the Stephen Colbert’s show on CBS — a show that offered him a reliably supportive audience and a long track record of 86 percent of jokes slamming conservatives or Republicans.

Pritzker received roaring cheers when he said that he was protecting democracy from Texas gerrymandering. Colbert then showed him the map of Illinois, which features ridiculously shaped, snaking districts that stretch across the state — all drawn to maximize Democratic performance in elections. Pritzker just shrugged and joked how they had kindergarteners design it. Colbert and the audience laughed uproariously. So let’s recap. Pritzker had just declared gerrymandering a threat to democracy. He followed up by making a joke of his own unparalleled gerrymandering. The New York audience cheered both statements. Some of the outrage by Democrats seemed part of a comedy routine. In Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healey pledged to retaliate by gerrymandering her heavily gerrymandered state. The problem?

It is already so badly gerrymandered that there are no Republican House members in the state — there haven’t been any since the 1990s. We have reached the point in our age of rage where one’s hypocrisy can be openly acknowledged but then dismissed with a chuckle. It is not cheap to lock Republicans out completely in heavily Democratic states. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) quickly pledged to order a new round of gerrymandering in a state where Republicans constituted roughly 40 percent of the congressional vote in 2024 but received only about 17 percent of the House seats. To reduce the Republicans to near zero would require passage of a ballot proposition, costing more than $200 million, even as California faces a budget crisis and a deficit greater than $20 billion. And that may prove to be just a fraction of the true cost.

Read more …

“..federal agents and intelligence officers who weaponized their government powers for political purposes could face criminal charges under civil rights laws..”

Top DOJ Lawyer Warns Feds Could Face Criminal Charges For Weaponization (JTN)

A top Justice Department lawyer is warning that federal agents and intelligence officers who weaponized their government powers for political purposes could face criminal charges under civil rights laws created to fight injustices during the Jim Crow era more than a half-century ago. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon cautioned in an interview with Just the News that she could not discuss any specific investigations or potential suspect. But she said recent reports that one or more grand juries were probing the weaponization of government powers against President Trump and his associates or followers might have given good reason for current and former FBI and CIA officials to hire lawyers.

“This, again, goes back to those Reconstruction Era statutes that sought to remedy the vestiges of racism, and we had some terrible incidents in our country’s history of law enforcement officials conspiring to deprive African Americans of their civil rights,“ she said in a wide-ranging interview with the “Just the News, No Noise” television show. “And that is where some of these laws stem from.” “But they’re broader than that, and so it can be a crime for government officials, either together or in conspiring with non-government officials, to violate people’s civil rights,” she explained. “That’s also a civil violation. I’ve actually sued over that in California for pro-life activists. And you know, we have long-standing cases involving these issues, and so I think, you know, government officials may think, because nobody ever bothers to enforce these statutes, that they’re immune, and they can do whatever they want.”

“Not so, and I think that’s why you’re seeing some people tongue-in-cheek saying that in DC, every lawyer is being retained …. as these investigations have begun to hit the newswires,” she added. Dhillon’s comments come as FBI Director Kash Patel has opened at least one criminal conspiracy case looking at whether DOJ, FBI, and intelligence community officers were engaged in a long-running conspiracy to violate the rights of Donald Trump and his followers from the Russiagate scandal to the raid on Mar-a-Lago. In addition, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have referred current and former officials to the Justice Department for possible prosecution for alleged abuses.

Last week, the Justice Department issued subpoenas to New York Attorney General Leticia James seeking any evidence of whether she sought to violate the civil rights of President Trump when she filed a civil lawsuit against his company for alleged fraud. Section 241 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code makes it “unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States.” Such conspiracy statutes are derived from the Civil Rights Acts of 1960 and 1964, which were enacted to protect black citizens from police abuses in the South and from prohibitions in public places. Those laws were complemented by a series of voting rights laws as well.

The laws were seldom successfully used against police officers during the 1960’s, but have been more commonly used against police misconduct over the last three decades, starting most notably with the infamous 1993 Rodney King case where four LAPD officers involved were captured on videotape beating King. The four were initially acquitted on state charges in May of that year, which led to five days of rioting. Fifty-three people (including 28 African-Americans, 19 Hispanics, 14 whites, and 2 Asians) were killed: the greatest death toll in any American civil disturbance since the 1863 Draft Riots in New York City. Looting and fires had inflicted more than one billion dollars in property damage. The four officers were retried under federal civil rights laws in February 1993, with two of them being acquitted, and the remaining two found guilty and sentenced to two and a half years in prison. In a civil lawsuit, King won a $3.8 million verdict from the City of Los Angeles.

More recently, former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted of violating George Floyd’s civil rights in 2020 by kneeling on his neck and suffocating Floyd. The Justice Department said in a press release that Chauvin pleaded guilty to willfully depriving Mr. Floyd of his constitutional right to be free from the use of unreasonable force by a police officer, resulting in Mr. Floyd’s bodily injury and death. In the plea documents, Chauvin agreed that the sentencing for this crime should be based on the sentence for second-degree murder because he acted willfully and in callous and wanton disregard of the consequences on Floyd’s life. He was sentenced to a term in prison of more than 20 years.

Elsewhere, a law enforcement officer was tried and convicted on similar charges related to violating the civil rights of Breonna Taylor in Kentucky during the execution of a search warrant in March 2020 that, according to the Justice Department, led to the death of Taylor in her home. Although his shots did not strike Taylor, the use of deadly force was unjustified. Taylor was killed during the botched raid when police rammed the door open and Taylor’s boyfriend, believing that intruders were breaking in, fired his handgun one time at officers, two of whom fired back, hitting and killing Taylor. A federal judge dismissed the felony charges against the other police officers in August of last year, although the other officers are still facing ongoing criminal litigation, according to a local TV station.

Read more …

Silly me, I figured Mamdani was far too far out in left field to get any votes. Now everyone’s saying woke’s wet dream is a shoe-in for mayor. And New York is fully dependent on Trump to come save it.

Former NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly Warns About Mamdani as NYC Mayor (CTH)

Former New York City Police Commissioner, Ray Kelly, is warning about what will happen if Zohran Mamdani wins the mayor race in New York City. However, at this point the Mamdani victory is almost assured. Mamdani is supported by both the professional political left and the professional political right. Essentially supported by establishment Democrats and establishment Republicans. Also, supported openly by the DNC and supported passively by the fundraising arm of the RNC. Mamdani represents the opportunity for both parties to fundraise billions of dollars in support and opposition. This is the UniParty at work. Zohran Mamdani is essentially a shoo-in for Mayor. He hits a very unique niche spot, fulfilling the role needed for the left and the right.

The left will promote the unaffordability of things and target the Gen-z audience for branding. The DNC will do their social/econ experiments again and fundraise. On the other side of the UniParty, the “conservatives” within the traditional GOPe will have their new foil. Conservatives will have the opportunity for thousands of hours of punditry, lots of column inches and, of course, fundraising. An argument can be made that Andrew Cuomo, financed by those who construct political distractions, entered the NYC race to ensure a Mamdani victory. Republicans, Democrats, communists, leftists, controlled right media, Palestinian supporters and Israel-First strategists all prefer both a beacon and a foil to keep the coliseum crowd occupied.

Yeah, politics in the post-Obama era is about seeing the other hand in slow motion now, feeling that intuitive sense of history repeating, and noticing the same tripwires are being triggered. Wash, rinse, repeat. ‘NEW YORK – Ex-NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly on Sunday warned it would be a “tragedy of major proportions” if city voters elect socialist mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, who is “totally unqualified” for the office. Kelly — the longest-serving police commissioner in Big Apple history with stints under Democratic Mayors Mike Bloomberg and David Dinkins — said he is especially worried Mamdani will gut the Police Department while trying to usher in “a whole list of wacky things.”

“It’s a tragedy of major proportions if Mamdani is elected mayor of the greatest city in the world,” Kelly said on WABC 770 AM’s the “Cats Roundtable” program. (more)” The guy is straight from central casting for the UniParty. A proud socialist, Muslim supporter of Hamas, progressive wealth spreader who hears and understands the voices of the Starbucks crowd. A NYC version of Barry Soetero. Professional Democrats and Republicans will benefit financially.

Read more …

“The entire point of Washington’s orchestrated conflict in Ukraine was to destabilize Russia. Has Washington abandoned this policy goal?”

“How does the military/security complex see the loss of its Russian enemy?”

Putin-Trump Meeting: The Triumph of Delusion Over Reality (Paul Craig Roberts)

A couple of days ago Trump said it wasn’t worthwhile meeting with Putin, but suddenly ordered his aides to arrange a meeting with Putin in a week. The explanations we have been given for this is that Putin said Trump’s negotiator Witcoff had made an acceptable proposal. Putin’s negotiator Kirill Dmitriev declared “a historic meeting in which dialogue will prevail.” One dreamer proclaimed that Putin and Trump “may reconfigure the world order.” These premature declarations of agreement and success have led to further romantic theorizing. One Russian commentator declared that Alaska was chosen for the historic meeting because it “so clearly embodies the spirit of neighborliness and mutually beneficial cooperation lost during the Cold War.” The Russian Atlanticist-Integrationists whose hearts and interests are in the West are hopeful that their declarations of bliss, even if involves Russian surrender, will prevail over Russian nationalism.

For example, Putin’s negotiator is Kirill Dmitriev, nominally a Russian, but in fact a graduate of Stanford University and Harvard Business School–entrances into the American Establishment–who began his career at Goldman Sachs, an establishment member. He is a Young Global Leader of the World Economic Forum. His long list of honors and directorships of Russian companies is provided by the WEF. Currently he is chief of the Russian Direct Investment Fund and Putin’s Special Envoy on International Economic and Investment Cooperation. Could Putin have chosen a more conflicted person to negotiate with Washington? Among these and other highly hopeful statements, what is the reality of the situation? Does it conform to the expressed expectations? No. As far as I can tell, Trump is headed into a “historic meeting” with his Russian counterpart and still has no idea what Putin’s position is.

Trump most recently spoke of a peace deal based on a “swapping of territories,” which Zelensky’s European supporters say must be a “reciprocal” swap of territory. Zelensky’s position is that all territory must be returned to Ukraine. Putin’s position is that all territory now incorporated into the Russian Federation must be accepted as Russian by Ukraine and the West. Otherwise, Russia has to repudiate its military victories in a war that was provoked by Washington. But the main problem with Trump’s approach is that he is thinking of the meeting in a very limited context of ending the military conflict with a land swap, whereas Putin wants a mutual security agreement with Washington and NATO that gets NATO off of Russia’s borders. The war that Putin wants to end is the West’s hostility toward Moscow. The war in Ukraine Russia can take care off.

Putin’s objective is a highly desirable goal, because the worsening provocations of Moscow will eventually result in nuclear war. But how realistic is Putin’s goal? I would say it is not realistic. First, the Wolfowitz Doctrine is in the way. The Wolfowitz doctrine declares the principal goal of US foreign policy to be to prevent the rise of any power that can serve as a constraint on American unilateralism. The neoconservatives who originated this doctrine are still very influential in US policy-making circles. No US president or Secretary of State has repudiated this doctrine. Trump himself recently declared the policy when he said “I rule America and the world.” That is a hegemonic statement.

Indeed, the current military conflict in Ukraine is entirely the product of Washington’s hegemonic foreign policy. Washington orchestrated the “Maidan Revolution” in order to overthrow a Russian-friendly democratic government and to install a Russophobic puppet. The puppet government then attacked the people in the Russian territories of Ukraine until they forced a Russian intervention after the West used the Minsk Agreement to deceive Putin and after the West refused the Kremlin’s request for a mutual security agreement during December 2021-February 2022. At this point Putin was forced to intervene in order to prevent the slaughter of the Russians in the independent Donbas republics by a large Ukrainian army trained and equipped by Washington.

If Putin had had the foresight to accept the Donbas republics’ request in 2014 to be reunited with Russia like Crimea, the war would have been avoided. But Putin, badly advised, confused a defense of Russian people with a provocation to the West. In 2014 the Atlanticists-Integrationists, whose interests are in the West, not in Russia, still intended for the Kremlin to crawl on its belly back into Western acceptance by being a good subject of Washington’s hegemonic rule.. The entire point of Washington’s orchestrated conflict in Ukraine was to destabilize Russia. Has Washington abandoned this policy goal?

Second, there is the interest of the US military/security complex. The power and profit of the military/security complex depends on having enemies. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to the creation of the “Muslim Threat” used to sustain the military/security’s profits and powers with Washington’s 21st century wars that destroyed, so far, five Muslim countries, while supporting with money, weapons, and diplomatic cover Israel’s genocide of Palestine, and Washington is now being aligned with Israel to destroy Iran.

A few days ago President Trump bragged that he had negotiated a deal with the EU to purchase hundreds of billions of dollars of US weapons to send to Ukraine. What happens to this deal if peace comes to Ukraine? How does the military/security complex see the loss of its Russian enemy? Has Trump promised them an Iranian war and/or a war with China as replacements? Third, if Trump favors peace with Russia, why did he just reinstall in Europe the US intermediate-range nuclear missiles that President Reagan had removed, and in addition deploy two submarines with nuclear missiles closer to Russia?

Read more …

“The second-order and third-order damages of RussiaGate are incalculable. A murder of American democracy was committed.” — Mike Benz on “X”

Under Color of Law (James Howard Kunstler)

Surely you’ve noticed the ominous cone of silence around the DOJ and the FBI as rumors of “accountability” mount against well-known figures who used government to make war against its own citizens. That is exactly what happened, by the way, in case you’re baffled by the news. The agencies aren’t leaking this time, especially not to the mendacious scribes that infest The New York Times and The WashPo, who function as vanguard to the corps of traitors in the rogue fourth branch of government called the Blob. So, the silence begs you to ask: Are they doing anything in there?

Yes, they are making cases. And they are not yapping idly about it in the news, legacy or alt. They are preparing evidence for grand juries that will decide if probable cause exists to indict those well-known figures — several of whom have become cable news performers, foolishly, if obliquely, advertising their own culpability for years now. You’ll just have to wait, though perhaps not for long. It is August, after all, the horse latitudes of the year when things go still.

You are lectured incessantly and sanctimoniously by these same suspects about the rule of law (in “our democracy”). Many of these characters are maestros in the dark arts of lawfare, which, paradoxically, is the practice of using law to pervert and dishonor the rule of law. Lately, you are introduced to a similar sounding phrase, under color of law, with a related meaning. Understand it and you will see what has been behind virtually all the mischief in our public affairs this past, vicious decade. Under color of law has deep roots in Anglo-American jurisprudence because law, by its nature, lends itself to abuse and nefarious misuse. The law’s “nature” is that it is a set of rules to decide matters of consequence, both personal and public, where much is at stake: ownership of property, liberty, life itself. At times, actions are taken in the name of the law to unjustly deprive persons of life, liberty, and property, usually for the benefit of other persons.

The phrase, life, liberty, and property, derives from John Locke’s Two Treatises on Government (1689), which argued that these are natural rights, God-given, and that it is government’s duty to protect these rights, government being the practical application of law. The phrase life, liberty, and property deeply influenced America’s founders. Thomas Jefferson changed it up a bit in the Declaration of Independence as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” with a eudaimonian twist to inspire America to flourish on its own, off England’s leash. It was also Jefferson’s way of detaching the Declaration from the issue of slavery, where “property” could refer to human beings.

But the Lockean original, life, liberty and property, reappears in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. It is in the Fifth Amendment, protecting persons from the arbitrary deprivation of these rights without due process by the federal government, and in the Fourteenth Amendment applying the same principle of law to state governments. Where lawfare comes in is under due process. Lawfare’s aim is to pervert due process, to use officers of the courts to act unfairly and unjustly in the name of the law, and thus, under color of law.

Read more …

“As an American with Armenian heritage, I am particularly optimistic about the opportunities this deal will create for economic partnerships. And I am thankful to have a president who is paying attention to this region..”

Note: this is Russia’s backyard.

Trump: The President for Peace (Sierra Knoch)

On Aug. 8, President Donald Trump hosted the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan for the signing of an historic peace deal between the two countries and the U.S. The deal is aimed at normalizing relations between the two nations which have been at odds for decades over a border dispute. This is another diplomatic win from the Trump administration that shows that many of these long-standing global conflicts that were ignored or even fueled by the Biden administration and deemed “unsolvable” are in fact solvable. Of course, nothing can get resolved overnight, and there is still work to be done in many of these instances, but the initial steps have been taken which are often the most important as they stop fighting and unnecessary killing.

Many may be wondering why the Trump administration bothers to focus on such relatively small conflicts, such as the Armenia-Azerbaijan dispute, or the Democratic Republic of Congo-Rwanda dispute or the Thailand/Cambodia dispute when we have larger conflicts still ongoing in Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Gaza. But the Trump administration is showing wisdom that the so-called “adults in the room” in the Biden administration lacked. These small conflicts offer opportunities for larger states such as Russia that benefit from conflict that keeps smaller states weak and dependent. Ending small conflicts not only saves lives, it eliminates opportunities for Russia, China, or other global bad actors to gain a foothold in these places and cause more trouble.

As an American with Armenian heritage, I am particularly optimistic about the opportunities this deal will create for economic partnerships. And I am thankful to have a president who is paying attention to this region and bringing both Azerbaijnis and Armenians closer to peace. The details of the deal include two separate agreements that Azerbaijan and Armenia signed with the United States. The agreements include points on energy, technology, economic cooperation, border security, infrastructure and trade. Additionally, the two countries signed a historic declaration together brokered by the U.S. and centered on ending conflict. The deal creates a shared transit corridor dubbed the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” which will no doubt bring economic success for the U.S. and the South Caucasus region. One needs only to look to the Armenian diaspora in America to see the work ethic, ingenuity, and craftsmanship that Armenian culture can contribute when given the opportunity.

According to several articles the corridor is going to run through a mountainous region between Armenia and Azerbaijan. In the agreement Armenia has agreed to award the U.S. exclusive special development rights on the Zangezur Corridor land for 99 years. The U.S. would sublease the land to a consortium that will develop rail, oil, gas and fiber optic lines and possibly electricity transmission along the 27-mile corridor. The joint declaration is the first-ever declaration signed between the two countries, which were both previously states of the former Soviet Union and regained their freedom when the USSR was disbanded in 1991. There are still issues to be worked out between the two nations, such as alleged human rights abuses by Azerbaijan toward ethnic Armenians, but in order to address any of these concerns the two nations must first stop the fighting and resume relations.

Although this agreement may not address every issue right now, I believe it is better to take the first step than to stall progress completely. This opportunity may not be around forever. With Vladimir Putin’s ongoing battlefield adventures in Ukraine pulling his focus and economic resources completely to that conflict, Russian influence is finally waning in Azerbaijan, which created an opening for the U.S. to facilitate this deal. The significance of these agreements extends beyond mere signatures; they represent a tangible investment in the future stability and prosperity of the region.

According to statements from the leaders of both Azerbaijan and Armenia this deal wouldn’t have been possible without Trump. For those who are concerned about tariffs or Trump’s global trade policy potentially driving away partners, it is clear that Trump’s reputation as the peacemaker is far more valuable to small states around the world than unbalanced trade. The relationships that are formed when Trump is able to achieve deals like this in Asia, Africa, and now the South Caucasus region are real and lasting because they show the benefit of American strength and leadership.

Additionally, these efforts send a clear message to adversarial powers that the era of unchecked influence in strategically sensitive zones may be coming to an end. By inserting American expertise and oversight, and by empowering local stakeholders, the deal lays a foundation for sustainable development and mutual benefit. Such diplomatic achievements demonstrate that when the United States leads with resolve and creativity, even seemingly intractable disputes can give way to hope and renewed partnership. While we may never see the cliché “World Peace” that some dream of, the Trump administration is showing that there is a real benefit to trying anyway. Balancing America First policies and strength with fast-paced action that takes advantage of opportunities for diplomacy when they arise is a winning approach for America in the Golden Age.

Read more …

“Europe is heading inexorably towards centralism. The question remains: Will the monetary coup succeed, or will the eurozone collapse first?”

The Return Of Private Money: American Dream Meets European Nightmare (Kolbe)

EU Europe and the USA are drifting further apart. In the shadow of the Ukraine war and Brussels censorship policies, a political hiatus is opening up even at the monetary policy level. Monetary policy is often treated as a stepchild in the media. Except during sovereign debt crises, when central banks step in as rescuers, politics and media mostly focus only on interest rate decisions. These are stylized as media highlights to help politics anchor inflation expectations and influence market activity. In short: this remains a superficial view that does not do justice to the complexity of monetary policy. It is regrettable—and perhaps no coincidence—that monetary policy is dealt with so hastily.

Money is the central good in economics. Its value development, dilution, and manipulation by political actors is a hot potato that remains largely untempered. Yet, since US banks withdrew from the London LIBOR contract and the national reference rate (SOFR) was introduced, monetary policy has evolved into a geopolitical key issue deserving serious discussion. Behind the artificially generated monetary background noise about interest rates and inflation control, a strategic drift is taking place that will redefine the economic future. EU Europe and the USA are taking separate monetary policy paths. Media censorship, climate socialism, and now the debate over the digital euro—one might say, Brussels and the ECB bankers spare no effort to turn the EU into a closed fortress of power.

With the digital euro, they would take a major step towards consolidating this power. It is programmable, fully transparent money on a centralized blockchain that would transform money into a morally and politically charged commodity. Climate targets, individual CO2 consumption, meat consumption, and travel activities—the coupling of individual behavior to the emissions-based control complex seems tangible. And sanctioning citizens and companies in cases of dissident behavior could become routine bureaucratic work.Following the line of reasoning of ECB President Christine Lagarde, it is clear what awaits Europeans: algorithmic surveillance of economic activity and moralistic control of individual behavior.

Is Money a Public Good? For Lagarde, money is a public good. Naturally, under the control of the state or state-like surrogates such as the ECB. The digital euro project is to start small, with limited wallets managed by the ECB, marketed ironically by the muted commercial banks that would become obsolete in case of full conversion—a strange understanding of banking revealed here. A digital euro is supposed to offer new choices, complement cash, and promote inclusion, according to Lagarde. But here again, one of those political slogans is revealed: “Inclusion” remains a hollow phrase without substantive content. In reality, the ECB aims to secure control over central capital flows and, in the next eurozone debt crisis, to prevent capital flight to avoid collapse and drying up of financial flows.

Everything else is whitewashing written for the disinterested reader of the business section. Europe is heading inexorably towards centralism. The question remains: Will the monetary coup succeed, or will the eurozone collapse first? The legal framework is supposed to be in place by early 2026 before rollout begins. Realistically, a start is expected earliest in 2028, perhaps only in 2029. There is hope that such large projects usually fail due to bureaucratic inertia. So let’s stay optimistic. Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, an astonishing turnaround is taking place. The monetary policy direction of President Trump’s administration aims at the partial reactivation of the private money system. The legal framework currently being set up (GENIUS Act) gives commercial banks the possibility to issue their own stablecoins, i.e., digital dollars, thereby expanding the booming market currently dominated by Tether. Worldwide, over 500 million people already use this new form of money—a movement that seems unstoppable, regardless of how Europeans view it.

Every dollar stablecoin is backed by an equivalent amount of short-term US Treasury bonds as well as gold or Bitcoin, giving the US Treasury a convincing argument to actively participate in the spread of this technology—American government debt is literally being sold to the private sector.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

His voice has improved crazy much

10000 Vaccines at once

shiong
https://twitter.com/FredsFarm247/status/1954651790588432783

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1954925041402912925
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1954619712047919306

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 102025
 


John Waterhouse Diogenes 1882

 

Cold Hard Land, Cold Hard Bargain: Putin&Trump Head Off To Alaska (Poletaev)
Zelensky Rejects Trump-Putin Meeting to Formulate Ceasefire Terms (CTH)
Zelensky Trashes Trump’s Peace Terms (RT)
Zelensky Risks Angering Trump – NYT (RT)
Witkoff May Have Misunderstood Putin’s Demands – Bild (Pravda.ua)
Alaska Perfect Stage for Historic Summit: Putin Envoy Dmitriev (Sp.)
Risk of Sabotage of Putin-Trump Summit Is Real – Dmitriev (RT)
In Alaska Trump & Putin Could Lay Groundwork For End Of Ukraine Conflict (Sp.)
Trump Sending Vance To Discuss Ukraine With Europeans (RT)
European Backers Make Counter-Offer Ahead Of Alaska Talks – WSJ (RT)
NATO Targets Kaliningrad (Pacini)
Beijing Brushes Off Trump’s Tariff Threat (RT)
Tulsi Gabbard Is All Alone (CTH)
Bill Maher: Democrats Must Choose Sanity Over Wokeness (Margolis)
The Experts Bet Against Trump and Lost (Margolis)
Whistleblower Ties Clinton Campaign to Fake Russia Hack (Paul Sperry)
California Hospital Covered Up Surge In Stillbirths After Covid Shots (CHD)

 

 

https://twitter.com/officer_Lew/status/1953921928336400829

Jay
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1953985193921970535

Solomon
https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/1954134932026180057

Cartel
https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1953993015132852474

 

 

 

 

“Alaska showdown: Who really needs this summit more?”

Cold Hard Land, Cold Hard Bargain: Putin&Trump Head Off To Alaska (Poletaev)

Steve Witkoff’s visit to Moscow has marked a striking shift in American rhetoric. Just a couple of months ago, in June and July, Donald Trump was threatening the Kremlin with new sanctions and issuing ultimatums. Now the agenda includes a Putin-Trump summit scheduled for August 15 in Alaska. This 180-degree turn has been accompanied by leaks hinting at possible deals and a return to the “thaw” in relations we last saw in the spring. If the meeting goes ahead, the Russian president will come to it in a far stronger position than he did a few months ago. Back in the spring, Trump’s push for a peace deal looked like a personal whim, and the so-called ‘party of war’ and globalists still had cards to play: Senator Lindsey Graham’s sanctions package, fresh US arms deliveries to Ukraine, and the proposals floated by French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer about sending Western troops to Ukraine.

Now it looks as if Trump is the one coming back to Vladimir Putin – driven by the failure of his oil embargo. On top of that, there’s an appearance – an illusion, perhaps – that Putin is backed by a united BRICS front, something Trump’s own moves have helped bring about. Whether that front actually exists, or can survive for long, is another matter. But at this moment, one of Trump’s key pillars of leverage looks shaky, if not entirely knocked out from under him. The other pillar is the war itself. In February and March, the front lines were static, and Ukrainian forces were still holding a foothold in Russia’s Kursk Region. Kiev was touting its ‘drone wall’ project, billed as an impenetrable shield against the Russian army.

Since then, Ukraine has suffered a major defeat in the Kursk border area, and the summer offensive that followed has gone Moscow’s way – more decisively than at the same point last year. The much-hyped ‘drone wall’ turned out to be far less sturdy than promised. Kiev still clings to the hope of holding the line, but barely. Even the most pro-Ukrainian Western analysts now admit, in so many words: We don’t understand how they’re still hanging on. From the rhetoric of even the fiercest globalist hawks, it’s clear they know no amount of weapons shipments can reverse the battlefield trend – at best, they can slow it. That’s why the ‘party of war’ in the West, and Kiev itself, have suddenly taken up Trump’s earlier call for a cease-fire. Which means Trump now needs talks with Putin not because he personally wants peace, but because the battlefield realities are pushing him there.

Nobody knows how much longer the Ukrainian military can hold. From Trump’s point of view, the sooner he can lock in some kind of deal with Moscow, the better. And that urgency is another advantage for Putin. If the second round of talks collapses, he loses nothing: the Russian army can simply keep advancing until the Ukrainian front breaks – or until the next peace initiative with Washington, whichever comes first. Does Moscow have vulnerabilities? Yes – and the biggest is the economy. Even without the oil embargo, a surging ruble has blown a hole in the federal budget: by the end of July, the deficit had already reached 4.9 trillion rubles ($61.4 billion) – 1.1 trillion rubles more than the planned deficit for the entire year. But Russia’s financial buffer is strong enough that it can run shortfalls like this for years without crippling the economy.

Read more …

“No one will and no one can deviate from it. Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.”

Well, we saw a poll yesterday that said 69% (up from 20% in 2022) want peace talks. At least some of them must have been aware that could include giving up land.

Zelensky Rejects Trump-Putin Meeting to Formulate Ceasefire Terms (CTH)

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is once again rejecting any consideration for President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss terms for a ceasefire without his involvement. On a Twitter storm Saturday, Zelenskyy rejected the thought of giving any Ukranian territory to Russia in exchange for peace. “The answer to the Ukrainian territorial question already is in the Constitution of Ukraine. No one will deviate from this—and no one will be able to. Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier,” Zelenskyy said. President Trump announced that he would meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 15, in Alaska. Zelenskyy reacted, carrying the message from the global intelligence community who support the ongoing conflict, and does not like the idea of the USA and Russia determining the outcome for Ukraine.

Zelenskyy has banned opposition parties in Ukraine, taken control of media, targeted religious groups who he claims are subversive to his interests and cancelled elections in order to remain in power. Now Zelenskyy hides behind the claim of a constitution his regime modified in order to ensure he alone controls the pathways to peace. (Via NBC) – A defiant Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy declared Saturday that his countrymen “will not give their land to occupiers,” after President Donald Trump suggested that a peace deal would include some “swapping” of territories with Russia. “The answer to Ukraine’s territorial question is already in the constitution of Ukraine,” Zelenskyy said in a message on Telegram early Saturday. “No one will and no one can deviate from it. Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.”

It has been reported that Vladimir Putin’s ceasefire terms include Russia totally controlling the Donbas region. “WASHINGTON ‘ […] Under the proposal being floated by the Trump administration, Russia would agree to a freeze of the war along the contact line in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, where Moscow controls less land than in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, a person familiar with the matter told POLITICO. In return, Russia would be allowed to keep the Donbas, said the person, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy, as others in this article. U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff returned from a meeting with Putin earlier this week and told Trump that the Russian president had presented the terms under which the Kremlin would agree to stop hostilities in Ukraine, a White House official told POLITICO. The official declined to describe Russia’s terms, but Trump said land swaps between Russia and Ukraine are under discussion. (more)”

President Trump does not view a meeting with Putin as a concession.

Read more …

Zelensky yesterday:

“..the answer to the Ukrainian territorial question is already there in the Constitution of Ukraine”.

Hmm. Little birdie tells me that according to the same constitution, you are not the legitimate president of Ukraine.

Zelensky Trashes Trump’s Peace Terms (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky has rejected US President Donald Trump’s call for territorial concessions to Russia, claiming no such agreement would be accepted by the Ukrainian people. Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff visited Moscow this week and reportedly made significant progress toward a compromise aimed at ending the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The US president said the proposal includes “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” sides and that Zelensky would need to find a way to approve such a deal under Ukrainian law. In his regular video address on Saturday, Zelensky stressed that Ukraine’s borders are defined by its constitution and that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue.

“The Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupiers,” he proclaimed. Zelensky added that Ukrainians will only respect a “real, living peace,” warning that “any decision taken against us and without us, without Ukraine, would be a decision against peace.” Earlier this week, Zelensky acknowledged that Ukraine is not in a position to forcibly retake Russian territories claimed by Kiev. The Ukrainian military relies heavily on Western weapons, funding and intelligence. The government is counting on sustained long-term support.

Russian officials have repeatedly accused Zelensky of denying reality and prolonging a conflict he cannot win. Moscow says it intends to achieve its core national security objectives, preferably through diplomacy. The Ukrainian Constitution, which Zelensky cited, also requires a president to hand power to either a newly elected successor or the parliament speaker when their term ends. Zelensky did neither when his term expired last year, retaining power under martial law. Last month, Zelensky clashed with Ukraine’s foreign backers after his administration pushed through legislation eliminating the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, created in 2015 under Western pressure. However, he quickly reversed the measure after aid donors threatened to suspend assistance.

Read more …

“..Mr. Trump, who the newspaper noted previously criticized Kiev for being “not ready for peace.”

Zelensky Risks Angering Trump – NYT (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky could find himself on the wrong side of the US president after he publicly criticized Donald Trump’s remark about the potential need for Kiev and Moscow to swap territories in order to end the Ukraine conflict, the New York Times has claimed. Trump will be meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Alaska next Friday in a bid to find a way out of the conflict. Russia insists that the Lugansk People’s Republic, the Donetsk People’s Republic, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions all became part of its territory following referendums held in 2022. However, Moscow currently controls only the former in its entirety, with active hostilities continuing in the neighboring DPR. Russian forces have so far secured only part of the other two regions.

Additionally, the Russian military is in control of patches of land along the border in the Ukrainian regions of Kharkov and Sumy. In an article on Saturday, the NYT conjectured that Zelensky’s “blunt rejection” of Trump’s suggestion “risks angering Mr. Trump,” who the newspaper noted previously criticized Kiev for being “not ready for peace.” In his regular video address on Saturday, Zelensky stressed that Ukraine’s borders are enshrined in its constitution and that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue. “The Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupiers,” he insisted.

Earlier this week Zelensky acknowledged, however, that Ukraine is not in a position to forcibly retake Russian territories it claims. On Friday, President Trump said that a peace agreement between the two belligerents would likely involve “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” sides, but stopped short of providing any specifics. Following a meeting between President Putin and Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, in Moscow on Wednesday, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov told reporters that Washington had made an “acceptable” offer to Moscow, but declined to go into further detail. Moscow has long accused Zelensky of denying reality and unnecessarily prolonging a conflict he cannot win.

Read more …

“Russia is demanding the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from these oblasts, but Witkoff thought the proposal was for Russian troops to withdraw from there..”

Smells like Witkoff didn’t get it right. Russia can’t throw new territory to the wolves. Who would ever trust them after?

Witkoff May Have Misunderstood Putin’s Demands – Bild (Pravda.ua)

US President Donald Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff may have misrepresented Russia’s position on a possible ceasefire in Ukraine after he met with Vladimir Putin this week. Source: Bild, as reported by European Pravda

Details: Bild reports that Russia has not abandoned its demand for complete control over Crimea and Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk and Kherson oblasts prior to any ceasefire, and has only agreed to a “sectoral” ceasefire. However, in peace proposals leaked to the media Putin appeared willing to discuss a ceasefire after the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces only from Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

Bild’s sources say this could have been the result of Witkoff misinterpreting what Putin said about a “peaceful withdrawal” from Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts: Russia is demanding the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from these oblasts, but Witkoff thought the proposal was for Russian troops to withdraw from there. “Witkoff doesn’t know what he’s talking about,” the German tabloid quotes an anonymous Ukrainian official as saying. According to Bild, it’s an assessment shared by “representatives of the German government”.

Background:
Amid news of the upcoming meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska on 15 August, as well as media claims that Washington and Moscow want to reach an agreement to end the war in Ukraine that would lock in Russia’s occupation of part of the territories seized during its full-scale invasion, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that “the answer to the Ukrainian territorial question is already there in the Constitution of Ukraine”.

Read more …

“Yesterday,” the other “Tomorrow”.

“..the U.S. and Russia are just 2.4 miles apart between the Diomedes islands, divided by the International Date Line..”

Alaska Perfect Stage for Historic Summit: Putin Envoy Dmitriev (Sp.)

Kremlin aid Yury Ushakov earlier confirmed that a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US counterpart Donald Trump will take place in Alska on August 15. The head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and Russian special presidential envoy for economic cooperation with foreign countries, Kirill Dmitriev, called Alaska a “perfect stage” for a historic summit of the leaders of Russia and the United States. “Historic [Russia-US] summit in Alaska on August 15. Perfect stage: the U.S. and Russia are just 2.4 miles apart between the Diomedes islands, divided by the International Date Line (one is “Yesterday,” the other “Tomorrow”). Let us go from yesterday to tomorrow in peace,” Dmitriev wrote on X. He also called for developing Arctic ties between Russia and the US.

“President Trump announces a [US-Russian] summit with President Putin in Alaska. Born as Russian America—Orthodox roots, forts, fur trade—Alaska echoes those ties & makes the US an Arctic nation. Let’s [Russia and the US] partner on environment, infrastructure & energy in Arctic and beyond,” Dmitriev stressed. The Kremlin and the White House previously said Russian and US presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump would meet in Alaska on August 15. Alaska’s authorities told Sputnik that they did not know the exact location of the upcoming meeting.

Read more …

“Putin has said he is willing to meet the Ukrainian leader to finalize – but not negotiate – a truce.”

Note: Kirill Dmitriev, for Putin, is a bit what Steve Witkoff is for Trump. Witkoff is a real estate billionaire, Dmitriev heads the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF): both come from the world of finance. And they seem to push the political guys, Kellogg and Ushkanov, to the background.

Risk of Sabotage of Putin-Trump Summit Is Real – Dmitriev (RT)

Countries with a vested interest in prolonging the Ukraine conflict will likely go to great lengths to derail the planned meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his American counterpart Donald Trump, Moscow’s senior negotiator Kirill Dmitriev warned on Saturday. The two leaders are set to meet next Friday in Alaska, with a possible resolution of the armed conflict between Kiev and Moscow at the top of the agenda. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has already rejected any truce that would involve territorial concessions, despite Trump saying they would be part of the proposed deal. “Certainly, several nations that have a vested interest in prolonging the conflict will take titanic efforts (provocations and disinformation) to torpedo the planned meeting,” Dmitriev wrote on social media.

Dmitriev, who serves as Putin’s aide for international economic cooperation and heads Moscow’s efforts to normalize ties with Washington, was responding to remarks by former US Defense Department adviser Dan Caldwell. Caldwell said there was a “concerted effort to undermine” the summit, reacting to a Wall Street Journal article which he noted was based largely on Ukrainian and European sources. Earlier this week, US media claimed Trump was pressuring Putin to meet with Zelensky before agreeing to a face-to-face meeting with the Russian leader. Trump denied imposing such conditions, saying, “They would like to meet me, and I’ll do whatever I can to stop the killing.”

Moscow has called Zelensky’s continued claim to the presidency unconstitutional since his term expired last year. Putin has said he is willing to meet the Ukrainian leader to finalize – but not negotiate – a truce. He also suggested that the question of Zelensky’s disputed status needs to be addressed to ensure the legality of any future treaty. Dmitriev has previously described the upcoming summit as a historic opportunity and praised the venue, noting Alaska’s historical ties to Russia before its sale to the United States in the 19th century.

Read more …

‘Ok, everyone, listen up: this is the REAL meeting and as such the only two REAL actors with REAL power will be there..”

In Alaska Trump & Putin Could Lay Groundwork For End Of Ukraine Conflict (Sp.)

The upcoming Putin-Trump summit is going to be held in Alaska because it is a place with a “historical tie to both countries” and it is “out of the way’ enough to avoid inviting any third parties,” says Matthew Crosston, professor of national security and director of academic transformation at Bowie State University in the US. “To me, this is Putin and Trump saying, ‘ok, everyone, listen up: this is the REAL meeting and as such the only two REAL actors with REAL power will be there, namely Russia and the US’,” Prof. Crosston tells Sputnik. The choice of the summit’s location also highlights the recognition of Putin in the international arena, an acknowledgment of his “place on the world stage.”

As for the potential outcome of the summit, Prof. Crosston argues that any “immediate and substantial diplomatic achievement” should not be expected. “This does not mean, however, that the Alaska summit is a purely symbolic gesture carrying no real impact,” he points out. “More often than not in these situations the most significant outcomes appear publicly only some time later.” The Alaska summit will likely be the place where the groundwork for the resolution of the Ukrainian conflict is going to be laid out, so this is not just a formal ‘meet and greet’ event, he adds.

Read more …

Trump doesn’t want to talk to the Europeans. They don’t want peace.

Trump Sending Vance To Discuss Ukraine With Europeans (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance will meet UK Foreign Minister David Lammy and other European and Ukrainian officials in Britain as part of a renewed push for peace negotiations on the Ukraine conflict, Reuters reported on Saturday, citing a spokesperson for Downing Street. Vance’s trip seems intended to pave the way for a summit between the Russian and US presidents in Alaska on Friday, where resolving the conflict between Kiev and Moscow is expected to be at the top of the agenda. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has spoken to Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky ahead of the forum with Vance and the expected Putin-Trump meeting, according to the Reuters source.

Starmer and Zelensky discussed Trump’s proposals for a peace deal, the spokesperson said. “They agreed this [meeting in Britain] would be a vital forum to discuss progress towards securing a just and lasting peace,” he added. Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff visited Moscow earlier this week and reportedly made significant progress toward a compromise aimed at ending the fighting between Russia and Ukraine. The US president said the ideas under discussion include “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” sides, adding that Zelensky would need to find a way to approve such a deal under Ukrainian law.

Zelensky has rejected any such agreement, claiming that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue. “The Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupiers,” he proclaimed. Moscow’s senior negotiator Kirill Dmitriev has also warned that countries trying to prolong the Ukraine conflict will likely go to great lengths to derail the planned meeting between Putin and Trump. Another warning came from former US Defense Department adviser Dan Caldwell, who said there was already a “concerted effort to undermine” the upcoming summit.

Read more …

“..the “counterproposal” advocated a strictly “reciprocal” exchange of territory, and on condition that “ironclad security guarantees [be provided to Ukraine,] including potential NATO membership.”

Want to sabotage? Come up with what you know will be rejected.

European Backers Make Counter-Offer Ahead Of Alaska Talks – WSJ (RT)

A number of European nations have joined Ukraine to present their own “counterproposal” for a resolution of the conflict with Russia, the Wall Street Journal has reported, citing anonymous European officials. The plan was hastily drawn up after US President Donald Trump confirmed that he would be meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Alaska next Friday. The Journal said on Saturday that representatives of Ukraine, the UK, France, and Germany had “scrambled to respond” to a proposal reportedly floated following a meeting between US special envoy Steve Witkoff and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Wednesday. According to media reports, Ukraine would be required to cede all of the Donetsk People’s Republic to Russia as part of a peace agreement.

Moscow considers the DPR, as well as the Lugansk People’s Republic, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, to be part of its territory following referendums held in 2022. However, Russia presently controls only the LPR in its entirety. During a meeting on Saturday in the UK, chief aides to European leaders presented the joint plan to US Vice President J.D. Vance, as well as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, with Trump’s Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg and Witkoff joining via video link, WSJ reported. Kiev’s European backers insisted that a “ceasefire must take place before any other steps are taken,” the newspaper claimed. Moscow has consistently stressed that any peace process should proceed the other way round.

The publication said that the “counterproposal” advocated a strictly “reciprocal” exchange of territory, and on condition that “ironclad security guarantees [be provided to Ukraine,] including potential NATO membership.” The Kremlin has repeatedly described such a scenario as a red line. Also on Saturday, Zelensky insisted that Ukraine’s borders are enshrined in its constitution and that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue. His remark came after President Trump said that a peace agreement between Kiev and Moscow would likely involve “some swapping of territories.”

Read more …

“The officer acknowledged that NATO’s expansion towards Russia’s borders took place in the absence of a symmetrical military expansion on the Russian side..”

NATO Targets Kaliningrad (Pacini)

In recent days, there has been an intensification of rhetoric from several NATO member countries, which have made new accusations against the Russian Federation, claiming that Moscow is planning a military attack against Europe, scheduled, according to these statements, for 2027. These statements, which appear surprisingly coordinated, seem to reflect more a Western communication strategy than a real alarm about imminent threats from Russia. A significant development concerns the hypothesis, put forward by some Western military authorities, of a possible simultaneous offensive conducted jointly by China and Russia: Beijing through an invasion of Taiwan, Moscow with a direct attack on Europe. This thesis was explicitly expressed by the new NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, General Alexus Grynkewich, and subsequently supported by Polish government officials, such as the deputy prime minister and defense minister.

The emphasis on 2027 as a reference date appears singular. According to some interpretations, this insistence stems from internal NATO simulations that predict a possible collapse of Ukraine in that year, which could require the opening of new fronts to contain the Russian advance. Alternatively, this narrative could reflect an attempt to generate a larger-scale military crisis in order to ease Russian military pressure on Ukraine. The Russian region of Kaliningrad, which has recently been the subject of increasing attention and hostile rhetoric from Atlantic Alliance officials, is of particular strategic importance. General Christopher Donahue, commander of the U.S. Army for Europe and Africa, has publicly stated that NATO would develop a detailed plan for the conquest of Kaliningrad “in unprecedented times” in the event of a large-scale conflict with Russia.

This announcement is part of the broader “eastern flank deterrence line” strategy, which aims to strengthen the Alliance’s land capabilities, harmonize industrial production in the defense sector, and introduce standardized digital systems to facilitate operational coordination. According to Donahue, land capabilities are now becoming increasingly important, to the point where they can effectively counter so-called A2/AD (anti-access/area denial) strategies and enable power projection in the maritime domain. The implicit message emerging from this strategic narrative is that some of NATO’s statements and postures seem designed to provoke an armed response from Russia, which would allow the Alliance to characterize that response as “aggression” and thus justify its own escalation.

The key factor is timing: the year 2027 plays a perhaps highly symbolic role and, above all, is close enough to the implementation of the war plans that NATO has developed in recent years. There is one significant problem: the EU has planned rearmament for 2030, not 2027… Who teaches math to the Alliance’s generals? NATO needs the EU to fight this war. There is a communication problem in the secretariat. Perhaps it is time to change the reception staff. However, there are also those who do not share this view, such as Admiral Rob Bauer, former chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, who recently stated that a limited Russian attack on a Baltic state would not automatically trigger a military response from the Alliance, but would instead trigger a consultation process among member states.

The officer acknowledged that NATO’s expansion towards Russia’s borders took place in the absence of a symmetrical military expansion on the Russian side and even admitted that Moscow is increasing arms production beyond operational needs in Ukraine, suggesting a military reserve capacity for future scenarios. This, let’s be clear, is the most logical thing a country can do when it has an entire military partnership threatening it for decades… but NATO’s high command is incapable of seeing this.

Another factor frequently cited as justification for the Western escalation is the so-called Russian ‘shadow fleet’, a group of ships used to transport energy resources in circumvention of sanctions. Former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Landsbergis has claimed that the Russian “ghost fleet” numbers around a thousand naval vessels. Some analysts also argue that the small Baltic states are seen as potential “sacrificial pioneers” in an attempt to drag Russia into a wider conflict and prolong Western hegemony through widespread militarization. Bauer’s own words seem to suggest that a limited Russian attack would not trigger an automatic response, but rather an opportunity to intensify propaganda, increase military spending, and gain time to manage internal crises.

Read more …

“We will continue to take energy supply measures that are right for China based on our national interests.”

Beijing Brushes Off Trump’s Tariff Threat (RT)

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has dismissed US threats of additional trade tariffs over its purchases of Russian oil, saying Beijing will continue to act in line with its national interests. US President Donald Trump has targeted major buyers of Russian crude, including India and China, claiming such trade helps sustain the conflict in Ukraine. His administration has also promoted tariffs as a way to counter what it considers unfair trade practices by other countries. Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said Friday that Beijing’s partnership with Moscow remains “consistent and clear.”

“It is legitimate and lawful for China to engage in economic, trade and energy cooperation with other countries, including Russia,” Guo told reporters at a regular briefing. “We will continue to take energy supply measures that are right for China based on our national interests.” China and Russia have described their relationship as an unprecedentedly close strategic partnership rooted in mutual respect and compromise toward shared goals. Both have accused Washington of pursuing unilateral gains at the expense of others and seeking to derail the emergence of a multipolar world order.

India has also rejected Washington’s tariff pressure, calling it “unfair, unjustified and unreasonable.” Brazil, another major economy hit by the US tariffs, has criticized the measures as well. Trump has linked his late July move against Brazil to the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is accused of plotting to overthrow his successor, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Brazil, China, India and Russia are the founding members of BRICS, a group of large non-Western economies. Trump has accused the organization of trying to undermine the US dollar’s role as the global reserve currency, and has threatened to introduce punitive tariffs against its members.

Read more …

“..those who control power within the Oval Office keep Tulsi isolated and away from the President.”

Tulsi Gabbard Is All Alone (CTH)

The least understood issue right now, is how isolated and alone Tulsi Gabbard is on her mission to bring sunlight to the Intelligence Community weaponization and corruption.…”There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things”… The IC uses various media leaks and narrative engineers as the tools against their enemy; in this case DNI Tulsi Gabbard. The most common arrow in their manipulative quiver is the term “sources and methods.” The Washington Post notes how the Intelligence Community is upset about DNI Tulsi Gabbard compromising their ‘sources and methods’ by releasing the House Intelligence Report that deconstructed the Russiagate Intelligence Community Assessment. What has them so upset is Tulsi’s release of the House Intel report. This is the report that drove the FBI to raid Mar-a-Lago in an effort to retrieve it from Trump. This is the report that outlines how the CIA fabricated the Russiagate claims. Tulsi is being targeted for releasing this specific report. That tells you how important it is to the CIA.

“WASHINGTON DC – […] The document that Gabbard ordered released on July 23 is a 46-page report stemming from a review begun in 2017 by majority Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee. It takes issue with U.S. intelligence agencies’ finding earlier that year that Russian President Vladimir Putin developed a preference for Trump over Democrat Hillary Clinton and aspired to help him win the election.
[…] The House report is the most sensitive document the Trump administration has yet released, and details of how its publication occurred have not been previously reported.
[…] The document contains multiple references to CIA human sources reporting on Putin’s plans. Such sources are among the agency’s most closely guarded secrets. After the report was completed in 2020, it was considered so sensitive that it remained in storage at the CIA rather than on Capitol Hill.
[…] as the Trump administration prepared to release the report publicly, there were multiple versions of it circulating, some with more redactions to protect sensitive information, current and former U.S. officials said. Gabbard, who has led the administration’s effort to relitigate the 2016 campaign, pushed to release as much as possible, they said. “CIA put forward their proposed redactions and edits to the document,” said a person familiar with the process. Gabbard “has greater declassification authority than all other intelligence elements and is not required to get their approval prior to release.” Trump then approved the publication of the version from Gabbard’s office “with minimal redactions and no edits,” this person said.
[…] It is unclear exactly how Trump gave his approval, or if he examined the competing versions of the House report beforehand. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. (READ MORE)”

The HPSCI report release is what is driving the CIA bananas. Despite efforts by Donald Trump to declassify the HPSCI report before leaving office, the CIA never released it. No one except the internal Intelligence Community (CIA/DNI) had seen the HPSCI report until Tulsi Gabbard released it on July 22nd. This is a key point, because the HPSCI report touches on all of the other declassified evidence recently released. The authors of the HPSCI report had reviewed all of the same information John Durham reviewed. The HPSCI report walks through the entire construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment ordered by President Obama on December 6, 2016.

Arguably, because of the underlying evidence reviewed to produce it, the HPSCI report is the most critical of the declassified release in the last few months. The HPSCI report walks through the timeline, as the ICA was created between early to late December 2016. Do NOT forget. Tulsi Gabbard is essentially all alone on this mission of sunlight. Tulsi’s isolation is the one issue people do not quite seem to understand. Pam Bondi (AG) isn’t with her. Director Kash Patel (FBI) and Director John Ratcliffe (CIA) are not with her. Susie Wiles (CoS) is not with her. In all of these efforts DNI Tulsi Gabbard is all alone. The Israel-First media and activist group is also aligned against her.

If you doubt that’s the scenario, show me a single voice from inside the administration who stood up to (even gently) defend her when Tulsi was attacked about her position on the Iran nuclear capabilities. Tulsi is all alone. She is all alone on this mission and even physically all alone when on task within the administration. Watch for it and you can clearly see it. Once you see it, you cannot unsee it. This is not about President Trump per se’. The Office of the President is not a significant participant at the moment, and those who control power within the Oval Office keep Tulsi isolated and away from the President. However, if DNI Tulsi Gabbard turns against Palantir, she will be removed. Full stop. We saw those Palantir boundary rails surface when DNI Gabbard was not fully behind the bombing of Iran.

People argue against the power of the ODNI, saying the office is a functionary only. These are historically old arguments by people who do not fully understand the nature of the silo system. Yes, this is the typical viewpoint; however, readers on these pages will note that I have said repeatedly for years now, the DNI position can be used for powerfully good purposes. The DNI can look at anything in Washington DC. Anything, inside any silo. As noted by the angered WaPo, “Gabbard has greater declassification authority than all other intelligence elements and is not required to get their approval prior to release.” The DNI can look at anything in any silo and put sunlight upon it. Yet, people claim the DNI has no power. lol The ability to bring sunlight is power. Go Tulsi!

Read more …

“..urging his side to choose sanity before it’s too late, warning that the alternative is a permanent descent into madness..”

Bill Maher: Democrats Must Choose Sanity Over Wokeness (Margolis)

Bill Maher continues to carve out a unique position as a leftist who openly challenges the woke left from within his own party. As I’ve pointed out before, Bill Maher may be a leftist, but he’s spoken out repeatedly against the woke left, and that’s a good thing that I hope helps move the party away from crazy. It’s not working yet, but dare to dream. His critiques have been sharp and unrelenting, exposing the destructive elements that have taken hold in portions of the Democratic Party. Yet Maher’s disdain for the woke left is not just comic disdain; it’s rooted in a deep frustration with how the progressive wing is unraveling the party and the nation. Whether it’s calling out the ridiculous outrage over the Sydney Sweeney ads or admitting that President Donald Trump was right about tariffs, Maher has shown an ability to be honest about the issues without blindly following the party line.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1951495192185368991

Yes, Maher may be a leftist who hates Trump, but he recognizes that woke activists are destroying his party. Maher is not just mocking woke excess; he’s demanding a serious reckoning. His most recent monologue challenged Democrats to confront a fundamental question: Do they support the values of Western civilization? “The world is a complicated place, and it’s not just about oppressor and oppressed,” Maher said recently. “They have a thought in their head that white people did some very bad things — and white people did some very bad things — but so did everybody else in the world. But they don’t know that. They just see the world through this one prism. And until they do, I don’t think you’re gonna get them off this issue, and I don’t think the Democratic Party is gonna be able to go forward until they make a decision. Whose side are you on here? Are you on the side of Western civilization and Western values, or are you on the side of the terrorists?”

Maher zeroed in on intersectionality as the first wave of the woke “infection,” an idea that repackages historical grievances into racial hierarchy dogma that unfairly demonizes white people alone. Maher’s challenge to Democrats is radical in its clarity: it’s time to decide if you stand with the values that built the West or if you side with terrorists. He warned chillingly that many Democrats are only a step away from aligning with Hamas, with some already there. That is the stark reality Maher is laying bare. In his words, “Are you with those kids because, you know, Mandami, he’s the perfect candidate for them?” The warning here is not subtle. If Democrats continue to embrace the woke core that sympathizes with radical ideologies over patriotism and Western values, their collapse is assured.

Bill Maher cuts through the absurdity of the woke left’s claims. Whether you agree with his broader politics or not, Maher is signaling that the battle for the soul of the Democratic Party and America is no longer a game. It’s a choice between sanity and self-immolation. And so far, Bill Maher is shouting for sanity to prevail. Bill Maher slices right through the woke left’s nonsense with the kind of blunt honesty that’s becoming rare in his party. Whether you agree with his broader politics or not, he couldn’t be clearer: the fight for the soul of the Democratic Party and the future of the country are no longer a sideshow. We’ve reached a crossroads between common sense and political self-destruction. And right now, Maher is one of the loudest voices urging his side to choose sanity before it’s too late, warning that the alternative is a permanent descent into madness.

Read more …

“..nothing’s more dangerous than bad advice from people who never face the consequences.”

The Experts Bet Against Trump and Lost (Margolis)

For years, the self-anointed experts in economics have been catastrophically, almost comically wrong about Donald Trump’s tariff strategy. They were wrong during his first term, and he is proving them wrong again in his second. They didn’t just miss the mark; they weren’t even aiming at the right target. Now, with new data and landmark trade agreements in hand, the world has every reason to demand accountability from the academic class that branded Trump’s trade policies as reckless economic self-sabotage. Remember the parade of Nobel laureates and Ivy League economists lining up to denounce Trump’s tariffs as a singular threat to American prosperity? All those economic apocalyptic predictions that they repeated endlessly like gospel. They were wrong, and it’s about time they all admit it, don’t you think?

Economist John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, explained in the New York Post how the orthodoxy went from smug certainty to stunned confusion. And as he makes clear, it’s time those so-called experts learn to eat a little crow. As Lott notes, the anti-tariff hysteria never made logical sense. Experts from the right and left were quick to denounce Trump’s trade policy.

“On the left, Nobel laureate and Columbia professor Joseph Stiglitz declared in January that Trump’s policy was “very bad for America and for the world,” while University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers called it “impressively destructive.” On the right, prominent free-market advocates like George Mason’s Donald Boudreaux also voiced strong opposition. Yet their arguments against tariffs revealed a fundamental misunderstanding: They decried tariffs as uniquely harmful, while ignoring that the same logic applies to all taxes.

Take the common critique that tariffs, as a tax on trade, reduce trade overall. Phil Gramm and Larry Summers — one conservative, one liberal — jointly argued that tariffs “distort domestic production” by pushing resources toward less efficient uses. They warned that tariffs would slow economic growth.”

Critics love to warn that tariffs slow growth and hurt consumers. Fair enough, but so do all taxes. Sales taxes discourage spending, income taxes discourage work, and corporate taxes drive away investment. Every tax distorts the economy, and tariffs are no different. If you oppose tariffs just because they raise prices, you’d have to oppose every tax. With Washington spending $7 trillion this year, taxes aren’t going anywhere. The real goal should be minimizing the damage, and Trump understood that. Before his policies, the average U.S. tariff rate was just 2.5% — tiny compared to top personal income tax rates over 43% and corporate taxes around 27.5%. If tariffs can offset other taxes, they might lower the overall burden.

Experts painted tariffs as economic sabotage, ignoring that all taxes chip away at prosperity. They also swore that Trump’s tough tactics would kill trade deals. Instead, he opened markets once thought unreachable. Trump played hardball, and other countries blinked. The refusal to admit America’s leverage isn’t analysis; it’s just laziness. “Trump began with aggressive tariff threats, horrifying many economists — but the results speak for themselves. The United States has secured deals that dramatically opened foreign markets representing 55% of global GDP. Even critics have had to acknowledge the shift. “To avoid worst of Trump tariffs, [the European Union] accepted a lopsided deal,” the Washington Post conceded, while the London-based Financial Times described how the EU “succumbed to Trump’s tariff steamroller.”

The evidence shows that it’s time for a reckoning. The doomsaying economists who swore tariffs would trigger disaster were wrong: not just on the math but on the realities of power and negotiation. When tariffs can cut other taxes, open markets, and give America leverage, it’s worth reevaluating instead of parroting outdated talking points. But expecting these “experts” to admit it is like expecting the media to apologize for the Russian collusion hoax; it’s not going to happen. The lesson is simple: don’t outsource your common sense to the ivory tower. Trump’s tariffs weren’t a gamble; they were a masterclass in real-world leadership. And nothing’s more dangerous than bad advice from people who never face the consequences.

Read more …

“..It seemed only brief interaction was occurring – in some cases, no unauthorized access, or even attempted access, was detected on ‘victim’ systems.”

Whistleblower Ties Clinton Campaign to Fake Russia Hack (Paul Sperry)

A whistleblower report declassified last week suggests that Hillary Clinton’s campaign efforts to manufacture evidence tying Donald Trump to alleged Russian hacking in 2016 were deeper than previously known – as were Obama administration efforts to conceal them. According to the report, a former senior U.S. intelligence analyst who investigated alleged Russian attempts to breach state voting systems during the 2016 election suspected the breaches may have been “related to activities” of the computer contractors involved in the Alfa Bank hoax, who were accused of manipulating Internet traffic data. In that well-publicized case, a Clinton campaign lawyer worked with federal computer contractors and the FBI to create suspicions that Russia was communicating with Donald Trump through a secret server shared by Alfa Bank of Russia and Trump Tower in Manhattan.

The anonymous whistleblower – who served as the deputy national intelligence officer for cyber issues in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence from 2015 to 2020 – told Special Counsel John Durham he stumbled onto “enigmatic” data while leading the investigation of alleged Russian cyber activity for the Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian meddling in the 2016 election. He said that his discovery took place in December 2016 when President Obama ordered the ICA. After examining state-reported breaches of election networks, the whistleblower said, “It seemed only brief interaction was occurring – in some cases, no unauthorized access, or even attempted access, was detected on ‘victim’ systems.” Though the suspicious activity initially was attributed to Russian actors, further analysis raised doubts.

But when he brought his findings to his boss, ODNI’s national intelligence officer for cyber issues, he was ordered to stop investigating and not include his findings in the final ICA draft. “After being directed to conduct analysis of Russian-attributed cyber activity for the ICA, I had been abruptly directed to abandon further investigation,” the whistleblower analyst said. He added that his boss, whose name was blacked out in the whistleblower statement, “directed me to abandon analysis of these events, stating reports of Russia-attributed cyber activity were ‘something else.'” While the names of the whistleblower and his boss are blacked out in the report, a RealClearInvestigations search of federal records shows Vinh Nguyen was the national intelligence officer for cyber issues at the time. The whistleblower would have been Nguyen’s deputy.

The whistleblower’s 2023 complaint, declassified last week by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, also seems to contradict the recent claims of Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, and his CIA Director, John Brennan, among others that the ICA was a neutral document prepared according to the highest standards whose conclusions were widely supported by the intelligence community. The whistleblower said his supervisor also “pressured me to accept the ICA’s judgment of a decisive Russian preference for then President-elect Trump, and stated to me that he sought my concurrence as means to sway the position of” another intelligence agency. “I was pressured to alter my views on the key judgment,” he said. But, he added, “I could not concur in good conscience based on information available, and my professional analytic judgment.”

Read more …

“..the hospital averaged one fetal death per month, she said in the lawsuit. However, beginning in spring 2021, the number of stillbirths skyrocketed to about 20 per month, and remains at that level today..”

California Hospital Covered Up Surge In Stillbirths After Covid Shots (CHD)

A California hospital concealed data linking a “catastrophic surge” in stillbirths among women who received COVID-19 vaccines, according to a lawsuit filed last week in the Superior Court of California, Fresno County. Michelle Spencer, a nurse at Community Medical Centers’ (CMC) Community Regional Medical Center, said the hospital “deliberately and selectively” concealed from staff, patients and regulators a spike in unborn baby deaths that began in spring 2021, and retaliated against her when she publicized the information. The lawsuit also says the hospital concealed medical data related to the fetal deaths that showed a link to COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant mothers. The data include hospital-wide medical records documenting the number of stillbirths and the vaccination histories of those babies’ mothers.

One managing nurse at the hospital told a staff member that nearly all of the stillbirths occurred among vaccinated mothers. According to the complaint, Spencer “witnessed firsthand the exponential increase in unborn baby deaths directly correlating with pregnant women who received a Covid vaccine and then would deliver a dead baby a close number of days or weeks following their injection.” Spencer’s attorney, Greg Glaser, said: “The essence of this case is that the truth shall set you free. The hospital possessed vaccinated versus unvaccinated comparison data. The numbers proved the vaccines were causing miscarriages and more in the vaccinated group. “We know hospital management analyzed the data because they said so, and we see they concealed it from regulators because that file [requested by regulators] is empty.”

Children’s Health Defense is funding the lawsuit, which accuses the hospital of fraud, retaliation and unethical business practices. Spencer, who has been employed with the hospital since 2017, works in the antepartum, postpartum and labor and delivery units, all located on the hospital’s third floor. Before the COVID-19 vaccination rollouts, the hospital averaged one fetal death per month, she said in the lawsuit. However, beginning in spring 2021, the number of stillbirths skyrocketed to about 20 per month, and remains at that level today, Spencer said. The number is an estimate because Spencer can’t access the hospital’s full medical records.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Aphasia

IVM

Every dog needs this.

Bellamy

Click for the whole photo- worth it.

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 072025
 


Theo van Doesburg Counter-Construction 1923

 

Trump, Putin To Meet As Soon As Next Week In Potential Breakthrough (ZH)
Trump Tells Team To Arrange Putin Meeting ‘Fast’ – CNN (RT)
Marco Rubio Discusses Potential for Trump and Putin Meeting (CTH)
Ghislaine Maxwell Reportedly Cleared Trump’s Name In DOJ Interview (HUSA)
Zelensky Rejects Any Limited Ceasefire With Russia (RT)
Zelensky Rating Slumps – Poll (RT)
Ukraine ‘Doesn’t Belong Among Civilized Nations’ – Hungarian FM (RT)
Zelensky and the EU Increasingly Desperate Over The Inevitable Outcome (SCF)
Top Trump Officials Will Discuss Epstein Strategy (CNN)
FBI Burn Bags Had More Than Russiagate Files In Them (Margolis)
DNI Tulsi Gabbard Breaks Down Russiagate (CTH)
Ex-CIA Officer: Russiagate Deep State Operatives Still Work At The Agency (MN)
Trump Slaps India With Additional 25% In Tariffs Over Russian Energy Trade (ZH)
Sen. Adam Schiff Under Criminal Investigation For Mortgage Fraud (ZH)
The Lucky Continent? (Rabo)

 

 

 

 

Rubio

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1952839386032226316

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1953210757220581495

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1953144644247699556
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1953126714621522032

coup

scott

https://twitter.com/TheGabriel72/status/1953078954564436172

Taibbi

 

 

 

 

Steve Witkoff was at the Kremlin yesterday with somehing new to tell Putin (we don’t know what). Or there would not have been a meeting. Did Putin have a breakthrough idea? Hard to imagine. He for years now has had the No Nukes, No Nazis, No NATO standpoint, and that stands. Give up -new- territory? Once a piece of land has been declared part of Russia, you can’t just undeclare it. Besides, the people in the oblasts have voted to join Russia, and that is serious.

Russia didn’t want any of this when the SMO started in early 2022, Putin didn’t even want to discuss it for Crimea then. But things have changed. Russian(-speaking) people needed protection, and got it. Curious to see what the talks result in. That the US insists on bringing Zelensky along does not exactly help achieve peace. Same goes for the fully russophobe European NATO nations.

Trump, Putin To Meet As Soon As Next Week In Potential Breakthrough (ZH)

It appears the Wednesday Witkoff-Putin meeting in Moscow has led to a breakthrough of sorts, coming right down to the wire of threatened fresh US anti-Russia sanctions set to be imposed Friday. Presidents Trump and Putin plan to meet in person as soon as next week, the NY Times is reporting. A meeting with Ukraine’s leader would then follow. “President Trump intends to meet in person with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia as soon as next week, and he plans to follow up shortly afterward with a meeting between himself, Mr. Putin and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the plan,” the breaking report says.

There’s as yet been no indicators from the Russian or Ukrainian sides of the plan, or even that Moscow is aware of an ‘agreement’ to proceed with a meeting. According to more details: Mr. Trump disclosed his plans in a call with European leaders on Wednesday, the people said. The meetings would include only those three men, and would not include any European counterparts. The European leaders, who have tried to play a coordinating role on meetings to end the violence between Russia and Ukraine while supporting their European neighbor, appeared to accept what Mr. Trump said, one of the people familiar with the call said.

Anti-Moscow critics have said that the Kremlin is just buying more time with Washington while its military operations in Ukraine proceed at full pace. Will a breakthrough actually come of this? Trump has said of a fresh call with European leaders that they agreed with him that “the war must end” – but that it must be “an honest end”. There must be something substantial cooking if both sides agree to a meeting, which would be the first such face-to-face interaction between Trump and Putin of the US president’s second term.

Read more …

Russia has confirmed the plans now.

Trump Tells Team To Arrange Putin Meeting ‘Fast’ – CNN (RT)

US President Donald Trump has told his team to “move fast” to arrange a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, CNN reported on Wednesday. Putin proposed a direct meeting with Trump during talks earlier in the day with US special envoy Steve Witkoff, the news outlet said, citing two anonymous sources in the White House. The US president’s aides reportedly began planning for a potential summit immediately. Though these types of high-level meetings typically require preparation time, “Trump was urging his team to move fast,” CNN wrote. No location has been confirmed, but discussions could begin as early as next week, the outlet added.

Earlier in the day, Trump praised the outcome of the Putin-Witkoff talks, saying there is “a very good prospect” for a meeting between the Russian president and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. “There is a good chance there could be a meeting very soon,” he told reporters in the Oval Office. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated on Wednesday that this could come in the form of a trilateral summit involving Trump, Putin, and Zelensky, provided peace talks on the Ukraine conflict go well. The New York Times also reported that the US president intends to meet soon with his Russian counterpart.

Trump unveiled the plan in a recent phone call with European leaders, in which he announced plans to hold a trilateral summit alongside Putin and Zelensky after a one-on-one with the Russian leader, the NYT wrote on Wednesday, citing anonymous sources. Moscow has not yet confirmed any plans for a meeting. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said time is needed to normalize US-Russia relations before a summit can occur. Relations between Washington and Moscow fell to an “unprecedented level” under Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, leaving many points of contention, he told TASS on Wednesday.

Read more …

“Rubio added “a lot has to happen before that can occur.”

Marco Rubio Discusses Potential for Trump and Putin Meeting (CTH)

At the White House event with Apple CEO Tim Cook, President Trump said that “there’s a really good prospect that” there will be a meeting with Zelenskyy and Putin. But he disagreed with the suggestion it amounted to a “breakthrough.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio notes in the interview here, “an opportunity will present itself very soon for the president to meet both with Vladimir Putin and with President Zelenskyy at some point here, hopefully in the near future.” Rubio added “a lot has to happen before that can occur.”

Read more …

Pardoning Ghislaine would unleash a lot of anger.

Ghislaine Maxwell Reportedly Cleared Trump’s Name In DOJ Interview (HUSA)

Convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell reportedly told the Justice Department in a recent interview that she never observed President Donald Trump doing anything around her that “caused concern.” Maxwell was recently interviewed by the DOJ about roughly 100 people who were associated with her and her accomplice, deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. “Maxwell said nothing during the interview that would be harmful to President Donald Trump,” ABC reported, citing anonymous sources. “There is also an audio recording of the interview, the sources said, but it’s not clear whether the administration plans to release the audio to accompany any public release of the transcript,” the outlet added. “The public release of the transcripts could come as soon as this week.”

Maxwell was moved from federal prison in Florida to a cushier, lower-security camp in Texas after her DOJ interview. Maxwell was previously housed in the “honor dorm” of a low-security prison in Tallahassee, Florida. “Maxwell’s cushy new digs in D South – the so-called ‘honor dorm’ – are reserved for 30 to 40 of the low-security Florida lockup’s best-behaved prisoners,” the Daily Mail reported in March 2024. She has an appeal pending before the Supreme Court, and rumors are swirling that President Donald Trump may pardon her in exchange for information about his political enemies. A potential pardon would give Maxwell every incentive to clear Trump’s name – which is what she did, according to a Wednesday report from ABC News.

Read more …

“Moscow has also said a ceasefire could be possible if Ukraine halts troop movements, suspends mobilization, stops foreign arms shipments, and holds a presidential election.”

Zelensky Rejects Any Limited Ceasefire With Russia (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has rejected any limited ceasefire with Russia, insisting that Kiev will only agree to a complete halt in hostilities. His statement came in the wake of reports from Bloomberg that Moscow planned to propose a pause in air operations. Moscow and Kiev have agreed to several partial ceasefires since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Both sides have also accused each other of violating the agreements. Following a US-mediated 30-day agreement to pause strikes on energy infrastructure earlier this year, Moscow reported that Kiev’s forces had violated the truce over 100 times. Bloomberg reported on Tuesday, citing anonymous sources, that the Kremlin is considering offering an “air truce” during the visit of US special envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow this week.

The arrangement would reportedly involve halting missile and drone strikes but would not end ground operations. The proposal is expected to come amid US President Donald Trump’s threats to impose secondary tariffs on Russia and its trading partners unless a peace deal is reached soon. Moscow has not confirmed plans to propose any sort of limited truce. In a post on his Telegram channel, Zelensky wrote that Kiev supports only an “immediate, complete and unconditional ceasefire. ” We’ve already tried many different formats, he said, referring to proposals for “silence in the skies” and halts to energy sector attacks. He alleged that all such agreements were breached and urged further sanctions on Moscow.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Moscow favors a peaceful resolution and a “long- term, lasting peace” rather than a temporary truce. He has stressed that any settlement must address the “realities on the ground” and the root causes of the conflict. Russia has repeatedly called on Ukraine to recognize the loss of five of its former regions that joined Russia in public referendums, withdraw its forces from those territories, commit to neutrality, and limit its military capabilities. Moscow has also said a ceasefire could be possible if Ukraine halts troop movements, suspends mobilization, stops foreign arms shipments, and holds a presidential election. Kiev has rejected the terms as unacceptable.

Read more …

Still much higher than I would have guessed. Who’s doing the polling?

Zelensky Rating Slumps – Poll (RT)

Public trust in Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has dropped by 7% in about a month, according to a nationwide poll released on Wednesday. The apparent slump in popularity came after his controversial botched crackdown on the country’s key anti-corruption agencies. The survey by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), conducted from July 23 to August 4, suggests that trust in Zelensky stands at 58%, down from 65% in June. The poll says 35% of Ukrainians now say they do not trust Zelensky – an increase from 30% in early June. The drop in support was especially steep among respondents under 30, where trust fell by 15% – from 74% at the start of summer to 59% by early August, according to the poll.

The KIIS partially attributed the decline to Zelensky’s attempt to strip the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) of independence, citing Russian influence. Critics of the move accused Zelensky of having authoritarian tendencies, sparking protests at home and discontent in the West, given that many supporters of Kiev have for years demanded that it intensify the fight against corruption. Following the backlash, Zelensky was forced to roll back the reforms. KIIS stressed that although the controversy undoubtedly damaged Zelensky’s image, other factors are at play.

Of those who distrust him, only 6% cited the controversy as the reason, compared to 21% who pointed to overall corruption and 20% who say Zelensky is an inefficient leader during a time of conflict. The KIIS poll was based on phone interviews with 1,022 respondents across Ukraine. Last month, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) stated that US and UK officials had secretly met with their key Ukrainian counterparts to discuss ousting Zelensky and replacing him with former military chief Valery Zaluzhny. According to the SVR, the recent NABU and SAPO controversy was in large part engineered by Zelensky’s own officials to provide justification for the Western partners to seek his removal.

Read more …

“..Ukrainian draft officers were accused of beating to death a dual Ukrainian-Hungarian citizen.”

Ukraine ‘Doesn’t Belong Among Civilized Nations’ – Hungarian FM (RT)

Ukraine can have no place in the EU and “doesn’t even belong among civilized nations,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. His comments come after Ukrainian draft officers were accused of beating to death a dual Ukrainian-Hungarian citizen. Media reports emerged last month that 45-year-old Jozsef Sebestyen, who lived in Ukraine’s Zakarpatye Region – home to a large Hungarian minority – died as a result of injuries sustained when he was beaten with iron rods by recruitment officers. News of Sebestyen’s death sparked outrage in Hungary, where hundreds gathered outside the Ukrainian Embassy in Budapest to condemn the incident.

Budapest summoned Ukraine’s ambassador to issue a formal protest and called on Brussels to introduce sanctions against Ukrainian leaders responsible for Sebestyen’s death. Commenting during an episode of the Harcosok Oraja podcast which aired on Wednesday, Szijjarto said: “A country like that not only has no place in the EU – it doesn’t even belong among civilized nations.” Ukraine’s forced conscription, marked by beatings and even killings, is “state-institutionalized” and “state-executed,” Szijjarto claimed. He added that any civilized country would act immediately upon seeing footage of officers violently detaining people, and that those responsible would be swiftly arrested and jailed.

“So what happens in Ukraine instead? Everyone turns their heads, no one dares to talk about it,” the foreign minister concluded. The Ukrainian military has claimed that Sebestyen died of a medical condition and showed no signs of violence. Hungary, however, has requested that the EU impose sanctions on three Ukrainian officials involved in mobilization efforts. In addition to alleged human rights violations, Hungary has cited several reasons for its opposition to Ukraine’s bid for EU accession. Szijjarto has argued that Ukraine’s membership would weaken rather than strengthen the bloc, while Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban has repeatedly warned that it would bring war directly onto EU territory.

Read more …

“The Western rhetoric of “defending Europe” is a smokescreen used to justify the militarization of the continent and the artificial prolongation of the conflict.”

Zelensky and the EU Increasingly Desperate Over The Inevitable Outcome (SCF)

In yet another sign of Ukraine’s psychological collapse, President Vladimir Zelensky has once again openly advocated for the political destabilization of Russia. In recent speeches, Zelensky stated that only a regime change in Moscow could guarantee “security” for Europe and prevent future conflicts on the continent. In practice, this is a desperate attempt to keep the narrative of the “Russian threat” alive, even as it becomes increasingly clear that the West has lost control of its proxy war against Moscow. Zelensky proposes a two-step plan: deepen the seizure of Russian financial assets and intensify diplomatic and political efforts to bring down the current Russian government. His logic is simple—but completely flawed: according to him, even if the war in Ukraine ends, the “threat” will remain as long as Vladimir Putin is in power.

The proposal, however, ignores Russia’s internal political reality, where Putin enjoys broad popular and institutional support. In other words, what the West and Kiev are pursuing is a coup d’état disguised as a “democratic transition”. But any serious analyst knows that the political structure of the Russian Federation is solid and widely backed by its population. Putin’s recent re-election, with a strong majority and high voter turnout, confirms this. There is no internal base for an uprising against the Kremlin—nor is there any international legitimacy for such an operation. Moreover, Zelensky’s calls to use frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s war effort border on institutionalized looting. It is a flagrant violation of international law and economic sovereignty.

Confiscating the assets of citizens and companies based solely on nationality, then redirecting those resources to the war industry, reveals the level of moral and legal degradation that now dominates Western politics. Even more concerning is the fact that European leaders, such as Kaja Kallas, have already openly advocated for the fragmentation of Russia—a dangerously revanchist discourse reminiscent of the Cold War, which undermines any possibility of multilateral dialogue. The idea of breaking up the Russian Federation into dozens or even hundreds of “microstates” reflects an imperialist fantasy rooted in the darkest moments of European colonialism—and echoes remnants of the Nazi-fascist ideology that presupposes the creation of ethno-states.

Nonetheless, the obsession with “containing” Russia ignores a fundamental fact: there is no concrete evidence that Moscow intends to invade other European countries. The special military operation in Ukraine did not stem from any expansionist ambition, but from the need to protect the Russian population in Donbass and to curb NATO’s encroachment on Russia’s borders. After years of Western provocation and the genocide of ethnic Russians in what was then eastern Ukraine, Moscow chose to act. The Western rhetoric of “defending Europe” is a smokescreen used to justify the militarization of the continent and the artificial prolongation of the conflict.

In reality, Europeans are already feeling the economic and social consequences of this suicidal policy: inflation, an energy crisis, the erosion of civil liberties, and growing public dissatisfaction—manifested most recently in electoral results favoring illiberal candidates and parties, which were shamefully censored by European governments. The most rational path for Europe would be to distance itself from Kiev’s pro-war madness and adopt a foreign policy based on stability, sovereignty, and mutual respect. Unfortunately, European leaders appear fully aligned with a Russophobic agenda—even if it means plunging the continent into yet another decade of chaos. Zelensky does not speak for himself; he is merely the loudest voice of a failed project that insists on attacking Russia while Ukraine itself collapses economically, militarily, and politically.

Read more …

“Trump on Tuesday defended Blanche’s recent sit-down with Maxwell, arguing that Blanche wanted to ensure that people who “aren’t involved are not hurt” by something “very unfair.”

Top Trump Officials Will Discuss Epstein Strategy (CNN)

Top Trump administration officials will gather at the vice president’s residence Wednesday evening as they continue to weigh whether to publish an audio recording and transcript of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s recent conversation with Jeffrey Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. The administration’s handling of the Epstein case, as well as the need to craft a unified response, is expected to be a main focus of the dinner, three sources familiar with the meeting told CNN. The meeting will include White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, Vice President JD Vance, Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel and Blanche. With the exception of Vance, the White House considers those officials the leaders of the administration’s ongoing strategy regarding the Epstein files, two of the sources said.

The meeting comes as Trump’s administration is considering releasing the contents of Blanche’s interview last month with Maxwell. Two officials told CNN that the materials could be made public as early as this week. There have also been internal discussions about Blanche holding a press conference or doing a high-profile interview, possibly with popular podcaster Joe Rogan, according to three people familiar with the discussions, though those conversations are preliminary. Rogan, who endorsed Trump on the eve of last fall’s election, has been highly critical of the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein case and previously called their refusal release more information about Epstein a “line in the sand.” [..] Patel and Bondi have previously clashed over the administration’s Epstein strategy.

Meanwhile, CNN previously reported that the Justice Department has been digitizing, transcribing and redacting the interview materials as they weigh if and when to publicly release the information from the Maxwell interview. There is over 10 hours of audio, a senior Trump administration official said. Portions of the transcript that could reveal sensitive details like victim names would also have to be redacted, one of the officials said. One official told CNN that some of the conversation within the White House has focused on whether making the details from the interview public would bring the Epstein controversy back to the surface. Many officials close to Trump believe the story has largely died down. Trump on Tuesday defended Blanche’s recent sit-down with Maxwell, arguing that Blanche wanted to ensure that people who “aren’t involved are not hurt” by something “very unfair.”

On Wednesday morning, the family of Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre issued a statement asking why no survivors had been invited to the meeting at Vance’s home. They offered to attend in Giuffre’s stead, as she died by suicide earlier this year. “Missing from this group is, of course, any survivor of the vicious crimes of convicted perjurer and sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. Their voices must be heard, above all,” wrote Giuffre’s two brothers and sisters in law, Sky and Amanda Roberts and Danny and Lanette Wilson. Amid the clamor for more disclosures about the case, the House Oversight Committee on Tuesday issued nearly a dozen subpoenas to the Justice Department and high-profile Democratic and GOP figures for files and information related to Epstein — a significant show of defiance against Republican leaders.

Two of the administration officials said if they were to release the audio and transcript, it would likely be done sooner rather than later. One said the release could be several weeks from now, depending on what the most senior-level officials within the West Wing and Justice Department decide. It was not immediately clear whether the White House and DOJ were aligned on the issue. “This is nothing more than CNN trying desperately to create news out of old news. [Trump] already addressed this issue in an interview with Newsmax, a real news outlet that routinely gets better ratings than CNN,” White House Communications Director Steven Cheung told CNN, when asked about the possibility of releasing the transcript. Blanche interviewed Maxwell at the US attorney’s office in Tallahassee, Florida, last month over a period of two days. Maxwell was sentenced in 2022 to 20 years in federal prison for carrying out a yearslong scheme with Epstein to groom and sexually abuse underage girls. She has continued to appeal her conviction, including with the Supreme Court.

Last week, Maxwell was moved from a Florida federal prison to a lower-security federal prison camp in Texas, a relatively uncommon move as those convicted of sex offenses are almost always deemed too high of a risk to public safety. As Trump has faced mounting pressure from his base for transparency, the White House has repeatedly said the DOJ should release all “credible evidence” in the Epstein files. Asked about Blanche’s meeting with Maxwell last week, Trump again said he’d like to see everything in the files released. “We’d like to release everything, but we don’t want people to get hurt that shouldn’t be hurt, and I would assume that was why he was there,” Trump told Newsmax on Friday. The president said he hadn’t spoken to Blanche about his meetings with Maxwell and didn’t know when that information would be made public.

“I haven’t spoken about it, but he’s a very talented guy, Todd Blanche, and a very straight shooter, and I think he probably wanted to know, you know, just to get a feeling of it,” Trump said. CNN previously reported that a senior Trump administration official stated that the president is not currently considering clemency for Maxwell, though he has repeatedly left the door open on the matter in recent weeks, saying he’s “allowed to do it.”

Read more …

The Russiagate Files contained Epstein files.

Why any evidence in the burn bags of anything was not…well, burned, no idea.

FBI Burn Bags Had More Than Russiagate Files In Them (Margolis)

Last month we learned that FBI Director Kash Patel uncovered a hidden SCIF room at FBI headquarters — sealed off since the Comey era — stuffed with thousands of Trump-Russia documents and burn bags. Among the most damning finds? The classified annex to the Durham report. “Just think about this,” Patel said. “Me, as director of the FBI, the former ‘Russiagate guy,’ when I first got to the bureau, found a room Comey and others hid from the world in the Hoover Building — full of documents and computer hard drives no one had ever seen. They locked the door, hid access, and just said, ‘No one’s ever gonna find this place.’” But there was something else in those burn bags besides Russiagate documents. According to Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), materials tied to Epstein were among the contents found in the burn bags, and a formal investigation is now underway.

During an interview on “The Benny Johnson Show,” Rep. Luna dropped a bombshell: “I’m asking [the FBI] directly who authorized this information to be placed in burn bags and what information they have about the former deputy director of the FBI destroying evidence pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein, which we know right now the FBI is actively investigating.” She credited Johnson’s program with kickstarting the inquiry. “It was your show that kinda tipped me off to follow up with one of those whistleblowers, and now that’s a full-fledged investigation,” Luna said. Johnson sought clarification. “You’re confirming to us that the FBI has destroyed Epstein evidence?” he asked. “I’m confirming that there’s an open investigation, and that the leads on your show resulted in them finding burn bags pertaining to Russiagate and potentially Epstein, yes,” Luna replied.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1952745647821463844

The congresswoman tied the attempted destruction of Epstein-related material to a broader pattern of misconduct during the Bush-era DOJ and FBI. “The actual cover-up was in 2005, 2006, 2007 when Epstein was allowed to skate even though they had him dead to rights,” Johnson said, pointing to former FBI Director Robert Mueller and then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Luna didn’t dispute the timeline and said this was part of what she’s pushing to uncover. Beyond Epstein, Luna also alluded to the potential destruction of evidence tied to the FBI’s now-debunked Trump-Russia investigation. “Had Tulsi [Gabbard] not come forward with that information in regards to Russiagate… think about it: people using their positions of power to violate constitutional rights, civil liberties, go after people, spy. It can’t be tolerated in a free and fair society.”

Despite the disturbing implications, Luna expressed confidence that the current administration is making progress on accountability. “I’m just really happy to know that, under this administration, that people are being held accountable,” she said. She also noted arrests are being made behind the scenes. If proven true, the FBI’s attempted destruction of Epstein-related materials could mark a new chapter in the scandal — and raise even more questions about who’s protecting whom.

Read more …

Long interview. Miranda Devine used to mostly write, but has now become a “face”.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard Breaks Down Russiagate (CTH)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard appears for an extensive podcast interview with Miranda Devine. It may create ‘splodey heads in Washington DC, but DNI Gabbard is now positioned as the tip of the spear to penetrate the fraud, lies, schemes and manipulations of the Intelligence Branch of government. Tulsi Gabbard is the leading voice for honesty and sunlight against the entire DC apparatus that participated in the Russiagate construct.

Gabbard now understands how the DC silo system was weaponized during the manufacturing of information against a political candidate, Donald Trump. Gabbard is speaking truth toward a corrupt system, and she will be the target of all fury that’s dependent on the retention of the corruption. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard sits down with Miranda Devine to discuss, in her own words, Obama’s Russiagate plot to sabotage Trump, Hillary Clinton’s vendetta against her, and the evidence that could topple Brennan, Clapper, and Comey.

Read more …

It’ll take time to sweep all the agencies.

Ex-CIA Officer: Russiagate Deep State Operatives Still Work At The Agency (MN)

A former CIA operations officer has warned that Deep State operatives who concocted the fake Russia collusion narrative against President Trump under then Director John Brennan are still active inside the agency. Bryan Dean Wright told the Daily Caller that “At least two still do work there. That doesn’t mean that all of the other people have left. Those are just the two that I’m aware of.” nWright claims that One of the operatives still has a “blue badge,” meaning they are a direct CIA employee, while another possesses a “green badge,” and carries out work as a contractor. The Daily Caller notes that Wright declared in a recent op-ed that Brennan should “rot in prison” for treasonous plotting to undermine the integrity of the Republic. “These men thought they knew what was best for America, and they didn’t give a damn what voters like you thought,” the former spook asserted.

Wright further suggested that because Brennan worked at the agency for so long, he likely continues to shape the culture at the CIA and has almost certainly cultivated generations of like minded employees. As we’ve highlighted, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has officially handed the Department of Justice a criminal referral relating to the “treasonous conspiracy” by Brennan, other Obama officials and the former President himself outlined in Declassified documents. Further documents released by Gabbard have revealed that not only did the CIA believe a Russian intelligence assessment that the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign planned to smear Trump by linking him to the Kremlin, but that the FBI helped the Clinton campaign orchestrate the Russia hoax to distract from its investigation into her emails.

The declassified documents also show that the Clinton Campaign plotted to use Crowdstrike to push the claim that Russian hackers leaked information from the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). President Trump has admitted that he previously refrained from pursuing an indictment for Hillary Clinton, but believes now she should “pay a very big price.” A House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report declassified on July 23 has also shown that just five CIA analysts under Brennan wrote the 2017 intelligence assessment, which included the infamous fake Steele dossier, on which the Russia hoax was based.

The report notes that according to a CIA self-assessment declassified on July 2, the analysts were part of a “Fusion Cell” Brennan had put together months to explore Russian election interference. There are concerns that those agents remain embedded in the framework of the CIA. Current CIA Director John Ratcliffe proclaimed last week that Brennan, James Comey, Hillary and others face “serious legal consequences,” for their roles in the scandal, revealing that he has made additional referrals for criminal prosecution, building on those sent weeks earlier by Gabbard, including one about Barack Obama.

“We’re gonna continue to share the intelligence that would support the ability of our Department of Justice to… bring fair and just claims against those who have perpetrated this hoax and the American people and this stain on our country,” he said during a Fox News interview. On Sunday Ratcliffe described Hillary’s role in the Russia hoax and her efforts to frame Trump as the “greatest political scandal” in a lifetime. “There was Intelligence from foreign Intelligence services, that one U.S. presidential candidate was trying to frame another candidate for treason, claiming that he was an agent of a foreign power, an agent of Russia, and that Intelligence was never shared,” Ratcliffe urged.

Read more …

India gets blamed for Ukraine. Get serious. What do you say to that? Show it to me on a map?

Trump Slaps India With Additional 25% In Tariffs Over Russian Energy Trade (ZH)

Just as he warned yesterday, President Trump signed an executive order imposing an additional 25% tariff on India over its purchase of Russian energy, the White House said Wednesday hours after talks between the US and Russia over the war in Ukraine failed to yield a breakthrough. The accelerated tariffs – which will stack on top of 25% country-specific tariffs set to be implemented overnight – will go into effect within 21 days, according to the executive order signed by Trump. “They’re fueling the war machine. And if they’re going to do that, then I’m not going to be happy,” Trump said Tuesday in an interview with CNBC. This rhetoric was escalated in the initial paragraphs of the Executive Order:

“Executive Order 14066 of March 8, 2022 (Prohibiting Certain Imports and New Investments With Respect to Continued Russian Federation Efforts To Undermine the Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity of Ukraine), expanded the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 14024 of April 15, 2021 (Blocking Property With Respect To Specified Harmful Foreign Activities of the Government of the Russian Federation), to include the actions taken against Ukraine by the Government of the Russian Federation. To address that unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, Executive Order 14066 prohibited, among other things, the importation into the United States of certain products of Russian Federation origin, including crude oil; petroleum; and petroleum fuels, oils, and products of their distillation.

To deal with the national emergency described in Executive Order 14066, I determine that it is necessary and appropriate to impose an additional ad valorem duty on imports of articles of India, which is directly or indirectly importing Russian Federation oil. In my judgment, imposing tariffs, as described below, in addition to maintaining the other measures taken to address the national emergency described in Executive Order 14066, will more effectively deal with the national emergency described in Executive Order 14066.”

Accordingly, and as consistent with applicable law, articles of India imported into the customs territory of the United States shall be subject to an additional ad valorem rate of duty of 25 percent.” The reaction was immediate extended selling pressure in India ETF…

Read more …

“Pulte indicated potential violations of federal laws, including wire, mail, and bank fraud.”

Sen. Adam Schiff Under Criminal Investigation For Mortgage Fraud (ZH)

How does the old expression go? “When you point one finger at someone, three point back at you?” Sen. Adam Schiff – best known for dramatizing Trump’s Ukraine call during his first term, misidentifying evidence in texts, overstating “collusion” findings, and defending a FISA memo later found to contain false statements – is under criminal investigation for alleged mortgage fraud, according to a Trump administration source cited by Fox News. Laura Ingraham revealed the news on “The Ingraham Angle” last night, reporting that the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Maryland is conducting the probe. The investigation follows a criminal referral from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to the Department of Justice, according to Fox News.

FHFA Director William Pulte alleged that Schiff “has, in multiple instances, falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms,” which he said could endanger the stability of the U.S. mortgage system. According to the FHFA, Schiff and his wife purchased a home in Potomac, Maryland, in 2003, financing it with a $610,000 Fannie Mae-backed loan by declaring it their primary residence. However, Schiff also claimed a condo in Burbank, California, as his primary residence, even receiving a $7,000 California homeowner’s tax exemption. Fox News writes that in a 2011 affidavit, Schiff certified the Maryland property as his primary residence. The FHFA notes that this designation was reaffirmed in multiple refinancing filings through 2013, despite Schiff serving in Congress representing California.

A 2023 spokesperson said, “Adam’s primary residence is Burbank, California, and will remain so when he wins the Senate seat.” Another comment to CNN explained that both the Maryland and California addresses were listed as primary residences “because they are both occupied throughout the year and to distinguish them from a vacation property.” FHFA investigators and Fannie Mae’s financial crimes unit concluded Schiff showed “a sustained pattern of possible occupancy misrepresentation” across five loans. Pulte indicated potential violations of federal laws, including wire, mail, and bank fraud.

https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1952876848079114744

Read more …

“..on a per capita basis, Switzerland has already pledged a significant amount of investment into the US and Swiss multinational companies already have sizeable facilities in the country..”

The Lucky Continent? (Rabo)

While European equity markets ended the day on a slight positive note, the US market could not hold its opening gains and the S&P500 ultimately ended down some 0.5%. The US treasury curve flattened, led by front-end increases in rates (2y +5bp), following the significant steepening last week. European yield moves stayed within a narrow +/- 2bp range. The US trade deficit shrunk further in June, to $60.2bn, the lowest deficit since September 2023. Unsurprisingly it was yet another significant decline in imports – as tariff-mitigating frontloading activities faded – that drove that decline in the deficit. A prime example, again, were Swiss goods shipments, which showed a (seasonally adjusted) drop in US imports to $6.7bn from 13.4bn in May. That brings the US trade balance deficit even below its pre-trade war level and this suggests that we could start to see a reversal of the front-loading trade over the next few months.

That also means that the backlash is yet to come for exporting countries. So, even though the US-EU trade deal was slightly more favorable than we had accounted for in our projections for the Eurozone, the economy could still slip into a recession. But that would more likely still be more a technical contract rather than a real recession. Economists may have gotten a bit more clarity on the tariffs in recent weeks, especially when it comes to several big economies such as Japan and the EU (although questions remain). But for some other countries, the prospects remain far less certain (if that word still has any meaning). Case in point is India, which is still asking itself how to respond to Trump’s recent tirade and his threat of a substantial increase in the current 25% tariff on Indian exports, because of its “high barriers to trade” and its purchases of Russian oil.

So far, Modi’s government has been intransigent, arguing India is being unreasonably targeted by the US. The country is looking for ways to limit the economic damage, but Bloomberg reports that officials will continue to seek back-channel talks to ease the tensions. It remains to be seen whether India is willing to risk a significant escalation – like China was. Switzerland is in a similar crisis-fighting mode. After the surprise announcement of a 39% tariff on Swiss exports last Thursday, the country’s leaders have been frantically discussing alternative proposals to bend this rate, which is more than double the tariff the EU agreed with the US. The tariff will go into effect tomorrow, so Swiss President Karin Seller-Sutter flew –unsolicited!– to Washington yesterday with a “more attractive offer” in her bag.

Business minister Parmelin commented on Swiss public radio that the government needed to “fully understand what happened” between Swiss and US trade negotiators. Not too long-ago, reports had suggested that Switzerland could be one of the first countries to announce a deal with the US, after the UK. There was even some optimism that the tariff could be a low as 10%. That said, there is a clear difference between the British and Swiss trade relationships with the US. The UK has a modest goods trade deficit with the US. Switzerland, by contrast, has a buoyant surplus. This stood in the region of CHF 38.5bn last year, with chemical and pharmaceutical products being a key part of that. This contributed to Trump’s initial threat of a 31% tariff for Switzerland. It is not clear why that rose to 39% on August 1, but reports do point to a difficult phone call between the Swiss president and Trump last week.

There is speculation that Switzerland’s new offer could follow the blueprints of the Japan and EU deals, which include pledges to buy more American LNG and to invest more in the US. That said, on a per capita basis, Switzerland has already pledged a significant amount of investment into the US and Swiss multinational companies already have sizeable facilities in the country. Perhaps as a last-ditch effort may we suggest the Swiss President emphasize to President Trump that the “Trump Victory Tourbillon comes equipped with a Swiss-made TX07 Tourbillon”, as the Trump watch website advertises?

Our FX strategist, Jane Foley, notes that Swiss economic data and inflation have been relatively weak lately. Assuming Swiss politicians can negotiate a trade deal with the US with a baseline tariff closer to 15% this week, the probability of another rate cut this year – following the June cut – will likely diminish. That may give the CHF some support, and on this outcome we see scope for EUR/CHF to return to 0.93 near-term. However, confirmation of higher tariffs would likely lead to further upward pressure on EUR/CHF. The June high in the 0.9430 area may offer some resistance.

Remarkably some European officials are now even using the troubles nations such as Switzerland and India are facing to give a positive spin on the EU’s recent trade agreement. They argue that the US-EU deal may be better than deals some others have gotten or may get. Both sides are in the final stages of drafting a joint statement on their trade deal, which would essentially be a nonbinding rundown of what both sides have agreed to, according to those officials. One EU official also said that negotiators hope to have more news soon on the list of goods that will be exempted from the 15% tariff.

However, if the EU pushes too far, it may draw the ire of the US president, who already remarked that he will impose a 35% tariff on EU goods if the EU does not make good on its promise to invest an additional $600bn over Trump’s term. And note that the EU’s ‘commitment’ on that front is hard to steer, given that most of those investments should be done by the private sector (and if this implies factories moving from Europe to the US that would obviously weigh on European growth potential further down the line).

Read more …

 

 

 

 

5G

TX

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 012025
 


Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec Portrait of Vincent van Gogh 1887

 

US Could Offer Russia Enormous Economic Deal – Politico (RT)
Medvedev Mocks Trump’s ‘Nervous Reaction’ (RT)
Trump Says Medvedev ‘Entering Very Dangerous Territory’ (RT)
Trump and Medvedev’s Dangerous Exchange of Words (Scott Ritter)
Trump Raises Tariff On Dozens Of Countries, With Minimum Rate Of 10% (ZH)
‘Damage Has Been Done’: Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Czar Slams Zelensky (RT)
Whistleblower On Russia Collusion Hoax Threatened Over Reporting: ODNI (JTN)
Brennan, Clapper Downplay Steele Dossier’s Impact In Russiagate Investigation (JTN)
Declassified Durham Annex Confirms Hillary Clinton Plan To Smear Trump (ZH)
Declassified Document Links Russiagate Hoax To Soros (RT)
Zelensky Calls For ‘Regime Change’ In Russia (RT)
Germany and Rest of EU Transforming Into Fourth Reich – Lavrov (RT)
The EU Can’t Make Peace – Only Enemies (Bordachev)
Even If Obama Has Immunity, He Could Face Prosecution (Margolis)
MTG introduces Clean Skies Act Banning Weather Modification, Geoengineering (AmG)
RFK Jr. Drops Stunning New Vaccine Announcement (VF)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1950526910305292748

hillary

pelosi act
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1950615656803480020

flynn

tulsi
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1950966222641639721

 

 

 

 

Kalo mina. Let’s start today in left field. If Politico is even half right here, that would shift the earth. It’s just that Russia’s principles are not for sale. Still, how much of Trump knows his current course leads to something he absolutely doesn’t want, war with Russia?!

US Could Offer Russia Enormous Economic Deal – Politico (RT)

Diplomats in Eastern Europe have been raising concerns that US President Donald Trump could offer Moscow sweeping concessions and “enormous economic deals” to settle the Ukraine conflict, Politico has reported. In an article published on Thursday, citing Eastern European officials, US experts, and industry insiders, the outlet suggests that a Trump-led peace initiative might involve lifting sanctions on Russian energy – a move described as a “sledgehammer that could smash” Western efforts to isolate Moscow. “Of course, we are concerned about the talk of a return to Russian energy, and the lack of clarity about the US’ position,” an Eastern European official said.

Since the Ukraine conflict escalated in 2022, the West has imposed sweeping sanctions on Russia – with a heavy focus on energy – in a bid to cripple its economy and isolate it politically. The EU, once heavily reliant on Russian supplies, has sought to cut ties. However, Russia still accounts for 17.5% of its LNG imports, second only to the US, which holds a 45.3% share. In May, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed phasing out all remaining Russian gas imports by the end of 2027. The plan drew strong criticism from several member states. The EU has invested heavily in LNG infrastructure, linking terminals to Central and Eastern Europe, with countries such as Lithuania prepared to pay a premium for American gas over the cheaper Russian alternative.

However, Politico noted that Brussels’ latest $750 billion energy deal with Washington would require the bloc to slash purchases from other suppliers, including cheaper sources, and more than triple its US imports. Still, the economic pull of Russian gas remains strong. In Germany, some politicians have signaled an openness to resuming imports to revive the country’s struggling industry. Russian energy, the sources noted, remains more affordable than US supplies, once shipping and processing costs are factored in. Russia maintains it is a reliable energy supplier and has denounced Western restrictions as illegal under international law. Moscow has redirected most exports to ‘friendly’ markets, mostly in Asia.

Read more …

“If some words from the former president of Russia trigger such a nervous reaction from the high-and-mighty president of the United States, then Russia is doing everything right..”

Medvedev Mocks Trump’s ‘Nervous Reaction’ (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s angry comments toward Russian officials were a “nervous reaction” and are evidence that Moscow is pursuing the right path, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said. Medvedev was responding to a post by Trump on Truth Social hours earlier, in which the US president described him as a “failed” former leader and warned him to “watch his words,” adding that Medvedev was “entering very dangerous territory.” “If some words from the former president of Russia trigger such a nervous reaction from the high-and-mighty president of the United States, then Russia is doing everything right and will continue to proceed along its own path,” Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, wrote on social media.

He also ridiculed Trump’s claim that the Russian and Indian economies were “dead” and going “down together” due to lack of cooperation with the US. Medvedev had earlier dismissed Trump’s demands for Moscow to swiftly end its military campaign against Ukraine, calling the threats of secondary sanctions against Russian energy customers “theatrical” and ineffective. Medvedev insisted that such ultimatums will not prevent Russia from pursuing its national security goals and merely make Trump appear similar to his predecessor, Joe Biden.

Trump previously criticized the BRICS group of nations, which includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and several other states pursuing a new multipolar world order. The US president claimed proposed tariffs on countries doing business with BRICS members could cripple the organization. Trump’s statement regarding India and Medvedev followed New Delhi’s refusal to accommodate US demands on trade.

Read more …

I have no idea why Trump all of a sudden wants to address Medvedev.

Trump Says Medvedev ‘Entering Very Dangerous Territory’ (RT)

US President Donald Trump has issued a warning to former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, calling him a “failed” leader and cautioning him against combative rhetoric. Medvedev, now serving as deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, had earlier dismissed the notion that Trump, or any other US official, could dictate Moscow’s stance on the Ukraine conflict. His comments came in response to American calls for Russia to negotiate peace or face tougher sanctions. Trump fired back on Wednesday in a post on Truth Social, in which he vented frustration over resistance from Russia and India to his international trade agenda. He claimed both countries had “dead economies,” before singling out Medvedev.

“Tell Medvedev, the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he’s still President, to watch his words. He’s entering very dangerous territory!” Trump wrote. Medvedev responded, saying the “nervous” reaction by the American leader simply proved that Russia was right in its policy choices and should maintain its course. Earlier this week, Medvedev responded to remarks by US Senator Lindsey Graham, who warned Russia to comply with Trump’s demands for swift peace talks with Ukraine or face consequences. Medvedev retorted that “it’s not for you or Trump to dictate when to ‘get at the peace table.’”

Medvedev has criticized what he described as Trump’s “theatrical” ultimatums, warning that such pressure tactics only increase the risk of a direct conflict between the two nuclear powers. “Don’t go down the Sleepy Joe road!” he said, referencing Trump’s mocking nickname for former President Joe Biden. Russia continues to assert that it will meet all of its military objectives in the Ukraine conflict, whether by force or diplomacy. Officials in Moscow say a negotiated resolution is preferable but currently unfeasible due to what they describe as Kiev’s unreasonable positions and unwillingness to engage in good-faith talks.

Read more …

X post.

“..These missiles would be launched, broadcasting launch codes that would send all strategic nuclear force weapons to their targets, even if Moscow was taken out..”

Trump and Medvedev’s Dangerous Exchange of Words (Scott Ritter)

As the rhetoric heats up, we must remain cognizant of the consequences. The sharp exchange of words between President Trump and former President Medvedev underscores just how dangerous the deteriorating relations between the US and Russia have become. The threats being promulgated are not idle ones. President Trump has become enthralled with the Israeli “Nasrallah” solution—leadership decapitation and middle management disruption designed to bring about the rapid collapse of a government/system. It was tried—and failed—in Iran. But Trump is being advised by Russophobes who believe that the US can successfully implement such a plan against Russia. This plan begins with sanctions, as all such plans do. It ends with a decapitation strike on Moscow.

Trump’s imagined conversation with Putin, where he threatened to “bomb the sh*t out of Moscow”, is indicative of the President’s thinking in this regard. The preferred decapitation strike is done using B-52 bombers launching cruise missiles, accompanied by Trident missiles launched from Ohio-class submarines operating off the coast of Russia, allowing for a flatter trajectory flight and shorter flight time. Medvedev’s comment about the “Dead Hand” indicates that Russia is well aware of Trump’s plans. The “Dead Hand”, or Perimeter system, is a long-standing fail-safe mechanism/plan which guarantees a full-scale nuclear retaliation in case any nation is foolish enough to try a decapitation strike. It dates back to Soviet times, when a special regiment of SS-20 missiles was equipped with radio transmission devices instead of warheads.

These missiles would be launched, broadcasting launch codes that would send all strategic nuclear force weapons to their targets, even if Moscow was taken out. This wasn’t theoretical—in my book Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika, I write about how the Soviets transitioned this capability to the SS-25 system once the SS-20 was eliminated under the INF treaty. Today this mission is being handled by special regiment of SS-27 missiles. There are other components of the “Dead Hand”. Medvedev’s mentioning of it is a not-to-gentle reminder to Trump and his planners that it is suicide to think of a preemptive decapitation strike against Russia. Hopefully this message gets through. Otherwise, the “Walking Dead” allusion made by Medvedev will be the future of the United States and the world.

Read more …

Too many changes, too fast?! Who can keep up?

Trump Raises Tariff On Dozens Of Countries, With Minimum Rate Of 10% (ZH)

Almost 4 months after Liberation Day sparked a global market crash, moments ago T-Day finally arrived… and barely anyone noticed. Late on Thursday, just ahead of the August 1 deadline for tariff renegotiation, President Trump announced a slew of new tariffs, including a 10% global minimum and 15% or higher duties for countries with trade surpluses with the US, forging ahead with his unprecedented effort to reshape international commerce. First, the silver lining: baseline rates for many trading partners remain unchanged from the duties Trump imposed in April, which may ease investors’ worst fears – although with the S&P sitting at record highs it is difficult to claim anyone had any fears about anything – after the president had previously said they could even double. Yet Trump’s decision to raise tariffs on Canadian goods to 35% threatens to inject fresh tensions into an already strained relationship.

Trump signed the new tariff directive just hours before his prior Aug. 1 deadline for higher tariffs to kick in on scores of trading partners. As Bloomberg reports, most tariffs will take effect after midnight on Aug 7, to allow time for US Customs and Border Protection to make necessary changes to collect the levies. Taken together, the result will be significantly higher tariffs on goods from almost all US trading partners. The average US tariff rate will rise to 15.2% if rates are implemented as announced, according to Bloomberg Economics, an increase from 13.3%, and significantly higher than the 2.3% it was in 2024, before Trump took office. Major industrialized economies, including the European Union, Japan and South Korea, accepted 15% duties on their products, while charges on items from Mexico, Canada and China are even bigger.

Today’s announcement notwithstanding, Trump is expected to unveil separate tariffs on imports of pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, critical minerals and other key industrial products in the coming weeks. Other details are also forthcoming, including so-called “rules of origin” to decide which products are transshipped, or routed through another country, and thus would face at least a 40% rate, a senior US official told Bloomberg, adding that a decision will be made in the coming weeks. The senior US official said there is no date yet when revised auto tariff rates would be implemented. Thursday’s order was signed behind closed doors without the fanfare of Trump’s April tariff rollout, during which he brandished placards with rates during a Rose Garden event. Since then Trump has faced criticism for overpromising on trade deals after he and aides vowed to broker numerous agreements, with at least one pledging “90 deals in 90 days.”

In the end, imports from about 40 countries will face the new 15% rate and roughly a dozen economies’ products will be hit with higher duties, either because they reached a deal or Trump sent them a letter unilaterally setting import taxes. The latter group has the highest goods-trade surpluses with the US. Some of those were expected, such as a 25% levy on Indian exports that Trump announced this week on social media. Others included charges of 20% on Taiwanese products and 30% on South African goods. Thailand and Cambodia, two countries that were said to have struck a last-minute deal, received a 19% duty, matching rates imposed on regional neighbors including Indonesia and the Philippines. Vietnam’s goods will be tariffed at 20%, according to the WSJ. Trump’s deals with the EU, Japan and South Korea would lower duties on their vehicle exports to 15% from the general rate of 25%.

In a separate order, Trump followed through on his threat to hike tariffs on exports from Canada, one of the US’s largest trading partners, from 25% to 35% for goods that do not comply with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement. That change excludes goods that are covered under the North American trade pact he negotiated in his first term. That stood in contrast to the 90-day extension Mexico received to negotiate a better agreement. Earlier in the day, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he agreed to extend for 90 days the existing tariffs on Mexican goods. He said a 25% fentanyl tariff, a 25% tariff on cars and a 50% tariff on steel, aluminum and copper would remain in place. Still other nations are set to be hit with even higher tariffs. Trump has pledged to hike tariffs to 50% on Brazil over its digital policies and legal action against former President Jair Bolsonaro, a Trump ally.

The lower 10% and 15% rates are expected to apply to a wide range of mostly smaller- and medium-sized economies that Trump showed little interest in bargaining with one-on-one. He had signaled in recent days there were simply too many countries to cut individualized deals with all of them. Some smaller states, however, were hit with the highest rates, including Syria at 41%, as well as Laos and Myanmar and 40% each, both preferred hubs of Chinese transshipments. [..] One big exception from this week’s deadline is China, which faces an Aug. 12 deadline for its tariff truce with the US to expire. The Trump administration has signaled that is likely to be extended. No final decision has been made but the recent US-China talks in Stockholm were positive, the official said.

Read more …

If you give in to street protests, you’re found out.

‘Damage Has Been Done’: Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Czar Slams Zelensky (RT)

Ukraine’s top anti-corruption prosecutor has accused Vladimir Zelensky of severely undermining the country’s independent anti-graft institutions, warning that his U-turn – under pressure from protesters and Western backers – will not remedy the damage done. The remarks come following a wave of protests and widespread international criticism over Zelensky’s attempt to bring the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) under the authority of the executive branch, which he controls. Despite Zelenksy announcing a U-turn following threats of funding cuts from Brussels, the head of SAPO, Aleksandr Klimenko, has insisted that serious damage has already been done.

“Our work has been effectively stopped,” Klimenko said in an interview with the Financial Times published on Wednesday, explaining that the takeover triggered a collapse in cooperation from whistleblowers and raised fears of persecution among investigators. “Almost all of our whistleblowers stopped co-operating with us,” Klimenko stated. “The NABU team is currently confused and frightened because they understand they can be detained without sufficient evidence.” The move to place SAPO and NABU under presidential control – which parliament passed on July 22 and Zelensky signed the same evening – immediately sparked protests in Kiev, Lviv, Dnepr, Odessa, and other cities. Demonstrators demanded full restoration of the agencies’ independence, shouting slogans such as ”Corruption kills,” ”Treason,” and “Zelya is the devil.”

The public backlash and criticism from Kiev’s Western sponsors prompted Zelensky to submit a new bill, promising to reinstate full autonomy for the anti-corruption bodies. A parliamentary vote on the legislation is expected to take place on Thursday, but its passage remains uncertain due to wavering support within his own party. Klimenko revealed that ahead of the raid, SAPO and NABU were investigating corruption allegations involving 31 sitting lawmakers and 40 former MPs, including members of Zelensky’s ruling party. He suggested the attacks on the anti-graft bodies were likely motivated by attempts to derail these investigations. The SAPO chief explained that the anti-graft agencies managed to maintain their independence over the years “largely thanks to international partners – especially the Americans,” but once “interest and pressure waned, that’s part of why this attack was possible.”

Read more …

“..statements from a direct supervisor pressuring intelligence officials to endorse the ICA to receive a promotion..”

Whistleblower On Russia Collusion Hoax Threatened Over Reporting: ODNI (JTN)

A senior intelligence official, who was a whistleblower in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, was threatened over reporting wrongdoing, according to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. On Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released new documents that give a firsthand account of what the office say is the whistleblower’s “relentless efforts to expose the egregious manipulation and manufacturing of intelligence.” The documents include the whistleblower’s work done in the months leading up to the November 2016 election, their concerns about using “discredited information as then-DNI Clapper and Central Intelligence Agency Director Brennan worked to craft the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) at President Obama’s request,” and how a direct supervisor attempted to pressure them to endorse the key findings of the ICA about the Russian government’s alleged support for Donald Trump at the time, according to the office.

“Thank you to the brave Intelligence Community Whistleblower who courageously came forward to expose the truth about one of the biggest and most impactful scandals in our nation’s history,” Gabbard said in a statement. The documents include what the whistleblower alleges are statements from a direct supervisor pressuring intelligence officials to endorse the ICA to receive a promotion and concerns over flawed intelligence practices, such as choosing to use open-source references to Russian media as “evidence” for the Russian government’s support for Trump, but ignoring foreign media from other countries, including NATO allies, that supported Hillary Clinton and denigrated Trump.

According to the whistleblower’s records, then-DNI James Clapper and other senior Obama administration officials denounced the Steele dossier privately, but also ensured that the January 2017 ICA included it. The dossier was political opposition research on Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign compiled by British counterintelligence specialist Christopher Steele. The finding in the report that the campaign appeared to collude with Russia have now been debunked. The whistleblower reported their concerns to more than a dozen government offices including to the office of Justice Department special counsel John Durham, the intelligence community inspector general, a U.S. senator and other official whistleblower channels over the last six years.

Read more …

There are rumors circling that Brennan still today has intensive contacts inside the CIA.

Brennan, Clapper Downplay Steele Dossier’s Impact In Russiagate Investigation (JTN)

Former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on Wednesday hit back at the Trump administration over allegations they were involved in a treasonous scheme related to Russiagate. The Trump administration and Senate Republicans have recently declassified intelligence reports that allegedly reveal a plot by former President Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to falsely link President Donald Trump to Russia to distract from Clinton’s own classified email server scandal in 2016. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard earlier this month also stated that her office had “revealed overwhelming evidence that demonstrates how, after President Donald Trump won the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama and his national security cabinet members manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.”

The report released by Gabbard also alleges the December 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment glossed over evidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin may have favored (or at least fully expected) a Hillary Clinton victory nine years ago. Brennan and Clapper on Wednesday defended their investigation in an opinion piece for the New York Times, and claimed that the assessment was focused on Russia’s actions, not whether the country colluded with someone in the U.S. “The assessment made no judgment about the impact of Russian information operations on the outcome of the election,” the former intelligence officials wrote. “While some state and local electoral boards and voter information and registration systems were accessed by Russian intelligence, the assessment made clear that none of those types of systems were involved in counting votes.

“Russian influence operations might have shaped the views of Americans before they entered the voting booth, but we found no evidence that the Russians changed any actual votes,” they added. They also pushed back on the use of the now-discredited Steele Dossier in their investigation, stating that the dossier was “not a source or taken into account for any of its analysis or conclusions.” “We have testified under oath, and the reviews of the assessment have confirmed, that the dossier was not used as a source or taken into account for any of its analysis or conclusions,” the pair said. “At the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s insistence, a short summary of the dossier was added as a separate annex only to the most highly classified version of the document that contained the assessment. That annex also explained why the dossier was not used in the assessment.”

The duo additionally defended the validity of the 2016 intelligence assessment, arguing that even the bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence validated the assessment’s findings. The select committee included now Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “While some external critiques have noted that parts of the Russia investigation could have been handled better, multiple, thorough, yearslong reviews of the assessment have validated its findings and the rigor of its analysis,” the pair said. “The special counsel John Durham, who was appointed during Trump’s first term to investigate how the Russia probe was conducted, similarly found no evidence of an Obama administration conspiracy against Trump,” they continued. “But he affirmed the findings of the special counsel Robert Mueller, who conducted a separate investigation into the allegations, which found ample evidence of Russian interference in the election.”

The pair concluded by defending their efforts to keep the intelligence review under wraps, declaring that they knew any leaks about Russia’s meddling in the election would become “political dynamite.” “Despite claims by Trump administration officials of a nefarious political conspiracy, we did everything we could at the time to prevent leaks of intelligence reports, including Russia’s preference for Mr. Trump, a requirement that President Obama regularly emphasized,” they wrote. “We knew such reports would be political dynamite. And despite substantial reporting on the matter, we succeeded in preventing such leaks before the election.”

Read more …

The Durham Annex is a treasure trove.. Much more to come. Does make one wonder why so much was buried in an annex.

Declassified Durham Annex Confirms Hillary Clinton Plan To Smear Trump (ZH)

On Thursday, newly declassified documents reveal that not only did the CIA believe a Russian intelligence assessment that the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign planned to smear Donald Trump by linking him to the Kremlin, it’s clear that the FBI helped the Clinton campaign orchestrate the Russia hoax to distract from its investigation into her emails.

To review:
• Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard earlier this month declassified several documents – including a 2020 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) report and other intelligence communications revealing that the Obama administration “manufactured and politicized intelligence” to create a false narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.
• Gabbard’s releases highlight the inclusion of the Steele dossier – an unverified report funded by the Clinton campaign alleging ties between Trump and Russia – in the 2017 ICA as an annex. The hoax dossier was used to bolster the Russian interference narrative, despite CIA objections and its discredited status. The HPSCI report states that Brennan insisted on referencing the dossier, even though senior CIA officers warned it was flawed, with Brennan allegedly saying, “doesn’t it ring true?
• Gabbard has called these actions a “treasonous conspiracy” led by Obama, Brennan, Clapper, James Comey, Susan Rice, and others, aimed at undermining Trump’s presidency. She has referred the documents to the Justice Department and FBI for investigation into potential criminal implications.

And now we have the Durham annex… which includes a 2016 memorandum alleging that Russian intelligence knew of a Clinton campaign plan to tie Trump to Russian hackers. This memo claims the plan was designed to “distract the [American] public from the Clinton email server scandal.” Gabbard’s HPSCI report similarly references Russian intelligence claiming Clinton’s campaign discussed linking Putin to Trump.

• Clinton’s Approval of Smear Campaign: Pages 4 and 5 of the annex, highlighted in X posts, contain a 2016 memorandum alleging that Clinton personally approved a plan on July 26, 2016, to frame Trump with Russian hacking claims. • The memo suggests this was to distract from her email scandal, with coordination involving DNC leadership and outside groups.
Russian Intelligence Awareness: The annex confirms that Russian intelligence was aware of this plan, which aligns with Gabbard’s claim that the FBI and CIA had access to this information but pursued the Trump-Russia narrative anyway.
• No New Criminal Charges: Despite these allegations, Durham’s broader investigation (2019–2023) found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy among Obama officials to fabricate intelligence. He criticized the FBI’s handling of the Steele dossier and Crossfire Hurricane but did not charge Brennan, Clapper, or others named by Gabbard.

As ZH regular TechnoFog notes;

To briefly summarize, the Classified Appendix provided further information about the matters covered in parts of Durham’s report – specifically, those relating to Hillary Clinton’s plan to link Trump and Russia; the threat of foreign influence by a foreign government; and the Carter Page FISA application renewals. But the most material information covers the Clinton Plan, and provides further details on how that plan started, efforts by Clinton and her team to influence officials within the Obama Administration, and how the Clinton Campaign would use Crowdstrike to further their theory that the Russians hacked and leaked information from the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). The Smoking Gun(s)…

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1950940242401280278?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1950940242401280278%7Ctwgr%5Efd3b7c821c19fe93912eb2c9416995b1c9e80227%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fsmoking-gun-declassified-durham-appendix-confirms-hillary-clinton-plan-smear-trump-use

And as Michael Shellenberger notes, the CIA believed Russian memos mentioning a Clinton plan to smear Trump as a Russian asset: “The CIA prepared a written assessment of the authenticity and veracity of the above-mentioned intelligence. The CIA stated that it did not assess that the above [redacted] memoranda or [redacted] hacked U.S. communications, to be the product of Russian fabrications.” What’s more, other memos reveal that the plan was to have Crowdstrike and ‘ThreatConnect’ spin narratives to the media in the absence of actual evidence of Trump-Russia collusion. Stay tuned, things are getting spicier…

Read more …

“..Clinton’s foreign policy adviser Julianne Smith, who said the future Russiagate “will be a long term affair to demonize [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and Trump.”

Declassified Document Links Russiagate Hoax To Soros (RT)

A newly unclassified document suggests George Soros’ Open Society Foundation was involved in the effort by the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016 to falsely accuse then-candidate Donald Trump of ties to Russia. The document, a 29-page annex to John Durham’s 2023 Special Counsel report, was released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday shortly after it was declassified. It sheds more light on what Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) described as “one of the biggest political scandals and cover-ups in American history.” “Based on the Durham annex, the Obama FBI failed to adequately review and investigate intelligence reports showing the Clinton campaign may have been ginning up the fake Trump-Russia narrative for Clinton’s political gain… These intelligence reports and related records, whether true or false, were buried for years,” Grassley said in a statement.

The annex cites several emails allegedly sent by Leonard Benardo, senior vice president of Open Society Foundations, throughout July 2016, which provide details on the Clinton campaign’s plans to falsely accuse Trump of Russia links and tie him to the alleged Democratic National Committee (DNC) hack. Analysis by the Durham team concluded the Benardo emails “were likely authentic,” the annex states.“During the first stage of the campaign, due to lack of direct evidence, it was decided to disseminate the necessary information through the FBI-affiliated ‘attic-based’ technical structures… in particular, the Crowdstrike and ThreatConnect companies, from where the information would then be disseminated through leading US publications,” one of the emails reads.

Another email purportedly sent by Benardo states that the “media analysis on the DNC hacking appears solid” and suggests that “later the FBI will put more oil into fire,” apparently predicting the probe by the agency. It also cites an individual named “Julie,” identified in the annex as Clinton’s foreign policy adviser Julianne Smith, who said the future Russiagate “will be a long term affair to demonize [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and Trump.”

Read more …

“It’s time to confiscate Russian assets, not just freeze them..,”

Zelensky Calls For ‘Regime Change’ In Russia (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has called on Kiev’s Western backers to push for regime change in Moscow in order to “defend” themselves from alleged “Russian aggression.” The Ukrainian leader delivered his remarks during a conference marking the 50th anniversary of the Helsinki Accords, which emphasized equal and indivisible security for all. In an article published for the same occasion, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov argued that the West’s betrayal of those core principles was a key factor that led to the ongoing conflict. “I believe Russia can be pushed to stop this war… But if the world doesn’t aim to change the regime in Russia, that means even after the war ends, Moscow will still try to destabilize neighboring countries,” Zelensky said in his virtual address.

“It’s time to confiscate Russian assets, not just freeze them,” he added, urging Kiev’s sponsors to “put every frozen Russian asset… to work defending against Russian aggression.” Moscow has repeatedly dismissed speculation that Russia plans to attack the EU and NATO as “nonsense.” Lavrov said the EU is sliding into what he described as a “Fourth Reich,” marked by a surge in Russophobia and aggressive militarization, while President Vladimir Putin has accused Western states of deceiving their populations to justify inflated military budgets and cover up economic failures.

Russia has stated that it is ready to negotiate peace with Ukraine and has held several rounds of direct talks with Kiev in recent months. At the same time, it has accused Ukraine and its Western backers of lacking interest in reaching a long-term solution that addresses the root causes of the conflict and the territorial reality on the ground. Moscow has also raised concerns about Zelensky’s legal authority. His five-year presidential term expired in May 2024, but he has refused to call new elections, citing martial law. Russian officials have suggested that any documents signed under his name could later be challenged, insisting that the true power now lies with the Ukrainian parliament.

Read more …

“If they want to be part of the process, they must learn proper manners, abandon diktat and colonial instincts, and get used to equality and teamwork.”

Germany and Rest of EU Transforming Into Fourth Reich – Lavrov (RT)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has accused Germany and the wider European Union of sliding into what he described as a “Fourth Reich,” marked by a surge in Russophobia and aggressive militarization. The stark warning was delivered in an article published on Friday in the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the 1975 Helsinki Final Act on European security. Lavrov criticized the EU and NATO for betraying the core principles of the Helsinki process, which emphasized equal and indivisible security for all. Instead, he claimed that Western powers have pursued unilateral dominance, NATO expansion, and political interference in sovereign states under the guise of promoting democracy and human rights.

“Today’s Europe has completely plunged into a Russophobic frenzy, and its militarization is becoming, in fact, uncontrolled,” Lavrov wrote, citing German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s calls to build Europe’s strongest army and reintroduce conscription as evidence. He also pointed to recent remarks by Germany’s defense minister about the need to be prepared to kill Russian soldiers as further proof of a hostile and dehumanizing agenda. This brings historical events to mind. With their current leaders, modern Germany and the rest of Europe are transforming into a Fourth Reich. He argued that the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) has failed in its mission and has instead become a vehicle for Western propaganda and selective enforcement. He said the West ignored Russian calls for equitable security guarantees, and that NATO’s continued encroachment on Russia’s borders left Moscow no choice but to launch its 2022 military operation in Ukraine.

To defuse tensions, Lavrov called for “an honest dialogue” aimed at stabilizing the situation on the Eurasian continent through a new security framework based on sovereign equality and the principles of the UN Charter. “There will be a place for European countries within this architecture,” he wrote, “but they certainly will not be the ones calling the tune. If they want to be part of the process, they must learn proper manners, abandon diktat and colonial instincts, and get used to equality and teamwork.” Lavrov concluded by warning that if NATO and the EU continue to hollow out the OSCE’s core principles, the organization may collapse altogether, and history will remember those who “buried” the last chance for peaceful coexistence in Europe.

Read more …

“Europe is leaving the world stage in disgrace..”

The EU Can’t Make Peace – Only Enemies (Bordachev)

The most dangerous thing about Western Europe today is not just its decline, but its refusal to recognize it. The half-continent continues to posture, continues to lecture, and continues to imagine itself as a pillar of global order. But it has lost the internal resources that once sustained that illusion. What remains is a hollow echo of power, wrapped in a language of values that even those same Western Europeans no longer seem to believe. The region’s failure is most visible in its inability to make peace. Time and again, it chooses confrontation – with Russia, with China, with reality itself. Devoid of meaningful autonomy, it now functions as a permanent appendage of the US. It is no longer an actor on the world stage, but a supporting cast member, often unwelcome and increasingly irrelevant.

Western Europe’s descent has been rapid. Just 10 or 15 years ago, it projected global importance and confidence. Today, the cracks are impossible to ignore. The reasons are many: Elite degradation, political inertia, a population gripped by apathy. But above all, it is the bloc’s unrelenting selfishness – its refusal to give, only to demand – that lies at the heart of this collapse. Nowhere was this clearer than in last week’s failed EU-China summit. Eurocrats went to Beijing with nothing to offer, only with a desire to extract. China, which has no historical affection for Western Europe, responded accordingly. There was simply nothing to discuss.

And then, as if to underscore its strategic drift, the bloc offered a humiliating concession to the US. Faced with the threat of new tariffs, Brussels agreed to purchase American energy and weapons in vast quantities. So much for ‘strategic autonomy’. These are not signs of a serious power. These are the actions of a civilization on the back foot, stumbling blindly into dependence. Anyone still speaking of a sovereign EU industrial or defense policy is either a fantasist or a liar. What then does Western Europe have to offer the world? One might say historical symphonic music. But beyond that, its legacy is one of oppression and self-justifying tyranny. Its technical achievements were built to subjugate others. Its political philosophy was designed to defend conquest and exploitation.

Fifteen years ago, I sat in a closed meeting organized by Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign policy chief at the time. The topic: Western Europe’s new role in the world. The one suggestion they could not accept was that the bloc should offer something to the world without expecting a reward. Their worldview simply doesn’t allow for that. Even in climate change – a cause that should unite the planet – the EU has turned the issue into a cynical trade weapon, using green regulations to punish developing countries. The result? Western Europe stands alone. It has lost its power, and with it, its relevance. Worse, it doesn’t even seem to understand what it’s lost.

Can the region still pose a threat? Possibly. But not because it has the strength. Rather, because it has the recklessness. Its politicians lack vision, competence, or restraint. They cannot imagine peace. And so they default to confrontation – especially with Russia. The danger is not that Western Europe is ready to fight. Its people enjoy lives too comfortable to risk. Its defense industry is in disrepair. But wars can begin through stupidity as well as strength. EU elites, betting on regime change in Moscow, continue to pour weapons into Ukraine. Some dream of extending the conflict into the Baltics. Others talk of arming mercenaries to fight Russia directly.

The Americans won’t die for Europe. That much is clear. But the EU may yet drag the world into catastrophe, simply by being incapable of restraint. If by some miracle a wider war is avoided, what then? What is Western Europe’s future? A museum of irrelevance? A vassal of Washington? Already it is falling behind in science, in technology, in global influence. It doesn’t know where it belongs, and is incapable of adjusting. It will become a permanent satellite of the US – militarily, politically, and economically. Key industries will be handed over. National elites will lose the power to govern. The Collective West as we know it will vanish. In its place: America, and a few adjacent territories managed by obedient proxies. Perhaps this is what Western Europe deserves. It is certainly the path it has chosen.

Read more …

“Because of that immunity, he loses the ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment if he’s called before a grand jury..”

Even If Obama Has Immunity, He Could Face Prosecution (Margolis)

Barack Obama may soon be facing the consequences of a trap he helped set. As we previously reported, investigative journalist John Solomon told Steve Bannon last week that Obama likely won’t be indicted for his role in the Russiagate scandal despite the mounting declassified evidence tying him directly to the scheme. However, he may be wrong. As I’ve pointed out, Obama could indeed face indictment because the Supreme Court did not give presidents blanket immunity. The court ruled that “The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law.” Still, Solomon believes that while Obama may avoid formal charges, he’s far from out of legal jeopardy and could be facing serious trouble ahead.

Appearing on Real America’s Voice, Solomon laid out the real legal problems facing the former president. He echoed the widespread belief that the Supreme Court’s ruling shields Obama from prosecution for official acts performed as president. Solomon didn’t stop there. Even he knows that’s not the full story, and this time, neither immunity nor the careful spin of “official acts” will shield Obama from scrutiny. “However, Barack Obama can now be summoned before a grand jury. He cannot take the Fifth Amendment because he has immunity from prosecution. He’ll have to tell the truth. If he lies as a private citizen about what he did as president, he’ll no longer have that immunity.”

It’s an irony that hangs heavy, given Obama’s own tactics as president. “The irony of that is significant, because on Jan. 5, 2017, he presided over a meeting in the White House where the FBI had just cleared Mike Flynn of any wrongdoing. And they schemed in that meeting how they might be able to jam up Mike Flynn. They came up with the idea: ‘We’ll lure him into an interview, catch him in a lie, and then prosecute him that way.’ Barack Obama is now about to face a potentially similar situation—one he unfairly created for Mike Flynn.”

If we accept Solomon’s assessment that Obama has immunity that may keep him safe in the technical sense for official acts, it’s now a double-edged sword. Because of that immunity, he loses the ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment if he’s called before a grand jury to testify about what actually transpired in his White House during those fraught days—especially regarding the plotting against General Flynn. He’ll be compelled to answer directly, under oath. And if he lies, he is in legal jeopardy—the exact “trap” his own administration foisted on Flynn. I still think Obama isn’t protected because the Supreme Court indicated that not all acts by the president are official. Actions motivated by politics or personal vendetta don’t get the same constitutional shelter as legitimate actions. Nobody gets to walk free simply because they once held power. The Supreme Court’s ruling was a test, and Obama is about to find out just how limited immunity can be once he steps outside those constitutional boundaries. One way or another, justice may come for Barack Obama.

Read more …

Good on her. Got to start somewhere.

MTG introduces Clean Skies Act Banning Weather Modification, Geoengineering (AmG)

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has introduced the Clear Skies Act of 2025 calling for an end to what she calls the “dangerous and deadly practice of weather modification and geoengineering.” The bill, designated H.R. 4403, would prohibit weather modification through the use of geoengineering, cloud seeding, and solar radiation management through the release of chemicals into the atmosphere to change the weather, temperature, climate or to block out sunlight. If enacted, the law would punish weather modification violations as a felony with offenders facing up to $100,000 in fines and/or five years in prison for each violation.

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1949890795982496004?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1949890795982496004%7Ctwgr%5Ec12e17fa6e6532683cb2d5ac343102f5339b1e3d%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Famgreatness.com%2F2025%2F07%2F29%2Frep-greene-introduces-clean-skies-act-banning-weather-modification-geoengineering%2F

Greene says her bill is similar to Florida’s S.B. 56 which repeals the state’s ability to issue permits for geoengineering and weather modification and prohibits the injection, release, or dispersion of chemicals or substances into the atmosphere for the express purpose of altering weather, temperature, climate, or sunlight intensity. Under the Clear Skies Act, all existing federal authority and executive orders permitting weather modification would be repealed and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Justice (DOJ) would be directed to investigate and prosecute violations.

H.B. 4403 would also create a public reporting system that would allow Americans to report suspicious activity and which the EPA would be required to investigate. In announcing the Clear Skies Act Greene spoke of the need to protect the nation’s skies, waters and people from weather modification, saying, “It’s time to end this dangerous and unregulated practice.”

Read more …

“Over 39 years, the VICP has awarded just $5.4 billion to 12,000 victims. That comes out to about “1.2 awards per million doses administered.”

RFK Jr. Drops Stunning New Vaccine Announcement (VF)

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just took aim at a system that has failed Americans for nearly 40 years, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). This program was created under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which shielded vaccine manufacturers from lawsuits over injury claims. Before becoming HHS Secretary, Kennedy exposed how vaccine manufacturers were being hammered with lawsuits due to injuries. One of the largest manufacturers at the time, Wyeth (now part of Pfizer), reportedly told President Reagan: give us legal protection or we’ll stop making vaccines. Reagan’s response? Why not just make safer vaccines? Wyeth’s answer: Vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.”

That phrase—“unavoidably unsafe”—would later appear in a Supreme Court decision and reflects the legal premise that some vaccine injuries are inevitable. “And so, anybody who tells you vaccines are safe and effective, the industry itself got immunity from liability by convincing the President and Congress that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe,” Kennedy previously stated. Senator Edward Kennedy, a key sponsor of the law, wrote at the time: “When … children are the victims of an appropriate and rational national policy, a compassionate government will assist them in their hour of need.” That compassionate government never showed up. Over 39 years, the VICP has awarded just $5.4 billion to 12,000 victims. That comes out to about “1.2 awards per million doses administered.”

In a brand-new statement on X, Secretary Kennedy said he intends to FIX the broken system. He explained that the court was meant to resolve claims “quickly and fairly,” with “doubts about causation resolved in favor of the victim.” But that hasn’t happened. “The structure itself hobbles claimants,” Kennedy wrote. “The defendant is HHS, not the vaccine makers; and claimants are therefore facing the monumental power and bottomless pockets of the U.S. government represented by the Department of Justice.” He explained how Special Masters, who decide the cases, often come from government or political backgrounds and typically show a strong pro-government bias. “There is no discovery, and the rules of evidence do not apply,” Kennedy lamented.

He added that petitioners’ attorneys report retaliation, fee suppression, and even denied access to the Vaccine Safety Datalink, a taxpayer-funded CDC database containing the best data on vaccine injuries. Worse, expert witnesses for injured children have reported intimidation and threats to their careers, including the loss of NIH funding if they testify. But Kennedy says that era is over. “The VICP is broken, and I intend to fix it,” he wrote on X. “I will not allow the VICP to continue to ignore its mandate and fail its mission of quickly and fairly compensating vaccine-injured individuals.” Kennedy added that he is working closely with AG Pam Bondi and HHS staff to restore the court’s original mission and pledges to “steer the Vaccine Court back to its original Congressional intent.”

https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1950866812683407360

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1950715548259459211

werner
https://twitter.com/GenFlynn/status/1950885611147002295

lagarde

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.