Johannes Vermeer Woman holding a balance 1662-63
Newt
.@newtgingrich on President Trump: “The guy just keeps coming… this is a mythic figure, almost like the various Scandinavian Beowulfs and other kinds of sagas. There’s no practical way you can explain Trump within a normal political structure.” pic.twitter.com/5jbcXMGIXU
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) December 10, 2024
Judge+Sachs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866257322798100761
Putin
Living amongst the Russians, you realise just how offensive the Nazi symbolism is to them.
Putins' brother died of diphtheria during the Nazi Siege of Leningrad, his grandmother killed by Nazis in 1941, his uncles died fighting on the Eastern Front. pic.twitter.com/copYTB7Org
— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) December 9, 2024
Freak out
John Fetterman on how Dems should handle Trump: "If everything is a freak out, then people can just tune you out. … So, at some point, if you don't just pick your spots, then no one's going to just pay attention at that point."
He said he was going to wait to see if GOP can… pic.twitter.com/gaZCOOcaHn
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 9, 2024
Elon AI
“The other AIs being produced are not maximally truth-seeking; they tend to be trained to be politically correct. We need an AI that loves humanity, and that’s why I created xAI.”
一 Elon Musk
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) December 10, 2024
“..the first Democrat to join the House’s newly-formed DOGE caucus..”
• Pressure Mounts For Support Of Trump’s Cabinet Picks During Honeymoon (JTN)
President-elect Donald Trump seems to finally be enjoying the honeymoon period he didn’t get after his 2016 victory, with Democrats publicly expressing willingness to work with him on key initiatives and public polling showing broad approval of his plans. After winning the White House the first time, Trump didn’t experience the traditional polling bump and sense of public optimism that often comes with a new president. The post-2024 transition period, however, has been discernibly different. In a recent Rasmussen Reports survey, 55% of voters expressed the belief that Trump’s election win had given him a mandate to implement his agenda, while 32% disagreed and 13% were unsure. A separate Napolitan Institute survey, found that 53% approved of how Trump is handling the transition while 43% disapproved.
As he goes to war with some Senate Democrats and moderate Republicans over his Cabinet nominees, public support for his agenda seems to be giving him momentum to push through the controversial personnel picks who will implement it. Some Democrats, moreover, have expressed openness to specific nominees and interest in participating in some of his initiatives. The incoming commander-in-chief has repeatedly pointed to his landslide electoral victory that saw him carry both the Electoral College and the popular vote to support claims of a mandate for change. To that end, he has selected nominees for key departments with unconventional backgrounds and has rattled upper chamber lawmakers in doing so. The confirmation hearings won’t begin until January, but in the meantime, lawmakers face a pressure campaign from Trump supporters to get on board with his efforts.
Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., last week became the first Democrat to join the House’s newly-formed DOGE caucus, a group of lawmakers dedicated to trimming the size of the government and working with Trump’s planned Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). “I’ve been clear that there are ways we can reorganize our government to make it work better for the American people,” he said at the time. “The Caucus should look at the bureaucracy that the DHS has become and include recommendations to make Secret Service and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] independent federal agencies with a direct report to the White House.” Potentially driving lawmakers like Moskowitz to get on board with the DOGE agenda is public polling data suggesting it enjoys broad support. The Napolitan survey also found that 52% of Americans approve of the way Trump is managing the transition.
Some of the specific proposals from DOGE co-leaders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, such as bringing federal employees back to the office, have majority support. Fifty-seven percent of Americans backed requiring federal employees to cease remote work, while just 28% opposed the move in the Napolitan survey. Fifty-three percent backed firing those who refused to work in-person. Another 60% supported moving some federal agencies out of the Washington, D.C., area. The public is, at best, cautiously optimistic about DOGE’s prospects, even if they support its efforts. Only 45% think the new department can “easily eliminate” trillions in waste. Forty-nine percent think eliminating waste fraud and abuse will balance the budget.
At least some of Trump’s cabinet picks seem to have picked up support from upper chamber Democrats, notably Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., whom he tapped for Secretary of State. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., had positive words for the Florida Republican, as did other lawmakers across the aisle. “Unsurprisingly, the other team’s pick will have political differences than my own,” Fetterman said. “That being said, my colleague [Rubio] is a strong choice and I look forward to voting for his confirmation.” Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., moreover, has also expressed interest in Rubio’s potential confirmation. “I look forward to talking to him. You know, Marco Rubio, you have strange bedfellows, and you have strange alliances,” she said.
Fetterman also expressed openness to Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Oz and Fetterman squared off for one of the Keystone State’s Senate seats in 2022. Fetterman insisted he doesn’t have “any kind of bitterness” toward Oz and was “open to dialogue” on the issues relevant to CMS. To be sure, Democrats haven’t signed up to back some of his more contentious nominees. Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, R, had to drop his bid for Attorney General in the face of intransigent Democrats and moderate Republicans who refused to support him.Now, Defense Secretary-designate Pete Hegseth faces uncertain prospects as Democrats largely oppose him and some of the same Republicans concerned with Gaetz have not committed to his confirmation.
“A warrior whose vote cannot be bought, and whose integrity cannot be folded,” the letter reads. “We are honored to call her one of our own.”
• 250 Conservative Veterans Sign Letter Backing Tulsi Gabbard Nomination (Hill)
More than 250 veterans have signed a letter supporting former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), President-elect Trump’s nominee to be director of national intelligence. The letter offers a fierce defense of Gabbard’s “lifelong devotion to service” and blasts critics who call into question her loyalty. “We are appalled by the baseless attacks questioning Tulsi’s loyalty to our great nation. For over 20 years and across multiple combat deployments, Tulsi has risked her life to defend the safety, security and freedom of the American people,” the letter reads. “These attacks insult not only her, but every one of us veterans who have served our country.” The support comes as Gabbard faces growing scrutiny for her past comments on Moscow and her 2017 visit with the former Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad.
Gabbard — who served in the House for eight years as a Democrat — has made remarks about the Russia-Ukraine war that were sympathetic to Moscow and echoed by Russian state news, which has praised her nomination. In the Middle East, Gabbard visited Syria in 2017 and said Assad was not an enemy of the U.S. — though she later labeled him a “brutal dictator.” The remarks have gained renewed attention in recent days, as the Syrian government collapsed and Assad was driven out of the country by rebels. The letter comes days after a group of nearly 100 former national security officials issued their own letter about Gabbard, urging the Senate to “carefully scrutinize” the former congresswoman. They raised concerns about her experience level, her past comments and meeting with Assad, and that she has “publicly cast doubt on U.S. intelligence reports.”
“Her sympathy for dictators like Vladimir Putin and Assad raises questions about her judgment and fitness,” the letter last week read. The veterans, in their letter Monday, push back against “so-called ‘experts’ in Washington” who have criticized Gabbard, saying their attacks are “baseless lies and smears.” “Unable and unwilling to challenge the substance of her views, her critics resort to baseless lies and smears, exposing the weakness of their arguments,” the letter reads. “Tulsi’s patriotism, shaped on the battlefield, mirrors the values and aspirations of the American people far more than the failed policies of so-called ‘experts’ in Washington, who have been part of the problem for too long.”
The veterans praise Trump in the letter for selecting Gabbard as the nominee, saying, “As Director of National Intelligence, she will be a fearless reformer and a true patriot, ensuring that the intelligence apparatus serves the American people and protects our Republic.” “We are deeply grateful to President Trump for appointing Tulsi Gabbard to this critical role and proud to stand beside her—a leader whose courage and convictions we know firsthand. A warrior whose vote cannot be bought, and whose integrity cannot be folded,” the letter reads. “We are honored to call her one of our own.” The letter was signed by former acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, both of whom served for short periods of time in the first Trump administration. Reps. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) and Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) signed the letter, as did Rep.-elect Abe Hamadeh (R-Ariz.).
“They take something, then add anonymous sources, and contortions, and flat-out lies and then they try to try you in the media..”
• Pete Hegseth Lashes Out At Media ‘Smear’ Campaign (RT)
Donald Trump’s nominee to be US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, has accused the media of staging a libel-based show trial to prevent him from becoming the next Pentagon chief. The US president-elect’s naming of Hegseth has led to a series of negative news reports that have raised questions about his fitness for the job and likelihood of being confirmed by the Senate. Among the accusations leveled at the army veteran and television presenter are alcohol abuse and sexual misconduct. In 2017, then Fox News host Hegseth was accused of raping an unnamed woman after a Republican convention in California. Police investigated the claim and did not file any charges. It was reported recently that Hegseth paid the woman an undisclosed sum, and both parties signed a confidentiality agreement. In an interview with Fox News on Monday, Hegseth insisted that “the left” is trying to use the case to stage a show trial in the media.
”This is what the left does… It’s the anatomy of a smear. They take something, then add anonymous sources, and contortions, and flat-out lies and then they try to try you in the media before you can even get into the doors with senators,” he said.Hegseth went on to say that Trump urged him to “keep fighting” and “stand up for the change that needs to come to the Defense Department.” During his re-election campaign, Trump accused the Democrats of damaging America’s standing on the world stage and vowed to restore the country’s prestige under a “peace through strength” banner.Under the US constitution, presidential appointments to significant offices must be confirmed by the upper chamber of the US Congress, the Senate. Historically, the Senate has confirmed most nominations, with only three exceptions in the past 100 years.
Hegseth
Hannity: You were fully exonerated and correct me if I'm wrong here, wasn't there videotape evidence that was responsible for exonerating you?
Hegseth: In addition to personal witnesses and all of that, it was fully investigated at the time years ago. I was completely cleared. pic.twitter.com/KYkv7ZBuj1
— Acyn (@Acyn) December 10, 2024
“The most effective army is the one that the enemy does not want to face on the battle [field]..”
• Pete Hegseth Will Be Confirmed As Secretary of Defense, Predicts His Lawyer (JTN)
Timothy Parlatore, the attorney for Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth, on Monday said that he believes his client has enough support in the Senate to get him confirmed early next year. President-elect Donald Trump nominated Hegseth, a former Fox News host, for the position last month, but reports of allegations of sexual misconduct and heavy drinking have threatened to derail his confirmation. Parlatore said that the nominee has had some positive discussions with Republican senators in recent weeks that have focused on policy, which have helped them feel more confident in confirming Hegseth. The lawyer did not have a specific count for how many Republicans are now on board with Hegseth, but said his team was “feeling very good” about the numbers.
The attorney also said that Hegseth had a good discussion with Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, who described the conversation on Monday as “encouraging.” “I think that once … you kind of strip away all of the anonymous, you know, fake claims, then that gives him the opportunity to sit down with Senator Ernst and others and start talking about policy,” Parlatore said on the “Just The News, No Noise” TV Show. “Let’s talk about what we’re going to actually do to improve the Pentagon. And I think that that is one place where the two of them really have found common ground.” Parlatore said that some of the policy ideas that Hegseth has would get “politics” out of the Defense Department, and that he is focused on returning the department to military readiness and projecting a strong military to deter enemies from attacking. “The most effective army is the one that the enemy does not want to face on the battle [field],” Parlatore said.
“.. because the DOJ sought court approval ex parte to keep its surveillance secret, he wasn’t alerted until earlier this fall, six years after the initial subpoena.”
• DOJ Spied On Kash Patel, Staffers Without Telling Courts (JTN)
The Justice Department spied on two House members and and several congressional staffers in a leak investigation without telling the courts, the agency’s inspector general found in a sweeping investigation released Tuesday. As a result, the department obtained phone records from the two members of Congress and 43 staff members including President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel, who worked as a staffer on the GOP-led House Intelligence Committee at the time. The department initiated the probe to investigate leaks to the media of FBI classified information as part of the now-discredited Trump-Russia probe which had recently been shared with Congress.
Inspector General Michael Horowitz found that the Justice Department, in filings with the court, did not reference “the fact that they related to requests for records of Members of Congress or congressional staffers,” despite implicating constitutional separation of powers between two government branches. Patel, who is poised to become the new director of the FBI if confirmed, previously sued former Trump Justice Department officials and FBI Director Christopher Wray, accusing them of violating his Fourth Amendment right to protection from unreasonable searches and seizures when they tried to obtain Patel’s personal records, Just the News previously reported. Patel said he was completely unaware of the subpoena until December 2022, when Google notified him about it.
Another former staffer, Jason Foster, previously told Just the News that he confirmed that the government successfully asked a federal court to hide its spying on Congress for five consecutive years. Foster is now the head of the Empower Oversight whistleblower center. In 2017 at the time of the secret surveillance, he was the chief investigative counsel for Sen. Chuck Grassley on the Senate Judiciary Committee. The seizure of his personal data occurred in 2017 while he worked for the Senate, and ordinarily under the original court order, Foster would have been notified a year later. But because the DOJ sought court approval ex parte to keep its surveillance secret, he wasn’t alerted until earlier this fall, six years after the initial subpoena.
He should not be allowed to keep this hanging over Trump’s head.
• How Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg Plans To Keep Trump Case Alive (ZH)
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg – who had a Biden DOJ plant in his legal case against former President Donald Trump – is trying to ensure his hush money case doesn’t vanish into thin air as Trump prepares for his return to the White House. According to court filings revealed Tuesday, Bragg’s office is fiercely opposed to dismissing the case outright but is open to pausing proceedings while Trump serves his second term as president. The 82-page legal brief, prosecutors’ most detailed argument yet, stops short of recommending an explicit course of action but outlines several ways to keep the case alive. Among them: delaying sentencing until after Trump leaves office in 2029 or freezing the case while leaving the jury’s guilty verdict intact, The Hill reports.
“The extreme remedy of dismissing the indictment and vacating the jury verdict is not warranted in light of multiple alternative accommodations that would fully address the concerns raised by presidential immunity,” wrote Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy. The filing comes as Trump, now president-elect, wages a legal battle to quash the 34 felony charges stemming from hush money payments to an adult film star. Trump’s lawyers claim his status as president-elect grants him immunity and demands immediate dismissal. Prosecutors, however, aren’t buying it. They argue that immunity doesn’t apply until Trump is inaugurated, meaning the case could theoretically proceed to sentencing before January 20, 2025 — a prospect Trump has vowed to fight tooth and nail. Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over Trump’s trial, will now decide the case’s fate, with a ruling expected any day.
The DA’s office acknowledged the complications of prosecuting a sitting president but stopped short of saying the case should be completely shelved. Trump was convicted by a Manhattan Jury ‘of his peers’ on 34 counts of falsifying business records, however his reelection to the highest office in the land has put a damper on prosecutors’ plans. Sentencing was initially scheduled for last month, only to be postponed indefinitely by Judge Merchan, making it increasingly unlikely Trump will face punishment anytime soon. That would leave open the possibility that Trump could still proceed to sentencing in 2029, after he leaves office. Alternatively, state prosecutors said the judge could terminate the case without tossing Trump’s conviction, noting a jury verdict removed the presumption of innocence, he was never sentenced and his conviction was “neither affirmed nor reversed” on appeal because of presidential immunity. -The Hill
Trump’s legal team is crying foul, claiming the prosecution disrupts his transition efforts and his ability to govern effectively. “Wrongly continuing proceedings in this failed lawfare case disrupts President Trump’s transition efforts and his preparations to wield the full Article II executive power authorized by the Constitution pursuant to the overwhelming national mandate granted to him by the American people on November 5, 2024,” Trump’s attorneys fumed in a recent filing. Prosecutors hit back, accusing Trump of using delay tactics to muddy the waters. “Having filed those motions to dismiss and then sought repeated adjournments of sentencing to permit their determination by this Court, it is particularly brazen for defendant to argue that the Supremacy Clause bars the Court from taking any action on the motions defendant himself filed,” Conroy wrote.
“.. the judge had wanted the jury to convict Penny, but that jurors, who ride the subways, understood Penny acted to save others.”
• Giuliani Says Jury Verdict In Penny’s Case Is A Black Eye To Bragg (JTN)
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Monday night claimed that a New York City jury sent a strong message to the city’s ruling elite by finding Daniel Penny clear of any wrongdoing in the death of Jordan Neely. Penny, a former Marine, was acquitted by the Manhattan jury earlier Monday, after he kneeled on Neely’s neck on a subway last year, which prosecutors argued resulted in the man’s death. The jury was deadlocked on a more serious charge last week, which resulted in the charge being dismissed, but they only debated the lesser charge briefly on Monday before finding Penny innocent. Giuliani said that the verdict was a “shocker” given how fast it was reached, but that it was “great day … for justice.” He also claimed the judge had wanted the jury to convict Penny, but that jurors, who ride the subways, understood Penny acted to save others.
“The jury of New Yorkers, and they ride the subways and you can be the most left wing wacko [but] you ride the subways, you’re scared,” Giuliani said on the “Just The News, No Noise” TV show. “And Penny, they know Penny did the right thing. This is a person to person, human reaction above the heads of the fools that have run the city for so long. The crazy, silly, criminal-loving liberals.” Giuliani also said that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg should have resigned or been removed from office the second he claimed he would not prosecute people “for beating up cops” or “resisting arrest.” “He’s probably not prosecuted half the cases that come before him,” Giuliani said. “He’s responsible for any number of murders in New York, and beatings. There are probably seven to 10,000 criminals walking the streets of New York that would not [be] if I were the mayor or Mike Bloomberg and Ray Kelly.”
The former mayor added that Neely, who has a history of mental illness and had been arrested himself in the past, should not have been on the street to begin with. “The person who caused this is number one, the New York system, and then the people who didn’t deal with his mental illness,” Giuliani said. “Mr. Penny didn’t have anything to do with this. He just tried to save people. [Neely’s] father had years to try to save us from this guy, and didn’t do a damn thing.”
“..the regime of Vladimir Zelensky has completely lost its legitimacy and, as a result, its ability to be negotiated with.”
• Russia Close To Winning Ukraine Conflict – Spy Chief (RT)
Kiev’s military is now close to complete collapse, the head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), Sergey Naryshkin has said, adding that the current Ukrainian government has completely lost its legitimacy and is unfit for talks. In an interview with the Russian magazine Razvedchik (“Spy”) released on Tuesday, Naryshkin reiterated that the Ukraine conflict is essentially not a battle against Kiev but rather a struggle against the collective West, and that Russia’s freedom and sovereignty is at stake. The intel chief expressed optimism about Russia’s progress on the battlefield. “The frontline situation is not in Kiev’s favor. The strategic initiative in all areas belongs to us, we are close to achieving our goals, while the Ukrainian army is on the verge of collapse.”
According to Naryshkin, the regime of Vladimir Zelensky has completely lost its legitimacy and, as a result, its ability to be negotiated with.” The Ukrainian leader’s presidential term expired this past May, after he refused to hold a new election, citing the ongoing martial law. Russian forces have been making steady progress in recent weeks. Ukrainian commanders, meanwhile, have been complaining about a lack of manpower and exhaustion in their ranks, despite the draft age having been lowered from 27 to 25 and mobilization rules tightened this past spring. Moscow has said that its main goals in the conflict are Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification. It has also signaled that it is ready to declare an immediate ceasefire and begin peace talks as soon as Ukraine withdraws from all Russian territories, including Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye Regions.
If woke is the only identity you have left…
• Obstruction of Immigration Enforcement Could Prove Costly for Citizens (Turley)
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston recently became the latest Democratic leader to engage in a chest-pounding call to arms in resistance to the incoming Trump administration’s plan to deport people who entered the United States unlawfully. While a post-election poll by YouGov for CBS News shows that a massive 73% of adults want President-elect Donald Trump to prioritize the repatriation of illegal migrants, the mayor pledged to not only have Denver police “stationed at the county line to keep (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) out” but also that “you would have 50,000 Denverites there.” Johnston said it would be like a “Tiananmen Square moment” and answered yes when questioned whether he’d be ready to go to jail. That moment soon passed, however, as lawyers apparently explained to the mayor that armed resistance to the federal government is often called – wait for it – insurrection.
It appears that Johnston was not keen on becoming the Jefferson Davis of the left, so he backpedaled, stating, “Would I have taken it back if I could? Yes, I probably wouldn’t have used that image.” Yet, Johnston is not alone in pledging resistance to repatriation efforts. Cities are reaffirming or adopting sanctuary city status, including most recently Boston. The cities pledge to continue their ban on any cooperation with the federal government in detaining or removing unlawful migrants. Other mayors are pledging to use city funds to pay for the defense costs of those fighting deportation. The doubling down on sanctuary city promises will likely draw more migrants to those communities, which some mayors have welcomed despite the heavy costs of housing, education and other city services.
Immigration proved to be one of the top issues for voters in this year’s election, which brought control of both houses of Congress and the White House to the GOP. Citizens overwhelmingly supported new tough immigration measures, including deportations. With Democratic cities joining the “resistance,” they may find the costs even higher. Congress cannot compel cooperation without triggering constitutional concerns. In Federalist #46, James Madison recognized the right of state officials to oppose federal policies, including “the refusal to co-operate with officers of the Union.” In cases such as Printz v. United States (1997), which involved federal requirements that states cooperate on gun control measures, the Supreme Court enforced an anti-commandeering line that allowed states to refuse such federal orders.
However, this is a two-way street. Just as cities and states do not have to carry water for the federal government, the federal government does not have to supply the water to the states. The second Trump administration and Congress can play hardball by barring federal funds in various areas for these cities. With their status as sanctuary cities, housing, law enforcement and social programming costs will continue to rise. Many of those budgets are heavily infused with federal funding. However, if cities resist or frustrate federal policy, there are ample reasons why the federal government might restrict funding. Such measures can go too far. The Supreme Court has warned that financial penalties can be so coercive that they effectively commandeer states. However, the federal government is not required to spend money on services where costs are rising at least in part because of resistance to federal law.
Under constitutional law, the federal government cannot be a bully, but it does not have to be a chump.It’s clear that elected leaders like Johnston did not think very long or well before starting a war with the incoming administration. In addition to the possible loss of federal funds, acts of resistance can trigger criminal liability if they amount to actively shielding or hiding unlawful migrants sought by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Under federal immigration law, it is a felony when anyone in “knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation.”
That is not triggered by a simple refusal to cooperate, but some officials have been accused of crossing the line, including state judges. It also could endanger private groups that work closely with these cities in housing and transporting unlawful migrants. Moreover, as I wrote recently, Trump can cite a curious ally in this fight: Barack Obama. During the Obama administration, the federal government largely triumphed over states in barring their interference with federal immigration policies. Back then, Democrats supported President Obama in claiming that the federal government had overriding authority on immigration in cases like Arizona v. United States. The pressure on cities could grow if the Trump administration prioritizes members of violent gangs such as Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) or Tren de Aragua for deportation. To resist those efforts would be politically unpalatable in cities dealing with crime associated with such gangs. It could take years to hash out these efforts. However, if Denver’s Mayor Johnston is any measure of the resistance, the chest-pounding may decline when the federal funding dries up.
“Last year, only 13 senators voted against the Military Industrial Complex and a defense budget full of waste and fraud. That must change.”
• Bernie Sanders Says Musk Is Right On Military Spending (JTN)
President-elect Donald Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency has energized Republicans, but it’s also receiving attention from some liberal lawmakers, including Bernie Sanders. Sanders, the independent from Vermont, wants to help Trump’s DOGE, which is co-led by Tesla CEO Elon Musk and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy. Sanders has his eye on the U.S. military budget. “Elon Musk is right,” Sanders wrote on X. “The Pentagon, with a budget of $886 billion, just failed its 7th audit in a row. It’s lost track of billions. Last year, only 13 senators voted against the Military Industrial Complex and a defense budget full of waste and fraud. That must change.”
Sanders’ comments come before the U.S. House is set to vote on a compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes nearly $900 billion to support U.S. military service members, infrastructure, and defense capabilities during the 2025 fiscal year. The 1,813-page document released Saturday by the Senate and House Armed Services Committees outlines U.S. defense policy priorities and their costs for 2025. Most of the proposed funds, $849.9 billion out of the $895.2 billion topline, would go to programs within the Department of Defense. Ramaswamy and Musk wrote in a November op-ed that the military is on their list. “The Pentagon recently failed its seventh consecutive audit, suggesting that the agency’s leadership has little idea how its annual budget of more than $800 billion is spent,” they wrote.
The U.S. Department of Defense’s annual audit once again resulted in a disclaimer opinion. That means the federal government’s largest agency can’t fully explain its spending. The disclaimer this year was expected. And it’s expected again next year. The Pentagon previously said it will be able to accurately account for its spending by 2027. Musk has gone even farther in his criticism of military spending. He called the military’s most expensive ever project, the F-35 stealth fighter, “obsolete.” “The F-35 design was broken at the requirements level, because it was required to be too many things to too many people,” Musk wrote on X. “This made it an expensive & complex jack of all trades, master of none. Success was never in the set of possible outcomes. And manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones anyway. Will just get pilots killed.”
In May, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found the cost of the Pentagon’s most expensive weapon system was projected to increase by more than 40% despite plans to use the stealth fighter less, in part because of reliability issues. The U.S. Department of Defense’s F-35 Lightning II is the most advanced and costly weapon system in the U.S. arsenal. It’s a joint, multinational program that includes the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, seven international partners and foreign military sales customers. The Pentagon has about 630 F-35s. It plans to buy about 1,800 more. And it intends to use them through 2088. DOD estimates the F-35 program will cost over $2 trillion to buy, operate, and sustain over its lifetime. The Pentagon hasn’t responded to Musk’s comments. Late last month, a reporter asked Defense Department Press Secretary Air Force Major General Pat Ryder about Musk’s comments on the F-35.
“Yeah, as I’m sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently a private citizen, I’m not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35.” Trump set lofty goals for the new group. “It will become, potentially, ‘The Manhattan Project,’ of our time,” Trump’s announcement said. “Republican politicians have dreamed about the objectives of ‘DOGE’ for a very long time.” The original Manhattan Project was a research and development project during the second World War that led to the creation of nuclear weapons. Ramaswamy and Musk have previously outlined their plans for DOGE, which could include mass federal layoffs and reductions in federal regulations. Musk and Ramaswamy said they won’t rely on action from Congress and will instead “focus particularly on driving change through executive action based on existing legislation rather than by passing new laws.”
There will be another accident. And then?
• Boeing Reportedly Restarts 737 Max Production (ZH)
Boeing has reportedly resumed production of its 737 Max aircraft at its Renton factory in Seattle, Washington, a little more than a month after a seven-week strike by 33,000 unionized factory workers concluded with a new contract. This marks a critical step in the company’s recovery efforts during a particularly turbulent year. Reuters was the first to report on Boeing’s restart of production of its best-selling commercial jet. According to three sources familiar with the situation, production at the Renton factory resumed last Friday. “Production resumed on Friday, said one of the sources, who all spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak with media. Boeing declined to comment.” -RTRS. Analysts at Jefferies forecast that Boeing will likely average around 29 737 Max jets per month in 2025, falling far short of the company’s pre-restriction goal of 56.
Earlier this year, the FAA capped 737 Max production at 38 per month due to safety vulnerabilities within Boeing’s production line at Renton. Two Max crashes, Covid travel downturn, supply chain snarls, financial challenges, and multiple Max jet incidents — including a door panel blowout on an Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9 — have been mounting headwinds for the struggling planemaker. On top of this all, a seven-week strike sent the company to the brink of a devastating stall. The good news is that Boeing is under new leadership, with newly appointed CEO Kelly Ortberg dismantling disastrous DEI initiatives and shifting the focus to safety as the era of wokeism comes to an abrupt end. As of mid-November, Goldman’s Noah Poponak and Anthony Valentini still had a “Buy” rating on the planemaker with a 12-month price target of $200.
“Our 12-month price target of $200 is derived from targeting a 4.5% free cash flow yield on 2026E free cash, discounted back one year at 12%. Key risks: (1) the pace of air traffic growth, (2) supply chain ability to ramp-up production, and (3) contract operating performance within the defense segment,” the analysts said. Shares of Boeing were up 1% to $158 handle in premarket trading. However, on the year, shares were down 40%. Shares have been locked in a multi-year lateral between $100 and $250 following the Max jet crashes. FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker recently told Reuters that he wouldn’t be surprised if it took the company a couple of months to ramp production at Renton to the FAA’s production limit.
“[Elon] Musk put the GEC on the map in March 2023, when he deemed it to be the “worst offender in U.S. government”..
• State Dep. Scrambles To Scuttle $100M Censorship Network Before Trump (ZH)
The State Department revealed in a Monday filing that they are “substantially likely” to shut down their $100M Global Engagement Center (GEC), which was revealed in early 2023 to have been funding a “disinformation” tracking group which worked to pressure advertisers to demonetize outlets it accuses of spreading “disinformation.” Except, they’re really just “realigning” the “Center’s staff and funding to other Department offices and bureaus for foreign information manipulation.” The move comes amid a lawsuit from Texas AG Ken Paxton and several conservative media outlets listed a GEC-funded “dynamic exclusion list” of websites it doesn’t like, which it would then distribute to ad tech companies – such as Microsoft’s Xandr – in order to try and “defund and downrank these worst offenders,” and deprive said sites of ad revenue.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1864036564579561767
As Headline News’ Ken Silva notes further; it’s unclear how the GEC’s closure will affect the lawsuit. Monday’s court filing said lawyers for all parties are still discussing the implications. [Elon] Musk put the GEC on the map in March 2023, when he deemed it to be the “worst offender in U.S. government” when it comes to censorship and media manipulation. According to revelations from the “Twitter Files”—a trove of internal records about the censorship decisiosn made within the social media company—the GEC funded groups such as the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, which in turn compiled blacklists of Twitter accounts that were supposedly tied to foreign disinformation campaigns. The Digital Forensic Research Lab sent those blacklists to Twitter so that the company could deactivate the accounts listed.
Federalist senior legal correspondent Margot Cleveland further revealed in April 2023 that the GEC marketed anti-conservative censorship products to private-sector tech firms. Cleveland also noted that the GEC apparently worked with infamous FBI Agent Elvis Chan, who was revealed in the Twitter Files to be in constant touch with the social media firm about censorship issues. Despite those scandals, Democrats had been pushing to renew the GEC’s $100 million budget before it expires at the end of the year. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who drafted the original legislation in 2016 that led to the GEC, argued last year that the censorship network was crucial to counter foreign disinformation. “There’s no way to combat Russian and Chinese misinformation without the GEC,” Murphy insisted.
The Russians weren’t going to save Assad yet another time. Cost/benefit.
• Putin-the-Unready Is Beginning to be Held Accountable (Paul Craig Roberts)
John Helmer’s December 8 report from Moscow substantiates my conclusion that the Russian government’s inability to acknowledge reality, instead relying on agreements with Russia’s enemies, results in failure . In Ukraine by trying to minimize conflict, the Kremlin maximized conflict. In Syria relying on diplomatic rather than military means resulted in a massive strategic defeat for Russia and Iran. The Middle East, where the correlation of forces were moving against US/Israeli dominance, has been lost to Greater Israel and US control of oil flows and waterways. From Moscow John Helmer reports that recriminations are running high for Putin’s loss of Syria. And it is not only Putin who is being held accountable but also the commanders of Russia’s forces in Syria, head of the General Staff General Valery Gerasimov, Russian military intelligence (GRU), and the Defense Ministry.
They are all damned for failure to detect, warn, and act to prevent the Israeli-American-Turkish overthrow of Assad and the Syrian government. The same group of failures are damned for failure to prevent the Israeli air force from preventing the resupply of Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards from providing reinforcements. Putin, like American presidents, puts the defense of Israel before the interests of his own country. Putin is so fearful of offending Israel that he constantly refused to provide his Syrian ally air defense from Israeli attacks. Now that Putin and Lavrov, essentially two 20th century American liberals, have brought a massive strategic defeat down on their heads and Iran’s, Russia’s last remaining Middle East ally, it is likely that Netanyahu and Trump’s Zionist appointees will behave more aggressively against Iran and Russia.
The Zionist are on a roll, having reversed their declining fortunes in one fell swoop while again Putin sat on his butt. As much as I admire Putin, he is certainly not proactive, or sometimes even aware, and thus lacks the leadership ability that a leader of a threatened country needs. Putin would be perfect in peace time, but he is not up to dealing with an existential threat. Putin and Lavrov are too fearful of offending someone to be able to act. I don’t know how far the recriminations will go. But if Washington should also succeed with its color revolution in Georgia, the Zionist neoconservatives could succeed in their plan to destabilize Putin. Whether Putin’s fall would help the neoconservative agenda depends on his replacement. The chance is high that Putin would be replaced with a more determined war leader. Regardless, the Russian defeat has caused a loss of confidence in Putin’s leadership, and it will encourage more provocations that are not good for peace.
“If Tesla does become the world’s most valuable company by far, that short position will bankrupt even Bill Gates..”
• Elon Musk Jokes Bill Gates Could Go “Bankrupt” On Short Tesla Bet (ZH)
The rivalry between two of America’s top billionaires, Elon Musk and Bill Gates, continued on Tuesday morning when Musk jokingly suggested on X that Gates’ alleged short position on Tesla might lead to his financial demise. “If Tesla does become the world’s most valuable company by far, that short position will bankrupt even Bill Gates,” Musk wrote on X, referring to a multi-billion dollar equity short Gates put on Tesla a couple of years ago.
This is why it’s a big “fuck you” to Bill Gates since day 1 $TSLA pic.twitter.com/MLkBwGDQqW
— Teslaconomics (@Teslaconomics) December 10, 2024
According to Walter Isaacson’s 2023 biography of Musk, Gates held an undisclosed short position in Tesla, allegedly worth billions. In late 2023, Musk wrote on X: “Gates placed a massive bet on Tesla dying when our company was at one of its weakest moments several years ago. Such a big short position also drives the stock down for everyday investors,” adding, “To the best of my knowledge, Gates *still* has that massive bet against Tesla on the table. Someone should ask him if he does.” Musk noted, “The lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy of Gates who had the nerve to ask me to donate to his mostly window-dressing environmental causes, while simultaneously aiming to make $500M from Tesla’s demise, boggles the mind …”
[..] There is still no word on whether Gates has doubled or tripled down – or possibly cut his Tesla short bet. Tesla shares have surged 62.5% this year, primarily due to President-elect Donald Trump’s victory and Musk’s increasing relationship with the incoming administration. In terms of wealth, Bloomberg data shows Musk is number one on the Billionaire Index at $376.2 billion, while Gates is number six at $165.9 billion. Regarding Tesla, the company’s market capitalization is nearing $1.3 trillion, and it ranks eighth on the list of the world’s most valuable companies. Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas wrote in a June note that Tesla is much more than an EV company, with tailwinds in the powering up America theme in the era of AI data centers. Naomi Seibt, a German teen who denounces the woke agenda, wrote on X, “Can’t imagine a greater form of retribution than bankrupting the vaccine vegan.” Another X user asked: “Why would someone who constantly talks about protecting the environment short the stock of one of the most environmentally friendly companies on the planet?”
“It’s a disfavored practice to go to a second Supreme Court justice after the first one has turned down the request, so it was a long shot..”
• SCOTUS Asked to Block State From Probing Doctors Who Question COVID Policies (ET)
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas this week revived an emergency application to block the Washington Medical Commission from investigating licensed physicians in the state over their criticism of COVID-19 policies. The Washington state commission deems the doctors’ dissenting views on the disease as potentially dangerous misinformation that should be suppressed. The physicians counter that just because they have medical licenses they don’t forfeit their free speech rights under the First Amendment. The Dec. 4 order by Thomas regarding the application in Stockton v. Ferguson was unusual in that Justice Elena Kagan rejected the same application on Nov. 20. The applicants renewed their request in a court filing directed to Thomas on Nov. 22. Supreme Court rules allow an application that has been denied by one justice to be presented to another justice. Neither Thomas nor Kagan explained their respective decisions.
The application is now scheduled to be considered by all nine justices at the court’s private judicial conference on Jan. 10, 2025. The justices could grant an injunction against the commission, deny the injunction, or schedule the case for oral argument. As of Dec. 6, the Supreme Court had not requested a reply from the commission. The application was brought by former professional basketball player John Stockton along with Drs. Richard Eggleston, Thomas Siler, and Daniel Moynihan and another 50 unidentified medical doctors, as well as Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. President-elect Donald Trump, who will be inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2025, has nominated Kennedy to be secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy, an attorney, is also listed as co-counsel on the application.
The applicants filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, which denied the injunction on May 22. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the injunction on Sept. 3. An appeal remains pending in the Ninth Circuit. The application states that it concerns the state’s program that targets “Washington-licensed physicians for expressing public views on COVID-19 that diverge from prevailing orthodoxy.” The state calls the doctors’ viewpoint “misinformation” and claims that it may “regulate this speech,” which is something the Supreme Court ruled in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra (2018) that it cannot do, according to the application. “The Court should speak clearly and decisively to state actors, professional organizations, other non-state actors, and the national media: Public speech does not lose its constitutional protection from government action simply because it is uttered by a healthcare professional, even if it is at odds with medical orthodoxy,” the application stated.
In September 2021, based on its authority under Washington state’s Uniform Disciplinary Act, the Washington Medical Commission began enforcing a policy against doctors “for public speech critical of COVID-19 policies,” which has resulted in “disciplinary actions against at least ten healthcare practitioners,” it stated. Around the time the enforcement actions began, Washington Secretary of Health Dr. Umair A. Shah said, “It has never been more vital for trusted healthcare professionals to band together against the threat of misinformation.” “As we battle COVID-19, with so many tools at our disposal to protect ourselves and others, it is viral misinformation, rooted in unfounded scientific claims, that often stands in our way.”
The commission is prosecuting Eggleston and Siler for opinion articles that they wrote in The Lewiston Tribune and American Thinker, respectively, that criticized COVID-19 policies. The applicant Children’s Health Defense, which has a Washington state medical doctor as a member, joined the application because “[the nonprofit group] is actively involved in advocacy and protecting freedom of speech and Covid vaccine related issues and educates the public on these issues,” the application stated. The applicants’ attorney, Richard Jaffe of Sacramento, California, told The Epoch Times that he is “hopeful” about the application. “It’s a disfavored practice to go to a second Supreme Court justice after the first one has turned down the request, so it was a long shot,” he said.
But Thomas “seems to think it’s an important issue” that needs to be heard, Jaffe said. There are many articles in the mainstream media “talking about how they’re not sanctioning enough doctors for speaking out in public against vaccination or repeated boostering,” he said. “The country needs some guidance from the Supreme Court as to what the First Amendment means in terms of a physician’s free speech,” Jaffe said.
“Offering asylum to these foreigners is simply giving ordinary people a chance to live in freedom..”
• Western Conservatives Find Asylum In The Russian Federation (SCF)
Defending family and traditional values has long been a central guideline of Russian policy, both domestically and diplomatically. Moscow is expanding its efforts to counteract the degrading cultural influence of the West in the country, as well as offering a safe haven for foreigners interested in living in accordance with their ancestral values. Recently, President Vladimir Putin signed a decree that makes it easier to obtain visas and citizenship for conservative-minded citizens from countries of degrading neoliberal ideologies. The goal of the Russian initiative is above all humanitarian, providing an opportunity for like-minded citizens to live in peace, away from the psychological and ideological challenges imposed by Western countries that have adhered to the so-called “woke agenda”.
As part of this initiative, Russian state organizations have been implementing various initiatives to provide refuge to foreigners interested in living in the country. A major press conference was recently held, bringing together Russian and foreign citizens interested in sharing their experiences of living in accordance with traditional values in Russia. The conference was led by State Duma deputy Maria Butina, who currently heads the Russian Parliament’s Committee on International Relations, and brought together a number of foreigners and members of civil society, including businesspeople from different sectors. Together with Russian authorities and journalists, foreigners who have taken refuge in Russia were able to share their impressions of life in the country, job opportunities and other personal experiences.
Among the foreign citizens who participated in the event were some public figures, such as the German journalist Anna Lipp, who suffered severe persecution in her country due to her support for the special military operation in Ukraine, and Martin Held, an Austrian citizen and author of the social project “Moya Rossiya”. In addition to them, the Frenchman Alexander Stefanesco, businessman and founder of the project “Ruspatriation”, also participated in the conference, as well as several other distinguished foreigners who were well received in Russia due to their common mentality with the local people. As a result of the conference’s discussion, participants announced the creation of the “Welcome to Russia!” project, which aims to show Russian reality to foreigners interested in living in the country, as well as to assist with processes such as legal bureaucracy and cultural adaptation.
In the end, Russians and foreigners showed interest in contributing to the arrival of more conservative-minded citizens in Russia, which is welcomed by both migrants, who can finally live the way they believe is right, and by natives, who can interact with like-minded foreigners and develop deep cultural ties that strengthen Russia’s image as a civilizational pivot. There is certainly a deep strategic Russian interest in receiving such immigrants. In recent years, Russia has faced a major challenge in integrating thousands of immigrants from the post-Soviet space, mainly from the Caucasus and Central Asia, into its society. On the other hand, Western immigrants, who are almost always Christian and conservative, certainly show fewer cultural barriers to adaptation than Central Asians, which facilitates a balance in the migration scenario, avoiding tensions in public opinion regarding the reception of foreigners.
However, the main point of the Russian project is humanitarian. Conservative people are being persecuted in the Western Hemisphere simply because they do not agree with so-called “progressive” ideas, such as woke culture and the LGBT agenda. Offering asylum to these foreigners is simply giving ordinary people a chance to live in freedom, without the state violating their values and beliefs. In the past, the US has created a strong anti-Russian propaganda campaign advocating a false conservatism, which it justified by the claim that the USSR and post-Soviet Russia were examples of moral degradation. History has shown which side in the world arena really defends traditional values. Today, it is clear to an increasing number of Western citizens that it is not in the US or Europe that Christianity and conservatism are truly valued and protected.
Cat maze
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866310477749555559
Grass
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866327339568976354
Octopus
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866290032614809600
Spike
— NaveenkumarM (@Naveenn2710) December 10, 2024
Change
Some of the most satisfying transformations in moviespic.twitter.com/9p1tHUw1a6
— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) December 10, 2024
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
