Menu Icon

Debt Rattle October 17 2024

Oct 172024
 
 October 17, 2024  Posted by at 8:43 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  78 Responses »


Ivan Kramskoy Christ in the desert 1920

 

• I’m Voting For Him And Here’s Why (Jason)
• Musk Stumps For Trump In Pennsylvania, Donates Nearly $75 Million To PAC (ZH)
• Joy Reid: Black Male Trump Voters Part Of A ‘Global Fascist Phenomenon’ (ZH)
• US Election Betting Skyrocketing (RT)
• Harris Pledges Break From Biden’s Course In Fox Interview (RT)
• US Democrats Worried About Pennsylvania – Politico (RT)
• Ukraine Wants To Join NATO While Biden Is US President – Envoy (RT)
• Zelensky Presents ‘Victory Plan’ To Ukrainian Parliament (BBC)
• British Military Believes Kiev ‘On The Verge Of Losing’ – Daily Express (RT)
• How The West Doomed Ukraine (Diesen)
• Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Anti-Ballot Harvesting Directive (JTN)
• Trump Urges Georgians To Vote Early Amid Record Breaking Turnout (JTN)
• Liz Cheney Under Fire for Improper Contacts with Jan. 6 Witness (Turley)
• The Zionist Lobby Wins, But The US Loses (SCF)
• Dmitry Rogozin For President (Helmer)
• How Do We Get Off the Road to Armageddon? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Could The SCO Summit Save The BRICS+ New Order? (Pacini)
• BMW Says EU Ban On Gasoline Cars From 2035 Is “No Longer Realistic” (ZH)

 

 

Leads in all swing states.

 

 

Trump poll and Trump Media.

 

 

Ackman
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846214495779119179

Elon

RFK

Voter ID

Gutfeld Musk
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846444714117288154

Engineer

Trump Faulkner he’s good in this

BB

 

 

 

 

X thread.

• I’m Voting For Him And Here’s Why (Jason)

I can’t stand Donald Trump. He is braggy, he insults people for no reason, and he is just a brutal personality. But my mind is made up. I’m voting for him and here’s why:

* He puts Americans and their well-being first. Kamala will not.

* He will bring @elonmusk into his cabinet to be the efficiency czar and get rid of waste. This alone may be the best single reason to vote for him.

* He will bring @RobertKennedyJr into his cabinet to Make American Healthy Again. He will finally get to the bottom of why our food companies are destroying the health of our children.

* I’m sick of the way the media lies continuously about @realDonaldTrump, starting with the incessant racism claims. They are just nonsense. The latest thing I learned? He sent his plane to fly Nelson Mandela home after he was in jail with the U.S. wouldn’t do it. Racist? No.

* I’m sick of the U.S. being embroiled in foreign wars. Trump will keep us out of them again. He’s just crazy enough that foreign nations will stand down. They have no fear of Kamala. They will fear him.

* Trump sees this country as fundamentally good. Kamala sees it as inherently evil.

* Trump will end the nonsense of the open border which makes our country less secure, less financially stable, and brings in millions of people illegally who compete for Americans’ jobs.

* This government has to print billions to care for the illegals. That makes all of our dollars less valuable and makes prices zoom upward.

* He will stockpile Bitcoin.

* He will keep men out of women’s bathrooms and women’s sports.

* He is a heavyweight personality and negotiator. Kamala is a phony personality and a lightweight negotiator.

* The people who want Kamala Harris to win are the most annoying people in the country. They have pushed for pronouns, masks, endless vaccines, cancel culture, riots, blatant racism towards whites, gender confusion, undermining the U.S. constitution.

* He will upset the current political system. He was nearly the victim of assassination 3x. And he keeps going. He’s not the best in interviews, but he at least puts himself out there. Over and over and over. Kamala hasn’t done a single press conference.

* Harris and the media trying to prop her up hid Biden’s cognitive decline. They accuse @realDonaldTrump of being a threat to democracy. Yet she was installed as the nominee with no votes. She wants to pack the Supreme Court. She wants to eliminate the filibuster. She sued @RobertKennedyJr to keep him off the ballot. And the threat to democracy is Trump? Nonsense.

* Those who support Harris look at Trump supports as vile, stupid, ignorant, and fascists. They disown family members or disinvite them from Thanksgiving dinner of they support Trump. This is disgraceful.

* Every time she talks, I try to give her a chance. But she is the most phony and condescending politician I have ever seen. Ever. I can’t do it. I won’t do it.

* She and those who support her are resistant to Voter ID and believe requiring an ID is racist. Her Department of Justice is suing the state of Virginia for trying to purge the voter rolls of illegals. Why would we not want 1 vote per 1 U.S. citizen? Is it more racist to believe people from the inner city are perfectly capable of securing a government issued ID? Or to believe they are incapable?

That’s it. I’m done. Thanks for hearing me out.

Read more …

“America PAC was created to support six key values: secure borders, sensible spending, safe cities, a fair justice system, self-protection, and free speech..”

• Musk Stumps For Trump In Pennsylvania, Donates Nearly $75 Million To PAC (ZH)

Businessman Elon Musk is touring Pennsylvania until Monday to stump for former President Donald Trump, where he’ll give talks to votors across the state. “Tomorrow night through Monday, I will be giving a series of talks throughout Pennsylvania,” Musk wrote early Wednesday on X. “If you’d like to attend one of my talks, there’s no attendance fee. You just need to have signed our petition supporting free speech & right to bear arms & have voted in this election.” “To clarify, you need have voted in Pennsylvania,” he added. Of note, the deadline to register to vote in Pennsylvania, a critical battleground state, is Oct. 21.

Meanwhile, Musk has donated nearly $75 million to his America PAC, and was the sole donor of $74,950,020 according to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). The PAC set a goal to get 1 million voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and North Carolina to sign the petition in support of the First and Second Amendments by Oct. 21. “Sign our petition in defense of YOUR Constitutional rights to Free Speech & Bear Arms!” the PAC wrote on X earlier this month. “For each registered swing state voter you refer that signs the petition, you get $47!” As the Epoch Times notes further, Musk is the world’s wealthiest person, with a net worth of $246.8 billion, according to the Forbes real-time billionaires list. He announced the launch of the America PAC back in May, stating at the time that it was created to “support candidates who believe in the core values of America.”

According to its mission statement, America PAC was created to support six key values: secure borders, sensible spending, safe cities, a fair justice system, self-protection, and free speech. The super PAC has since become the seventh-largest outside spender during the 2024 election cycle, spending a total of $106,031,817, according to a tally by OpenSecrets. The pro-Trump super PAC, Make America Great Again Inc, has spent $253,970,695 this election cycle, and the pro-Harris super PAC, Fast Forward USA, has spent $263,417,307 according to the non-profit. Earlier filings from September show that America PAC received millions of dollars in donations from Palantir Technologies co-founder Joe Lonsdale’s Lonsdale Enterprises, venture capitalist Doug Leone, and Sequoia Capital partners Shaun Maguire, among others.

Read more …

You left out “racist”. And why not throw in “misogynist”.

• Joy Reid: Black Male Trump Voters Part Of A ‘Global Fascist Phenomenon’ (ZH)

While it’s true that not many Americans watch MSNBC’s Joy Reid and take her seriously (her show ‘The ReidOut’ is #14 on the list of most popular news commentary shows in the US according to viewership), she does remain a symbol of the woke left and her views often give us a glimpse into the collective hive mind of progressives. Similar to women on shows like ‘The View’, Reid is a standard bearer for perpetually angry, post-menopausal cat ladies that do sadly tend to vote in large numbers. These are the same women coming out in droves to support Kamala Harris based purely on her gender and skin color. They are the same women that supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 simply because they wanted a woman president and they didn’t care who it was. And generally speaking it is these kinds of women that use shaming tactics as a means to control the people around them. Their only source of power in life is to henpeck others into submission.

The problem for Harris is that childless cat ladies are not a large enough demographic to ensure a presidential win; she needs men to vote for her as well. As many critics have pointed out, this is rather ironic given the fact that Democrats and leftist activists have spent the better part of the last decade calling masculinity a “toxic” and oppressive social disease that needs to be eliminated. They have worked hard to demonize all men as potential rapists, misogynists, mass shooters and fascists. Now, not surprisingly, progressive women want men to lift them out of the hole they’ve dug for themselves. But they don’t want to admit they were wrong about men or apologize for their behavior and accusations, no. That would be asking far too much. Instead, they have turned to the same old shaming tactics they always use to get what they want.

This week Joy Reid suggested that Kamala Harris’ plunge in the polls is due in large part to a ‘global fascist phenomenon’ led by white males. She also argues that pockets of ‘black and brown men’ are a part of this supposed fascist takeover. The campaign to drag black voters back to the Democrat plantation continues. Reid’s comments come not long after Barack Obama (also a henpecker) tried to shame black men into voting for Harris by accusing them of bias against her because she’s a woman. As 2016 taught Americans, it’s foolish to blindly trust the polls and the election isn’t over until it’s over – That said, numerous indicators suggest that Harris does not inspire trust or optimism among most Americans.

Minority voters including black men have been loudly explaining why they don’t like Harris, and her being a woman is rarely on their list of complaints. Here’s what most American voters care about according to the surveys: The failing economy and stagflation, mass immigration and open borders and foreign policy leading to WWIII. That’s it. It doesn’t matter if they are white, black, brown, man or woman, these are the issues that concern people the most. Electing the first black woman president is irrelevant compared to these problems. Black male voters in particular are walking away from the political left, not because they are turning “fascist”, but because they’re finally waking up to the game being played with their futures.

Read more …

“Trading platform Kalshi [..] is offering investors the opportunity to stake up to $100 million on the result of the November vote..”

• US Election Betting Skyrocketing (RT)

Election betting using so-called ‘prediction markets’ is skyrocketing in the US after a ban on the practice was recently lifted, according to media reports. Platforms are currently forecasting a narrow win for Republican candidate Donald Trump against Democratic rival Kamala Harris. Trading platform Kalshi, which last week won its legal fight against a US regulator in a Washington court, is offering investors the opportunity to stake up to $100 million on the result of the November vote. The court’s decision came after the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) failed to demonstrate harm to elections, despite arguing that such bets are similar to gaming and could undermine democratic integrity. The CFTC’s appeal against the ruling is ongoing. In the first days since the ban was lifted, more than $12 million has been taken in, according to Kalshi founder Tarek Mansour.

He added that the platform is working to attract more traders and several institutional investors. The bets are structured as binary options, priced up to $1 per contract. As of Monday, contracts favoring the former US president traded at 54 cents, while those for current Vice President Harris were at 47 cents. The prices also reflected a widening gap between Trump and Harris that has fluctuated between 51 and 49 cents for either candidate since the market opened a week ago. Although betting prices may indicate belief among traders that Trump will win the election, experts are cautious, saying that only the participation of institutional players could bring a clearer assessment.

“You may want more institutional money because while these investors might have their own particular political views, they’ll have studied the outcome and their wagers represent especially informed opinion,” Grant Ferguson, a political scientist and a follower of prediction markets at Texas Christian University told the Financial Times on Tuesday. Offshore prediction platforms such as Polymarket have also seen a surge in bets with over $1.9 billion staked on the presidential race. Experts expect volumes to soar tenfold as election day approaches.

Read more …

She said “There is not a thing that comes to mind” when asked how she would differ from Biden. She was chastised for it. So they reinvented her. Easy as pie.

• Harris Pledges Break From Biden’s Course In Fox Interview (RT)

US Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris has distanced herself from the political course set by President Joe Biden, in an interview with Fox News on Wednesday. In previous media appearances, Harris had avoided drawing contrasts between herself and the outgoing president. “You’re not Joe Biden, you’re not Donald Trump, but nothing comes to mind that you would do differently?” Fox host Bret Baier asked the Democratic candidate. “Let me be very clear, my presidency will not be a continuation of Joe Biden’s presidency,” Harris replied, pledging to draw on her “professional experiences” and bring in “fresh new ideas.” “For example, as someone who has not spent the majority of my career in Washington DC, I invite ideas: whether it be from the Republicans who are supporting me, who were just on stage with me minutes ago, and the business sector and others, who can contribute to the decisions that I make,” the vice president continued.

Referring to the Harris campaign’s slogan, “Time to turn the page,” Baier pressed the Democrat nominee about what she would turn the page to, having already been vice president for three and a half years. Harris pivoted her answer to her Republican rival. “Well, first of all, turning the page from the last decade in which we have been burdened with the kind of rhetoric coming from Donald Trump,” she replied, accusing the former president of dividing the American people. Harris had been widely criticized in the media over her recent interview on the Late Show, for evading a question on what “major changes” her presidency would bring, compared to Biden’s. “Sure, well I’m obviously not Joe Biden,” she told host Stephen Colbert last week, adding that neither is she Donald Trump, to cheers from the studio audience.

“And so when we think about the significance of what this next generation of leadership looks like, were I to be elected president, it is about – frankly, I love the American people, and I believe in our country,” she said, going on to praise the American work ethic, ambition and character. In an interview on ABC last week, Harris was also asked how she would have done things differently to Biden. “There is not a thing that comes to mind in terms of – and I’ve been a part of most of the decisions that have had impact,” the presidential nominee said. Trump seized on the remark, writing on his Truth Social platform the following day: “Kamala stated clearly, yesterday, that she would not do anything different than Joe Biden, so there is nothing to debate.” Harris took over as the Democratic party’s contender for the election after Biden stepped down earlier in the year, after a disastrous televised debate against Trump raised concerns over his mental state.

Kamala Fox

Read more …

“..she “empowers a culture” that has left local elected officials feeling “unengaged and disrespected.”

• US Democrats Worried About Pennsylvania – Politico (RT)

Some of the top Democrats in Pennsylvania are reportedly unhappy with the way Vice President Kamala Harris has run her campaign in the biggest battleground state in the upcoming US presidential election. Pennsylvania accounts for 19 Electoral College votes and Democrats are hoping their traditional strongholds of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh will come through for Harris on November 5 against Republican Donald Trump. Both parties are on track to spend over $500 million in TV advertising there, more than in any other state. “Democrats fret that any mistake here, big or small, could tip the election away from them,” Politico reported on Wednesday, citing insider sources.

“Pennsylvania is such a mess, and it’s incredibly frustrating,” said one elected Democrat, who asked to remain anonymous. “I feel like we’re going to win here, but we’re going to win it in spite of the Harris state campaign.” Harris’ campaign manager for Pennsylvania, Nikki Lu, has drawn criticism from the Philadelphia set. One strategist claimed that she “empowers a culture” that has left local elected officials feeling “unengaged and disrespected.” Lu is from Pittsburgh, on the other side of the state. Philadelphia City Councilmember Kendra Brooks told Politico that “there’s been a lot of struggles” within the campaign, due to “folks coming into Philadelphia that are making assumptions about what needs to happen in Philadelphia and not necessarily having the relationships to move Philadelphia politics.”

Lu has also been accused of not doing enough to attract black and Latino voters, seen as key Democrat voting blocs. While complaints about voter outreach are common among Pennsylvania Democrats, “this level of frustration and finger-pointing is not,” Politico noted. The campaign’s initial Latino coalition manager, Mariel Joy Kornblith Martin, quit after just two weeks on the job and sent a memo to state party leaders in August complaining she was not given the data or the infrastructure she needed. A Harris campaign official said Martin’s claim was “untrue.” According to former Philadelphia city council member Maria Quinones-Sanchez, the campaign has become “so scientific around door-knocking and connecting, that they forget that culturally, Latinos like just noise.”

“We need young African American men to come home. We need African American women… to come out in record numbers, and disaffected African Americans,” said Ryan Boyer, an important Philadelphia labor leader. He accused Lu of being “slow” to reach out to surrogates that could help with the black community, such as Mayor Cherelle Parker. Lu herself did not comment to Politico. Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez sent a statement that the Democrats were “running the largest and most sophisticated operation in Pennsylvania history,” with 50 staff reaching out to black voters and another 30 to Latinos. In recent weeks, however, the campaign brought in President Barack Obama’s former field director for Pennsylvania, Paulette Aniskoff, as well as several other operatives with ties to Philadelphia.

Read more …

“..a major part of Joe Biden’s legacy as president..” What, the end of NATO?

• Ukraine Wants To Join NATO While Biden Is US President – Envoy (RT)

Admitting Ukraine into NATO before the end of the year could be a major part of Joe Biden’s legacy as president, Kiev’s envoy to the bloc, Natalia Galibarenko, has said. Vladimir Zelensky has pitched immediate membership in the US-led bloc as part of his ‘victory plan’, which he presented on Wednesday. Galibarenko explained the reasoning behind this in an interview with Reuters in Brussels, recorded the day before. “Our idea is that giving Ukraine [an] invitation at this moment is a political signal,” she told the agency. “We sincerely believe that it can be part of the legacy of current American administration.” Russia has demanded Ukraine’s military neutrality, and the specifically the renunciation of its NATO aspirations, as one of the preconditions for the current conflict to end.

According to Galibarenko, fast-tracking Kiev into the bloc would be “like a final, final verdict,” making Moscow unable to press the issue further. Even an invitation by itself, without any practical actions towards membership, would “send a powerful public message,” she argued. While NATO has declared that Ukraine is on an “irreversible” path to join eventually, it has qualified this by saying it will happen “when allies agree and conditions are met.” The US-led bloc has also told Kiev that it cannot join while at war and declined to give a timeline for accession. Two NATO members, Slovakia and Hungary, have already said they would vote against admitting Ukraine. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has argued that this would mean an open war with Russia, which he is opposed to.

The US has been one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine, approving almost $180 million in military and financial aid to Kiev since 2022. According to Reuters, Galibarenko’s push suggests there is “major uncertainty” in Kiev about what might happen after the American presidential election on November 5. Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ candidate for the White House, has “signaled” continued support for Ukraine but has not spelled out any policies. Former president and Republican candidate Donald Trump has promised to end the conflict within a day, presumably by discontinuing the US aid that is sustaining Ukraine.

Speculation about Biden fast-tracking Ukraine’s NATO bid first appeared earlier this month in Financial Times, but has not been substantiated. Then Vice President Biden was entrusted with Washington’s Ukraine policy during President Barack Obama’s second term, and played a key role in the 2014 coup in Kiev. His presidency’s sole foreign policy achievement so far has been to end the US war in Afghanistan after nearly 20 years. The pullout from Kabul in August 2021 ended in a virtual stampede for the exits, however, as the US-backed Afghan government imploded before the advancing Taliban.

Read more …

“..the Kremlin rubbished his “ephemeral peace plan,” saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”..”

• Zelensky Presents ‘Victory Plan’ To Ukrainian Parliament (BBC)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has presented MPs with a long-awaited “victory plan” that aims to strengthen his country’s position enough to end the war with Russia. Zelensky told parliament in Kyiv that the plan could finish the war – which began with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 – no later than next year. Key elements include a formal invitation to join Nato, the lifting by allies of restrictions on long-range strikes on Russia, a refusal to trade Ukraine’s territories and sovereignty, and the continuation of the incursion into the Kursk region of Russia. The Kremlin dismissed the plan with a spokesman saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”.

Addressing MPs, Zelensky also criticised China, Iran and North Korea for their backing of Russia, and described them as a “coalition of criminals”. He said he would present the victory plan at an EU summit on Thursday. “We are at war with Russia on the battlefield, in international relations, in the economy, in the information sphere, and in people’s hearts,” Zelensky told parliament.

The plan outlined by Zelensky consists of five key points:
• Inviting Ukraine to join Nato
• The strengthening of Ukrainian defence against Russian forces, including getting permission from allies to use their long-range weapons on Russian territory, and the continuation of Ukraine’s military operations on Russian territory to avoid creation of the “buffer zones” in Ukraine
• Containment of Russia via a non-nuclear strategic deterrent package deployed on Ukrainian soil
• Joint protection by the US and the EU of Ukraine’s critical natural resources and joint use of their economic potential
• For the post-war period only: replacing some US troops stationed across Europe with Ukrainian troops

Three “addendums” remain secret and will only be shared with Ukraine’s partners, Zelensky said. The plan was presented to US President Joe Biden, as well as presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, back in September. Key allies such as Britain, France, Italy and Germany have also reportedly been shown the plan. However Zelensky’s conditions for peace are increasingly at odds with the situation which surrounds him. In front of MPs he acknowledged the growing fatigue in his country. His own tiredness was etched across his face as he said that “victory has become for some an uncomfortable word and it’s not easy to achieve.” nNational morale has gradually been crumbling under the weight of a mounting death toll, a controversial mobilisation law and never-ending Russian assaults on Ukrainian territory.

It’s increasingly thought any peace deal would have to involve Ukraine conceding territory in exchange for security guarantees. However, there was no hint of a compromise to bring the end of the war closer. Instead, Zelensky doubled down on wanting to force Russia to negotiate and to not cede Ukraine’s territory, through the strengthening of his own military. He also claimed his extensive plan could be implemented with the agreement of his allies, and not Russia. In public, Zelensky evidently still sees this war as existential, and warned of Russian President Vladimir Putin continuing to strengthen his position.

He also seemed to frame his vision as an investment opportunity for Western allies in terms of natural resources and economic potential. The Ukrainian president wants his exhausted troops to keep fighting. But with his army so reliant on Western aid, his “victory plan” will need the approval of the next US president. Immediately after Zelensky finished speaking, the Kremlin rubbished his “ephemeral peace plan,” saying Kyiv needed to “sober up”. The only way the war would end was Ukraine to “realise the futility of the policy it is pursuing,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

Read more …

“..by significantly increasing military aid, Western nations would enable Ukrainian forces to make Russia “helpless, running somewhere screaming in terror.”

• British Military Believes Kiev ‘On The Verge Of Losing’ – Daily Express (RT)

Behind closed doors, the British military has grim expectations for the Ukraine conflict and believes that Kiev is about to lose, the tabloid Daily Express claimed on Tuesday. Over the past month, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has been touting his ‘victory plan’ to foreign leaders. Later this week he is set to unveil it to Ukrainian MPs and the general public, as well as the European Council. What Zelensky will present to his nation on Wednesday will not include specific numbers of requested weapons shipments by donor nations, according to his aide Mikhail Podoliak. As one of the key suppliers of arms to Ukraine, Britain has publicly supported Kiev’s uncompromising position in the conflict with Russia. But private assessments by its generals say the situation is bad for Ukraine, a military source cited by Daily Express said.

”I was speaking to a very senior British Army officer today,” the source was quoted as saying. “He told me that Ukraine is on the verge of losing the war against Russia. It’s very serious.” Zelensky has briefed the leaders of key Western nations on his ‘victory plan’, starting with US President Joe Biden in late September and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer last week. The head of the British government said it was “very important we’re able to show our continued commitment to support Ukraine.” Kiev has been asking for permission to use British-donated Storm Shadow missiles for long-range strikes into Russia. The lifting of restrictions on the use of Western weapons is understood to be integral to Zelensky’s proposal.

The Ukrainian leader had hoped to promote his plan at a gathering of donors in Germany last week, but the event was postponed after Biden canceled his participation to deal with the aftermath of deadly Hurricane Milton. Russia has made significant gains on the battlefield in the past several months, particularly since August, when Ukraine sent some of its best-equipped and experienced troops into Kursk Region. Podoliak claimed in an interview earlier this week that by significantly increasing military aid, Western nations would enable Ukrainian forces to make Russia “helpless, running somewhere screaming in terror.” Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that Moscow will treat Ukrainian long-range strikes with arms provided by Western nations as coming directly from the donors, and will respond accordingly.

Read more …

A history of..

• How The West Doomed Ukraine (Diesen)

In February 2022, Russia started its military operation against Ukraine to impose a settlement after a group of NATO countries had undermined the Minsk II peace agreement for seven years. On the first day after the start of hostilities, Vladimir Zelensky confirmed that Moscow had contacted him to discuss negotiations based on restoring Ukrainian neutrality. On the third day, Russia and Ukraine agreed to start peace negotiations based on a Russian military withdrawal in return for this. Zelensky responded favorably to this condition, and he even called for a “collective security agreement” to include Russia to mitigate the security competition that had sparked the war. The talks that followed are referred to as the Istanbul negotiations, in which Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement before the US and UK sabotaged it, according to numerous claims by people close to the process.

For Washington, there were great incentives to use the large proxy army it had built in Ukraine to weaken Russia as a strategic rival, rather than accepting a neutral Kiev. On the first day after the start of the military operation, when Zelensky responded favorably to starting negotiations without preconditions, US State Department spokesperson Ned Price rejected this stance – saying Russia would first have to withdraw all its forces. “Now we see Moscow suggesting that diplomacy take place at the barrel of a gun or as Moscow’s rockets, mortars, artillery target the Ukrainian people. This is not real diplomacy… If President Putin is serious about diplomacy, he knows what he can do. He should immediately stop the bombing campaign against civilians, order the withdrawal of his forces from Ukraine, and indicate very clearly, unambiguously to the world, that Moscow is prepared to de-escalate.”

This was a demand for capitulation as the Russian military presence in Ukraine was Moscow’s bargaining chip to achieve the objective of restoring Kiev’s neutrality. Less than a month later, Price was asked if Washington would support peace talks, to which he replied negatively as the conflict was part of a larger struggle: “This is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine… The key point is that there are principles that are at stake here that have universal applicability everywhere, whether in Europe, whether in the Indo-Pacific, anywhere in between.” In late March 2022, Zelensky revealed in an interview with The Economist that “there are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”

Israeli and Turkish mediators have since confirmed that Ukraine and Russia were both eager to make a compromise to end the war before the US and UK intervened to prevent peace from breaking out. Zelensky had contacted former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to help with the talks. Bennett noted that Putin was willing to make “huge concessions” if Ukraine would restore its neutrality to end NATO expansion. Zelensky accepted this condition and “both sides very much wanted a ceasefire.” However, Bennett argued that the US and UK intervened and blocked the peace agreement as they favored a long war. With a powerful Ukrainian military at its disposal, the West rejected the Istanbul peace agreement and there was a “decision by the West to keep striking Putin” instead of pursuing peace.The Turkish negotiators reached the same conclusion: Russia and Ukraine agreed to resolve the conflict by restoring Ukraine’s neutrality, but NATO decided to fight Russia with Ukrainians as a proxy.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu argued that some NATO states wanted to extend the war to bleed Russia: “After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long… But following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, I had the impression that there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue – let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine.” Numan Kurtulmus, the deputy chairman of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s political party, confirmed that Zelensky was ready to sign the peace agreement before the US intervened: “This war is not between Russia and Ukraine, it is a war between Russia and the West. By supporting Ukraine, the United States and some countries in Europe are beginning a process of prolonging this war. What we want is an end to this war. Someone is trying not to end the war. The US sees the prolongation of the war as its interest.”

Read more …

“Anyone returning a ballot for a family member or disabled voter is required to enter county boards of elections offices and fill out an attestation form stating that they are following the law..”

• Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Anti-Ballot Harvesting Directive (JTN)

The Ohio Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the secretary of state’s directive preventing ballot harvesting, ruling that its challengers filed their suit too late. In August, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) issued a directive stating that ballot drop boxes outside county boards of elections can only be used by voters dropping off their own ballots, Dayton Daily News reported. Anyone returning a ballot for a family member or disabled voter is required to enter county boards of elections offices and fill out an attestation form stating that they are following the law. The Ohio Democratic Party sued over the directive, requesting that it be rescinded. However, the lawsuit was not filed until Sept. 27, nearly a month after the directive was issued. The court ruled that the lawsuit was filed too late, as military and overseas ballots were sent out on Sept. 21 and early voting began on Oct. 8, according to the Statehouse News Bureau.

“I’m grateful the court has allowed us to proceed with our efforts to protect the integrity of Ohio’s elections,” LaRose said in a statement on Tuesday. “Political activists tried once again to dismantle the safeguards we’ve put in place, specifically in this case against ballot harvesting, and they’ve been rejected. This is the same policy that’s been used successfully in other states, and it’s designed to protect both individuals and election officials from accusations of illegal voting. The court’s decision should reinforce the confidence Ohio voters have in the security, honesty, and accountability of our elections.” In July, an Ohio federal judge partially struck down a state law restricting who can return absentee ballots for disabled voters, ruling that it violated the Voting Rights Act. LaRose issued his directive about a month later.

Read more …

“Go to the polls and vote. Then for the next 21 days get everyone you know to get out and vote. We don’t want to take a chance.”

• Trump Urges Georgians To Vote Early Amid Record Breaking Turnout (JTN)

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday night urged Georgia residents to turn their ballots in early, after the state counted a record-breaking 300,000 votes cast during the first day of early voting and a state court blocked a hand-counting ballot rule. Georgia Secretary of State Chief Operating Officer Gabriel Sterling confirmed the number in a social media post, saying the number was “123% higher than the old record for the 1st day of voting.” Tuesday was the first day of in-person early voting in the Southern state, and the first day voters could return absentee ballots. Other states have already begun their early voting, including Arizona, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Virginia. North Carolina will begin its early in-person voting on Thursday.

Trump has been campaigning in critical swing states, including Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, ahead of the November election. The former president’s urging on Tuesday occurred during a campaign stop in Atlanta. “Early mail-in voting in your state is now underway, and early in-person is underway. But I’ll tell you what, I’m hearing very good things,” Trump said during the rally. “So if you have a ballot, return it immediately. If not, go tomorrow or as soon as you can. Go to the polls and vote. Then for the next 21 days get everyone you know to get out and vote. We don’t want to take a chance.”

The comment comes as a Georgia judge late Tuesday paused a new rule from the Georgia State Election Board that would have forced officials to hand-count the number of ballots cast at each polling place, determining that it would cause “administrative chaos” because of a lack of preparation and training, according to CNN. Vice President Kamala Harris, who is the Democratic nominee for president, is campaigning in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin this week. Trump is also expected to campaign in Detroit, Michigan, on Friday night.

Read more …

“..a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter..”

• Liz Cheney Under Fire for Improper Contacts with Jan. 6 Witness (Turley)

Former J6 Committee Co-Chair and Rep. Liz Cheney has long been criticized for her role in creating a one-sided and at times erroneous record of what occurred on January 6th. That includes editing out Trump’s call for supporters to protest “peacefully,” burying evidence on Trump’s offer to supply National Guard support for that day, and highlighting a false account of Trump in his presidential limo that was directly contradicted by witnesses. She now stands accused of unethically contacting a key represented witness to get her to change her testimony. In my view, ethical proceedings are unlikely after the disclosure of ex parte communications with former Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson. However, the evidence seemingly contradicts public accounts of how Hutchinson decided to fire her counsel and change her testimony.

Hutchinson was represented by Stefan Passantino, who some clearly viewed as a stumbling block to getting Hutchinson to turn against Trump. Hutchinson would claim under oath that Passantino pressured her to stay “loyal” to Donald Trump and coached her responses to support Trump despite her conflicting accounts. However, newly disclosed evidence allegedly contradicts that account, including Hutchinson telling former Trump aide (and now The View co-host) Alyssa Farah Griffin that “[Passantino’s] not against me complying.” Griffin reportedly responded “I actually agree with Stefan’s approach and think it’s accomplished everyone’s goals. I am happy to tip liz off.” Hutchinson would later dump Passantino and testify to allegations that have been challenged as untrue. That includes the limo allegation that was repeatedly raised by Cheney and others. Hutchinson recounted the story that Trump allegedly grabbed the wheel of the vehicle after the Secret Service allegedly refused to take him to the Capitol.

Cheney and the Committee were aware that the account was directly and clearly refuted by the driver of the vehicle. However, they buried his account and highlighted that claim in its final report as being credible. The new allegation concerns the communications leading up to that changed testimony. Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., chairman of the House Administration oversight subcommittee has released the new evidence while alleging that Cheney used an encrypted phone app to evade defense counsel in speaking with Hutchinson. Under Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, “a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the prior consent of the lawyer representing such other person or is authorized by law or a court order to do so.” Cheney is a D.C. licensed lawyer.

At the outset, in my view, Cheney was acting as a member of Congress in this matter. That has always been a rather grey area for lawyers who are also members of Congress. The bar has taken a broad view of the need for lawyers to adhere to these ethical standards. However, it is not clear politically or ethically if the Bar officials would be inclined to pursue Cheney, who has been lionized in Washington for her role in the investigation. Yet, the record does indicate that Cheney was not just aware of the represented status but the policy of the House to respect the rules governing represented parties. In one message Griffin tells Hutchinson, “Her one concern was so long ad [sic] you have counsel, she can’t really ethically talk to you without him.”

That did not appear to prove a barrier. Before Passantino withdrew as counsel, Cheney communicated secretly with Hutchinson. A later message was send to Cheney reading on June 6, “Hi, this is Cassidy Hutchinson. I’m sorry for reaching out this way, but I was hoping to have a private conversation with you (soon), if you are willing.” Cheney responded, “I would be happy to. Let me know what time works for you.”

Read more …

“Tel Aviv is exhausting its defense and intelligence resources without achieving any meaningful objective..”

• The Zionist Lobby Wins, But The US Loses (SCF)

The U.S. has apparently made the decision to intervene directly in the large-scale conflict currently taking place in the Middle East. According to recent reports, American military units, including auxiliary groups and special forces, are being sent to Israel to more effectively support Tel Aviv’s forces in their land-to-air operations. The main reason for the U.S. intervention is to support the IDF in air defense operations, and there is an official statement that there is no intention to use U.S. troops on direct combat lines. However, these claims have no practical credibility, since what we are seeing in the Middle East is a progressive escalation. Previously, direct American assistance was limited to the naval front. Now, specialized troops are already operating air defense systems on “Israeli” soil. Soon, it is quite possible that there will be direct American combat involvement both in Gaza and on the border with Lebanon, since Washington clearly does not have the ability to impose limits on Israel.

The arrival of American troops in Israel at this time is highly significant because the Zionist occupation is going through one of the most difficult moments in its recent history. Israel failed to achieve any of its strategic objectives with the genocidal operation in the Gaza Strip, having killed thousands of civilians, but failed to defeat Hamas and free the prisoners of war. Now, after suffering a humiliation during the recent Iranian attack on Zionist military and strategic bases, Israel is carrying out a disastrous invasion of Lebanon, where it suffers from Hezbollah’s high qualification in guerrilla and attrition warfare – in addition to Israeli cities being increasingly easy targets for the Shiite militia’s missiles and drones. It is fair to say that Israel is facing more difficulties now than at any other time in its military history. Tel Aviv is exhausting its defense and intelligence resources without achieving any meaningful objective, falling into a trap from which it will certainly not escape without profound changes in its state structure – if not its actual ceasing of existence as a state.

It would be naive to think that Pentagon strategists are unaware of this type of situation. Despite American propaganda encouraging Israel, senior American defense officials certainly know that entering Israel is strategic suicide for the United States, which is why the Pentagon’s recent decision seems even more irrational. However, it is important to understand that not all decisions made by a state are based on strategic sense and rationality, and that several factors influence it, such as historical and ideological ties and, above all, the stimulus of various lobbies. Contrary to what many experts say, the reality of U.S.-Israeli ties cannot be understood by taking Washington as the main agent of relations. Israel seems to have much more influence on American politics than Washington has in Tel Aviv. It is no coincidence that, despite Democrats and Republicans disagreeing on many issues, they continue to agree on Israel, with support for Zionism being absolute among all American politicians.

In fact, what the decision to send American military personnel to Israeli soil reveals is that it is the Zionist lobby that really controls the main strategic decisions of the United States. Joe Biden and his main allies have made it clear several times that they are not willing to directly support Israel in a major regional war in the Middle East. With elections coming up and major domestic problems in the United States, all Washington wants to do is to resolve its own issues and avoid military engagement. However, American decision-makers do not seem to have enough strength to neutralize the influence of the Zionist lobby, giving in on several important issues, even though all strategic sense advises something different to be done. In the end, it is possible to say that once again the Zionist lobby has won the American political game. It remains to be seen how long the U.S. will be able to resist the pressure from this same lobby for direct intervention.

Read more …

“That is to say,” Rogozin has written, “there have been some rather decent people in my family tree”.

• Dmitry Rogozin For President (Helmer)

According to the Russian Constitution amendments adopted in 2020, Vladimir Putin can run for re-election in 2030 and win another term until 2036, when he will be 84. The contest over the presidential succession may thus be postponed for another decade. Or else it is under way already. That’s one of the stakes in the present argument in Moscow over how the Ukraine war should end between the General Staff and the Kremlin – between unconditional capitulation of the regime west of the Dnieper River to the Polish border, and the east-of-Dnieper terms Putin proposed at Istanbul in March 2022, and repeated in a speech to the Foreign Ministry this past June. The debate in Moscow over the terms of Istanbul-I and of Putin’s proposed Istanbul-II involves much more than future control of the territories east of the Dnieper and of the territories to the west.

The question is whether the military trust Putin to administer the outcome of the war which Russian voters believe has been won by the General Staff. In his June 14 speech Putin admitted to his audience of senior Foreign Ministry officials what they all knew – that he and the General Staff had disagreed over the “preservation of the Ukrainian sovereignty over these territories, provided Russia has a stable land bridge to Crimea.” Putin’s “land bridge” and other territorial concessions were dismissed by the General Staff. One candidate has already tossed a military style cap into the succession race: this is Dmitry Medvedev, the one-term president and currently deputy secretary of the Security Council; he is 59 now, 71 in 2036. In his Telegram platform, Medvedev has been a consistent advocate of the General Staff line: “In my opinion, recently, even theoretically, there has been one danger – the negotiation trap, into which our country could fall under certain circumstances.

Namely, the early unnecessary peace talks proposed by the international community and imposed on the Kiev regime with unclear prospects and consequences [Medvedev was referring to Istanbul-I]. After the neo-Nazis committed an act of terrorism in the Kursk region, everything has fallen into place. The idle chatter of unauthorized intermediaries on the topic of the beautiful world has been stopped. Now everyone understands everything, even if they don’t say it out loud. They understand that there will BE NO MORE NEGOTIATIONS UNTIL THE COMPLETE DEFEAT OF THE ENEMY! [Medvedev’s caps]” Medvedev implies criticism of Putin but remains loyal in the hope of negotiating an amicable transfer of power between the two of them. At the same time Medvedev is signalling the General Staff that the military can trust him. But they don’t.

There is another succession candidate who is trusted by both the military and the voters, but who has not announced he is running. Putin is well aware of him; he has repeatedly tried to sideline him. This is Dmitry Rogozin, a presidential campaigner against Boris Yeltsin; Duma deputy and negotiator in Chechnya; ambassador to NATO; deputy prime minister in charge of the military industrial complex; head of Roskosmos, and now, after surviving a Ukrainian assassination attempt, senator for the Zaporozhye region in the Federation Council. Rogozin is 60; in 2036 he will be 72. Rogozin is the son of a Russian Army general, grandson of a Russian Navy officer, great-grandson of a Red Army pilot, great-great-grandson of a general of the Russian Army in the war against Japan of 1904-05. Rogozin’s ancestors have been recorded in the Russian fight against the Teutonic Knights (13th century) and with Dmitry Pozharsky and Kuzma Minin in the war against the Poles (17th century). “That is to say,” Rogozin has written, “there have been some rather decent people in my family tree”.

In a recently published book, On the Western Front, Rogozin has said more explicitly: “The war against Ukrainian radical nationalism and Russophobia is not a confrontation between armies and military technologies, but our country’s response to an existential threat to our entire people, the entire Russian civilization. This is the restoration of historical justice. This is a common cause, in which the unity of the army, society and its political class must be manifested. This is the opportunity to kick out of the country (and not let back in!) the fifth column of traitors and globalisation-mongers.

The war in Ukraine is a war for Ukraine and Russia, it is a holy war for the right of the Russian people to exist and reunite on their ancestral territory. This is a war against a much stronger and more resourceful enemy, a war to force the collective West, manipulated by the Anglo-Saxons and German revanchists, to recognize Russia’s right to a safe and independent future for our children. Therefore, there should be no ‘red lines’ for us in this war…I consider it fundamentally important to constantly show universal solidarity with our army. It is impossible to maintain the illusion that the army is ‘out there doing its job’, and we continue to live as before.”

Read more …

“In my opinion it is essential that Trump be elected, because it will give America four more years. But the result is unlikely to be renewal of our country. Simply, the can will be kicked down the road.”

• How Do We Get Off the Road to Armageddon? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Two days ago on October 14 I posted my column about a new US Department of Defense Directive, 5240.01, that radically alters the relationship between the US military and American citizens. In the new directive issued one month prior to the election, the US military is authorized to intervene against American citizens and to use deadly force against Americans. I asked why such a drastic reformulation of long established policy unless the Democrats were setting up a coup in place of a lost election. The dramatic change in policy requires more examination than my speculative question, but does not seem to be getting any attention. One would think that those patriots who are convinced that the military will come forward at the last resort and save our freedoms should be alarmed by Department of Defense Directive 5240.01. Those patriots who see Trump as America’s savior should be alarmed by his response.

In a Fox Business interview on October 13, Trump was asked if he anticipated any chaos following the announcement of the election results. Trump said not from his supporters, a surprising statement if the Democrats steal the election. Trump thought that Kamala’s loss could result in disturbances from the woke left-wing, but “it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military.” So here we have it: Trump has bought into Directive 5240.01. Having accepted the directive, how can Trump complain if the directive is used against him? It is only a few days before the presidential election and Trump seems again to be in the clutches of advisors composed of the ruling elites. Who are Trump’s advisors? Do they have any sense? Why is Trump aligned with Israel’s genocide of Palestine and attacks on Iran? Is Trump just another warmonger serving the military/security complex and Greater Israel?

Trump directs American hostility toward China, because of the lopsided trade deficit. But it was Wall Street that forced the offshoring of US manufacturing. The trade deficit results when the US corporations bring their offshored production home to America to sell. How can it be that Trump hasn’t a single advisor able to inform him of the real problem? We have to be grateful for Trump. He realizes that America is in dire straits, and he alone has emerged as anyone willing to do anything about it. But Trump is a real estate developer. He does not know issues and their history. His first term proved him to be a poor judge of people as he appointed to his government the very people he had declared to overthrow, and they overthrew him. Judging by his positions on DOD 5240.01, China, Israel, he has learned nothing and has no better advisors. In my opinion it is essential that Trump be elected, because it will give America four more years. But the result is unlikely to be renewal of our country. Simply, the can will be kicked down the road.

It is difficult to rouse the American people to the realities that they face. Americans are the most insouciant of all peoples. They exist surrounded by oceans and friendly countries devoid of military potential. Americans have ruled the world because World War II destroyed all rivals. Americans might be beginning an acquaintance with hardship, having lived on credit card and student loan debt, but despite the deceptions their government inflicts on them — 9/11, Muslim Terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, Covid pandemic, Russian invasion of Ukraine, Iranian nukes, Chinese threat, Trump insurrection, Putin’s resurrection of the Soviet Empire, the return of slavery by white supremacists– a large segment of the population still trusts the government that is destroying them. So, what can be done? How can an insouciant population deal with a ruling elite when the population doesn’t understand what is happening?

Read more …

“Strengthening Rimland is a necessary condition for the integrity of Eurasia. Not a possibility, but a necessity.”

• Could The SCO Summit Save The BRICS+ New Order? (Pacini)

On Tuesday, Oct. 15 and Wednesday, Oct. 16 in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, is the 24th SCO Summit, the partnership established in 2001 as an outgrowth of the Shanghai Five to promote mutual defense, security and international counter-terrorism across the greater Eurasian region. Today there are 10 full members, namely China, Belarus, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Russia, with Afghanistan and Mongolia as observer members already welcomed and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain as countries in dialogue, Cambodia, Egypt, Kuwait, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates, to be joined at this 2024 Summit by guests from ASEAN, the CIS, the UN, and a representation from Turkmenistan.

A long and extensive list of states representing, geopolitically speaking, all of Eurasia and the Rimland coastal zone. Since this is a partnership centered on security issues, and therefore with an at least partially military agenda, we are talking about a meeting that can be a thorn in the side of NATO and the collective West. Strengthening Rimland is a necessary condition for the integrity of Eurasia. Not a possibility, but a necessity. This the Soviet leaders understood, and for that reason they had aimed not only at effective control of most of the areas abutting the Rimland, and thus to the South and East, but also had been far-sighted in weaving strong diplomatic relations and ideological-political cooperation with the countries to the East, so as to ensure lasting stability at the expense of attempts at destabilization coming from the West.

Rimland stability is not only a strategic issue but also an economic and political one. This meeting of SCO leaders comes just days before the start of the long-awaited BRISC+ Summit in Kazan, dubbed by many as “the event of the year,” from which the organizational line of the new global majority, or at least the programmatic lines of it, could emerge. As described earlier, there is a possibility-not officially stated, but theoretically plausible and confirmed by some rumors-that an alliance between BRICS and SCO, that is, between the two lungs of the emerging multipolar world, one economic and the other strategic, is in the works. This union would lead the new bloc to have a cohesive strength superior to that of NATO and, therefore, to represent not only an adversary, but even an enemy.

There are many reasons for the need for such an alliance: the West continues to promote wars and destruction, with aggressive diplomacy and an exasperated attempt to control the globe, without accepting that the rules-based order no longer applies; International Law is practically dead and it no longer makes sense to reason with paradigms written by the offices of bureaucrats in Washington and New York; genocide is taking place in Palestine and it is almost impossible to intervene because of the balance of war that Israel and the U.S. have created, threatening a nuclear apocalypse and blaming Iran and the Axis of Resistance. But, more than anything else, there are some brief reasons that are particularly urgent:

• the BRICS countries need an integrated defense system that harmonizes differences and specificities, especially now that the partnership is expanding and the new members lack the real military strength of the great powers. This in a multipolar world is normal, because military capacity is redistributed among multiple actors participating in the same scenario, the hegemonic polarizing force is lost, and a balance is set up made up of different magnetisms, which must keep in constant contact and balance in order to subsist;

• the economy of the BRICS countries and the politics of the partnership are in danger of being compromised, the hegemon still being very strong and entrenched, thus with the capacity to undermine the stages of realization of the multipolar transition.

This second point is very topical: think of how the situation in Gaza and Lebanon is undermining delicate diplomatic balances between Israel and Russia, and between Russia and Iran, involving the other Middle Eastern states and provoking antipathy in the Eastern countries that are bearers of peaceful solutions and seek to limit escalation. Think also of the situation in Taiwan, where the U.S. continues to foment a colorful revolution, or Turkey’s double-dealing that is teasing Islamic countries. A solution that gives whiplash to the West’s slowly waning adversaries is urgently needed.

Read more …

Never was of course. Delusional.

• BMW Says EU Ban On Gasoline Cars From 2035 Is “No Longer Realistic” (ZH)

Germany’s car manufacturing giant BMW is warning that an EU ban on the sale of gasoline and diesel cars from 2035 is “no longer realistic” amid slow EV sales as the European auto industry will see a “massive shrinking” with such a ban. European carmakers are already struggling with their EV sales as subsidies in many countries are coming to an end and Chinese low-cost vehicle makers are gaining market share. Last year, the EU member states approved an emissions regulation under which the bloc will end sales of new carbon dioxide-emitting cars and vans in 2035. The rules target 55% CO2 emission reductions for new cars and 50% for new vans from 2030 to 2034 compared to 2021 levels, as well as 100% CO2 emission reductions for both new cars and vans from 2035. Under the regulation, the European Commission will assess in 2026 the progress the EU has made in achieving the target. The Commission will decide whether the targets need to be reviewed.

But BMW’s chief executive Oliver Zipse said on Tuesday at the Paris Automotive Summit that the ban “could also threaten the European automotive industry in its heart.” The current regulations will “with today’s assumptions, lead to a massive shrinking of the industry as a whole,” Zipse added, as carried by Bloomberg. Electric vehicle sales in Europe have been suffering this year. Sales in Germany, for example, are plummeting as Berlin ended subsidies at the end of 2023. Amid slowing sales of EVs, the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, ACEA, last month called for urgent action to reverse this year’s trend of declining EV sales. The European auto manufacturers united in ACEA, called on the EU institutions “to come forward with urgent relief measures before new CO2 targets for cars and vans come into effect in 2025.” Europe’s automakers “are playing our part in this transition, but unfortunately, the other necessary elements for this systemic shift are not in place,” ACEA said.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Candace

 

 

Aristotle Time

 

 

Dog toys
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846586910031950085

 

 

New shoes
https://twitter.com/i/status/1846594910075470191

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 13 2024

Oct 132024
 
 October 13, 2024  Posted by at 8:31 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Max Ernst Ubu Imperator 1923

 

• Kamala Unwinding (Kunstler)
• US Election ‘Too Close To Call’ In Swing States – WSJ Poll (RT)
• The Scent of a Harris Panic in the Air (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Shills For Harris (Michael Tracey)
• Dems Won’t Certify Election if Trump Wins (HUSA)
• Trump’s Toughest Foe Could Be Harris Lawyer Marc Elias (Sperry)
• Alien Enemies Act is Not a Viable Legal Basis for “Operation Aurora” (Turley)
• Jon Stewart: Americans Don’t Need Guns To Protect Constitutional Rights (ZH)
• Biden, Netanyahu Closer to Consensus on Attacking Iran (Antiwar)
• Biden Warns Iran Against Going After Trump – WaPo (RT)
• CBS News Faces Integrity Crisis Amid Bias Concerns, Missteps (JTN)
• 3 Million Non-Citizens Have Texas Driver’s Licenses Allowed As Voter ID (JTN)
• DOJ Sues Virginia Over Removing Non-Citizens From Voter Rolls (JTN)
• NATO Could Have Prevented Ukraine Conflict – Hungary FM (RT)
• NATO Planning New Russia Strategy – Politico (RT)
• Boeing To Fire 17,000 Employees (RT)

 

 

 

 

Trump ad

Vance

Jan 6

Kirk

Tucker Dhillon

Hawley Wray

Judge Thomas

Appellate

 

 

 

 

 

 

“She ends as an historical prank on her own country. It must be deeply demoralizing to be used like that in front of the whole world.”

• Kamala Unwinding (Kunstler)

The outstanding question: will the Democratic Party actually go ahead and attempt to execute an election steal despite growing evidence of a developing Trump landslide that might obviate it? The works are already in motion. The mail-in ballots went out long ago and early votes are getting cast by the day. The overseas ballots that require no US address or voter verification are flooding in by the millions and four years of open borders has 10-million illegal aliens (at a minimum) dispersed around the nation, great gobs of them planted in swing states, processed through the DMVs and social services — with the requisite automatic voter registration — their ballots already pre-bundled for harvest.

It could go a few ways. One is, just let’er rip, harvest all those fake votes, stuff the drop-boxes, flood the zone, and do it all right in America’s face as if to say: we can do whatever we want. . . to get whatever we want. . . and you can’t stop us. That is probably the point where blue America finds out exactly what the Second Amendment was designed for. You might also expect a whole lot of state-organized resistance, especially in the populous red ones, Texas, Florida, real court cases over fraud this time, contested certification.

Or, the election could come out a hopeless unresolvable muddle. There’s no precedent for this and no provision in the Constitution, but you can imagine the Supreme Court having to decide a necessary do-over minus all recent gimmicks, paper ballots only, voters with proof of citizenship only, all voting on one re-scheduled election day before January 1. This novelty would be something apart from the clunky Congressional machinery established for settling electoral college disputes, since it is predicated on various states’ inability to determine their electoral college vote in the first place, based on patent irregularity and fraud. You could also imagine a period of disorder so deep and grave that the regime behind “Joe Biden” declares martial law. . . or, alternately the military — the martial institution — has to take matters into its own hands, shoving aside even “Joe Biden” and his filthy retinue. Appalling to consider, I’m sure, but these things happen in history, and the Party of Chaos has set enough mischief in motion to wreck the election and wreck the country. Call it catastrophizing, if you will. There it is.

But to step back from that abyss, it appears that Mr. Trump’s momentum accelerates by the day, that he is becoming, at last, an implacable, irresistible juggernaut who will, perforce, overcome all the gimmicks, traps, and frauds arrayed against him. Kamala seems to think so. Have you ever seen such resignation, such loserdom-in-action as her recent performance on CBS’s 60-Minutes, or her pitiful admission on ABC’s The View that she couldn’t think of anything she would do differently beyond the excellent management of national affairs under “Joe Biden” (and herself as veep). Surely that said it all. She has nothing, brings nothing. Long ago, she was a pretty girl with a law degree and an infectious laugh on the fringes of local politics in San Francisco. The winds of fortune blew her this way and that way until she ended up way over her head, used by the reprobates around her as a mere device to stay out of jail. She ends as an historical prank on her own country. It must be deeply demoralizing to be used like that in front of the whole world.

Read more …

With all the shenanigans going on, Trump needs to win by a huge margin. Another reason not to believe these polls.

• US Election ‘Too Close To Call’ In Swing States – WSJ Poll (RT)

Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are locked into a dead heat in all seven of the battleground states that will decide the outcome of next month’s US presidential election, according to a poll published on Friday by the Wall Street Journal. Sampling 4,200 voters, the poll found Harris with a razor-thin lead over Trump in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and Trump holding a slim advantage in Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. However, the newspaper noted that no lead is wider than two percentage points, except for in Nevada, where Trump leads by five points. All of these results are within the newspaper’s margin of error. Across all seven swing states, Trump leads Harris by 46% to 45%, the poll found. Some 93% of Republicans are backing Trump, while 93% of Democrats are supporting Harris, the WSJ noted, adding that independents prefer Harris by a slim 40% to 39%.

“This thing is a dead heat and is going to come down to the wire. These last three weeks matter,” Republican pollster David Lee, who worked on the survey, told the newspaper. “It really could not be closer,” Democrat pollster Michael Bocian said. “It’s an even-steven, tight, tight race.” A slew of recent polls have shown Trump and Harris within the low single digits of each other in these key states, with Trump gaining the upper hand in every state but Wisconsin in an average compiled by RealClearPolitics. Voters surveyed by the Wall Street Journal ranked the economy and immigration as their top two issues of concern, respectively.

They favored Trump over Harris on economic issues by ten points, and on immigration and border security by 16 points. Harris beat Trump on the issue of abortion by 16 points. By this time in the 2020 campaign, President Joe Biden was leading Trump by five points in the states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Trump won all three of these post-industrial northern battlegrounds in 2016, and lost them to Biden in 2020. Winning all three would likely guarantee the presidency to either Trump or Harris this year.

Baris

Read more …

“..so far, the cures for the Harris slide are far worse than the malady itself..”

• The Scent of a Harris Panic in the Air (Victor Davis Hanson)

The 2024 race is still close. But then so was the 1980 Carter-Reagan race at this same juncture. Indeed, incumbent president Carter was then comfortably up in the last two October Gallup polls—before utterly and suddenly evaporating on Election Day. But in the last seven days, there seems a sense of panic in the Harris campaign. How do we know that? Why are Democratic pundits—from Axelrod to Carville—blasting the Harris campaign and otherwise warning of bad things to come? Why are some of the once Democrat sure-thing senate races—e.g., in Ohio, Wisconsin, and even Michigan—tightening up? Pundit poll-watchers are suggesting that Trump is close, even, or slightly ahead in the swing-state polls, suggesting that he is nearing a margin that could cancel out anticipated “ballot irregularities”.

The expected October Harris-Biden surprises—the opportune Fed interest rate cut, the transparently desperate Jack Smith beefed-up re-indictment, the current new Hollywood Trump-hit movie, the desperate Zelensky fly-in to Pennsylvania, the election-cycle customary Bob Woodward unsourced gossip book—seemed so far to have had no effect. Why would any campaign send out the bumbling Tim Walz to a Fox Sunday interview after his disastrous debate? Why is a suddenly smiling Biden so eager to claim candidate and VP Harris as a co-conspirator to his disastrous four years? Why would Harris pivot and now agree to (admittedly mostly softball) interviews, thus confirming to the voting public why she wisely had previously avoided all press conferences, interviews, and town halls? Why—after the last two moderator-rigged ABC and CBS debates—would Harris desperately want another and possibly believe that Trump would ever agree to any such warped forum?

The last 4-5 Harris scripted interviews, but especially on CBS’s 60 Minutes, have been train wrecks. Everyone expected (and was not disappointed) the on-spec word salads, predictable sappy retreats to her misleading bio, the now accustomed deer-in-the-headlights confusion about her prior three years with Biden, and the general mush in lieu of any policy prescriptions. Why would CBS think it worth ruining its already debased reputation by doctoring the transcript of the Harris disastrous interview in a vain attempt at Orwellian repair? Why is a rusty but still narcissistic Barack Obama at last hitting the campaign trail? And is he still effective—or reduced to becoming an Oprah-like caricature? After all, is it wise for the elite Obama (in his now accustomed snarky “clingers” style) to venture out of his mansions (Kalorama? the Hawaii beachfront? or the Martha Vineyard estate?) to talk down to black males struggling under years of a hyperinflationary economy, a flood of illegal immigrants from an open border, and a four-year-spiking crime rate?

Does the Netflix grandee berating black men as victims of false consciousness, misled, and brainwashed into voting for the Trump agenda really win them over to Harris? Does the hundred-million-dollar-plus man Obama persuade anyone by reverting for a few moments to his old community-organizing, fake black patois and his pseudo-racial intimacy of “brothers”? And does it work for Obama (remember “when they go low, we go high”) to blast Trump as racist and crude, when Obama jokes that Trump wears diapers— this after previously suggesting at the Democratic convention that Trump suffered from small genitalia? If this should continue, soon the July 21st coup that removed Biden, along with the Harris pick of Tim Walz, will go down as days of Democrat infamy. Anything can happen in the next three weeks. But so far, the cures for the Harris slide are far worse than the malady itself.

Read more …

“These aforementioned attendees were essentially just “seat fillers” — they were not the audience members who were called on to ask pre-selected questions..”

• Shills For Harris (Michael Tracey)

Last night’s Univision “town hall” with Kamala Harris was billed as an exciting opportunity for “undecided Latino voters” to question and evaluate the potential next President of the United States. The corporate press release from Univision advertises it explicitly as such. But viewers at home would have been wholly unaware that this billing was false. As I discovered, having been granted the sacred opportunity to view the event from an adjacent room on the University of Nevada, Las Vegas campus, the carefully curated “town hall” audience was actually comprised of avowed Harris supporters. “I already knew I was going to go for Kamala,” one town hall participant told me. “Part of the reason why I wanted to go was just, like, to also fully support her.” “So you were already decided, before you came?” I asked another. “Yes,” she replied, declaring her support for Kamala.

The audience members I spoke to were selected with the help of a company called FansOnQ, according to the company’s founder, Conny Quintanilla, whose title for yesterday’s event was “Audience Manager.” The company puts out “casting calls” for events like the Latin Grammy Awards, which have been previously held in Las Vegas. It’s a type of company that you might not be consciously aware exists, but once you’re told of its existence, it makes perfect intuitive sense: people who want to dance at award shows are “vetted” by this particular company, perhaps for good looks and rhythmic skills. That’s the same company which filled the seats at Kamala’s town hall. Another person told me he was able to attend because he “knows people” at an unnamed “progressive organization,” which somehow granted him the ability to get in the town hall audience. The person said he works as an intern for Rep. Steven Horsford, Democrat of Nevada. I’m not naming the person because he was wary of attribution. Others quoted here also didn’t want to be identified.

These aforementioned attendees were essentially just “seat fillers” — they were not the audience members who were called on to ask pre-selected questions. Those audience members were flown in from around the country at Univision’s expense. Which is a bit odd, because there would certainly have been plenty of genuine “undecided Latino voters” in Clark County, Nevada who I’m sure would’ve been more than happy to ask Kamala Harris a question. NOTE: The non-question-asking attendees were still integral to the televisual production of the event, hence their recruitment. Uninformed viewers at home were under the false impression that the people they were watching react to Kamala’s answers were “undecided voters,” when numerous of them were in fact pre-committed Harris voters who sought to attend for the specific purpose of demonstrating their support for Kamala.

Naturally, I wanted to interview the actual question-asking attendees. However, a corporate dictate apparently came down prohibiting this. “We won’t be making them available,” Anna Negron, Director of Corporate Communications at TelevisaUnivision, told me when I asked if there would be an opportunity to interview said audience members. She would not elaborate on the reason for this strange secrecy. Reporter Mark Kellner of the New York Post asked Negron the same question, and was similarly dismissed. So the sum total of the authorized journalistic acts that we were permitted to carry out at this event was to sit in a side room and politely view a generously provided video feed of the “town hall,” which was taped several hours before it aired yesterday. For the record, I don’t think she actually used a teleprompter, despite social media allegations to that effect. I can verify that the event was already contrived enough as it is — no need to embellish any phony stories.

Of course, most journalists covering the event simply repeated the conceit that Kamala was empathetically taking questions from “undecided Latino voters.” In other words, they simply regurgitated the corporate press release. Her actual remarks were bereft of any real substance. The only amusing part was when she name-dropped Alberto Gonzales, the former Attorney General under George W. Bush, as one of her cherished Republican endorsements — adding him to the esteemed roster of Dick and Liz Cheney and myriad “national security officials” affiliated with Mitt Romney and John McCain. Perhaps Kamala calculated that the surname “Gonzales” would be extraordinarily appealing to these allegedly “undecided Latino voters.”

It’s worth briefly reminiscing about what the purpose of a “town hall” has traditionally been: for ‘townspeople’ to gather and air their concerns about issues that most affect them. (“Town halls” are actually how some small New England towns are governed — the town halls effectively become temporary citizen-led legislatures to decide questions around zoning and so forth.) Now, though, they’re just glitzy TV productions that accomplish the polar opposite of the free-flowing dialogue and debate with which the term was once associated. Indeed, these events now more resemble the production values of the Latin Grammy Awards — literally — than a forum to scrutinize candidates for public office.

Read more …

‘I’ve been told this type of rhetoric is “dangerous to our democracy” or something…’

• Dems Won’t Certify Election if Trump Wins (HUSA)

Despite their constant whining about the Jan. 6, 2021, “insurrection,” the Democrats recently admitted that they won’t certify the 2024 election results if Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is elected. Axios reported that the Democrats would certify the election results only if Trump used “free, fair and honest means to secure a victory,” which, according to Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., is not what Trump would do. This statement implies that he would be declared a winner only if he cheats. “[Trump] is doing whatever he can to try to interfere with the process, whether we’re talking about manipulating electoral college counts in Nebraska or manipulating the vote count in Georgia or imposing other kinds of impediments,” the politician told the news source. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., also questioned whether Trump would win the election fair and square, telling Axios that she doesn’t know “what kind of shenanigans he is planning.”

Conservatives on Twitter pointed out the hypocrisy after the article was published. “I’ve been told this type of rhetoric is “dangerous to our democracy” or something,” @Patriot_Vibes wrote. Co-owner of Trending Politics, Colin Rugg, also mocked the Democrats who have been talking non-stop about Republicans and Trump’s alleged attempt to overthrow the government at the beginning of 2021. “The ‘democracy defenders’ won’t commit to certifying an election?” he wrote. Others wrote that the recent news is a warning from Democrats about their own insurrection, this time it being real and violent. Some conservatives noted that hearing about the recent news was not surprising after the Democrats replaced Joe Biden, who was elected by leftists during the primaries, with the current Democratic presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, who nobody cared about before the disastrous debate between Trump and Biden.

“No surprise there. They threw democracy out the window when they put Kamala in w/o a single vote. Why wouldn’t they pull some more shenanigans? We’ll get SCOTUS involved if we have to, but they need to do their job or GTFO,” an anonymous person wrote. The Democrats’ recent comments are also unsurprising because Raskin said he would never allow Trump to be in the White House again. “I’ve been warning of this for months. Here is Rep Jamie Raskin confirming what I’ve been predicting. Even if President Trump wins the 2024 election, Democrats will not accept the results and refuse to leave the White House, creating a civil war scenario,” investigative reporter and commentator Drew Hernandez said.

Read more …

Elias makes a lot of money. But I think the Steele dossier has tainted him too much to be effective.

“According to court records, Elias acted as a cutout for more than $1 million in campaign payments for the dossier..”

• Trump’s Toughest Foe Could Be Harris Lawyer Marc Elias (Sperry)

Elias later testified that he was worried – then as now – that Trump was a threat to democracy: “I received information that was troubling as someone who cares about democracy.” That “information” turned out to be a fictitious “dossier” linking Trump to the Kremlin crafted by former British spook and FBI informant Christopher Steele, who huddled with Elias in his Washington office. “Some of the information that was in it I think has actually proved true. It was accurate and important,” Elias testified in a closed-door hearing on Capitol Hill in December 2017, according to a declassified transcript. Actually, Steele’s allegations proved to be a collection of improbable rumors and fabricated allegations invented by Steele’s top researcher and a Clinton campaign adviser. Nonetheless, the disinformation was fed to the FBI and media, igniting criminal investigations (including illegal electronic surveillance), congressional probes, and a media frenzy that crippled Trump’s presidency with bad press for years.

In a parallel operation against Trump, Elias worked with his then-law partner Michael Sussmann and Clinton campaign officials – including Jake Sullivan, who is now President Biden’s national security adviser – to develop misleading evidence of a “secret hotline” between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that allegedly used a “back channel” connection between email servers at Trump Tower and Russian-owned Alfa Bank. These false allegations were posted on social media and brought to the attention of the FBI, triggering a separate criminal investigation targeting Trump and his campaign. Like other Russiagate probes, it was eventually discredited. But the damage was done. By spreading fake Russian dirt on Trump, Elias was able to create scandals that dogged Trump for years, tarnishing his electability. The Democratic lawyer’s machinations, however, drew scrutiny from other investigators and hurt his own reputation – albeit temporarily.

During his probe of Russiagate, Special Counsel John Durham found Elias intentionally sought to conceal Clinton’s role in the dossier. According to court records, Elias acted as a cutout for more than $1 million in campaign payments for the dossier. By laundering its payments through a law firm, the Clinton campaign and Elias were able to claim attorney-client confidentiality when Durham sought their internal emails (the assertion of that privilege also blocked investigators from accessing communications between Elias and Steele’s immediate employer, the Washington-based opposition research firm, FusionGPS). But their shell game got the Clinton campaign in trouble with the Federal Election Commission, which later fined it and the Democratic National Committee $113,000 for misreporting the purpose of the payments as “legal expenses,” rather than opposition research, in violation of FEC laws.

The Durham probe, which Elias insists was “politically motivated,” nonetheless raised ethical issues with the D.C. Bar and Elias’ former law firm, Perkins Coie, reportedly leading to their breakup in August 2021, when Elias suddenly left the powerhouse after almost 30 years. The firm, which Elias had joined fresh out of law school in 1993, grew “increasingly uncomfortable” with the unwanted scrutiny the Durham probe invited on it, according to published reports. The veteran prosecutor exposed questionable billing practices by the firm. Durham also revealed the Democratic firm had set up an FBI workspace within its Washington offices, further calling into question the FBI’s impartiality in investigating Trump. In late 2021, Elias opened his own firm, the Elias Law Group, but soon lost major clients who reportedly grew weary of his aggressive tactics and go-it-alone style.

Last year, the DNC severed its 15-year relationship with Elias; then more recently, the Biden campaign parted company with him. In 2020, Elias had quarterbacked Biden’s legal team that fought Trump’s claims in court that the election had been stolen. He also beat back GOP measures to ensure election integrity after Democrats took advantage of the COVID-19 pandemic to dramatically loosen rules for voting – including allowing ballot harvesting, drop boxes, and ballots arriving up to four days after Election Day to still be counted. Top Democratic Party officials were said to sour on Elias after he filed election-related lawsuits without consulting with them, some of which backfired with unfavorable – and lasting – rulings. Biden’s team reportedly also became frustrated with his fees. Elias billed the DNC and Biden campaign more than $20 million during the 2020 election cycle.

But Elias has since taken on other clients – including Kamala Harris – who have more than made up for the loss in revenue. So far in this election cycle, the latest FEC filings show the Elias Law Group has received a total of more than $22 million in disbursements from a host of major Democratic and anti-Trump clients.

Read more …

It’s a war act. But there’s no war.

• Alien Enemies Act is Not a Viable Legal Basis for “Operation Aurora” (Turley)

In announcing his “Operation Aurora,” former President Donald Trump has suggested that he may use the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) of 1798 to crackdown on “every illegal migrant criminal network operating on American soil.” The plan to begin mass deportations is certainly popular with the public, according to polling. However, without a declaration of war, he will likely have to look to alternative statutory vehicles for a peacetime operation. This is not the first time that the Trump campaign has invoked the AEA. Last year, the campaign cited the law as giving it the power to “remove all known or suspected gang Members, drug dealers, or Cartel Members from the U.S.” The AEA has only been used three times and each time we were in a declared war: the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II. It is a law that became infamous in its use to put Japanese, German, and Italian civilians in internment camps during World War II. In DeLacey v. United States in 1918, the Ninth Circuit wrote that:

“The first reported case arising under the [AEA] is [by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in] Lockington’s Case [in 1814] … Lockington … had refused to comply with the executive order of February 23, 1813, requiring alien enemies who were within 40 miles of tidewater to retire to such places beyond that distance from tidewater as should be designated by the marshals. He was arrested, and on petition for habeas corpus attempted to test the legality of his imprisonment. Chief Justice Tilghman said of the [AEA]: “It is a provision for the public safety, which may require that the alien should not be removed, but kept in the country under proper restraints. … It is never to be forgotten that the main object of the law is to provide for the safety of the country from enemies who are suffered to remain within it. In order to effect this safety, it might be necessary to act on sudden emergencies. … The President, being best acquainted with the danger to be apprehended, is best able to judge of the emergency which might render such measures necessary. Accordingly, we find that the powers vested in him are expressed in the most comprehensive terms.”

The laws sweeping language makes it ripe for abuse. Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Brackenridge in Lockington’s Case (1814) observed that under the AEA “the President would seem to be constituted, as to this description of persons, with the power of a Roman dictator or consul, in extraordinary cases, when the Republic was in danger, that it sustain no damage: ne quid detrimenti respublica capiat.” However, the AEA’s only limiting language is found in the triggering language for those powers: “Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event…” In Ludecke v. Watkins, 335 U.S. 160 (1948), the Supreme Court held Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote a supportive decision of the presidential authority under the AEA on when the powers expired, but not when the powers begin:

“And so we reach the claim that, while the President had summary power under the Act, it did not survive cessation of actual hostilities. This claim in effect nullifies the power to deport alien enemies, for such deportations are hardly practicable during the pendency of what is colloquially known as the shooting war. Nor does law lag behind common sense. War does not cease with a cease-fire order, and power to be exercised by the President such as that conferred by the Act of 1798 is a process which begins when war is declared but is not exhausted when the shooting stops.” This broad granting of authority under the AEA is obviously a great attraction for presidents who have rarely hesitated to use the maximal levels of their powers. However, the threshold requirement of a declared war has proven the limiting element and it is telling that the law been used only three times by presidents.

Read more …

“Once a government has a monopoly on violence, the concept of public consent is meaningless..”

• Jon Stewart: Americans Don’t Need Guns To Protect Constitutional Rights (ZH)

Donald Trump’s recent return to Butler, PA where he was nearly assassinated due to Secret Service incompetence (or deliberate failure) has got the political left all worked up. Perhaps in part because Thomas Crooks failed to complete his task despite being given every conceivable opportunity to succeed, but also because Elon Musk was there to support the rally. Nothing Musk said was particularly shocking to normal Americans, but his comments on the necessity of the 2nd Amendment as a means to keep the 1st Amendment have outraged Democrats. Coastal progressives in particular have sought to disarm the rest of the nation for decades. Gun control and ultimately gun confiscation are foundational policies that their movement revolves around. The question is, why? Why are they so desperate to violate the Bill of Rights and take firearms away?

They certainly don’t care about people’s safety. If they did, they wouldn’t have cheered on the baseless and violent BLM and Antifa riots. Social media is replete with woke activists calling for the deaths of conservatives. These are not peaceful people seeking nirvana, they are happy to use violence if they think it will get them more power. This is a problem that old-school Democrats like Jon Stewart continue to enable while pretending it doesn’t exist. Stewart, clinging to cultural relevancy on his newly rebooted Daily Show, attempted to lampoon Elon Musk over his assertions on the 2A in Butler, but his strange diatribe about representative democracy is a retro callback to the 1990s and comes off as rather naive. Does Stewart really believe this nonsense? It’s hard to say, but the past few years have made his arguments obsolete.

The 1st Amendment is not protected by the “consent of the governed.” Americans just experienced a three year period of active censorship under the Biden Administration working closely with Big Tech and social media companies. Stewart shrugs off such censorship as if it’s overblown and doesn’t matter, but even Mark Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook was under pressure from the establishment to silence dissent on a number of issues from covid mandates to Hunter Biden’s laptop. Contrary to Stewart’s delusions about democracy, the reality is that the Constitution does not defend itself. According to polls a large number of Democrats desired the erasure of numerous rights during the covid scare. They don’t represent the majority, but there is more than enough of them to add weight to any authoritarian effort. And, the only thing stopping them from getting everything they want is the existence of millions of American gun owners.

It’s not as if the progressive/globalist establishment intends to give up, either. As John Kerry noted during a climate conference held by the WEF in September, their open intent is to shut down free speech rights regardless of the democratic process. If they could get rid of the 1st Amendment, they would. The only reason they haven’t is because the US government doesn’t have a monopoly on force. In Stewart’s fantasy land, a free Republic is a self perpetuating entity that continues on for eternity once it is set in motion, driven only by the goodness and purity of ideology and the voting process. But elections can be subverted by top-down corruption and the system has clearly been broken for some time. One only need to look at the malicious government crackdown on speech happening in the UK to see what happens when a population is disarmed.

There are examples of this across the globe, yet in the world of The Daily Show there is some kind of magical force embedded in “democracy” that protects the populace from abuse. To be sure, the act of violent rebellion is generally a last resort after all other measures have been exhausted. It’s just important to recognize that there’s always a breaking point and America is very close now. Stewart ironically contradicts his own premise when he claims guns “only protect the speech of the people holding the guns.” Yes Jon, that’s why the 2A exists, so that everyone’s speech is protected. Because a representative government can become a tyrannical government as easily as any other government. All it takes is time. The 2A ensures that the “consent of the governed” is never manufactured or forced without the threat of rebellion. Once a government has a monopoly on violence, the concept of public consent is meaningless and the elites will do as they please.

As Thomas Jefferson once wisely stated in reference to the potential for future citizen rebellion: “…What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Read more …

WWIII as their legacy for Trump.

• Biden, Netanyahu Closer to Consensus on Attacking Iran (Antiwar)

President Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu moved closer to an understanding on Israel’s plans to attack Iran during their phone call on Wednesday, Axios reported on Thursday. The report, which cited US and Israeli officials, said that the US had accepted Israel is going to launch a major attack on Iran soon and is only concerned that striking certain types of targets could dramatically escalate things. However, Iran has vowed it will respond to any type of Israeli attack, and the situation could easily turn into a full-blown war that would involve the US. An Israeli official told Axios that the Israeli plans are still a bit more aggressive than the US would like. The US has been warning against striking nuclear facilities or oil infrastructure, and recent media reports have said Israel will likely target military infrastructure.

Netanyahu convened his security cabinet on Thursday to brief them on the situation with the US and is expected to get approval for him and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant to set a timeline for the Israeli attack. The Times of Israel reported that the US and Israel will continue conversations on the plans in the coming days, signaling the attack is not imminent. NBC News reported on Tuesday that the US was considering supporting Israel’s attack with direct airstrikes of its own, although US officials said intelligence support was more likely. The Jerusalem Post reported that the US was offering Israel a “compensation package” of military aid and full diplomatic support if it only hits US-approved targets in Iran. The US has also committed to defending Israel from any Iranian response.

Iran fired nearly 200 ballistic missiles at Israel last week in response to a string of Israeli escalations, including the assassination of Hamas’s political chief, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran. Immediately after the attack, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said the US would work with Israel to ensure Iran suffers “severe consequences.”

Read more …

So noble.

• Biden Warns Iran Against Going After Trump – WaPo (RT)

US president Joe Biden has told the White House National Security Council to warn Iran against trying to assassinate Donald Trump, the Washington Post has reported. The message that the US president wanted to be relayed to Tehran was that Washington would treat any attempt on the life of his predecessor, or on that of any other former American official, as an act of war, the paper wrote on Friday. WaPo cited National Security Council spokesman Sean Savett, who insisted that Biden has directed “every resource” to make sure that the Republican Party nominee is well protected and that his security detail receives intelligence data in a timely manner about any dangers he might face. “We consider this a national and homeland security matter of the highest priority, and we strongly condemn Iran for these brazen threats,” Savett stated.

Tehran will face “severe consequences” if it attacks any American citizen, including people who “continue to serve the US or those who formerly served,” he stressed. Late last month, Trump claimed that there were “big threats” on his life, coming from Iran. He said that the two assassination attempts against him in recent months, at a rally in Pennsylvania in July then, in September, at his golf club in Florida, “may or may not involve” Tehran. WaPo, citing sources familiar with the matter, wrote that currently there is no evidence tying Tehran to either of the incidents. The former president’s statement came a day after his team announced that they had a meeting with representatives of US intelligence, who warned them about Tehran’s alleged plans to kill Trump and to “sow chaos” in the country.

Politico said on Friday that it had talked to dozens of officials, who claimed that Iran’s efforts to kill Trump, as well as persons involved in the assassination of top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, were “even more extensive and aggressive than previously reported.” Soleimani died in a US drone strike outside an airport in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, in January 2020, during Trump’s period in office, and Iran has promised that he would be avenged. However, after Trump was wounded in the ear in an assassination attempt on July 13, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani stressed that Tehran “strongly rejects” any suggestion that it was involved. “Iran is determined to pursue legal action against Trump for his direct role in the crime of assassinating Martyr General Qassem Soleimani,” Kanaani said.

Read more …

“About the notion that broadcast licenses should be up for bidding anew, Collins said: “If it causes a conversation in the halls of New York, and panic, maybe I’m all for it.”

• CBS News Faces Integrity Crisis Amid Bias Concerns, Missteps (JTN)

CBS News was once home to giants in the journalism industry. Walter Cronkite – known as “the most trusted man in America” – broadcast from a bomber in WWII on a mission over Germany. Edward R. Murrow changed investigative reporting forever with a 1960 documentary that is still taught in journalism schools today. And Mike Wallace could stir fear in the hearts of interview subjects with a simple phone call from his “60 Minutes” office. But today the news giant once heralded as the “Tiffany network” is blinking with crisis as the neutrality of its anchors is challenged and the integrity of editing at its most famous news magazine has been questioned. Many believe the storm of credibility was born two decades ago when then-Anchor Dan Rather’s supposed scoop on George W. Bush’s Vietnam war service factually crumbled, a miscue so embarrassing it sunk the 60 Minutes II franchise for good.

But a steady run of miscues and clashes in the era of Donald Trump and Middle East war has only inflamed the distrust – at least among conservatives – to scandalous levels and left a cloud lingering over the entire CBS News franchise. The most recent accusations of liberal bias exploded when CBS announced ahead of the vice presidential debate between Republican Sen. JD Vance and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic nominee, that its moderators would not “fact-check” the candidates’ answers. Instead, CBS moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan pulled a fast one, and several times argued with him about assertions. At one point when Vance answered their questions pushing back, they interrupted him and cut his mic off. In another event, The Free Press reported that a memo from Mark Memmott, the network’s director of standards and practices, told CBS reporters not to refer to Jerusalem as being in Israel, though it is the nation’s capital city and home to the U.S. embassy.

But perhaps the most politically incendiary incident, and the one that has Trump calling for CBS to lose its broadcast license, involved “60 Minutes” on Monday, when the network’s flagship news show was caught subbing one rambling answer from Vice President Kamala Harris for a more coherent one. “60 Minutes is a major part of the News Organization of CBS, which has just created the Greatest Fraud in Broadcast History,” Trump posted on social media after the Monday night show aired. “CBS should lose its license, and it should be bid out to the Highest Bidder, as should all other Broadcast Licenses, because they are just as corrupt as CBS — and maybe even WORSE!” The Harris interview was conducted by Bill Whitaker at the Naval Observatory over the weekend and an edited portion aired on “Face the Nation,” also a CBS show.

When Whittaker asked about U.S. diplomacy in Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reaction to the Biden administration’s desire to scale down the war against Hamas, Harris responded with: “Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by or a result of many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region.” But when the question aired later on “60 Minutes,” the response by Harris was different. “We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end,” the presidential nominee said. In an additional social-media post by Trump, he said: “With me, 60 Minutes does the exact opposite! They take everything I say, realize how totally BRILLIANT it is, and take it out. So, with Kamala they add, with ‘TRUMP’ they delete. Like the Democrat Party, THEY ARE A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY!”

While progressive pundits quickly came to the defense of CBS, saying that edits for the sake of time and “concision” are common in news media, Trump’s assertion that broadcast licenses ought to be in play due to media bias is gaining traction among conservatives. “I want to hold these people responsible. We’re giving them FCC licenses. They don’t deserve them,” Arizona senatorial candidate Kari Lake said Thursday on the “Just the News, No Noise,” TV show with host John Solomon. Broadcast licenses are considered a shared “public common” after the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, an obscenity case, that the federal government had jurisdiction to manage the airwaves.

Similarly, former Congressman Doug Collins, who has served as legal counsel for Trump, told co-host Amanda Head that some of Trump’s lawyers will be filing an FEC complaint claiming that CBS has been making in-kind political contributions to the Harris-Walz campaign. About the notion that broadcast licenses should be up for bidding anew, Collins said: “If it causes a conversation in the halls of New York, and panic, maybe I’m all for it.” Michael Whatley, the chair of the Republican National Committee, called the behavior of CBS “appalling” during the “John Solomon Reports” podcast Thursday. “CBS and 60 Minutes are lying to the American people about what was said and what was done in that interview,” Whatley said. “This is just the latest example that the media is absolutely not going to play it straight.” Noting the rise of alternative media and falling ratings for broadcast news shows, he added: “There is a reckoning that is taking place with the mainstream, traditional media outlets that’s long overdue.”

Falling ratings are a long-term problem and has caused layoffs – and O’Donnell took a pay cut in 2022 to $3.8 million annually, down from $8 million previously – but as recently as four years ago the vice presidential debate between Harris and then-Vice President Mike Pence, scored 25 percent more viewers than did last month’s Vance-Walz debate. Another problem faced by CBS is its decision in February to lay off senior investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge after she reported stories that irritated progressive activists, including some involving the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, has launched an investigation into Herridge’s termination.

Herridge went on to say that when she interviewed then-President Trump in 2020, CBS News posted the entire interview transcript. And on Wednesday, Herridge weighed in on the “60 Minutes” fiasco, posting on the X social-media platform: “As Trump campaign calls on @60Minutes to release ‘full, unedited transcript’ of Kamala Harris interview … there is precedent.” The New York Post quoted unnamed sources as saying that “Herridge had pushed for the publication of her full transcript at the time and that it was a “special case.” “It’s about transparency and standing behind the integrity of the final edit,” Herridge posted Wednesday.

Read more …

How on earth can you hold a free and fair election under such rules?

• 3 Million Non-Citizens Have Texas Driver’s Licenses Allowed As Voter ID (JTN)

Texas GOP Rep. Chip Roy and state Rep. Brian Harrison, R, said that the Texas Department of Public Safety has confirmed there are nearly 3 million non-citizens with driver’s licenses in the state that secretary of state has allowed for use as voter ID. The announcement on Thursday came after an Tuesday advisory by the Texas secretary of state’s elections director, Christina Worrell Adkins, which states that while non-citizen driver’s licenses are not acceptable as voter ID, they can be used if the person is already a registered voter. “BREAKING: according to [Texas Department of Public Safety] – 2,824,613 non-citizens have DL’s, CDL’s, or ID – after working with my friend [Brian Harrison] to run this to ground. That’s why this matters – a lot,” Roy posted on X on Thursday as he shared his earlier post with a Texas Scorecard article about non-citizens using driver’s licenses as voter ID.

“Almost 3 million non-citizens have been issued driver licenses, CDLs, or IDs in Texas,” Harrison wrote Thursday as he shared Roy’s post on X. “The Secretary of State’s office is instructing poll workers to give ballots to people with non-citizen driver licenses. [Chip Roy] is right: ‘this matters a lot.’ Developing..” The secretary of state’s advisory explains that only U.S. citizens are permitted to register to vote and cast ballots in Texas. However, the guidance also states that a person with a non-citizen driver’s license or identification card can vote if they are listed on the voter rolls. If the person is not on the voter rolls and has a non-citizen driver’s license or ID, then they may still vote by provisional ballot.

Read more …

Fill up the voter rolls with illegals well in advance and no-one can take them off less than 90 days before the election.

• DOJ Sues Virginia Over Removing Non-Citizens From Voter Rolls (JTN)

The Department of Justice has sued Virginia over removing non-citizens from its voter rolls ahead of the November election. The DOJ announced the suit Friday against the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Virginia State Board of Elections, and the Virginia Commissioner of Elections for allegedly violating the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. The NVRA prevents states from using systematic programs to remove ineligible voters from voter rolls within 90 days of a federal election, according to the DOJ. “As the National Voter Registration Act mandates, officials across the country should take heed of the law’s crystal clear and unequivocal restrictions on systematic list maintenance efforts that fall within 90 days of an election,” Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke said in a statement. “By cancelling voter registrations within 90 days of Election Day, Virginia places qualified voters in jeopardy of being removed from the rolls and creates the risk of confusion for the electorate.

Congress adopted the National Voter Registration Act’s quiet period restriction to prevent error-prone, eleventh hour efforts that all too often disenfranchise qualified voters,” she added. “The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy and the Justice Department will continue to ensure that the rights of qualified voters are protected.” Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) slammed the DOJ over the litigation. “With less than 30 days until the election, the Biden-Harris Department of Justice is filing an unprecedented lawsuit against me and the Commonwealth of Virginia, for appropriately enforcing a 2006 law signed by Democrat Tim Kaine that requires Virginia to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls – a process that starts with someone declaring themselves a non-citizen and then registering to vote,” Youngkin said in a statement Friday.

“Virginians – and Americans – will see this for exactly what it is: a desperate attempt to attack the legitimacy of the elections in the Commonwealth, the very crucible of American Democracy. With the support of our Attorney General, we will defend these commonsense steps, that we are legally required to take, with every resource available to us. Virginia’s election will be secure and fair, and I will not stand idly by as this politically motivated action tries to interfere in our elections, period.” The DOJ lawsuit come two weeks after the department sued Alabama for removing ineligible voters from its voter rolls.

Read more …

“..the main goal of Russian diplomacy is now “crisis management and the prevention of… a truly large-scale conflict.”

• NATO Could Have Prevented Ukraine Conflict – Hungary FM (RT)

The current standoff between Russia and the West could have been avoided if NATO and the US had engaged in serious talks on Moscow’s demand for security guarantees, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has argued. In December 2021, two months before Russia launched its military operation in Ukraine, it submitted a list of security proposals to NATO and the US, insisting that the bloc withdraw its military infrastructure to the 1997 borders. The key point of the document was to halt NATO’s expansion, particularly regarding Ukraine, which has long sought to join the military bloc. However, the bloc rejected the proposal, citing its “open-door policy” on new members. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that one of the key reasons for the conflict was the threat of Kiev’s potential NATO membership.

In an interview with RIA Novosti on Saturday, Szijjarto suggested that the Russian terms could have served as a basis for avoiding the Ukraine conflict. “I remember those times. I think that what was missing there was a serious discussion… I do believe that if someone has an issue… then it should be discussed. And these discussions have not taken place, unfortunately,” the diplomat said. Szijjarto acknowledged that any debate on what might have happened is now moot, but stressed that he wishes “those dialogues had taken place. Because if they had taken place, we might not be in the situation we are right now.” In May, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said Moscow’s proposal on security guarantees was no longer on the table, and that the main goal of Russian diplomacy is now “crisis management and the prevention of… a truly large-scale conflict.”

Szijjarto, along with other top Hungarian officials, have repeatedly criticized the West’s approach to the Ukraine crisis, calling on both sides to reach a ceasefire and start peace talks. He has also blasted Western sanctions against Moscow as ineffective and crippling the EU economy. Russia has never ruled out talks on Ukraine, and Putin said in June that Moscow would immediately agree to a ceasefire and start peace talks if Kiev were to withdraw troops from the Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions and commit to neutrality. Later, he said that any engagement was out of the question as long as Ukrainian troops occupy part of Russia’s Kursk Region.

Read more …

“..options for fighting Russia are being continuously worked out within the bloc, military budgets of member states are being boosted, and Western economies are being militarized..”

• NATO Planning New Russia Strategy – Politico (RT)

NATO’s defense ministers will meet in Brussels next week to start rethinking the bloc’s decades-old strategy on relations with Russia, Politico has reported Despite ties between NATO and Russia hitting “rock bottom” after the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, the ‘Founding Act’ with Moscow remains in force within the US-led alliance, the outlet noted in an article on Friday. The 1997 document, which states that NATO and Russia share a common goal to “build a stable, peaceful and undivided Europe,” does not reflect the current situation, Politico wrote. During its summit in Washington in July, NATO labeled Moscow the “most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security,” while Russia continues to insist that the bloc’s eastward expansion is an “existential danger” for the country.

NATO countries are now trying to “map out different elements of [the Russia] strategy and advance the debates inside the alliance that takes us to subjects like the future of the NATO-Russia Founding Act,” a senior US official was quoted by Politico as saying. “It is time to now craft a new strategy in terms of specific positions” of the member states, the official added. Lower-level discussions on the new Russia policy have been underway for months within the bloc, and next week the issue will be addressed at the ministerial level, the report said. NATO previously announced that it planned to formulate a new strategy before its summit in The Hague, to be held next summer. “Right now we have to have an understanding across the alliance… that the [Founding Act] and the NATO-Russia Council were built for a different era, and I think the allies are prepared to say that was a different era in our relationship with Russia, and therefore something new is merited,” the US official explained.

The official described the strategy as a “political exercise,” adding that its military implications are expected to be “limited.” According to Politico, there are differences among members when it comes to the new policy towards Moscow, as some are concerned that an overly aggressive “signal” could “destabilize” Russia. There are also questions over Hungary and Slovakia, which see “strategic value” in engaging with Moscow, despite being NATO members, it added. Earlier this week, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko said NATO is no longer hiding the fact that it is bracing for a potential military conflict with Moscow. Possible options for fighting Russia are being continuously worked out within the bloc, military budgets of member states are being boosted, and Western economies are being militarized, he said. It was not Russia but NATO that took “the path of confrontation” by refusing to engage in dialogue, Grushko insisted. Because of this, the US-led bloc bears full responsibility for a “major European security crisis” caused by the Ukraine conflict, he added.

Read more …

“We reset our workforce levels to align with our financial reality and to a more focused set of priorities..”

• Boeing To Fire 17,000 Employees (RT)

The US manufacturer Boeing has announced plans to eliminate around 10% of its workforce over the coming months, as the aerospace giant’s losses continue to mount and a strike undercuts the production of its best-selling planes. The job cuts will include executives and managers in addition to ordinary employees, according to a memo shared by the company’s new president and CEO Kelly Ortberg on Friday. The corporation employs nearly 170,000 people worldwide. “Our business is in a difficult position, and it is hard to overstate the challenges we face together,” said Ortberg, who became CEO of the troubled aircraft maker two months ago. A month after he took the helm, 33,000 hourly workers went on strike. “We reset our workforce levels to align with our financial reality and to a more focused set of priorities,” he added.

The “tough” decision is aimed at completing structural changes that will ensure the company’s ability to stay competitive and execute the customers’ orders over the long term, the CEO emphasized. Ortberg added that Boeing is also delaying its program to develop the 777X airplane until 2026 and halting production of its commercial 767 freighters in 2027 after fulfilling remaining orders. Earlier this week, Boeing said it had filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board against the union that represents its striking West Coast factory workers. The company emphasized that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers had failed to bargain in good faith during the four-week work stoppage, adding that it was “issuing misinformation to its members about the status of negotiations.”

The company earlier withdrew a contract offer it had made to the striking machinists, saying that further negotiations “do not make sense at this point.” The union had previously stated that Boeing had refused to improve wages, retirement plans and vacation or sick leave. In a preliminary report on the financial results issued on Friday, the corporation said it expects to have an operating cash outflow of $1.3 billion in the third quarter, and that it will report a loss of $9.97 per share.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Maher

 

 

Phone frogs

 

 

Material girl

 

 

Voila
https://twitter.com/i/status/1844929481615790263

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 6 2024

Oct 062024
 
 October 6, 2024  Posted by at 8:35 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  130 Responses »


Francisco Goya Witches’ Sabbath 1798

 

• Biden Doubts US Presidential Election Will Be Peaceful (TASS)
• We Can’t Have The World Laughing At US – Trump (RT)
• Political Storm Rages Over FEMA Disaster Relief Weeks Before Election Day (JTN)
• Musk Accuses Biden Administration of Blocking Disaster Relief (RT)
• Biden/Harris Doctrine Has Brought the World Closer to World War III (AmG)
• Israel Should Strike Iran’s Nuclear Sites – Trump (RT)
• Soleimani Wins: Israel Falls Into The Trap of the Axis of Resistance (SCF)
• The Resistance Wants Victory (Pacini)
• Tanker Blown Up By Houthis As Disasters Mount For Biden-Harris (ZH)
• NATO Plans Major Force Buildup – Welt (RT)
• New NATO Chief Visits Ukraine (Antiwar)
• Kiev May Have To Accept Loss Of Territory – Stoltenberg (RT)
• Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico To Visit Russia For Victory Day (RT)
• Robert Fico Is A Rare Voice Of Sanity When It Comes To Russia (Amar)
• Le Pen Trial Chance for Establishment to Bring Her Party to Its Knees (Sp.)
• Alex Jones Creditors Target Future Assets – Which Could Include His Name (ZH)
• Argentina’s Milei Accused Of Copying Speech From The West Wing (RT)

 

 

 

 

FEMA sources
https://twitter.com/i/status/1842201497028689989

 

 

Rally

 

 

Biden press

 

 

Trump NC


Trump DEI
https://twitter.com/i/status/1842394029012480193

 

 

Fitton

Ashli Babbitt

Vivek Bolton
https://twitter.com/i/status/1842234866223436183

Liz Cheney Harris

 

 

 

 

• Biden Doubts US Presidential Election Will Be Peaceful (TASS)

US President Joe Biden is convinced that the upcoming presidential election in the United States will be free and fair, but doubts that it will be peaceful. “I’m confident it [the election] will be free and fair. I don’t know whether it will be peaceful,” he said, answering to a reporter’s question at the White House. “The things that [former President and Republican candidate Donald] Trump has said and the things that he said last time around when he didn’t like the outcome of the election were very dangerous.” Biden added that Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, had dodged the question of whether he will accept any outcome of the vote.

“They haven’t even accepted the outcome of the last election. So, I’m concerned about what they are going to do,” he said. The US will hold a presidential election on November 5. Incumbent US President Joe Biden was expected to run on the Democratic Party ticket, but after his disastrous performance at the June debate with Trump, he decided to quit the race and instead supported the nomination of his Vice President Kamala Harris. Her candidacy was later formally endorsed at a Democratic Party Convention.

Read more …

“They respected us. They respected us more than they’ve ever respected us, and now they laugh at us. We can’t have them laugh at us.”

• We Can’t Have The World Laughing At US – Trump (RT)

The US has squandered respect on the world stage, becoming a laughing stock, former President Donald Trump said at a campaign event in the swing state of Pennsylvania. Trump held a rally to drum up support for his re-election in the city of Butler on Saturday, returning to the site where he nearly survived an assassination attempt in July. The Republican nominee vowed to lift up the US economy, combat violent crime and crack down on illegal immigration through the southern border. “Everything has to be the best,” he said. “We have to have the best schools. We have to have strong borders. We don’t want bad people coming in and hurting us,”“You deserve a nation that builds things again, makes things better, that aims for the stars once more, and that once again, commands respect, and we want to get respect like we had it four years ago,” he told the rally crowd.

The entire world respected us. They respected us. They respected us more than they’ve ever respected us, and now they laugh at us. We can’t have them laugh at us. Throughout his campaign, Trump has accused the “weak” administration of President Joe Biden and the Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris, of damaging America’s reputation. He claimed that the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza would not have broken out if he was still in charge. Trump also argued that he had good relations with all of the world leaders, including presidents Vladimir Putin of Ukraine and Xi Jinping of China. He repeatedly claimed that he would quickly resolve the Russian-Ukrainian conflict if elected for a second term in November. Biden and Harris, meanwhile, have accused Trump of undermining NATO and failing to stand up to Russia. “Our NATO allies are so thankful that you are no longer president,” Harris told Trump during a televised debate last month.

Read more …

FEMA just flatly denies. That’s one way to do it.

• Political Storm Rages Over FEMA Disaster Relief Weeks Before Election Day (JTN)

After the devastation of Hurricane Helene, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) appears to be facing a storm of its own, as allegations of mismanagement and obstruction fly just weeks before the November election. A series of Republicans and alleged whistleblowers have accused the agency of mismanaging funds that were designated for disaster relief and using it for illegal immigrants at the southern border instead. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Wednesday admitted to reporters that FEMA does not “have the funds to make it through the [hurricane] season,” but said it does have enough to handle Hurricane Helene, which has resulted in over 200 deaths since making landfall in Florida last week. The secretary and FEMA have not indicated how much more money they would be needing to get through the rest of the season, which concludes at the end of November, but said the money approved through Congress’ continuing resolution would not be enough.

A group of Republican senators expressed concern on Friday over the allegations that FEMA’s “entanglement” with the border crisis could impact its ability to provide disaster relief. “FEMA’s continued entanglement in DHS’s efforts to respond to the border crisis could impact its readiness and emergency response mission,” the Republican lawmakers wrote to Mayorkas. “Rather than ensuring FEMA is ready to respond to hurricanes and other emergencies, FEMA has been pulled into a border crisis mission.” The senators also requested information on how many full-time FEMA employees have since been deployed at the border, and how much money FEMA reprogrammed to support its border-related mission duties. Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz backed up the senators’ concerns in his own letter to Mayorkas on Friday, in which he claimed FEMA whistleblowers said the agency used taxpayer funds marked for disaster relief on non-disaster-relief programs that housed and supported illegal immigrants on the country’s southern border.

Gaetz also said that he was told by whistleblowers that FEMA employees are on the ground in areas impacted by the hurricane, such as North Carolina, but do not have deployment orders so they are waiting on the clock in hotels. FEMA, the White House, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have denied all of the allegations of misappropriating its funds, claiming the money used for the border and for disaster relief are from two separate programs. The agency has even created a “rumor response” page on its website. “No money is being diverted from disaster response needs,” the agency said in a news release. “FEMA’s disaster response efforts and individual assistance is funded through the Disaster Relief Fund, which is a dedicated fund for disaster efforts. Disaster Relief Fund money has not been diverted to other non-disaster related efforts. “The funding for communities to support migrants is appropriated by Congress to Customs and Border Patrol – it has nothing to do with FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund,” it added.

FEMA has spent approximately $650 million on grants to non-profits and local authorities that resettle and aid migrants so far, per Fox News, and has sent employees down to the border to help address the increase in unaccompanied minors that began in 2021. But the money for grants is far less than the roughly $20 billion budget for the agency’s disaster relief fund. Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk on Friday also criticized the federal response to Hurricane Helene, claiming that the government was blocking flights trying to bring Starlinks and aid to hurricane victims, after a source told Musk the airspace was shut down. The source texted Musk that FEMA is blocking shipments and seizing goods from volunteers. He also claimed the government is throttling private flights in the North Carolina airspace, which is making it harder to bring in supplies and Starlinks.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg denied the reports that they are making it harder for civilians to help with disaster relief, stating that “no one is shutting down the airspace and FAA doesn’t block legitimate rescue and recovery flights.” FEMA also denied the accusation, stating that reports they were confiscating aid meant for the survivors were “false” but that such rumors often spread after disasters. “FEMA does not take donations and/or food from survivors or voluntary organizations,” the agency said in its news release. “Donations of food, water, or other goods are handled by voluntary agencies who specialize in storing, sorting, cleaning and distributing donated items.”

Read more …

“As of Friday, FEMA had spent $45 million on relief efforts following Hurricane Helene, or 14 times less than it spent housing illegal immigrants last year..”

• Musk Accuses Biden Administration of Blocking Disaster Relief (RT)

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has accused US President Joe Biden’s administration of “actively blocking” the supply of Starlink internet terminals and critical aid to areas of North Carolina devastated by Hurricane Helene. The administration has dismissed those claims as false. Hurricane Helene tore through the American southeast last week, killing more than 225 people and leaving hundreds unaccounted for. The damage was particularly severe in Georgia and western North Carolina, where bridges were washed away and tens of thousands of people are still without running water, power, and cellphone service. During a visit to Georgia on Monday, former US President Donald Trump said that he had been in touch with Musk, who would be delivering Starlink internet terminals to affected areas. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) also said in a press release that it would be distributing Starlink terminals to local authorities.

On Friday, however, Musk claimed on his X platform that FEMA “is not merely failing to adequately help people in trouble, but is actively blocking citizens who try to help!” Citing a SpaceX engineer in North Carolina, Musk claimed that FEMA personnel are confiscating Starlink terminals and other supplies arriving in the state. In a follow-up post, the billionaire shared text messages from the engineer, who alleged that the agency had “shut down the airspace to ‘regulate’ the private choppers we are riding in to deliver Starlink and supplies.” Replying to Musk’s post, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said that “no one is shutting down the airspace and [the Federal Aviation Administration] doesn’t block legitimate rescue and recovery flights.” “If you’re encountering a problem give me a call,” Buttigieg added. The issue was apparently resolved late on Friday night, with Musk replying to thank Buttigieg and announce that “support flights are underway.”

Republican politicians and conservative pundits have accused the Biden administration of slow-walking relief to western North Carolina due to the fact that the region’s predominantly white population overwhelmingly voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020. Trump visited Georgia and North Carolina before Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris earlier this week, and claimed at a rally on Friday that “a lot of the money that was supposed to go to Georgia and supposed to go to North Carolina” had been spent on “people that came into the country illegally.”

After FEMA spent $640 million on housing for illegal immigrants over the last fiscal year, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced on Wednesday that the agency does not have enough money to make it through the rest of hurricane season, which typically runs until early December. However, the $640 million spent on illegal immigrants was not drawn from FEMA’s disaster relief fund, but from a separate fund authorized by Congress. As of Friday, FEMA had spent $45 million on relief efforts following Hurricane Helene, or 14 times less than it spent housing illegal immigrants last year, according to a White House statement.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1842331082139566081

Read more …

What? “Several experts, including Blinken and Sullivan, wrote that President Biden enhanced American foreign policy by strengthening the American economy..”

• Biden/Harris Doctrine Has Brought the World Closer to World War III (AmG)

By a strange turn of fate, on October 1, 2024, the day that Iran launched the largest ballistic missile attack ever against Israel, Foreign Affairs magazine published an article by Secretary of State Antony Blinken in which he claimed “the Biden administration’s strategy has put the United States in a much stronger geopolitical position today than it was four years ago” and that Iran is being held in check. A year earlier, Foreign Affairs published another tragically erroneous article by National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, which said, “Although the Middle East remains beset with perennial challenges, the region is quieter than it has been for decades.” Six days after this article was posted, Hamas launched a sneak attack against Israel, massacring more than 1,200 people and maiming and injuring many more. In a stunning violation of journalistic ethics, Foreign Affairs allowed Sullivan to revise his article after the Hamas terrorist attack. Here is a link to the original version.

In these articles, Biden officials are trying to rewrite history by manufacturing false narratives of a successful Biden national security doctrine that they claim has enhanced U.S. and global security. This is, of course, preposterous. Not only has there been a huge increase in global instability since Donald Trump left office in January 2021, the Biden-Harris administration has brought the world closer to World War III because of an increased chance Russia could use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, the real prospect of an Israel-Iran War, a new Russia-China-Iran-North Korea Axis, a growing chance that China will attack Taiwan, and other current and potential crises.

Several Biden allies have tried to invent a so-called Biden Doctrine since 2021. Most made fatuous claims that Biden was reversing the damage done by President Trump to the country’s alliances, deterrence, and global leadership despite clear evidence that Trump strengthened alliances and had a successful foreign policy that brought global stability and kept U.S. troops out of new wars. Others asserted that Biden “restored trust abroad for the U.S.,” a claim that many U.S. allies would dispute. Several experts, including Blinken and Sullivan, wrote that President Biden enhanced American foreign policy by strengthening the American economy. The huge advantage that Donald Trump currently has in the polls over Kamala Harris on the economy proves this isn’t true either.

In January 2024, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote an article titled, “A Biden Doctrine for the Middle East Is Forming. And It’s Big” on a supposed new Biden Middle East peace initiative to quickly end the Hamas/Israel war. Under this plan, the Biden administration would bring peace to the Middle East with a tough stand on Iran, push for recognition of a Palestinian state, and greatly scale up the U.S. security alliance with Saudi Arabia. None of these things happened. Instead, Middle East security has deteriorated in 2024 to the worst level in decades.

Read more …

His big blind spot.

• Israel Should Strike Iran’s Nuclear Sites – Trump (RT)

Israel should carry out a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities to avenge Tehran’s recent missile attack on the Jewish state, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has argued. Earlier this week, Iran fired around 180 missiles at Israel, calling it retaliation for the assassinations of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, both of whom had close ties to Tehran. The attack killed one Palestinian in the West Bank, while the Israeli military acknowledged that some of the projectiles hit its air bases. The attack also followed what Israel called a “limited ground operation” in southern Lebanon targeting Hezbollah. Speaking at a campaign event in North Carolina on Friday, Trump, known for his hawkish stance on Iran, disagreed with US President Joe Biden, who had earlier refused to support an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

“They asked him, what do you think about Iran, would you hit Iran? And he goes, ‘As long as they don’t hit the nuclear stuff.’ That’s the thing you want to hit, right? I mean, it’s the biggest risk we have, nuclear weapons,” he said. “When they asked him that question, the answer should have been, hit the nuclear first, and worry about the rest later,” Trump added. As president, Trump spearheaded the US withdrawal in 2018 from the nuclear deal with Iran. Under the agreement, Iran had agreed to limit its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. At the time, however, Trump argued that the deal did little to permanently prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Following the Iranian strike on Israel, Axios reported that West Jerusalem is eyeing a “significant retaliation” for the missile barrage and that all options are on the table, including strikes on Tehran’s nuclear facilities. Other potential targets could reportedly include gas and oil rigs or air defense systems, while targeted assassinations could also be considered. Meanwhile, according to an Al Jazeera report, Iran warned the US that any Israeli attack could be met with an “unconventional response.” As tensions continue to soar in the Middle East, Politico reported that Biden is growing increasingly frustrated by Israel’s conduct, including recent attacks on Hezbollah and the war in Gaza, with the White House said to be acknowledging the possibility that it may not be able to prevent a full-scale “regional war.”

Read more …

“..one of the greatest military thinkers in history – the man largely responsible for creating the trap that Israel has just fallen into, four years after his death..”

“Soleimani’s strategy was focused on creating a prolonged war, wearing down the Zionist regime to the point of no return of its own state structure.”

• Soleimani Wins: Israel Falls Into The Trap of the Axis of Resistance (SCF)

In 2020, the U.S. military assassinated Iranian General Qassem Solemani in a terrorist attack with drones in Iraq. The purpose of the operation was simply to eliminate one of the greatest military thinkers in history – the man largely responsible for creating the trap that Israel has just fallen into, four years after his death. Much more than a mere military officer, Soleimani was a strategist and negotiator – perhaps it would not be an exaggeration to even call him a “war diplomat”. An expert in clandestine operations, intelligence and special forces’ tactics, Soleimani was responsible for enabling the network of anti-Zionist organizations known as the “Axis of Resistance”. Overcoming religious, ethnic and ideological differences between the various Islamic and anti-Zionist movements, Soleimani united different factions in a joint strategy against Israel.

Obviously, this strategy was centered on Iran and gave the Islamic Republic the leading role in the fight against the Israeli occupation and its regional proxies. However, one of the keys to the success of the Axis is precisely its largely decentralized nature, guaranteeing autonomy of action for its members, without tight Iranian control over all the acts of the coalition. The Axis of Resistance was victorious in Syria, where several militias, with the support of Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), defeated ISIS and other Israeli proxies. At the time, Soleimani’s military diplomatic success was so great that even a dialogue with the Kurdish militias (historically supported by the West) was possible at a time of confrontation against more dangerous groups – such as ISIS itself. Soleimani’s survival was perceived as an existential threat by Israel, encouraging the Zionist lobby in the U.S. to push for a targeted assassination operation.

The main problem, however, is that targeted assassinations are rarely effective against highly ideological groups and countries with well-defined war strategies. Soleimani’s death did not dismantle the Axis, but rather further united the militias around Iran – including the Palestinian Sunni militias, which have historically suffered a struggle for influence between Shiites and Wahhabis. Today, no one can deny Iran’s great influence over the Palestinian Resistance. What few people know, however, is that this process is precisely the result of the diplomatic alliances achieved by Soleimani. By killing Ismail Hannyeh, the Hamas leader closest to Iran in the entire history of the Palestinian party and responsible for the peace between the Palestinian jihadists and the Syrian government, Israel also hoped to destabilize the Axis – reducing Iranian influence and expanding the pro-Wahhabi lobby in Palestine, which, as we know, did not happen.

In the same vein, by killing Hassan Nasrallah, then head of Hezbollah, Israel planned to once again destabilize the Axis, liquidating the leadership of the main Shiite paramilitary organization and thus possibly fomenting an institutional crisis within the group. Contrary to Zionist expectations, Hezbollah did not show any shock from the assassination of its leader, except to become even more organized and confident in its engagement against the occupation. Tel Aviv will not stop carrying out targeted assassinations. It is quite possible that the response to Iran’s recent attack will be through assassination attempts against other Iranian public figures. This Israeli method is due to a specific characteristic of the regime that was acutely perceived by General Soleimani: Israel’s inability to go to all-out war. Contrary to the myth of “Israeli invincibility” commonly propagated in the West, Tel Aviv has a natural weakness due to its own geographical limitations.

The policy of targeted killings was developed by Israel to try to destabilize its enemies psychologically and institutionally, avoiding prolonged military engagements. Without the capacity for continuous replenishment of troops and resources and having a very small territory with very exposed targets, Israel fears a large-scale war – and this was precisely Soleimani’s assessment. By creating the Axis of Resistance, the Iranian general has condemned Israel to perpetual war. There will be no peace at any time. If Israel defeats Hamas and the other Palestinian militias, there will still be Hezbollah and the Syrian militias in the north. On the naval front, Yemen will continue to capture ships and strike on strategic targets throughout occupied Palestine. In Iraq, the Resistance will not stop its operations at any time. And in the end, even if it defeats all these enemies, Tel Aviv will still have to face Iran itself – the largest military power in the Middle East, which, unlike Israel, has a large population and a gigantic territory, rich in resources and protected by a complex mountainous geography.

In other words, the existence of the Axis of Resistance is Israel’s death sentence. Soleimani’s strategy was focused on creating a prolonged war, wearing down the Zionist regime to the point of no return of its own state structure. The time will come when Israel becomes unviable as a country and will have to accept negotiating terms to create a demilitarized and non-ethnic state (joint between Jews and Palestinians), putting an end to apartheid. Otherwise, years of war will destroy all the country’s resources and create an irreversible migration crisis, leading millions of citizens to flee the Middle East forever.

Read more …

“..on the eve of one of the most delicate lunar transits of the century – with the Moon entering Libra with an eclipse attached with Mars opposed to Pluto retrograde in Capricorn, which will perfect the opposition at the end of the month, a conjunction harbinger of great clashes..”

• The Resistance Wants Victory (Pacini)

This is it. Something has happened. And this ‘something’ was for many unexpected, for others much hoped for. Now we have to reckon with what will happen. There are choices that cannot be made without considering certain esoteric data, the influence of which can be decisive for the success of a strategic operation. Israel knows this well, applying the notions of the Jewish Kabbalah to all political and military choices. This time the timing was not lacking even in the response: on the eve of one of the most delicate lunar transits of the century – with the Moon entering Libra with an eclipse attached with Mars opposed to Pluto retrograde in Capricorn, which will perfect the opposition at the end of the month, a conjunction harbinger of great clashes and which opens a two-year period of important battles – the Islamic Republic of Iran took the step of responding to the Zionist fury.

The attack was claimed as a legitimate response to the assassination of Haniyeh, Nasrallah and other members of the Resistance, following what the United Nations had also declared in recent months, when Israel had violated Iran’s territorial sovereignty by attacking Tehran directly. From a technical military point of view, it was an attack that could be described as modest. Certainly not focused on gaining significant strategic advantage, the operation involved some 400 hypersonic missiles that reached targets in Israel within approximately 15 minutes, all of them strategic in nature, i.e. military bases, weapons depots, and supply platforms. No civilian targets were tracked in the executed attack, confirming the military precision and legitimacy of the attack under International Law and Ius in bello, a necessary clarification given the Israeli use of targeting civilian targets.

What this attack has shown is that Iran has succeeded in overcoming Israel’s multi-layered air defence, somewhat like it did in April under similar circumstances. This time, however, the missile attack was significantly more successful than the previous one, with more warheads impacting the targets. The missiles employed were – according to the official release of the Iranian institutions – Fatteh-1s, defined as hypersonic, employed for the first time. Bear in mind that the term ‘hypersonic’ means that the missile maintains a speed of Mach 5 (or higher) for the entire duration of the flight, not just for part of it as is the case with non-hypersonic missiles. They are missiles with a weight of 450 kilos and a range of more than 1400 kilometers. From the recovered fragments, it appears that Cheibar Shekan missiles, which are particularly fast and have a longer cruise range, were also used.

The attack was followed by a series of ‘diplomatic clarifications’: if Israel counter-attacks, Iran is ready to strike more heavily. In the meantime, the U.S. condemned the attack and deployed its armed forces in support of Israel, which had also been present in the area for some time, both with the regular missions already there and the reinforcements sent since the beginning of the fight with Hamas in October last year. The quality of this attack is perhaps to be understood more on the level of international relations than on the strictly military level. Such a ‘partial’ attack was not helpful in clearing the way for ground troops, let alone in tampering with the enemy’s systems. The affected bases had already been evacuated hours in advance and Israel was waiting for the promised retaliation. What has changed is at the international level. The U.S. barefacedly confirmed its sine qua non protection to Israel, while, let us remember, Netanyahu was in New York at the UN plenary when he issued the order to attack to kill Nasrallah and shortly afterwards invade Lebanon, starting the Third Lebanon War.

Read more …

“..This chaos has sparked global supply chain snarls for the shipping industry as commercial vessels are rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope.”

• Tanker Blown Up By Houthis As Disasters Mount For Biden-Harris (ZH)

The Biden-Harris administration is facing several disasters this week. From FEMA’s botched response in the hurricane-ravaged US Southeast to elevated WW3 risks in the Middle East, one major and ongoing crisis that went underreported this week was multiple attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels on commercial ships in the critical maritime chokepoint of the southern Red Sea. On Wednseday we penned a note, citing intelligence firm SynMax, which specializes in maritime and energy intelligence, about two commercial vessels targeted by Houthis: “Two ships targeted by Houthis in the Red Sea yesterday—Panama-flagged CORDELIA MOON and Liberian-flagged MINOAN COURAGE—the first such attacks since September,” SynMax wrote on X.

Fast forward to late week, the maritime news website gCaptain released footage showing one of the vessels, Panama-flagged tanker M/T Cordelia Moon, being hit by a Houthi unmanned surface vessel. Here’s more from the gCaptain: The incident, which occurred on October 1, involved multiple missile strikes and a hit by an USV. The vessel was unladen and in ballast condition at the time of the attack. According to the Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC), the vessel was targeted while navigating the southern Red Sea, approximately 64 nautical miles from Al Hudaydah, Yemen. The attack unfolded in several stages, according to the ship’s Master:
At 0150 UTC, three projectiles landed near the ship’s port bow.
At 0253 UTC, a fourth projectile splashed 100 meters from the aft starboard quarter.
At 0500 UTC, the ship was struck by a USV on its port side.

The JMIC confirmed that the Cordelia Moon sustained damage but did not require assistance. All crew members are reported safe, and the vessel is proceeding to its next port of call. It also assesses that vessel was likely targeted due to affiliations within the vessel’s operation structure. The current threat assessment indicates that vessels with Israeli, United States, or United Kingdom associations are at the highest risk, but ships within company structures that have been identified as making port calls to Israel are also potential targets. As tensions continue to rise in the Red Sea, this latest incident underscores the dangers to vessels and their crews in the region, particularly those with connections to countries perceived as adversaries by the Houthi rebels. Dramatic footage.

For one year, Houthi rebels have launched over 80 attacks on commercial ships in the critical maritime chokepoint, sinking two ships and killing four sailors. [..] This chaos has sparked global supply chain snarls for the shipping industry as commercial vessels are rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope. Even more concerning is the Biden-Harris administration’s failure of ‘Operation Prosperity Guardian’ to ensure freedom of navigation and maritime security in the critical chokepoint. Meanwhile, the clogged chokepoint is causing major supply chain disruptions at top global ports. [..] In August, former Navy Seal and Blackwater founder Erik Prince issued this dire warning about what the clogged Red Sea actually means for the West: America’s “credibility and deterrence” are quickly eroding.

Read more …

49 additional combat brigades of 5,000 soldiers each.

• NATO Plans Major Force Buildup – Welt (RT)

NATO is planning to dramatically increase the number of its combat units amid tensions with Russia, the daily Die Welt reported on Saturday, citing a confidential planning document it obtained from the German Defense Ministry. Entitled the “Minimum Capability Requirements,” it was reportedly written by two top commanders of the US-led bloc: American General Christopher Cavoli, the Supreme Allied Commander Europe, and French Admiral Pierre Vandier, who is responsible for the bloc’s doctrinal and transformation issues. The document outlines the basic requirements NATO has to fulfil if it plans to defend “every centimeter” of its territory in a potential conflict with Moscow, Die Welt said. Cavoli and Vandier explain that the current number of the bloc’s combat brigades is insufficient for this task and should be increased from 82 to 131.

Under German army standards, the strength of such new formations should be around 5,000 soldiers each, the newspaper said, without explaining if the NATO strategy paper outlined any specific requirements. The number of corps and divisions is also to be increased from six to 15 and from 24 to 38 respectively, according to the document. The number of ground-based air defense units equipped with systems such as US-made Patriots or the German-made IRIS-T should be expanded fivefold from 293 to 1467, the outlet said. Each of the 32 NATO members would reportedly have to contribute to these new “minimum capabilities” depending on its population. It is unclear how quickly NATO countries would be able to meet the new requirements. According to Die Welt, the German Armed Forces – the Bundeswehr – currently has eight combat brigades and one more is being formed. Berlin plans to field one more brigade by 2031.

The buildup would require “significant further funding,” the authors said, as cited by Die Welt. The plan would “probably demand significantly more than two percent” of member states’ national GDP to be spent on defense, they added. Western nations have repeatedly called Russia a major threat to their security since the start of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. The Kremlin has denied any plans to attack NATO. President Vladimir Putin has dismissed talk of a ‘Russian threat’ as “nonsense” and propaganda by Western governments aimed at scaring European populations “to extract additional expenses” from them. However, Russian senior officials have warned that the West’s ever-increasing involvement in Ukraine via weapons shipments and other military assistance creates the risk of a direct confrontation between Moscow and the bloc.

Read more …

“Ukraine is closer to NATO than ever before. And we will continue on this path until you become a member of our alliance. I very much look forward to that day..”

• New NATO Chief Visits Ukraine (Antiwar)

Former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte visited Ukraine on Thursday, just two days after replacing Jens Stoltenberg as the head of NATO, demonstrating the alliance’s commitment to the proxy war. “This is now my fifth time in Ukraine since the full onslaught of Russia started in February 2022,” Rutte said alongside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. “But this is my very first time as NATO Secretary General, and it was important to me that I come to Ukraine at the start of my mandate.” Rutte vowed he would work to support Ukraine’s continued move closer to NATO and eventual membership in the alliance. “Ukraine is closer to NATO than ever before. And we will continue on this path until you become a member of our alliance. I very much look forward to that day,” he said.

Rutte’s visit comes as Ukraine continues to lose territory to Russian forces in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region. On Wednesday, Ukraine announced it was withdrawing from the strategic Donetsk town of Vuhledar, and Russian troops are closing in on Pokrovsk. Fighting is still raging in Russia’s Kursk Oblast, but the invasion has failed to distract Russia from eastern Ukraine. Russian forces have been slowly pushing the Ukrainians back in Kursk since launching a counteroffensive a few weeks ago. Zelensky is still pushing hard for the US to allow NATO missiles to be used in long-range strikes inside Russian territory, a step that would risk a direct NATO-Russia war and nuclear escalation.

“The frontline must be strengthened, and long-range capabilities must finally be provided in the way necessary to end this war. Everyone in the alliance understands the needs,” Zelensky said in his nightly address after meeting with Rutte. Last month, the US appeared poised to approve the decision on long-range strikes but may have backed down after Russian President Vladimir Putin warned it would mean NATO is at war with Russia and ordered changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine.

Read more …

“The West should “make the conditions” that would enable Ukraine to “sit down with the Russians and get something which is acceptable… something where they survive as an independent nation”.

• Kiev May Have To Accept Loss Of Territory – Stoltenberg (RT)

Ukraine may have to recognize the loss of some of its territory to Russia in order to achieve peace and security guarantees, Jens Stoltenberg said in his first long interview after stepping down as NATO secretary-general. Stoltenberg ended his ten-year tenure as the chief of the US-led alliance on October 1. In a conversation with the Financial Times published on Friday, he said that Kiev may be forced to rethink seeing the restoration of the 1991 borders as a prerequisite for any peace deal. Stoltenberg suggested that “a kind of new momentum” would come after the US presidential election in early November, possibly ushering in “ways to try to get movement on the battlefield combined with movement around the negotiating table.” The West should “make the conditions” that would enable Ukraine to “sit down with the Russians and get something which is acceptable… something where they survive as an independent nation”.

Asked what he would propose to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, the former NATO chief offered a comparison to the resolution of the Soviet-Finnish war nearly 85 years ago. “Finland fought a brave war against the Soviet Union in ‘39. They imposed much bigger costs on the Red Army than expected,” he said. “The war ended with them giving up 10% of the territory. But they got a secure border.” Under the March 1940 treaty, Finland ceded a large portion of the Karelia region and Viipuri, its second-largest city at the time (known as Vyborg in Russia). Stoltenberg argued that Ukraine could obtain security guarantees from NATO even “if there is a line that is not necessarily the internationally recognized border.” He noted that the US defense pact with Japan does not cover Tokyo’s claim on the Kuril Islands, which are part of Russia, and that West Germany was admitted to NATO despite the fact that East Germany was controlled at the time by a separate, Soviet-aligned government.

“When there is a will, there are ways to find the solution. But you need a line which defines where Article 5 is invoked, and Ukraine has to control all the territory until that border,” Stoltenberg said, referring to the section of the NATO treaty, which outlines the duty of member states to defend each other. Russia has said that it would not accept Zelensky’s ten-point ‘peace formula’ and not relinquish control over Crimea and four other regions, which Kiev and its backers continue to view as Ukrainian territory under illegal occupation. Kiev’s hopes of imposing its terms appear more distant after the failed 2023 counteroffensive and Russia’s new victories in Donbass, where Moscow’s troops have been making steady progress throughout 2024. During its renewed advances, the Russian Army pushed the Ukrainians out of several heavily fortified towns, including Avdeevka, which fell in February, and Ugledar, which was captured earlier this week.

Read more …

“..he recently reiterated to authorities in Kiev that he does not understand why they continue to fight the Russians..”

• Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico To Visit Russia For Victory Day (RT)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico on Saturday announced his intention to visit Moscow to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany. Speaking to the host of the ‘Saturday Dialogues’ show on Slovakia’s RTVS radio, Fico said the event should have nothing to do with today’s conflicts. “Who will stop me next year, when it will be the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, from going to a peaceful demonstration in Moscow? I think I will go. And why wouldn’t I go. What does it have to do with the present time?” Fico stated, responding to a question from the host about his possible attendance. Fico said he would not let anyone forget that “freedom came from the East,” apparently referring to the liberation of Slovakia from Nazi occupation by the Soviet Army in spring 1945.

With regard to present-day Ukraine, he said he recently reiterated to authorities in Kiev that he does not understand why they continue to fight the Russians. Since returning to power in 2023, Fico has stopped Slovak weapons deliveries to Ukraine. He has also repeatedly called for a diplomatic solution to the conflict. At a press conference earlier this week, the premier vowed to do everything in his power to restore relations with Moscow once the fighting ends. Earlier this month, Fico lambasted the West for condemning the atrocities committed by the Third Reich during WWII while turning a blind eye to Ukrainian troops wearing Nazi symbols. In a speech the former site of Sered concentration camp in western Slovakia, he called on the global community to stop “silently tolerating” Kiev’s forces using Nazi insignia.

Moscow has long tried to draw the attention of the global community to the growing influence of Nazi ideology among the Ukrainian public, and has made the “denazification” of Ukraine one of the goals of the military operation it launched in February 2022. Russian Security Council deputy chairman Dmitry Medvedev accused the West earlier this year of nurturing and supporting modern Nazis by backing Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin also recently slammed the West for “forgetting the lessons of World War II” and “mocking history” by justifying the actions of current followers of the Nazis.

Read more …

“..he is heading to a meeting with the Ukrainian leadership to discuss how to continue the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine so that the Slovak economy does not go the way of Germany’s..”

• Robert Fico Is A Rare Voice Of Sanity When It Comes To Russia (Amar)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has done something very normal that in today’s West is highly unusual – speaking at a press conference in Bratislava, Fico said that when a war ends, actual peace should follow. This sensational idea is the essence of his statement that if the Ukraine War “ends during the [2023-2027] mandate of this government,” he will do “everything possible for the renewal of economic and normal relations with Russia.” What an outrageously reasonable idea! Especially for the leader of a small state that belongs to both the EU and NATO. And all the more so as he is heading to a meeting with the Ukrainian leadership to discuss how to continue the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine so that the Slovak economy does not go the way of Germany’s – a slow, then increasingly rapid collapse by energy strangulation at the hands of Washington and Kiev.

Fico made the remarks about re-establishing normality with Russia – which would go far toward re-establishing normality in Europe in general – at a press conference on his government’s new tax policies, namely increases. They are needed, Fico argues, to lower a fiscal deficit that has grown bad enough to lead to a downgrade by Fitch International at the end of last year due to what the ratings agency called a “deterioration in public finances and an unclear consolidation path.” In other words, like all other EU countries, Slovakia is struggling with economic problems. Its government seeks to tackle them by deficit reduction; the opposition does its part and disagrees. So far, nothing unusual. But there is something that is very unusual in the Slovak case – namely, the clearsighted and open acknowledgement of two facts by the leader.

First, that Slovakia has no good reason to make its problems worse by giving up on comparatively inexpensive energy from Russia, whether in the shape of oil or gas. Never mind that the EU exerts, in Fico’s words, “huge pressure” to bend Slovakia to its will. Indeed, as Fico has correctly pointed out, grand gestures of cutting yourself off from Russian energy tend to end up with buying it anyhow, only at a higher price and via middlemen. And secondly, that the eventual end of the Ukraine conflict should lead to a rapid re-establishment of normal commercial and political relations with Russia. Unfortunately, there as well, the Slovak leadership is a lonely voice; the only comparably sane positions on these questions are to be found in Hungary. It is true that there are more and more voices among yesterday’s ultra-hardliners in the West who are beginning to strike a different, more timid tone now that Moscow is winning the war against both Ukraine and NATO.

Germany’s Olaf Scholz is begging for a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is slowly dawning on NATO’s former figurehead, Jens Stoltenberg, that Ukraine will lose territory; and France’s Emmanuel Macron is becoming gloomy about the potential ‘end’ of the EU. But unfortunately, there are enough obstinate hardliners left, and even those who are beginning to get cold feet are still nurturing delusions such as a territorially (and otherwise) reduced Ukraine inside NATO.Even if and when the EU finally learns its lesson, things will not be easy at all. Though Fico could hardly be expected to say anything to the contrary, there is one part of his statement that is not quite as realistic as the rest – that the “European Union needs Russia, and Russia needs the European Union.” In principle, yes – as neighbors, the EU and Russia should derive great mutual advantages from stable and persistent cooperation.

But in reality, as shaped by Western economic warfare via sanctions, Russia has ever less interest in the EU, for two reasons: The EU has revealed itself as knowing no limits, not even of elementary self-interest, in its obedience to the ongoing US attempts to degrade Russia; from Moscow’s perspective, it is an entirely unreliable actor since it does not even act rationally. Second, in response to the sanctions attack, Russia has succeeded in re-casting and re-orienting its economy in a manner that makes the EU much less important for it. None of this means that there is no potential for future cooperation. But it won’t be the same as in the past, it won’t be symmetrical, and Russia will emerge with a stronger position than the EU which it will not hesitate to use.

Fico is to be commended for his good sense and the persistent courage to speak it, especially in view of the fact that he barely survived an assassination attempt by a deranged Ukraine fan, who may or may not have been just that – a crazed loner. The Slovak leader is not giving up and he should not. Yet he is up against something extraordinarily resistant to reasonable arguments – a form of mass delusion among the West’s elites. The real problem is that so many Western leaders have not simply lost their connection to reality – they are proud of having proactively abandoned it. That’s why, in the final analysis, their obstinate refusal to give up on misguided wishful thinking is not really even about Russia.

They are in rebellion against having to heed facts as such, and what annoys them most about the Russian leadership is its insistence on living in the real world. Think of this Western syndrome as the real-life equivalent of something Orwell foresaw in his novel ‘1984’, which is all too often misunderstood as a silly Cold War pamphlet. In his drab, imaginary future, which is at least as much about the abyss of human hubris as about politics, the ruling elites practice what one of them describes as “collective solipsism.” If we all believe we are levitating, then we are levitating. Gravity be damned. That is as concise a description of the state of mind that prevails in Washington, Brussels, and London as we will get.

Read more …

“The alleged facts date back to a time when Ms. Le Pen’s party had few elected members, but had major funding needs because of its solid foothold in France, the need to finance a party machine etc… ”

• Le Pen Trial Chance for Establishment to Bring Her Party to Its Knees (Sp.)

Prosecutors in the case against Marine Le Pen and her colleagues allege that between 2004 and 2016, the populist right party, then known as the National Front, misused millions of euros in EU moneys, spending cash doled out for parliamentary aides on personnel including a bodyguard for Ms. Le Pen and her father, a chief of staff, a secretary, and a graphic designer. Le Pen denies any wrongdoing, accusing the prosecution of “fabricating” “preconceived ideas” about the case, assuring that the party has “not violated any political and regulatory rules of the European Parliament,” and promising to present “serious and extremely solid arguments” in the party’s defense in the coming months. “Parliamentary assistants do not work for the parliament. They are political assistants to elected officials, political by definition,” Le Pen maintains. “I have the impression that [preconceived ideas] have been fabricated by the prosecution, the European Parliament,” she said in her testimony Wednesday.

The European Parliament wants €2.7 million in compensation from the National Rally for “financial and reputational damages,” accounting for €1 million already paid back by the party following a probe. The 56-year-old politician served as National Rally president between 2011 and 2021, worked as a member of European Parliament between 2009 and 2017, and ran for president three times between 2012 and 2022, taking 41.5% of the vote in the 2022 race in the runoff against incumbent Emmanuel Macron. Separately, Le Pen and her colleagues could now face up to 10 years in jail and a €1 million fine, if found guilty of misusing the EU funds. Le Pen could also be banned from running for office for five to ten years, which would bar her from running in the 2027 presidential election. Notably, the National Rally and its allies won some 142 seats in snap French legislative elections in July, taking 53 additional seats in the 577-seat parliament as pro-Macron centrists saw their numbers drop by 86 seats, to 159 total.

The populist right party emerged as kingmaker capable of bringing down the Macron-appointed government of Prime Minister Michel Barnier this week after the populist left New Popular Front filed a no-confidence motion over the government’s undemocratic representation and austere budgetary plans. Le Pen had earlier promised to keep Barnier “under surveillance,” but to give his government a chance, on the condition that any new tax hikes are complemented by measures to assist the lower and middle classes, and measure are taken to tighten controls on immigration and measures against crime, including narcotics and human trafficking. Mainstream observers expect the trial to push the National Rally to focus its attention and resources on defending themselves instead of fully playing their opposition role, with some suggesting that Le Pen’s years-long campaign to successfully broaden the party’s base could be seriously marred if she or her colleagues are found guilty.

The trial is a chance for the establishment to cast shade on her party, and “a good opportunity to bring what is now France’s leading party to its knees,” Dr. Edouard Husson, a historian and publisher of Le Courrier des Strateges – a French geopolitical affairs journal, told Sputnik. “I can’t comment on the facts of the case. But I can talk about the context. The alleged facts date back to a time when Ms. Le Pen’s party had few elected members, but had major funding needs because of its solid foothold in France, the need to finance a party machine etc… The French system for financing political parties is disadvantageous for small parties or parties on the rise, such as the Front National/Rassemblement National at the time – since it grants funding on the basis of the number of votes obtained. I therefore assume that what Ms. Le Pen and the other defendants are accused of is using European Parliament funding beyond what is reasonable. Obviously, the Rassemblement National’s fear is that it may be judged more severely than other parties,” Husson explained.

Read more …

One goal: Shut him up.

• Alex Jones Creditors Target Future Assets – Which Could Include His Name (ZH)

Lawyers targeting Alex Jones over a $1.4 billion judgement to Sandy Hook families have asked a Texas court to appoint a receiver to manage assets he acquired after his recent Chapter 7 bankruptcy conversion. The move seeks to control any new ‘non-exempt’ assets or endeavors that Jones might generate in the future. If the receiver deems that Jones’ name, as a business entity or brand, holds value – they could seize control of any profits or business activity generated under it to satisfy the debt. Jones explained the situation on Friday: Non-exempt assets are properties and income streams that bankruptcy protection does not cover. In the Jones’ case, this could include future earnings from personal appearances, digital content revenues, or any new business ventures initiated after the conversion of his bankruptcy case from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7.

Jones has raised just under $80,000 as of this writing in a GiveSendGo campaign to foot his legal bills. In response, InfoWars said the following: “As President Trump has rightly stated hundreds of times, “They’re not after me, they’re after you—I’m just in the way,” when you stand with Alex Jones in the face of the globalist onslaught you are standing up not only for yourself but your family, your country, and God. Again, your desperately needed donations will fund Alex Jones’ legal defense and expenses associated with staying on the air that are essential to him being able to stay on the air regardless of what happens to InfoWars. We the people have turned the tide but evil is striking back. Without your support the enemies of humanity will win.

Thank you,
Alex Jones & Crew

Read more …

“..Milei’s adviser, Santiago Caputo, who is reportedly a big fan of The West Wing and was said to have made watching the show a condition for joining his political consulting firm.”

• Argentina’s Milei Accused Of Copying Speech From The West Wing (RT)

Argentine President Javier Milei has been accused of plagiarizing the hit US political drama ‘The West Wing’ during his recent speech at the UN. According to the Buenos Aires Herald, Carlos Pagni, a journalist with the newspaper La Nacion, was the first to notice the “remarkable resemblance” between parts of Milei’s fiery address and the monologue delivered by fictional US President Jed Bartlet. “We believe in freedom of expression for all. We believe in freedom of worship for all. We believe in freedom of commerce for all and we believe in limited governments, all of them,” Milei told the UN General Assembly on September 24.

“We believe that everyone should live free of tyranny and oppression, be that in the form of political oppression, economic slavery, or religious fanaticism. This fundamental idea cannot remain merely as words. It must be supported in facts, diplomatically, economically, and materially,” he continued. Nearly identical words were spoken by Bartlet, who was portrayed by actor Martin Sheen, to his cabinet in episode 15 of season four of the show. Pagni suggested that the speech was written by Milei’s adviser, Santiago Caputo, who is reportedly a big fan of The West Wing and was said to have made watching the show a condition for joining his political consulting firm.

Created by screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, The West Wing ran from 1999 to 2006, winning multiple awards, including three Golden Globes and 26 primetime Emmys. Milei, a self-described anarcho-capitalist who is known for using brash and sometimes eccentric language, has not commented on the matter. Speaking from the podium in New York last month, he described the UN as a “Leviathan with multiple tentacles” that attempts to trample on the sovereignty of countries and impose a “socialist” agenda.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Walz fraud

 

 

AI

 

 

Expecting

 

 

Chicken coop

 

 

Gosling
https://twitter.com/i/status/1842443112779518343

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 27 2024

Sep 272024
 
 September 27, 2024  Posted by at 8:50 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  59 Responses »


Pablo Picasso The bathers 1918

 

• Ukraine ‘Is Gone’ – Trump (RT)
• Trump Agrees To Meet Zelensky (RT)
• Trump Pushes Narrative That Iran Is Trying to Kill Him (Antiwar)
• US Doesn’t Want Ukraine In NATO – Erdogan (RT)
• Biden Behind Nord Stream Sabotage – Russia’s Top MP (RT)
• NATO Outlines Plans In Event Of War With Russia (RT)
• Biden Drains Remaining Ukraine Aid Funds (RT)
• US Congress ‘Happy to Be Lied to’ in Service of American Imperialism (Sp.)
• Moderator for VP Debate Tied to Donations for ‘Lincoln Project’ (HUSA)
• Former CDC Director Robert Redfield Praises “Make America Healthy Again” (ZH)
• The Assault on America’s Defining Principles (Turley)
• What Happens if We Hold College and Nobody Comes? (Turley)
• Taxes and Tariffs and Trade: Trump’s Plan To Bolster The Economy (JTN)
• FBI Claims it Doesn’t Have DNC’s Jan. 6 Pipe Bomb Footage (HUSA)
• Appeals Court Seems Skeptical of New York Civil Fraud Suit Against Trump (ET)
• FBI Specialist Urges Americans to Prepare For Hardship (MN)
• Boeing Machinists on Strike Have a Historic Opportunity (Sawant)

 

 

 

 

Trump ad

 

 

Melania

 

 

Holistically


https://twitter.com/i/status/1839095068537532889

Bidenomics

 

 

Rogan Chamath

 

 

Eric Adams
https://twitter.com/i/status/1839436032888221900

 

 

Bug
https://twitter.com/i/status/1839019582985744422

 

 

RFK food

 

 

Loverboy

 

 

Ballots
https://twitter.com/i/status/1838887620253728832

 

 

USB stick

 

 

 

 

“Millions and millions of people, including all of these great soldiers, they’re dead. Those gorgeous buildings with golden towers are demolished and lying broken on their side. Ukraine is gone. It’s not Ukraine anymore. You can never replace those cities and towns.”

• Ukraine ‘Is Gone’ – Trump (RT)

Former US President Donald Trump has hammered Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky for refusing to negotiate with Russia, arguing that the country is now “obliterated” while Kiev is reduced to sending “young children and old men” to the front lines amid its conflict with Moscow. Zelensky is currently visiting the US to attend the UN General Assembly in New York and pitch his so-called ‘victory plan’ to key figures in President Joe Biden’s administration. Republican lawmakers, however, have condemned Zelensky for publicly criticizing Trump and his running mate, J.D. Vance. He incited further ire among Republicans when he appeared at an event at a munitions plant organized by Pennsylvania Governor Joshua Shapiro, a key ally of Trump’s Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris.

At a rally in North Carolina on Thursday, Trump accused Zelensky of “making little nasty aspersions” toward him, before turning to the Ukrainian leader’s handling of the conflict with Russia. “The country is absolutely obliterated,” he declared. “Millions and millions of people, including all of these great soldiers, they’re dead. Those gorgeous buildings with golden towers are demolished and lying broken on their side. Ukraine is gone. It’s not Ukraine anymore. You can never replace those cities and towns.” “And Biden and Kamala allowed this to happen by feeding Zelensky money and munitions like no country has ever seen before,” he continued. “But now Ukraine is running out of soldiers. They’re using young children and old men because their soldiers are dying.”

While the Ukrainian military does not publish casualty figures, the Russian Defense Ministry has estimated Kiev’s losses at around half a million men. Ukraine’s manpower shortage has been well documented by Western media outlets, and the country’s top general acknowledged earlier this month that recruits are often sent to fight after as little as six weeks’ training. Trump argued that Biden and Harris could have “easily” struck a deal with Russia to prevent the conflict from ever starting. Instead, through “a lot of bad statements and stupid statements,” Biden “egged it on.” “And we continue to give billions of dollars to a man who refuses to make a deal,” Trump said, referring to Zelensky. “Any deal, even the worst deal, would have been better than what we have right now.”

Russia and Ukraine reportedly agreed to a peace deal during talks in Istanbul in 2022. The agreement would have involved Ukraine declaring military neutrality, limiting its armed forces, and vowing not to discriminate against ethnic Russians. In return, Moscow would have joined other leading powers in offering Ukraine security guarantees. However, Zelensky withdrew from the talks at the last moment. According to Ukrainian negotiator David Arakhamia, former US Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, and several Ukrainian media reports, the US and UK were instrumental in convincing Zelensky to abandon negotiations. Trump maintains that he would settle the conflict “in 24 hours” if elected president this November. Zelensky, however, has stated that the former president “doesn’t really know how to stop the war,” while Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said that he doesn’t “think there is a magic wand” that can stop the fighting overnight.

Read more …

“Any deal, even the worst deal, would have been better than what we have right now.”

• Trump Agrees To Meet Zelensky (RT)

US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has announced he will meet with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky on Friday in New York. Zelensky has met with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, who is the Democrats’ candidate for the presidency in the November election. He has also sought a meeting with Trump. “I will be meeting with him tomorrow morning at around 9:45 at Trump Tower,” the former and possibly future US president announced at a press conference in New York City on Thursday afternoon. Earlier in the day, Trump had posted a message from Ukraine’s deputy ambassador to the US, relaying Zelensky’s request for a meeting, to his TruthSocial platform. “Dear Donald, I hope you’re doing well. I recall our recent phone call – it was really good,” Zelensky wrote. “All of us in Ukraine want to end this war with a just peace. And we know that without America this is impossible to achieve.

That’s why we have to strive to understand each other and remain in close contact.” “You know I always speak with great respect about everything connected to you, and that’s how it should be,” the Ukrainian actor-turned-politician wrote, adding that he would “really like for our meeting to take place.” The request came after Trump criticized the “little nasty aspersions” Zelensky had made about him and his running mate, Ohio Senator JD Vance, in an interview published last Sunday. At a campaign rally in North Carolina, Trump described Ukraine as “absolutely obliterated” and accused Biden and Harris of “feeding Zelensky money and munitions like no country has ever seen before.” “We continue to give billions of dollars to a man who refuses to make a deal,” Trump said, referring to Zelensky. “Any deal, even the worst deal, would have been better than what we have right now.”

Read more …

Not a very high level of credibility. Who feeds him this? Warmongers?!

• Trump Pushes Narrative That Iran Is Trying to Kill Him (Antiwar)

On Wednesday, former President Donald Trump pushed a narrative being spread by US intelligence officials that Iran is trying to kill him even though there’s no evidence of Iranian involvement in either attempt on his life. Trump’s campaign said they were briefed on the alleged Iranian threat by officials from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which is led by Avril Haines. “Big threats on my life by Iran. The entire US Military is watching and waiting. Moves were already made by Iran that didn’t work out, but they will try again,” Trump wrote on X after the briefing. “Not a good situation for anyone. I am surrounded by more men, guns, and weapons than I have ever seen before.” The claim that Iran is plotting to kill Trump was first made by a CNN report back in July, following the assassination attempt by Thomas Matthew Crooks, who was shot and killed by the Secret Service.

The report acknowledged there was no evidence Crooks was linked to Iran, which was reaffirmed on Tuesday by intelligence officials speaking to The New York Times, who stressed there was no Iran connection to the July shooting. The Times report also said there was no evidence that Iran was connected in any way to Ryan Routh, who was arrested on September 15 and recently charged with attempting to assassinate Trump. Routh is a staunch supporter of the Ukraine proxy war and traveled to the country to help recruit fighters for the Ukrainian foreign legion. Despite the lack of evidence, Trump suggested at a campaign event on Wednesday that Iran might have been involved in the two assassination attempts. “As you know, there have been two assassination attempts on my life that we know of, and they may or may not involve – but possibly do – Iran,” he said at an event in North Carolina.

“If I were the president, I would inform the threatening country, in this case Iran, that if you do anything to harm this person, we are going to blow your largest cities and the country itself to smithereens,” Trump added. The claims about Iran come amid soaring tensions in the Middle East as Israel has dramatically escalated its bombing campaign in Lebanon, a situation that could potentially turn into a full-blown war between the US and Iran. But Iran’s actions over the past year have shown they’re not interested in war with the US. For example, when Iran launched a reprisal attack on Israel in response to the bombing of the Iranian consulate in Syria, Iranian officials said they warned the US 72 hours in advance. The US denied the claim, but Turkey and Jordan confirmed they were given notice, which would have gotten back to the US. Iran and the US also engaged in indirect negotiations in Oman to avoid escalation.

Iran’s new president, Masoud Peseshkian, has also taken an extremely diplomatic tone toward the US since coming into office and wants direct negotiations with Washington. “We are not hostile towards the US. They should end their hostility towards us by showing their goodwill in practice,” Pezeshkian said last week. “We are brothers with the Americans as well.” Members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) occasionally vow they will take revenge for Trump’s assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who headed the IRGC’s Quds Force. But in response to recent allegations, Iran has said Trump should be punished for the killing in a court of law. “These accusations are unsubstantiated and malicious,” Iran’s mission to the UN said in response to the CNN report in July. “From the perspective of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Trump is a criminal who must be prosecuted and punished in a court of law for ordering the assassination of General Soleimani. Iran has chosen the legal path to bring him to justice.”

Read more …

“..the US, first and foremost, does not want to see Ukraine as a NATO member. And many NATO countries do not want Ukraine to be a member-state.”

• US Doesn’t Want Ukraine In NATO – Erdogan (RT)

The US is the main opponent of Ukraine joining NATO, although many other countries in the bloc are also against Kiev’s potential membership, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said. While Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s so-called ‘victory plan’ stresses NATO accession, Erdogan told NBC News on Wednesday that “the US, first and foremost, does not want to see Ukraine as a NATO member. And many NATO countries do not want Ukraine to be a member-state.” Zelensky is currently in the US, where is he promoting the plan and is scheduled to meet with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris in Washington on Thursday. “These are not questions to be rushed,” he added. “And when making our minds, when we are taking our decisions, we always take into consideration the stance of other NATO member states, we discuss those possible questions around the table and make the final decision accordingly,” Erdogan stated.

When asked directly if Ankara would accept Ukraine in NATO, Erdogan replied that “we are going to follow the developments, the deliberations, and reach a final decision accordingly. These are not decisions to be rushed in an excited way.” He also spoke about Türkiye’s ties with Russia, describing them as “multidimensional, political, economic, cultural, defense industry related. There are many dimensions, dimensions there and our solidarity, our interaction, has been going on and economically every day, these relations are expanding.” A unanimous decision by all members is required to expand NATO. Finland and Sweden, who became the latest nations to join the bloc in 2023 and 2024 respectively, had to overcome strong initial opposition from Türkiye, which accused them of harboring members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), considered a terrorist group by Ankara.

A senior US State Department official told AP on Tuesday that the political element of Zelensky’s ‘victory plan’ focuses on how to assure the Ukrainian population that they will be welcomed into Western institutions such as the EU and NATO, assuming they continue to fight Russia or if a negotiated settlement with Moscow is achieved. NATO declared at a 2008 summit in Bucharest that Ukraine, along with another former Soviet Republic, Georgia, would join the US-led bloc at some stage. After the conflict between Russia and Ukraine broke out, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and other officials repeatedly claimed that Kiev was on track to becoming a member, but never announced a specific timeline for accession. Moscow, which views NATO as hostile and vigorously opposes its eastward expansion, highlighted Kiev’s aspirations of joining the bloc as among the main reasons for launching its military operation against Ukraine in February 2022.

Read more …

Yet another narrative (retelling) pops up: “..a privately-funded operation masterminded by a now-disgraced Ukrainian intelligence officer..”

• Biden Behind Nord Stream Sabotage – Russia’s Top MP (RT)

US President Joe Biden “was behind” the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz helped him tank his country’s economy in the aftermath, Vyacheslav Volodin, the head of the Russian State Duma, has claimed. The senior legislator commented on Thursday on the second anniversary of the explosions, which disabled the undersea connectors built to deliver Russian natural gas directly to Germany, noting the failure of European investigators to name the culprit. There have been accounts in the media suggesting possible scenarios, “which were occasionally laughable,” he said. “Washington and Biden personally were behind the Nord Stream bombing. His interest was to cut Western Europe off from cheap Russian gas and force it to buy it from America at a price three times higher,” he said.

The German economy took a hit and is now in recession due to a loss of competitiveness, Volodin added, “which means that the people of Germany were punished instead of Washington, as Biden and Scholz took money out of their pockets.” “You cannot pin this one on some ‘pro-Ukrainian group’ and civilian divers,” Volodin stressed. On Tuesday, the German news outlet Der Spiegel published its latest retelling of the events of September 2022. It mostly repeats the story that a privately-funded operation masterminded by a now-disgraced Ukrainian intelligence officer conducted the sabotage with the blessing of former General Valery Zaluzhny. The Western press has been repeating similar versions of this story for months. Spiegel claimed to have identified the divers, saying that most were civilians, but the group was led by a commando.

The operation was first contemplated years before the outbreak of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine in February 2022, it stated. Pulitzer Prize-winning US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh alleged that Biden had ordered the sabotage of Nord Stream in a February 2023 article. He said US military divers had secretly planted explosives to destroy the pipelines at a significant depth, using a NATO exercise in the Baltic Sea as a cover. The White House has denied the accusations, but Russian officials have called the story plausible. Prior to the destruction of Nord Stream 1 and 2, senior US officials, including Biden, had issued threats to destroy the Russian-German pipelines.

Read more …

They’re trying to sell a story: “..a large number of frontline casualties without the capability to airlift them for treatment..”

• NATO Outlines Plans In Event Of War With Russia (RT)

NATO would have to deal with a large number of frontline casualties without the capability to airlift them for treatment in the event of a major war with Russia, its logistics chief has said. Lieutenant-General Alexander Sollfrank, the head of NATO’s Joint Support and Enabling Command (JSEC), outlined the difficulties that troops would face in an interview with Reuters on Wednesday. “The challenge will be to swiftly ensure high-quality care for, in the worst case, a great number of wounded,” Sollfrank said. The environment of a hypothetical conflict with Russia would be completely different from what the US and its allies faced in Afghanistan and Iraq, he added. Unlike insurgents in the Middle East, Russia has the military capability to threaten NATO aircraft, Sollfrank noted, predicting that medical evacuations would have to be conducted on the ground.

“For planning reasons, all options to take a great number of wounded to medical installations need to be considered, which includes trains but potentially also buses,” the NATO official said. Ukraine is currently using hospital trains to evacuate injured troops from the front line, as reported by CNN earlier this month. The NATO logistics command, which is based in the southern German town of Ulm, recently staged an exercise based on coordinating medical evacuations, Reuters said. JSEC contingency plans would require a legal foundation for issues such as the expedited transportation of narcotics across national borders, Sollfrank said. He also called for a ‘military medical Schengen’ – similarly to how the bloc needs a ‘military Schengen’ to rapidly deploy troops and weapons to the eastern flank, according to the official.

The US and its allies have claimed that Russia may be planning to attack NATO, and that the West can delay or prevent that outcome by arming Ukraine. The bloc has been expanding in Europe for decades, in violation of assurances given before Moscow agreed to German reunification in 1990. The Russian government has cited NATO’s approach to its borders and the bloc’s intention to add Kiev to its ranks as key causes of the Ukraine conflict. Officials in Moscow have denied having any aggressive intentions toward NATO, which they consider a hostile force that must be deterred.

Read more …

“The mechanisms allow payments to arms manufacturers and permit weapons to be drawn directly from American military stockpiles..”

• Biden Drains Remaining Ukraine Aid Funds (RT)

US President Joe Biden announced nearly $8 billion in military aid to Ukraine on Thursday, releasing the remaining funding authorized by Congress. Lawmakers recently declined to extend the availability of certain funds beyond next week’s deadline. The funding includes $2.4 billion under the Pentagon’s Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and $5.5 billion under the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA). The mechanisms allow payments to arms manufacturers and permit weapons to be drawn directly from American military stockpiles. The latter sum was set to expire at the end of this month, which marks the end of the fiscal year in the US. The White House had hoped that the US Congress would allow the PDA money to be spent at a later point. However, legislation passed on Wednesday did not include any such clause, reportedly following resistance from Republicans skeptical of the continued bankrolling of Kiev.

Biden announced the decision on military aid during a meeting with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, who is in the US to promote his ‘victory plan’ in the conflict with Russia. Zelensky has said he wanted the US president to be the first to see the proposal as it heavily relies on American aid. According to the Wall Street Journal, US officials have previewed the plan but found it “unimpressive.” The US president said Kiev will receive an additional Patriot surface-to-air system, more munitions and drones, as well as a new capability, the AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW). The glide bomb has a range of up to 130km when dropped from a high-flying aircraft. Some supporters of Kiev’s cause have criticized the 11th-hour drawdown of funds by Biden. Senator Roger Wicker, a Republican from Missouri, claimed it was “typical of this administration to wait until the last possible moment to announce full use of the PDA.”

Zelensky’s visit also triggered complaints from members of the GOP, after he criticized the Republican presidential ticket and visited an ammunition factory in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, without a single Republican official present. Senior party members have accused the Ukrainian leader of campaigning for the Democrats. They also alleged that the Biden administration facilitated potential meddling in the 2024 presidential election by organizing Zelensky’s Pennsylvania visit and spending taxpayer money on it.

Read more …

“..most of Congress was very happy to be lied to and would have denounced Blinken for the truth.”

• US Congress ‘Happy to Be Lied to’ in Service of American Imperialism (Sp.)

Secretary of State Antony Blinken is facing calls to resign after a damning report suggested he willfully misled Congress to keep US military aid flowing to Israel. Analysis by the investigative reporting nonprofit ProPublica revealed that Blinken defied the findings of multiple government bodies that concluded Israel was deliberately blocking humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip. Blinken ignored the advice of multiple officials with the State Department and US Agency for International Development (USAID), testifying before lawmakers that Tel Aviv was not interfering with the flow of aid. US law forbids the provision of military equipment to any country obstructing American humanitarian assistance. Journalists Dan Lazare and Robert Fantina joined Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program Wednesday to discuss the scandal, which has led the director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations to call on Blinken to resign.

“This is business as usual,” said Fantina. “The United States doesn’t respect international law and doesn’t respect its own laws if those laws somehow get in the way of its quest for power and profits. So the fact that Blinken lied to Congress, blatantly lied – and this wasn’t something that was inconsequential, this caused the starvation, the continued starvation and the slaughter of innocent people.” “We’ve said before that the United States is enabling this genocide by continuing to arm Israel and by increasing its arms shipments to Israel,” he continued. “So the fact that Blinken is lying should really surprise no one. Other international organizations that aren’t affiliated with any nation have said repeatedly for months that Israel is blocking humanitarian aid. And yet the United States denies this, or at least Blinken did.”

The human rights organization Amnesty International affirmed Israel was stemming the flow of humanitarian assistance earlier this year, characterizing Tel Aviv’s actions as a “tightening” of its “16-year-long suffocating blockade” of Gaza. Israel has tightly controlled the amount of food and other basic necessities allowed to enter the Palestinian territory since June 2007, when it decided to dismantle its settlements in the Gaza Strip. However, Israel has exerted control over the strip of land, which is considered sovereign Palestinian territory under international law, since 1967, when it seized land intended to form the basis of a Palestinian state in the region. The US has served as the country’s strongest backer in the decades since, with Israel becoming the United States’ largest cumulative recipient of foreign aid. Observers claim the US backs the country as a crucial beachhead in a geopolitically vital region where Israel serves as a proxy for US interests against Iran and other adversaries.

“Israel is engaged in a brutal war, which is now spreading dramatically and it will continue doing so,” said Lazare, claiming Israel is inarguably using the flow of humanitarian aid as an instrument of war. “It’s all irrelevant. I mean, war is the cessation of law, and, therefore, calling on warmakers to obey the law strikes me as kind of contradictory.” “If you’re acting on behalf of the [US] government or any kind of imperialism, you are free to lie to Congress at will, the laws against lying to Congress only apply to those which the empire sees as a threat,” posited host Garland Nixon. “Congress does not mind being lied to if it thinks it benefits the empire,” Lazare agreed. “In general there are lies Congress likes and lies Congress doesn’t like. And, therefore, it’s Congress’ power of decision, power to decide which lies are okay and which lies are not. And generally the okay ones are those that further America’s imperial ambitions.” Sam Perlo-Freeman, a researcher with the group Campaign Against Arms Trade, agreed, claiming simply, “most of Congress was very happy to be lied to and would have denounced Blinken for the truth.”

Read more …

“..it quickly became clear that some of its members were growing increasingly unhinged with Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

• Moderator for VP Debate Tied to Donations for ‘Lincoln Project’ (HUSA)

The husband of one of the two moderators in next week’s CBS News debate featuring vice presidential candidates J.D. Vance and Tim Walz appears to have made two donations of $250 apiece to the controversial Lincoln Project during the 2020 election. Records from the Federal Election Commission show that Ali “Yado” Yakub, the husband of Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan, contributed on July 2 and Sept. 26 of that year to the anti-Trump super-PAC. Voting records confirmed that the address listed was the residence of Yakub, who was registered as a Republican, and Brennan, who was registered as an independent.Many have observed that registration offers no indication about political preference, with Democrats during the recent primary—in which President Joe Biden ran largely uncontested—frequently changing their party identification to vote against Trump.

Yakub also made contributions to ActBlue in 2019, including two that were earmarked for the primary campaign of future Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. Headline USA reached out to both Brennan and Yakub by phone and email but received no response. The Lincoln Project—founded by high-profile NeverTrump ex-Republicans Rick Wilson, George T. Conway III, Steve Schmidt, Reed Galen, John Weaver and Jennifer Horn—initially appeared to be a sort of principled response by members of the GOP establishment to Trump’s takeover of the party. However, it quickly became clear that some of its members were growing increasingly unhinged with Trump Derangement Syndrome.

The group lost all credibility when, in January 2021, allegations emerged that co-founder John Weaver had engaged in sexual impropriety with young, male staffers and had allegedly solicited boys as young as 14. The bombshell led to an exodus of the group’s more influential figures, such as former John McCain campaign chief Steve Schmidt, who had become a registered Democrat the month prior. Only two of its charter members—Rick Wilson and Reed Galen—are currently associated with the group, which has grown more radical and outlandish, notoriously engaging in a stunt in which it staged a fake neo-Nazi rally and attempted to blame Trump supporters.

It also has run ads pushing blatant disinformation, such as attempting to suggest that Trump would monitor and arrest people for attempting to obtain an abortion. Trump has repeatedly emphasized that the issue is now at the state level and will remain so if he is re-elected, while noting that he personally favors exceptions for abortions in a set of specific, narrowly tailored circumstances. Moreover, the Lincoln Project has sought to falsely tie Trump to the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which he has repeatedly disavowed and denied any association with. The project launched in April 2023, well before Trump was the presumptive nominee, and was designed as a series of policy proposals for use by whichever candidate prevailed.

Read more …

“Maybe it was a warning sign when big pharma and the feds pushed Ozempic as the ‘wonder shot’ to end the obesity crisis..”

• Former CDC Director Robert Redfield Praises “Make America Healthy Again” (ZH)

Former CDC Director Robert Redfield, who served during the Trump administration, wrote an editorial in Newsweek praising President Trump’s decision to join forces with Robert Kennedy Jr. to “make America healthy again.” “We know chronic disease is more than 75 percent of the country’s $4 trillion annual health care expenditure. Unfortunately, we have become a sick nation. We’re paying too much for chronic disease, and this must change. It’s time to make America healthy again,” Redfield wrote in the op-ed published on Tuesday. After more than four decades in public health, Redfield believes the former president “chose the right man [RFK Jr.] for the job” to combat the processed foods industrial complex, which has ignited an obesity crisis across the Heartland.

“For instance, obesity in American children has increased dramatically since John F. Kennedy’s presidency, from around 4 percent in the 1960s to almost 20 percent in 2024,” he said, adding, “The causes of childhood obesity are complex, but a primary origin is clearly the modern American diet of highly processed foods.” He explained the causes for this obesity crisis are primarily due to “special interest and corporate influences on our federal agencies.” Redfield pointed out that “Kennedy is right” about the corporate capture problem of federal agencies.

Kennedy is right: All three of the principal health agencies suffer from agency capture. A large portion of the FDA’s budget is provided by pharmaceutical companies. NIH is cozy with biomedical and pharmaceutical companies and its scientists are allowed to collect royalties on drugs NIH licenses to pharma. And as the former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), I know the agency can be influenced by special interest groups. Redfield acknowledges that agency capture is a serious issue, highlighting that federal agencies responsible for regulating food and medicine are possibly compromised by the food industrial complex and big pharma. Maybe it was a warning sign when big pharma and the feds pushed Ozempic as the ‘wonder shot’ to end the obesity crisis instead of promoting exercise and safe, clean food.

Read more …

Enemies of the Constitution. They will end the country.

“..an explosion of books and articles laying out a new vision of “democracy” unconstrained by constitutional limits on majority power..”

• The Assault on America’s Defining Principles (Turley)

Kamala Harris declared in Tuesday’s debate that a vote for her is a vote “to end the approach that is about attacking the foundations of our democracy ’cause you don’t like the outcome.” She was alluding to the 2021 Capitol riot, but she and her party are also attacking the foundations of our democracy: the Supreme Court and the freedom of speech. Several candidates for the 2020 presidential nomination, including Ms. Harris, said they were open to the idea of packing the court by expanding the number of seats. Mr. Biden opposed the idea, but a week after he exited the 2024 presidential race, he announced a “bold plan” to “reform” the high court. It would pack the court via term limits and also impose a “binding code of conduct,” aimed at conservative justices. Ms. Harris quickly endorsed the proposal in a statement, citing a “clear crisis of confidence” in the court owing to “decision after decision overturning long-standing precedent.”

She might as well have added “because you don’t like the outcome.” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.) has already introduced ethics and term-limits legislation and said Ms. Harris’s campaign has told him “that your bills are precisely aligned with what we are talking about.” The attacks on the court are part of a growing counterconstitutional movement that began in higher education and seems recently to have reached a critical mass in the media and politics. The past few months have seen an explosion of books and articles laying out a new vision of “democracy” unconstrained by constitutional limits on majority power. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley law school, is author of “No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States,” published last month. In a 2021 Los Angeles Times op-ed, he described conservative justices as “partisan hacks.”

In the New York Times, book critic Jennifer Szalai scoffs at what she calls “Constitution worship.” She writes: “Americans have long assumed that the Constitution could save us; a growing chorus now wonders whether we need to be saved from it.” She frets that by limiting the power of the majority, the Constitution “can end up fostering the widespread cynicism that helps authoritarianism grow.” In a 2022 New York Times op-ed, “The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed,” law professors Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale called for liberals to “reclaim America from constitutionalism.” Others have railed against individual rights. In my new book on free speech, I discuss this movement against what many professors deride as “rights talk.” Barbara McQuade of the University of Michigan Law School has called free speech America’s “Achilles’ heel.”

In another Times op-ed, “The First Amendment Is Out of Control,” Columbia law professor Tim Wu, a former Biden White House aide, asserts that free speech “now mostly protects corporate interests” and threatens “essential jobs of the state, such as protecting national security and the safety and privacy of its citizens.” George Washington University Law’s Mary Ann Franks complains that the First Amendment (and also the Second) is too “aggressively individualistic” and endangers “domestic tranquility” and “general welfare.” Mainstream Democrats are listening to radical voices. “How much does the current structure benefit us?” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) said in 2021, explaining her support for a court-packing bill.

“I don’t think it does.” Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said at the Democratic National Committee’s “LGBTQ+ Kickoff” that “we’ve got to reimagine” democracy “in a way that is more revolutionary than . . . that little piece of paper.” Both AOC and Ms. Robinson later spoke to the convention itself. The Nation’s Elie Mystal calls the Constitution “trash” and urges the abolition of the U.S. Senate. Rosa Brooks of Georgetown Law School complains that Americans are “slaves” to the Constitution.

Read more …

“..many departments have purged their ranks of Republicans, conservatives, and libertarians.”

• What Happens if We Hold College and Nobody Comes? (Turley)

In the 1930s, Bertolt Brecht asked “What if they gave a war and nobody came?” As someone who has been a teacher for over 30 years, I find myself increasingly asking the same question as trust and enrollments fall in higher education. Trust in higher education is plummeting to record lows. According to recent polling, there has been a record drop in trust in higher education since just 2015. Not surprisingly, given the growing viewpoint intolerance on our campuses, the largest drops are among Republicans and Independents. There has been a precipitous decline in enrollments across the country as universities worry about covering their costs without raising already high tuition rates. From 2010 to 2021, enrollments fell from roughly 18.1 million students to about 15.4 million. There are various contributors to the drop from falling birthrates to poor economic times.

However, there is also an increasing view of higher education as an academic echo chamber for far left agendas. For many, there is little appeal in going to campuses where you are expected to self-censor and professors reject your values as part of their lesson plans. That fear is magnified by surveys showing that many departments have purged their ranks of Republicans, conservatives, and libertarians. In my new book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss the intolerance in higher education and surveys showing that many departments no longer have a single Republican as faculties replicate their own views and values. One survey (based on self-reporting) found that only nine percent of law professors identified as conservative. Some anti-free speech advocates are actually citing higher education as a model for social media in showing how “unlikeable voices” have been eliminated.

Many of those “unlikeable” people are now going elsewhere as schools focus on degrees in activism and denouncing math, statistics, the classics, and even meritocracy as examples of white privilege. Schools offering classic education are experiencing rising enrollments, but the growing crisis has not changed the bias in hiring and teaching. Despite repeated losses in courts, universities and colleges continue to deny free speech and diversity of thought. The fact is that this academic echo chamber may be killing educational institutions, but the intolerance still works to the advantage of faculty who can control publications, speaking opportunities, and advancement with like-minded ideologues. We have seen the same perverse incentive in the media where media outlets are seeing plummeting readers and revenue.

Journalism schools and editors now maintain that reporters should reject objectivity and neutrality as touchstones of journalism. It does not matter that this advocacy journalism is killing the profession. Reporters and editors continue to saw at the limb upon which they sit due to the same advantage for academics. For reporters, converting newsrooms into echo chambers gives them more security, advancement, and opportunities. Recently, the new Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis was brought into the paper to right the ship. He told the staff “let’s not sugarcoat it…We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.” The response from reporters was to call for owner Jeff Bezos to fire Lewis and others seeking to change the culture.

Read more …

“I will give you the lowest taxes, the lowest energy costs, the lowest regulatory burden and free access to the best and biggest market on the planet, but only if you make your product here in America.”

• Taxes and Tariffs and Trade: Trump’s Plan To Bolster The Economy (JTN)

In a bid to build a broader coalition, former President Donald Trump has outlined a vision of tax cuts, import tariffs, and “reciprocal trade” to preserve and restore American industries. Since coming down the escalator of Trump Tower in 2015, the Republican standard bearer has espoused unconventional trade policies and dragged much of the GOP kicking and screaming toward protectionism. His tenure saw the U.S. renegotiate trade agreements with its neighbors, resulting in the United States, Mexico, Canada Agreement (USMCA), while also waging a trade war with China seeking to curb some of Beijing’s abuses. His signature tax plan, the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, saw the doubling of the standard deduction and the reduction of the corporate tax rate to 21%. As he has sought to contrast himself with Harris, Trump has highlighted both elements of his economic plan and doubled down on the tax cuts and tariffs approach.

“So, as your president, here is the deal that I will be offering to every major company and manufacturer on Earth,” he said at a Tuesday event in Savannah, Ga. “I will give you the lowest taxes, the lowest energy costs, the lowest regulatory burden and free access to the best and biggest market on the planet, but only if you make your product here in America.” “It all goes away if you don’t make your product here and hire American workers for the job,” he warned. His message, so far, appears to have resonated with working class voters, notably the traditionally Democratic-leaning union workers. After internal polling showed that its members decidedly favored Trump over Vice President Kamala Harris, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters declined to endorse a candidate, marking the first time in decades that the union had not backed a Democrat for president.

In recent weeks, Trump has unveiled a litany of tax relief proposals, most of which involve either simplifying the system or eliminating taxation on certain sources of income entirely. Speaking at a New York rally last week, Trump vowed to restore state-and-local-tax (SALT) deductions for federal tax returns in an about-face after signing the TCJA, which imposed a $10,000 cap on SALT deductions. “I will cut taxes for families, small businesses and workers, including restoring the SALT deduction, saving thousands of dollars for residents of New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and other high cost states,” he said. Earlier this month, he pledged to eliminate all taxes on overtime work as well, saying “[t]he people who work overtime are among the hardest working citizens in our country … It’s time for the working man and woman to finally catch a break.”

Trump has also promised to end taxation on Social Security benefits, a proposal that has drawn broad support from the public across most age brackets, according to recent polling. Among the most notable of his campaign pitches, however, has been a pledge to eliminate taxes on tips, which he announced at a June rally in Nevada in a bid to win over service workers in the critical battleground. Separate from pledging further tax cuts, he has also made the TCJA a central fixture of his campaign. Many of the act’s cuts are set to expire next year and he has begun to focus on the adverse impacts for taxpayers of permitting those cuts to sunset.

Using information from the Tax Foundation, the Trump campaign this month launched a website, dubbed kamalataxincrease.com, breaking down the average cost to tax-paying families by state. The site estimates that a Harris-proposed tax plan would cost families an average of $2,580.57 in additional taxes per year. The TCJA lowered the corporate tax rate to 21%, but Trump vowed to go further in his Tuesday speech, promising a “manufacturing Renaissance” through a “15% Made in America tax rate.” “We’re cutting the business tax from 21% to 15% which makes us the most competitive tax anywhere on the planet, but only for those who make their product in the USA. See, that’s an incentive,” he said. “[P]eople are going to be pouring in. Companies are going to be pouring in.”

Read more …

They’re trying to run out the clock. “Massie then called for answers on the matter before Election Day.”

• FBI Claims it Doesn’t Have DNC’s Jan. 6 Pipe Bomb Footage (HUSA)

The FBI has claimed that it doesn’t have the Democratic National Committee headquarters’ security footage from the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol Hill uprising—footage that would presumably show the discovery of a pipe bomb that was allegedly planted outside the DNC the night before. The FBI’s admission was revealed in a Friday letter from Homeland Security Inspector General Joseph Cuffari to Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. In that letter, Cuffari said he asked the FBI to review the DNC security videos from Jan. 6—but was told that the bureau doesn’t have that footage. “On March 18, 2022, the FBI informed DHS OIG that it did not have any video footage from January 6, 2021,” Cuffari told Massie.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1838980352901079550

The letter to Massie was revealed Tuesday, the same day Revolver News published a report suggesting that the DNC pipe bomb footage was tampered with. Revolver reported that an unnamed DHS-OIG official viewed the DNC footage, and said that the footage clearly shows the pipe bomber planting a device on the evening of Jan. 5—something that the footage released by the FBI to the public doesn’t show. Revolver also reported that the DHS-OIG official had to go to the DNC to view the footage—raising questions about why the FBI doesn’t have video of one of the most significant crimes from the whole Jan. 6 fiasco. “We can only conclude that either the FBI is lying and did have footage, or they’re telling the truth and for some reason deleted the footage,” Revolver wrote on Tuesday. Meanwhile, Vice President Kamala Harris continues to be tight-lipped on the subject, despite the fact that her motorcade drove past the DNC pipe bomb on Jan. 6.

Harris left the Capitol at 11:21 a.m. arrived to the DNC at 11:25 a.m., but the nearby pipe bomb wasn’t discovered until 1:07 p.m. by a plainclothes Capitol Police officer. Some J6 researchers argue that Harris’s silence on the issue suggests that the U.S. government is engaging in a coverup with the pipe bomb case—perhaps because a government asset planted the bombs, or for some other unknown reason. On Tuesday, Massie raised that possibility again. “It’s almost as if they don’t want to know. Can you rule out that there were any confidential human sources involved in the whole pipe bomb thing?” Massie asked DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz. Horowitz said he didn’t “recall” whether any government assets were involved, but he’d have to go back and refresh his memory. Massie then called for answers on the matter before Election Day.

Read more …

“Mar-a-Lago is worth $18-26 million”. That alone closes the case.

• Appeals Court Seems Skeptical of New York Civil Fraud Suit Against Trump (ET)

Appeals judges in New York fielded multiple questions to the New York Attorney General’s Office on Sept. 26 indicating that they were skeptical of its application of an anti-fraud law to former President Donald Trump’s business practices. The questions came during oral arguments over Trump’s claims that the state Supreme Court erred in handling the civil fraud case, which resulted in a $489 million penalty for the former president. Trump’s attorney in the case, D. John Sauer, told a five-judge panel in the court’s appellate division that the judge and prosecutors flouted time limits on the claims involved. He noted that Attorney General Letitia James’s office pressed an overly broad interpretation of legally punishable fraud and that, regardless, the former president hadn’t committed fraud in his dealings with banks and others. Some of the judges questioned whether the state was acting within the bounds of its authority or had a legitimate interest in bringing the suit.

Justice David Friedman pressed New York Deputy Solicitor General Judith Vale on whether there was any precedent for the attorney general suing over transactions involving sophisticated parties where neither “lost any money. “Every case that you cite involves damage to consumers, damage to the marketplace. … We don’t have anything like that here,” Friedman said. Vale argued that “there was absolutely a public impact and a public interest here.” “There are at least four different public harms from the kind of misconduct here,” she said. Vale also said that “when risk is injected into the market, that does hurt the counterparties and it does hurt the market as a whole.” Justice Peter Moulton asked, “How do we draw a line, or at least [put up] some guardrails to know when the AG is operating well within her broad, admittedly broad sphere of 63(12)?”

Moulton was referring to New York Executive Law 63(12), which is the statute James used in suing Trump. The statute allows the attorney general to apply for court intervention when “any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business.” Part of Sauer’s argument was that the attorney general’s conception of fraud was too loose and noted that no one was victimized by Trump’s conduct. At one point, he told the court that under existing precedent, “there has to be a capacity or tendency to deceive, or atmosphere conducive to fraud.” “And what we’ve pointed out is that you have a situation where there were no victims, no complaints,” he said, also saying that Trump’s business partners did their due diligence.

Presiding Justice Dianne Renwick was skeptical that the statute required some kind of harm in order to prove fraudulent activity. She read the relevant portion of the statute and told Vale: “I don’t read harm or threat of harm in that, but the other side is saying that that is to be read into this statute. “Are there any cases where the language harm or threat to harm limits the scope of the attorney general?” Vale said that there weren’t “as to liability and not in cases like this where what the attorney general is seeking injunctive relief and disgorgement.”

Trump is currently facing a disgorgement of $489 million with interest accruing by the day. During oral arguments, Vale encountered multiple questions about the appropriateness of the disgorgement. Moulton told Vale that the disgorgement amount was “troubling.” “How do you tether the amount that was assessed by [the] Supreme Court to the harm that was caused here, where the parties left these transactions happy about how things went down?” he asked. Vale responded that “disgorgement looks at taking the gain away from the wrongdoer.” Although the amount was high, she said that “there was a lot of fraud … and illegality.”

Read more …

Posted the video yesterday. Here’s some backgroud added in.

• FBI Specialist Urges Americans to Prepare For Hardship (MN)

A former FBI specialist who was persecuted for questioning January 6 said during a hearing with lawmakers on Capitol Hill that Americans should stock up on food and prepare for hardship. Marcus Allen, a former FBI staff operations specialist, told the Judiciary Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government that he was deliberately targeted by higher ups for asking why there were so many federal informants in the crowd at the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. “The FBI questioned my allegiance to the United States, suspended my security clearance, suspended my pay and refused to allow me to obtain outside employment or even accept charity,” Allen testified The feds came down hard on Allen after he sent an email on September 21st, 2021 which his supervisors claimed contained hyperlinks to “extremist propaganda” from “questionable sources”.

Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who testified alongside Allen, is investigating the FBI’s security clearance and adjudication process, including the targeting of “political conservatives who were seen as loyal to Trump or resistant to COVID-19 vaccine mandates.” “There are no words strong enough to describe the impact the FBI’s lies about me have had on me and my family,” said Allen during an emotional statement. “The stress has taken a toll on our health and our children have suffered, traumatized by the thought of our door getting kicked in or Dad not coming home.” Allen added even more ominously: “This is a warning, to the American people I say.. I personally have no confidence the FBI will reign in its own conduct.” However, it was Allen’s final comments that raised many eyebrows.

The former FBI staffer urged Americans to use their right to vote despite any doubts they may have about election integrity. “My other recommendations are in the natural order,” Allen continued, “Arm yourself and know how to defend yourself, make three to four friends in your neighborhood and promise to come to each other’s mutual aid in times of hardship.” “And during the great depression, people stocked up their pantry, so I think that’s a good practice especially in our economic times, and make sure you have three to four months of food,” he added. Allen also urged Americans to pray and read the bible regularly.

Read more …

Boeing can’t afford any of this.

• Boeing Machinists on Strike Have a Historic Opportunity (Sawant)

In a potentially game-changing move, 33,000 Boeing machinists in the Pacific Northwest, unionized with IAM District 751, are on strike after rejecting the company’s initial insulting contract offer. A stunning 96 percent of the rank and file voted to go on strike, marking a sea change for the fight of working people at Boeing. For decades, Boeing’s executives and wealthy shareholders have, with the active help from Democrats and Republicans in Washington state and Washington D.C., enforced a decades-long brutal regime that has thrown both workers and safety standards under the bus in favor of short-term profit maximization for themselves. The strike offers an opening for the company’s workers to win historic gains and begin rebuilding a fighting union with a militant, active rank-and-file membership.

Like workers everywhere, Boeing machinists are fighting for decent wages and benefits in the face of the sky-high cost of living. The workers are demanding a 40 percent wage increase, which is the bare minimum they need given the ground they have lost in past sell-out contracts from the bosses, combined with historic inflation levels and high living costs in the region. They are angry at Boeing’s shell games, including the attempt to take away their annual employee bonuses (called “AMPP”), which they were promised in return for being forced to accept higher healthcare costs in a past contract. They are also demanding an end to the intolerable regime of mandatory overtime, which is running rampant at Boeing, denying workers the right to a life outside of work. The machinists are also fighting for a restoration of defined benefit pension, and full and retroactive reinstatement of pension for all workers.

The initial contract offer from the Boeing bosses came nowhere close to meeting these demands. What Boeing touted as a 25 percent raise over four years in the contract offer is, in reality, much less. When coupled with the cost of living and the removal of the annual AMPP bonus, the proposed raises don’t even make up for recent and future inflation, much less the severe blows from past contracts. The offer also fails to restore workers’ pensions.Since the strike began, Boeing has been forced to release a second contract offer, which includes a 30 percent pay increase over the next 4 years, up from 25 percent in the last offer. The strike has also forced Boeing to back down from their attempt to take away workers’ annual bonuses. But this new offer is still far less than what workers have been demanding and what they need, and workers immediately responded both on the picket line and in social media with their strong opposition to this totally inadequate offer, saying they must continue the strike.

The union leadership has now come out with a statement that says as much also, and which condemns the disgraceful way in which Boeing has attempted to undemocratically circumvent the union with this offer. Because of this, they are rejecting this new offer outright.In the Seattle area, a job at Boeing used to be highly sought after — it was a path to decent wages and benefits and relative stability. A common phrase among workers was “If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going.” With the attacks over the last 15 years, many new Boeing workers are instead being paid less than the Seattle minimum wage, and the company has had higher and higher turnover. These attacks on the workforce have gone hand-in-hand with the corporation’s major struggles in recent years with safety and quality control.

The strike comes in the wake of the machinists being sold out in a spectacularly shameful deal made over a decade ago in November 2013 by Boeing executives and shareholders with the Democratic Party-dominated Washington State Legislature, and Democratic Governor, Jay Inslee. The defined benefit pension plan, won by the unionized machinists in previous decades, was eliminated in one fell swoop. A defined benefit plan, which is currently accessible only to a small proportion of the workforce in the private sector and which was won through labor struggle, is a plan that guarantees retired workers a decent income for life. This was replaced by Boeing with a far weaker 401(K) retirement system that leaves workers at the mercy of the ups and downs of the stock market. This dramatically undermines annual retirement income, as well as shifting the risk away from the executives and major shareholders of big corporations like Boeing onto the backs of working people.

The Democratic Party justified this historic attack on both the Boeing machinists and working people statewide by claiming that it was necessary to save jobs. Boeing executives had carried out public extortion, threatening to take away the final assembly of the 777X aircraft out of Washington state, which would eliminate an estimated 10,000 union jobs. State and local Democrats from across the region insisted that the machinists accept the contract, and scandalously told them that if they didn’t, they would be responsible for not only the loss of their own jobs, but also the broader economic repercussions if Boeing were to move future production out of state.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Shots

 

 

Hurricane


https://twitter.com/i/status/1839079306586386738

 

 

Not impresssed
https://twitter.com/i/status/1839397581476257900

 

 

Jaguar

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle September 14 2024

Sep 142024
 
 September 14, 2024  Posted by at 8:41 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  23 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Autumn landscape 1885

 

• No More Debates – Trump (RT)
• No More Debates, No More Mistakes (Quoth the Raven)
• What You Don’t Know Might Surprise You (Kunstler)
• The Trump-Kamala “Debate” Left Untouched What Is Really At Stake (PCR)
• Russia Warns NATO of ‘Direct War’ Over Ukraine (RT)
• Putin’s Warning Heard Loud And Clear – Kremlin (RT)
• War Is Upon Us or Will Putin Blink Again (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Musk Channels Star Wars Over WWIII Threat (RT)
• Ukraine a Non-Sovereign State Ruled by ‘Political Frankenstein’ Zelensky (Sp.)
• NATO Plans to Send Troops to Ukraine to Force Russia Into Talks – Moscow (Sp.)
• ‘Negotiation’ Only Way To End Ukraine, Gaza Conflicts – Beijing (RT)
• The Big Collapse Awaits (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Brazil Seizes Musk’s Money (RT)
• The Folly of Criminalizing “Hate” (Njoya)

 

 

 

 

He wants them all to see
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834372286184570982

 

 

Hat

 

 

Overtime

 

 

Bongino
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834350085909741738

 

 

Blumenthal
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834436362046472646

 

 

Jesse

 

 

Girdusky

 

 

 

 

She/they sort of seemed to have a lead there for a fleeting second, but handed the baton right back to him. Now it’s his call, not theirs.

NOTE: They should have a debate on X.

• No More Debates – Trump (RT)

Former US President Donald Trump has ruled out another debate with Kamala Harris, comparing the vice president to a boxer who lost a fight and wants a rematch. Harris, who rejected two earlier debate offers from Trump, said the two candidates “owe it to the voters” to face off again. Harris was widely regarded as winning Tuesday night’s ABC News debate against Trump, although subsequent polls have shown little change in voter attitudes and several informal surveys found undecided voters backing Trump after the primetime showdown. The vice president’s campaign immediately called for a second debate, and Trump appeared open to the idea, telling Fox News on Wednesday that he would take part, but only if the debate was hosted by “a fair network.” In a post to his Truth Social platform on Thursday, however, the Republican announced that he wouldn’t debate his Democratic rival again.

“When a prizefighter loses a fight, the first words out of his mouth are, ‘I WANT A REMATCH’,” Trump wrote.“Polls clearly show that I won the debate against Comrade Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ radical left candidate, on Tuesday night, and she immediately called for a second debate.” “She was a no-show at the Fox Debate, and refused to do NBC and CBS,” Trump continued, concluding: “KAMALA SHOULD FOCUS ON WHAT SHE SHOULD HAVE DONE DURING THE LAST ALMOST FOUR YEAR PERIOD. “We owe it to the voters to have another debate,” Harris’ campaign wrote on X on Thursday. Trump initially asked Harris to agree to three debates: one hosted by Fox News on September 4, another hosted by ABC on September 10, and a third hosted by NBC News on an unconfirmed date.

Harris’ campaign only agreed to the ABC debate, although Trump wavered about committing to this showdown, accusing the network of “ridiculous and biased” coverage of him. Throughout the debate, Trump was repeatedly interrupted and fact-checked by ABC hosts David Muir and Linsey Davis, the latter of whom was a member of Harris’ sorority in Howard University in Washington. Harris was not subjected to the same fact-checking, despite both candidates making misleading claims. “So many things I said were debunked, like totally debunked,” Trump told Fox News on Wednesday. “But she could say anything she wanted. My stuff was right, but they would correct you,” he continued, calling the debate “totally rigged.”

Fact check

Read more …

“..news networks don’t deserve the ratings of another debate or the trust of the American people..”

• No More Debates, No More Mistakes (Quoth the Raven)

Strategically, I think the Trump campaign is making the right decision by saying there will not be a third debate. It could be strategy to get terms he wants for another debate, but I’m hoping it is what it appears to be on its face, closing the book on further debates. Trump didn’t “win” the first debate, but I don’t think that’s why he’s not agreeing to another debate. And I know a lot of people are going to write this off as Trump being scared to debate Kamala Harris again, but I think we all know that’s not the case. I believe this is the right move, likely being made for multiple strategic reasons which I want to explain. First, let’s not forget that Kamala Harris has had ample opportunity to agree to another debate already but has chosen not to do so. She declined offers from networks like NBC and Fox in advance of the first debate and only brought up the idea of another debate after the last one. Her lack of courage and indecision in not agreeing to another debate should rightfully come back to bite her in the ass. Harris wants another bite at the apple because she didn’t do as badly as everybody thought she would, and now she can’t have it because she didn’t believe in herself enough to agree to terms ahead of time. Tough rocks for her.

Second, not doing a debate pigeonholes Harris to the poor policy explanations and reasoning she put forth in the last debate. The entire world watched both candidates this week, and though Harris may have performed better artistically, she came up light on policy prescriptions and details on her plans are for crucial issues like the economy and immigration. This was reflected in several post-debate interviews, including ones from Reuters and CNN, where independent voters were not swayed to her side. She was given a chance to talk policy and thought it would be far more useful to take jabs at Donald Trump instead. As I noted the night of the debate, this may have been a short-term success, but as the hours turn to days after the last debate and independent-minded critical thinkers start looking for more substance, it’s going to backfire.

Third, Harris’s team was asking for provisions and rule changes up to the very last minute of the debate. Putting aside the fact that Trump already did another debate with an entirely different candidate before knocking him out of the race after agreeing to the rules set by the Democratic Party, Harris tried to change the rules of the ABC debate all the way up until the last minute, asking for mics to be live on the day of. As I’ve commented before, Democrats are obsessed with micromanaging every last detail of these debates and their candidate because they lack significant substance on policy. Harris’ appearance was more of a successful public relations event than it was an opportunity to explain her policy positions to the American people. Trump, so far, has done two debates on enemy territory, CNN and ABC, and has not been shy about taking interviews or holding press conferences throughout his entire campaign. Putting policy aside in favor of nitpicky tactics of trying to modify every last detail so the opposing airhead candidate has her best chance to deliver some type of catchphrase or polish on her flip flops is simply not something Republicans need to put up with again.

Fourth, the next debate will be the vice presidential debate, and JD Vance is far more articulate in explaining policy positions than Donald Trump is. If policy is going to rule the day, I’m certain Vance will out-joust Tim Walz. I’m basing this on watching both of their media appearances over the last month or so and common-sense policy prescriptions that I think most Americans in the middle are looking for. Not having another presidential debate shows the Republicans’ confidence in JD Vance, and frankly, I think he’s going to do a significantly better job than Trump did. It’ll make the vice presidential debate the official sendoff for both sides heading into the general election. Tim Walz can brush up on how best to spin his way through sounding like his administration actually has policy ideas, but I’m not sure there’s anything he can do to keep pace with Vance in a debate.

Finally, news networks don’t deserve the ratings of another debate or the trust of the American people, whether Democrats know it or not. The previous debate was so blindingly biased towards Harris, both in the lines of questioning and in how the moderators interjected on her behalf, that network news in general doesn’t deserve to be trusted with another debate. Megyn Kelly said it best in her post-debate analysis when she stated that Republicans should never agree to another debate after what took place this week. As I’ve noted, I think the American public will see the objective truth that this was an ambush on Donald Trump and not an objective forum for two candidates to debate each other on the merits.

Read more …

“Prepare to duck-and-cover, or possibly to put your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.”

• What You Don’t Know Might Surprise You (Kunstler)

Now, as for the Harris-Trump debate, otherwise, and given the rigged features of the exercise, it’s obvious that Mr. Trump muffed several major scoring opportunities. When Ms. Harris dredged up the notorious hoax about “very fine people on both sides” in Charlottesville, Mr. Trump could have addressed the moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis and asked them why they did not “fact-check” the utterance, which had been thoroughly debunked by the Left-wing site Snopes.com, advertising itself as “the definitive Internet reference source for researching urban legends, folklore, myths, rumors, and misinformation.” Nor did they fact check the likewise debunked “suckers and losers” hoax about US soldiers supposedly uttered by Mr. Trump at the Normandy D-Day cemetery. Actually, Muir and Davis “fact-checked” Mr. Trump over thirty times and Ms. Harris hardly at all.

In any case, Mr. Trump blew many other chances to pin Ms. Harris with her own lies and hypocrisies — like, failing to state plainly that in nearly four years she never actually visited the Mexican border (whatever her designated title was: “Border Czar,” “Root Causes Detective”) . . . failing to clarify that the president has been removed from the abortion debate altogether and has no role in telling women what to do with their own bodies under current law. . . that Ms. Harris’s voteless selection as nominee was a paradigmatic affront to “our democracy” that even her own fellow party members ought to recognize . . . that the War in Ukraine was actually started in early 2014 by Barack Obama, Victoria Nuland, and the CIA, not by Mr. Putin . . . and omitting to state that all — every last one — of the 2020 election lawsuits across the nation were dismissed on procedural grounds and not on the merits of their arguments, which were never heard in court.

That’s just a short list. It is also rumored that Ms. Harris got the debate questions beforehand, since her husband, Hollywood lawyer Doug Emhoff, is a close friend of Dana Walden, Co-chair of the Disney Corporation board of directors (Disney owns ABC-News.) Anyway, that much-awaited event is over now and we are into the homestretch of this election. Kamala Harris has still shown no disposition to meet the press, to answer any questions impromptu and unscripted. The voting public seems to be losing patience with that. Her poll numbers are sinking, despite her admirable ability to speak in declarative sentences and lead joyful laugh-fests.

What remains for our sore-beset country beyond that vortex of nefarious blobbery and balloting lawfare is the interesting development that our government is now pressing to commence World War Three before the election can happen. “Joe Biden,” of course, is lately as absent from the public consciousness as Rutherford B. Hayes, but whoever acts in the president’s name these days just gave permission for Ukraine to strike targets inside Russia with long-range missiles. So far, the UK and the Netherlands have officially jumped in on that decision. Note that the Ukrainians have no ability to actually do the targeting of said missile themselves, which involves satellite technology, meaning whatever missiles happen to get fired into Russia will be done by NATO personnel. Mr. Putin has made it clear that such action will have consequences. We might infer that means Russia will strike back at some NATO targets. I must imagine his primary target will be NATO headquarters in Brussels. Other targets would probably follow, perhaps even in the USA. Prepare to duck-and-cover, or possibly to put your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.

Read more …

“It is about who controls the US government–the people or the ruling elites.”

• The Trump-Kamala “Debate” Left Untouched What Is Really At Stake (PCR)

What we need to understand about American presidential elections is that normally the candidates of both parties are chosen by the ruling elites. Therefore, it matters not to them who is elected. Trump is hated by the ruling elites because he took the nomination away from their list of approved Republican candidates in 2016, and they have been trying to get rid of him ever since. Trump is dangerous to the ruling establishment because he says he stands with the people against them. In other words, this is not an election contest between Republicans and Democrats. It is about who controls the US government–the people or the ruling elites.

I can say with complete confidence that for many decades the universities and law schools have undermined Americans’ beliefs in the US Constitution and in the belief system that is the basis of the United States. This undermining has had an effect on the American population. Democrat members of the population are convinced that white Americans, especially if they are southerners, are racists who have oppressed black Americans. They are also convinced that men oppress women. They are also convinced that the concept of sexual perversion is bigotry. The Democrats project all these alleged faults of white people not on their own white selves but onto Republican voters–“Trump deplorables” in Hillary Clinton’s words. So, Trump has two targets on his back. The ideological one of being a white male who oppresses blacks and women and the upstart who challenges the rule of the military/security complex, Wall Street, Big Pharma, and the other interest groups including the Israel Lobby whose money elects the members of the House and Senate.

Very few, including Trump, dare to admit the Israel Lobby’s control of the US government. That control is manifest in Netanyahu, a war criminal with a policy of genocide, being invited to address the House and Senate and being received with 53 standing ovations. The members of the House and Senate understand that they are in office due to the campaign contributions of their donors. Therefore, they are responsive to the donors whose money elects them, not to the people who vote. They understand that if they take issue with official narratives, they will lost office. As Kamala has not challenged the ruling establishment and as she is female and part black, she is immune to the ideological denunciation. Trump is at the disadvantage, because accused of being a racist and a misogynist, he proves the point when he attacks Kamala, who is free to sit there and gaslight the American public.

CNN’s “instant poll” following the Trump-Kamala “debate” assigns victory to Kamala by a 63% to 37% margin. In actual fact, there is no debate. There is a carefully constructed list of questions prepared by a partisan media that representatives of the presstitute media ask the candidates. The questions are artfully constructed to aid the preferred candidate. Sometimes the questioners even jump in and aid the favored candidate in “correcting” the unfavored candidate. It is likely that the favored candidate is provided with the questions in advance. The entire purpose of the “debate” is to aid the theft by boosting the image of the preferred candidate. The reason RINO Republicans such as Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell are opposed to Trump is that they prefer a candidate that is as acceptable to the ruling elites as the Democrat candidate. Be sure to understand that what you are seeing in the Trump-Kamala contest is the ruling elite’s determination to have its candidate in office, not the people’s candidate.

Of course, many American voters are too insouciant to understand the process and the stakes, and enough of them vote for the candidate of the ruling elite to keep the ruling elite in power and the people out of power. This is what Trump is up against. Possibly, Trump has gained more realization than voters of how elections are rigged whether or not votes are stolen. What is at stake is not a political party’s platform. What is at stake is who rules–the people or the elites. The answer is seldom the people. Even when the elite’s candidate loses, they continue to rule by filling up the winning candidate’s administration with their people, as they did Trump, and they continue to control majorities in the House and Senate, irrespective of party. Trump is not perfect. My view is that if the people do not support him, never again will a candidate of either party dare speak for the people. If Trump is again denied office, what has been done to Trump for the last eight years will be a lesson for all future political candidates: Get on the wrong side of the elite, and you will be crucified–and the people will not come to your aid.

Read more …

“If such a decision is made, that means NATO countries are starting an open war against Russia..”

• Russia Warns NATO of ‘Direct War’ Over Ukraine (RT)

Granting Kiev permission to use Western-supplied weapons would constitute direct involvement in the Ukraine conflict by NATO, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said. Moscow will treat any such attack as coming from the US and its allies directly, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday, explaining that long-range weapons rely on Western intelligence and targeting solutions, neither of which Ukraine is capable of. NATO countries would “start an open war” with Russia if they allow Ukraine to use long-range weapons, Nebenzia told the UN Security Council on Friday.

“If such a decision is made, that means NATO countries are starting an open war against Russia,” Moscow’s envoy said. “In that case, we will obviously be forced to make certain decisions, with all the attendant consequences for Western aggressors.” “Our Western colleagues will not be able to dodge responsibility and blame Kiev for everything,” Nebenzia added. “Only NATO troops can program the flight solutions for those missile systems. Ukraine doesn’t have that capability. This is not about allowing Kiev to strike Russia with long-range weapons, but about the West making the targeting decisions.”

Russia considers it irrelevant that Ukrainian nationalists would technically be the ones pulling the trigger, Nebenzia explained. “NATO would become directly involved in military action against a nuclear power. I don’t think I have to explain what consequences that would have,” he said. The US and its allies placed some restrictions on the use of their weapons, so they could claim not to be directly involved in the conflict with Russia, while arming Ukraine to the tune of $200 billion. Multiple Western outlets have reported that the limitations might be lifted this week, as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Secretary David Lammy visited Kiev. Russia has repeatedly warned the West against such a course of action.

Read more …

“..if the West allows Kiev to hit targets deep inside Russia, “this will mean that NATO countries, the US, European countries are fighting against Russia..”

• Putin’s Warning Heard Loud And Clear – Kremlin (RT)

The West has received and understood the latest warning by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Friday. Putin stated earlier that allowing Ukraine to use Western-supplied weapons to hit targets deep inside Russia would make these countries directly involved in the conflict. The UK was the first country to announce the shipment of its own long-range missiles to Ukraine in May 2023, followed by France several months later. Washington revealed that it had supplied Kiev with ATACMS missiles this spring. However, Kiev’s backers have publicly prohibited Ukraine from using the weapons against targets located deep inside internationally recognized Russian territory. Kiev has been demanding that these limitations be lifted since at least May. Several media outlets have suggested that Washington and London will soon do so, or secretly have already.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Peskov described Putin’s latest warning as “very important.” The Russian president’s statement was “clear, unequivocal, and doesn’t lend itself to multiple interpretations,” the spokesman said. He added that “we have no doubt that this statement has reached its recipients.” On Thursday, Putin explained that the Ukrainian military lacks the capabilities to use Western long-range systems and requires intelligence from NATO satellites and Western military personnel to operate them. In light of this, if the West allows Kiev to hit targets deep inside Russia, “this will mean that NATO countries, the US, European countries are fighting against Russia,” he said.

“Their direct participation [in the Ukraine conflict], of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature” of the hostilities, the president stressed. Putin added that Russia will “make the appropriate decisions based on the threats facing us.” Ahead of their visit to Kiev earlier this week, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy hinted that their countries could give Ukraine the green light for long-range strikes on Russian territory with British and American missiles.

Putin

Read more …

“The insane recklessness of Collective Biden..”

https://gilbertdoctorow.substack.com/p/the-insane-recklessness-of-collective

• War Is Upon Us or Will Putin Blink Again (Paul Craig Roberts)

Gilbert Doctorow, a cautious commentator, has arrived at a position similar to my own. On September 10, Doctorow wrote in his article, “The insane recklessness of Collective Biden,” that “I cannot say how close we are to midnight on the nuclear war watch. But a Third World War fought at least initially with conventional weapons is now just days, at most weeks away.” What has pushed the cautious Dr. Doctorow to my position “is the near certainty that the United States and Britain have just agreed to give the Zelensky regime permission to use the long-range missiles which have been delivered to Ukraine, certainly including Storm Shadow and likely also the 1500 km range stealth missile known as JASSM to strike deep into the Russian heartland, and so ‘to bring the war to Russia’ as the Zelensky gang put it.” Doctorow reasons that Russia’s destruction of Ukraine’s army has prompted the neoconned Biden regime into one last desperate and reckless act of trying to deprive Russia of its victory “by escalating the conflict to a world war.”

Simultaneously with this US idiocy of underwriting missile attacks deep into Russia, Doctorow believes that “the United States has given Israel the go-ahead to launch a full-blown war on Lebanon.” This despite the fact that Lebanon has Iran’s protection, and Iran has Russia’s protection. So, we have at hand two prospects for the outbreak of major wars that will go nuclear. Extraordinary, isn’t it, that there is no discussion whatsoever of this duel crisis in the Western media or in the “debate” between Trump and Kamala. It is as if the US has no foreign policy experts and no Russian experts, but only supporters of the official narrative. The controlled narrative world in which we live makes us blind to reality. Indeed, it does seem that we do live in The Matrix in which there are no explanations other than the fraudulent ones protected by “fact checkers” in the official narratives.

Doctorow concludes that “a presently localized conflict in the Middle East can in a flash become a regional war that in a further flash becomes a second front to the war between the United States and Russia which I foretold above when speaking about Ukraine.” Doctorow is a person with whom I can agree. But I have a doubt. Just as for eight years Putin was lost in his delusion about the Minsk Agreement and failed to prepare for the coming conflict, and just as Putin seems yet to realize that he is at war with NATO, not conducting a “limited military operation in Donbas,” and just as Putin has refused to realize that by conducting a never-ending war he has permitted the West to become totally involved, thus changing the character of the conflict and vastly expanding it, can it be that Putin is still in denial of reality and does not see the war that is unfolding, partly because of his own inaction?

With the Russian media itself reporting that the Chinese are cooperating with Washington’s sanctions against Russia and refusing to handle Russian/Chinese financial transactions, thus accepting Washington’s wedge into the purported Chinese-Russian alliance, perhaps Washington will prevail over those who challenged the American hegemonic order but were unwilling to move forward with their challenge. Putin’s problem is that he is a mid-20th century American liberal who believes in good will. His Western opponent is operating on the Marxist principle that violence is the only effective force in history.

Read more …

“..X account Wall Street Silver, which warned that the US is “expected to launch WW3 this weekend and authorize attacks deep in Russian territory.”

• Musk Channels Star Wars Over WWIII Threat (RT)

US entrepreneur Elon Musk has reacted with foreboding to President Vladimir Putin’s warning to NATO about the consequences of potential long-range strikes against Russia with weapons provided by the US-led military bloc. Putin said on Thursday that Ukraine would depend on satellite intelligence and programming by NATO specialists to enable long-range strikes deep into Russia. Any such attacks “will mean that NATO nations, the US and European countries, are at war with Russia,” he stated. Musk shared a video of Putin’s remarks posted by the popular X account Wall Street Silver, which warned that the US is “expected to launch WW3 this weekend and authorize attacks deep in Russian territory.”

“I have a bad feeling about this,” the billionaire commented, using a catchphrase popularized by the Star Wars character Han Solo upon seeing the Death Star space station. Ukraine has been asking for the capability to strike targets deep inside Russia with Western weapons for months, claiming that the lack of permission to do so has undermined its positions on the front line. UK Prime Minister Kier Starmer is meeting with US President Joe Biden in Washington on Friday, where they will discuss relaxing restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range Western weapons.

The meeting comes after US Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Kiev with his British counterpart, David Lammy. Both NATO members have provided long-range weapons to Ukraine, which have been used against targets inside territories that Kiev claims, but not inside internationally-recognized Russian territory. The original post with Putin’s remarks attribute personal responsibility for a possible outbreak of a world war to Biden and US Vice President Kamala Harris, who is also the Democratic Party’s nominee in the upcoming presidential election. Musk is a supporter of Republican candidate Donald Trump. The former president has accused his opponents of putting the world at risk of a nuclear war during his campaign.

Read more …

The opposition. What’s left of it.

• Ukraine a Non-Sovereign State Ruled by ‘Political Frankenstein’ Zelensky (Sp.)

Chairman of the Council of the Other Ukraine movement Viktor Medvedchuk gave an interview to EADaily on September 12 about the causes of the Ukrainian crisis, Russia’s mission and the destructive influence of the collective West. “For a long time an independent Ukraine has not been existing politically, economically, or legally,” Ukrainian opposition politician and Chairman of the Council of the Other Ukraine movement Viktor Medvedchuk told EA Daily. “The country is ruled by an illegitimate president who has usurped power, becoming a dictator.” The Western-backed Euromaidan coup d’etat of 2014 dealt a heavy blow to Ukrainian sovereignty and legitimate power. For 30 years the West has fuelled anti-Russian sentiment, distorted history and facilitated the rise of Nazism in Ukraine.

The Minsk agreements of 2015 corresponded to EU interests, but the UK and US, who sought to start a war, deliberately disrupted the settlement process. Washington’s plan was “to destabilize the situation on Russia’s borders, and then inside Russia. The first step succeeded, the second did not. The US managed to break Ukraine and Europe, but not Russia.” In 2020 Ukraine got a chance to nullify the adverse consequences of the 2014 regime change through democratic means. “Our party ‘Opposition Platform – For Life’ won local elections in 2020, after we were ranked second in the 2019 parliamentary elections, and began to lead in polls across the country,” Medvedchuk said.

But in February 2021 the Zelensky regime illegally blocked broadcasting of opposition channels, slapped sanctions on Medvedchuk and his wife, groundlessly accused him of treason and arrested him in May 2021. Other Ukrainian opposition politicians were also subjected to persecution. The special military operation in Ukraine would not have begun if Zelensky had abandoned the idea of joining NATO.The situation in Ukraine and in the world will improve after the West stops pouring billions into propping up Zelensky, who is a “political Frankenstein”.

Read more …

They mean talks on Zelensky’s “peace plan.” Not going to happen.

But you just wait till the first German and French troops come home in body bags. That’ll change the mood at home.

• NATO Plans to Send Troops to Ukraine to Force Russia Into Talks – Moscow (Sp.)

NATO countries are making plans to send their troops to Ukraine in order to ensure conditions to force Russia to hold talks in line with Kiev’s formulas, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin said at the opening of the 11th Xiangshan Security Forum in Beijing. “In order to ensure conditions for forcibly coercing Russia into negotiations in line with Kiev’s formulas, NATO countries are making plans to send their troops to Ukraine. This is a dangerous game that could lead to a direct military clash between nuclear powers,” Fomin said.

Russian weapons have proven their effectiveness in combat conditions, Alexander Fomin said. “Russian weapons have fully proven their effectiveness in combat conditions, while Western weapons systems, which allegedly have high tactical and technical characteristics… burn perfectly on the battlefield with no chance of recovery,” Fomin said. The United States is actively working on a new version of its nuclear doctrine, in which the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons can be significantly lowered, Fomin said.

Read more …

“..nations should “never interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, never violate other countries’ rights and interests.”

• ‘Negotiation’ Only Way To End Ukraine, Gaza Conflicts – Beijing (RT)

Negotiating is the only solution to the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts, Chinese Defense Minister Dong Jun said at the opening ceremony of the Beijing Xiangshan Forum on defense and security. The annual event is hosting around 20 defense ministers and 700 delegates from around 100 countries this year, including representatives from Moscow and Kiev. The senior official called on world powers to promote peace through facilitating political settlements of conflicts. “To resolve hotspot issues such as the crisis in Ukraine and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, promoting peace and negotiation is the only way out. There is no winner in war and conflict, and confrontation leads nowhere,” Dong said, calling on all countries to promote “peaceful development and inclusive governance.”

The more acute the conflict, the more we cannot give up dialogue and consultation. The end of any conflict is reconciliation. According to Dong, in order to solve regional tensions, neighboring countries should “seek strength through unity,” and on the global scale, nations should “never interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, never violate other countries’ rights and interests.” “Major countries must take the lead in safeguarding global security, abandon a zero-sum mindset, and refrain from bullying the small and the weak,” he stated. China has repeatedly said that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine must be resolved through negotiations.

This May, along with BRICS partner Brazil, it presented a six-point proposal on a diplomatic settlement to the crisis. The plan highlighted diplomacy as the sole means to bring about peace and advocated for an international summit that both Russia and Ukraine would attend. A previous conference in Switzerland this summer was held without Russia and focused solely on Kiev’s demands, which Moscow has outright rejected. Russia, which has often expressed eagerness to resolve the Ukraine conflict diplomatically, had previously signaled that it would welcome the Chinese-Brazilian plan as a foundation for a potential peace settlement. Kiev, however, refused to consider the initiative. Speaking to Metropoles news outlet earlier this week, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky called the proposal “destructive,” and accused Beijing and Brasilia of “colluding” with Russia.

Read more …

“..the Federal Reserve, where there has never been any intelligence. Today there is no sign of intelligence anywhere in the US government..”

• The Big Collapse Awaits (Paul Craig Roberts)

In the 1970s when I served in the congressional staff and in the 1980s when I served in the executive branch, there was still some intelligence in the US government, with the exception of the Federal Reserve, where there has never been any intelligence. Today there is no sign of intelligence anywhere in the US government. That fact is documented every day on my website. As I recently reported, about 900,000 new jobs that had been claimed over the preceding year have just disappeared in a revision. A further downward revision could follow. These non-existent jobs were the Federal Reserve’s evidence for a hot inflation-prone economy justifying high interest rates. All the time the Fed was preaching inflation, the Fed was contracting the money supply, a contraction that has been underway for 2.5 years. This in itself is proof that the “inflation” was really higher prices caused by the shortages the senseless Covid lockdowns caused.

In other words, the higher prices were due to mandated shortages, not to inflation. A central bank too stupid to recognize this is too stupid to justify its existence. Whenever the Fed contracts the money supply recession follows. If the contraction is too large and lasts too long, as it was following the 1929 stock market crash, the result is a decade of depression and high unemployment. A contraction in the money supply means that the same level of economic activity and employment cannot be maintained at the same level of prices. Either economic activity and employment fall or prices fall. Historically, it has been economic activity and employment that fall first, and prices follow. Generally, that means profits fall. Now that it has dawned on the dummies at the Fed that they have set a recession in place, the talk is interest rate reductions. Wall Street is salivating over a possible half of one percent beginning.

For Wall Street, a reduction in interest rates means an increase in money, and it is liquidity increases that drive stock prices higher. What usually happens is that stock prices rise in expectation of the Fed loosening, but by the time the Fed loosens the economy is in a recession. So stock prices rise while profits fall, with the market banking on recovery to bring profits up to the level implied by the stock prices that have jumped the gun. Things, however, can go wrong. Expectations of lower interest rates is a signal to start up home building. But if a recession is in place, who is going to be purchasing homes? If the builders’ loans are due before the houses sell, the builder goes bust. In today’s immigrant-invader overrun America, there is a new consideration. According to even presstitute media reports, in blue cities immigrant invader gangs are seizing homes and apartment buildings, and soon, if not already, newly constructed homes.

If you are sufficiently stupid to live in a blue city, you can go to the grocery store and return to find your home occupied by immigrant-invaders. The police will not remove them. If you are stupid enough to live in a blue city, what this means is that you cannot risk going shopping, or to a medical appointment, or to pick up your kids from the school that indoctrinates them unless you hire a security service to occupy your home in your absence. You cannot possibly risk your home by going on a vacation. Builders will have to provide armed security for nearly finished homes, apartments, or any type of structure. No, I am not delusional. This is what is already happening. Keep in mind also my reports on The Great Dispossession. Federal regulators have taken away your ownership of your investments and bank account and given them, in the event that your depository institution enters financial difficulties, to the creditors of your depository institution.

This is what is meant by a “bail-in.” If you thought you didn’t need to read my articles, you made a mistake. Use the search feature and find them. To be clear, we already own nothing if there is another financial difficulty. Given the Federal Reserve’s record, such a difficulty is certain. Will it be this time, or the next time, or the one after?

Read more …

Theft.

“..He also froze Starlink’s assets, calling it part of a “de facto economic group” with X..”

• Brazil Seizes Musk’s Money (RT)

The Brazilian Supreme Court has unblocked the bank accounts of X and Starlink, only to withdraw $3.3 million from them in order to enforce a fine levied against Elon Musk’s social media platform. Judge Alexandre de Moraes banned X’s operations in Brazil at the end of August. He also froze Starlink’s assets, calling it part of a “de facto economic group” with X. “With the full payment of the amount due, [de Moraes] considered that there was no longer any need to keep the bank accounts blocked and ordered the immediate unblocking of the bank accounts/financial assets, motor vehicles and real estate of the aforementioned companies,” the court said in a statement on Friday. According to the court, a total of 18.35 million Brazilian reals (around $3.3 million) was withdrawn from both accounts, of which 11 million was from Starlink and the rest from X.

The companies were fined “for not removing content after an order from the [court] in ongoing investigations, in addition to having removed its legal representatives from Brazil,” the court said. Musk has not yet commented on the seizure of the funds. Earlier this month, he said the blocking of Starlink’s accounts was “absolutely illegal” since it was a separate company with different shareholders. The tech magnate also threatened to go after Brazilian state assets in retaliation. “Unless the Brazilian government returns the illegally seized property of X and SpaceX, we will seek reciprocal seizure of government assets too,” Musk wrote at the time. “Hope Lula enjoys flying commercial,” he added, referring to Brazilian President Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva. De Moraes has also threatened a fine of 50,000 Brazilian reals ($8,874) per day against anyone who used a virtual private network (VPN) to access X.

There have been no reports of the fine being enforced, however, and multiple prominent Brazilians – including several political parties – have continued posting on the platform. The dispute between the US entrepreneur and Brazilian authorities began in April, when de Moraes ordered X to delete the accounts of several supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro, accusing them of spreading “disinformation” about himself and the court. Musk refused, saying this would violate Brazilian laws. X’s Global Government Affairs team has said that de Moraes had threatened their Brazilian legal representative with imprisonment and froze all of her bank accounts even after she resigned. The judge then cited lack of counsel as the reason for the fine and the ban on the platform’s operations. “Unlike other social media and technology platforms, we will not comply in secret with illegal orders,” X said in a statement at the time.

Read more …

“..the only goal of these types of “hate” laws is to create a special category of crime based entirely on the identity of the victim. Identity politics is now part of criminal law…”

• The Folly of Criminalizing “Hate” (Njoya)

Many people were shocked when over 1,000 protesters were arrested in the UK and jailed for various offenses including “violent disorder” and stirring up racial hatred. Most shocking were the cases of those arrested for posting social media comments on the riots, despite not being present at the scene and there being no evidence that anybody who joined in the riots had read any of their comments.

In societies which uphold the value of individual liberty, the only purpose of the criminal law should be to restrain and punish those who commit acts of aggression against other people or their property. The criminal law should not be used to prevent people from “hating” others or to force them to “love” each other. In announcing yet another raft of laws “to expand the list of charges eligible to be prosecuted as hate crimes,” New York Governor Kathy Hochul said that “During these challenging times, we will continue to show up for each other. We are making it clear: love will always have the last word in New York.” To that end, she introduced “legislation to significantly expand eligibility for hate crime prosecution.”

Attempts to promote love between different racial or religious groups in society, for example, by charging people with stirring up “hate” when they protest against immigration, misunderstands the role of the criminal law. Threats to public order entail violating the person or property of others—as happens in a violent riot—not merely the exhibition of “hate” towards others. Yet increasingly, public order offenses are linked to hate speech or hate crimes.

Laws prohibiting hate speech and hate crimes typically define “hate” as hostility based on race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or religion. Often, hostility is understood simply as words that offend others. For example, in the UK, the Communications Act 2003 prohibits sending “a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character.” The Online Safety Act 2023 targets illegal content online including both “inciting violence” and the publication of “racially or religiously aggravated public order offenses.” Conduct online includes writing posts or publishing blogs or articles on websites.

Given that inciting violence is already a crime—“conduct, words, or other means that urge or naturally lead others to riot, violence, or insurrection”—there seems to be no discernible purpose in adding the concept of “hate” to such crimes. To give an example, writing “burn down the store” on social media might be seen as inciting violence, but writing “burn down the Muslim store” in the same circumstances would be categorized as a hate crime. Arson (actually burning down the store) is a crime, but based on the racial or religious identity of the store owner arson is deemed to be a “worse” crime—a hate crime—even though the harm in both cases and the loss suffered by store owners who are victims of arson does not vary based purely on their race or religion.

Therefore, no “hateful conduct” laws are needed to further “criminalize” what is already a crime. The conclusion is inescapable that the only goal of these types of “hate” laws is to create a special category of crime based entirely on the identity of the victim. Identity politics is now part of criminal law. “Hate” based on race or religion is now a priority in criminal law enforcement with resources increasingly diverted towards it. For example, New York has devoted a budget of $60 million to “fight hate.”

Events in the UK over the past week chillingly illustrate the consequences of an identity-based approach to law enforcement. In the ongoing police purge of rioters, those who wrote “hate speech” posts on social media platforms were charged with “inciting racial hatred” and sentenced to prison terms of up to two to three years. Far from fighting against “hate,” this is likely only to further fuel resentment and racial antagonism.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

RFK Gates

 

 

RFK portal

 

 

Top gear

 

 

Hug
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834471936270762494

 

 

Friday
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834466374594241022

 

 

Cub and pup

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 13 2024

Jul 132024
 
 July 13, 2024  Posted by at 8:48 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  76 Responses »


Henri Matisse Luxury, calm and pleasure 1904

 

• Trump, Orban, Putin: Why Are All The ‘Dictators’ Hellbent On Peace? (Bridge)
• Orban Meets Trump To Talk ‘Peace Mission’ (RT)
• Biden Sees ‘No Reason’ To Talk To Putin (RT)
• Zelensky Slams ‘Crazy’ Limits On Russia Strikes (RT)
• UK Disputes Zelensky’s Long-range Strikes Claim – Telegraph (RT)
• Ukrainian Strikes On Kremlin Would ‘Make No Sense’ – Biden (RT)
• Scott Ritter: Ukraine an ‘Open Target for Russia to Take Apart’ (Sp.)
• NATO’s Obsession Boosts Russia’s Role as Global Leader – Rasmussen (Sp.)
• Why Is the West Preparing for War? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• NATO Summit: Collectively Losing Their Mind (Lauria)
• The Warhead Evidence, Medical And Autopsy Reports Are Missing (Helmer)
• The Cover Your Ass Olympics (Kunstler)
• “The First Amendment is Out of Control” (Turley)
• EU Offered X Secret Censorship Deal – Musk (RT)

 

 

 

 

Roger Stone

 

 

Biden press

 

 

Fallon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1811809637836161076

 

 

Tucker Biden

 

 

Straight-faced no less.

 

 

PA

 

 

Jon Stewart fails painfully – for same reason they can’t meme

 

 

 

 

“The question remains, however, who will speak out on behalf of peace if not Trump, Putin, and Orban?”

Note: The others owe their careers to donations from the MIC.

• Trump, Orban, Putin: Why Are All The ‘Dictators’ Hellbent On Peace? (Bridge)

One of the greatest farces of these modern times is that those who scream the loudest about democracy and human rights are the very same people who violate international norms at every opportunity. In the June issue of The New Republic, a left-leaning US political journal, a scowling Donald Trump was featured on the cover sporting a Hitler moustache above a caption that read: “American fascism, what it would look like.” [..]

There’s just one problem with the journal’s nervous handwringing: Trump has already served a four-year term as US leader and there was no visible sign of fascist goosestepping down Main Street during that period. In fact, just the opposite is true. While Adolf Hitler invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, thus triggering World War II, Trump went down in the history books as the first American commander-in-chief in modern times to avoid a military conflict. Now on the campaign trail for the second time, with the insatiable defense industry licking its chops for more profits, the Republican frontrunner has declared he would end the Ukraine-Russia conflict in 24 hours if reelected. When it is considered that ‘democracy’ today primarily works on behalf of the military industrial complex and other associated business interests, it is easier to understand how Trump is described in the corporate-owned media as an existential threat to the American republic. Peace is the last thing on Washington’s mind, and Russia understands that better than any country.

Back in 2008, the “dictator” Vladimir Putin delivered his now-famous speech at the Munich Security Conference where he warned his Western colleagues on the dangers of military expansion. “NATO expansion… represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our Western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them.” Despite Putin’s explicit warning, NATO went on to add an additional six members to the alliance, bringing the total number to 32, with Ukraine, ignoring Moscow’s major red line, scheming to be number 33. For anybody who asserts this is only a “defense alliance” would do well to consider what America’s response would be if all of Latin America and the border state of Mexico were joining a military alliance led by Moscow. Needless to say, we would be knee-deep in bloodshed by now. Yet Russia is supposed to accept an endless military incursion smack up against its border.

This was certainly not the last time Russia attempted to broker a peace deal with Washington. Almost eight years after the 2014 Maidan Revolution, and months before Moscow kicked off its special military operation in Ukraine, the Kremlin released its plan for peace on the continent. Among other things, the draft treaty called for the US and Russia to refrain from deploying troops in regions where they could be perceived as a threat to each other’s national security, as well as a ban on sending their troops and military hardware into areas where they could strike each other’s territory. The treaty was also designed to ban the deployment of intermediate-range missiles in Europe. Had the Western powers consented to the plan – it barely made headlines in the NATO countries – it’s not difficult to imagine decades of peace between east and west, the very last thing that Washington wants.Instead, the US and its European puppets placed Russia in an impossible position with regards to the ongoing militarization and Nazification of Ukraine, forcing it to respond as any other country concerned about its national security would.

This leads us to the West’s third favorite bogeyman, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who has dared to declare that his country is predominantly Christian and conservative and has every right to stay that way. Orban, whose country now holds the rotating EU Council presidency, went on a peace-making tour with stops in Moscow, Kiev, Beijing, and Washington (where he ruffled more than one hawk’s feathers by visiting Trump at Mar-a-Lago instead of Biden in DC). The frustration on the part of Brussels as it watched the Hungarian “tyrant” speak out in favor of reducing weapons sales was laughable if not downright pathetic. “Hungary has presented the trips as a ‘peace mission’ to help negotiate a ceasefire for the war in Ukraine. Orban may consider himself as one of the few who can speak to both sides – but in reality he has no mandate to do so,” wrote Armida van Rij, a senior research fellow at Chatham House, a European think tank. The question remains, however, who will speak out on behalf of peace if not Trump, Putin, and Orban? The answer thus far is nobody.While there are certainly other statesmen besides Trump, Putin, and Orban on the international stage who can make the case for peace, time is running out to hear those critical voices.

Read more …

“We discussed ways to make peace. The good news of the day: he’s going to solve it!”

“Thank you Viktor. There must be PEACE, and quickly. Too many people have died in a war that should never have started!”

• Orban Meets Trump To Talk ‘Peace Mission’ (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has met with GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump as part of the former’s effort to settle the Ukraine conflict. The Hungarian leader, who has repeatedly criticized the West’s approach to the hostilities and called for an immediate ceasefire, traveled to Russia, Ukraine, and China last week to discuss prospects for a peaceful settlement. He later attended NATO’s annual summit in Washington, but did not hold high-level talks with US President Joe Biden. Writing on X (formerly Twitter) on Thursday, Orban said he visited Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida as part of what he called “peace mission 5.0.” “We discussed ways to make peace. The good news of the day: he’s going to solve it!” the Hungarian Prime Minister noted, posting a photo of him standing next to Trump, with both smiling.

The GOP presidential frontrunner responded to Orban, writing on the Truth Social network: “Thank you Viktor. There must be PEACE, and quickly. Too many people have died in a war that should never have started!” Orban previously hailed Trump as “a man of peace,” under whose watch the US “did not initiate a single war.” The Republican has repeatedly vowed to end the Ukraine conflict within 24 hours if elected. While the details of this plan remain sketchy, last week Politico reported, citing sources, that Trump could strike a deal under which “NATO commits to no further eastward expansion,” specifically into Ukraine and Georgia while holding talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin “over how much Ukrainian territory Moscow can keep.”

During his visit to Kiev, the Hungarian leader called on Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to agree to a ceasefire with Russia, a proposal the latter rejected. Zelensky also suggested that Orban does not have the clout required to negotiate an end to the conflict, noting that only the US, EU, or China could fill that role. Orban also traveled to Russia and met with Putin in an attempt to find, as he put it, “the shortest way out” of the Ukraine conflict. Numerous media reports suggested that this trip outraged many Western officials. White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said that Ukraine was right to be concerned by attempts to negotiate peace without its participation. “Whatever adventurism is being undertaken without Ukraine’s consent or support is not something that’s consistent with our policy, the foreign policy of the United States,” he stressed.

Read more …

“..The last phone call between Biden and Putin took place in late December 2021..”

• Biden Sees ‘No Reason’ To Talk To Putin (RT)

US President Joe Biden has said he has no reason to talk with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, including about the Ukraine conflict. However, he also said he would not refuse to engage with any world leader. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Biden was asked whether he would still be able to “deal” with Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping in a few years. “I’m ready to deal with them now,” he replied, noting that he maintains contact with Xi. However, when it comes to the Russian leader, Biden said he had “no good reason to talk to Putin” at the moment. “There’s not much that he is prepared to do in terms of accommodating any change in his behavior,” he added, referring to the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev. “I’m not ready to talk to Putin unless Putin is ready to change his behavior.”

However, Biden then said he was open to engagement with “any leader who wants to talk,” including Putin. He recalled that the last time the pair had a direct conversation, they were discussing an arms control agreement relating to nuclear weapons in space. “That didn’t go very far,” he added. The last phone call between Biden and Putin took place in late December 2021, several weeks before the start of Russia’s campaign in Ukraine, which resulted in bilateral relations plummeting to their lowest point since the Cold War.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said last month that Russia was ready to hold talks with the US but only if such dialogue is “comprehensive” and includes not only arms control issues but also the Ukraine conflict. “It is impossible to take out any individual segments from the general complex of accumulated problems,” he said, acknowledging that both sides need to engage to address mounting problems in the global security architecture. On Thursday, Putin’s name was again mentioned by Biden during a joint event in Washington when he confused Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky for the Russian leader, exacerbating concerns about his mental state, which have been mounting since his disastrous debate performance against GOP rival Donald Trump last month.

Read more …

“..unlimited long-range strikes inside Russia is crucial for “having Ukraine on the map” and not allowing Moscow to “attack half of the planet.”

• Zelensky Slams ‘Crazy’ Limits On Russia Strikes (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky on Thursday lashed out at Kiev’s foreign backers for their reluctance to lift the remaining limitations on the use of Western-supplied weapons for long-range strikes inside Russia. Kiev already has the greenlight from several Western states to hit “legitimate” targets inside Russia with their weapons, as well as a concession from Washington to strike beyond Russia’s border near the city of Kharkov. However, Zelensky has been pushing for the strike range to be extended – a prospect Moscow has warned would constitute an escalation of the conflict. Speaking at a press conference at the NATO summit in Washington, Zelensky claimed that allowing Kiev to launch unlimited long-range strikes inside Russia is crucial for “having Ukraine on the map” and not allowing Moscow to “attack half of the planet.”

“If we want to win, if we want to prevail, if we want to save our country and to defend it, we need to lift all the limitations,” Zelensky stated. He cited week’s tragedy at the Okhmatdet children’s hospital in Kiev, which Ukraine has claimed was hit by a Russian missile. Moscow has insisted that the facility was hit by a Ukrainian air-defense missile. “That is a crazy question why we can’t answer and attack these… military bases from where these guided bombs from jets or missiles came, targeted us and killed our children,” Zelensky argued. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday that Kiev is deliberately using tragedies in its PR campaigns ahead of important international events to demand more support from the West. Russia’s ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, claimed that Kiev’s Western supporters saw the hospital tragedy as a “perfect gift” to justify escalation of the conflict.

US President Joe Biden on Thursday reaffirmed the limits on how Ukraine can use American-supplied weapons, arguing that it “wouldn’t make sense” to allow Zelensky to strike deep inside Russia.“We have allowed Zelensky to use American weapons in the near border regions of Russia. If he had the opportunity to strike Moscow, strike the Kremlin, would that make sense? No, it wouldn’t,” Biden said at a press briefing in Washington. The UK, which has a ban on using its long-range Storm Shadow missiles to hit targets deep inside Russia, has also apparently distanced itself from earlier statements by Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The premier on Wednesday signaled he was loosening restrictions on how the missiles are used, saying “it is for Ukraine to decide how to deploy [them].” However, according to a report by The Telegraph citing Downing Street, UK government policy “had not changed” regarding the deployment of the long-range missiles, and the limitations remain in place.

Lavrov

Read more …

“..the Ukrainian leader announced that he had “learned about the permission to use Storm Shadow missiles against military targets in Russian territory.”

• UK Disputes Zelensky’s Long-range Strikes Claim – Telegraph (RT)

Claims by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky that the UK has cleared him to order attacks deep inside Russia with British-supplied weapons are not true, according to The Telegraph. After a meeting with Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Wednesday, the Ukrainian leader announced that he had “learned about the permission to use Storm Shadow missiles against military targets in Russian territory.” The two officials “had the opportunity to discuss the practical implementation of this decision” he added. The Telegraph reported on Thursday that the situation was “more nuanced,” according to a senior defense source. In fact, there has been no policy change regarding the weapons after the new Labour government came to power, the British newspaper explained.

The Ukrainian use of air-launched long-range cruise missiles produced jointly by the UK and France was the source of a diplomatic spat in May, when then-Foreign Secretary David Cameron expressed sympathy for Kiev’s desire to use them outside of what London recognizes as Ukrainian territory. Ukraine “has the right to defend itself,” he said at the time, which many observers as well as the Russian government interpreted as a permission to deliver such strikes. British officials later indicated that certain limitations remained in place for Storm Shadow systems. Starmer this week said it was “up for Ukraine to decide how to deploy” the missiles, prompting the Kremlin to call his remarks “irresponsible and escalatory.”

Sources told The Telegraph that Zelensky would have to “seek assurances elsewhere” before he could fire British weapons deep inside Russia. Three nations – presumably Ukraine, the UK, and France – would have to sign off on such attacks, and it was not a done deal that Kiev would get its way, the report suggested. A senior defense official told the newspaper: “It’s not going to happen.” Zelensky urged Western backers, particularly the US, to lift all limitations on how Kiev can use their arms, during this week’s NATO summit in Washington DC. US President Joe Biden indicated that there will be no policy change. “If he had the capacity to strike Moscow, strike the Kremlin, would that make sense?” Biden said of Zelensky at a joint press conference on Wednesday. Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that should Western arms be used to strike targets deep inside Russia, Moscow could provide similar military capabilities to parties hostile to the US and its allies elsewhere in the world.

Read more …

About as much sense as strikes on the White House.

• Ukrainian Strikes On Kremlin Would ‘Make No Sense’ – Biden (RT)

The US sees no reason to allow Ukrainian strikes deeper inside Russian territory despite pleas from Kiev for permission to launch such attacks, President Joe Biden has said. Washington approved Ukrainian cross-border attacks using US-supplied weapons against Russian targets in late May, arguing that the shift in policy would help repel Moscow’s offensive in the border Kharkov Region. Biden said at the time that the US was permitting strikes “only in proximity to the border [with Russia] when [Russian weapons] are being used on the other side of the border to attack specific targets in Ukraine.” Russia launched its offensive in Kharkov Region in a bid to establish a so-called “cordon sanitaire” to shield its border areas from recurring Ukrainian attacks targeting civilians.

According to the Washington Post, Ukraine is allowed to strike some 100km inside Russian territory as recognized by the West, with officials in Kiev complaining that they were not authorized to attack some key airfields. Pentagon officials later also confirmed that Ukraine was allowed to strike targets beyond Kharkov Region. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, however, has insisted that all restrictions be lifted, calling it “crazy” that Kiev was being prevented from retaliating in response to some Russian strikes. Speaking at a press conference in Washington, DC on Thursday, Biden signaled that the US had no plans to loosen restrictions further.

“We’ve allowed Zelensky to use American weapons in the near term and the near abroad into Russia… If he had the capacity to strike Moscow, strike the Kremlin, would that make sense? It wouldn’t.” He added that Kiev and the West should ask itself “What’s the best use of the weaponry [Zelensky] has and the weaponry we’re getting to him?” President Vladimir Putin has said Ukrainian attacks inside Russian territory using Western-supplied weapons are “close to aggression,” while warning of an asymmetrical response.

Meanwhile, the US has essentially given Kiev carte blanche to use American-made weapons in attacks on Russian territories claimed by Ukraine. In late June, Moscow accused Kiev of launching a strike using long-range ATACMS missiles on Crimea, which killed four civilians and injured more than 150 on a beach in Sevastopol. Russia claimed that Washington was complicit in the attack, saying it had enabled a “premeditated terrorist missile attack.” Commenting on the tragedy, State Department spokesman Matthew Miller dismissed the accusations as “ridiculous.” He said that, while the US “regret[s] any civilian loss of life in this war,” it supplies Kiev with weapons “so it can defend its sovereign territory against armed aggression.”

Read more …

“Indeed, no issue has been resolved in favor of Ukraine. That’s the reality of NATO today..”

• Scott Ritter: Ukraine an ‘Open Target for Russia to Take Apart’ (Sp.)

No matter how many and what kind of air defense systems NATO plans to donate to the Kiev regime, Russia will continue to pursue its military objectives while grinding through those weapons, underscored Scott Ritter. Fueling the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine will leave the West facing depleted stocks of its own air defense systems. Russia is able to wipe out the military equipment provided to the Kiev regime, especially air defense, at a rate “far greater than the West can even replenish its own stocks,” former US marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter told Sputnik. “This is a losing equation. And without air defense, Ukraine is literally an open target for Russia to take apart as it best sees fit,” said Ritter. On the opening day of the recent NATO summit in Washington, US President Joe Biden pledged to provide Ukraine with five new strategic air defense systems and dozens of smaller, strategic anti-air batteries over the coming year.

In remarks delivered at the opening of the summit, Biden said that to donate the Patriot systems, the US would join forces with Germany, Romania, Italy, and the Netherlands. The announcement came two days after a missile strike hit a children’s hospital in Kiev, with the Zelensky-led neo-Nazi regime and its Western allies groundlessly accusing Russia of targeting the building. Indeed, the well-timed announcement from Washington comes as Ukraine seems to have “a particular desire” for the Patriot air defense system, noted Ritter, but “it’ll take whatever it can get.” According to the ex-marine intel officer, even after Ukraine gets the promised air defenses, it will face a big problem reconstructing an integrated air defense umbrella.

Back when Ukraine was initially provided with the NATO air defense systems such as the Patriots, NASAMs, IRIS-T, French (SAMP/T) Mamba – they had a Soviet era air defense umbrella that consisted primarily of the S-300 air defense system, the Buk, others, he explained. However, in the months of the proxy conflict this air defense umbrella became nonexistent, underscored Ritter, adding: “And when Ukraine brings in their air defense systems, they have to do so in a very makeshift, haphazard manner. They aren’t able to use them the way they were designed. This requires trickery, you know, turning on and off radars, firing missiles before radar lock is taking place. It’s a very inefficient way to use air defense systems. And because Russia is able to put an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance umbrella over Ukraine, anytime Ukraine uses air defense, it’s detected.”

Since Russia’s Armed Forces are able to in very short order locate and destroy the systems, Kiev is in “one of these vicious cycles where there simply isn’t enough weapon systems available to allow Ukraine to build the air defense umbrella it needs,” remarked the expert. “This is one of the detrimental consequences of the attritional warfare that’s being waged today in Ukraine… And it’s one of the issues that this NATO summit has not been able to resolve in favor of Ukraine. Indeed, no issue has been resolved in favor of Ukraine. That’s the reality of NATO today,” concluded Scott Ritter.

Read more …

“If anything Russia is acting more of a leader here and thus it may strengthen Russia’s hand..”

• NATO’s Obsession Boosts Russia’s Role as Global Leader – Rasmussen (Sp.)

The latest NATO joint declaration condemning Russia appears to be backfiring and instead establishing Moscow more than ever as the leader of the global resistance against US hegemony, retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel and political consultant Earl Rasmussen, told Sputnik. “If anything Russia is acting more of a leader here and thus it may strengthen Russia’s hand,” former vice president of the Eurasia Foundation Rasmussen said. Russia was the central focus of the 32-nation Alliance declaration that was issued on Wednesday. The declaration stated that Russia remains the most significant and direct threat to the Allies’ security, and expressed profound concern over the deepening strategic partnership between Russia and China, which aims to undermine and reshape the rules-based international order. However, despite its hostile tone towards Russia and China, Rasmussen said he doubted the NATO summit had achieved any concrete results.

“I think in general the summit will accomplish very little. It will act as a cheerleader/pep-talk. Very little seems to have been accomplished thus far, with few exceptions.” he said. The declaration document itself showed a provocative mood towards Russia and China, Rasmussen observed.”It discusses expansion in Europe as well as stronger coordination in Asia and the Middle East in addition to funding contributions and weapon system modernization,” he added. NATO leaders in their declaration also displayed a clearly stated objective to increase the number of joint military exercises and to establish a security presence along their eastern borders with Russia, Rasmussen noted. The growing tensions expressed at the summit looked likely to endure, Rasmussen said, adding that China and Russia should react with patience but determination against the growing hostility they faced from the West.

Read more …

“European male ethnicities are so oppressed by their own governments and by immigrant-invaders favored by European governments, that the defense ministers of Europe are women. What does a white ethnic European male have to fight for?”

• Why Is the West Preparing for War? (Paul Craig Roberts)

One result of the just concluded NATO Summit is Germany’s decision to host US intermediate-range missiles. Prior to 2019 when Washington cancelled the INF Treaty, the treaty prevented such deployment. The INF Treaty was signed by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev on December 8,1987, and the treaty was ratified on June 1, 1988. The treaty was part and parcel of ending the cold war. Reagan called the treaty a “step toward a safer world.” “The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty required the United States and the Soviet Union to eliminate and permanently forswear all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. The treaty marked the first time the superpowers had agreed to reduce their nuclear arsenals, eliminate an entire category of nuclear weapons, and employ extensive on-site inspections for verification. As a result of the INF Treaty, the United States and the Soviet Union destroyed a total of 2,692 short-, medium-, and intermediate-range missiles by the treaty’s implementation deadline of June 1, 1991.”

Blaming Russia the Trump administration pulled out of the treaty. The consequence was to kill the nuclear disarmament that the INF Treaty began and to renew the arms race. If I had to bet I would say Washington’s withdrawal was a consequence of the US nuclear industry needing the source of profits that the arms race provided and the neoconservatives’ determination to revive US hegemony through the buildup of force. If Russia was truly out of compliance, Trump’s focus should have been to work to bring Russia into compliance, not terminate the treaty. The efforts of several American presidents and Soviet leaders in the 20th century to defuse tensions and to build trust were squandered by Washington in the 21st century. Regardless, what is clear is that Washington is pushing both Europe and Russia into preparing for war, and is itself preparing.

The US Senate has joined the House of Representatives in creating a draft registration system from which to field a conscripted army. The Senate’s version includes women in the draft, as equal treatment requires. Clearly, Washington sees the need for a larger army than a volunteer army can provide. Now that the Biden regime is supplying F-16s and long-range missiles to Ukraine, weapon systems that Biden said would never be given to the Ukrainians, along with targeting information, clearly Washington’s intent is to further widen the war by carrying it deep into civilian areas of Russia. Simultaneously, Washington is using its NGOs in Georgia to orchestrate a color revolution there in order to open a second front against Russia. Putin’s slow forever war in Ukraine has played directly into Washington’s hands.

China is the main focus of Washington’s strategy of isolating Russia. At the recent NATO Summit China was accused of being a “decisive enabler” of Russia’s conflict with Ukraine. By allegedly supplying armaments to Russia, China is accused of challenging “our interests, security and values.” I would have expected a different Chinese reply than was made. China should have said to Washington/NATO: “You started the conflict and your weapons systems and French troops are supporting and widening the conflict. You have blocked all efforts to end the conflict; yet you dare accuse us of responsibility for it.” Instead, the Chinese disavowed supplying Russia with any military support. This is an extremely weak response. It suggests that all the Russian-Chinese assurance of a “no-limits partnership” is just words. An appropriate response from China would have been: “We are considering sending 500,000 of our best soldiers to serve under Russian command in Ukraine and have called up another million men for military training.

A response such as this is what would end the conflict before the dumbshit hegemonic West puts us all in a war of annihilation. In recorded history one can find very few competent civilian and military leaders. Alexander the Great, Constantine, Charles Martel, Charlemagne, the Duke of Marlborough, Robert E. Lee. No such men exist today, but the weapons are far more terrible. Moreover, modern war targets civilians and civilian infrastructure, as the Israelis are doing in Gaza. The goal is less to defeat an opposing army than it is to foreclose an opponent’s ability to conduct war. In Europe a warrior class no longer exists. European male ethnicities are so oppressed by their own governments and by immigrant-invaders favored by European governments, that the defense ministers of Europe are women. What does a white ethnic European male have to fight for?

In the US the fighting force has always come from the southern states. But what have these traditional Americans, these military families, witnessed? They have seen all southern names struck from military bases. They have experienced their promotions on hold while homosexuals, black females, and transgendered people confused about their own gender are promoted. Taking orders from such people is not a southern man’s idea of the military. So recruitment has collapsed. There are so few people willing to fight for America that Congress entertains proposals to enroll immigrant-invaders, paid with citizenship for fighting for American hegemony. America has reached the point that Rome reached. Once the Roman military was German, the Germans became the emperors. The Germans did a fairly decent job compared to the decadent Romans, but the Empire was exhausted by its internal conflicts and collapsed. Perhaps it is the collapse of the West that Putin and XI are banking on. Why bother to fight people busy destroying themselves.

Read more …

“NATO’s aim is to regain control of Russian resources and finances as the West enjoyed in the 1990s, when it asset-stripped formerly state-owned industries, enriching themselves and a new class of oligarchs while impoverishing the Russian people. Putin is now standing in their way.”

• NATO Summit: Collectively Losing Their Mind (Lauria)

On March 7, 2022, two weeks after Moscow entered the civil war in Ukraine, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told CBS News from Moldova that the U.S. would give Poland a “green light” to send Mig-29 fighter jets to Ukraine. Within days the Pentagon shot down the idea. Then U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also supported the Polish planes scheme, but the Pentagon rejected it because it “could result in significant Russian reaction that might increase the prospects of a military escalation with NATO,” according to then Pentagon spokesman John Kirby. But yesterday Blinken told a public policy forum at the NATO summit in Washington: “As we speak the transfer of F-16 jets is underway coming from Denmark, coming from the Netherlands and those jets will be flying in the skies of Ukraine this summer to make sure that Ukraine can continue to effectively defend itself against the Russian aggression.”

It is not quite NATO declaring a no-fly zone over Ukraine, which was dismissed by President Joe Biden in March 2022 because “that’s called World War III, okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.” “President Biden’s been clear that … if you establish a no-fly zone, certainly in order to enforce that no-fly zone, you’ll have to engage Russian aircraft. And again, that would put us at war with Russia,” added Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin at the time. Though not declaring a no-fly zone, these are still NATO fighter jets leaving from NATO countries to operate with Ukrainian pilots against Russian aircraft in Ukrainian airspace. More dangerously, NATO is permitting Ukraine to fly the F-16s to attack inside Russian territory. So what changed since March 2022 to allow the U.S. and NATO to risk, in the previous words of Biden, “World War III?”

What’s changed is that back then the White House and the Pentagon still thought the strategy of economic and information warfare plus a proxy ground war would defeat Russia in Ukraine, and ultimately bring down Vladimir Putin in Moscow. But for more than a year now it’s been evident that the U.S. — and NATO — have lost the economic and information war, as well as the proxy fighting on the ground in Ukraine. One year into the war, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at a dinner in February 2023 that he had to face facts: Ukraine would lose the war and should negotiate a settlement with Moscow. The Wall Street Journal quoted Macron as telling Zelensky that “even mortal enemies like France and Germany had to make peace after World War II.” Macron told Zelensky “he had been a great war leader, but that he would eventually have to shift into political statesmanship and make difficult decisions,” the newspaper reported.

U.S.-led NATO could not launch its economic, information and proxy war against Russia without cause. That cause would be Russia invading Ukraine to defend ethnic Russians in a civil war that had raged since 2014, sparked when the U.S. helped to overthrow the democratically-elected government that year. The economic war, intended to spur Russians to overthrow their government, has failed spectacularly. The ruble did not collapse despite sanctions on the Russian central bank. Nor has the economy. Instead an alternative economic, commercial and financial system that excludes the West has arisen with China, India and Russia in the lead, and most of Asia, Africa and Latin America taking part in what appears to be the final chapter of Western colonialism. The sanctions instead backfired on the West, especially in Europe. The information war has failed across the world. Only the United States and Europe, which consider itself “the world,” believe their own “information.”

The proxy war is being lost on the ground, though more than $100 billion in U.S. aid to Ukraine has created a bloodbath. There will either be a negotiated settlement in which Ukraine loses territory; a total Russian victory; or potentially the final war. The U.S. pushed Russia to the brink to provoke its intervention. It began with a 30-year NATO expansion eastward with NATO exercises on Russia’s borders while calling for Ukraine to become a member, a call reiterated at the summit yesterday. In December 2021 the West rejected Russian treaty proposals to roll back NATO troop deployments and missile installations in Eastern Europe, creating a new security architecture in Europe. NATO’s aim is to regain control of Russian resources and finances as the West enjoyed in the 1990s, when it asset-stripped formerly state-owned industries, enriching themselves and a new class of oligarchs while impoverishing the Russian people. Putin is now standing in their way.

Read more …

“In her presentation for the UN, Bell omitted the medical evidence. Her military expert went unnamed, his evidence unexamined. This is called hearsay in a British or American court..”

• The Warhead Evidence, Medical And Autopsy Reports Are Missing (Helmer)

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Maria Zakharova, the Okhmatdet hospital had been struck by a US-made, Norway-supplied NASAMS air defence missile, fired by a Ukrainian battery attempting to protect the Artyom (Artem) plant. “Many eyewitnesses and other sources have already confirmed that a Western-made NASAMS surface-to-air missile hit a building of the Okhmatdet Hospital for Children in Kiev. Officials on Bankovaya Street [Zelensky regime headquarters] immediately started blaming Russia for deliberately killing children. However, no one said that the Artyom Plant is located next to the affected clinic, and that Defense Ministry buildings and military warehouses are also located next door. Certainly, no one said that pro-Bandera supporters are deliberately deploying air defence systems in residential areas, using civilians as a human shield.

The Kiev junta has been using purely civilian enterprises for military purposes for a long time, either using them to assemble and repair military equipment or to store Western-made weapons and military equipment.” The Russian representative at the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzya, currently rotational president of the UN Security Council, told a special council session that the strike on the hospital had been a Ukrainian one, not a Russian one. He added: “The X-101 missile would have done a lot more damage to the building it hit [Min 6:52]…if it had been a Russian missile, there would have been nothing left of the building and the children and most of the adults would have been killed rather than wounded [Min 8:20]” Like Zakharova, Nebenzya identified military industrial targets. The two Russian officials have not identified the electric war targets.

They are not lying; they are telling less than the full truth. When that is understood from all the available evidence, there is no mens rea. No conviction in a western court of law. The prosecution’s case is dismissed. In war, especially in propaganda war, there is no such thing as independence. United Nations (UN) organizations from the UN Secretary-General and his office down the UN line, are not independent. In the current war they have taken the US-NATO side. In a briefing by Danielle Bell, a UN official in Kiev on Tuesday, the day after the air raid, she claimed “Analysis of the video footage and assessment made at the incident site indicates a high likelihood that the children’s hospital suffered a direct hit rather than receiving damages due to an intercepted weapons system. Of course, as was said earlier, this must be investigated. At the time of the attack, 670 child patients, mainly inpatients, were there together with more than a thousand medical staff.”

Bell, a Canadian national who has served beside US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, did not say what she meant by “direct hit” and did not distinguish between warhead detonation, shrapnel wounds, and blast impacts. When prompted for more evidence, Bell said: “We haven’t determined.” In a British or American courtroom, that is the end of proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defence lawyer would then announce to judge and jury the prosecution has failed and move for summary dismissal. But the UN official announced differently, conclusively: “We’ve assessed the factors that suggest the likelihood that it was a direct hit of a KH-101 [X-101 is the Cyrillic acronym translated into English] missile launched by the Russian Federation. The factors suggesting that it was a direct hit are based on video footage, which shows the technical specification of the type of weapon that was used. It shows the weapon directly impacting the hospital rather than being intercepted in the air. And thirdly, my military, our military expert, visited the site yesterday and observed damages at the site that were consistent with a direct hit.”

To measure “consistent with a direct hit” in a homicide prosecution requires clinical and autopsy evidence of the cause of death or injury to individuals. In the Kiev hospital case, to date there is no evidence of fragmentation metal or cluster elements from the X-101 warhead causing either death or injury in the hospital. No comparison has been published openly by the Ukrainians of X-101 warhead fragmentation and NASAMS warhead fragmentation. The warhead payload of the X-101 has been reported at 400 kg of high explosive fragmentation of metal elements. The warhead of the NASAMS missile is 20 kg of explosive.

Physical wounding by flying glass or collapsing structures is consistent with blast from outside the hospital. Wounds by warhead shrapnel identified in the bodies of the casualties by X-ray or CT and MRI scans can be compared for the source of the metal to distinguish between the X-101 and the NASAMS. This has not been done by the Ukrainian side. Without such evidence – protected by chain of custody to prevent tampering, substitutions of metal, and fakery – the prosecution fails. In her presentation for the UN, Bell omitted the medical evidence. Her military expert went unnamed, his evidence unexamined. This is called hearsay in a British or American court. For proof of actus reus, the judge will direct the jury that without circumstantial corroboration and cross-examination, the expert’s testimony has next to no evidential value in a homicide prosecution.

Read more …

“..and direct a corporate looting operation of Russia’s oil and mineral riches. Ukraine was the doorway they had to go through to get that done.”

• The Cover Your Ass Olympics (Kunstler)

You can’t deny that “Joe Biden” did his goodest last night facing down a half-dozen pre-selected reporters representing blob-adjacent news orgs such as Reuters and NPR at the post-NATO meetup damage-control event billed as a “news conference.” Only a week after he declared himself to be the “first black woman vice-president,” he pivoted to correct the record, telling the DC press corps that he’d “picked Vice-president Trump to be vice-president. . .” and everyone in the room saw that they were back in that mortifying scene in The Caine Mutiny when the confused and incompetent Captain Queeg reaches for the ball bearings in his pocket. At the end of the harrowing hour, he minced his way offstage, leaving his Party of Chaos evermore sore perplexed as to how they might lever this burnt-out old hack out of the nomination they foolishly secured for him months ago.

It ain’t gonna be easy, as “JB” repeatedly insisted he had no intention of stepping aside, despite the forces mustering against him in Congress, the media, and Hollywood. Even CNN is turning on him. Meanwhile, the #VeepTrump clip went viral on social media. So much for damage control. You understand, don’t you, what a fiasco the 75th Anniversary DC NATO meetup itself was? Everyone in the room, including the key prime ministers and presidents, could sense how flimsy the alliance now appears, as led by our maundering near-zombie president. Like “Joe Biden,” NATO’s raison d’être has been exposed as badly out-of-date and dangerously unhinged. Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg kicked things off declaring that “Ukraine is on an ‘irreversible’ path to NATO.” This controverts what everybody in NATO knows is Mr. Putin’s clearest red line, and is therefore either a jape or a bit of recklessly provocative idiocy.

The truth of the matter is this: following its transition out of the failed Soviet experiment thirty years ago, Russia was never a threat to its European neighbors. All the talk of Vladimir Putin seeking to reassemble the old USSR empire was knowingly false, as is the chatter now about Russia looking to invade Europe. What Russia actually sought was to be regarded, once again, as a normal European nation able to conduct normal business with the rest of Europe. The USA wouldn’t allow it. Exactly why remains partially mysterious. Surely, post-1991, it was in the interest of US military contractors to maintain their Cold War revenue streams. To do that, a foreign hobgoblin had to be invoked — and perhaps China was not the best candidate, since it had begun manufacturing everything on sale in the Walmart — so Russia, with practically no export economy, was cast in that role.

And the politicians, too, surely liked creaming off their share of that military-industrial revenue stream, so they went along policy-wise, with figures like John McCain and Lindsay Graham leading the charge. But the US intel blob and State Department had darker motives, driven by an animus that has slowly revealed itself to be insane — just as the Democratic Party has turned obviously insane, adopting a playbook that could have been written by Franz Kafka. Being likewise insane, the intel blob and the neocons at State harbored an unappeasable hatred toward Russia that, since the Soviet collapse, allowed no accommodation and gelled into a naked avarice for seizing the resources of Russia with a long-term plan to subvert the Russian state, break it up the way they broke up Serbia in the 1990s, and direct a corporate looting operation of Russia’s oil and mineral riches. Ukraine was the doorway they had to go through to get that done.

Read more …

Too much free speech? What does the 1st Amendment say about that?

• “The First Amendment is Out of Control” (Turley)

As I have laid out in testimony before Congress, Jen Easterly, who heads the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, extended her agency’s mandate over “critical infrastructure” to include “our cognitive infrastructure.” The resulting censorship efforts included combating “malinformation” – described as information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.” So, you can cite true facts but still be censored for misleading others. The media has been running an unrelenting line of anti-free speech columns. Recently, the New York Times ran a column by former Biden official and Columbia University law professor Tim Wu describing how the First Amendment was “out of control” in protecting too much speech. Wu insists that the First Amendment is now “beginning to threaten many of the essential jobs of the state, such as protecting national security and the safety and privacy of its citizens.” He bizarrely claims that the First Amendment “now mostly protects corporate interests.”

So free speech not only threatens your life, your job, and your privacy, but serves corporate masters. Ready to sign your rights away? Wait, there is more. There is a movement afoot to rewrite the First Amendment through an amendment. George Washington University Law School Professor Mary Anne Franks believes that the First Amendment is “aggressively individualistic” and needs to be rewritten to “redo” the work of the Framers. Her new amendment suggestion replaces the clear statement in favor of a convoluted, ambiguous statement of free speech that will be “subject to responsibility for abuses.” It then adds that “all conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons.” Franks has also dismissed objections to the censorship on social media and insisted that “the Internet model of free speech is little more than cacophony, where the loudest, most provocative, or most unlikeable voice dominates . . . If we want to protect free speech, we should not only resist the attempt to remake college campuses in the image of the Internet but consider the benefits of remaking the Internet in the image of the university.”

Franks is certainly correct that those “unlikeable voices” are rarely heard in academia today. As discussed in my book, faculties have largely purged conservative, Republican, libertarian, and dissenting professors. The discussion on most campuses now runs from the left to far left without that pesky “cacophony” of opposing viewpoints. Experts at leading universities were fired or stripped of positions for questioning COVID claims. Conservative faculty have been hounded from schools and conservative sites have been targeted by government-funded programs. Thousands have been banned from social media. What is particularly maddening for many in the free speech community is how the left has responded to opposition to censorship and blacklisting. Some are claiming to be victims by those who criticize their work to target individuals and groups as disinformation.

Others, like comedian Jon Stewart mock those who object to the erosion of free speech by noting that conservatives are making these objections on television or online. So, according to Stewart, how can there be a problem if you are able to still object? The suggestion is that there can be no threat to free speech unless people are completely silenced. Stewart insists that “we are surrounded by and inundated with more speech than has ever existed in the history of communication.” In other words, because people can still speak, the well-documented systems of censorship and blacklisting must not be so bad. It is not clear what Stewart would accept as sufficient censorship. In universities, polls show both faculty and students afraid to speak openly. The government has funded a host of programs to pressure the source of revenue of conservative sites and to target dissenting voices.

Yet, because we are raising objections to these trends, Stewart laughs at the very notion that free speech is under fire. After all, he is doing just fine. What appears to be a punchline to Stewart is a bit more serious for others who have their livelihoods threatened by the anti-free speech movement. Stewart has the benefit of being a liberal comedian on a liberal network. Try being a conservative comedian today getting air time on most cable outlets or college campuses. Like so many academics, everything seems just fine to them. With the purging of opposition viewpoints, those who remain have little to complain about. The effort to assure citizens that “there is nothing to see here” is belied by a massive censorship system described by one federal court as “Orwellian.” Conservatives face cancel campaigns and blacklisting in academic and media forums.

Read more …

“Mike Benz, a former Trump administration official, highlighted this to suggest the EU’s real motivation is to “use the DSA to force X to restaff the censorship squad fired when Elon took over.”

• EU Offered X Secret Censorship Deal – Musk (RT)

X (formerly Twitter) is facing persecution by the European Union because it rejected Brussels’ demand to secretly censor opinions on the platform, its owner Elon Musk has revealed. The EU announced on Friday that it considered X in violation of its Digital Services Act (DSA) and intended to levy massive fines against the company unless it changed its practices. “The European Commission offered X an illegal secret deal: if we quietly censored speech without telling anyone, they would not fine us,” Musk wrote in response. “The other platforms accepted that deal. X did not.” “We look forward to a very public battle in court, so that the people of Europe can know the truth,” he added. Musk bought Twitter in October 2022, after voicing displeasure over widespread censorship on the social media platform. He has since unbanned most blocked accounts, including that of former President Donald Trump.

When Musk announced “the bird is freed,” one of the responses came from Thierry Breton, the EU Commissioner for Internal Market. “In Europe, the bird will fly by our rules,” Breton said, with a reference to the DSA. On Friday, Breton explained the European Commission’s move against Musk by arguing that X violates the EU’s “transparency requirements” by denying access to “researchers,” among other things. “Back in the day, BlueChecks used to mean trustworthy sources of information. Now with X, our preliminary view is that they deceive users and infringe the DSA,” Breton said. According to the Commission, allowing anyone to obtain verification in exchange for a subscription fee “negatively affects users’ ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with.”

The Commission also objected that X does not maintain “a searchable and reliable advertisement repository” that would “allow for the required supervision and research into emerging risks.” What most bothered the EU body was that X does not allow scraping its public data by “researchers” or grant access to its application programming interface (API), as DSA mandates. Mike Benz, a former Trump administration official, highlighted this to suggest the EU’s real motivation is to “use the DSA to force X to restaff the censorship squad fired when Elon took over.” He further alleged that people who present themselves as researchers are actually “censorship activities & political operatives.” Musk reposted Benz’s analysis with just one word of comment: “Exactly.” X is now expected to respond to the Commission in writing. If the EU upholds Breton’s preliminary findings, X could be fined “up to 6% of the total worldwide annual turnover” and ordered to address its “breach” under “enhanced supervision,” the body said.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Magnetics

 

 

France fags

 

 

Doggo dive
https://twitter.com/i/status/1811515980280926540

 

 

Honey

 

 

 

 

Handstand
https://twitter.com/i/status/1811744486516461940

 

 

Kitty

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 12 2024

Jul 122024
 
 July 12, 2024  Posted by at 9:18 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  66 Responses »


Pablo Picasso The three dancers 1925

 

• Biden Will ‘Never Recover’ And Must Drop Out – Aides to NBC (RT)
• Biden Mixes Up Harris & Trump, Zelensky & Putin (Sp.)
• Comer Subpoenas Top Biden Handlers To Find Out Who’s Running The Country (ZH)
• NATO More Nervous About Biden Than Trump – Politico (RT)
• West Sees Zelensky As Cash Cow, to Keep Him in Power ‘For Now’ – Russia (Sp.)
• NATO Declaration Is Neoconservative Recommitment to US Hegemony – Sachs (Sp.)
• Either NATO or Ukraine -or Both- Must Go – Medvedev (RT)
• We are NATO. And We’re Comin’ To Get Ya (Pepe Escobar)
• Poland Preparing Military For Full-Scale Conflict, Army Chief Says (ZH)
• NATO Countries Closest to Russia Up Defense Spending (ET)
• Musk Announces X To Sue Those Behind Advertising Censorship Cartel (ZH)
• AOC Files Articles Of Impeachment Against Justices Alito, Thomas (Fox)
• LinkedIn, Google Openly Censor Conservatives – Again (Sellers)
• Can the West Survive Democracy? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• ‘My Life’s Work Melting Before My Eyes’ (Scott Ritter)

 

 

 

 

Joe VP
https://twitter.com/i/status/1811002365232755172

 

 

Obama report

 

 

HiMARS

 

 

Tesla

 

 

Eva

 

 

Elon drones

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..The last full cabinet meeting was on October 2 last year..”

• Biden Will ‘Never Recover’ And Must Drop Out – Aides to NBC (RT)

US President Joe Biden has no way to recover from the debate disaster and needs to drop out of the race, multiple campaign aides have told NBC News. The 81-year-old Democrat has been under increasing public pressure from the media, senior party members, donors, and celebrity sympathizers to step down after a catastrophic performance in the June 27 debate with Republican challenger Donald Trump. “No one is denying that the debate was a setback,” campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon and campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a memo to staff, leaked to NBC on Thursday. “But Joe Biden and this campaign have made it through setbacks before.” Others were more blunt. “He needs to drop out,” one Biden campaign official told NBC, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“He will never recover from this.” “No one involved in the effort thinks he has a path,” said a second campaign aide. Another campaign worker described Biden’s chances of winning the November election as “zero.” Multiple aides have raised concerns that the president’s performance might spill over to down-ballot races, costing Democrats seats in Congress. Biden called into a friendly MSNBC show on Monday and insisted he was “not going anywhere” and that he would be the party’s nominee. However, NBC’s sources said that it was a “widespread” feeling in both the campaign and the party that the Democrats should nominate someone else, such as Vice President Kamala Harris. Meanwhile, CNN has revealed that Biden’s aides have been scripting and orchestrating cabinet meetings in a sort of a stage production.

The last full cabinet meeting was on October 2 last year, according to the outlet. The White House responded by providing a statement from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who called the way the meetings have been run “standard practice for any administration.” CNN sources, however, said that this was definitely not the case under President Barack Obama, when Biden was his vice president. Last week, it was revealed that a Parkinson’s Disease expert has visited the White House at least eight times over the past year. If anyone dares question the president’s health or fitness, however, Biden’s aides “beat the s**t out of” them and insist they “stay on message,” a top Democrat close to Biden’s inner circle told CNN.

Read more …

No-one tells him anything apparently.

• Biden Mixes Up Harris & Trump, Zelensky & Putin (Sp.)

President Joe Biden said during a press conference after the NATO summit that he would take a neurological exam if his doctors recommended it but so far he has not received such suggestions from his medical team. “If they think I should have a neurological exam again, I’ll do it, [but] no one’s suggesting that to me now,” Biden said on Thursday. Earlier in the press conference, Biden referred to Vice President Kamala Harris as former US President, and his likely opponent, Donald Trump. “I wouldn’t have picked Vice President Trump to be vice president [inaudible] if I think she’s not qualified to be president,” Biden said. When asked how he would respond to the gaffe, which former President Donald Trump had already posted about on social media, Biden would only reply “listen to him [Trump].”

Earlier in the day at a NATO event, Biden similarly mixed up Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “And now I want to hand it over to the President of Ukraine who has as much courage as he has determination. Ladies and gentlemen, President Putin,” Biden said to the confusion of the crowd. Biden has been facing calls to end his reelection campaign, including by members of his own party, after an embarrassing performance during a televised debate with Trump. Biden has since been insistent that he will remain in the race, despite a series of high-profile gaffes and disastrous interviews in the weeks since the debate. The press conference was Biden’s first in 2024. He said he will not leave the race unless his team tells him “There’s no way you can win,” but claimed “No one’s saying that. No poll says that.”

Read more …

“Key White House staff must come before our committee so we can provide the transparency and accountability that Americans deserve..”

• Comer Subpoenas Top Biden Handlers To Find Out Who’s Running The Country (ZH)

The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed three top White House aides on Wednesday, and has demanded that they sit for depositions concerning President Joe Biden’s health – and who’s actually running the country. As Axios reports, Oversight chair James Comer (R-KY) subpoenaed First Lady Jill Biden’s top aide Anthony Bernal, deputy chief of staff Annie Tomasini, and senior adviser Ashley Williams, who the outlet described as “low-profile but very influential” inside the White House. According to Wednesday letters, Comer cites Bernal and Tomasini’s access to the first family’s residence – which White House residence staff found ‘unusual,’ as ‘political staffers often don’t have such access.’

According to one former Biden aide, these three employees – Annie Tomasini, Anthony Bernal, and Ashley Williams – have created “a protective bubble around” President Biden and he is “staffed so closely that he’s lost all independence.” -House Oversight Committee Comer also writes that the committee is “concerned” that each official is “one of several White House staffers who have taken it upon themselves to run the country while the President cannot.” In his letter to Bernal — whose influence extends well beyond the first lady’s office — Comer wrote: The “Committee seeks to understand the extent of Mr. Bernal’s influence over the President and his knowledge of whether the President is personally discharging the duties of his office.” -Axios

Tomasini, a close friend of the Biden family, maintained close relations with Hunter throughout the Obama administration – sometimes referring to him as her “brother,” and often ending emails with “LY” (Love You), according to emails dating from 2010 to 2016. “The White House has shielded three key aides from testifying about President Biden’s mishandling of classified documents and now we’ve learned through reporting these same aides are also seeking to cover up President Biden’s declining cognitive state inside the White House. President Biden is clearly unfit for office, yet his staff are trying to hide the truth from the American people. Key White House staff must come before our committee so we can provide the transparency and accountability that Americans deserve,” said Comer in a statement.

Read more …

“..you’re more stressed about whether he will go off script than being excited to listen to the leader of the free world..”

• NATO More Nervous About Biden Than Trump – Politico (RT)

The frail state of US President Joe Biden seems to have worried NATO officials at the key Washington summit far more than how the bloc could be drastically changed if Republican frontrunner Donald Trump retakes the White House, Politico reported on Thursday, citing sources. Long-running concerns about the 81-year-old president’s mental state were exacerbated by his shaky debate performance against Trump two weeks ago. Numerous media outlets have described Biden – who often confused words and failed to finish sentences – as “fumbling” and “incoherent.” The debate disaster reportedly left some Democrats scrambling to find a replacement for him, although Biden himself has categorically stated he had no plans to drop out of the race.

Biden is also taking part in the key NATO summit in Washington this week. According to Politico, several European nations have been “alarmed” by the president’s apparent decline and increasingly concerned by or even resigned to the fact that he could lose the November election to Trump, who harbors much more “hostile” feelings towards NATO. Some NATO officials were upset that concerns about Biden had distracted the public from what was supposed to be a celebratory summit, according to the report. “It’s a very weird feeling to be in Europe listening to the president of the United States, and you’re more stressed about whether he will go off script than being excited to listen to the leader of the free world,” one Western official told the magazine. A Politico source noted that “everyone’s focusing on Biden’s appearance” rather than on Trump’s statements about NATO, recalling that the GOP candidate is not much younger than his rival. “We would prefer a more stable situation in the US,” the official added.

While Biden has championed NATO as “the bulwark of global security,” Trump has been much more critical of the bloc. The ex-president has repeatedly blasted NATO allies for failing to pay what he considers a “fair share” of common defense spending. In February, Trump claimed to have told fellow Western leaders that, unless they invest more in defense, when he was in office he “would encourage” the Russians “to do whatever the hell they want.” This prompted rebukes from both the Biden administration and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. Earlier this month, Politico also reported that Trump was considering a deal with Russia not to expand NATO to Ukraine and Georgia if he is reelected.

Read more …

“..Washington and Brussels would prefer Zelensky to remain in power, as lucrative war profiteering schemes are tied to him. Zelensky’s opponents are advised to exercise restraint “for the time being.”

• West Sees Zelensky As Cash Cow, to Keep Him in Power ‘For Now’ – Russia (Sp.)

The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has released information obtained from Russian covert operatives, shedding light on the direct involvement of the collective West in the proxy conflict in Ukraine. According to the declassified information, the US State Department and the European External Action Service are worried about the increasing distrust among Ukrainians towards the state institutions of the Kiev regime, as well as towards Volodymyr Zelensky’s rule, which they consider illegitimate. Despite this, Washington and Brussels would prefer Zelensky to remain in power, as lucrative war profiteering schemes are tied to him. Zelensky’s opponents are advised to exercise restraint “for the time being.”

The declassified information also unveils the search for an alternative to Zelensky that is currently underway, with ongoing contacts being maintained with key figures including ex-president Petro Poroshenko (leader of the European Solidarity party), Kiev Mayor Vitali Klitschko, former Ukrainian commander-in-chief Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, and Ukrainian aide Andriy Yermak. In a worst-case scenario, Zelensky may be made the ‘fall guy’ and replaced with one of these potential substitutes. According to the declassified information, the French Defense Ministry is worried about the increasing number of casualties among its citizens in Ukraine. This concern was highlighted by the recent incident in Kharkov on January 16 where ‘dozens’ of French nationals were killed when a temporary deployment point of foreign mercenaries was destroyed by the Russian armed forces. Despite this, a French contingent of 2,000 men is being prepared for deployment to Ukraine.

The FBI, US private military companies (PMCs), and the DEA have ramped up efforts to recruit imprisoned members of Mexican and Colombian drug cartels to fight in Ukraine in return for a full pardon. The first such group numbering several hundred people is to be dispatched to Ukraine in the summer. If the pilot project is successful, it may be extended to include other countries with a high crime rate, according to the declassified information. The declassified information indicates that the United States is attempting to steer the investigation into the May assassination attempt on Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico in a specific direction. Their objective is to present the incident as a lone wolf attack with no connections to foreign entities. This is being done to prevent it from being exposed as an act of targeting individuals with dissenting viewpoints, such as Fico and Hungary’s Prime Minister Victor Orban.

Read more …

“..Article 10 of the Washington Treaty, which claims that Russia has no input if NATO expands to surround Russia..”

• NATO Declaration Is Neoconservative Recommitment to US Hegemony – Sachs (Sp.)

NATO’s latest joint declaration serves as a stark neoconservative recommitment to US hegemony, Jeffrey Sachs, a world-renowned economist and President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, told Sputnik. “The NATO Declaration is a stark neoconservative recommitment to US hegemony. It calls for NATO to back the ‘rules-based order,’ which is actually the US-based order that is often directly contrary to the UN Charter,” Sachs said. On Wednesday, NATO released a joint Washington Summit Declaration, which outlines the alliance’s efforts to further isolate Russia, bolster the alliance’s security on its eastern flank, increase security assistance for Ukraine, and claim Ukraine is on an “irreversible path” into NATO, among other initiatives. “It describes NATO as a defensive force despite the fact that NATO is repeatedly engaged in offensive regime-change operations, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Serbia, Libya, Ukraine, and others,” Sachs said.

Sachs explains that NATO’s declaration also restates Article 10 of the Washington Treaty, which claims that Russia has no input if NATO expands to surround Russia. Moreover, Sachs said NATO’s joint statement describes its commitment to advanced biotechnologies, which raises concerns of biowarfare. Sachs also pointed out that the declaration shows NATO’s intention to continue to deploy anti-ballistic missiles throughout Europe as it’s previously done in Poland, Romania, and Turkiye, which has directly destabilized the nuclear arms control architecture ever since the United States unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002. The White House announced earlier that the United States will begin episodic deployments of the long-range fires capabilities of its Multi-Domain Task Force in Germany in 2026. Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov said US plans to deploy intermediate- and shorter-range missiles to Germany pose a direct threat to international security and increase the risks of a missile arms race.

Read more …

“..make sure that the ‘irreversible path of Ukraine’ towards NATO ends with either the disappearance of Ukraine, or the disappearance of NATO. Better, both..”

• Either NATO or Ukraine -or Both- Must Go – Medvedev (RT)

NATO’s declaration that Ukraine’s eventual membership of the US-led military bloc is “irreversible” means that either the nation or the alliance – and preferably both – should disappear, former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has said. A joint statement adopted by the leaders of NATO states during a summit in Washington, DC this week expressed support for Ukraine’s “right to choose its own security arrangements,” and declared that it is on an “irreversible path to full Euro-Atlantic integration, including NATO membership.” Russia has consistently said that Ukraine’s accession to NATO would cross a ‘red line’. It cited the expansion of the bloc in Europe as one of the key triggers of the current hostilities with Kiev. “The conclusion is obvious. We have to do everything to make sure that the ‘irreversible path of Ukraine’ towards NATO ends with either the disappearance of Ukraine, or the disappearance of NATO. Better, both,” Medvedev said on Thursday.

The wording of the joint statement, according to media reports, was intended to appease Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, who has claimed that his nation deserves to be fast-tracked into NATO in gratitude for fighting to supposedly “defend” the West from Russia. But member states, including the US, have made it clear that Ukraine will not be able to join them as a full participant while the conflict remains unresolved. Kiev has signed numerous bilateral security agreements with Western nations in recent months in lieu of guarantees provided for under the NATO Treaty. The most recent pact was finalized with Luxembourg this week. Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chair of the Russian Security Council, previously called for caution in the event that Kiev made a U-turn and accepted Russia’s conditions for a negotiated peace.

He argued that such a deal, which would include Kiev’s renunciation of its NATO aspirations, could lead to a new coup in Ukraine and an even more radical government eventually seizing power. In that scenario, he said, hostilities would resume and Ukraine’s statehood would be lost for good. But “the enemies of Russia will not go anywhere” and will “gather strength for a new attempt to destroy our country,” Medvedev predicted.

Read more …

“..China “cannot enable the largest war in Europe in recent history without this negatively impacting its interests and reputatio..”

• We are NATO. And We’re Comin’ To Get Ya (Pepe Escobar)

We are the world. We are the people. We are NATO. And we’re comin’ to get ya – wherever you are, whether you want it or not. Call it the latest pop iteration of the “rules-based international order” – duly christened at NATO’s 75th birthday in D.C. Well, the Global Majority had already been warned – but brains under techno-feudalism tend to be reduced to mush. So a gentle reminder is in order. This had already been stated in the first paragraph of the Joint Declaration on EU-NATO Cooperation, issued on January 9, 2023: “We will further mobilize the combined set of instruments at our disposal, be they political, economic, or military, (italics mine) to pursue our common objectives to the benefit of our one billion citizens.” Correction: barely one million, part of the 0.1% plutocracy. Certainly not one billion. Cut to the 2024 NATO Summit Declaration – obviously redacted, with stellar mediocrity, by the Americans, with the other 31 assorted vassal members duly assenting. So here’s the main 2024 NATO “strategic” trifecta:

• Extra tens of billions of dollars in “assistance” to the upcoming rump Ukraine; the overwhelming majority of these funds will be slushing around the industrial-military money laundering complex.
• Forceful imposition of extra military spending on all members.
• Massive hyping up of the “China threat”.

As for the theme song of the NATO 75 show, there are actually two. Apart from “China Threat” (closing credits), the other one (opening credits) is “Free Ukraine”. The lyrics go something like this: it looks like we are at war against Russia in Ukraine, but don’t be fooled: NATO is not a participant in the war. Well, they are even setting up a NATO office in Kiev, but that is just to coordinate production for a Netflix war series. The outgoing epileptic slab of Norwegian wood posing as NATO Secretary-General – before the arrival of his Dutch Gouda replacement – put on quite a performance. Highlights include his fierce denunciation of “the growing alliance between Russia and its authoritarian friends in Asia”, as in “authoritarian leaders in Iran, North Korea and China”. These malignant entities “all want NATO to fail”. So there’s much work to do “with our friends in the Indo-Pacific”.

“Indo-Pacific” is a crude “rules-based international order” invention. No one across Asia, anywhere, has ever used it; everyone refers to Asia-Pacific. The joint declaration directly blames China for fueling Russian “aggression” in Ukraine: Beijing is described as a “decisive enabler” of the Kremlin’s “war effort”. NATO script writers even directly threaten China: China “cannot enable the largest war in Europe in recent history without this negatively impacting its interests and reputation”. To counter-act such malignity, NATO will expand its “partnerships” with “Indo-Pacific” states. Even before the summit declaration, the Global Times was already losing their cool with these inanities: “Under the hype from the U.S. and NATO, it seems that China has become the ‘key’ to the survival of Europe, controlling the fate of the Russia-Ukraine conflict like a ‘decisive power.’”

Read more …

“..it cannot end, it must not end in the victory of Russia because if it happened that way, we will have another war soon because Russia will attack again..”

• Poland Preparing Military For Full-Scale Conflict, Army Chief Says (ZH)

NATO officials have announced several major moves which collectively mark a significant escalation with Russia at the annual NATO summit in Washington DC this week. First, President Biden on Tuesday unveiled that the US is sending dozens of anti-air defense systems to Ukraine forces amid stepped-up Russian aerial assaults. Next, a joint statement from Washington, the Hague and Copenhagen confirmed that an initial batch of US-made F-16 jet fighters are en route to Ukraine. This alone marks a massive escalation, given Moscow has already vowed it will target the jets. On Wednesday, yet another ultra-provocative announcement was made aimed at ‘deterring’ Moscow. Poland’s army chief of staff General Wieslaw Kukula called for his country to prepare its soldiers for all-out conflict. “Today, we need to prepare our forces for full-scale conflict, not an asymmetric-type conflict,” General Kukula told a press conference. “This forces us to find a good balance between the border mission and maintaining the intensity of training in the army,” he said.

His ‘border mission’ reference alludes to the ongoing tensions with Belarus, a close Russian ally which forms part of the ‘Union State’. Poland recently implemented its “East Shield” program, a $2.5 billion initiative to beef up defenses along the Poland-Belarus border. Going back to 2021, Belarus has been accused of intentionally flooding the Polish border with Middle East migrants as a form of hybrid warfare. The European Union has charged President Alexander Lukashenko with orchestrating a border crisis in order to bog down Polish troops and border guards. Another issue is that China’s military has kicked off exercises with Belarusian forces in Brest in recent days, which lies within miles of the Polish border. According to more of Wednesday’s Polish military announcement from Reuters,

“Speaking at the same event, deputy defense minister Pawel Bejda said that as of August, the number of troops guarding Poland’s eastern border would be increased to 8,000 from the current 6,000, with an additional rearguard of 9,000 able to step up within 48 hours notice.” Warsaw has also been on a major recruitment campaign toward rapidly increasing the size of its armed forces. This comes at a moment the NATO ‘eastern flank’ country is increasingly hitching its wagon to Ukraine’s fate. The current size of the Polish armed forces is commonly estimated at 190,000 personnel, but Warsaw wants to bolster it to 300,000 troops within a few years. On Monday, President Zelensky met with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk in Warsaw where the two signed an unprecedented military agreement. Zelensky subsequently highlighted a provision which allows Poland to intercept Russian missiles over Ukraine territory, if they are deemed a threat to Poland and its population.

Poland has throughout the Ukraine war maintained a muscular, hawkish posture toward Russia and has criticized efforts at peaceful settlement at the negotiating table. Just this week Polish President Andrzej Duda reiterated that Ukraine must not cede any territory to Russia in exchange for peace. He said Tuesday, “If there is anyone who wants to give to Russia a piece of Ukrainian land and they are not Ukrainian, then let them give a piece of their land to Russia because it is easy to give away a piece of somebody else’s land.” “I would like this war to end as soon as possible. However, it cannot end, it must not end in the victory of Russia because if it happened that way, we will have another war soon because Russia will attack again,” Duda added.

Read more …

“..transforming the fear to preparedness.”

• NATO Countries Closest to Russia Up Defense Spending (ET)

The nations on NATO’s easternmost flank are investing record amounts on defense in order to deter further Russian aggression against the region. Defense ministers from Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania gathered on July 9 in Washington to express their dedication to the NATO alliance and encourage other allies to pull their weight when it came to defense contributions. Anything less, they warned, could encourage more violence in Eastern Europe and, possibly, the end of some nations outright. Latvian Defense Minister Andris Spruds said that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s continued targeting of civilians in Ukraine demonstrated a tolerance for “human loss.” Mr. Putin’s “absolute disregard of human life and human dignity,” he said, had to be taken into account when dealing with Russia.

“We are dealing with an aggressive country,” he said during a fireside chat hosted by Politico on the sidelines of NATO’s 75th annual summit. “Russia is an existential threat, and we should be ready for this existential threat for years.” To that end, he added, the international community should prepare to fend off Russian aggression for years to come. It was vital, he said, that NATO “not engage from positions of weakness and appeasement.”

Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were all governed by the Soviet Union until its collapse in 1991. Now, Mr. Putin has implemented a foreign policy based on uniting the so-called Russian World, including substantial Russian-speaking communities in former Soviet states, which East European leaders fear will lead to conquests beyond Ukraine. As such, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have all exceeded NATO’s guideline of spending 2 percent of their GDP on defense to ensure collective deterrence against foreign aggression. Lithuanian National Defense Minister Laurynas Kasciunas said the investments were about “transforming the fear to preparedness.”

Read more …

‘perpetrators and collaborators’

• Musk Announces X To Sue Those Behind Advertising Censorship Cartel (ZH)

Elon Musk announced on Thursday that social media platform X will sue ‘perpetrators and collaborators’ who have colluded to control online speech, as revealed on Wednesday by an interim staff report released by the House Judiciary Committee. “Having seen the evidence unearthed today by Congress, X has no choice but to file suit against the perpetrators and collaborators in the advertising boycott racket,” Musk wrote on his platform, adding “Hopefully, some states will consider criminal prosecution.” The House report details a coordinated effort by the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) and its Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) initiative to demonetize and suppress disfavored content across the internet. As we noted on Wednesday, the WFA is a global association representing over 150 of the world’s biggest brands and over 60 national advertiser associations which created GARM in 2019.

This alliance quickly amassed significant market power, representing roughly 90% of global advertising spend, which amounts to nearly one trillion dollars annually. GARM’s Steer Team reads like a who’s who of corporate America, including heavyweights such as Unilever, Mars, Diageo, Procter & Gamble (P&G), GroupM, AB InBev, L’Oreal, Nestle, IBM, Mastercard, and PepsiCo. These corporations not only wield immense economic influence but are now revealed to be leveraging this power to control online discourse under the guise of “brand safety. The Committee report details multiple instances of GARM’s coordinated efforts to influence and censor online content.

Perhaps the most notable example is the recommendation for a boycott of Twitter following Elon Musk’s acquisition. GARM members, including Danish energy company Orsted, were advised to pull their advertising from Twitter, a move that significantly impacted Twitter’s revenue. Internal emails show GARM’s satisfaction with the result, with GARM leader Rob Rakowitz boasting about the impact on Twitter’s financials. “GARM recommended that its members ‘stop all paid advertisement’ on Twitter in response to Mr. Musk’s acquisition of the company. GARM’s internal documents show that GARM was asked by a member to ‘arrange a meeting and hear more about [GARM’s] perspectives about the Twitter situation and a possible boycott from many companies.” -House Judiciary Committee. And now, Musk is going to sue. Though he may want to quit GARM first.

Read more …

Way out of her league. It’s all about the immunity verdict.

• AOC Files Articles Of Impeachment Against Justices Alito, Thomas (Fox)

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., filed articles of impeachment against Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas on Wednesday, alleging “unchecked corruption.” Ocasio-Cortez threatened to file the articles last week, raising arguments about undisclosed gifts Thomas has received from wealthy conservatives and recent controversies involving Alito’s home and personal politics. “The unchecked corruption crisis on the Supreme Court has now spiraled into a Constitutional crisis threatening American democracy writ large,” Cortez wrote in a statement. “Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito’s pattern of refusal to recuse from consequential matters before the court in which they hold widely documented financial and personal entanglements constitutes a grave threat to American rule of law, the integrity of our democracy, and one of the clearest cases for which the tool of impeachment was designed.”

“Justice Thomas and Alito’s repeated failure over decades to disclose that they received millions of dollars in gifts from individuals with business before the court is explicitly against the law. And their refusal to recuse from the specific matters and cases before the court in which their benefactors and spouses are implicated represents nothing less than a constitutional crisis. These failures alone would amount to a deep transgression worthy of standard removal in any lower court, and would disqualify any nominee to the highest court from confirmation in the first place,” she argued. Ocasio-Cortez’s Wednesday filing includes three articles of impeachment against Thomas and two against Alito. The charges against Thomas involve undisclosed gifts as well as his lack of recusal in cases allegedly involving his wife’s legal and financial interests. The charges against Alito also include failure to disclose gifts and his lack of recusal in cases in which he had “a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party” before the court.

Ocasio-Cortez first threatened an article of soft impeachment following the Supreme Court’s ruling in former President Trump’s immunity case. The ruling in question said a president has absolute immunity from prosecution for “actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” and “presumptive immunity” for official acts in general. The court said there is no immunity for unofficial acts. “The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote on X following the decision. “Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture. I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.” The lawmaker argues that Alito was biased in favor of Trump and participants in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. She and other critics base the accusation on Alito flying an “appeal to heaven” flag at his home. The flag has been a symbol associated with American independence since before the Revolutionary War.

Read more …

Amy Coney Barrett.

• LinkedIn, Google Openly Censor Conservatives – Again (Sellers)

Tech companies are once again colluding with Democrats to push disinformation and censor legitimate conservative opinions, this time with the imprimatur of legitimacy conferred by the U.S. Supreme Court that allows them to do so more shamelessly and aggressively than ever. Today’s censorship is being made possible by the letters A, C and B—as in Justice Amy Coney Barrett. While the court’s two other centrists, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts, are equally culpable (along with its leftist bloc) in allowing the atrocity that is Murthy v. Missouri, it was Barrett’s name on the majority opinion. And, indeed, her support for the wrong side in several of the court’s other recent landmark cases has raised serious red flags. Pundit Mark Levin speculated recently that Barrrett has already gone the way of Harry Blackmun and David Souter—two Republican-appointed justices who had, by the end of their terms, become some of its most unabashedly left-leaning, likely due to what is sometimes dubbed the “Greenhouse effect” in honor of a former New York Times reporter fond of haranguing the court’s conservatives.

“I’m telling you that Barrett has decided she’s a politician, not a Justice,” Levin noted on a recent podcast, according to Newsweek. By the end of her term, the 52-year-old justice “will have flipped all the way to the left,” he added. With Democrats in Congress and the media exerting immense pressure on conservative justices like Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, perhaps Barrett, the court’s youngest jurist—who replaced liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsberg—remains in survival mode, opting to pick her battles carefully. But in the process, she is throwing essential civil liberties, such as First Amendment free-speech rights, under the bus and severely undermining the safeguards that help preserve America’s democratic institutions.

Barrett’s maverick streak made no difference in the recent Fischer and Trump rulings—which sided in favor of conservatives by, respectively, tossing the Justice Department’s overreach on Jan. 6 “obstruction” cases and forcing the D.C. district court to adjudicate whether former President Donald Trump’s 2020 election challenges qualify for presidential immunity. However, the Murthy decision—which found the court’s “wet noodle” wing delivering a win for Big Tech and the Deep State by deciding that the plaintiffs lacked sufficient standing after years of alarming anti-conservative censorship and government collusion on social-media platforms—will continue to have chilling implications for free speech until the right case comes along to overturn it.It effectively gave sites like Google (and YouTube), Facebook (and Instagram), LinkedIn and countless other leftist dominated tech companies carte blanche to continue the sort of egregious suppression of views that many noted in the lead-up to the 2020 election, with Hunter Biden’s laptop becoming the most ignominious example.

In addition to the laptop, the case dealt with the aggressive suppression of COVID skepticism—much of which has borne out as valid, but which continues to be mischaracterized due to the stigma attached by government-backed propaganda that was designed to clear the paths for Big Pharma’s mRNA “vaccines” to get their emergency approval from the Food and Drug Administration. Then there are the questions surrounding the irregularities in the 2020 election—questions that have fueled ongoing suspicions of massive vote fraud and a stolen election, since all of the major public and private institutions colluded to prevent any sort of meaningful presentation of evidence.

Read more …

“How can a democracy of morons succeed, even if once it was a world leader before intelligence and reason were schooled out of the American population?”

• Can the West Survive Democracy? (Paul Craig Roberts)

As our Founding Fathers knew, Democracy has many problems. One of the larger problems is that one person one vote is a poor way to make governing decisions. One reason is that intelligence is not equally distributed. Another is that interest in the affairs of state is not equally distributed. Some people want to know what is going on and others concentrate on sports and soap operas and scrolling their cell phones in search of entertainment. Yet another reason is that some have a financial or an ideological interest in controlling the explanations that reach the public and serve as a basis for their decisions placed in the ballot box. Still others focus on putting votes in the ballot boxes that the voters themselves did not put there. There is no doubt that democracy stinks. Founding Father John Adams gave us his view:

“Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true. Passions are the same in all men, under all forms of government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation.” Our Founding Fathers roped in democracy. They limited the vote to male property owners. They limited democracy to the House of Representatives and the suspect Representatives to two year terms.

The Senate was not elected by popular vote but by the vote of state legislatures who were assumed to be male property owners. Our Founding Fathers tried to protect us from democracy, which they regarded as the rule of the ignorant mob. And that is what it is. Nevertheless today it is all we have as a check on the tyranny of government. So today we are forced to defend democracy, which no Founding Father would do. Our Founding Fathers saw democracy as tyranny. But for us today democracy is the last and only check on the tyranny of the power of government institutions created by elites who are not interested in our opinions. From the standpoint of Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, and Hillary Clinton, American citizens count for no more than Muammar Gaddafi. We are in the way of their power. They are committed to moving us out of their way. That is what the eight-year attack on Trump and his supporters is about. That is why there are 1,000 falsely convicted American patriots in prison and why President Trump faces multiple criminal and civil indictments.

The ruling American Establishment has has put a negative connotation on every explanation that is not the official narrative. Gradually, any challenge no matter how factual to an official explanation is becoming a criminal act. If the Democrats are reelected or can come close enough to being reelected to cover their theft of the election, by 2028 it will be impossible to speak a word of truth in America. The Ruling Elites will have removed Truth out of their way. It is absurd to think that Americans know this. Americans are so indoctrinated and brainwashed that they don’t know anything. A Rasmussen Poll of the American population reveals that despite the outpouring of reports from the world’s top medical scientists that the Covid-19 “vaccine” has killed far more people than the released Covid virus, only one-third of Americans believe that the Covid vaccines are killing people. In other words, Americans are so utterly stupid that they cannot tell the difference between medical science and media propaganda.

With reports coming in every day of only vaccinated athletes in the prime of life suddenly dropping dead on the playing field, with only vaccinated babies having heart attacks, with the new form of turbo-cancer appearing only among the vaccinated, with miscarriages of vaccinated women off the charts, with neurological problems of the vaccinated off the charts, with new forms of blood clots never seen before of the vaccinated, with new diseases never seen before afflicting only the vaccinated, with massive excess deaths in every Covid vaccinated population, with the admissions that the Covid “vaccines” were not protective, with the overwhelming evidence that the “vaccines” are a threat to life and health, still 69% of Americans have no regrets being jabbed. So, what we have is a population, 69% of which is too stupid to be functional in a one person one vote Democracy. These fools can outvote the 33% by two to one. How can a democracy of morons succeed, even if once it was a world leader before intelligence and reason were schooled out of the American population?

Read more …

“..official U.S. policy precludes even shaking hands with Russian diplomats..”

• ‘My Life’s Work Melting Before My Eyes’ (Scott Ritter)

July 16 will mark the 42nd anniversary of the famous “Walk in the Woods” conducted by Paul Nitze and Yuli Kvitsinsky, respectively the U.S. and Soviet lead negotiators for INF talks that, at the time, were stymied. Faced with a calcified recalcitrance on the part of U.S. hardliners, the two men took a walk in the woods outside Geneva, Switzerland, where they outlined possible ways to break the negotiation impasse. The ideas that Nitze and Kvitsinsky came up with never came to pass — neither the U.S. nor the Soviet Union were ready to undertake such drastic actions. But their courageous stab at diplomacy at a time when neither side was talking to the other shook free the rust that had frozen their respective sides, lubricating the machinery of diplomacy, and set in motion the processes that led to Reagan and Gorbachev signing the INF Treaty some five and a half years later.

The key take-away from the Nitze-Kvitsinsky “Walk in the Woods” was that, when it comes to meaningful arms control, success is not immediate. The process of arms control must be seen in the long term. It was also clear that fear fueled consideration of positive outcomes that eventually led to an equitable solution in the form of the INF Treaty. There is no doubt in my mind that within the ranks of the Russian and U.S. diplomatic corps today are two men possessed of the vision and courage of Paul Nitze and Yuli Kvitsinsky who can, if given the opportunity, recreate the magic of the “Walk in the Woods.” That magic helped create the conditions for negotiations that helped pull the U.S. and Soviet Union from the nuclear abyss more than four decades ago. But two hurdles must be crossed first. It is difficult to imagine a U.S. and Russian diplomat walking and talking today when, as Professor Sergey Markedonev, a fellow participant at the Vienna round table pointed out, official U.S. policy precludes even shaking hands with Russian diplomats.

To cross that bridge the U.S. government needs a signal from the American people that such behavior is not acceptable. We need a modern-day version of the June 1982 Central Park million-person rally in support of nuclear disarmament and arms control and against nuclear war. America has an election coming up in November where issues of our collective existential survival as a people and nation are on the line. There is no more existential issue than that of nuclear war. As was the case in June 1982, we, the people of the United States, need to send a collective signal to all who seek to represent us in the highest office of the land, that we will not tolerate policies that lead toward nuclear war. That we insist on policies that promote nuclear disarmament and arms control. That we demand that our diplomats begin talking with their Russian counterparts. I’m tired of watching my life’s work melt before my very eyes. It’s time to rebuild the foundations of our collective survival. To make mainstream the cause of disarmament that once saved us from nuclear Armageddon.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Frens
https://twitter.com/i/status/1811278890679009583

 

 

More Frens
https://twitter.com/i/status/1811405515492102598

 

 

Baby dolphin
https://twitter.com/i/status/1811470069823930406

 

 

 

 

Batteries

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 11 2024

Jul 112024
 
 July 11, 2024  Posted by at 9:01 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  65 Responses »


Henri Matisse Window at Tangiers 1912

 

• Orban Is What Zelensky Should Have Been (Amar)
• Merkel Would Have Prevented Ukraine Conflict – Orban (RT)
• Trump Issues Fresh Challenge To Biden (RT)
• Dem Senator Says Trump Could Beat Biden In “Landslide” (ZH)
• MSM Launches ‘Muh Russia’ Election Narrative (ZH)
• NATO Preparing For ‘Protracted Wars’ – Pentagon (RT)
• EU Members Up Defense Spending by 30% Over Last 3 Years – Borrell (Sp.)
• New UK Prime Minister Pledges Sharp Rise In Military Spending (RT)
• ‘Russia Will Not Prevail’ – Biden to NATO (RT)
• Kiev Can ‘Never’ Get Enough Weapons – Zelensky (RT)
• US Bodycount 35 KIA After Russian Missile Strike (Helmer)
• Ukraine Timing Tragedies To Coincide With Important Events – Kremlin (RT)
• West to Supply Ukraine With ‘Squadrons’ of F-16 Fighter Jets (Sp.)
• High-Tech Western Weapons ‘Useless’ In Ukraine Conflict – WSJ (RT)
• We Were “Deceived & Gaslit For Years” (Alastair Crooke)
• NC Democrats Vote to Block 3rd-Party Candidates from Ballots (Turley)

 

 


Anti-Trump rally in New York City, June 3, 2017 © AFP / Eduardo Munoz Alvarez

 

 

Trump Kamala

 

 

 

 

Buffett

 

 

 

 

“..Hungary’s leader does not speak for the European Union, even if his country holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU. That is true, but to be frank, uninteresting. What is intriguing instead is the compulsive need to keep saying it.”

• Orban Is What Zelensky Should Have Been (Amar)

When your enfant terrible is also (almost) the only adult in the room, then something is very wrong with your room. For “the room” read the EU – and the West more broadly – and, for both the enfant terrible and the adult in the room, Viktor Orbán, prime minister of Hungary, and there you have it: the shortest possible description of what the big brouhaha about his recent trips to first Kiev, then Moscow and Beijing is really all about. The EU, in reality, has no policy worthy of the name to address the single most urgent issue in Europe at this point, namely, how to end the war in and over Ukraine. As Orbán himself has correctly pointed out in an interview with the German newspaper Die Welt, all the EU does is copy America’s “policy of war.” In other words, Brussels, like Washington, has ruled out diplomacy and compromise to end the war.

Indeed, if the US and EU had engaged in genuine diplomacy, then the war could have been prevented or ended quickly, in spring 2022. Orbán may be putting too much weight on – and too much trust in – a single Western leader, but that is his larger point when he claims that the large-scale war would not have happened if Angela Merkel had still been in office as chancellor of Germany. Against this backdrop of EU non- or, really – anti-diplomacy, Orbán has dared stand out by going on what, using social media to great effect, he has loudly announced as his “peace mission.” That appeal to public opinion has, of course, angered his detractors even more: Not only has he dared speak to “the autocrats” out there, he has also addressed the masses at home in the West. Perish the “populism”!

Yet it is a traditional and legitimate move among politicians worth their salt: Before practicing the art of – back then – radio reach-out to perfection in World War II, no lesser a leader than young Charles de Gaulle, in his ‘The Edge of the Sword’, recognized the absolute need to “dominate opinion,” since “nothing is possible” without that true “sovereign.” Yet Orbán’s “populism” is not even the main problem this time. That rather has to do with the fact that he has turned his own initiative into a foil against which the EU’s mainstream’s lack of imagination, rigidity, and, last but not least, complete subservience to the US are glaringly obvious. In the EU it is now going “rogue” to do what is not only obvious but reasonable and urgently needed: seek at least dialogue instead of stonewalling. That reflects badly on the EU.

So does the fact that the Hungarian leader has a habit of realism where the EU establishment prefers fictions maintained by – aggressively enforced – group think. Orbán has no time for the silly idea that Russia is a threat to European states inside NATO, he observes – rightly – that Russian policy is rational, and he recognizes the fact that Russia cannot be defeated in Ukraine. All of this is true, and all of it is taboo in Brussels. To complete his register of sin and heresy, the Hungarian prime minister also has the temerity to cultivate a memory and a sense of history. In a Newsweek editorial, he has just reminded NATO of two essential facts: that the alliance was founded for defensive purposes (to which it has badly failed to stick) and that the recent habit of treating a future war with “the world’s other geopolitical power centers,” that is, Russia and China, as de facto inevitable can turn into a “self-fulfilling prophecy.”

When you are thin on substance, rely instead on formalities and, if need be, legalism. Much of the EU elites’ response to Orbán’s initiatives has taken that self-revealing form. As soon as Orbán dared go to Moscow, leading EU cadres, such as Josep Borrell, Ursula von der Leyen, and Charles Michel could hardly stop falling over themselves with denunciations and reminders that Hungary’s leader does not speak for the European Union, even if his country holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU. That is true, but to be frank, uninteresting. What is intriguing instead is the compulsive need to keep saying it.

Read more …

Likely.

• Merkel Would Have Prevented Ukraine Conflict – Orban (RT)

The Ukraine conflict would not have escalated into an “international war” if former German Chancellor Angela Merkel were still in power, according to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. He accused current EU leaders of lacking vision in an interview with Die Welt published on Monday. A vocal proponent of a diplomatic solution for Ukraine, Orban last week embarked on a “peace mission” to some of the countries he says are the “five main actors” to the conflict – Ukraine, Russia, China, the EU, and the US.Orban’s first stop was Germany, where he spoke to Chancellor Olaf Scholz. The Hungarian leader said “there was hardly any agreement” between the pair regarding the resolution of the conflict, noting that he “always” misses Scholz’s predecessor, Merkel, due to her practical approach. According to Orban, if Merkel were still in power, the Russia-Ukraine conflict in its current form “would never have happened.”

“She had the ability, the understanding and the skills to isolate the conflicts that are bad for Europe. We made the mistake of allowing there to be a conflict, of allowing there to be a war. And instead of isolating it, we escalated it and made it international,” he stated. Orban recalled the failed Minsk peace accords, brokered by France and Germany, which ostensibly sought to resolve the dispute in Donbass in 2014 that preceded the current conflict. The path to peace would be much easier for all parties today if similar agreements were in place, the Hungarian prime minister argued. “If you believe that a political agreement like Minsk can solve all problems, then Minsk is of course a failure. But if you see that there is a situation that is bad and needs to be resolved somehow, then the only relevant reference point is not how can it be made better, but how it can be prevented from getting even worse,” Orban stated.

“Peace does not come by itself,” he added, stating that it has to be brokered by global leaders who want it, and claiming that “unfortunately we lack those.” Orban has often criticized the West’s approach to the Ukraine conflict, calling for a diplomatic settlement through negotiations. However, his ceasefire overture to Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky earlier this month was rejected, while his EU peers criticized him for his later visit to Russia. Several diplomatic sources told Politico earlier this week that the bloc could even revoke Hungary’s rotating EU presidency, which it assumed last month.

Read more …

“Trump said he wanted to give Biden a “chance to redeem himself.”

• Trump Issues Fresh Challenge To Biden (RT)

Former US President Donald Trump has challenged Joe Biden to a “no-holds-barred” debate and an 18-hole game of golf so that the incumbent leader can prove he is still fit for office. The 81-year-old Biden is facing growing calls from his fellow Democrats to drop out of the 2024 presidential race over concerns about his mental health, following his disastrous performance during a debate with Trump last month. Speaking at a rally in Miami on Tuesday, Trump said he wanted to give Biden a “chance to redeem himself.” “Let’s do another debate this week so ‘Sleepy’ Joe Biden can prove to everyone all over the world that he has what it takes to be president. But this time it will be man to man, no moderators, no holds barred,” Trump said, calling on Biden to “name the place, anytime, anywhere.”

Trump also recalled that during their CNN-hosted debate, Biden had declared that he would be willing to test his skills and stamina against his rival on the golf course. “Can you believe this? Did you ever see him swing?” Trump told his supporters, announcing that he is “officially challenging ‘Crooked Joe’ to an 18-hole golf match right here.” The presumptive Republican candidate promised that if Biden won, he would donate $1 million to any charity of his opponent’s choice. However, Trump doubted that Biden would accept his challenge “because he is all talk.” Biden campaign spokesman James Singer responded to the challenge on Wednesday by claiming that the US president “doesn’t have time for Donald Trump’s weird antics – he’s busy leading America and defending the free world.” He also dismissed Trump as a “liar, a convict, and a fraud only out for himself.”

Biden himself has unequivocally stressed that he is “firmly committed” to staying in the presidential race, while White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has insisted that the incumbent is determined to serve out his full second term in office if reelected. At the same time, calls for Biden to drop out of the election have continued to grow, with many senior Democrats and party donors urging him to “do the right thing” and quit, fearing he would not be able to beat Trump. A survey conducted by CBS News/YouGov in the wake of last month’s presidential debate also found that 72% of registered voters do not believe that Biden has the “mental and cognitive health necessary to serve as president.”

Read more …

“The White House, in the time since that disastrous debate, I think, has done nothing to really demonstrate that they have a plan to win this election..”

• Dem Senator Says Trump Could Beat Biden In “Landslide” (ZH)

Sen. Michael Bennett (D-CO) on Tuesday became the first Democratic senator to publicly cast doubt on President Joe Biden’s chances against Donald Trump in November. “Donald Trump is on track, I think, to win this election, and maybe win it by a landslide, and take with him the Senate and the House,” Bennett told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Tuesday – after telling colleagues the same in private. “So for me, this isn’t a question about polling. It’s not a question about politics. It’s a moral question about the future of our country.” “The White House, in the time since that disastrous debate, I think, has done nothing to really demonstrate that they have a plan to win this election,” he continued.

Bennet’s comments echo those of a growing number of congressional Democrats who say Biden’s reelection bid could hurt the entire party in down-ballot races this fall. As CNN reports, “Democrats, including those inside the administration, view this week as critical to Biden’s political survival, and lawmakers on Capitol Hill gathered privately for their weekly meetings on Tuesday.” “The stakes could not be higher,” said Bennett, who says his voters have “deep concerns” over whether Biden can win. Punchbowl News had a sobering take on the state of affairs for Democrats in their Wednesday AM newsletter, saying Biden has “made a mess of the Democratic party.” Senate Democrats were far from united about whether Biden is the best person to defeat Trump. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) told us that Biden needs to “continue to aggressively make his case” to his fellow Democratic senators in order to “earn full support.”

New Jersey Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill issued a statement Tuesday afternoon calling on Biden to step aside in favor of another Democratic candidate. “[B]ecause I know President Biden cares deeply about the future of our country, I am asking that he declare that he won’t run for reelection and will help lead us through a process toward a new nominee.” Fellow New Jersey Democratic Rep. Andy Kim — who’s running for Senate — walked right up the line of whether Biden should get out. “What steps can we actually take right now [to replace Biden.] That’s where some of the confusion is. Especially with all the talk of what are the actual deadlines. It’s hard to kind of make a decision without fully understanding that. We need to get a better grasp on it,” said Kim.

Meanwhile, House Democratic leaders met privately on Tuesday morning with some of their most vulnerable members, for a conversation that was “honest, brutal and intense,” and left some members crying, according to sources with knowledge of the meeting. ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, meanwhile, told TMZ that he doesn’t think Biden can serve another four years. The 63-year-old Stephanopoulos sat down for a closely-watched interview with Biden last week following the president’s disastrous debate performance last month against Donald Trump. “Do you think Biden should step down?” the TMZ journalist asked the “Good Morning America” co-host and moderator of “This Week.” “I don’t think he can serve four more years,” replied Stephanopoulos after a pause.

Read more …

Russiagate 3.0.

• MSM Launches ‘Muh Russia’ Election Narrative (ZH)

While the Democratic party melts down over Joe Biden’s cognitive decline – an obvious risk to US national security, the 2024 election wouldn’t be complete without a Trump-Russia narrative. To that end, the Wall Street Journal reports that the Russian government has launched a ‘whole-of-government” effort to influence the US presidential election in favor of Donald Trump – who, for some reason, Russia held off on invading Ukraine while he was president (and ostensibly wouldn’t have sent $175 billion and counting in US aid to combat). Citing unnamed ‘senior US intelligence officials,’ the Journal writes: The officials didn’t mention Trump by name, but said that Russia’s current activity—described as covert social-media use and other online propaganda efforts—mirrored the 2020 and 2016 election cycles, when Moscow also favored Trump and sought to undermine Democratic candidates, according to U.S. intelligence agencies.

Of course, Russia’s 2016 ‘influence campaign’ amounted to roughly $100,000 in Facebook ads, which “didn’t reference any specific presidential candidate, or even the election itself,” largely targeting BLM members and ‘Pokemon Go’ aficionados. Insidious. That said, the officials say that the activity witnessed so far this election cycle “isn’t on the scale or scope seen in 2016, when Russia’s actions included a hack-and-leak of Democratic Party emails, rudimentary cyber-probing of some state election systems and other actions intended to undermine Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign.” Hacked emails, you say? Edit: And as ZeroHedge reader ‘The Wolverine’ notes in the comments below: ‘Remember that time Adam Schiff interviewed the President of CrowdStrike and refused to release the transcript for months and months?’

According to the new report, Russia is seeking to influence specific voting groups, including those in swing states, and promote divisive narratives while denigrating specific politicians, the anonymous US intelligence officials told reporters, without mentioning the specific voters or politicians who have been allegedly targeted. But wait, there’s more! The Kremlin “is also working to influence members of Congress and is broadly seeking to undermine U.S. support for Ukraine in its war with Russia,” according to the anonymous officials – one of whom said that Russia was the “pre-eminent threat” to the election, while Iran was a ‘lesser threat at the moment,’ and aims to be a ‘chaos agent’ by exacerbating social tensions. “We have observed actors tied to Iran’s government posing as activists online, seeking to encourage protests, and even providing financial support to protesters,” said Avril Haines, the director of national intelligence, in a separate Tuesday statement.

Read more …

Neverending. And we are all hostages.

• NATO Preparing For ‘Protracted Wars’ – Pentagon (RT)

The US and its allies are planning to continue ramping up defense spending, which will ensure long-term demand for weapons, US Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks told a gathering of arms manufacturers during a NATO event on Tuesday. Speaking at the NATO Summit Defense Industry Forum, the official praised NATO members for boosting their military budgets since the initial flare-up of the Ukraine conflict in 2014, and particularly after the open hostilities between Ukraine and Russia erupted in 2022. Over the past decade, the average annual increase in spending was 72%, adjusted for inflation, she said. That reversed a period when “defense industries across the Atlantic were affected by decades of inconsistent funding and blinkered demand signals,” she said. She said the current thinking is: “Production matters. Production is deterrence.”

Western arms manufacturers have the ability “not just to compete, but to out-compete and prevail” over Russia and other nations that the US considers its rivals, including China, North Korea and Iran. “That includes ensuring we are prepared for the possibility of protracted war, which every ally must be prepared for – and not just in Europe, either,” Hicks warned. Developing the manufacturing base on both sides of the Atlantic in a way that combines “information-age ingenuity and industrial-era capacity” will benefit US allies in the Pacific, such as Australia, Japan and South Korea, the official said. She claimed that Western political systems are inherently beneficial for building “arsenals of democracy,” since they foster innovation and transnational cooperation. On the other hand, “autocracies,” according to her reasoning, can’t move beyond “just landing at each other’s airfields, or sailing ships alongside each other for a few days at a time.”

The Pentagon is looking for ways “to be a better customer,” Hicks said, by streamlining its internal processes, delivering targeted investments in the defense sector, and providing security services to weapons businesses. Russian officials have described NATO as a tool of US geopolitical ambition and a way to secure a permanent market for American weapons in Europe. Moscow has cited Washington’s pledge that Ukraine will eventually join the bloc together with NATO’s increased presence in Ukraine since 2014 as among the key triggers of the ongoing conflict. Beijing has accused the US of being stuck in a “Cold War mentality” and playing “zero-sum games” with non-Western nations, including China.

Read more …

Yay!

• EU Members Up Defense Spending by 30% Over Last 3 Years – Borrell (Sp.)

EU member states have increased their joint defense spending by 30% in the last three years, while in 2024, the bloc’s defense spending is expected to reach approximately 2% of GDP, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Wednesday. “In the last three years, the total expenditure [in the defense sector] in Europe … has increased by 30% and this year we will be reaching almost an average all together of 2% [of GDP], it is not enough, but is much better and it is growing,” the high-ranked EU official said during his speech at the 75th NATO Anniversary Summit in Washington. The NATO summit kicked off in Washington on Tuesday and will run through July 11. In late June, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the European Union needed to invest 500 billion euros ($535 billion) in defense in the next 10 years.

The European Union “regrets” that people are dying in Ukraine, but it will continue to supply weapons to Kiev to counter Russia’s actions, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Wednesday. “We certainly regret that people are dying, but Ukrainian soldiers are fighting and dying because they are defending their country,” Borrell said during a speech at the fifth NATO Anniversary Summit in Washington. The EU will continue to support Ukraine, Borrell added. “I am happy to have heard [US] President Biden a moment ago to say that Russia cannot prevail, for that we have to increase our [military] industrial capacity, putting more money on the table, more technological development,” Borrell said.

Read more …

“..not prepared to fight in an armed conflict of “any scale” and would run out of ammunition rapidly..”

• New UK Prime Minister Pledges Sharp Rise In Military Spending (RT)

The UK is set to boost its military capabilities and plans to gradually increase defense spending to 2.5% of its GDP, new Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Tuesday as he departed for a NATO summit in Washington. Starmer has pledged to publish a roadmap for defense expenditure following calls from both the UK military and NATO states to clarify his policy, his office has said. “I am committed to that 2.5% [of gross domestic product] within our fiscal rules, but that strategic review needs to come first,” he told Reuters ahead of the NATO summit. His predecessor Rishi Sunak had promised earlier this year that London would reach this target by 2030. According to Starmer’s office, the government will launch a strategic review next week to “determine the future defense posture” of the UK and the military capabilities it needs. The timeline for the review or when the spending goal might be achieved has not been specified, however.

Many NATO states have for years struggled to reach an agreed threshold of 2% of GDP for defense spending, but the push has gained momentum since the start of the Ukraine crisis in 2014 and especially after the launch of Russia’s military operation in 2022. Starmer, who became the UK prime minister after his party’s landslide victory in the general election last week, reiterated that London’s commitment to Kiev remains unchanged. Britain has been one of Ukraine’s biggest backers in the conflict with Russia, pledging £12.5 billion (around $16 billion) in support for Kiev, including £7.6 billion (around $9.7 billion) in military aid, since February 2022. Meanwhile, recent military research revealed that Britain’s armed forces are in such a poor state that they are barely able to defend the country, with deficiencies spread across its various branches. Rob Johnson, director of the Oxford Changing Character of War Center, told the FT last week that the UK was not prepared to fight in an armed conflict of “any scale” and would run out of ammunition rapidly.

Read more …

“According to Reuters, Biden delivered his remarks without a teleprompter in an explicit and clear-cut manner..”

• ‘Russia Will Not Prevail’ – Biden to NATO (RT)

US President Joe Biden has delivered a forceful speech to NATO members in a bid to reassure them that Ukraine can still prevail in its conflict against Russia. However, several Western diplomats told Reuters that the US leader’s better-than-expected stage performance failed to make up for his disastrous debate with Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. In the keynote speech at the opening of the NATO summit in Washington on Tuesday, Biden touted the bloc as “the bulwark of global security” and reiterated its intention to support Ukraine with military aid, including new deliveries of air defense systems. “We know [Russian President Vladimir] Putin won’t stop at Ukraine. But make no mistake, Ukraine can and will stop Putin… When this senseless war began, Ukraine was a free country. Today, it is still a free country, and the war will end with Ukraine remaining a free and independent country,” he declared. “Russia will not prevail. Ukraine will prevail.”

Russia has repeatedly condemned Western arms shipments to Ukraine, arguing they only prolong the conflict. It has also called NATO a “hostile” bloc directly involved in the conflict between Kiev and Moscow. According to Reuters, Biden delivered his remarks without a teleprompter in an explicit and clear-cut manner, in sharp contrast to his performance at the debate with Republican rival Trump last month. The 81-year-old president’s performance was described as “fumbling” and “incoherent,” with numerous media reports claiming that the debate disaster led to prominent Democrats urging him to drop out of the race. Several unnamed Western diplomats told Reuters that Biden’s NATO speech failed to erase the damage to his public image done by the recent debacle. “We don’t see how he can come back after the debate,” one European diplomat noted, adding that the president’s remarks were scripted and could not be seen as evidence of his endurance.

“I can’t imagine him being at helm of the US and NATO for four more years,” he remarked. Meanwhile, Biden has insisted he is “not going anywhere” and intends to beat Trump in the November election. On Tuesday, the GOP candidate challenged his rival to another face-off, calling it a “chance [for Biden] to redeem himself in front of the entire world,” and suggesting that the debate should be held without moderators. Biden and Trump are already scheduled to hold another debate, which will be moderated by ABC, on September 10.

Read more …

So why give him any?

• Kiev Can ‘Never’ Get Enough Weapons – Zelensky (RT)

Virtually no quantity of weapons that the US and its allies supply to Kiev for its fight with Russia will be enough, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has said. The Ukrainian leader is visiting the US this week as the heads of NATO states hold a summit in Washington DC. Zelensky called for more arms deliveries at the Ronald Reagan Institute on Tuesday, where he participated in an event alongside US Senator Mitch McConnell. While he highlighted his determination to continue hostilities with Russia, he stressed on several occasions the disparity in military strength between the two sides in the conflict. ”It’s not enough. It’s never enough,” he said, referring to the five additional Patriot missile systems, which US President Joe Biden pledged the same day to Kiev on behalf of his nation, Germany, Romania and others.

Asked about the fate of the 31 Abrams main battle tanks supplied by the US last year, Zelensky said the number was too low to “change the situation on the battlefield.”He went on to say the number of F-16 fighter jets pledged by Western donors has been insufficient. Russia uses some 300 jets in the Ukraine conflict, while Kiev would only be able to field 10 to 20 F-16s anytime soon, he said. ”Even if we will have 50 it’s nothing. They have 300,” Zelensky said. Being on the defense, Ukraine would need a fleet of 128 F-16s for parity with Russia, he stated.

Zelensky urged the US to lift all restrictions on using American-provided weapons against targets deep inside Russia and to provide Kiev with better long-range strike capability. In late May, the Biden administration revised its policy restricting the use of American weapons inside what the US recognizes as Russian territory, but would not allow long-range strikes, according to media reports and statements by officials. Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that his country may supply weapons similar to those that Ukraine gets from the West to parties hostile to the donors elsewhere in the world in case of further escalation. Moscow has described the Ukraine conflict as part of a US-led proxy war against Russia, in which NATO members take part in virtually every aspect except by sending their own troops to the battlefield.

Read more …

“Should Moscow conclude that it is now Washington policy to fight Russia, not just to the last Ukrainian, but to the last American?”

• US Bodycount 35 KIA After Russian Missile Strike (Helmer)

The latest Russian Defense Ministry daily bulletin was issued on Tuesday afternoon, July 9. Since then the Pentagon and the White House have been as silent as the tomb. Make that thirty-five American tombs. “During the day [July 9],” said the Defense Ministry briefer in Moscow, “the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation carried out a group strike with high-precision weapons on American HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems prepared for strikes on the territory of Crimea, as well as the venue of an official meeting of the AFU [Armed Forces of the Ukraine] command staff. The objectives of the strike have been achieved. Four US-made HIMARS MLRS launchers were destroyed, as well as up to 35 foreign specialists who serviced them.” Several hours later, the Pentagon briefer, Major General Pat Ryder, announced “a great kickoff to NATO summit events this week.”

General Ryder wasn’t referring to the largest number of US battlefield deaths ever recorded under hostile Russian fire. He had nothing to say about the Ukraine battlefield action, and the reporters attending failed to ask him about it. At the White House briefing which followed the Pentagon, the lead announcement was President Joseph Biden’s telephone calls to officials in Texas dealing with Hurricane Beryl; his plan to meet on Thursday with Vladimir Zelensky; and an assurance that “Russia’s aggression against Ukraine poses a threat to transatlantic security. That’s what it does. And it shows how critical the NATO Alliance is and how important it is to continue to make sure that it is strong, and that’s what the president has been able to do.” Reporters did not ask about US combat deaths in the Ukraine.

The New York Times also blacked out the report of the Russian strike on the HIMARS batteries, focusing instead on the Kiev targets of the day, and on claims by anonymous US intelligence and other officials that “Russia is unlikely to make significant territorial gains in Ukraine in the coming months as its poorly trained forces struggle to break through Ukrainian defenses that are now reinforced with Western munitions.” “You’d think in an election year,” comments a NATO veteran with Afghanistan war service, “that dead American ‘specialists’ would be an issue. This tells that they [the Biden Administration] are as committed to ‘victory’, or hiding an American defeat, as their [Trump campaign] opponents are. They are also loath to get into the role they played in getting things to this point.” That said, what interpretation can President Vladimir Putin and the Russian General Staff give after the 35 US battlefield deaths have been concealed by US officials? Should Moscow conclude that it is now Washington policy to fight Russia, not just to the last Ukrainian, but to the last American?

Read more …

“..if a Russian missile had struck the hospital, there would be “nothing left of the building”

• Ukraine Timing Tragedies To Coincide With Important Events – Kremlin (RT)

Kiev is deliberately using tragedies for publicity ahead of important international events, such as this week’s NATO summit in Washington, so that Vladimir Zelensky can push for more support from the West, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has claimed. In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin, Peskov suggested that Ukrainian authorities are effectively organizing PR campaigns “on blood,” referring to Monday’s deadly tragedy at the Okhmatdet children’s hospital in Kiev, where a missile killed two people and injured dozens more. Kiev and its backers have blamed Russia for the incident. Moscow has denied the allegations, insisting that it has never targeted civilian facilities. Instead, it claims that the hospital was struck by a Ukrainian air-defense missile. Peskov claimed that such tragedies in Ukraine often occur right before international events that are important for relations between Kiev and the West.

“I believe that there are no coincidences in this regard,” the spokesman said, suggesting that the Okhmatdet incident had been another “PR operation.” “This is truly a tragedy, but it is being deliberately used to create a backdrop that would accompany Zelensky’s participation in the NATO summit,” Peskov said, adding that Kiev’s methodology is “quite unclean, jesuitical, well-known, and has been repeated many times.” The Kremlin spokesman also noted that it was “very difficult” for Russia to get its point across to Western audiences regarding such incidents. “They do not want to hear anything,” Peskov said, adding that the “hysteria” in Western newspapers and TV channels “is likely due to the monopolistic dominance of Anglo-Saxon media there.” Nevertheless, Peskov said Russia would continue to “tell the truth about what has happened, both domestically and in countries where the audience is ready to hear us and where we have technical means to reach them.”

Meanwhile, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vasily Nebenzia, has also insisted that Moscow had no involvement in the Okmatdet incident. Speaking at the UN Security Council on Tuesday, he suggested that if a Russian missile had struck the hospital, there would be “nothing left of the building” and that “children and adults would have died rather than being injured.” Nebenzia explained that Russia had, in fact, been targeting the Artemov missile plant in Kiev, which is located approximately 2km from the Okhmatdet hospital. “There is every reason to believe that the Ukrainian air-defense missile that hit it was intended for a Russian missile that hit the plant,” he said, noting that the tragedy could have been avoided if Ukraine hadn’t deployed air defense in residential areas.

Read more …

“..Russian pilots and air defense personnel “will have new stars on their fuselages and new medals on their chests.”

• West to Supply Ukraine With ‘Squadrons’ of F-16 Fighter Jets (Sp.)

Western allies intend to supply Ukraine with entire “squadrons” of modern American-made F-16 fighter jets, according to a joint statement from the leaders of the US, Netherlands, and Denmark. They announced that the transfer of the first of these aircraft has already begun, allowing Ukrainian forces to start using them this summer. “We are committed to further enhancing Ukraine’s air capabilities, which will include squadrons of modern fourth generation F-16 multi-role aircraft,” US President Joe Biden said in a joint statement with Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at the NATO summit in Washington. The coalition, according to the leaders, intends to assist with the maintenance, armament, and pilot training for these jets. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in turn, announced that a transfer of F-16 fighter jets was currently underway from Europe to Ukraine.

“I’m also pleased to announce that as we speak, the transfer of F-16 jets is underway, coming from Denmark, coming from the Netherlands, and those jets will be flying in the skies of Ukraine this summer to make sure that Ukraine can continue to effectively defend itself against the Russian aggression,” Blinken said at the NATO Public Forum. Commenting on the development, Andrey Kartapolov, head of the State Duma Defense Committee told Sputnik that the transfer of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine will not affect the course of the special operation and will change nothing. “We have known for a long time that they would give them something by the end of the summer; they have nothing else left but the F-16. Now they will be giving them, perhaps a dozen or so, but it will not change anything at all. We have been expecting them for a long time, and we have been preparing. It will not affect the course of the special operation,” said Kartapolov. He noted that after the transfer of F-16s to Ukraine, Russian pilots and air defense personnel “will have new stars on their fuselages and new medals on their chests.”

Read more …

“The Russians have gotten really, really good” at interfering with guided munitions..”

• High-Tech Western Weapons ‘Useless’ In Ukraine Conflict – WSJ (RT)

Russia’s electronic warfare capabilities have rendered precision-guided Western munitions “useless” in the Ukraine conflict, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday. With their guidance systems scrambled, some of these weapons have reportedly been retired within weeks of hitting the battlefield. When the US announced the delivery of GPS-guided Excalibur artillery shells to Ukraine in 2022, pro-Kiev outlets predicted that the $100,000-per-shot projectiles would make “Ukrainian artillery a whole lot more accurate” and “cause Russia a world of pain.” However, the Russian military adapted within weeks, Ukrainian commanders told the Wall Street Journal. Russian signal-jamming equipment was used to feed false coordinates to the shells and interfere with their fuses, causing them to veer off course or fall to the ground as duds.

“By the middle of last year, the M982 Excalibur munitions, developed by RTX and BAE Systems, became essentially useless and are no longer employed,” the newspaper stated, paraphrasing the Ukrainian commanders. The Soviet Union invested heavily in electronic warfare (EW) during the 1980s, viewing jamming technology as a crucial bulwark against the guided missiles and shells that the US was beginning to develop at the time. While weapons such as the 1990s-era Excalibur shells were used by the US to devastating effect in Iraq and Afghanistan, officials and analysts in Washington have since concluded that they are far less effective against a peer-level opponent like Russia. “The Russians have gotten really, really good” at interfering with guided munitions, US Deputy Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment William LaPlante told the WSJ.

Retired US General Ben Hodges, who once predicted that Western weapons would help Ukraine seize Crimea by last winter, told the newspaper that “we probably made some bad assumptions because over the last 20 years we were launching precision weapons against people that could not do anything about it… and Russia and China do have these capabilities.” Some of NATO’s most advanced weapons systems have met a similar fate in Ukraine. The newly-developed Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), a joint project of Boeing in the US and Saab in Sweden, was given to Ukraine earlier this year, with Kiev’s troops firing these GPS-guided munitions before their American counterparts. However, it has since been pulled from the battlefield after it proved completely ineffective against Russian EW.

Likewise, Russian EW has significantly blunted the accuracy of Ukraine’s Western-provided GMLRS missiles, which are fired from the HIMARS multiple-launch rocket system, Ukrainian soldiers told the WSJ. As with the Excalibur shells, GMLRS missiles were once described by pro-Kiev pundits and analysts as a “game changer” that would swing the conflict in Ukraine’s favor. Russia has long insisted that no amount of Western weapons systems will prevent it from achieving victory. Supplying these weapons is a “futile project” that will only encourage Kiev to “commit new crimes,” Moscow’s ambassador to Washington, Anatoly Antonov, warned last week.

Read more …

“Unelected advisers, party hacks, scheming family members and random hangers-on make the critical daily decisions..”

• We Were “Deceived & Gaslit For Years” (Alastair Crooke)

Emmanuel Todd, the French anthropological historian, examines the longer dynamics to events unfolding in the present: The prime agent of change leading to the Decline of the West (La Défaite de l’Occident), he argues, was the implosion of ‘Anglo’ Protestantism in the U.S. (and England), with its entailed habits of work, individualism and industry – a creed whose qualities were held then to reflect God’s grace through material success, and, above all, to confirm membership of the divine ‘Elect’. Whereas traditional liberalism had its mores, the decline of traditional values triggered the slide towards managerial technocracy, and to nihilism. Religion lingers on in the West, though in a ‘zombie’ state, Todd avers. Such societies, he argues, flounder – absent some guiding metaphysical sphere that provides people with non-material sustenance.

However, the incoming doctrine that only a wealthy financial élite, tech experts, leaders of multinational corporations and banks possess the required foresight and technological understanding to manipulate a complex and increasingly controlled system changed politics completely. Mores were gone – and so was empathy. Many experienced the disconnect and the disregard of cold technocracy. So when a senior WSJ editor tells us that the ‘deception and ‘gaslighting’ collapsed with the CNN Biden-Trump debate, we should surely pay attention; He is saying the scales finally fell from peoples’ eyes. What was being gaslighted was the fiction of democracy and also that of America declaring itself – in its own scripture – to be the trailblazer and pathfinder of humanity: America as the exceptional nation: the singular, the pure-of-heart, the baptizer, and redeemer of all peoples despised and downtrodden; the “last, best hope of earth”.

The reality was very different. Of course, states can ‘live a lie’ for a long period. The underlying problem – the point Todd makes so compellingly – is that you can be successful in deceiving and manipulating public perceptions, but only up to a point. The reality was, it simply was not working. The same is true of ‘Europe’. The EU’s aspiration to become a global geo-political actor too, was contingent on gaslighting the public that France, Italy and Germany et al could continue to be real national entities – even as the EU scooped up all national decision-making prerogatives, by deceit. The mutiny at the recent European elections reflected this discontent. Of course, Biden’s condition has been long known. So who then has been running affairs; making critical daily decisions about war, peace, the composition of the judiciary and the boundaries of state authority? The WSJ piece gives one answer: “Unelected advisers, party hacks, scheming family members and random hangers-on make the critical daily decisions” on these issues.

Maybe we have to reconcile to the fact that Biden is an angry, senile man who yells at his staff: “During meetings with aides who are putting together formal briefings, some senior officials have at times gone to great lengths to curate the information in an effort to avoid provoking a negative reaction”.“It’s like, ‘You can’t include that, that will set him off’ or ‘Put that in, he likes that,’” said one senior administration official. “It’s very difficult and people are scared sh*tless of him.” The official added, “He doesn’t take advice from anyone other than those few top aides, and it becomes a perfect storm because he just gets more and more isolated from their efforts to control it”. Seymour Hersh, the well-known investigative journalist reports: “Biden’s drift into blankness has been ongoing for months, as he and his foreign policy aides have been urging a ceasefire that will not happen in Gaza whilst continuing to supply the weapons that make a ceasefire less likely.

There’s a similar paradox in Ukraine, where Biden has been financing a war that cannot be won – yet refusing to participate in negotiations that could end the slaughter”. “The reality behind all of this, as I’ve been told for months, is that Biden is simply ‘no longer there’ – in terms of understanding the contradictions of the policies he and his foreign policy advisers have been carrying out”. On the one hand, Politico tells us: “Biden’s insular senior team are well acquainted with the longtime aides who continue to have the president’s ear: Mike Donilon, Steve Ricchetti and Bruce Reed, as well as Ted Kaufman and Klain on the outside”. “It’s the same people — he has not changed those people for 40 years … The number of people who have access to the president has gotten smaller and smaller and smaller. They’ve been digging deeper into the bunker for months now.” And, the strategist said, “the more you get into the bunker, the less you listen to anyone”. In Todd’s words then, decisions are made by a small ‘Washington village’.

Read more …

“Democrats are seeking to bar third-party candidates from the general election . . . all in the name of perfecting democracy.”

• NC Democrats Vote to Block 3rd-Party Candidates from Ballots (Turley)

Months ago, I wrote a column about how Democrats have continued to try to block voters from being able to vote for candidates while claiming the mantle of the defenders of Democracy. This effort not only included Democratic Secretaries of State attempting to remove former president Donald Trump from the ballots, but efforts in the primary from the ballot. Many of these Democrats now calling for a “blitz primary” previously said nothing as voters were barred from having a choice in the primary. Now, in North Carolina, Democrats are seeking to bar third-party candidates from the general election . . . all in the name of perfecting democracy. The Democratically controlled North Carolina’s Board of Elections voted against giving ballot access to new parties supporting presidential candidates Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Cornel West. All three Democrats (Alan Hirsch, Jefferson Carmon, and Siobhan Millen) voted to prevent voters from being able to vote for Kennedy and West, though the decision will have to be reconsidered.

Yet, even if reversed, they are preserving uncertainty as to whether they will be viable candidates in the minds of voters. The excuses for this action are superficial and manufactured. Chairman Alan Hirsch insisted that their organizations were “problematic” in how they gathered signatures and how Republicans may be supporting their efforts to allegedly “take away votes from Joe Biden.” They also said that they were concerned that the third-party candidates were using the new party rules to gain an easier path to ballots. That is a bizarre objection. They are opting for the best approach under the existing rules. It seems openly partisan for these three Democrats to suddenly raise concerns over the existing rules when it could harm Joe Biden or the Democratic Party. Yet, Democratic commissioner Siobhan Millen worked hard to rationalize what is a raw political muscle play to prevent voters from having a choice:

“If this board keeps rubber-stamping thinly veiled so-called parties, national operatives are going to continue to come in and keep manipulating our system. Allowing unaffiliated candidates to follow the more lenient new-party rules is allowing a blind eye to partisan mischief, potentially.” If Millen wants to see partisan mischief, she does not have to look far. She and her colleagues are engaging in precisely such mischief to deny voters choices this election to try to bolster the chances of Biden in a swing state. Democrats continue to claim to defend Democracy while resisting democratic choice and abusing the legal process. This glaring disconnect was evident when President Joe Biden spoke on the top of the Point-du-Hoc in Normandy on the 80th anniversary of D-Day. Biden again used the event to suggest that democracy was in danger in the United States with the upcoming election.

Yet, Biden has overseen widespread government censorship with federal agencies targeting those with opposing views on everything from elections and climate change to COVID-19 and transgender policies. As Democratic secretaries of state sought to bar Trump from ballots, Biden refused to oppose the efforts. When liberal law professors and members demanded to pack the Supreme Court to guarantee a liberal majority, Biden refused to denounce it during the last campaign. This is why some in the country may view Biden and the Democrats as existential threats not just to Democracy, but to themselves. They see a party that is engaged in efforts to cleanse ballots (of Republicans), censor dissenting voices and prosecute political opponents. The effort in North Carolina continues this hypocritical and cynical narrative. These three Democratic board members just voted to prevent their fellow citizens from being able to cast votes for third-party candidates who are attracting increasing support among disgruntled voters.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Dog stairs

 

 

Malinois
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810787853091115082

 

 

Whales

 

 

Dance
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810755264343106007

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 10 2024

Jul 102024
 
 July 10, 2024  Posted by at 9:10 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  55 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Family of Saltimbanques 1905

 

• Trump Makes Biden Election Prediction (RT)
• A Second Spousal Regency Is Now Underway (Stockman)
• Paul Krugman Urges Biden To Drop Out (RT)
• Senile, Drooling, but Mostly Fabulous (Luongo)
• The Crowning of Kamala Harris? (Les Leopold)
• Orban: “China Has A Peace Plan, America Has A War Policy” (SCF)
• The Big Picture behind Viktor The Mediator’s Peace Shuttle (Pepe Escobar)
• EU Might ‘End’ Hungary’s Presidency – Politico (RT)
• Kremlin Responds To Kiev Hospital Attack Allegations (RT)
• NATO Should Not Be Party To Ukraine Conflict – Erdogan (TASS)
• Netanyahu Goes for Broke (Patrick Lawrence)
• Israeli Gaza Campaign May Kill 186,000 or More – 8% of Population (Juan Cole)
• UK Finances Worst Since 1945 – New Chancellor (RT)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Speaker Johnson

 

 

MEP
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810450168866635813

 

 

Rogan Dr. Phil

 

 

Orban Soros

 

 

Populists

 

 

 

 

“He has the delegates, he doesn’t have to get out. There’s nothing they can do to get him out.”

• Trump Makes Biden Election Prediction (RT)

US President Joe Biden “doesn’t want to quit” and “may very well stay” in the race for the White House, Republican rival Donald Trump has said. According to Trump, the Democratic Party will find it difficult to force Biden to quit. In the two weeks since he debated a visibly frail and confused Biden last month, Trump has stayed out of the public eye. Meanwhile, liberal media outlets have run articles questioning Biden’s mental health, as Democratic donors and lawmakers reportedly weigh their options for forcing the 81-year-old to suspend his reelection campaign. In a phone interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity on Monday night, Trump predicted that Biden will withstand the pressure to step down. “It looks to me like he may very well stay in,” Trump told Hannity.

“He’s got an ego and he doesn’t want to quit. This isn’t necessarily a very positive thing for our country, but I think he might very well stay in.” Biden himself has vowed to stay in the race, telling MSNBC on Monday that he is “not going anywhere.” In a letter to Democrats in Congress earlier that day, Biden insisted that he “wouldn’t be running again if I did not absolutely believe I was the best person to beat Donald Trump in 2024.” Biden won the support of nearly 99% of Democratic delegates during the party’s largely symbolic primary elections this year. This victory gives the president “a lot of power,” Trump told Hannity, adding that removing him from office via a constitutional amendment could be the only option available to the Democrats. “Unless they use the 25th Amendment… he has all the power,” Trump explained. “He has the delegates, he doesn’t have to get out. There’s nothing they can do to get him out.”

Should this come to pass, Trump said that he would expect to face Vice President Kamala Harris in November’s presidential election. “I think that [the Democrats] are very concerned about the vote if it’s not her,” he said. “They are gun-shy, they don’t want to do it any other way. It seems that if he gets out for whatever reason – and I don’t think he wants to get out – but if he gets out then it will be her.” Trump offered a cruder assessment of Biden’s chances in the days after the debate. In leaked footage filmed at one of his golf courses in late June, Trump could be heard telling a small group of supporters that Biden would surely be “quitting the race,” calling the president an “old, broken-down pile of crap.” Turning to Harris, Trump said that while she would be a better opponent, she is “so pathetic” and “so f**king bad.”

Trump on Biden

Read more …

“..why Kamala Harris and the timorous men and woman of the Biden cabinet have not activated the 25th Amendment: They are scared to death of Jill Giacoppo!”

• A Second Spousal Regency Is Now Underway (Stockman)

As it turned out, the immobilization of the presidency during the last 18 months of Wilson’s term was one of history’s great serendipity’s. Absent Wilson’s tireless promotion, the abominable League of Nations Treaty died aborning. America was thus given one more chance to return to its ways as a peaceful Republic untroubled by the petty intrigues of nations beyond the great Atlantic and Pacific Ocean moats. Needless to say, that reprieve has long since been kicked away. America is now a dangerous Empire and its president is virtually the helmsman of the planet. So the fact that Jill Biden has apparently read and copied the entirety of professor Markel’s account of America’s first Spousal Regency is troubling indeed. It was evident beyond a shadow of a doubt last Thursday night that a second Spousal Regency is now underway.

“Joe Biden” would have received his gold watch from Washington’s grateful ruling apparatchiks long ago, save for the obvious fact that Jill Biden has said that absolutely “nyet means nyet”. At this point, of course, it would be helpful if Jill did speak a bit of Russian because the minions helping her conduct this unauthorized, unlawful and constitutionally- repugnant Regency have gotten her marooned in what amounts to an helacious Moscow Winter. Alas, however, it appears that her second language lies elsewhere. That is to say, Jill Jacobs Giacoppo’s tribal ferocity did not originate from the bucolic hills of Willow Grove Pennsylvania or the classrooms of Upper Moreland High School or even the instructors at Brandywine Junior College. Her father’s family had emigrated from the Sicilian village of Gesso, losing the “Giacoppo” part within days of passing Lady Liberty, but hanging on to the blood loyalty part even unto the present fraught hour.

That is to say, Edith Wilson Biden is a clear and present danger to the American Republic. She has spent the last 47 years marinating in the self-righteous hypocrisies, follies and evil-doings of the Washington ruling class—without ever once have been called to accountability by any kind of electorate at all. Like Edith Wilson, she was apparently an able spouse and hostess – who taught classes at Northern Virginia Community College on the side and was pleased to call herself “doctor” owing to a quasi-honorary degree from the Biden family’s political sinecure at the University of Delaware. And yet and yet. Jill Giacoppo is an utterly unqualified usurper, who has even less excuse for her blatant power grab than did Edith Wilson back in the day. At least in Edith’s time there was no 25th Amendment to regularize, organize and legitimize the transfer of power to the constitutionally prescribed role of Vice President.

To be specific, section 4 of the 25th Amendment addresses the precise case of a President unable to fulfill his constitutional role but who cannot or will not step aside. In that event, it provides both a decision-maker and a procedure. The deciding group is the Vice President and a majority of the Cabinet. If this group declares a President “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” the Vice President immediately becomes Acting President; and he remains so unless a two-thirds majority of both chamber reinstate the former president. So why was “Joe Biden” still in the Oval Office last Thursday night making a spectacle of his very disabled self before a global audience of 51 million?

It’s plain as day that there is one reason and one reason alone as to why Kamala Harris and the timorous men and woman of the Biden cabinet have not activated the 25th Amendment: They are scared to death of Jill Giacoppo! Then again, this election is allegedly about saving constitutional democracy from the prospect of an illegal coup. And while the DNC and its megaphones in the MSM may resolutely deny it, that’s exactly what is now dangerously underway in their own backyard.

Read more …

Paul who?

• Paul Krugman Urges Biden To Drop Out (RT)

US President Joe Biden should “do the right thing” and drop out of the election race in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris, Nobel Prize winner and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has said. Democrats and key party donors are growing increasingly concerned about their prospects for the vote in November after Biden’s disastrous performance in the June 27 debate against Republican rival Donald Trump. In a column on Monday, Krugman argued that Biden has been “ludicrously mistreated” by having his “every verbal or physical stumble” analyzed. Despite this, however, Krugman, the 2008 Nobel Prize winner in economics, said Biden should stand aside as his party’s candidate for president.

Harris should “probably” be the one to take his place, he added. The televised debate last month gave Biden a “golden opportunity” to “be calm and reassuring” in the face of Trump’s “bizarre and menacing” behavior, but he “utterly failed the test,” Krugman wrote. ‘During the CNN-hosted showdown, Biden appeared visibly confused, slurring his words and struggling to finish his sentences. While the White House blamed Biden’s poor performance on a cold and his busy travel schedule earlier in the month, some Democratic donors and liberal pundits have called on the 46th president to suspend his campaign. Some formerly friendly media outlets have also demanded that Biden step aside.

The 81-year-old has refused to withdraw from the race, admitting only that he does not debate “as well as [he] used to.” Speaking to MSNBC on Monday, Biden said he is “not going anywhere” and vowed to continue his reelection campaign, insisting he is “the best candidate to beat Donald Trump.” A survey conducted by CBS News/YouGov in the wake of the presidential debate found that 72% of registered voters do not believe that Biden has the “mental and cognitive health necessary to serve as president.”

Read more …

“..Doug Emhoff, you know the ‘second gentleman’ was at a debate watch party with Rob Reiner and Jane Fonda. What did he do to deserve that? Meathead and Hanoi Jane?”

• Senile, Drooling, but Mostly Fabulous (Luongo)

Well, here we are. It’s a full blown panic. It is now obvious that President Biden lacks the mental faculties to carry on the office of the presidency. And the nervous mice are starting to tiptoe out on the ice and do the ‘noticing in public’ they have avoided the last three and a half years. The Democrats are now dividing themselves between the culpable and those with culpable deniability. Who knew? Who could have known? It’s time to call a lid on the whole damn thing, Jack. Now Republicans don’t want to hear that, they want to keep Biden in the race, for obvious reasons. That’s easy to understand and if he was just running as a candidate and not for reelection, it wouldn’t be a big deal. But, there is a country to run, every single day. And we do not know who is running it. That is beyond politics. And beyond unacceptable.

Democrats are nervous about Kamala. Who cares? She is the Vice President of the United States of America and her job is to step into the vacuum at moments like this. There will be plenty of time for a post-mortem later, but there can be no pretending that Biden is capable of finishing out his term. It’s nonsense and everyone knows it. But the Democrats have never met a rule or standard that they weren’t willing to politicize, and relativize, to their own ends. They can always screw over President Harris at the convention in six weeks, and give the nomination to someone else. They can fight the ballot issues at the state level. But I bet she winds up with the Senile Ice Cream Man’s superdelegates, so maybe everyone should stop worrying and learn to love the Kam…ala. How did we get here? According to some, it was because the right wing crankosphere has been too mean.

Calling out the obvious denied the establishment press their ability to do their jobs. They had to spend all their time doing counter-narrative against internet meanies, otherwise they would have noticed the president is unfit for office. Well, we’ve been calling him the Senile Ice Cream Man™ for over three years over here, so it must be our fault. We are deeply sorry about that. Sorry about being able to perceive reality. Meanwhile, the press is still getting their heads around the possibility of consequences. Give credit to the New York Times for being able to sniff a change in the zeitgeist and move quickly towards it. Even as they deserve heaps of scorn for carrying on the farce for so long, they’ve quickly put on their big girl pants and are out doing the journalism thing. It’s been cringeworthy to watch. So the press is doing the careful lane change. But we still have to watch all the Democrats pretend they didn’t know.

“Whip smart” Joe Biden is the best he’s ever been! That’s what they said on Morning Joe! You know the show where marriages, and credibility, goes to die. But, it wasn’t a lie, exactly. In some ways, Biden hasn’t changed at all. He was always an egotistical prick who said dumb stuff. Joe has always made up thinly believable lies based on his patronizing view of the world. He’s always been awkwardly sniffing people. Even if you believe “Corn Pop was a bad dude,” do you not remember Biden was the life insurance policy for the first black president? Obama thought “…I sure don’t want to get shot, who could I pick for VP that would make even an assassin think twice? Oh, I know, Joe Biden. No one wants that dumbass in charge!” Supposedly, poor Doug Emhoff, you know the ‘second gentleman’ was at a debate watch party with Rob Reiner and Jane Fonda. What did he do to deserve that? Meathead and Hanoi Jane?

In any case, five minutes in Reiner reportedly started screaming while Jane was crying. Awkward. Not as bad as listening to Kamala practice a speech, but pretty bad. Then you have the Hollywood elites, with their fake surprise and lamentations of betrayal. I can think of a lot of off-color compound words people might use to describe Ari Emmanuel. Dumbfuck is not on that list. He was so surprised to see Biden’s performance, shocked I tell you. Bitch, please.

Read more …

Dems are trying to turn disaster into a demonstration of democracy.

• The Crowning of Kamala Harris? (Les Leopold)

While we await President Biden’s talk with the Lord Almighty, the Democratic Party lords are planning the coronation of Vice President Kamala Harris. Is she the best Democratic Party nominee? Many party leaders are eager to shut down that discussion. For them, it’s game over. They say that Harris should be the nominee and anyone who opposes her will greatly offend key Democratic constituencies, starting with the Black women who have been the backbone of the party in key states. How would it look, for example, if a white woman like Governor Gretchen Whitmore, were chosen instead? After all, Harris is literally “next in line.” Picking anyone else, therefore, would be like cutting ahead of the line. Not fair and an insult to people of color. But that argument is a stretch. It’s not automatic that vice presidents get a free ride to the nomination. Sometimes they have to fight for it, as Hubert Humphrey did in 1968.

And Biden himself, of course, was pushed aside for Hillary Clinton in 2016, even after serving two terms as Obama’s VP. Party elites also point to the fact that Harris is well known and therefore has a big edge over newer candidates who have not yet been vetted through the national political grinder. But that also cuts the other way. While Harris is well known, that’s not necessarily a plus. As of July 5, 51.2 percent disapprove of the job the Veep is doing, with only 37.1 percent approving, according to ABC News’ 538 poll averages. And currently, she is trailing Trump in the latest poll, 47 to 42 percent. Her supporters will correctly point out, however, that the other, lesser-known Democratic hopefuls are currently polling even more poorly against Trump. Harris also has a stellar electoral record to be considered in California, where she served as Attorney General and then U.S. Senator. And, of course, she won the vice presidency in 2020, but that vote was largely about Biden and Trump.

As a national candidate for president in 2020, however, she did not do well. After one good debate in June 2020, her campaign faltered, as her poll numbers crashed from 15 percent to 3 percent in December. She then withdrew even before the primaries began. Some will write that off as old news that doesn’t tell us much about the current situation, but really, why exactly doesn’t that history matter? What concrete evidence do we have that she would do better now as a presidential candidate? What counts most today is who the Democratic rank-and-file really want as their presidential candidate when Biden has his come-to-Jesus moment and stands down. The party’s candidate this year needs to inspire and draw the broadest possible turnout to defeat Donald Trump in the battleground states.

The Democrat mantra is that “democracy is on the line” this fall. That same concern should guide their candidate selection process. Are they willing to open it up, so the base of the party has a say in who is nominated? If so, then the Democrats should seriously consider a reasonable process outlined by Jonathan Alter in the New York Times:

• Only those with a certain threshold of support in polls may take part in Democratic debates scheduled before the convention.
• Each qualifying candidate will be granted a half-hour address on the opening night of the convention, with the winner expanding on it in his or her acceptance speech.
• Delegates should take into consideration—though not be bound by—state and national polls showing the relative strengths of the candidates.
• The candidates should identify possible running mates.

Representative James Clyburn (D-S.C.), a Biden campaign co-chair no less, is suggesting a mini-primary before the August nominating convention. And James Carville argues for holding four regional town halls for new candidates selected by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, who also would chair the meetings. It’s possible that Kamala Harris would come out of this process as the strongest contender, igniting and mobilizing many of the key Democratic Party constituencies. But it would be a grave error to use that untested assumption to eliminate rank-and-file Democrats from having a real say in the process.

Read more …

“China has a peace plan. America has a war policy. And Europe, instead of having its own strategic approach, is simply copying the American position..”

• Orban: “China Has A Peace Plan, America Has A War Policy” (SCF)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán continued his peace mission with a trip to China before moving on to the United States on Monday, July 8th. After visiting Kyiv and Moscow last week, he headed to the capitals of the two global powers, who—in the prime minister’s words—have the ability to influence the outcome of the Russo-Ukrainian war. Hungary assumed the rotating Presidency of the Council of the European Union on July 1st, and Orbán is using this role to promote his “peace mission,” an attempt to bring the war in Ukraine to an end. Though the prime minister made it clear that he is not mandated to hold talks on behalf of the other EU member states, he said he would like to find out how far Ukraine and Russia were willing to go—and update fellow EU member states on his findings.

Since the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Hungary has been the only EU member state to call for a ceasefire and peace talks instead of prolonging the war by sending weapons to Ukraine. As we recently reported, Orbán visited both Kyiv and Moscow last week in an attempt to talk to both participants in the war that has now raged for almost two-and-a-half years. He was criticised by EU leaders for talking to Russian President Vladimir Putin, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stating that “appeasement will not stop Putin.” However, Balázs Orbán, the prime minister’s political advisor (not related to Viktor Orbán) said in an interview on Sunday that Hungary’s EU presidency provides a good opportunity to open the communication channels between the parties of the war. Unveiling the agenda of the presidency in June, Hungarian EU Affairs Minister János Bóka said “the EU has to guarantee the security and peace of Europe, and every one of our priorities will be interpreted within this framework.”

In a short video uploaded to his X account after his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing, the prime minister said: “Of course, the warring parties have the last word in the war, but three world powers have a decisive influence: China, the United States and the European Union. They also influence when this war will end.” In Beijing, Orbán said he had discussed with Xi the Chinese peace plan, saying “China is the only world power that has been clearly committed to peace from the beginning.” China’s and Brazil’s road map states that “dialogue and negotiation are the only viable way out of the crisis.” China did not attend a Western-backed peace summit held in Switzerland last month, saying it is meaningless to hold such a conference without the participation of one of the warring factions, Russia. According to AP reporting, Xi followed his meeting with Orbán by calling on Russia and Ukraine to stop the fighting—and on other major powers to create an environment conducive to talks.

“China has a peace plan. America has a war policy. And Europe, instead of having its own strategic approach, is simply copying the American position,” Viktor Orbán told German daily Die Welt in an interview shortly before his trip to Beijing. After visiting Beijing, Orbán flew straight to Washington, D.C., where he is set to attend the summit of NATO leaders, which begins on Tuesday. Member states plan to pledge to keep pouring arms and ammunition into Ukraine at current levels for at least another year. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance’s 32 member countries have been spending around €40 billion each year on military equipment for Ukraine since the war began and that this should be “a minimum baseline” going forward.

Before the summit, it was rumoured Orbán would meet former President Donald Trump who has claimed he could end the war within 24 hours of moving back into the White House. Orbán openly supports Trump’s presidential candidacy, and has stated that the former president would bring back peace to Ukraine. “Prime Minister Orbán, like my father, wants to see PEACE brought back to the world. Enough of the constant wars and the endless sums of money to fund them. … Peace must be the ultimate goal,” Donald Trump Jr.—Trump’s son, who recently visited Budapest—posted on X.

Read more …

“All negotiations with him, he is always in a good mood – this is the first thing. Secondly, he is more than 100% rational. When he negotiates, when he begins to explain, when he makes an offer, saying yes or no, he is super, super rational..”

“..it is a real challenge to negotiate with him and be prepared to match his intellectual and political level.”

• The Big Picture behind Viktor The Mediator’s Peace Shuttle (Pepe Escobar)

Viktor Orban is on a roll. And that has set out a riotous roller coaster. Everyone has been gripped by the extraordinary spectacle of pre-historic specimens wallowing in the Western geopolitical swamp reaching the depths of Hysteriastan at the sight of the Hungarian Prime Minister’s peace shuttle moving from Ukraine and Russia to China. And to do that on the eve of the 75th anniversary of warmongering Global Robocop NATO has got to be the ultimate affront. The 3-hour long Putin-Viktor The Mediator meeting in Moscow was quite something. These are arguably Putin’s three main points: 1.Kiev cannot allow the idea of a ceasefire because that would remove the pretext for extending martial law. 2.If Kiev ends martial law, it will need to hold presidential elections. The chances of the current Ukrainian authorities winning are close to zero. 3.There should not be a truce for additional Kiev weaponizing: Moscow wants a complete and final endgame.

By comparison, these are arguably Orban’s three main points: 1.The positions of Russia and Ukraine are very far from each other, much needs to be done. 2.The war in Ukraine has begun to have an impact on the European economy and its competitiveness (as much as the EU “leadership” may deny it). 3.“I heard what Putin thinks about the existing peace initiatives, the ceasefire and negotiations, and the vision of Europe after the war.” Orban also made a point of emphasizing the airtight pre-meeting secrecy, as “means of communication are under total surveillance by the Big Boys”. He described the search for a solution in Ukraine as his “Christian duty”. And he said he asked three direct questions to Putin: whether peace talks are possible; whether a ceasefire before they begin is realistic; and what Europe’s security architecture could look like.

Putin, said Orban, answered all three. The clincher – not for the warmongers, but for the Global Majority – was Orban’s description of Putin: “All negotiations with him, he is always in a good mood – this is the first thing. Secondly, he is more than 100% rational. When he negotiates, when he begins to explain, when he makes an offer, saying yes or no, he is super, super rational. How else can you say it in Hungarian? Cool headed, reserved, careful and punctual. He has discipline. So it is a real challenge to negotiate with him and be prepared to match his intellectual and political level.” All of the above ties up with the concept of a new Eurasia security system proposed last month by Putin – and a key theme of discussion at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Astana last week. Putin has emphasized the central role of the SCO in the process, stating that a “decision was made to turn the SCO regional anti-terrorist structure into a universal center tasked with responding to the entire range of security threats.”

In a nutshell: the SCO will be arguably the key node in the new Eurasia-wide indivisibility of security arrangement. This is as huge as it gets. It all started with the concept of Greater Eurasian Partnership, proposed by Putin in 2015 and conceptualized by Sergey Karaganov in 2018. Putin took it to another level in his meeting with key Russian diplomats in June; it’s time to set up serious bilateral and multilateral guarantees for collective Eurasian security. That should be a security architecture, according to Putin, open to “all Eurasian countries that wish to participate,” including “European and NATO countries.” And it should lead to “gradually phasing out” the military presence of “external powers in Eurasia”, side by side with “establishing alternatives to Western-controlled economic mechanisms, expanding the use of national currencies in settlements, and establishing independent payment systems.” In a nutshell: a complete geopolitical and technical-military revamp, as well as geoeconomic (the importance of developing alternative international transport corridors such as the INSTC).

Read more …

“With such a meeting the presidency ends before it has really begun.”

• EU Might ‘End’ Hungary’s Presidency – Politico (RT)

The European Union could revoke Hungary’s presidency of the bloc over Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s trip to Moscow, Politico EU has reported, citing diplomatic sources. Orban went to Ukraine last week, upon assuming the European Council presidency and vowing to “Make Europe great again.” He then went to Russia, triggering howls of outrage in Kiev and Brussels alike. “Member states were already irritated by the ‘MEGA’ motto. But a meeting with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin will permanently overshadow the Hungarian presidency,” Politico reported on Monday evening, citing an unnamed EU diplomat. “With such a meeting the presidency ends before it has really begun.” Politico described Orban as having gone “rogue” and suggested the EU ambassadors “could move from public condemnations alone to concrete action to restrain” Budapest at their meeting on Wednesday.

There is “a very clear political disapproval” of Orban in Brussels, another anonymous diplomat said, adding that the ambassadors are “now discussing what exactly to do on Wednesday.” The bloc “can get rid of the Hungarian presidency within weeks,” argued Daniel Hegedus, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund think-tank. He laid out a series of steps by which Brussels could move the start of Poland’s presidency to September 1, cutting Hungary’s term short, so as to “attach negative consequences to Orban’s behavior.” This would require a four-fifths majority in the European Council.

Orban has dismissed criticism that he does not have a mandate to represent the EU by saying that his peace missions are not classical negotiations and therefore do not require one. Bigger powers might be able to end the conflict, but Hungary can be “a good tool in the hands of God” to promote peace, the Hungarian leader said last Friday on national radio. Hungary has long been one of the few EU members critical of the bloc’s unqualified support for Ukraine, urging Brussels instead to push for peace. Budapest has blocked plans to finance Kiev’s weapons purchases, declined to participate in the program of training Ukrainian troops, and refused passage of weapons and equipment to Ukraine via its territory.

Read more …

“..used by the Ukrainian authorities to ensure continued funding and the continuation of the conflict.”

• Kremlin Responds To Kiev Hospital Attack Allegations (RT)

Moscow has vehemently denied responsibility for the tragedy at the Okhmatdet children’s hospital in Kiev, after a missile hit the facility on Monday. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has insisted that the incident was caused by a Ukrainian air defense missile. Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Peskov stressed that Russia “does not strike civilian targets” and that all strikes carried out by the Russian military are exclusively aimed at “critical infrastructure facilities and military targets that are somehow related to the regime’s military potential.” Regarding Ukraine’s accusations that Moscow intentionally hit the hospital in Kiev, Peskov pointed to the official statement by the Russian Defense Ministry, which “absolutely rules out that there were strikes on any civilian targets. It states that we are talking about the fall of an anti-missile.”

The Russian Defense Ministry reported on Monday that it had conducted a large-scale attack using long-range high-precision weapons to strike Ukrainian military industry facilities and aviation bases. The attack was said to be in response to Kiev’s continued attempts to cause damage to Russian energy and economic facilities. The ministry stated that all the intended targets were hit and rejected Kiev’s claims of Russian missiles striking civilian facilities as “absolutely untrue.” “Numerous published photos and video footage from Kiev clearly confirm the fact of destruction due to the fall of a Ukrainian air defense missile launched from an anti-aircraft missile system within the city,” the ministry said. It also accused Kiev of attempting similar “hysterics” in the past, especially before large international summits, such as the NATO gathering in Washington that kicked off on Tuesday. The Russian Defense Ministry suggested that the incident at Okhmatdet is being used by the Ukrainian authorities to ensure continued funding and the continuation of the conflict.

Russia’s ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, has also suggested that the hospital tragedy is seen by Kiev’s Western backers as a “perfect gift” to justify further escalation of the conflict and the continuation of hostilities. The Western press is “whipping up hysterics” and hiding relevant facts about the tragedy, Antonov claimed, including Moscow’s assessment that the incident was caused by a Ukrainian air defense missile. Pro-Kiev media outlets have claimed that the weapon that struck the hospital was a Russian air-launched Kh-101 cruise missile. However, others have argued that the projectile, which can apparently be seen in a video filmed from a distance by a witness, was probably an AIM120 fired by a NASAM missile system or an interceptor fired by the MIM-104 Patriot missile system. Western donors have provided Ukraine with this type of US-developed weapon.

Read more …

“They do not want to hear anything..”

• West Doesn’t Want To Listen – Kremlin (RT)

Russia will continue to “speak the truth” to the world, despite Western governments and media refusing to allow their citizens to hear what Moscow has to say, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated on Tuesday. Peskov was asked by the VGTRK broadcaster about Ukraine’s claims that Russia struck a children’s hospital in Kiev. Moscow has insisted that its forces targeted a nearby missile plant and that the hospital was actually hit by a stray Ukrainian air defense missile. Ukraine’s version of events was quickly backed by its Western supporters. Moscow and Kiev further traded accusations during an emergency UN Security Council meeting on Tuesday. “It is very difficult to get our point across to the Western world right now. They do not want to hear anything,” Peskov said. “We see the hysteria in [Western] newspapers, TV channels,” the Kremlin spokesman added. “This is likely due to the monopolistic dominance of Anglo-Saxon media there.”

Nevertheless, Moscow will continue to “tell the truth about what has happened, both domestically and in countries where the audience is ready to hear us and where we have technical means to reach them,” Peskov stressed. Since 2022, the EU has banned several Russian news broadcasters, including RT, citing “systematic information manipulation and disinformation.” YouTube similarly began to crack down on Russian-linked content, removing more than 70,000 videos and 9,000 channels related to the Ukraine conflict, according to The Guardian. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has branded the sanctions “political censorship and a campaign to completely wipe out alternative viewpoints.”

Read more …

“..every day that weapons are being used [in Ukraine] confirms the rightness of Turkey’s position” on the issue..”

• NATO Should Not Be Party To Ukraine Conflict – Erdogan (TASS)

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that during his participation in the NATO summit in the United States he intends to bring up the issues of counterterrorism, Gaza, and Ukraine, especially the fact that the alliance should not become a party to the conflict. “We expect an outcome from this summit that takes into account our national security interests and strengthens solidarity within the alliance. During our meetings [in Washington], we will draw attention to the growing threat of terrorism in the world and emphasize the need to intensify NATO’s efforts here. We maintain a principled position on the conflict in Ukraine. We support its territorial integrity and consider it unacceptable for NATO to become a party to the war in Ukraine,” Erdogan told reporters before departing for the United States, according to his administration’s X page.

He added that “every day that weapons are being used [in Ukraine] confirms the rightness of Turkey’s position” on the issue. Erdogan also said that he intends to “put Israel’s ongoing massacre against the Palestinian people on the agenda” at the summit. “We have not been able to achieve what we wanted from NATO regarding Israel and Palestine. The efforts of the international community are not yet enough to stop Israel. We will put these issues back on the agenda of our meetings in the US and expect to obtain the results we hope for. Serious talks were held in Doha. The head of Mossad also visited Qatar. Certain steps have been taken, but they have not been finalized yet,” the Turkish leader pointed out.

He also recalled that Turkey “is among five NATO countries that make up the backbone of the organization,” which other alliance members agree with. He said he will have a meeting with new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte during the summit. The new NATO summit, timed to coincide with the 75th anniversary of the organization, will be held in the US capital on July 9-11.

Read more …

Delusional.

• Netanyahu Goes for Broke (Patrick Lawrence)

It is a matter of record that the Zionist project has had extensive territorial designs on the lands known as Palestine since at least the early 20th century. As others have argued, the Israelis’ openly racist assault on the Palestinians of Gaza is to be understood not as a sudden eruption of violence, a departure, but as an especially savage continuation of Zionist conduct for more than a century. When history is brought to bear in this fashion, it becomes increasingly apparent that the invasion of Gaza since the events of last Oct. 7 ought not be seen in isolation. The more pathologically disturbed members of Benjamin Netanyahu’s freak-show regime — notably, but not only, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben–Givr, the finance and national security ministers — have never been shy on this point. They are entirely dedicated to the restoration of Eretz Yisrael, the mystical Land of Israel, which, variously interpreted through the ages, could extend at the extreme from the Red Sea all the way to the Euphrates Valley.

But the crazed ultras to whom Netanyahu owes his political survival have not yet got far enough to turn their visions into articulated policy. Is this changing? This is our question, along with another: Is the Biden regime — or at this point its successor — prepared to “stand with Israel,” as American leaders like to put it, if extremist dreams of violent conquest turn into real, live political and military plans?I have been convinced for some time, as I gather that many Palestinians are, that when the Israel Occupation Forces are done in Gaza they will next turn to the West Bank. On this point I now correct myself: In my interpretation the IOF, in close collaboration with brutish Israeli settlers, has already begun its assault in the West Bank. Of late the Israelis have also been openly threatening to launch a full-scale attack on Hezbollah, the political and military movement that controls southern Lebanon. This, too, bears interpretation.

Douglas Macgregor, the retired colonel and now an energetic commentator on politico- military affairs, has no trouble putting together the 2–and–2 of this moment. Here he is last week on “Judging Freedom,” Andrew Napolitano’s webcast program: “Whatever happened on the 7th of October, and I’m still not convinced that was not allowed to happen, … the decision then to attack had very little to do with what happened on the 7th of October and everything to do with a long-term strategic plan to begin the process of ethnically cleansing, expelling, or murdering, whatever you want to call it, the Arabs in Gaza and, ultimately, the Arabs on the West Bank.” This seems right but short of the emerging reality. A few minutes later in his exchange with Macgregor, Napolitano played a clip of Netanyahu addressing a table of officials, at least some of whom are American, last Friday:

“Iran is fighting us on a seven-front war. Obviously, Hamas and Hezbollah. The Houthis, militias in Iraq and Syria. Judea and Samaria on the West Bank. Iran itself. They’d like to topple Jordan. Their goal is to have a combined ground offensive from their various fronts, coupled with combined missile bombardments. We’ve been given the opportunity to scuttle it. And we will. The first requirement is to cut that hand [he gestures as if to cut through his right forearm], Hamas. People who do these things to us are not going to be there. We will have a long battle, I don’t think it’s that long, but we’ll get rid of them. We also have to deter the other elements of the Iran terror axis. We have to deal with the axis. The axis doesn’t threaten only us. It threatens you. It’s on the march to conquer the Middle East — conquer the Middle East — conquer. That means conquer Saudi Arabia, conquer the Arabian Peninsula, it’s just a question of time. And what’s standing in their way is a small Satan, that’s us, on the road to the middle-sized Satan, that’s the Europeans — they’re always offended when I tell them that — ‘You’re the great Satan!’ And we have to stop that.”

Read more …

“9 out of 10 children under 5 in Gaza are suffering from one or more infectious diseases. Levels of acute watery diarrhea are 20 times higher than typical.”

• Israeli Gaza Campaign May Kill 186,000 or More – 8% of Population (Juan Cole)

Rasha Khatib, Martin McKee and Salim Yusuf, The Lancet calculate that 186,000 or more people may be killed* by the Israeli total war on Gaza, about 8% of the population. If you do not see this study reported on your cable “news” channel, you may conclude that the corporation that owns it is complicit in genocide. One of the paper’s authors, Martin McKee, “is a member of the editorial board of the Israel Journal of Health Policy Research and of the International Advisory Committee of the Israel National Institute for Health Policy Research.” Although McKee says he is writing solely in a personal capacity, I think we may conclude that some members of the professional Israeli public health community have their hair on fire about the prosecution of the Gaza War. The Gaza Ministry of Health now says that over 38,000 Palestinians have been killed by the Israelis. As The Lancet notes, the World Health Organization and even the Israeli intelligence services accept these figures.

Since the Israeli Air Force has dropped as many as five hundred two-thousand-pound bombs and by now has destroyed or damaged a majority of the buildings in the Gaza Strip, it is likely that at least 10,000 uncounted dead are under the rubble. The 38,000 dead are the result of what is called direct gathering of the figures. Initially the dead were identified and reported by hospitals. As Israel has reduced the ability of hospitals to function by its attacks on them, this direct reporting has continued, but hospitals began being unable in some cases to send along identification, though they could confirm the reception of the corpses. Some dishonest observers suggested that this inability to know the names of the dead somehow made the numbers less reliable, but the World Health Organization refuted this allegation. The dead are in makeshift morgues still gradually being identified.

Indirect counting of the dead attempts to calculate the missing people using statistical methods. Sometimes public health experts have attempted to interview people to collect data on dead family members and friends, and then projected totals based on these surveys. That method is not available in Gaza, where the Israeli authorities will not permit journalists and other observers, and where it is dangerous to be because there are no real safe zones, with those regions declared safe zones often having been bombed. Muhammad Jawad et al., in a survey of 118 unique armed conflicts affecting 102 countries from 1990 to 2017 found that they produced an average of 19.2 battle-related deaths per 100,000 population (54.7 for those in war as opposed to minor conflict). There were in addition an average of 311 excess deaths per 100,000 population from causes other than being immediately killed by a bomb or bullet. So, 16 civilians died of starvation, communicable, maternal, neonatal, and nutritional diseases and injuries, for every direct death in combat.

And this seems important, in the Jawad et al. study: “Effect estimates were disproportionately larger for children aged under 5 years, regardless of the cause of death. Gaza had some 350,000 children under 5. UNICEF reported in May, “9 out of 10 children under 5 in Gaza are suffering from one or more infectious diseases. Levels of acute watery diarrhea are 20 times higher than typical.” Already last March, 1 in 3 children under 2 were acutely malnourished, a condition that produces permanent cognitive and emotional damage. The Lancet authors used a much smaller multiplier, of four indirect deaths for each direct death. Based on the death toll known when the paper was written, they arrived at 186,000 dead for this war over the coming months. They admit that the estimate of four indirect deaths for every direct one is conservative, so the number could be substantially greater.

Read more …

“We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility..”

• UK Finances Worst Since 1945 – New Chancellor (RT)

The UK’s new Labour government has inherited the worst economy since the Second World War, the newly appointed chancellor of the exchequer, Rachel Reeves, has said. Reeves took charge of the country’s finances after Labour won 412 of the 650 seats in the House of Commons in last week’s general election, ending 14 years of Conservative Party rule. “I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the Second World War,” Reeves said in a speech at the Treasury on Monday. “We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility,” she added, accusing her Tory predecessors of acting out of “political self-interest” as part of a “government that put party first, country second.”

“New Treasury analysis that I requested over the weekend shows that, had the UK economy grown at the average rate of other OECD [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development] economies this last 13 years, our economy would have been over £140 billion [$179 billion] larger,” Reeves said. She claimed that Tory policies effectively cost the UK budget £58 billion ($74 billion) in lost tax revenue in 2023 alone. “That’s money that could have revitalized our schools, our hospitals, and other public services,” the new chancellor said. “Growth requires difficult choices – choices that previous governments have shied away from.”

Reeves vowed to end “political timidity” in the UK’s “antiquated planning system,” and promised reform while staying committed not to “no increases in National Insurance, and the basic, higher, or additional rates of Income Tax, or VAT.” According to The Guardian, the UK’s deficit has reached the highest level since the 1960s under more than a decade of Conservative governments, while the country was badly affected by “shocks including Brexit, the Covid pandemic and the cost of living crisis.” The International Monetary Fund projected in early July that the UK’s GDP will grow by 0.5% this year.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Liberals

 

 

Celine

 

 

Malhotra

 

 

Giant squid

 

 

Leopard and lion

 

 

Mommy otter
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810362505077600404

 

 

Pump it

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle June 21 2024

Jun 212024
 
 June 21, 2024  Posted by at 8:48 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , ,  54 Responses »


Claude Monet Water lilies 1904

 

• West Could Ditch Zelensky Early Next Year – Putin (RT)
• Zelensky Has No One Left to Turn to, Except Putin (DeMartino)
• Zelensky Bans Another Ukrainian Opposition Party (RT)
• Press Freedom ‘Shrinking’ In Ukraine – Reporters Without Borders (RT)
• Russia Fears a NATO Attack. Here’s Why. (Istomin)
• NATO ‘Moving Into Asia’ – Putin (RT)
• Russia Could Arm North Korea – Putin (RT)
• Western Property Could Be Seized – Zakharova (RT)
• “We Need Icebreakers” – And More Strategic Partnerships (Pepe Escobar)
• ‘Strategic Defeat’ Means End Of Russia – Putin (RT)
• Russia Will ‘Never’ Withdraw Troops – Putin (RT)
• Missouri AG Sues New York State Over Trump Lawfare (ZH)
• No Tax on Tips (RCW)
• UK PM Owns $7 Million Home In California – Politico (RT)
• French First Lady Transgender Libel Case Goes To Trial (RT)
• Key Evidence Missing In Assange Snooping Case (RT)

 

 

 

 

Bannon Trump
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803545732223303793

 

 

Sachs

 

 

Attack mode

 

 

More attack mode

 

 

Omarosa is selling a book

 

 

Tapper 2020
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803795912377942091

 

 

Maldonado

 

 

 

 

“Zelensky remains of use to foreign sponsors only as long as he can enforce policies that will help Kiev prolong hostilities with Russia..”

• West Could Ditch Zelensky Early Next Year – Putin (RT)

Ukraine’s supporters in the West will likely remove Vladimir Zelensky as soon as he outlives his usefulness, after pushing through all the necessary “unpopular decisions,” Russian President Vladimir Putin has predicted. Zelensky remains in power in Ukraine despite his term in office having officially expired on May 20. He opted not to hold a presidential election, citing martial law imposed due to the conflict with Russia. Putin has repeatedly stressed that the Ukrainian constitution does not provide for prolonging a president’s term, and explicitly states that elected lawmakers should retain their powers until a new parliament can be chosen by the Ukrainian people. On Thursday he reiterated, that the country’s laws clearly state that Zelensky’s “train has left” and that presidential power should be transferred to the speaker of the Verkhovna Rada.

“What are we even talking about? The West simply doesn’t want to replace him right now, the time has not come yet. I’ve already said it, but I think it’s obvious to anyone,” the Russian leader said at a press conference in Hanoi, Vietnam. “They will pin all unpopular decisions on him, including lowering the military age, and that’s it, then he will be replaced. I believe it will be sometime in the first half of next year,” he added. Putin echoed analysis shared by the Russian foreign intelligence service (SVR) earlier in the day, which claimed Zelensky will be scapegoated for the country’s inevitable military defeat. “It is becoming increasingly evident that the White House will soon shut down ‘Project Zelensky’,” the SVR stated on Thursday, noting that retired General Valery Zaluzhny, the former top commander of the armed forces, is a likely candidate to replace him.

Last week, Putin noted in a keynote speech on Russian foreign policy that Zelensky remains of use to foreign sponsors only as long as he can enforce policies that will help Kiev prolong hostilities with Russia. The Russian president also said any agreements signed by Zelensky with foreign nations after May 20, such as the recent bilateral ten-year security deal with the US, can be easily discarded by other parties, since he no longer has any legal authority to represent Ukraine.

Read more …

“..the armed forces, where they say approval of Zelensky has dropped to 17%…”

• Zelensky Has No One Left to Turn to, Except Putin (DeMartino)

With an increasing number of Ukrainians turning against Volodymyr Zelensky, no chance to win the war and a so-called “international community” abandoning him, Zelensky is finding himself without allies and with no escape from the hell he created for his country. While according to the pro-Ukrainian Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) a small majority of Ukrainians still say they support Zelensky, that number is rapidly dropping, from 77% in September 2023 to just 56% in May. The poll authors, of the dystopian-named MOBILISE Project, speculated that the decrease in popularity could stem from the new mobilization law. “Zelensky’s approval rating fell throughout winter 2023/2024. This fall occurred in tandem with the introduction of new mobilization law,” it noted. It also notes that only 34% of Ukrainians said they support the mobilization law, while 52% disagreed with it. Rumors of an additional mobilization law lowering the age even more are likely to make the situation worse for Zelensky.

Keep in mind that these poll results are the work of the KIIS and MOBILISE, pro-Zelensky-regime organizations. Additionally, a different poll by another pro-Ukrainian organization, the Razumkov Centre, found that 64.5% of Ukrainians stated “You have to be very careful with people” when asked if most people can be trusted. Considering respondents are living in a war-torn country under martial law and full-scale mobilization, it is reasonable to question if every respondent felt safe giving anti-regime answers to pollsters. Nevertheless, the trend is too difficult for even pro-Ukrainian sources to spin convincingly into an endorsement of Zelensky. And the SVR said that the situation is even worse within the armed forces, where they say approval of Zelensky has dropped to 17%.

“[Ukrainians] are without electricity 80% of the day, rolling blackouts major cities… are being bombed. Infrastructure, valuable infrastructure being bombed,” explained documentarian Regis Tremblay on Sputnik’s The Critical Hour. “They’ve lost over 600,000, according to Douglas MacGregor and Scott Ritter, over 600,000 dead with a million wounded who cannot return to the front… This guy is a dead man walking. It’s only a matter of time now before he is no longer useful to the United States and they throw him under the bus.” The United States has a long history of supporting and then abandoning allies once they are no longer useful to them. Just a partial list reveals the grim possibilities that result from accepting US arms. Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Ngo Dinh Diem, all received US arms and all ended up dead at the hands of the US government. “Zelensky is no longer the president of Ukraine. His term ended and now he is an illegal president,” noted Tremblay.

With his military dwindling and dissatisfied, his people turning against him, and his allies shunning him, Zelensky might want to think about what he can do to achieve peace. Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin laid out his terms to begin negotiations, while Zelensky’s NATO benefactors rejected it outright; it was an olive branch he should strongly consider grabbing. “We are ready to continue our dialogue with the Ukrainian side. And it doesn’t matter where they take place – in Minsk, Istanbul or Switzerland,” Putin said at a press conference on Thursday while visiting Vietnam. “I do not think that such nihilism [by Ukraine and the West] regarding our proposals will remain forever. For sure, something will change, including our conditions, depending on the situation on the ground,” Putin added.

Read more …

There was still one left?

• Zelensky Bans Another Ukrainian Opposition Party (RT)

A Ukrainian court has banned the Nash Krai (Our Land) political party and ordered the seizure of its assets at the request of the Ministry of Justice. The move is the latest in a crackdown on the opposition under Vladimir Zelensky’s administration. A panel of judges from the Eighth Administrative Court of Appeal issued the ruling on Wednesday, according to a statement. “The court satisfied the claims of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine: the activities of the political party Nash Krai were banned; the property, funds and other assets of the party, its regional, city, district organizations, primary cells and other structural units were transferred to the state,” the statement read.

The party was registered in August 2011 as the ‘Bloc Party’ and was renamed ‘Nash Krai’ in 2014. From 2015, the party positioned itself as a “group of local leaders and businessmen” who aimed to avoid political games and intrigue, according to RBK Ukraine. Only three of its members were elected to the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian parliament) as independents in 2019, but the party gained some 1,694 seats in regional administrations during local elections in 2020. Following the escalation with Russia in February 2022, Zelensky banned major political competition, including Opposition Platform – For Life (OPZZh), the second biggest party in terms of seats in the Verkhovna Rada. He also cracked down on the media, shutting down multiple television channels associated with his political opponents and consolidating nine of the largest TV networks into a single 24-hour state-run broadcast dubbed ‘Telemarathon’.

Zelensky’s presidential term expired on May 20, although he chose not to hold elections under the pretext of martial law imposed after the beginning of the conflict with Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin has noted the Ukrainian constitution has no provision for prolonging a president’s term in this way. It forbids holding elections during a period of emergency, and explicitly states lawmakers should retain their powers until a new parliament can be elected by the people, Putin said, calling the current Ukrainian political situation a “usurpation of power.”

Read more …

A joke.

• Press Freedom ‘Shrinking’ In Ukraine – Reporters Without Borders (RT)

Independent media outlets are being subjected to growing pressure in Ukraine, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has warned. The non-profit group urged the government in Kiev to combat impunity for violent crimes against reporters and to end arbitrary restrictions regarding coverage of the conflict with Russia. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky signed a law in 2022 that significantly expanded the government’s media regulation powers, allowing for outlets to be temporarily banned. The legislation came under fire both domestically and in the West at the time. On Wednesday, RSF released a report titled ‘Shrinking press freedom in Ukraine: urgent need to implement a roadmap for the right to information’, which claimed that “political pressure and obstacles are mounting on the Ukrainian media.”

“Since the beginning of 2024, at least five journalists have been under surveillance or threatened because of publications on corruption,” the group estimated. The document details in particular how the threat of forcible enlistment into the Ukrainian armed forces has been used to silence reporters. Moreover, it accused Ukrainian authorities of directly interfering in the work of some media outlets. RSF cited the case of Ukrinform, which had a military representative installed at its helm last month. Around the same time, the existence of ‘stop lists’ of guests banned from being invited on air by the same media outlet was revealed, the report wrote. RSF went on to denounce a decree passed earlier this month that obliged journalists to submit any quotes and interviews with military personnel to a special center for strategic military communications for clearing.

“The pressure, threats and interference must stop… the Ukrainian media landscape remains fragile,” Jeanne Cavelier, head of RSF’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk, emphasized. Citing Ukrainian journalists and monitoring groups, the New York Times reported on Tuesday that the government in Kiev has increasingly been curtailing press freedoms, in a manner that cannot be justified by wartime security needs. According to the article, the authorities in Kiev are trying to ensure that the opposition, especially the party of former president Petro Poroshenko, does not receive positive coverage in the press, and that the government and the military are never criticized. The newspaper claimed that the Ukrainian government has also had “tense relationships” with Western media throughout the conflict, temporarily revoking military press passes for journalists from several outlets, following reports criticizing the military.

Read more …

“The belief that their situation will deteriorate over time leads states to take increasingly adventurous steps..”

• Russia Fears a NATO Attack. Here’s Why. (Istomin)

A recent admission by US President Joe Biden is telling: “If we ever let Ukraine fail, mark my words, you will see Poland go, and you will see all these countries along Russia’s actual border negotiate on their own.” Thus, the good old ‘domino theory’ is back in the minds of Western strategists. The growing bitterness of Western countries towards Russia is consistent with the way in which they look at armed conflicts in terms of the logic of preventive war. Rather than linking interstate clashes to aggressive opportunism, this model sees escalation as a product of fears about the future. The belief that their situation will deteriorate over time leads states to take increasingly adventurous steps, up to and including the use of force. Throughout history, major wars have usually been the product of this preemptive logic – the desire to strike before an expected weakening.

For example, the collapse of the continental blockade system led Napoleon to attack Russia. German fears about the prospects for modernization of the Russian army were the trigger for the First World War. A similar dynamic can be seen today in the policy of the West, which has invested considerable resources in confronting Russia. The fact that Moscow doesn’t countenance losing in any way, but, on the contrary, is gradually moving towards achieving its goals, can only lead to frustration on the part of the US and its allies. This does not lead to reconciliation, but to the search for more effective means to hinder Russia. Having failed in its plans to destroy the Russian economy with restrictive measures and to inflict a strategic defeat on Moscow at the hands of Kiev, the West is moving ever closer to the brink of direct military confrontation. At the same time, it is becoming increasingly insensitive to the possible consequences of such a scenario.

Like casino players, the US and its allies are raising the stakes with each successive bet. The growing adventurism is clearly visible in the debate over the deployment of Western troops in Ukraine. Moreover, not only hysterical Western European leaders, but also seemingly more responsible American generals have begun to speak out on the issue. For example, the head of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Charles Brown, has concluded that the deployment of NATO troops to the country is inevitable. The West’s willingness to take risks is reinforced by its contradictory, if not schizophrenic, view of Russia. Public figures never tire of claiming that Moscow’s potential was greatly overestimated in the past and has been further weakened by the Ukraine operation. At the same time, without being aware of the dissonance, they justify the build-up of their own armed forces on the grounds of an increased Russian threat.

An Irish writer once labelled this sort of thinking as “Russophrenia.” The inconsistency is also evident in the portrayal of Russia as an insatiable expansionist intent on invading its neighbours, combined with a belief in its reverence for Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which guarantees that NATO members will provide mutual assistance in the event of an attack on one of them. The portrayal of Russia as a ‘paper tiger’ – an aggressive but weak actor – lays the groundwork for pre-emptive escalations to reverse the trends of confrontation unfavorable to the West. And they can be carried out not only in Ukraine. The idea of restricting Moscow’s access to the Baltic Sea, which ignores the inevitable response to threats to Kaliningrad, is evidence of this, and is regularly introduced into Western discussions.

Read more …

“..the Chinese Foreign Ministry also denounced NATO as a “walking war machine that causes chaos wherever it goes.”

• NATO ‘Moving Into Asia’ – Putin (RT)

The US-led military bloc is increasingly shifting its focus on the Asia-Pacific, creating security threats not only to all countries in the region, but Russia as well, President Vladimir Putin said in Vietnam a day after signing a strategic partnership treaty with DPRK leader Kim Jong-un. Following a meeting with his Vietnamese counterpart To Lam on Thursday, Putin announced that the sides “showed mutual interest in building a reliable and adequate regional security architecture based on the principles of the non-use of force and a peaceful settlement of disputes, in which there will be no place for selective military-political blocs.” “The positions of Russia and Vietnam on these issues largely coincide or are close to each other,” Putin said. At a press conference later in the day, the Russian leader noted that the situation in the world is developing in such a way that requires strengthening cooperation with partners, “especially in those areas that we consider important, including taking into account what is happening in Asia.”

“We see what’s happening in Asia, right? A block system is being put together… NATO is already moving there as if to a permanent place of residence. This, of course, poses a threat to all countries in the region, including the Russian Federation. We are obliged to respond to this and we will do so,” he insisted. Russia reserves the right to provide arms to allies, as the West claims it can arm Ukraine with impunity, and could send long-range weapons to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and other countries, Putin added. Last month, in a thinly veiled reference to NATO and other Western-dominated organizations, Putin warned that the Asia-Pacific region is “no place for closed military and political alliances,” adding that both China and Russia deem the establishment of such blocs as “harmful and counterproductive.”

Back in 2021, the US, UK and Australia established the so-called AUKUS security partnership, which seeks to help Canberra acquire nuclear-powered submarines. Washington is reportedly attempting to fast-track Canada and Japan’s membership. Beijing has condemned the AUKUS pact as an attempt to build an “Asia-Pacific version of NATO,” with Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin arguing last year that it is based on a “Cold War mentality which will only motivate an arms race, damage the international nuclear nonproliferation regime, and harm regional stability and peace.” Earlier this year, the Chinese Foreign Ministry also denounced NATO as a “walking war machine that causes chaos wherever it goes.” Beijing has accused NATO of meddling in Asian affairs, saying the bloc is a “terrible monster” and has extended a “black hand” toward the region.

Read more …

“We don’t need a first strike..” [..] “Because our return strike is guaranteed to destroy any attacker.”

• Russia Could Arm North Korea – Putin (RT)

Since the West claims it has the right to arm Ukraine with impunity, Russia reserves the same right and might send long-range precision weapons to the DPRK and other countries, President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin spoke with reporters in Hanoi following his meetings with the leadership of Vietnam on Thursday. One of the questions related to his previous suggestion that Moscow could send missiles to the adversaries of the West, in response to the US and its allies greenlighting Ukrainian strikes deep inside Russia. ”We do not rule out supplying weapons to other countries, including the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” Putin said. “Let the West think where they might end up.”

Western countries that have supplied long-range and other weapons to Ukraine have said they can’t be held responsible for how Kiev uses them, and insist that it does not make them parties to the conflict, Putin elaborated, adding that Russia therefore reserves the same right for itself. The Russian president also noted that Moscow is considering modifications to its doctrine on the use of atomic weapons, as the West appears to be working on low-yield weapons to lower the nuclear threshold. “We don’t need a first strike,” he said in response to another question. “Because our return strike is guaranteed to destroy any attacker.”

When asked about the peace terms he offered Ukraine last week, Putin said that Russia has always been willing to negotiate, while Kiev and its Western backers sabotaged both the Minsk process and the Istanbul talks. However, the terms he outlined will not be valid forever, Putin cautioned. ”Our terms will change depending on the situation on the ground,” the Russian president said. Putin arrived in Hanoi on Wednesday evening from Pyongyang, where he signed a strategic partnership treaty with DPRK leader Kim Jong-un. His trip to Vietnam has involved the strengthening of bilateral ties with Hanoi, including trade and nuclear energy cooperation.

Read more …

Euroclear.

• Western Property Could Be Seized – Zakharova (RT)

Russia has a “wide arsenal” of political and economic countermeasures to respond to the potential confiscation of its sovereign assets, including a tit-for-tat seizure of Western property in Russia, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. The leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) nations agreed at last week’s summit in Apulia, Italy, to use interest from frozen Russian assets to secure a $50 billion loan for Kiev. Zakharova pointed out that Russia has a “significant” amount of Western funds and property under its jurisdiction. “All of it may be subject to Russian retaliatory policy and retaliatory actions. The arsenal of political and economic countermeasures is wide,” she told reporters at a regular press briefing on Wednesday. Russia, however, will not disclose the nature of the retaliatory actions, Zakharova added.

G7 countries have approved in principle a US plan to provide Ukraine with a $50 billion loan issued against frozen Russian assets, to help Kiev buy weapons and rebuild damaged infrastructure. The idea is to use nearly $300 billion in Russian sovereign funds frozen in the West in the wake of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, as the basis for the loan. G7 countries would use profits from the assets to cover the debt interest. Most of the frozen assets are being held in the EU. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said recently that the profits earned from the immobilized Russian assets amounts to around $3-$5 billion per year. The G7 intends to disburse the funds through multiple channels, directing them to Ukraine’s military, general budget, and reconstruction needs. Disagreements, however, remain among the US and its allies as to who will carry the loan risks if Western governments lose control over the Russian assets. Moscow has repeatedly said it will treat any attempt to tap into them as theft, and will retaliate.

Read more …

“..the high quality of life in Murmansk..”

• “We Need Icebreakers” – And More Strategic Partnerships (Pepe Escobar)

The St. Petersburg forum offered a wealth of crucial sessions discussing connectivity corridors. One of the key ones was on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) – or, in Chinese terminology, the Arctic Silk Road: the number one future alternative to the Suez canal. With an array of main corporate actors in the room – for instance, from Rosneft, Novatek, Norilsk Nickel – as well as governors and ministers, the stage was set for a comprehensive debate. Top Putin adviser Igor Levitin set the tone: to facilitate seamless container transport, the federal government needs to invest in seaports and icebreakers; a comparison was made – in terms of technological challenge – to the building of the Trans-Siberian railway; and Levitin also stressed the endless expansion possibilities for city hubs such as Murmansk, Archangelsk and Vladivostok. Add to it that the NSR will connect with another fast-growing trans-Eurasia connectivity corridor: the INSTC (International North South Transportation Corridor), whose main actors are BRICS members Russia, Iran and India.

Alexey Chekunkov, minister for development of the Far East and the Arctic, plugged a trial run of the NSR, which costs the same as railway shipping without the bottlenecks. He praised the NSR as a “service” and coined the ultimate motto: “We need icebreakers!” Russia of course will be the leading player in the whole project, benefitting 2.5 million people who live in the North. Sultan Sulayem, CEO of Dubai-based cargo logistics and maritime services powerhouse DP World, confirmed that “the current supply chains are not reliable anymore”, as well as being inefficient; the NSR is “faster, more reliable and cheaper”. From Tokyo to London, the route runs for 24k km; via the NSR, it’s only 13k km. Sulayem is adamant: the NSR is a game-changer and “needs to be implemented now”.

Vladimir Panov, the special representative for the Arctic from Rosatom, confirmed that the Arctic is “a treasure chest”, and the NSR “will unlock it”. Rosatom will have all the necessary infrastructure in place “in five years or so”. He credited the fast pace of developments to the high-level Putin-Xi strategic dialogue – complete with the creation of a Russia-China working group.

Andrey Chibis, the governor of Murmansk, noted that this deep, key port for the NSR – the main container hub in the Arctic – “does not freeze”. He acknowledged the enormity of the logistical challenges – but at the same time that will attract a lot of skilled workers, considering the high quality of life in Murmansk. The building of the NSR indeed can be interpreted as a 21st century, accelerated version of the building of the Trans-Siberian railway in the late 19th/early 20th century. Under the overarching framework of Eurasia integration, the interconnections with other corridors will be endless – from the INSTC to BRI projects part of the Chinese New Silk Roads, the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and ASEAN. In a session focused on the Greater Eurasia Partnership (GEP) Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Pankin praised this concept of Eurasia “without dividing lines, uniting ancient civilizations, transportation corridors and a unified common space of 5 billion people”.

Inevitable connections were drawn – from GEP to the EAEU and the SCO, with the proliferation of multimodal transport and alternative payment systems. Khan Sohail, the deputy secretary-general of the SCO, remarked how virtually “everyday there are new announcements by China” – a long way “since the SCO was established 21 years ago”, then based exclusively on security. Big developments are expected at the SCO summit next month in Astana. Sergey Glazyev, the minister of macroeconomics at the Eurasia Economic Commission, part of the EAEU, praised the EAEU-SCO progressive integration and fast-developing transactions in baskets of national currencies, something “that was unchallengeable 10 years ago”. He admitted that even if GEP has not been formalized yet, facts on the ground are proving that Eurasia can be self-sufficient. GEP may be on the initial stage, but it’s fast advancing the process to “harmonize free trade”.

Read more …

1,000 years.

• ‘Strategic Defeat’ Means End Of Russia – Putin (RT)

The West must realize that defeating Russia is not only unlikely, but impossible due to the unity of its people who understand that it would spell the end of the country’s thousand-year history, President Vladimir Putin has argued. Speaking at a press conference in Hanoi following his meetings with the leadership of Vietnam on Thursday, Putin addressed the issue of Western powers “raising the temperature” of the Ukraine conflict through gradual escalation. “Apparently, they expect us to get scared at some point. But at the same time, they also say that they want to achieve a strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield. What does this mean for Russia? For Russia, this means the end of its statehood. This means the end of the thousand-year history of the Russian state. I think this is understandable for everyone,” Putin noted. And then the question arises: Why should we be afraid? Wouldn’t it be better to go all the way then? This is elementary logic.

Even though Putin repeatedly admitted that any conflict involving the use of nuclear weapons would have dire consequences for humanity, he has maintained that Moscow would be forced to defend itself using all available means if the country’s very existence was at stake. Back in 2018, he famously said that “as a citizen of Russia and the head of the Russian state I must ask myself: Why would we want a world without Russia?” The US and its allies have funneled weapons, ammunition, and equipment to Ukraine over the past two years, while insisting they are not a party to the conflict but want to inflict “a strategic defeat” on Moscow. In recent months, Washington, London, and other NATO members announced they were lifting restrictions on Kiev’s use of their weapons against Russia.

Citing the need to send the West a message, last month the Kremlin ordered the military to carry out drills in deploying non-strategic nuclear weapons. Asked on Thursday whether Russia could change its nuclear doctrine to include a clause on the possibility of launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike, Putin emphasized there was no need for that. “We do not need a preventive strike yet, because the enemy is guaranteed to be destroyed in a retaliatory strike,” he said.

Read more …

“..Kiev has an interest in our troops remaining there, because they don’t want to hold elections.”

• Russia Will ‘Never’ Withdraw Troops – Putin (RT)

Ukraine’s demand for the withdrawal of Russian troops is only designed to perpetuate the conflict, because that’s the only way the current Kiev government can stay in power, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin was speaking at a press conference in Hanoi following his meetings with the leadership of Vietnam on Thursday. Among other topics, he addressed the Ukraine conflict. “If negotiations are linked to the withdrawal of our troops, about which the Kiev regime dreams, then this will never happen,” Putin told reporters. “Because the Kiev regime does not want to relinquish power, does not want to hold normal elections according to the Ukrainian constitution, they will forever drag out the ceasefire talks,” the Russian president added. “This means that Kiev has an interest in our troops remaining there, because they don’t want to hold elections.”

As for attempts to “beat back” Russian troops from Kharkov, Putin said that Kiev’s orders to achieve a victory on the battlefield “at all costs” will mean it is Ukraine that will suffer. Kharkov, he said, is a tactical operation, which Ukraine is trying to portray as strategic. When asked about the Western rejection of the peace terms he offered Ukraine last week, Putin said that it was true to form. “I expected just such a reaction, at first,” he said. “What happens later, time will tell. It all depends on how the situation develops on the ground.” Russia has always been willing to negotiate, while Ukraine and its Western backers sabotaged the Minsk process and the Istanbul talks, Putin said, noting that the terms he outlined will not be valid forever.

According to the Russian president, Ukraine has to recognize Russian sovereignty over the entire territory of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, “as defined by their administrative borders at the time they joined Ukraine [in August 1991].” Kiev must withdraw its military from the four regions and inform Moscow in writing that it no longer plans to join NATO, before any ceasefire talks can begin, Putin said last Friday. Vladimir Zelensky has denounced the proposal as an “ultimatum,” insisting that the only way to end the conflict is based on his “peace formula,” which amounts to a Russian surrender. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg claimed that Putin’s offer was not “made in good faith,” and would cost Kiev “significantly more land,” while German Chancellor Olaf Scholz called it a “classic land grab” and an attempt to influence the ‘peace conference’ in Switzerland.

Read more …

This could have teeth.

• Missouri AG Sues New York State Over Trump Lawfare (ZH)

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey on Thursday announced that he’s suing the State of New York over what he called a “direct attack on our democratic process through unconstitutional lawfare against President Trump.” “We have to fight back against a rogue prosecutor who is trying to take a presidential candidate off the campaign trail,” Bailey posted on X, adding “Stay tuned.” While Bailey didn’t elaborate, last month he accused the Biden DOJ of colluding with prosecutors in various Trump cases, filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in connection with his investigation.

“The investigations and subsequent prosecutions of former President Donald J. Trump appear to have been conducted in coordination with the United States Department of Justice,” Bailey posted in a lengthy thread on X. “This is demonstrated by the move of the third-highest ranking member of the Department of Justice, Matthew Colangelo, to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office in order to prosecute President Trump in December 2022,” Bailey continues.What’s more, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg worked hand-in-hand with NY Attorney General Letitia James in pursuing civil litigation against Trump, which he used to campaign on. Is Bailey about to become Trump’s Attorney General?

Read more …

” That signal says to lower-income workers across the country, “I understand your struggles, and I’m with you.”

• No Tax on Tips (RCW)

Donald Trump is a master showman and marketer. He demonstrated those skills once again with his proposal to kill the tax on tips. It’s more than shrewd. It’s brilliant. After the hoorays from waiters and other service workers died down, political analysts weighed in. Their conclusion: this is a very smart way to gain an edge in Nevada, where the presidential race is close. That’s certainly true. But Trump’s proposal is much smarter and will have a bigger impact, not because of its impact on tips, as such, but because of the larger signal it sends. That signal says to lower-income workers across the country, “I understand your struggles, and I’m with you.” Trump’s proposal says that loud and clear. It is both a blow to the IRS (who doesn’t like that?) and a tangible demonstration of how the former president connects to everyday working people. That’s a much broader cohort than the folks who rely on tips.

President Biden has emphasized his own connection to working people. He does it every time he calls himself “Scranton Joe,” and says he was raised by every group in town except the Hmong and Aboriginal Australians. (Those groups surely would be included if they had enough voters in swing states.) This contest for the allegiance of the working class is central to American politics and has been since the days of Andrew Jackson. They have been central to the Democratic Party’s coalition since Franklin Roosevelt’s reelection in 1936. FDR solidified the party’s coalition. Every successful Democrat on the national level since then has counted on the working-class vote – and the ones who didn’t (most notably Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and George McGovern in 1972) lost in landslides.

Ronald Reagan, who’d been a New Deal Democrat as a young man mounted a frontal assault against the FDR alliance and launched a long-term shift in the process. Donald Trump has gone further. He has captured that constituency among whites, competes for them among Hispanics, and is eroding it, at least slightly, among black men. That shift in all three groups could have a huge impact in the swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nevada, and Arizona. This year’s election may well hinge on them, and even slight changes could alter the outcome. Trump’s challenge to the heart of the old Democratic coalition is part of a larger realignment in American voting patterns. That realignment is obvious in the wealthy suburbs, which have gradually switched from moderate Republican to moderate Democrat. The wedge issue there is the Republican Party’s social conservatism, which alienates more than it resonates in those areas.

The suburbs are up for grabs this year because of weak economic performance, persistent problems with public schools (which are linked to Democrats because of the party’s bond with teachers’ unions), and the Democratic Party’s move much further left. No matter how the suburbs vote this year, though, their longer-term shift is clear. An equally clear shift in the opposite direction is happening in working-class neighborhoods. Chicagoans call them the “bungalow belt.” They were once occupied by immigrants from Eastern Europe. They are now the home of second- and third-generation Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and pilgrims from Central America. Trump is emerging as an unlikely champion of that constituency. He knows they don’t want ideological indoctrination in public schools or control by teachers’ unions instead of parents. They want cheaper energy a lot more than they want electric vehicles, which are too expensive. And they damn sure don’t want some bureaucrat in Bethesda telling them they can’t cook on a gas stove. They recoil at the idea of non-elected officials pushing that agenda down their throats.

Read more …

After the worst election defeat in history he might want to move.

• UK PM Owns $7 Million Home In California – Politico (RT)

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak owns a $7.2 million beach home in Santa Monica, California, where his opponents say he could move if he loses the general election next month, Politico reported on Wednesday. The UK Conservative Party is on course for a historic defeat in the upcoming vote, which would end its 14-year run in government, according to three major polls released on Wednesday. The polls predict an all-time low for the Tories and amid indicators that Sunak’s unpopularity has reached record levels. The prime minister called a snap election last month, claiming that his decision to call the vote was primarily motivated by economic factors such as a historic decline in British living standards, a rise in energy costs, and inflation.

The predicted landslide Labour victory has sparked speculation that Sunak could relocate to California if he finds himself “out of the top job,” the outlet said. “The Golden State has become an issue in the election campaign, so much so that ‘sending Sunak to California’ is political shorthand for ousting him from office,” Politico wrote. Sunak’s beach home overlooking the Pacific Ocean is located in a luxury apartment building in an elite area of Santa Monica, the outlet said. The outlet claimed that Sunak’s children would likely enroll in elite schools in the area, “rubbing shoulders with the children of celebrities” if Sunak opts to move straight after the election. The British prime minister has made no secret of his love for California, saying that living in the US had helped shape his mindset as a leader. After studying at Oxford, Sunak took an MBA at Stanford University in California, where he met his wife, Akshata Murty, the daughter of India’s sixth-richest man, and ran a hedge fund in Santa Monica.

US President Joe Biden even joked about Rishi Sunak’s home in California during a meeting in San Diego last year. “I want to welcome you back to California – he’s a Stanford man, and he still has a home here in California. That’s why I’m being very nice to you, maybe you can invite me to your home in California.” Sunak, however, has denied rumors that he is planning a move to California after a potential election defeat, pledging to stay in the UK regardless of the outcome. “It’s simply not true. I mean, it’s just simply not true,” Sunak said in an interview last month. He also dismissed claims that the early election had been arranged to suit his daughters’ schooling in the US.

Read more …

What a story.

• French First Lady Transgender Libel Case Goes To Trial (RT)

Two women have gone on trial for defamation in France after claiming that President Emmauel Macron’s wife, Brigitte, was a man once named “Jean-Michel,” France24 reported on Thursday. Amandine Roy, a self-proclaimed spiritual medium, was questioned in a Paris court on Wednesday, while the second defendant, independent journalist Natacha Rey, cited illness and was absent. In a 2021 interview, Roy quizzed Rey on her YouTube channel, where the journalist aired the theory that Brigitte Macron was actually the transgender identity of her brother, Jean-Michel Trogneux. The interview was followed by a social media storm of claims that the French first lady, formerly named Brigitte Trogneux, was Jean-Michel under a new identity. Brigitte Macron filed lawsuits in 2022 after the video was posted, alleging it defamed her, invaded her and her brother’s privacy, and violated her public image.

The judge ruled there was no case for invasion of privacy or violation of image. The public defamation case had been pending since January 2022. Brigitte Macron’s lawyer, Jean Ennochi, is demanding €10,000 ($10,750) in compensation for both the first lady and her brother, according to France24. Neither President Macron nor his wife were present at the proceedings, the network noted. France’s first lady was born Brigitte Marie-Claude Trogneux to a family of chocolatiers from Amiens. She married banker Andre-Louis Auziere in 1974, and the couple had three children together. She met Emmanuel Macron when he was 15 and she was teaching literature at La Providence Jesuit high school in her hometown. She divorced Auziere in 2006 and married Macron – 24 years her junior – in 2007.

Read more …

“..Spanish police had not provided the complete files from a Samsung phone, which Morales apparently used to keep in touch with American intelligence…”

• Key Evidence Missing In Assange Snooping Case (RT)

The Spanish case against a man whose firm allegedly snooped on Julian Assange for the US government has hit a roadblock over key evidence which has reportedly gone missing, according to the El Pais newspaper. The defendant, David Morales, is the owner of UC Global SL – a company hired to provide security at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the Wikileaks founder was holed up between 2012 and 2019. The company is accused of abusing its position by installing secret recording devices in the building, and reporting confidential details about Assange and his meetings to the CIA. An expose by the newspaper El Pais revealed the arrangement in 2019, leading to the businessman’s arrest.

On Wednesday, the outlet reported that Spanish police had not provided the complete files from a Samsung phone, which Morales apparently used to keep in touch with American intelligence. The absent data includes records of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Proton Mail and Skype communications. The device was seized in September 2019, when police searched Morales’ home in the Spanish city of Jerez de la Frontera, and its contents were supposedly copied on the spot. The police provided the Spanish High Court with a derivative Universal Forensic Data Report (UFDR) from the device, but not the complete original Universal Forensic Data Exchange (UFDX), El Pais said.

”It is extremely striking that the police unit has delivered the UFDR and UFDX files from the other devices and has not done so precisely from this one,” the public prosecutor’s office said. Judge Santiago Pedraz has ordered the police Cybercrime Unit to immediately recover the full data from the phone in his presence, and establish who was responsible for the situation. The abridged profile was shared through a cloud service used for storing evidence. Spanish authorities are aware of the importance of the phone records thanks to a protected witness, a former employee of UC Global SL. The UFDR reportedly includes some circumstantial evidence in the form of words recorded by the keyboard app Swiftkey.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Wayans Wade

 

 

SNL

 

 

Elon genuine
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803691601169903906

 

 

X news
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803634740538609717

 

 

Corbyn
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803705328124547222

 

 

Donziger

 

 

Honey
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803758343715959086

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries