Menu Icon

Debt Rattle March 13 2026

Mar 132026
 
 March 13, 2026  Posted by at 9:38 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  97 Responses »


Willem de Kooning Woman 1969


• The War on Iran Could Remake the World (Lukyanov)
• The 3 Big Lies About the Iran War (Ben Shapiro)
• Iran Confirms New Supreme Leader Injured But Recovering (RT)
• Attacking Water in Iran Can Bring Out Nukes – Martin Armstrong (USAW)
• Iran War Crack-Up (Helmer)
• Eat the Rich: Sanders and Khanna Introduce Federal Billionaires Tax (Turley)
• UK Behind Deadly Storm Shadow Missile Attack On Russian City – Kremlin (RT)
• Ukraine Attacking Russian Gas Pipeline To Stop Deliveries To Europe (RT)
• The UN Warns Trump About Migrant Rhetoric. Seriously. (Manney)
• Forget The Island: Jeffrey Epstein’s Secret War For Libya’s Billions (Fetouri)
• Epstein Guard To Testify As Oversight Committee Explores Potential MURDER (MN)
• The Politicking of Barack Obama (Victor Davis Hanson)
• The Era of Truth and Freedom is Over (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Putin Is Again on the Wrong Track (Paul Craig Roberts)
• 56% of Americans Now Suspect COVID-19 “Vaccines” Caused Mass Deaths (Hulscher)

 


 

 


 


It already does.

• The War on Iran Could Remake the World (Lukyanov)

The United States and Israel justified their military campaign against Iran by claiming it was necessary to protect themselves, and the world, from a nuclear threat. Tehran was accused of secretly accumulating enough weapons-grade uranium to build up to 11 atomic bombs. Yet after the first week of bombing, it became clear that nuclear fears were only part of the story. The war against Iran is not merely another Middle Eastern conflict. It marks the latest stage in a long process of upheaval that has been reshaping the region since the end of the Cold War. And the consequences of what is happening today will extend far beyond the Middle East.


The current war can be seen as the culmination of a transformation that began more than three decades ago. The modern Middle East emerged in the 20th century during the decline of colonial empires. But that order began to unravel in 1991, when the United States launched Operation Desert Storm to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. The timing was symbolic. The Gulf War coincided with a dramatic shift in global politics: the collapse of the Soviet Union, the end of the Cold War, and the emergence of what was often called the “unipolar moment.” The period of unrivalled American dominance.

What followed was a chain reaction of crises and interventions. The terrorist attacks on New York and Washington in September 2001 triggered the global War on Terror, leading to military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Arab Spring then destabilized regimes across the region, followed by intervention in Libya and the prolonged civil war in Syria.Each crisis pulled more actors into the vortex. Gradually, control over events slipped away from those who had initiated them. For Washington, the result was a strategic trap. The US sought to reduce its direct involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts while simultaneously maintaining its influence. These goals proved increasingly difficult to reconcile.

With hindsight, it is clear that many American decisions in the region were reactive. Each step was presented as part of a coherent geopolitical strategy, yet the long-term consequences were rarely calculated beyond the immediate horizon. Donald Trump, during both his first presidency and his return to office, repeatedly argued that the US should avoid military interventions far from its own borders. Yet Iran presented a different challenge. Iran is the most powerful state the US has confronted directly since World War II. Not necessarily in terms of military strength, but in terms of its demographic weight and regional influence. Attempting to dismantle such a pillar of the regional order inevitably carries profound consequences.

In Washington, a widely circulated interpretation suggests that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump agreed late last year to launch a decisive campaign against Iran. According to this view, the Israeli leadership played a decisive role in shaping the decision. Trump, who had previously championed a policy of restraint in the Middle East, deviated from that principle. The White House appears to have misjudged the political situation in Iran, expecting that a sharp military strike might trigger internal collapse.

There was also hope for a repeat of a familiar pattern: a rapid, surgical attack followed by a declaration of victory. But that scenario failed to materialize. Instead, the region plunged into instability. And once the war escalated, Washington found itself unable to step back without risking the perception of defeat.

Read more …

“The goal is simple: Undermine public confidence and turn what is shaping up as a strategic success into a perceived failure.”

• The 3 Big Lies About the Iran War (Ben Shapiro)

If you’ve been following coverage of the Trump administration’s military action against Iran, you’ve probably noticed something: A lot of people are determined to convince you that the United States is losing. They’re wrong. Even worse, many of them know they’re wrong. Critics across the political spectrum — from Democrats to elements of the so-called horseshoe Right — are pushing narratives that paint the conflict as a disaster in the making. The goal is simple: Undermine public confidence and turn what is shaping up as a strategic success into a perceived failure. Three particular claims are circulating widely. All three deserve to be addressed.


Lie No. 1: The war is a quagmire.
The first claim is that the United States has stumbled into another interminable Middle East war — one destined to drag on for years and possibly escalate to catastrophic levels. This is absurd. At the time of this writing, the conflict is less than two weeks old. Twelve days. That’s not 12 years, as in Vietnam, or even 12 months, as in the Spanish-American War. Wars unfold over time, and no one should pretend to know exactly how long any conflict will last. But the notion that the United States is already trapped in a generational quagmire — after less than two weeks of fighting — is less analysis than panic.

Lie No. 2: Iran is somehow winning.
A second claim insists that Iran is holding strong — that the regime is weathering the assault and even gaining the upper hand. Again, reality tells a different story. Iran’s military capabilities have been battered. Its missile and drone infrastructure has been heavily targeted. Its naval assets have reportedly suffered severe losses. Leadership turmoil inside the regime only compounds the problem. Reports suggest that the death of longtime Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has triggered a chaotic succession struggle. Even his presumed heir, Mojtaba Khamenei, appears to lack both political support and personal legitimacy within the system. In other words, the Iranian regime is not projecting strength. It is scrambling to maintain control.

Lie No. 3: The oil shock will break the United States.
The final warning is economic: Iran, critics say, will simply shut down the Strait of Hormuz, sending global oil prices skyrocketing and bringing the American economy to its knees.For a brief moment earlier this week, markets reacted to that fear. Oil prices jumped sharply amid speculation that the strait could be disrupted.But the panic faded almost as quickly as it began. Within days, crude prices had fallen back below $90 a barrel. Markets, unlike pundits, respond to reality. And the reality is that Iran faces enormous consequences if it attempts to choke off one of the world’s most vital shipping lanes.

President Donald Trump has made that point unmistakably clear. In a statement posted online, he warned that any Iranian attempt to block the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz would trigger an overwhelming American response.The message was aimed not only at Tehran but also at Beijing and other major energy consumers: The United States intends to keep global energy flowing — and anyone who interferes will pay a heavy price. There are legitimate questions to ask about any military action. Democracies require scrutiny, debate and skepticism. But skepticism should not be confused with hysteria.

Right now, critics are spinning worst-case scenarios while ignoring the basic facts on the ground: Iran’s military is under severe pressure, its leadership structure is unstable, and the economic fallout that many predicted has yet to materialize. None of this guarantees the conflict will end quickly or cleanly. War rarely works that way. But it does suggest that the narrative of inevitable American failure — so loudly promoted by the administration’s opponents — is far removed from the reality unfolding in the Middle East. And that reality matters far more than the talking points.

Read more …

The title of this article was originally: “Trump claims Strait of Hormuz ‘in great shape’ “.

• Iran Confirms New Supreme Leader Injured But Recovering (RT)

Iran has confirmed that newly appointed Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei was injured but is recovering. “He’s injured but fine,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told Italy’s Corriere Della Sera on Thursday. Earlier reports suggested Khamenei was wounded in the initial US-Israeli strikes that killed his father, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which may explain why he has yet to appear publicly or on video since assuming the top post. Meanwhile, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has outlined three conditions to end the conflict. In a post on X, he said the war can only end through recognition of Iran’s “legitimate rights,” reparations for US-Israeli strike damage, and “firm international guarantees against future aggression.”


Elsewhere, the US-Israeli military campaign against Tehran has continued to disrupt global energy markets. In Iran, the US has bitten off more than it can chewREAD MORE: In Iran, the US has bitten off more than it can chew Despite all 34 International Energy Agency (IEA) members agreeing on Wednesday to a record 400-million-barrel release from emergency reserves, oil prices have surged roughly 9% in the past 24 hours, with international benchmark Brent crude hovering just above $100 per barrel.

Here are the latest developments as RT continues to bring you up to date:
• At least two oil tankers were hit near Iraq’s Umm Qasr port early on Thursday, while the port of Salalah in Oman continued to burn overnight. Saudi Arabia and Bahrain also reported strikes on their oil facilities. Oman evacuated vessels from Mina Al Fahal as a precaution.
• US President Donald Trump claimed Iran has been “virtually destroyed,” but said he does not plan to end the campaign early, insisting the Strait of Hormuz remains “in great shape.”
• A Pentagon probe into the strike on a primary school in Minab that killed 168 children reportedly found that outdated US targeting data on a nearby IRGC facility likely caused the attack.
• The IDF intensified strikes in Lebanon after Hezbollah coordinated attacks with Iran’s IRGC, hitting a Beirut refugee camp. The total death toll in Lebanon now exceeds 634.
• Western banks began closing Middle East branches after Iran threatened financial institutions in retaliation for the strike on Tehran’s state-owned Bank Sepah, which handles military and IRGC payrolls.

Read more …

Iran has a very serious water issue.

• Attacking Water in Iran Can Bring Out Nukes – Martin Armstrong (USAW)

Martin Armstrong warned in February, “This is where the volatility starts kicking in.” What do we have? Oil, gold and silver spiking in price, and violent exchanges between Iran, the United States and many other countries in the Middle East. Now, water assets like desalination plants in Bahrain and Iran are being blown up. Add the worst water shortage in decades in Iran as a backdrop to constant bombing, and you have a situation that could turn very ugly, very fast. The water shortage is so bad that there has been water rationing in Tehran for months. This water rationing was part of the reason there were huge protests in Iran a few months ago.


Armstrong explains, “Part of the protests (in Iran) were about water rationing. The Islamic Republic Guard were called the ‘water mafia.’ They control the water. It’s kind of like North Korea. If you want to be fed, you join the army. All food goes to the army first, and water will also go to the military first.” Remember, they are water rationing in Iran now, and they don’t have a lot left. So, what happens if the US, Israel and other Persian Gulf nations knock out what’s left of Iran’s water? What happens if Iran is completely out of water? Armstrong says, “Personally, I would ask Pakistan for a nuke. Look, you are talking about the death of a country. When you get to that point, if you’ve got a nuke, you are going to use it.”

So, what happens if the dams and reservoirs are bombed and Iran is completely cut off from water? Armstrong says, “If you do that, is that a war crime because you are wiping out the average population and civilians? Would you do that? This is a mess. It’s a complete mess.” On the other side, what happens if Iran knocks out all the Persian Gulf oil refineries? Armstrong says, “If I were Iran, I would attack all the oil refineries of the neighboring states. You do that, and you will bring the entire West to its knees. The US only gets about 3% of our oil from the Middle East. You would wipe out Europe for sure.”

Armstrong sees gold going as high as “$8,800 an ounce . . . and silver $150 per ounce. . .. Oil could test $200 a barrel. . .. It’s going to get worse this summer, and it’s a 250-year drought cycle in Iran. I wrote about this on my site.” In closing, Armstrong says, “Winston Churchill said, ‘In time of war, truth is very precious, and it needs a bodyguard of lies to protect it.’”


Read more …

“Russian-Chinese cooperation has truly limitless possibilities and potential, and we will continue to act in unison.”

• Iran War Crack-Up (Helmer)

Iran has made one point very clear to the United States. It will negotiate on terms for a “permanent peace” but not for a ceasefire. It will fight on against US troops if they land, against US bases in the Arab states, and against US vessels at sea; it will keep the Hormuz Strait closed. Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi repeated this point in three interviews he gave the NBC and PBS television networks on March 6, March 8 and March 9. President Vladimir Putin has made one point very clear to Iran. “I want to confirm our unwavering support of Tehran and our solidarity with our Iranian friends,” he said in his message of March 9 to the new Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei. “Russia has been and will remain the Islamic Republic’s reliable partner. I wish you success in tackling the challenges in front of you, good health and strong spirit.”


The next day Putin telephoned Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian to “reaffirm his principled stance in favour of de-escalating the conflict as soon as possible and resolving it via political means. Masoud Pezeshkian expressed gratitude for the support provided by Russia, including in particular the humanitarian aid granted to Iran.” De-escalation isn’t ceasefire first; as soon as possible isn’t a short war; humanitarian aid isn’t exactly military aid but it may be. Putin’s wish for Mojtaba Khamenei’s “good health” may extend to new Russian measures for his security; or they may be no more than Putin’s wish. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, then announced the maybes are mightnots.

“’All of these issues were not discussed during that conversation [with Pezeshkian]’ in response to a question whether the presidents discussed Iran’s alleged demands to the United States, including guarantees against the resumption of hostilities, the right for a full peaceful nuclear fuel cycle as well as possible compensations.” Not exactly nothing was said, Peskov meant. But he omitted to say if Putin told Pezeshkian that Russia’s support for Iran’s security and for the new Supreme Leader’s “good health” is “unwavering”.Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, however, did say this to Aragchi in their telephone call on March 10. Russia backs negotiations “with due consideration for [the] security interests of Iran and its regional neighbours”, the foreign ministry communiqué announced.

President Xi Jinping has made nothing very clear — by his silence. Instead, he has delegated Wang Yi to speak. Wang is a Communist Party Politburo member and Foreign Minister; the first rank is more important than the second. “China calls for an immediate stop to military operations to avoid the spiralling escalation of the situation”, Wang said on March 8. “All sides should return to the negotiating table as quickly as possible, resolve differences through equal dialogue, and make efforts for realizing common security.” That’s to say, ceasefire first; negotiations second.

Wang then told his spokesman to announce on March 11: “As to China-Russia relations, both sides develop bilateral ties based on the principle of non-alliance, non-confrontation and not targeting any third party.” This is the first time China has officially emphasized its non-alliance with Russia. At their last direct conversation on February 4, 2026, the Kremlin spokesman had said: “Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping once again noted that the comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation between our two countries are at an unprecedented level, are based on equality and mutual benefit, are not directed against any third parties, and are not subject to short-term political considerations.”

“Comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation” was the watchword of their joint communiqué in Moscow on May 8, 2025; and in Kazakhstan on July 3, 2024; Putin told Xi in Moscow on March 21, 2023, “Russian-Chinese cooperation has truly limitless possibilities and potential, and we will continue to act in unison.”

Read more …

“That is the signature of economic factionalism, which feeds an insatiable appetite for greater wealth seizure.”

• Eat the Rich: Sanders and Khanna Introduce Federal Billionaires Tax (Turley)

“Enough is enough.” With those words, Senator Bernie Sanders (I., Vt) launched a push to impose a 5% annual wealth tax on America’s billionaires. With Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Cal.), the legislation, “Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act,” echoes the growing “eat-the-rich” mantra on the left — seeking to replicate a disastrous push in California that has led to an exodus from that state and an estimated loss of $2 trillion in taxable assets. It is also flagrantly unconstitutional. Under the plan, Congress would target 938 billionaires to tap them for $4.4 trillion. That money would then be redistributed as a $3,000 direct payment to every man, woman, and child in a household making $150,000 or less – $12,000 for a family of four.


The timing of the move is telling. Not only is it calculated before the midterm elections, in which the Democrats hope to retake power, but it follows the push by California Democrats and unions to impose a similar wealth tax in that state. Khanna, who represents Silicon Valley, has supported the state law, which includes a ruinous provision for startup entrepreneurs. The law would not only be retroactive to try to trap wealthy taxpayers who have fled the state, but also base wealth calculations on the voting shares of corporate executives. Often, with start-ups, entrepreneurs hold greater voting shares than actual ownership. However, just in case they need more incentive to leave the state, they will be taxed as if their voting shares represented actual wealth.

The practical problem is that the wealthy, like their wealth, are mobile. As a result, many are fleeing California. So now Khanna is joining with the nation’s leading Democratic Socialists to ensure there is nowhere to hide in the United States. For billionaires in California, they could be double-tapped for ten percent of their wealth. It has long been the dream of the far left. Years ago, Warren delighted Democratic voters in her run for the presidency by telling the rich she was coming after “your Rembrandts, your stock portfolio, your diamonds and your yachts.” In one debate, she dramatically rubbed her hands together after saying she would take some of the wealth of fellow candidate John Delaney, a self-made millionaire.

In my book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I discuss the growing threat of “economic factionalism” as politicians fuel rage against the wealthy based on the false premise that they are not “paying their fair share.” While there are good-faith arguments for adjusting tax burdens to address budget demands, the top 1 percent pays more taxes than the bottom 90 percent combined.There is little reason to believe that a wealth tax targeting billionaires will not, if upheld, be later extended to lower tax brackets, starting with multimillionaires. That is the signature of economic factionalism, which feeds an insatiable appetite for greater wealth seizure.

The Sanders-Khanna plan is notable in its express commitment to direct wealth redistribution. It also explains why the left has made the packing of the Supreme Court a priority. As Harvard professor Michael Klarman explained years ago, the radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election” requires control of the Supreme Court to uphold such measures.The problem is that the Constitution bars the implementation of such a federal wealth tax. When the 16th Amendment was ratified, it allowed for federal income taxes, and only income taxes: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

The effort to expand federal taxation beyond income taxes will require either a constitutional amendment or an enabling, packed Court.Nevertheless, these politicians will continue to dangle wealth distribution before voters. They will demonize figures like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk for their wealth while ignoring that these same figures are wealth and job creators, driving our economic growth. Instead, Sanders declared that “Billionaires cannot have it all.” The irony of Rep. Khanna (who has been floating a run for President in 2028) turning on his own constituents in Silicon Valley underscores the appeal of wealth-redistribution campaigns. He is turning the very heart of his state’s economic growth as state deficits and out-of-state migration increase.

For Sanders, the legislation is a key moment to advance his long-standing socialist agenda. He declared the beginning of the end of “unprecedented income and wealth inequality” in the United States through such redistribution. The stated objective of erasing wealth inequality highlights how this is just the start and the end of wealth taxation.As discussed in Rage and the Republic, none of this is new. Countries like France previously targeted the wealthy, triggering an exodus of taxpayers and their businesses from the country. It had to reverse its policy as the economy collapsed.

Of course, many young people have no memory of such failures in the 20th Century. Instead, they are drawn to the very same soundbites used in France and Great Britain before disastrous experiments with socialism. With no experience with socialist economies, figures like socialist mayor Zohran Mamdani can entice voters to “the warmth of collectivism.” There are legitimate concerns over the glaring and growing wealth gap in the United States. However, a wealth tax is neither a constitutional nor a practical way of addressing the problem.

Read more …

“.. the missiles “couldn’t have been launched without British specialists.”

• UK Behind Deadly Storm Shadow Missile Attack On Russian City – Kremlin (RT)

A Ukrainian strike on the Russian city of Bryansk using UK-made long-range Storm Shadow missiles would have been impossible without the direct involvement of British military specialists, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. The regional governor, Aleksandr Bogomaz, initially said the attack on Tuesday killed six people and injured 42, slamming the bombardment as an “inhumane terrorist act.” On Wednesday, he reported that the death toll had risen to seven, while confirming that the strike had involved Storm Shadow missiles. Peskov said on Wednesday the missiles “couldn’t have been launched without British specialists.”


He added that the strikes again show the necessity of the continued military campaign against Ukraine, as its success will ensure that “these barbaric actions by the Kiev regime don’t continue.” “One of the goals is to demilitarize Kiev and strip it of the ability to carry out attacks like this,” Peskov stressed. Ukraine has taken responsibility for the strike, claiming it was targeting a local microelectronics factory. Media reported that the attack came during a shift change at a local factory, when some employees were heading to the exit. According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, seven British cruise-missiles were used in the attack. The UK and other nations backing the Ukrainian government “bear full responsibility” for civilian casualties in Bryansk, it said in a statement on Wednesday.

London is “prepared to bring the conflict to a new level in terms of damage and loss of life” using Ukrainian “puppets,” it added.] The ministry said the UN must react to the incident, stating that “silence will be taken as encouragement of criminal actions” of the Ukrainian government and its foreign backers. Governor Bogomaz announced a day of mourning in Bryansk, saying that 20 people remain in local hospitals, while nine of the most severely injured have been transported to specialized medical facilities. Storm Shadow cruise missiles are launched from the air and have a range of up to 560 km. Bryansk is located just over 100 km from the Ukrainian border and is internationally recognized as Russian territory.

Read more …

“.. the goal is to jeopardize the peace process to end the Ukraine conflict.”

• Ukraine Attacking Russian Gas Pipeline To Stop Deliveries To Europe (RT)

Kiev has been deliberately attacking the infrastructure of the TurkStream gas pipeline in an attempt to halt deliveries to European consumers, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Wednesday. The statement comes after pipeline operator Gazprom reported on Wednesday that the Russkaya compressor station in southern Krasnodar Region, which serves as the starting point for supplies through the TurkStream, came under attack overnight. The company said the Beregovaya and Kazachya compressor stations were also targeted the day before, adding that its facilities in southern Russia were attacked 12 times in the past two weeks.


On Wednesday, the Defense Ministry confirmed the attacks, saying: “the Kiev regime, in order to stop gas supplies to European consumers, launched another attack using strike aircraft-type UAVs on the infrastructure of the Russkaya compressor station.” The ministry stated that four Ukrainian drones were shot down by Russian air defense systems in the airspace adjacent to the station, two more were intercepted by fighter aircraft, and three were destroyed by mobile fire teams. The TurkStream transports Russian gas to Türkiye via the Black Sea, with one line dedicated to the Turkish market and another supplying countries in Southern and Southeastern Europe.

Last month, President Vladimir Putin said Russia has become aware of plans to attack the TurkStream and Blue Stream trans-Black sea gas pipelines, adding that the goal is to jeopardize the peace process to end the Ukraine conflict. Putin did not publicly attribute the alleged plot to a specific party, saying it would be discussed behind closed doors with the Federal Security Service (FSB) board. In October, FSB chief Aleksandr Bortnikov warned that Ukraine and the UK were jointly preparing an attack on TurkStream.

Gas and oil infrastructure in the Black Sea has repeatedly come under Ukrainian attacks amid the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The attacks involved long-range drone strikes against various facilities ashore, as well as repeated attempts to target Russian naval vessels patrolling the pipelines with sea drones. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded to the attack, saying it highlights the “true nature and essence of the Kiev regime,” describing the strikes as “especially irresponsible against the backdrop of a global energy crisis that is brewing day by day.”

Read more …

Anything you say can and will be used… Soon as you say something anything about immigration you’re a racist, bigot, etc.

• The UN Warns Trump About Migrant Rhetoric. Seriously. (Manney)

As if we can’t hate the United Nations enough. The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination issued a warning about President Donald Trump’s immigration rhetoric, claiming that describing migrants as criminals could increase racial hostility. Members of the committee argued that the language used by political leaders can fuel discrimination and possibly trigger hate crimes against migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers living in the United States.


The Committee was deeply disturbed by the growing use of derogatory and dehumanizing language and the dissemination of harmful stereotypes targeting migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. “Portraying them as criminals or as a burden, by politicians and influential public figures at the highest level, particularly the President,” the Committee said, “may incite racial discrimination and hate crimes.” It underscored that the systematic use of racial profiling and arbitrary identity checks by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) against people of Hispanic/Latino, African, or Asian origin has resulted in widespread arrests of refugees, asylum seekers, migrants, and people perceived as such.

The Committee also raised alarm that the lives and physical integrity of the above vulnerable groups are jeopardised by the excessive use of force and violence by enforcement officers during immigration operations. It cited that at least eight people have died since January 2026 during ICE operations or while in ICE custody, including protesters exercising their right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association and detained refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants.

The committee, operating within the United Nations human rights system, raised concerns about immigration enforcement actions carried out by federal agencies, including ICE and Customs and Border Protection. Committee members also referenced deaths tied to immigration detention and enforcement operations since early 2026. UN officials urged the U.S. government to review immigration enforcement measures implemented after January 2025. Committee members called for restrictions on enforcement operations near schools, hospitals, and houses of worship. They also pressed federal authorities to prohibit racial profiling and consider alternatives to immigration detention for families and minors.

Trump administration officials rejected the criticism. The White House accused the U.N. of bias and said Trump had delivered on many of his campaign promises, including securing the U.S. border. “No one cares what the biased United Nations’ so-called ”experts” think, because Americans are living in a safer, stronger country than ever before,” White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales said when reached for comment. Administration officials argue that immigration enforcement remains necessary to address criminal activity tied to illegal entry and trafficking networks operating along the southern border.

The UN regularly presents itself as a global human rights watchdog, yet its own record has drawn scrutiny across multiple regions. Internal investigations into reconstruction programs in Iraq revealed allegations that UN development staff demanded bribes of up to 15% of contract values during a multibillion-dollar aid effort for postwar rebuilding projects. These accusations triggered whistleblower complaints about the misuse of funds intended for infrastructure and humanitarian aid.

Read more …

“New DOJ documents expose a 2011 plan by Epstein and former intelligence operatives to seize $70 billion in frozen Libyan assets ..”

• Forget The Island: Jeffrey Epstein’s Secret War For Libya’s Billions (Fetouri)

While NATO bombs were still falling on Tripoli in the summer of 2011, a different kind of predator was circling the Libyan capital from the safety of a Manhattan townhouse. Newly released 2026 US Department of Justice documents reveal that Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier and alleged Israeli intelligence asset, was also a geopolitical vulture looking to feast on the remains of the Libyan state.,Epstein’s private correspondence reveals a cold-blooded calculation to bypass international law and tap into the $32.4 billion in Libyan assets frozen in the US. The tragedy of the Libyan people was presented as a commercial opportunity.


On September 18, 2011, while the streets of Libya were still engulfed in the chaos, a clandestine plan was being hatched in New York to capture the country’s sovereign wealth. In an email titled ‘New York – Optics are important’, Jeffrey Epstein’s associate, Greg Brown, urgently pushed the financier to bankroll a high-level meeting with future Libyan leaders during the UN General Assembly. The targets were not minor players; they included Dr. Mohamed Magariaf, who would soon become Libya’s head of state, and his key advisers, Dr. Noah and Fadel Hshad.

Brown identified this trio as the men who would soon hold the mandate to negotiate with global giants like Goldman Sachs. The prize was a staggering $40 billion in Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) assets invested across Sub-Saharan Africa on top of the amounts frozen in the US banks. By offering to “identify, manage and monetize” these funds, Epstein’s circle sought to position themselves as the ultimate gatekeepers of Libya’s post-war economy – a ‘play’ that Brown promised would generate hundreds of millions for their own pockets.

The operation was in fact a privatized intelligence effort designed to exploit the vacuum of the Libyan state. Additional emails from the same period reveal that Epstein’s network was not working in isolation, claiming that former operatives from Britain’s MI6 and Israel’s Mossad were “willing to assist” in the hunt for Libya’s billions. This shadowy alliance viewed the $32.4 billion in funds frozen in the US – as well as the additional $40 billion’s African portfolio – not as protected sovereign wealth, but as a “significant opportunity” for recovery on a contingency-fee basis. By leveraging the “fearless” reputation Greg Brown attributed to Epstein, the group aimed to convince the nascent Libyan leadership that only their network of spies-turned-fixers had the “juice” to navigate the web of global finance and retrieve the nation’s “stolen” assets.

To justify this unprecedented financial intervention, Epstein’s network relied on a carefully constructed narrative that painted all Libyan overseas wealth as ‘stolen and misappropriated’ by the Gaddafi family – a claim that has never been proven 15 years later. This was a deliberate mischaracterization; in reality, these assets were the legitimate holdings of the Libyan State funds, invested in blue-chip stocks like Pearson and global banking giants. By framing a diversified state portfolio as ‘criminal proceeds’, Epstein’s people and their intelligence associates sought a legal loophole to bypass UN sanctions and extract a ‘contingency fee’ from wealth that belonged to the Libyan people – not a single family.

This strategy of criminalizing state assets was particularly aggressive across the African continent. During the 2011 chaos, persistent rumors (often fed by Western intelligence) portrayed the Libya Africa Investment Portfolio as Gaddafi’s personal slush fund rather than a legitimate development vehicle.

his narrative reached its peak with allegations involving former South African President Jacob Zuma. Claims surfaced that Zuma had received $30 million in cash (and even stashes of gold and diamonds) from the late Libyan leader for “safe keeping.” Although Zuma repeatedly and sarcastically denied these claims, noting that he would hardly be struggling with legal fees if he possessed this fortune, the ‘ghost story’ of the ‘Gaddafi Trillions’ served a vital purpose. It allowed shadow players like Epstein to treat the continent’s sovereign investments as ‘missing treasure’ up for grabs rather than state-owned assets that should have remained under the protection of international law.

The true danger of Epstein’s ‘New York Optics’ play was an attempt to formalize a shadow guardianship over Libya’s sovereign institutions before they could even be rebuilt. By targeting the individuals tasked with negotiating the Goldman Sachs settlement, Epstein was looking to establish a precedent when private, unaccountable fixers would manage the nation’s legal disputes.

This was a direct assault on Libya’s financial sovereignty, after the assault on its political sovereignty by the NATO military invasion. While the United Nations mission (UNSMIL) and international community spoke of ‘transitioning to democracy’, Epstein’s documents reveal a parallel reality: A race to ensure that the LIA remained a black box controlled by Manhattan-based intermediaries. This interference likely contributed to the years of litigation and internal divisions that have kept billions of dollars in state wealth effectively paralyzed – leaving the Libyan people to pay the price for a ‘recovery’ process that was designed by predators for predators.

Perhaps the most damning indictment of this intervention is that it was built on a financial phantom. For 15 years, the international community has been regaled with tales of ‘Gaddafi’s hidden trillions’ – a narrative Epstein’s network eagerly exploited to justify their ‘recovery’ services. Yet, the 2026 reality remains stark: Not a single personal bank account or secret stash belonging to the late Muammar Gaddafi has ever been found. The billions frozen in the West are, and always were, the documented institutional assets of the LIA. LIA was created in 2006 to, among other portfolios, invest oil money for poor families in the country.

Read more …

New number: $70 billion.

• Epstein Guard To Testify As Oversight Committee Explores Potential MURDER (MN)

House Oversight Chairman James Comer is ramping up the heat on the botched handling of Jeffrey Epstein’s custody, announcing a subpoena for prison guard Tova Noel amid bombshell revelations of suspicious cash deposits and online searches just before the disgraced elitist’s alleged suicide.


With fresh DOJ documents unearthing red flags that scream cover-up, Comer’s move signals a long-overdue push for transparency against the bureaucratic stonewalling that has shielded powerful figures tied to Epstein’s web of abuse. Comer dropped the news during a Fox News interview, pointing to media reports and overlooked Justice Department records that cast doubt on the official narrative of Epstein’s 2019 death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center.

“Well, the recent media reports, what you just said, are very concerning — especially the suspicious activity report on a $5,000 mysterious deposit that she had,” Comer told host Jesse Watters. “The reason that stands out to me, Jesse, is because very seldom are suspicious activity reports even reported for sums less than $10,000.” “That’s a mystery there, and that’s something that, according to the DOJ documents, they never looked into — never asked her about,” he continued. Comer emphasized broader questions lingering over Epstein’s case: “Because of this, because of the media reports, and because of the fact that, honestly, most people on the committee aren’t confident 100% that Epstein’s death was a suicide, we’re going to ask Ms. Noel to come in for a transcribed interview.”

“Again, no one’s accusing her of any wrongdoing, but we have a lot of questions about Epstein — questions about who else was involved in abusing girls,” Comer added. “Why did the government not do a better job of investigating and prosecuting Epstein when they had a chance years before they finally convicted him? Was Epstein a spy? Was our government involved in any way, shape, or form in trying to destroy evidence or hide evidence from any of those four properties?” “Now, was Epstein’s death a suicide, as the government has reported, or was there something else?” he questioned. “Again, no one’s accusing this prison guard of any wrongdoing, but I will announce tonight on your show that we are going to ask her to come in and sit for an interview because we have a lot of questions.”

The subpoena targets Noel, who was on duty the night Epstein died. DOJ records show she googled “latest on Epstein in jail” at 5:42 a.m. and 5:52 a.m., just 40 minutes before her colleague discovered the body at 6:30 a.m. Instead of conducting required checks, Noel admitted to napping and online shopping, while falsifying logs—a lapse that earned her a deferred prosecution deal from an Obama-era judge in 2021. FBI forensics flagged her search as the only notable one in a 66-page review of the guards’ computers. Noel denied remembering the searches, calling records “inaccurate.”mChase Bank flagged suspicious deposits into Noel’s account, including $5,000 on July 30, 2019—ten days before Epstein’s death. From December 2018, seven deposits totaled $11,880, coinciding with her assignment to Epstein’s unit. Yet DOJ investigators never questioned her about it.

An FBI briefing identified Noel as an “orange flash” on camera approaching Epstein’s cell at 10:40 p.m. the night before, carrying linens or clothing—the last approach to the tier. She denied it. Noel now faces a lawsuit for alleged assault at her new job as a medical assistant. The guard’s actions fueled a heated exchange between journalist Michael Shellenberger and Joe Rogan during his latest podcast episode.


This development echoes ongoing scrutiny of Epstein’s death. DOJ documents labeled his death a “MURDER” in one instance, showed it documented a day early, and highlighted the wrong noose being DNA-tested. As one X user noted in response to those revelations: “Epstein is alive. He was extracted, likely by our own government.” Another pointed to a bipartisan cover-up: “The evidence points to a cover-up: Trump’s first AG Bill Barr oversaw the initial Epstein “suicide” ruling amid massive irregularities, Biden’s DOJ continued the stonewalling, and now Trump’s team is doing the same. Epstein was likely a protected CIA/elite asset—too many powerful world leaders, billionaires & influencers were involved in his crimes. The government decided to bury it all to avoid total exposure & chaos.”

Read more …

“.. once Barack Obama came to the podium, he had an agenda.”

• The Politicking of Barack Obama (Victor Davis Hanson)

I’d like to comment recently on the politicking of Barack Obama. He’s been in the news recently, speaking at the Jesse Jackson funeral. What he did there, I’ll get to in a second, but he had a habit of talking down to black Americans as if they were naive, stupid, lacked his sophistication. Do you remember most poignantly when he told supporters of Kamala Harris, don’t dare, you don’t know what’s good for you. Don’t dare vote for basically a white racist like Donald Trump when you could empower a black woman. That didn’t go over very well, but he has a long history of that. Before I continue, though, the Democrats have a long history of using the venue of the funeral memorial service to hijack it and use it for political purposes.


In 2002, they did that with the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, and what should have been a memorial service turned into a four-hour campaign harangue. It was sort of the same way when Barack Obama went to the funeral of John McCain. He was asked to speak, and there’s no secret that John McCain and Donald Trump were not friends.Donald Trump felt that he had endorsed John McCain in 2008. John McCain had not turned the favor by explicitly telling the country that he would not vote for his own party’s nominee in 2016. John McCain, remember, had been a lifetime supporter of private medicine, and when Obamacare came on the scene, he was a vehement opponent. And when Donald Trump then was president, he had the votes to repeal Obamacare and bring in a free-market alternative.

John McCain inexplicably, in a late-night vote, flipped and decided to cast the deciding vote to crush that effort. And we have Obamacare today thanks to John McCain. He was never forgiven. Trump then said some things, and that all surfaced at the McCain funeral where Barack Obama sort of, without mentioning Trump, but it was very overt, the reference. He said that unlike people who are brash and think they’re tough and crude, basically, John McCain was tough, but he didn’t have to emphasize it. The next occasion came in 2020 for Barack Obama. That was at John Lewis’ funeral, and like the Wellstone funeral and the McCain funeral, once again, it was occasion to hijack the purpose, that is to honor the dead, and instead to use it for political purposes. So once Barack Obama came to the podium, he had an agenda.

And he was going to attack Donald Trump. And the way he did it was he said, we are suffering from racism and voter suppression. We don’t need voter IDs. We need a national holiday for balloting. We need to let prisoners vote, and we have too much Jim Crow racism in the country. Therefore, we’ve got to get rid of the Jim Crow racist filibuster footnote. He used it very ineffectively, but he used it in 2006 to deny the nomination of Justice [Samuel] Alito to the Supreme Court. And then he said that we have racist gerrymandering. That’s kind of ironic to see who’s been gerrymandering lately. And he has fully endorsed the efforts of Illinois, of Massachusetts, of Virginia, of California to ensure that Republicans don’t have House representation commensurate with their popular vote in their states.

In that long sermon, people were kind of startled. They thought, “Wow, this is a campaign. Is this a campaign advertisement, or is this an occasion for Obama to get relevance again after being out of office?” I would drop it there, but he did it again. He just went to the funeral of Jesse Jackson. I should add another footnote here that Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama were not close friends. Jesse Jackson said that he had been the trailblazer, the first African American presidential candidate that had a real chance to win. There had been others, but he felt that he was the most viable and that broke the barrier. And Obama was the beneficiary of that. He got so angry that in 2008 he got tired of Barack Obama, he thought, talking down to African Americans. So he said in a hot mic in the Fox Chicago studio, “I’d like to cut his” off, a vulgar reference to Obama’s testicles. But anyway, Obama was asked to speak.

Now, I would say in another footnote, all of these speeches at these funerals that Obama presents are basically about himself. He always relates anecdotes, not about necessarily just about the politician in question, but about his interaction with him. But in this particular Jesse Jackson speech, he went after division in the country using government. These are all sins he purportedly thinks that Donald Trump has committed—disunity, racism, valuing some people over others, and using the government to pursue enemies.

This was very, very rich. Very rich. Barack Obama, remember when he was president, he used the government to do what? Surveil Associated Press reporters, politicized the IRS to make sure they went after conservative groups and denied them tax-free status before his reelection effort. And remember most egregiously of all: He had at one point James Clapper, John Brennan, and James Comey in the Oval Office with him during the transition after Trump had been elected. And he basically said to them, your intelligence assessments from national intelligence, FBI, CIA are flawed because I’m not getting the results I want. I want Russian collusion. Collusion. Now go back and give me Russian collusion and Donald Trump.

Read more …

“.. only 3 or 4 percent of felony cases are decided by juries. In the US jury trials have already been abolished, not by law, but by non-usec..”

• The Era of Truth and Freedom is Over (Paul Craig Roberts)

The British Parliament is in the process of abolishing the right to trial by jury. The law, which seems about to pass, removes a jury trial for defendants whose crimes are punishable by a sentence of three years or less. Instead of a jury of one’s peers, a judge will determine a defendant’s innocence or guilt. Next the cutoff will be 5 years, then ten, then jury trial will disappear, and England will return to the Dark Ages. The appointed judge will decide according to the wishes of he who rules. The reason the Labour government gives for abolishing trial by jury is an 80,000 case backlog that is choking the British justice system, a backlog that the Labour government says will rise to 200,000 in 9 years.


So, first British governments for decades allowed massive numbers of third world immigrant-invaders into Britain, many of whom turned out to be practitioners of crime. Their crimes, many of which are never prosecuted such as the 180,000 gang-rapes of British girls covered up by British governments for 30 years, overwhelmed the ability of the court system to process, and the solution is to abolish trial by peers, one of Britain’s greatest contributions to justice. For eight centuries from Alfred the Great to the Magna Carter to the Glorious Revolution (1680) the British built freedom and the protection of liberty from arbitrary power into law and civil society. And now a great achievement of Western Civilization has been lost to immigrant-invaders.

Possibly, trial by one’s peers had already been lost in Britain. I do not know if plea bargaining has become a feature of the British justice system. In the “free” United States plea-bargaining is, according to the US Department of Justice, the dominant way to decide felony cases. According to the US Department of Justice, only 3 or 4 percent of felony cases are decided by juries. In the US jury trials have already been abolished, not by law, but by non-use. A plea bargain is self-incrimination, against which the US Constitution and British legal practice protect a defendant from being tortured into a confession, whether innocent or guilty.

Despite the Constitutiion, Americans are coerced into self-incrimination by the cost of paying defense attorneys, by the prosecutor’s threat that he will pile on more charges if the defendant insists on a jury trial. A defendant who insists on a jury trial faces not only a hostile prosecutor, whose time is used up in a jury trial when he could be building his conviction rate with plea bargains, but also a hostile judge whose court docket is clogged by a jury trial. A plea bargain takes a few minutes. A jury trial takes a day or several weeks and requires a lot of effort and resources and attention by the judge..

If the defendant is without financial resources, his public defender knows that if he competently represents his client he will not be assigned more cases by the court. The defendant is told by his lawyer that a jury that trusts the system will think that of so many charges against the defendant at least one of them will be true. The defendant will be told that the penalty for one conviction will be worse than the plea bargain that has attorney can negotiate for him. The process works to break down the defendant’s resistance to self-incrimination.

And, so, prosecutor, defendant and his attorney appear before the judge. All three swear that no deal has been made, that the defendant admits his guilt to a charge of a crime that never happened, but which carries a lesser sentence than the original crime for which the defendant was indicted. When I have written that America’s jails are full of innocent people, this is what I mean. Defendants admit to a crime never committed in order to avoid prosecution for one that did, whether or not the accused committed the crime.

The fact that 96-97% of felonies never go to trial means that the police evidence is never tested in court. Time has taught the police that they don’t need any evidence. Their work load is easy. The police just pick a plausible defendant and turn him over to the plea bargaining system. Feminist ideology and blacks taught that white people are racists have added their part to undermining the integrity of juries. A white male with feminists and blacks on his jury can be convicted out of hate. This is justice in the “free” West today. Even the British have now abandoned the struggle for justice for which they fought for eight centuries.

What more evidence does a sentient person need to understand that the foundations of freedom that made Western civilization unique and a magnet to the world no longer exists. This is why the United States, once the repository of these truth and freedom preserving institutions, can betray all morality, all law, by intentionally attacking a girl’s school in Iran for children of Iranian Guards in order to demoralize the Iranian military force in hopes of reducing its ability to resist Israeli-American unprovoked aggression against the Iranian nation. Trump and Netanyahu opened their war by murdering 185 little girls.

Do governments so totally evil, so overflowing with self-righteousness and self-justification for their crimes against humanity as Washington and Israel have a right to exist? This is the question that is before us. Yet the entire world, including Putin and Xi, refuse to confront the question, preferring to defer to evil.

Read more …

He’s definitely not his biggest fan.

• Putin Is Again on the Wrong Track (Paul Craig Roberts)

Just as Putin destroyed the reputation of the Russian military by refusing to win an ongoing minor conflict, he is again demonstrating the worst kind of judgment in calling for a return to peace and stability in the Middle East. Is Putin aware of the Zionist Israeli agenda of Greater Israel? How can he not be aware when Netanyahu himself has held up a map of Greater Israel? How can Putin not be aware when Tucker Carlson asked Washington’s ambassador to Israel how Israel could claim an entire region in which there were different countries and received the answer that the Israelis should just go ahead and take it all now? How can Putin be aware of Greater Israel and call for a return to peace and stability? The only stability permitted by Israel’s agenda is when Israel stretches from the Nile to Pakistan.


Just as Israel used the US to clear out of the way Iraq, Libya, and Syria, Israel is now using Trump to remove Iran as an obstacle to Greater Israel. The only way Israeli-American aggression in the Middle East can be avoided is for Israel’s agenda of Greater Israel and Washington’s agenda of hegemony to be negotiated away. Any other negotiations are mindless distractions from reality. The Israeli-American demands for hegemony are totally inconsistent with any possibility of peace and stability. When confronted with such hegemonic demands, how stupid must you be to call for “peace and stability”?= Why are there no calls for Israel to negotiate its agenda of Greater Israel, for Washington to negotiate its growing demands for hegemony over other countries?

If Putin convinces Iran to call off a war that Iran must fight to victory if the ancient country is to survive, Iran will be destroyed. Having betrayed Syria, is Putin now going to betray Iran in exchange for Washington removing sanctions on Russian oil so Putin can negate for Israel and the US the impact of the closed Strait of Hormuz? Is Putin aligning Russia with Washington and Israel against a BRICS partner? If Putin were a real leader, he would be calling for negotiating an end to the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel. The US cannot do it, because America is completely under Israel’s thumb. Unless the rest of the world can bring itself into acknowledging the reality of the agendas of Greater Israel and American Hegemony, the world will continue on the path to Armageddon.

Read more …

“Rasmussen survey finds 56% of U.S. voters believe COVID shots caused significant deaths — and 42% say CDC employees should be fired for their pandemic response.”

• 56% of Americans Now Suspect COVID-19 “Vaccines” Caused Mass Deaths (Hulscher)

Public opinion is shifting—and they want action. A new Rasmussen survey of 1,158 likely U.S. voters—conducted September 7–9, 2025, with a ±3% margin of error—reveals that 56% believe side effects from the COVID-19 shots have likely caused a significant number of unexplained deaths. Nearly one-third (32%) say it’s very likely. Only 35% still dismiss the idea.This shows that what was once called a “conspiracy theory” has become the mainstream view. The majority of Americans now believe vaccine harms are real and widespread.


Support for HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reflects this shift. Half of voters (50%) say government health officials deserve criticism for their handling of the pandemic, while 42% even think CDC employees should be fired for their role in misleading the public. Among those who strongly believe the shots caused deaths, over 70% want CDC firings.

Partisan divides remain—70% of Republicans, 46% of Democrats, and 54% of independents think the vaccines likely caused deaths—but the skepticism crosses party lines and racial groups. In fact, black (64%) and Hispanic (57%) voters are even more likely than white voters (54%) to suspect deadly vaccine effects. According to the survey, RFK Jr. is viewed favorably by 45% of voters, with strong support among Republicans and independents, even as Democrats turn sharply against him.The takeaway: A credible, nationally representative poll now confirms most Americans believe COVID-19 shots have killed many people, and they want accountability from the CDC and government health leaders.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2031914707989479467?s=20 https://twitter.com/XFreeze/status/2031684358327656503?s=20 https://twitter.com/ValerieAnne1970/status/2031792269636813252?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 2 2026

Mar 022026
 
 March 2, 2026  Posted by at 9:09 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  93 Responses »


Egypt, Fayum mummy Portrait of a boy, with a golden pendant. between 50 BCE and 250 CE


• The Road to World War III (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Has Netanyahu Destroyed Trump’s Presidency? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Trump’s Attack On Iran: Message To Vladimir Putin (Gilbert Doctorow)
• What Epic Fury Means for Putin (David Manney)
• Iran Names Interim Successor To Khamenei Under 2nd Day Of Massive Bombs (ZH)
• Netanyahu and Trump: the New Hitler-Mussolini Pact (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Trump Can Rely on Past Dem. Presidents for Authority to Attack Iran (Turley)
• Israel Uber Alles (Paul Craig Roberts)
• US Military Suffered 200 Casualties In Retaliatory Strikes – Tehran (RT)
• Bill Clinton ‘Did Not Have Sex’ With Mystery Woman In Epstein’s Jacuzzi (RT)
• UK, France Aiming To Tank Peace Talks With Ukraine Nuke Plot – Diplomat (RT)
• 85% Of Babies In 2026 Will Be Born In Asia And Africa (ZH)
• Court Says You Can’t Call AfD “Confirmed Right-wing Extremist” (Eugyppius)
• Joe Biden Accuses Trump Of Planning To ‘Steal’ The Midterms (ZH)

 


 

Pepe https://twitter.com/Thevictoria76/status/2027757456667910334?s=20

 


 

 


 


Paul Craig Roberts had a busy weekend.

• The Road to World War III (Paul Craig Roberts)

The failure of Putin and Xi to stand up for their countries in the face of Washington’s aggression has convinced Trump that he can act with impunity anywhere in the world. Remember, Trump said words to the effect that he can do whatever he wants. Trumps words reminded me of Lenin when he declared that “the scientific concept of dictatorship means neither more nor less than unlimited power, resting directly on force, not limited by anything, not restricted by any laws, nor any absolute rules. Nothing else but that.” With AI destroying endless thousands of American jobs, Trump will have plenty of canon fodder with which to invade Cuba, Turkey, Egypt (“from the Nile to the Euphrates”), and with which to occupy Taiwan.


The Iranian government shares responsibility for the attack on Iran with Russia, China, Israel, and Trump. The witless Iranian government allowed itself to again be deceived, thinking that they were in peace negotiations with Trump while Trump and Israel were preparing an attack on Iran. The Iranian government did not even have the intelligence to protect the country’s leadership from assassination by Israeli missiles. The Iranian government tried to ignore the coming attack and gave away the strategic initiative to its enemies. Putin has done the same thing, and it seems Xi also.

These are the wrong messages to send to Trump and Israel. Gilbert Doctorow believes, correctly in my opinion, that the inability of Iran, Russia, and China to act intelligently has brought us to the opening stage of World War III. Putin himself, like Iran, has been deceiving himself and the Russian people for a long time by participating in Ukrainian “peace negotiations,” despite the fact that Putin has said time and time again that it is impossible to trust the Americans. Nevertheless, Putin has setup himself and his country for another deception like the Minsk agreement. China’s only weapons are words that mean nothing whatsoever to Washington.

Perhaps the Democrats will impeach Trump for committing the United States to a war crime without the consent of Congress. But as Trump has proved himself to be Israel’s effective tool, the Democrats would find themselves up against the Israel Lobby, a fight for which Democrats have little stomach. My conclusion is that Israel and it’s American puppet will continue along the road to World War III.

Read more …

“What the choice comes down to is that Trump represents Israel over Americans, and Democrats represent immigrant-invaders over Americans. The question is: who do you prefer for your ruler?”

• Has Netanyahu Destroyed Trump’s Presidency? (Paul Craig Roberts)

I am happy to report that finally there is some good news. The latest Gallup Poll brings it to us. The poll shows that the attitude of Americans to the Israelis and the Palestinians has shifted and now favors the Palestinians. Little doubt this was brought about by the heartless cruelty toward Gaza civilians by the so-called “Israeli defense force.” Watching a genocide in which entire cities are destroyed, women and children are shot in the head intentionally by Satanic Israeli soldiers, denial by Israel of medicine, food and water for bombed-out Palestinian civilians, and statement after statement by members of the Israeli government that the intention is to dispel Palestinians from Palestine have all contributed to waking up America about the alleged “only democracy in the Middle East.” Perhaps the Israeli-Trump military attack on Iran yesterday will contribute to waking up the peoples of the Western world.


Americans have also noticed the growing curtailment of their free speech. In some states, such as Texas and Florida, an American citizen who criticizes Israel is disqualified from holding a state job or having a contract to supply the state with goods or services. Students critical of Israel’s behavior are expelled from university. Foreign students are deported if they criticize Israel or support Palestine. University professors are dismissed. Corporate and media employees are fired. It finally dawned on part of the American population that Israel is canceling the First Amendment to the US Constitution. It is easier for Trump to expel by deportation from America, a foreign student legally in the United States who protests the Israeli genocide of Palestine then it is for Trump to deport an illegal alien who has no right whatsoever to be present in the United States.

Additionally, Americans have noticed that president Trump represents Israel first and America afterward. It is an affront to national honor to have a president who kowtows to a foreign government. The escape of some Americans from insouciance has resulted in 41% of Americans sympathizing with the Palestinians and 36% with the Israelis. This is a dramatic change from 2019 when about 60% of Americans were aligned with Israel and only 21% with Palestinians. The strongest shift toward Palestinians is among Democrats and Independents. The Republicans with the exception of representative Massey and Senator Paul remain in Israel’s pocket.

There is a large downside for Trump in this development. The United States has spent the first quarter of the 21st century fighting Israel’s wars against Arab states that opposed Greater Israel. With the orchestrated 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, the George W Bush regime provided the excuse–the New Pearl Harbor– for the United States military to eliminate seven opponents to Greater Israel in five years. The Bush regime claimed that Muslims were responsible and launched a war that destroyed Arab opponents to Israel’s domination of the entire Middle East. Using American blood and vast amounts of American money, Washington has destroyed Iraq, Libya and Syria for Israel. And now Netanyahu has his two- bit puppet, Donald Trump, at work destroying Iran for Israel.

So what is Trump to do? Polls indicate that a large majority of Americans oppose war against Iran. But if Trump refused the mission handed to him by his Israeli master, he would lose the Israel’s Lobby support, and alienate the powerful Israel Lobby and the “Christian Zionists” who comprise a large segment of MAGA America. By going ahead with the attack, Trump alienates those opposed to more war and to Israel’s domination of the American government. With the midterm elections later this year, it is possible that by placing Trump between a rock and a hard place Netanyahu has destroyed the Trump presidency. The pros and cons of Democrats returning to power are obvious. The pro is that Democrats are likely to separate American interests from Israel’s. The con is that Democrats have taken an ideological position against “white racist America.” What the choice comes down to is that Trump represents Israel over Americans, and Democrats represent immigrant-invaders over Americans. The question is: who do you prefer for your ruler? The Israelis or the Muslims and the Hispanics?

Read more …

Gilbert Doctorow hidden inside a Paul Craig Roberts article. Oh well…

• Trump’s Attack On Iran: Message To Vladimir Putin (Gilbert Doctorow)

This note will be brief insofar as the news from the Middle East is still sparse. The Israeli-US attack on Iran resulted in destruction of the offices of the Ayatollah and of buildings of security forces in Tehran and in other cities, though reports are only preliminary. As for the Iranian counter-attack on Israel and on US military bases in the Gulf, information is still sketchier. However, my purpose is not to provide military intelligence but to offer political intelligence that is highly relevant to the prime interest of this Community – the war in Ukraine and how/whether attempts at brokering a peace by Trump still have any credibility.


The answer to that question is a resounding ‘no.’ U.S. diplomacy with Iran has now for the second time in less than a year been used only as a cover and a side-show while a vicious act of aggression against Iran was being planned. U.S. diplomacy is an exercise in treachery, nothing more. This truth was widely discussed on Russian state television on the leading news and commentary shows in the past few weeks. Presumably it was discussed within the Kremlin as well, but it is not at all clear that Vladimir Putin is ready to take the measures that the latest developments in Iran point to, namely: to break off all negotiations with Witkoff-Kushner and the Ukrainians; bomb the hell out of Kiev right now to put an end to Ukraine’s war-making potential on the front-lines and free brains and resources for Russia’s entry into the Middle East as co-defender of Iran alongside China.

I mention in passing that Trump’s speech to the nation announcing the start of U.S. military operations against Iran for the sake of degrading its military forces and promoting regime change was a vile collection of untruths and outright fabrications. Trump smashed any hopes we may have had that he could play a constructive role in international relations.

Yesterday, in my analysis of how the European Institutions have become smotherers of freedom of expression, of how the Commission exercises monarchical absolutism typical of the ancient regime, I said that they have to be put on a new footing, with cancellation of parliamentary democracy in favor of U.S. style Separation of Powers. Nota bene, checks and balances do not work every time, but they are our only hope for there to be public space open to debate on foreign and domestic policy with no holds barred. Trump’s action yesterday was immediately denounced by a member of Congress as violating the Constitution by opening war on Iran without authorization of Congress. We will see how far this censure goes, but it is a good start towards curbing autocracy in the Oval Office.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2026

Read more …

Iran oil exports to Russia? What? Russia is a major oil exporter in and of itself.

• What Epic Fury Means for Putin (David Manney)

The confirmation that Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed during joint U.S.-Israeli airstrikes was a cause for celebration inside the country. U.S. military officials announced that the operation targeted Iranian leadership compounds, missile facilities, and nuclear infrastructure across Tehran and other strategic sites. U.S. and partner forces began striking targets at 1:15 a.m. ET to dismantle the Iranian regime’s security apparatus, prioritizing locations that posed an imminent threat. Targets included Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps command and control facilities, Iranian air defense capabilities, missile and drone launch sites, and military airfields.“The President ordered bold action, and our brave Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Guardians, and Coast Guardsmen are answering the call,” said Adm. Brad Cooper, commander of CENTCOM.


Following the initial wave of U.S. and partner strikes, CENTCOM forces successfully defended against hundreds of Iranian missile and drone attacks. There have been no reports of U.S. casualties or combat-related injuries. Damage to U.S. installations was minimal and has not impacted operations. The first hours of the operation included precision munitions launched from air, land, and sea. Additionally, CENTCOM’s Task Force Scorpion Strike employed low-cost one-way attack drones for the first time in combat. Operation Epic Fury involves the largest regional concentration of American military firepower in a generation.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that the strikes aimed to eliminate immediate threats that Iran’s regime posed.Now, will this affect the war between Ukraine and Russia?

Iran has long supported Russia’s war effort in Ukraine. Under President Vladimir Putin, Moscow relied on Iranian Shahed drones to strike Ukrainian infrastructure and cities, which became central to Russia’s strategy of targeting energy grids during the winter months.Iran also supplies oil to Russia during periods when sanctions squeezed global markets. Disruption within Iran is now pitting two competing forces against each other. On the one hand, direct Iranian support to Moscow weakens amid disruptions to oil production and drone exports.On the other hand, instability in the Persian Gulf pushes oil prices upward, and Russia remains one of the world’s energy exporters.

Global energy markets face one of their gravest shocks in decades as joint U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran and Tehran’s retaliatory missile attacks across the Gulf disrupt oil exports from the world’s most important producing region.The duration of the conflict will likely determine the scale of the disruption, but for now, the threat and uncertainty are already enough to severely impact flows from the region, which accounts for 20% of global oil supplies.Barring a swift resolution, oil prices will likely rise sharply when trading opens on Monday morning. Benchmark Brent crude oil prices rose in recent weeks to around $70 a barrel, their highest since August 2025, as investors braced for military confrontation in the Middle East.

With 20% of global oil shipments passing through the Straits of Hormuz and tanker traffic slowing amid heightened security risks, Iran’s temporary closure of maritime routes sent oil prices sharply higher. A 10-12% spike in global crude prices strengthens Russia’s revenue stream, at least in the short term. That creates a paradox in the Ukraine conflict: Higher oil prices give Putin breathing room, while every dollar increase in crude prices translates into billions of additional revenue for the Kremlin. China, facing reduced Iranian supply, may turn more heavily toward Russian exports; that shift could deepen Moscow’s economic relationship with Beijing.

Read more …

Khameini was no.1 for 35+ years. Not so easy to replace. Takes time.

• Iran Names Interim Successor To Khamenei Under 2nd Day Of Massive Bombs (ZH)

As questions hang over who will ultimately succeed Iran’s slain supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, an interim leader has been appointed to fulfill his duties. Top Shia cleric Alireza Arafi has been named to the interim Leadership Council after Supreme Leader Khamenei was confirmed killed in US-Israeli strikes, state media reported Sunday. The ISNA news agency has described that Arafi, a member of the Guardian Council, is joining President Masoud Pezeshkian and Chief Justice Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei on the body tasked with carrying out the supreme leader’s responsibilities until the Assembly of Experts appoints a permanent successor. All of this happening as US-Israeli bombs continue to fall on Tehran and other sites for a second straight day, ‘uninterrupted’ – as President Trump pledged Saturday.


Born in 1959, 67-year-old Alireza Arafi ranks among the most powerful clerics in Iran. Before his emergency elevation, he held three key posts: director of the nationwide Islamic Seminary system, member of the Guardian Council, and member of the Assembly of Experts. While rooted in Qom’s clerical establishment, Arafi combines traditional religious authority with seeking to carefully modernize Iran; however his appointment of course signals continuity, and he’ll be tasked with seeking to ensure regime survival – which is what this moment is all about for Tehran. Most importantly, Arafi is viewed by the IRGC and political leadership as a loyal insider who will preserve a retaliatory trajectory during wartime.

Heavy US and Israeli bombing has been observed Sunday on the Iranian capital, particularly on known government and military command centers, but that hasn’t stopped large gatherings of mourners in other parts of the country.While there’s been evidence of local celebrations in some sectors among anti-government Iranians, Sunday footage on state TV and other international media shows loyalists in possibly the hundreds of thousands showing solidarity with the slain Ayatollah the Islamic Republic leadership.

]President Masoud Pezeshkian condemned the killing as “a great crime” and has declared seven days of public holidays in addition to the 40-day mourning period. Outraged and saddened Iranians were seen pouring into the streets of the capital soon after state TV finally made the announcement confirming Khamenei’s killing during the opening salvo of the US-Israeli attack. Iranian authorities have alleged major war crimes, including the deaths of over 85 young girls attending school when a bomb struck.

“There will be expected ceremonies,” Pezeshkian said, while noting they will have to happen even while the bombardment continues across the country. He’s also said his country views revenge as its “legitimate right and duty” after Khamenei had been murdered by the “most wicked villains in the world.” The president further claimed the act was a “declaration of open war on Muslims, especially Shiites, in all corners of the world.” According to NBC:

The government in Iran is under attack like never before. Today tens of thousands of regime supporters packed into Tehran’s Revolution Square to mourn the late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in a joint U.S. and Israel military operation. They chanted “God is great!” while officials promised revenge. One said Iran would deliver “terrifying blows” to make the U.S. and Israel beg for mercy.

Read more …

“Every American has the right to be totally ashamed.”

• Netanyahu and Trump: the New Hitler-Mussolini Pact (Paul Craig Roberts)

Trump’s claims against Iran are a packet of lies. They are Trump’s excuses for complying with Netanyahu’s demand that Trump take the United States to war against Iran for the sake of Israel’s agenda of Greater Israel. This is despicable behavior for anyone, especially for a president of the United States. Americans always fall for patriotic propaganda, and the gullibility and insouciance of the American population is what Netanyahu and Trump are relying on to insure misperception of illegal aggression as humanitarian work blessed by God. The Iranian government, the Iranian people, Putin, and Xi share responsibility for the wanton act of aggression against the Iranian nation.


The Iranian government sat on its butt, giving up the strategic initiative, despite the obvious fact that a massive attack against Iran was nearing completion. The utter stupidity of the Iranian people allowed themselves to be tricked by American operatives into mindless participation in demonstration not against the US and Israel, but against their own government, and gave Trump and Israel an excuse for the attack and the hope that it will lead to regime change utin and Xi not only lacked the intelligence to form a mutual security agreement between Russia, China, and Iran, an agreement that would have prevented the attack, but they also failed to provide Iran with air defenses to deter the attack. It seems that Alastair Crooke’s report that China had provided Iran with reliable air defense was not accurate.

In other words, neither the Iranian government nor its supposed allies were capable of acknowledging reality and taking the necessary steps to prevent the Netanyahu-Trump attack on Iran. Considering the unreality in which Putin and Xi operate, the same fate is likely for Russia, and then China will be pulled into a war over Taiwan. The United States has already demonstrated its capability to produce anti-Chinese demonstrations in Hong Kong and other parts of China. Just as the Arab countries, unable to organize, have been knocked off one by one while the others stood and watched, Russia, Iran and China seem to face the same fate.

Trump has taken America to war without consultation with, or approval by, Congress. This should be an impeachable act, but as the war is for Israel, any complaints are likely to be muted. As the United States has shown its willingness to ignore the First Amendment in order to silence critics of Israel, the United States will also give up Congress’ power to decide on war. Trump’s war on Iran proves that he is the complete Israeli puppet and that the United States of America has been harnessed to Israel’s goal of a Greater Israel.

Every American has the right to be totally ashamed.

Read more …

The authority is murky, standard.

• Trump Can Rely on Past Dem. Presidents for Authority to Attack Iran (Turley)

With the launch of the attacks on Iran, some have already declared the action unconstitutional. That includes the immediate condemnation of Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). The precedent, however, favors the President in this action, though the attack triggers obligations of notice and consultation with Congress. I am sympathetic to those who criticize the failure to seek declarations of war from Congress before carrying out such operations. Indeed, I have represented members of Congress in opposing such wars. We lost. The courts have allowed presidents to order such attacks unilaterally.


Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution states that “the President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states.” However, the Constitution also expressly states that Congress has the power to declare war under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11. Our last declared war was World War II. Since that time, Congress and the courts have allowed for resolutions to supplant the declaration requirement. They have also allowed for unilateral attacks on other nations.President Trump has referred to this action as a “war” and said that it will not be a limited operation. The attack will result in calls for compliance with the War Powers Resolution, passed by Congress in 1973.

The resolution requires “in the absence of a declaration of war” that a president report to Congress within 48 hours after introducing United States military forces into hostilities. The WPR mandates that operations must end within 60 days absent congressional approval. Notably, there was a recent secret briefing of the “Gang of Eight” that may have included a foreshadowing of this operation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed on Saturday that he has given notice to those senators.

Under the WPR: “The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.” The WPR limits such authority to “hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances,” and can be exercised “only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”

President Trump has cited the documented attacks of Iran and its proxies on U.S. forces and its allies. It is also a state sponsor of terrorism and has continued to seek nuclear weapons in defiance of the demands of the international community. Recently, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) announced that Iran had again barred it from these sites. There has historically been deference to presidents exercising such judgments under this vague standard. That was certainly the case with the attacks in Bosnia and Libya under Democratic presidents. Even with the highly deferential language, presidents have long chaffed at the limitations of WPR. Nixon’s veto of the legislation was overridden. Past Democratic and Republican presidents, including Obama, have asserted their inherent authority under Article II to carry out such operations.

There is always a fair amount of hypocrisy in these moments. There was no widespread outcry when Obama attacked Libya, particularly from Democrats. When I represented members to challenge the undeclared war in Libya, Obama (like Trump) dismissed any need to get congressional approval in attacking the capital city of a foreign nation and military sites to force regime change. Figures like then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were lionized for their tough action in Libya. Recently, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) sponsored a resolution to bar President Donald Trump from taking military action in Iran without congressional approval. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) proposed a similar resolution. Neither was passed.

Critics can also rely on Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs) to assert limits on the president when authorizing limited, defined military actions. Such resolutions date back to the Adams Administration in the Quasi-War with France. A 2001 AUMF authorized the President “to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.” It also authorized presidents to take military action to prevent future acts of terrorism against the United States.

The 2002 AUMF authorizes the President to use “necessary and appropriate” force to “defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.” Past presidents have interpreted these AUMFs to extend to new threats and beyond countries like Iraq. In a 2018 report, the Trump Administration declared that the 2002 AUMF “contains no geographic limitation on where authorized force may be employed.”

Read more …

“Once Trump has cleared the path for Israel, will Israel then turn on America?”

• Israel Uber Alles (Paul Craig Roberts)

During war, war propaganda, dominates over factual reporting, and even is turned by court historians into historical “fact” that prevails for years after the war is over. The current reporting on the Israeli-American attack on Iran is even more doubtful, considering the enormous lies we have been told by Israel and Trump. According to Fox News, in the joint military surprise attack on Iran, Israel’s missiles targeted the Iranian leadership, and the American missiles attacked the Iranian missile sites. Israeli and American officials confirm that Israel succeeded in assassinating 40 more Iranian top leaders, including Supreme Leader Khamenei, leaving Iran without leadership.


Whether or not true, if this is a loss remains to be seen. Apparently, the Iranian leadership lacked the wits to see that an attack was imminent and continued in the negotiations that Trump was using a second time to set Iran up for a surprise attack, and the Supreme Leader made no effort to locate to a safe place. This is not a sign of Iranian intelligence. It is likely that Iran will be defeated, the usual fate of a military that permits the strategic initiative to remain in the hands of the enemy, as Putin and Xi have also done. As Russia and China are too frightened to come to Iran’s aid, the defeat of Iran could also mean the end of BRICS and the New Chinese Silk Road. Russian and Chinese leadership are demonstrating that their support is purely verbal and means nothing.

Congratulations to Netanyahu, the Israel Lobby, and Israel’s American neo-conservative agents who are succeeding in the restoration of Israeli-American world hegemony. It seems that Israeli-American hegemony has no opponents capable of standing up to domination by the Israeli-American alliance, much less the pathetic Russian and Chinese governments. Russia and China will be knocked off one by one as they lack the intelligence to unite. Once Trump has cleared the path for Israel, will Israel then turn on America?

Read more …

US military officially says 3 dead. I don’t believe it was 200.

“Iranian forces have retaliated against American-Israeli attacks by targeting Washington’s military bases across the region..”

• US Military Suffered 200 Casualties In Retaliatory Strikes – Tehran (RT)

The US has suffered 200 casualties in Iranian retaliatory strikes on bases across the Middle East, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has claimed. Backed by the US, Israel launched what was described as a preemptive operation against Iranian military and nuclear-related targets in the early hours of Saturday, claiming the strikes were aimed at neutralizing threats posed by the Islamic Republic in the region. US President Donald Trump later confirmed that the White House had supported West Jerusalem in conducting the strikes, citing the failure of nuclear diplomacy as a direct trigger for the move.


“As a result of missile strikes on American bases, at least 200 US military personnel were killed and injured,” the Tasnim news agency reported Saturday, citing a statement by the IRGC. Commenting on the retaliation, IRGC General Ebrahim Jabbari warned Trump that the Islamic Republic has “advanced capabilities” and is ready for a prolonged conflict. “At the start of the war we will strike everything we have in our stockpiles,” Jabbari said, vowing to launch “the most powerful missiles later.” IRGC General Ebrahim Jabbari:Trump should know that today we fired the missiles from the back of our stockpile.Soon, we will unveil weapons that you have never seen before. — Clash Report (@clashreport) February 28, 2026 “What we have not shown until now, and what, as we Iranians say, we ‘put to rest in brine,’ we will reveal in the coming days,” he added.

Iran’s retaliation targeted several US military facilities across the Middle East, including the Fifth Fleet support center in Bahrain, a base in Iraqi Kurdistan, Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, Al Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates, Muwaffaq Al Salti Air Base in Jordan, and Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, according to reports. Israeli news outlets also said that some 35 missiles were launched toward Israel, with one person reportedly injured. The latest strikes represent Israel’s second major military campaign against Iran in less than a year. In June 2025, during a 12-day conflict, the IDF in cooperation with US military forces carried out a surprise bombing of the Islamic Republic’s military and nuclear facilities, killing senior military commanders, government officials, and nuclear scientists.

Read more …

There’s a woman’s face behind that black square in the photo.

• Bill Clinton ‘Did Not Have Sex’ With Mystery Woman In Epstein’s Jacuzzi (RT)

Former US President Bill Clinton allegedly told congressional investigators that he did not have sex with a woman photographed with him in a jacuzzi, and does not even know her name, according to CNN and NBC sources familiar with the testimony about his links to late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Clinton’s closed-door deposition before the House Oversight Committee on Friday lasted roughly six hours and concluded without the former president or his legal team addressing the press. The former president chose to manage the public response through social media, asserting in his opening statement that he “saw nothing” and “did nothing wrong.”


Several members of the committee told reporters outside the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center that the session was “productive” and said Clinton at times spoke more candidly than his attorneys preferred.“He did attempt to respond to every single question asked, even when his attorney told him to shut up,” House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer said. Rep. Nancy Mace thanked the former president for cooperating.Lawmakers questioned Clinton extensively about his appearances in newly released Epstein files, including photographs showing him alongside Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving a prison sentence for sex trafficking offenses.

At one point, Clinton was asked about photographs released by the Justice Department showing him in a hot tub with a woman whose face was redacted, according to CNN. Clinton allegedly said he did not know the woman and denied having any sexual relationship with her. He also repeatedly told investigators that he never visited Epstein’s private island. The inquiry also examined Clinton’s presence in Epstein flight logs and White House visitor records from the 1990s. Clinton has previously acknowledged traveling on Epstein’s private jet but has described their relationship as brief and said he was unaware of Epstein’s criminal conduct.

Clinton was represented during questioning by longtime attorney David Kendall, while spokesperson Angel Urena issued a written statement criticizing the Justice Department’s handling of Epstein-related evidence files. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who unlike her husband briefly spoke to reporters following her own testimony a day earlier, described the inquiry as “political theater.” Video recordings and transcripts of both Clintons’ depositions are expected to be released in the coming days, pending legal review. The testimonies form part of a wider congressional effort to examine individuals connected to Epstein’s network. Comer said additional subpoenas are expected but declined to identify future witnesses.

Read more …

“Any attempt to strengthen Ukraine’s position by supplying it with a dirty bomb or any other components will not lead to any results .. ”

• UK, France Aiming To Tank Peace Talks With Ukraine Nuke Plot – Diplomat (RT)

The UK and France are planning to arm Ukraine with a nuclear weapon to ensure its conflict with Russia is not settled in US-backed peace talks, senior Russian diplomat Gennady Gatilov told RT in an interview on Friday. Earlier this week, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) accused London and Paris of plotting to transfer the necessary components, technology, and equipment needed to develop a nuclear weapon or so-called ‘dirty bomb’.


The plans were specifically timed to undermine the trilateral Russian-US-Ukrainian peace talks, according to Gatilov, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN Office in Geneva. He argued that Kiev’s Western European backers have been increasingly “angered” by Russia’s advances on the battlefield. “This period was certainly not chosen by chance… there were truly important trilateral negotiations taking place,” he said. The UK, France and Ukraine’s other European sponsors were “essentially sidelined… which is causing them discontent, extreme discontent,” he said.

I think this was an attempt to increase their role in this process, and thus continue to encourage the Ukrainians, the Ukrainian regime, to continue military action. The diplomat cited the example of the failed 2014-2015 Minsk Agreements, which were ostensibly intended to reconcile the post-coup government in Kiev with anti-Maidan forces in Ukraine’s east. Germany and France were guarantors of the accords. Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and former French President Francois Hollande later admitted that the accords had been exploited to stall for time and allow Kiev to rearm.

According to Gatilov, from the early stages of the Ukraine conflict, France and the UK have played an “important role” in turning the country into what he called an “anti-Russia project.” When asked if the alleged nuclear handover plot by London and Paris would strengthen Kiev’s negotiation position in the peace talks, the diplomat said no. “Any attempt to strengthen Ukraine’s position by supplying it with a dirty bomb or any other components will not lead to any results,” he said. “On the contrary… this will worsen the political situation and complicate the search for a political solution to the problem.”

Read more …

Where the West was lost.

• 85% Of Babies In 2026 Will Be Born In Asia And Africa (ZH)

In 2026, 85% of babies worldwide will be born in just two continents: Asia and Africa. Where someone is born can shape everything from access to education and healthcare to long-term economic opportunity. This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, shows how global births are distributed across continents, based on population projections from the United Nations.

Asia Accounts for Nearly Half of Global Births
Asia is expected to see about 64.9 million births in 2026, accounting for roughly 49% of all births worldwide. Despite declining fertility rates in countries like China, Japan, and South Korea, Asia’s sheer population size keeps it at the center of global demographics. South and Southeast Asia, in particular, continue to contribute large numbers of births each year. As a result, nearly one in every two people born in 2026 will be born somewhere in Asia.

Africa Makes Up More Than One-Third of Global Births
Africa is projected to record 47.6 million births in 2026, representing 35.9% of the global total. This reflects the continent’s high fertility rates and young population structure. Many African countries are still early in their demographic transitions, with limited declines in birth rates so far. As population growth accelerates, Africa’s share of global births has been rising steadily and is projected to increase further later this century.

Smaller Shares in the Rest of the World
All other continents account for a relatively small share of global births. Latin America and the Caribbean are expected to see 9.3 million births, or 7% of the total, while Europe accounts for just 4.6%. North America’s share stands at 3%, reflecting lower fertility rates despite population growth driven by migration. Oceania contributes 0.5% of births, and Antarctica, with no permanent population, records no births at all.

Read more …

“The broadly worded judgment is a stinging humiliation for The Marshmallow Minister ..”

• Court Says You Can’t Call AfD “Confirmed Right-wing Extremist” (Eugyppius)

Old friends may remember the farce we experienced last May, when outgoing Marshmallow Interior Minister Nancy Faeser pushed her gaggle of goons in the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) to upgrade their political classification of Alternative für Deutschland.No longer did the BfV consider the national political party to lurk under mere “suspicion of right-wing extremism,” oh no. They announced suddenly and with much establishment fanfare that they had determined the AfD to be “confirmed right-wing extremists.”


Faeser and her goons hoped this new designation would edge the AfD more firmly into Evil Nazi Fascist Hitler territory in the popular mind, thereby preparing the way for banning the party. According to the dumb Gender Studies-tier retards unassailable and unbiased experts of the BfV, the AfD were more definitely Evil, more definitely Nazi, more definitely Fascist and more definitely Hitler than ever before. They had such clear proofs of all the Evil Nazi Fascist Hitlerism lurking within the AfD that they could not even reveal them. Doing so, Faeser said, would compromise the mysterious sources and methods of her highly sophisticated political spy agency. Instead, the Interior Ministry leaked a classified dossier supporting the upgrade to sympathetic media like Der Spiegel, and these media promptly published earnest articles telling us all how absolutely Fascist and Evil and Nazi and Hitler all the secret evidence showed the AfD to be, because trust us bro.

What happened next is that somebody leaked the full 1,000-page dossier to the alternative news outlets Cicero and NiUS, both of which promptly published the full .pdf. It turned out to be one of the stupidest and most trivial documents I’ve ever read. The supersecret hyperspy sources tapped by the BfV? Google and social media posts. The supersecret hyperspy methods used by the BfV? Compiling interminable lists of potentially untoward or possibly impolite things AfD politicians uttered in googlable documents or on social media. It was so bad that almost overnight the dossier destroyed much of the momentum for an AfD ban – exactly the opposite of what its architects had intended. Even many establishment figures quietly admitted what a travesty the whole thing had turned out to be.

NEVERTHELESS: The establishment moved quickly to capitalise on the new extremist designation. Various state governments began plotting to cleanse the civil service of AfD members on the grounds that they were affiliates of an officially “extremist” organisation. In Rheinland-Pfalz they even toyed with the idea of illegally excluding AfD candidates from running in local elections also on the basis of this bureaucratic designation. The Social Democrats began pushing to initiate ban proceedings against the AfD, a move that – if successful – would grant the left parties indefinite parliamentary majorities both nationally and across many state parliaments, amounting to a kind of legal coup and casting us into a new DDR-light regime.

Meanwhile, the AfD filed suit with the Administrative Court in Cologne to overturn their upgraded designation because it was so obviously dumb and unfounded. They also asked the court to prohibit the designation temporarily, while their primary lawsuit is pending – a long involved process that will take years. The Cologne judges released their unusually extensive 55-page decision on the temporary injunction yesterday. For the party-banning speech-repressing opinion-monitoring enthusiasts of Our Democracy, it is a disaster.

Read more …

“Claims Credit For Border Security .. ”

Requiring voter ID equals stealing the election.

“..he’s going to do everything he can to prevent you from wanting to vote ..”

I’m trying to see a logic in here…

• Joe Biden Accuses Trump Of Planning To ‘Steal’ The Midterms (ZH)

Former President Joe Biden made one of his rare post-presidential appearances Friday in Columbia, South Carolina, stepping onto a stage at a downtown art museum to accept a lifetime achievement honor from the state’s Democratic Party. During the speech, Biden claimed that Donald Trump is rigging the 2026 midterms before a single vote has been cast. “Here’s the good news,” Biden told the crowd. “In America, the power still belongs to the people for now. And the way to show the power is vote, show up, and vote. And folks, when we do that, that’s bad news for Donald Trump, and he knows it. That’s why he’s trying to pull out more and more barriers – put them up. He’s trying to steal the election because he knows he can’t win your vote, so he’s going to do everything he can to prevent you from wanting to vote.”


The “barriers” Biden was referencing are Trump’s push for photo ID requirements and proof of citizenship for first-time voter registration – the two key components of the SAVE America Act currently awaiting a Senate vote. Biden framed these measures as existential threats to democracy. What he did not mention is that the American public has already rendered its verdict on these policies — and it is not remotely close. A Pew Research Center survey found that 83% of Americans support requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote, including 71% of Democrats, 76% of black Americans, and 82% of Hispanics. = Gallup found nearly identical results: 84% in favor of photo ID requirements, with 98% of Republicans, 84% of independents, and 67% of Democrats on board. Eighty-three percent also support requiring proof of citizenship for first-time voter registration.

“The bottom line is this,” CNN’s chief data analyst Harry Enten said earlier this month. “Voter ID is not controversial in this country. A photo ID to vote is not controversial in this country. It is not controversial by party, and it is not controversial by race. The vast majority of Americans agree … that, in fact, you should have a photo ID to be able to vote.”

Biden was speaking, in other words, about a policy his own base largely supports — insisting it’s election theft. Biden also attempted to rewrite his legacy by claiming he had secured the southern border.”The day I left office, border crossings in the United States were lower than the day that I entered an office inherited from Trump,” he said. “He is — I won’t say it. That’s just a fact.” What Biden failed to mention was that border crossings hit record highs on his watch. The numbers were so high that even Barack Obama’s Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said back in 2024 that they were unsustainable.

During his presidency, he claimed that he needed new legislation to address the border crisis and insisted that it was up to Congress to give him the authority he needed to close the border. The Biden administration only chose to act on the border when polling showed that Trump had a significant advantage on the issue of immigration.No matter how hard he tries, Joe Biden can’t rewrite his record on the border. Rather than own his legacy, he’s proving exactly why Donald Trump won in 2024.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/2028122511922135127?s=20 https://twitter.com/scitechgirl/status/2028150089315680453?s=20 DNA https://twitter.com/BrainyScience/status/2027854938894663775?s=20 cell https://twitter.com/MAstronomers/status/2027852771680981086?s=20 https://twitter.com/maximumpain333/status/2027909335939223723?s=20 https://twitter.com/latestincosmos/status/2027842472345538797?s=20 https://twitter.com/AstronomyVibes/status/2028078201843449970?s=20

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle March 1 2026

Mar 012026
 
 March 1, 2026  Posted by at 10:22 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  71 Responses »


Mark Chagall Peace window, UN 1967


• Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is Dead (Matt Margolis)
• Trump Announces Major Airstrikes Against Iranian Regime (Matt Margolis)
• Saudi Arabia Joins U.S. in Fighting Iran (Salgado)
• Trump Isn’t Starting a War, He’s Ending One (A.J. Christopher)
• Russia Condemns US Attack On Iran, Warns Of ‘Radiological Catastrophe’ (ZH)
• Barack Obama Is to Blame for Iran. Here’s Why. (Matt Margolis)
• The Clash Of Civilizations Restarts History (J.B. Shurk)
• The Devil (and Gavin Newsom) Went Down in Dixie (Scott Pinsker)
• A Surprising Defense of Trump Came From Bill Clinton (David Manney)
• How Profanity Has Taken Hold of American Politics (Turley)
• Britain’s Islamic Bloc Vote Warning. America, Take Note. (Peter McIlvenna)
• The EU Wants A Nord Stream Sequel, But Not All Members Are Buying It (Marsden)
• Marine Le Pen Says She Will Not Run In 2027 Election If Under House Arrest (ZH)
• Bhattacharya To Lead Top US Health Agencies At Trump’s Request (Attkisson)
• RFK Jr. DESTROYS Media’s Trump Caricature, Celebrates Epic Win on Drug Prices (MN)

 


 

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2027850917337346454?s=20

 


 

 


 

 


 

 


 


Iran is a formidable force. They had 35 years to prepare. They have a million missiles. They have a million soldiers. Question is: who has their finger on the button now Khameini’s gone?

• Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is Dead (Matt Margolis)

Despite some initial debate, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed during the airstrikes Saturday morning, Israeli officials report. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was assassinated in an Israeli strike on Tehran, with his body found under the rubble caused by an Israeli airstrike, senior Israeli officials were informed on Saturday evening, the Jerusalem Post reports. Documentation of Khamenei’s body was reportedly shown to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Khamenei has ruled the Islamic Republic of Iran since 1989, previously serving as president under Ruhollah Khomeini’s regime from 1981 until his ascension to supreme leader. He was 86 years old.


Earlier on Saturday, Iranian officials promised to release a recording from Khamenei soon after Israeli strikes targeted his Tehran compound. The preliminary assessment among Israeli officials was that Khamenei was hurt in the strike. No official confirmation has been received by Israeli, American, or Iranian sources. In the immediate aftermath of the U.S.- Israeli strikes, there was a several hour window where no one could say for sure whether Khamenei was dead, wounded, or merely in hiding. Israeli TV, citing unnamed intelligence sources, quickly assessed that Khamenei had likely been killed when his compound in Tehran was flattened, but officials in Israel, the U.S., and Iran all stopped short of formal confirmation, stressing that his fate was still uncertain.

https://twitter.com/Osint613/status/2027833699316764764

An Israeli official also confirmed to Axios that Khamenei was killed. Why it matters: The 86-year-old Khamenei led Iran for 35 years, making him one of the world’s longest-serving authoritarian rulers. His death is a massive blow to the regime and could accelerate its collapse, which U.S. and Israeli officials have stated as a goal of their operation. The big picture: Khamenei’s killing sets off an immediate succession crisis with no clear answer.Under Iran’s constitution, a council of clerics is meant to select a new supreme leader – but Israel’s strikes also targeted senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and political leaders, leaving the regime’s chain of command in disarray. Israeli officials say they assess the Iranian minister of defense and the commander of the IRGC were also among those killed in targeted strikes on Saturday.

Yes, it’s official: https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2027839695007138207

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Penn.) once again had a sensible reaction:
Read more …

They have to go all the way now.

• Trump Announces Major Airstrikes Against Iranian Regime (Matt Margolis)

President Donald Trump addressed the nation early Saturday morning in an eight-minute video posted to Truth Social, announcing that the United States had begun a joint military strike in Iran. The strikes, which followed a coordinated U.S.–Israeli joint assault on key Iranian military assets, represent the most significant American military action in the Middle East in decades. “A short time ago,” he began, “the United States military began major combat operations in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime, a vicious group of very hard, terrible people.”


He framed the attack as a long-overdue reckoning. “Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world,” Trump said. “For 47 years, the Iranian regime has chanted ‘Death to America’ and waged an unending campaign of bloodshed and mass murder targeting the United States, our troops and the innocent people in many, many countries,” he said, as though ticking off the charges against a sworn enemy. Trump dove into history of Iran’s evil actions, from the 1979 hostage crisis to the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut in 1983, and even the attack on the USS Cole in 2000.

“Many died,” he said bluntly. “Iranian forces killed and maimed hundreds of American service members in Iraq.” He accused the regime of continuing “to launch countless attacks against American forces stationed in the Middle East” and striking “U.S. naval and commercial vessels in international shipping lands.” Then came his cutting declaration: “It’s been mass terror, and we’re not going to put up with it any longer.” “From Lebanon to Yemen and Syria to Iraq, the regime has armed, trained and funded terrorist militias that have soaked the earth with blood and guts,” he said, a vivid and gruesome description even by Trump’s standards. He pointed specifically to the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, reminding the nation that more than 1,000 innocent people were killed, including 46 Americans, and that 12 U.S. citizens were taken hostage.

“Iran is the world’s number one state sponsor of terror,” Trump asserted. “It has always been the policy of the United States, in particular, my administration, that this terrorist regime can never have a nuclear weapon. I’ll say it again — they can never have a nuclear weapon.” He reminded Americans of “Operation Midnight Hammer,” the 2025 strike that “obliterated the regime’s nuclear program at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan,” and painted Iran’s leadership as directionless and fanatical. “We tried. They wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it. Again, they wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it. They didn’t know what was happening. They just wanted to practice evil,” he said.

This new campaign was both an act of defense and destiny. The Iranian regime has long had nuclear ambitions, and nothing, not even that ridiculous nuclear deal with Obama, stopped them. And Trump understands that the regime was never going to stop pursuing nuclear weapons. “They rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can’t take it anymore,” Trump said. Iran, he warned, had been “developing long-range missiles that can now threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed overseas, and could soon reach the American homeland.”

[..] Finally, Trump turned to the people of Iran. “The hour of your freedom is at hand,” he said. “Stay sheltered. Don’t leave your home. It’s very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere. When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take.” He called it “probably your only chance for generations,” and pledged that “America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force.” “This is the moment for action,” Trump concluded. “Do not let it pass. May God bless the brave men and women of America’s Armed Forces. May God bless the United States of America. May God bless you all. Thank you.”

Read more …

BIG. Split up the middle east.

• Saudi Arabia Joins U.S. in Fighting Iran (Salgado)

The Muslim kingdom of Saudi Arabia is so outraged at a retaliatory Iranian strike on a United States base on Saudi soil that it is planning to join the operation against Iran’s regime, according to Fox News. The Iranian regime might have made a fatal mistake in striking multiple Gulf states that host American military bases. Several of those countries, including Qatar, are often inclined to be favorable towards the genocidal Iranian dictatorship, but by hitting targets in those countries, the Iranian jihadis have likely made them into enemies. And if Saudi Arabia really is joining the operation against Iran, that would be a major development.


Fox News national correspondent Jennifer Griffin announced live on Saturday afternoon, “We’re just getting word that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia says they will join the U.S. in the operation against the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Operation Epic Fury has a new partner. The Iranian regime was so foolish that it managed to get Saudi Arabia at least temporarily on the same side as Israel, which really is shocking.Griffin continued, “They [Saudi Arabia] said that this comes in the wake of Iran attacking the U.S. base in Saudi Arabia. I just spoke to a senior U.S. official who said the Iranians made a big mistake by firing on Arab coalition partners. Now they are likely to respond. So by Iran firing missiles at UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, they are now likely to fire back at Iranian targets.”

In short, Griffin stated, “So those coalition partners are now going to enter this operation that started off as a U.S.-Israeli operation. That is very, very significant, and we haven’t seen that happen in the past.” No kidding. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia already made an announcement that it “condemns and denounces in strongest terms the blatant Iranian aggression and the flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the United Arab Emirates, the Kingdom of Bahrain, the State of Qatar, the State of Kuwait, and Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The Kingdom affirms its full solidarity with and unwavering support for the brotherly countries, and its readiness to place all its capabilities at their disposal.”

The official statement added, “Saudi Arabia calls on the international community to condemn these blatant attacks and to take all firm measures necessary to confront Iranian violations.” By that point, Iran had launched a retaliatory strike against a U.S. base in Saudi Arabia. Even the terror-sponsoring Qatari regime that has interceded for Khamenei’s dictatorship in the past posted, “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs affirms that the State of Qatar reserves its full right to respond to this attack in accordance with the provisions of international law and in a manner proportionate to the nature of the aggression, in defense of its sovereignty and in protection of its security and national interests.”

But since Qatar then followed that up by calling for an immediate cessation in hostilities, it is unlikely that the pro-terror state will take any military action to help the United States in this case. Qatar is likely ticked off that its pals over in Iran might dare to hit it.

Read more …

“We have “thou shalt not kill.” They have “thou shalt kill every infidel you find.”

• Trump Isn’t Starting a War, He’s Ending One (A.J. Christopher)

As of this writing, the United States and Israel have begun what I can only assume to be the first round of military strikes on Iran. I also assume that the eventual goal is regime change, effected by the United States, but driven by the Iranian people. And I’m not alone. Over the past few days, the so-called “think” tanks are falling all over themselves to be the first to prophesy a quagmire, a “trap,” a “forever war,” and Iraq 3.0.


The dregs at Foreign Policy took a break from clamoring for a post-American world order to demand we not bomb Iran precisely to more quickly usher in said order. At Powerline blog, John Hinderaker gleefully straddles the fence as only he can by declaring his hope that Trump bombs the mullahs with the goal of regime change… and in the same sentence, expresses doubt that this will be accomplished. And if you’re willing to waste the brain cells, you can guess what ol’ Tucker’s position on it is.

But the absolute worst take must be from John Daniel Davison over at The Federalist. John’s main point is that if we allegedly “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear abilities with Operation Midnight Hammer, than why do we need to now bomb Iran again to prevent them from acquiring nuclear capabilities?bUm, well, because Iran is trying to rebuild them. As we knew they would. And if we keep bombing only their nuclear facilities, they will simply keep rebuilding them until the next Democrat gets elected president and we stop sending bombs and start sending pallets of cash again. So there’s that. John writes, “At a certain point, it begins to look like the Trump administration is fishing for a reason to strike Iran. Sorry, but that’s not good enough.” Fishing for a reason? I’ll give you a few reasons, John. You tell me if they’re “good enough.”

  • On November 4, 1979, the Iranian government took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
  • The Iranian government helped create, fund, and arm Hezbollah and Hamas.
  • On April 18, 1983, Hezbollah bombed the American embassy in Beirut, killing 63 people.
  • On October 23, 1983, Iranian-backed terrorists bombed the American and French barracks in Beirut, killing 307 people.
  • Over the next decade, Iranian-backed terrorists hijacked several planes, including TWA flight 847, which resulted in the killing of an American sailor.
  • On July 22, 1985, Hezbollah bombed a synagogue, a Jewish nursing home, and a kindergarten in Copenhagen.
  • On March 17, 1992, Hezbollah bombed the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, killing 29 people.
  • On July 18, 1994, Hezbollah bombed a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing 85 people.
  • On June 25, 1996, Iranian-backed terrorists bombed Khobar Towers, killing 19 American servicemen.
  • Iran provided training and expertise to al-Qaeda to commit the 1998 embassy bombings
  • Iran provided training and expertise to al-Qaeda to commit the 2000 USS Cole bombing.
  • During the Iraq War, Iran supported the Shia insurgency against coalition forces.
  • During the Afghan War, Iran supported the Taliban insurgency against coalition forces.
  • Iran supported Syria’s Assad government in crushing its own revolution.
  • On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a genocidal war against Israel.
  • Iran trains and supports the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
  • Iran maintains close ties with the world’s most totalitarian governments, to include Russia, China, North Korea and, until recently, Venezuela.
  • Iran’s government is protected by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), which is basically an Islamic version of Hitler’s SS.
  • For the last 47 years, Iran has been the foremost sponsor of terror in the world.


If these reasons aren’t “good enough” for John Daniel Davison, and we need to go “fishing” for more reasons, here’s another one: The Iranian government is founded on an offshoot of Islam called Twelver Shiism. It is an apocalyptic sect which holds that the twelfth imam Muhammad al-Mahdi (born 870 AD) never actually died, and has been in hiding this entire time. The Twelvers believe it is their divine duty to usher in the Apocalypse in order to trigger his return. Hence the unrelenting half-century war of terror against the West. We have “thou shalt not kill.” They have “thou shalt kill every infidel you find. That’s the mindset we’re up against. Not reason. Not logic. Not deals or agreements or easing of sanctions. Not a return to the “stable” order of the Cold War that so many “conservatives” seem to long for. The Ayatollahs, their IRGC henchmen, and their Hamas and Hezbollah proxies want all of us dead. All of us.

They would behead John’s kids in front of him and laugh as they did it. Still “not good enough,” John? Here’s one more reason: In the last 47 years, the geopolitical chessboard has never been so favorable to us and so unfavorable to Iran. In the last few years, Iran has lost both Hamas and Hezbollah as serious forces. Iran has lost its base in Syria. Iran has lost its base in Venezuela. Russia and China have quietly dumped Iran. The Houthis have been taught a few lessons. Iran has recently been militarily weakened in its humiliating defeat in the Twelve-Day War with Israel, as well as with Operation Midnight Hammer. And millions of the Iranian government’s own citizens openly despise the regime, and will be more than happy to see it relegated to the dustbin of history.

Read more …

Russia has to protest of course. But they’re happy too. Who wants to deal with a medieval regime?

• Russia Condemns US Attack On Iran, Warns Of ‘Radiological Catastrophe’ (ZH)

As fully predictable, Moscow has blasted the major overnight and early morning US-Israeli strikes on Iran, calling the attack “a preplanned and unprovoked act of armed aggression against a sovereign and independent U.N. member state” and has demanded an immediate halt to the military campaign and a return to diplomacy. The Foreign Ministry in a statement on Telegram accused Washington and Tel Aviv of “hiding behind” concerns about Iran’s nuclear program while actually pursuing regime change, as also cited in The Associated Press. After all, even on Friday Iran was strongly signaling readiness to take enrichment down to zero, as our own headline and others indicated: Iran Reportedly Agrees To Give Up Nuclear Material In Breakthrough: ‘Peace Deal Within Reach’.


Moscow is further warning of Iraq-style catastrophe and a regional domino effect which could unleash terrorism and chaos for years to come. The attacks could trigger “humanitarian, economic and possibly radiological catastrophe” in the region, and charged the US and Israel of “plunging the Middle East into an abyss of uncontrolled escalation.” However, the Kremlin is unlikely to come to Iran’s rescue in any direct way, given it is carefully trying to balance and restore relations with Washington in the context of the Ukraine war.

As for that other raging conflict in Eastern Europe, now four years in, Ukraine has come out in support of the US attacks on Iran. This is understandable, given the Iranians have long supplied Moscow with suicide drones which have wreaked havoc on Ukrainian cities. China too has condemned the attack on Iran alongside Moscow, but using words much more restrained that Russia’s. “China calls for an immediate stop of the military actions, no further escalation of the tense situation, resumption of dialogue and negotiation, and efforts to uphold peace and stability in the Middle East,” its foreign ministry ministry said on X.

Most or all of the BRICS countries are expected to come out against the US-Israeli aggression. Europe is expected to by and large stay on the sidelines, fearing that any broader Mideast war would have spillover effects, such as another potential refugee crisis. The UK, Germany and France have said nothing specifically on the ‘legality’ of the unprovoked US attack on Tehran, but have instead condemned the Iranian response.They released a joint statement telling Iran to stop its attacks on US-Israeli assets and bases in the region. “We condemn Iranian attacks on countries in the region in the strongest terms,” French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said.

Read more …

JCPOA

• Barack Obama Is to Blame for Iran. Here’s Why. (Matt Margolis)

Americans woke up Saturday to something big. The United States and Israel launched a massive joint offensive against Iran’s regime, known as Operation Epic Fury. According to reports, targets included Iran’s supreme leader and president. Major combat operations are now underway, and the implications are global. Predictably, Democrats in Washington and even some Republicans are questioning the strikes. But let’s be honest — this moment was long overdue. Iran’s reign of terror didn’t start yesterday. In fact, this confrontation is the direct result of the Obama administration’s disastrous decision a decade ago to appease, enrich, and embolden Tehran.


Barack Obama and his administration sold the world a fantasy with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly referred to as the Iran nuclear deal. This treaty was so bad that Obama didn’t even attempt to get the Senate to ratify it. He just pretended it wasn’t a treaty and signed it unilaterally, claiming it as a foreign policy victory for himself. In fact, Obama was so desperate to make the deal a defining foreign policy achievement of his presidency that the lies about the deal from the left have never stopped. He told us it was a historic diplomatic breakthrough that would block Iran’s path to nuclear weapons. In reality, it handed the mullahs a lifeline and a fortune. Sanctions were lifted. Tehran gained access to roughly $150 billion in frozen assets, and there was that infamous $1.7 billion in cash sent to the regime, much of it delivered on pallets in the middle of the night. Every step of the way, Obama was emboldening Iran, not containing it.

It didn’t take long for Iran to show what a joke the deal really was. Just three months after signing the deal, Tehran test-fired ballistic missiles in open violation of U.N. resolutions. German intelligence later reported that Iran was still seeking technology for a military nuclear program. The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed repeated violations of material limits — all while Obama kept reassuring us that the agreement was “working.” Even he eventually admitted Iran was violating the “spirit” of the deal, and that was as close as he’d ever get to admitting that his deal was a sham. nAnd while Obama’s State Department was congratulating itself, Iranian leaders were laughing. They bragged that the JCPOA favored Iran. Hassan Rouhani, then Iran’s president, boasted that the regime had used diplomacy to buy time and advance its nuclear program. The Obama administration believed it was outsmarting Tehran, but in reality, it had been duped.

It’s not as if the liberal media didn’t notice this either. The New York Times even reported in 2015 that Iran had breached its enrichment limits before the deal was finalized. Inspectors found that while the Obama White House claimed Iran’s program was “frozen,” the country’s nuclear stockpile actually increased by 20%. Iran was supposed to convert that material for peaceful use. Instead, they let it grow — and Washington looked the other way. By the time President Donald Trump took office, the JCPOA wasn’t the safeguard Democrats claimed it was; it was just a smokescreen. Obama’s grand achievement hadn’t restrained Iran’s nuclear ambitions one bit. If anything, it emboldened them to pursue nuclear weapons as never before. The regime’s missile program accelerated, its proxies expanded across the region, and its leaders grew richer, bolder, and more violent.

Nevertheless, when Trump took office in 2017, he didn’t immediately pull the plug. He gave the deal every chance to work. But by 2018, the evidence was clear: continued violations, broken promises, and a regime that had learned there were no consequences. So, in May of that year, Trump ended the charade and withdrew from the deal once and for all. Of course, Joe Biden wanted to revive the deal when he took office. While he never succeeded, the message to Iran was clear: the Democratic Party would always be there for the regime. If you want to know why negotiations with Iran always failed, the answer is obvious: they had to do was wait out Trump, and hope Democrats would be in power again.

Iran has been daring the world to stop it for years, and now, it is finally getting what it deserves.

Read more …

“Burma, India, Bangladesh, Thailand, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos fight against each other and themselves..”

• The Clash Of Civilizations Restarts History (J.B. Shurk)

Western globalists won’t last long. Thirty-five years ago, American political scientist Francis Fukuyama made a name for himself by advancing the proposition that the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union promised the ascendency and universalization of so-called Western liberal democracy. As a Marxist-Hegelian who saw the progression of history as an evolutionary process with a natural and predetermined conclusion, Fukuyama envisioned Western-styled liberalism as both “the endpoint of mankind’s ideological evolution” and “the final form of human government.” Expecting all human struggles to barrel toward a state of imminent equilibrium and future peace, Fukuyama stated out loud what many other late-twentieth century thinkers also believed: Humanity had reached the end of history.


After the 9/11 Islamic terror attacks in the United States, two decades of the “Global War on Terrorism,” communist China’s expansive “Belt and Road Initiative,” immigration-fueled social strife, the collapse of public trust in government institutions, the prevalence of pre-civil war conditions across Europe, the rise of Indian economic power,, the emergence of Donald Trump’s nationalism as a counterbalance to the World Economic Forum’s vaunted globalism, the return of the Russian Federation as a major source of European angst, the growth of “multiculturalism” and its attendant fracturing of national unity, the “great powers” competition for hydrocarbon energies and other natural resources, the new geopolitical race to project strength in the Arctic, and the ever-present discussion of an impending World War III — just to name a few of the numerous global conflicts of the first quarter of the present century — Fukuyama’s “end of history” argument has probably reached the end of its usefulness.

Before the curse of humanity’s short memory stores Fukuyama’s “end of history” thesis in the cupboard until it can be retrieved, dusted off, and recycled for practical use next century (just as Fukuyama had done with the historical conceptions of Hegel and Marx), it is worth noting how much of the academic world bought into this argument. I remember listening to two young political science professors discussing Fukuyama’s work after the 9/11 terror attacks, and even then — in the midst of such a horrific rebuke to the proposition that a globalized form of Western liberalism was preordained — both academics were staunch believers in the “end of history” and disagreed only about whether Professor Fukuyama was worthy of so much praise for having merely stated what was glaringly obvious.

I was around another man at the time named Samuel P. Huntington, and he had written an essay and book that took Fukuyama’s thesis to task. In The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Professor Huntington argued that unbridgeable cultural conflicts would continue to remake the world. Although critics called him “racist,” “Islamophobic,” “ignorant,” and even “Hitlerian” for dismissing the unifying effects of “diversity” and “multiculturalism,” Huntington’s predictions for a volatile twenty-first century were much more accurate than anything coming from the “end of history” camp. Still, even after death, the man who dispassionately forecasted a civilizational clash and an emerging period of global uncertainty is still maligned as “prejudicial,” “white supremacist,” “bigoted,” and “imperialist.”

Is there any conflict raging in the world today that can’t be described in terms of competing cultural values? Israel and its Islamic neighbors have been in a perennial state of war for eighty years. Indian Hindus and Pakistani Muslims remain at each other’s throats. Christianity and Islam have added fuel to fiery tribal conflicts that continue to rage across the continent of Africa. Armenia’s Christians and Azerbaijan’s Muslims struggle to maintain peace. The Balkans remain a potpourri of combative cultures and ethnic groups whose simmering passions can quickly boil over. Burma, India, Bangladesh, Thailand, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos fight against each other and themselves as civilizational loyalties turn ancient resentments into recurring bouts of violence. The War in Ukraine centers around the contested Donbas region whose people more closely align with the language, religion, and culture of Russia than with the historic identity that unites the people living in the western two-thirds of Ukraine. Everywhere in the world, battle lines are drawn around civilizational identity. Religious conflict, historic grievance, and cultural incompatibility drive violence around the planet.

Read more …

“Black people are roughly 20% of the Democratic Party. In the critical primary state of South Carolina, nearly 60% of the voters are black.” […] Gavin Newsom is slick, but he’s no Slick Willy.”

• The Devil (and Gavin Newsom) Went Down in Dixie (Scott Pinsker)

I love Charlie Daniels, but this has always bothered me: From the lyrics to his classic “Uneasy Rider”:


I I just ordered up a beer and sat down at the bar
When some guy walked in an’ said, “Who owns this car?
With the peace sign, the mag wheels, and four on the floor”


Well he looked at me and I damn near died
And I decided that I’d jus wait outside
So I laid a dollar on the bar and headed for the door

Jes’ when I thought I’d get outta there with my skin
These five big dudes come strollin’ in
With this one old drunk chick and some fella with green teeth

Okay, so first one guy walks in. Then five more guys come in — plus a drunk woman and the green-toothed gentlemen. That’s eight guys! Then the lyrics continue:
An’ I was almost to the door when the biggest one
Said “You tip your hat to this lady, son”
An’ when I did, all that hair fell out from underneath

Now the last thing I wanted was to get into a fight
In Jackson Mississippi on a Saturday night
‘Specially when there was three of them and only one of me

Wait — how did it go from eight to three?! Like I said, I love Charlie Daniels, but my boy’s not the greatest at math. Oh well. Still a heck of a storyteller. And his biggest hit was “The Devil Went Down to Georgia.” (Of course, since the Devil went DOWN to Georgia, the implication is, Hell must be north of Georgia. I’m thinking Richmond, Va.) Either way, the devil wasn’t the only one defeated in Dixie: Gavin Newsom, the exquisitely coiffed governor of California, just rolled snake eyes, too. Even his hometown news site admitted it. From SFGATE:”Newsom Is Touring Southern States. It’s Exposing Some Hurdles in His Path to 2028″.

Newsom began the first stretch of the book tour for his memoir “Young Man in a Hurry” this weekend in the South, with stops in Alabama, Tennessee and South Carolina. His team said starting in that region was “quite intentional” — but he’s already ruffled some feathers. While he is mostly sharing heartening anecdotes from the book, including how he handled being a student raised by a single mother and struggling with undiagnosed dyslexia, he is also clearly using his hourlong stage appearances to appeal to potential swing voters. No, it’s NOT about appealing to swing voters — at least, not yet. Newsom only cares about Democratic voters because, without them, swing voters are meaningless. He’s got to win his party’s nomination first.

That’s why his book tour was built around a Bizarro version of the Southern Strategy: Newsom needs black support. It’s his biggest vulnerability. We discussed this earlier in the week:”Black people are roughly 20% of the Democratic Party. In the critical primary state of South Carolina, nearly 60% of the voters are black.” […] Gavin Newsom is slick, but he’s no Slick Willy. There’s a reason why Toni Morrison dubbed the Man from Hope our “first black president.” Whereas Bill Clinton had an aw-shucks, good-natured, instantly relatable Southern charm, Gavin Newsom is as white as mayonnaise. Newsom isn’t “street” — unless that street is Wall Street. He’s the Patriarchy personified. Without black support, Gavin Newsom risks being the next Bernie Sanders. In CNN’s 2020 postmortem on Sanders’ loss to Joe Biden, the #1 reason cited was: Lack of Black Support.

Sanders ran into a wall in 2016 among black voters. Hillary Clinton catapulted herself to victory by winning blowouts throughout the South, where black voters make up a huge chunk of primary voters. Sanders needed to improve upon his performance. Instead, Sanders did as bad in 2020 among this pivotal group. Among African Americans who voted for Biden or Sanders, Sanders won just 23% in the median state with an entrance or exit poll. That was the same percentage he garnered in 2016. Black voters propelled Biden to his big win in South Carolina, which started him on his journey to defeating Sanders. This is why Gavin Newsom set up shop in Dixieland: He’s learned from Sanders’ campaign mistakes. Striking gold in New Hampshire or Iowa is meaningless if your cupboard is bare in the South. Trouble is, he tried to bond with black Democrats by playing up his stupidity. Here’s the video:

Read more …

“For Clinton to say, under oath, that Trump showed no indication of criminal involvement doesn’t neatly fit into partisan talking points. ”

• A Surprising Defense of Trump Came From Bill Clinton (David Manney)

Every once in a while, politics delivers a moment nobody sees coming. Former President Bill Clinton, under oath, reported that President Donald Trump never gave him any indication he was involved in Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal conduct. That sworn statement now adds a new wrinkle to one of the most combustible and easily proven false stories of the last decade. Bill Clinton has been facing questions about his own past ties to Epstein. Flight logs show Clinton traveled on Epstein’s private jet several times in the early 2000s, but he’s maintained he cut off contact after learning more about Epstein’s behavior. In this recent sworn exchange, Clinton reportedly stated that during his interactions with Trump, he never saw or heard anything suggesting Trump engaged in Epstein’s crimes.


Trump has repeatedly acknowledged knowing Epstein socially in the 1990s, appearing in photographs from that period. He’s also publicly stated that he broke off contact with Epstein years before Epstein’s 2008 guilty plea. In 2019, Trump told reporters that he hadn’t spoken to Epstein in about 15 years and described himself as “not a fan.” “Trump barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after Epstein behaved inappropriately toward a club member’s teenage daughter, according to journalists from the Miami Herald and Wall Street Journal. The reporters included some information about Trump’s links to Epstein in their 2020 book, “The Grifter’s Club: Trump, Mar-a-Lago, and the Selling of the Presidency.”

A Mar-a-Lago member told the journalists that Trump had “kicked Epstein out after Epstein harassed the daughter of a member,” Sarah Blaskey of the Miami Herald reported. “The way this person described it, such an act could irreparably harm the Trump brand, leaving Donald no choice but to remove Epstein.” The incident happened around October 2007, when Mar-a-Lago’s registry listed Epstein’s account as “closed,” the Miami Herald reported. Epstein was arrested in July 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges involving underage girls. He died in a Manhattan detention facility while awaiting trial. His longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, was convicted in 2021 on federal sex trafficking charges and later sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Clinton’s reported testimony stands out for one simple reason: it cuts against the common political storyline. Clinton and Trump have been rivals since Trump rode the escalator, trading barbs publicly and representing opposite poles in American politics. For Clinton to say, under oath, that Trump showed no indication of criminal involvement doesn’t neatly fit into partisan talking points. Statements under oath carry legal weight; false testimony risks perjury. That context matters; when a former president speaks under penalty of law, the words deserve attention. The broader Epstein scandal has touched powerful names across finance, politics, and entertainment, while Congressional interest remains high. Lawmakers continue seeking documents and testimony tied to Epstein’s network as calls for full disclosure have come from both sides of the aisle.

Clinton’s sworn statement doesn’t erase Trump’s past social proximity to Epstein, but it adds a factual element that complicates sweeping accusations. When critics assert that association equals guilt, sworn testimony suggesting otherwise forces a pause. While it’s fair to call the moment unexpected, it’s also fair to ask whether legacy political commentators who’ve spent years speculating will give equal attention to testimony challenging their narrative. Ignoring inconvenient details only subtracts from their sinking credibility. The Epstein case remains one of the most disturbing and long-reaching criminal sagas in modern history. Justice for victims remains central. Factual clarity about who did what remains essential, and when sworn testimony contradicts assumptions, it can’t be brushed aside.

Read more …

“I don’t swear in public very well, but we have to f–k Trump. Please don’t tell my children that I just did that.”

• How Profanity Has Taken Hold of American Politics (Turley)

“Respectfully, f–k off.” Those words by California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s spokesperson, Izzy Gardon, summed up the current race to the bottom of American politics. Democrats appear in a competition of the profane where voters are now subject to a virtual carpet-bombing of f-bombs and other indecent language. Gardon’s response was to a standard media inquiry after Newsom’s controversial statement to a black interviewer. In an Atlanta event, Newsom declared: “I’m like you … I’m no better than you. I’m a 960 SAT guy … literally a 960 SAT guy. You’ve never seen me read a speech because I cannot read a speech.” It was widely denounced as racist, but Newsom insisted that he was only talking about his struggle with dyslexia.


The spin quickly fell apart after his statement, “I’m like you … I’m no better than you,” which suggested he thought the audience in Atlanta had low scores. Reporters followed up to ask for proof about his disability, including his claim that “I cannot read.” The response was an f-bomb from Gardon. Newsom, too, unleashed a profane attack on Sean Hannity of Fox News — who gave the California governor a chance to respond to his critics. When Hannity criticized Newsom’s comments in Atlanta, the governor posted several four-letter words on X, concluding with: “Spare me your fake f—ing outrage.” There was a time when political leaders maintained basic standards of civility and avoided profanity in public. Presidents like Lyndon Johnson could be quite salty in private, but drew a line in public.

Rporters followed up to ask for proof about his disability, including his claim that “I cannot read.” The response was an f-bomb from Gardon. Notably, one of Richard Nixon’s objections to his tapes being made public was the inclusion of foul language used in the Oval Office. He noted in his book In the Arena that “since neither I nor most other presidents had ever used profanity in public, millions were shocked.” It was not long ago that Trump’s then-new White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci shocked many with a profane diatribe. He defended it as “an Italian thing.” At the time, I wrote that, as someone who was raised in an Italian family, we clearly had a different upbringing. I noted that if I used that language in public, my Sicilian grandmother would have ended the diatribe with a backhand.

Profanity sometimes added to the mystique of military leaders who sought to convey that they were unconcerned with social norms as warriors. Gen. George Patton was known to drop some doozies. In one scene in the famous eponymous movie, Patton is asked about the Bible next to his bed and whether he really prayed. Patton responds, “I sure do … Every godd–n day…” Politics was different. The public once looked to political leaders as role models who exemplified social norms. It now appears that profanity is viewed as an essential element of political speech on the left.m mPolitics was different. The public once looked to political leaders as role models who exemplified social norms. Katie Porter this week thrilled a crowd by waving around a sign reading “F–k Trump.” Porter was previously criticized for using such language to abuse staffers to “get out of my f–cking shot” in an interview.

At the State of the Union, Rep. Rashida Tlaib wore a button on the House floor reading “F–k Ice.” Such behavior is not just limited to Democrats. President Trump has used profanity on occasion. However, the Democrats appear to have made profanity a signature element in their campaigns.Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas, seems a perpetual profanity machine, regularly telling figures like Elon Musk to “f–k off” and dropping the f-bomb at a higher rate than prepositions. Some are virtually giggly over swearing in public. Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) declared, “I don’t swear in public very well, but we have to f–k Trump. Please don’t tell my children that I just did that.” The crowd roared with approval that Dexter was feigning being naughty with dirty words.

Read more …

Muslims born in Britain. Now poised to take over. How will the Christians defend themelves? They don’t even know they’re under threat.

• Britain’s Islamic Bloc Vote Warning. America, Take Note. (Peter McIlvenna)

Britain’s Gorton and Denton by-election on Feb. 26 was more than just a local upset. It gave a glimpse into demographic changes that could shape U.S. politics. The Green Party’s Hannah Spencer won with 41% and 14,980 votes, turning this Labour stronghold into the Greens’ first northern seat. Reform UK came second with 29% of the vote, and Labour finished third with 25%. Turnout was low at 48%. The main story: Muslim bloc power flipped a seat, and Reform UK leader Nigel Farage’s strategy did not work. The seat’s divided nature tells the story. Manchester wards like Burnage, Gorton & Abbey Hey, Levenshulme, and Longsight are changing fast: 40% Muslim, 62% U.K.-born, and 30% are graduates or students.


In Longsight, 60% are Muslim and 52% U.K.-born, making it a diverse, urban area where Gaza is a common topic. The Greens succeeded by using multilingual flyers, focusing on Palestine, and promoting anti-Islamophobia messages. Instead of attacking others, they built coalitions. That bloc, along with tactical left-wing voters, overshadowed everything else.Tameside wards, including Denton North East, South, and West, feel very different: less than 3% Muslim, 86% U.K.-born, and over 80% white British. These are working-class areas with few graduates and strong local roots. Reform UK led here, getting over 40% in some places by appealing to “keep Britain British” sentiment. Still, Manchester’s voters decided the outcome. This is a story of two different visions, almost like a modern Dickens novel.

Manchester is moving away from traditional English and British identity, with lower native birth rates, more multiculturalism, less connection to Christianity and old values, and a shift toward new cultural expressions. Tameside, on the other hand, is more cautious about fast cultural change, holding on to traditions and trying to keep established cultural identities. It is similar to the old divide between East and West Germany. The East kept its German identity, had little migration, and held onto traditions. The West became more multicultural, saw fewer native births, and its religious makeup changed. Gorton-Denton is a smaller version of this: Manchester shows the changing face of old England, while Tameside tries to stay recognizably British. The Greens won by understanding that concentrated bloc votes and progressive alliances now matter more than nostalgia.

Farage’s role was chaotic. Before the election, he avoided criticizing Muslims, maybe to appeal to more voters. But after losing, Farage accused others of “sectarian voting,” “cheating,” and “dangerous Muslim sectarianism.” He complained about “family voting,” with observers noting it in twelve percent of sampled cases, where husbands and wives crowded voting booths—the highest rate ever recorded. Democracy Volunteers flagged 68% of polling stations. No mosques were used as polling places; the council managed the process. Still, Farage’s comments sparked controversy. Critics say he changes his stance: soft on Islam to grow Reform, but harsh when things go wrong. Either way, he seems unsettled, caught between his supporters and the need to win votes.

Now, America faces similar questions in its primaries. The Muslim population is under 2% nationally, but is expected to grow due to higher birth rates and migration. CAIR reported 38 Muslim winners across the country last year. Zohran Mamdani won New York’s mayoral race with strong support for his socialist and pro-Palestine views. Ninety-seven percent of Muslim voters supported him, along with major donors, and Gaza became a key issue. Does this sound familiar? If the Gorton-Denton approach shows up in other places, like Dearborn, Queens, or Minneapolis, organized turnout could affect close elections.

Strong support from certain communities may help some candidates, while others might choose more moderate strategies. Family-based turnout, like what was seen in the U.K., could change usual voting patterns. Demographic changes are likely to continue, with some areas keeping traditional majorities and others forming new coalitions. The message is clear: Pay attention to demographic trends, or you might be surprised by changes in election results. Primaries are still important—voters may choose to stick with the status quo or join coalitions that want change. The lesson from Britain is that traditions alone may not be enough when organized participation increases.

Read more …

“Ukraine’s oil pipeline blackmail has Hungary demanding that support for Kiev be cut off..”

• The EU Wants A Nord Stream Sequel, But Not All Members Are Buying It (Marsden)

The Druzhba, or ‘Friendship’, oil pipeline is really living up to its name. All the ‘friends’ are fighting with each other. And now Hungary, worried about the EU’s slack attitude about what happens to its oil source, is saying that it’s time to deploy the army to protect it. Critics of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban argue that he only wants troops deployed inside the country because he’s down in the polls ahead of the April national election and he’s going to try some kind of autocratic jiu-jitsu to cancel them. Which totally ignores the fact that Ukrainian secret services are actively attacking the pipeline’s infrastructure – and there is something really fishy about the EU’s permissiveness around it.


Everyone from the Kiev Independent to French state media, France 24, has been attributing to the SBU, Kiev’s secret services, drone strikes on February 23, targeting a Russian oil pumping station serving Druzhba – citing actual SBU sources. And the EU’s position has been, “Look, it’s up to Ukraine if they want to fix it.” It’s not like they owe the EU anything, right? Just billions of euros, and counting. Can’t even get a repair job these days for that price, apparently. So Hungary’s been saying, “Hey, are you jokers going to actually do something about this? Because we’re putting our foot down on your whole ‘cash for Ukraine for European defense contractors’ charade and unilaterally canceling the next episode of your Russian sanctions unity show with a veto, until you reel in your spoiled brat foster kid.”

The EU says it would welcome the reactivation of landlocked Slovakia and Hungary’s fuel source running across Ukraine and delivering Russian oil. Funny that’s the case only now that it’s been bombed and the tap has been turned off – after years of official EU policy to ditch the Russian fuel that runs through it. But Brussels also said that it’s ultimately up to Little Zelya, Vladimir Zelensky, as to what he wants to do. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has been sounding like a waitress at Denny’s who’s fed up waiting for Little Zelya to decide what he wants while he kicks his little feet against the high chair. Queen Mommy, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, insists that he should be able to freely choose between blackmailing Hungary over oil or resuming the flow – with all the nonchalance of deciding between pancakes or a kid’s combo, even though it’s the Europeans whose interests she’s supposed to be defending and who are paying the tab.

“This risks our sovereignty, and we are not willing to tolerate this in silence,” Szijjarto said. “It is very frustrating that here in Brussels they usually stand on the side of a non-EU member state against EU member states. The European Commission behaves like a Ukraine Commission, and this is unbelievable.”

Read more …

Here’s democracy for you. Wait, didn’t that start in France?

“If I cannot be a candidate, Bardella will determine at what level he needs my presence, my advice and my experience,” Le Pen has stated about her protegé ..”

• Marine Le Pen Says She Will Not Run In 2027 Election If Under House Arrest (ZH)

In March 2025, Le Pen was convicted on charges dating back years ago, in a move that was widely contested and seen as a highly political attempt to keep her from running in next year’s presidential election. Now, she says she has no intention of running if her ban from running is lifted, if it means she must wear an electronic tag, i.e., ankle monitor. She is also ready to place full trust in Jordan Bardella, current leader of the National Rally (RN) Le Pen’s comments came during an interview with French television station BFMTV, her first since French prosecutors asked a court to uphold her five-year ban. A ruling on her case is expected on July 7.


“You cannot campaign under these conditions. Can you campaign without going out in the evenings to meet your constituents at rallies?” she asked, referring to the idea of having to campaign while wearing a monitor and under house arrest. Prosecutors had asked for Le Pen to be sentenced to four years in prison (three of which were suspended) and a fine of €100,000.In France, shorter prison sentences are often commuted, meaning that if the court follows the prosecutor’s request, Le Pen could spend anywhere from a few months to a year under house arrest, wearing an anklet. However, Le Pen has said she would not campaign under such circumstances. Le Pen says she will be present in court on July 7 to hear the Court of Appeal’s decision.

“Of course I will go, as I went every day to the trial in the first instance and on appeal because I respect justice,” she told BFMTV. Regarding the 2027 election, Le Pen said regarding RN leader Jordan Bardella: “The best-case scenario is that I am elected president of the Republic and he is my prime minister.” However, if she cannot run, then “Jordan will find himself a prime minister,” and she will take whatever “role he wants me to have.” Emphasizing that Bardella will be free to make his own choices, Le Pen told listeners, “If I cannot be a candidate, he will determine at what level he needs my presence, my advice and my experience.”

Read more …

A good thing about Covid: we found some really good people in the US. No, it ain’t Fauci.

“You don’t have to worry about looking over your shoulder, that you aren’t ideologically pure enough. You just focus on science that can translate over to solving the longevity problems that the United States has, the chronic disease problems, the real problems.”

• Bhattacharya To Lead Top US Health Agencies At Trump’s Request (Attkisson)

The head of the National Institutes of Health is now at the helm of a sub-agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya says President Trump personally asked him to take the CDC job temporarily until a permanent director can be named. “It’s hard to say ‘no’ to the president. What it means is that I will still be the director of the NIH. That’s my main day job,” Bhattacharya told “Full Measure” in a recent interview at NIH headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland. “But over the next couple of months, I’m gonna go work with folks at the CDC to help get the agency in a place where the new director, whoever ends up being Senate confirmed, we’ll have an organization that’s running well so that they can get their priorities in place.”


Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Bhattacharya was a medical doctor and professor at Stanford University, “happily publishing in journals.” But during Covid, he became a very vocal opponent – for scientific reasons – for government-mandated lockdowns to try to stop the spread of the virus. “I did a bunch of research that suggested that the lockdowns were not helping people, in fact, were causing tremendous harm to the poor children in the working class, all the school closures and all that,” he says. Bhattacharya helped create and get thousands of signatures on the Great Barrington Declaration to speak out against the lockdowns on public health grounds. For that, he became a target of the head of NIH at the time, Dr. Frances Collins, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, who headed the NIH Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

It was later revealed that the two men orchestrated a “devastating take-down” of Dr. Bhattacharya and his colleagues to silence and discredit them. Today, it’s a stunning reversal of fortunes for Dr. Bhattacharya that he was chosen to head up the very agency whose leaders had conspired against him. Bhattacharya says one of his main goals is to remove politics and ideology from science to “leave a lot more space for actual science.”“The cultural shift is, is enormous,” he says. “The purpose and the mission of the NIH is to do research that improves the health and longevity of the American people,” Bhattacharya said. “First of all, everyone should be behind that mission. And then second, once you say that’s the mission, that we’re only gonna be focused on the mission, it frees you up from all of the baggage.

“You don’t have to worry about looking over your shoulder, that you aren’t ideologically pure enough. You just focus on science that can translate over to solving the longevity problems that the United States has, the chronic disease problems, the real problems.” Establishment medicine figures who were frequently proved wrong about approaches to Covid and matters of Covid vaccine safety and effectiveness criticize most every decision and move Bhattacharya now makes. He says in response to the criticism: “If the NIH’s mission is to do support research that translates into better health and longer life for Americans, well, the NIH over the last 15 years has failed in its mission.

“And so the idea that it’s anti-science or politicizing the agency to remove political agendas from the agency, it’s almost Orwellian. And so when I see these stories, my general understanding of them is that it’s people that benefited from the old system where the focus was in part on ideology.” Bhattacharya says part of the steps to remove politics from the NIH is to begin a new plan to genuinely study vaccine injuries and treatments. “We’re working on that,” he told “Full Measure.” “One of the things that Tony Fauci’s old NIAID is gonna be doing is studying vaccine injury.”

Read more …

Bobby’s become a big Trump fan.

• RFK Jr. DESTROYS Media’s Trump Caricature, Celebrates Epic Win on Drug Prices (MN)

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. delivered a powerful takedown of the fake news narrative surrounding President Trump, exposing the blatant lies and highlighting the administration’s groundbreaking success in driving down prescription drug costs—a move that puts American families first and crushes Big Pharma’s grip. Kennedy’s remarks come amid the Trump administration’s aggressive push to overhaul healthcare, including the implementation of the Most Favored Nation policy, which ensures Americans no longer foot the bill for the world’s highest drug prices. Kennedy noted that the U.S. had been paying two to four times as much for prescription drugs as other nations, with the administration securing agreements from “60 or 70” drug companies to end this disparity.


This victory builds directly on Trump’s longstanding commitment to dismantle Obamacare’s inefficiencies and redirect funds to the people, as we detailed in our earlier coverage of his plan to scrap the “STUPID” system and empower Americans. Kennedy didn’t hold back on the media’s relentless smear campaign against Trump. “The caricature you see in the press: ‘Narcissistic bombast, who is uneducated, not thoughtful, lacks compassion.’ The ACTUAL person is the OPPOSITE of those things!” Kennedy stated. He praised Trump’s intellect and expertise across multiple fields, noting “He’s extremely detail-oriented, he’s an encyclopedia in many areas, in business, in sports, in the arts, in architecture, in building.”

Kennedy emphasized Trump’s unparalleled ability to deliver results, stressing “He knows how to, above all, he just knows how to get things done.” “He understands the uses of power probably better than any president that I can name and I’m pretty familiar with all the presidents,” Kennedy added. “So I don’t think we’ve ever had somebody who understands the use of power that he does. And the boldness with which he moves and which he expects us to move, I think has inspired all the people who work here right now to do things that people told them before were not possible,” he further urged. Tying it to the drug price breakthrough, Kennedy highlighted how Trump’s leadership turned promises into action.

“We were paying the highest drug price of any country in the world, now we’re paying the lowest. Every president’s promised to do that and all of them have said it’s insurmountable, you can’t do it, but we were able to do it!” he emphasised. This aligns with the broader Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) mission. As Calley Means has previously pointed out, key wins include lowering drug prices alongside reforms like eliminating food dyes and acknowledging vaccine injuries—proving MAHA is “WINNING big” despite leftist opposition. This drug price overhaul, part of Trump’s executive actions, ensures nearly 95% of medications are now the cheapest globally, delivering affordability without stifling innovation—a stark contrast to the bloated systems of the past.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/2027428352978558997?s=20 entanglement

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

02-02-2026 Music and Literature

Feb 022026
 
 February 2, 2026  Posted by at 2:18 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , ,  22 Responses »


Willem de Kooning Door to the river 1960


Jim Kunstler this week suggests that Russia is closer to the US way of thinking than any of its European allies: “..Russia is actually doing what it can to preserve Western Civ, including Christianity, literature, music, philosophy, and domestic civility..”

Not many westerners will share this view. We see ourselves as the protectors and keepers of civilization. Certainly not the Russians. Or Donald Trump. Many people today see Minneapolis (not unlike Ukraine), as a place where civilization is under threat from Trump and all those who support him, and where it’s being protected by “the other side”.

Thing is, it is quite questionable whether you can preserve your civilization at the same moment that you allow in 10-20 million new people with different customs, language and well, civilization, than those who have lived on “your” land before that moment.

Because by doing that, you change the population as well as the civilization. And before you do something so drastic, you must ask the “original” population what they think of that. This actually happened in this case: the 2024 presidential elections were to a large extent contested over Immigration, and Trump won by a large majority.

It would appear that the discussion about the topic is settled. But the Democatic Party will not acknowledge its loss. And so we have Minneapolis. It’s not just the Soros millions that power the anti-Trump rally, the Democrats have organized around their power game in a very serious fashion that hasn’t been tried before.

Is this how US civilization will be organized from now on? Will we see it drag itself from riot to riot in the streets, for which some arm of government, like police or ICE or you name it, will be blamed? Until so many illegal aliens -on paper- have been made Americans that there will never be a conservative government again?

Me, I’m still playing around with ideas in my head, amd I’m stuck with something Kunstler wrote: that the Russians want to preserve literature and music and philosophy. While our political leaders claim that Russia wants to conquer all of Europe. Physically. Though they seem to have no way of running, let alone controlling it.

Russia seems to have enough land. They don’t appear to have any need for Ukrainian land either. Moreover, Putin has said often that he sees Ukrainians as a sister- or brother people. A view that has undoubtedly influenced the military operaion too. Things don’t always seem to be what they seem to be.

I’ll end this with a piece by John Helmer, to get you up to date with where the Ukraine “war” is today. Helmer has been living in Moscow for 35+ years, he should know something. Something the multiple and neverending bans of RT tell us we are not supposed to know.


 

 

I’m still working to get things in order. Bear with me please. In this case, I like the idea of Russia preserving literature and music, against the background of fighting in Kiev and Minnesota, too much to not address it.

 

 

• At What Point, Capitulation Of The Kiev Regime? Can President Trump And General Grynkewich Save It?

For the first time since the negotiations to end the Ukraine war began, President Vladimir Putin has sent as the chief Russian negotiator a General Staff officer and military intelligence chief, Admiral Igor Kostyukov. The two Russians who have been closest to Putin, Vladimir Medinsky and Kirill Dmitriev, are not at the table. Neither is the Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov.

In Abu Dhabi on Friday (January 23), Kostyukov faced the Americans Steven Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Daniel Driscoll, and General Alexus Grynkewich. Driscoll is the Secretary of the Army, in the running to replace Peter Hegseth at the Pentagon, and a protégé of Vice President JD Vance. Grynkewich has been in charge of the losses on the Ukrainian battlefield since May 2024 when he was head of operations at the Pentagon and then as chief of the European Command (EUCOM) from July 2025.

At Abu Dhabi each of the Americans displayed open-neck, casual clothing. This dress-down Friday costume was a calculated insult to both the Ukrainian delegation – Rustem Umerov in uniform and Kirill Budanov in suit and tie—and to the Russians, Kostyukov and his second at the table, General Alexander Fomin. Kostyukov wore a dark civilian suit and a white collared shirt buttoned at the neck. But Kostyukov’s tie wasn’t tightly drawn. Was he sending the Russian Army’s message that it hasn’t reached the point of strangulation for the other side, yet?

The American signal was that they are dictating terms; that they retain escalation control over the Russians and they must capitulate, along with the NATO allies and the Zelensky regime. This is not the “coordinating” role which, after the two-day meetings concluded, Witkoff announced. “On Friday and Saturday, the United States coordinated a trilateral meeting alongside Ukraine and Russia, graciously hosted by the United Arab Emirates. Talks were very constructive, and plans were made to continue conversations next week in Abu Dhabi. President Trump and his entire team are dedicated to bringing peace to this war.”

Russian sources believe Witkoff’s stop to “this war” is no stop to the continuation of the war against Russia which the US, with the NATO allies, continues to escalate on land northward to Finland and Greenland; in the nuclear arms race in space; and at sea on all of Russia’s trade routes – the Baltic Sea through the Danish Straits, the Northern (Arctic) Route through the Bering Strait, the Black Sea through the Dardanelles, the Mediterranean, Caribbean, and the Indian Ocean.

This larger peace is what Putin claims Trump agreed in the “understandings of Anchorage, Alaska” – the terms the two presidents discussed last August before Trump cut their meeting short and flew home. “Naturally, we do not want to publicly go into the details of the provisions that are being discussed. And therefore, I cannot and will not tell you exactly what formula is meant by the Anchorage formula ,” Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, announced on Friday.

“There is a high dynamic. The Americans, as intermediaries, are rushing against time. They are in a hurry. They can be understood. This is not a quick process,” Peskov told a reporter on Sunday. “And now, in fact, the essence of the situation is that a certain formula for resolving the territorial issue was developed in Anchorage and on the eve of Anchorage. And now it is very important to implement it.”

Peskov was not asked, and the Kremlin is not yet acknowledging, that the US side has changed Putin’s “Anchorage formula” by introducing two new conditions for “resolving the territorial issue”. They were tabled at Putin’s meeting with Witkoff, Kushner and Joshua Gruenbaum, the Chabad devotee who has joined the negotiations for Putin’s agreement to the US takeover of Gaza through Trump’s Board of Peace (BOP). The second new Trump demand to add to the “Anchorage formula” is Putin’s acceptance of the US takeover of Greenland, which Yury Ushakov acknowledged in his read-out from the Kremlin meeting.

“During the meeting in the Kremlin, we also discussed Donald Trump’s idea of a Board of Peace, a host of regional matters and the Greenland issue,” Ushakov admitted. Putin’s new concessions in this three-way swap have stimulated dissent in Moscow. The Kremlin has replied with an editorial on Friday in Vzglyad, the semi-official security analysis platform, headlined: “Moscow [Putin] has made an elegant diplomatic move in a subtle game with the United States”.

“By supporting Washington’s initiatives, the Kremlin is showing how productive an equal Russian-American dialogue can be for the whole world, and especially for its hottest regions. And how useless and counterproductive Europe is in this sense…But why should Russia indiscriminately reject this proposal? Trump is quite sincerely striving for a Ukrainian settlement, so why not assume that he is pursuing the same goals in the case of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict?…

Rejecting such initiatives means cutting off opportunities for ourselves in advance, blocking one of the zones for playing on the world chessboard, and even publicly refusing to interact with the leading Western power. Moreover, the Peace Council does not currently touch upon or discuss any of Russia’s interests related, for example, to its own…It is logical that Trump, within the framework of his own dealmaking logic, considers this hint – and will be at least additionally motivated to take a respectful step in return, which is important for Russia’s interests.”

There is no consensus among the senior policymakers on the Security Council that there is anything “respectful” in Trump’s tactics or anything to be relied upon as he continues to change his “Anchorage formula” by upping the ante.

For the Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev has announced that time is running out for Trump to accept the year-long extension of time for negotiation of new strategic arms limitation terms when the START Treaty expires in a week’s time – on February 5. There has been “a shift in the right direction but the movement is still very weak,” Medvedev said in a lengthy interview published today.

“Donald Trump is initially unstable in political guidelines… We must make sure that Washington is really ready not in words, but in practice to respect our indigenous security interests. And able to work on an equal footing on a common reduction in conflict potential.”

“Unequal footing” — that was the signal from the dress-down US delegation in Abu Dhabi. Strategic arms limitations “must be mutual and parallel. And this position remains in force if no clarifications follow in the US approach by February 5,” Sergei Ryabkov, the first deputy foreign minister said over the weekend. He also conceded that there has been no follow-up on the Anchorage formula from Trump’s agencies. “It is counterproductive to hold high-level events that are later deemed fruitless.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry has also had belatedly to acknowledge that Trump has not released the Russian crew members of the Marinera, as had been announced with thanks by the Ministry spokesman, Maria Zakharova, on January 9. Worse, the British Government is refusing Russian consular access to the jailed crew.

Debt Rattle July 29 2025

Jul 292025
 
 July 29, 2025  Posted by at 9:36 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  49 Responses »


Edvard Munch Ashes 1894

 

• Von der Leyen Defends US Trade Deal (RT)
• US Trade Deal Will Fuel EU’s ‘Deindustrialization’ – Lavrov (RT)
• EU-US Tariff Deal A ‘Positive’ Development – Italy’s Meloni (RT)
• US-EU Trade Deal A ‘Fiasco’ – Le Pen (RT)
• Medvedev: Trump ‘Steamrolled, Humiliated’ Europe With One-Sided Deal (ZH)
• Medvedev Tells Trump ‘Russia Isn’t Israel Or Iran’ (RT)
• Trump Reduces Russia-Ukraine ‘Deadline’ To 10-12 Days (RT)
• Russia Alone Against Entire West For First Time In History – Lavrov (RT)
• I Love The Russian People – Trump (RT)
• Trump Drops a Truth Bomb About the Epstein Files (Margolis)
• Jailhouse Blues (James Howard Kunstler)
• Trump Welcomes British PM Keir Starmer to Turnberry, Scotland (CTH)
• Who Funds the WHO? (Fleetwood)
• Six Months In, Here’s What Sets Trump 2.0 Apart (Charlie Kirk)
• ‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Governments To Collaborate Before It’s Too Late (RT)
• Doug Casey on Global Disintegration (IM)

 

 

 

 

poll
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1949609289951113683

windmills

Doug

maher
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1949814680135835806

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1949812791164146145

werner

Ghislaine – do read the whole post

 

 

 

 

Ursula was not elected, but appointed. Her no. 1 priority is not pleasing the voters, it is keeping her job. Still, Trump was undoubtedly not happy that she gave him the whole deal and then some, before he could even lay on his art. Where’s the funn in that?

• Von der Leyen Defends US Trade Deal (RT)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has attempted to shrug off widespread criticism over the EU’s new trade agreement with the US. The controversial deal subjects most of the bloc’s exports to a 15% tariff while exempting American goods from retaliatory duties. The EU-US agreement was finalized on Sunday during a meeting with US President Donald Trump at one of his Scottish golf-resort hotels. ”15% is not to be underestimated, but it is the best we could get,” von der Leyen said, when asked by reporters whether the agreement offered relief to European carmakers. The compromise averts a looming 30% tariff Trump had threatened to impose on August 1. However, it falls far short of the EU’s original offer of zero tariffs on both imports and exports.

Trump has long accused the EU of exploiting regulatory barriers such as VAT distortions, and legal challenges in trade with the US. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the threat of tariffs was intended to “light a fire under the EU.” After negotiations stalled earlier this year, Trump escalated his demands, imposing a 25% tariff on cars, 50% on steel and aluminum, and threatening a 30% blanket tariff unless a deal was reached by August. The EU’s deal with the US has triggered a political backlash across the bloc. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou called it a “dark day” and an act of “submission.” Hungary’s Viktor Orban reportedly quipped that “Donald Trump ate Ursula von der Leyen for breakfast.” Numerous business associations have decried a “capitulation.”

According to Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev, “Trump wiped the floor with Europe.” Still, the deal found support in Berlin and Rome. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni described it as a necessary compromise to prevent a trade war and provide predictability for export-reliant economies. Before Trump’s return to office in January, the average US tariff on EU imports was roughly 1.5% while the bloc’s average imposed tariff was 1.35%, according to Brussels-based think tank Bruegel. Since then, a series of sweeping duties have been introduced.

Read more …

You get the feeling the warmongers in US and EU are trying to raze the entire continent in order to make it a war theater.

• US Trade Deal Will Fuel EU’s ‘Deindustrialization’ – Lavrov (RT)

The new US-EU trade agreement threatens to accelerate “deindustrialization” in Europe by redirecting investment to the US and increasing the bloc’s dependency on American energy exports, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. On Sunday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump finalized a controversial deal that allowed the EU and US to avert a full-scale trade war. Under the deal, the US has reduced its proposed 30% tariffs to a flat 15% on most European exports. The EU has committed to purchasing $750 billion worth of US energy, primarily liquefied natural gas and nuclear fuel, and agreed to invest around $600 billion into US industries. The bloc has also undertaken to increase imports of US-made weapons.

Speaking at the ‘Territory of Meanings’ forum on Monday, Lavrov described the arrangement as “clearly leading to further deindustrialization of Europe and capital flight.” He added that rising energy prices and investment outflows will strike a “very hard blow” to European industrial and agricultural sectors. According to Lavrov, von der Leyen was apparently “boasting” about the EU’s willingness to carry additional costs. “People like Ursula von der Leyen literally take pride in this path: yes, we will be forced to spend more money, yes, we will probably have fewer resources to address social problems, but we are obliged to defeat Russia.” He stressed that the trade deal is “obviously damaging for the Old Continent – it doesn’t even need to be analyzed.”

Lavrov’s stance was echoed by several EU politicians and the business community. Marine Le Pen, a key figure in France’s right-wing National Rally party, denounced the agreement as a “political, economic, and moral fiasco” detrimental to the EU’s sovereignty. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou concurred, calling it a “dark day” for the EU. German business leaders also voiced alarm. Wolfgang Niedermark, a member of the executive board of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), said the EU had sent a “fatal signal” by accepting high tariffs. “Even a tariff rate of 15% will have immense negative effects on the export-oriented German industry,” he warned.

Read more …

“There is a winner – US President Trump – and a loser, or rather two: The EU and Giorgia Meloni.”

• EU-US Tariff Deal A ‘Positive’ Development – Italy’s Meloni (RT)

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, one of the closest European allies of US President Donald Trump, has welcomed the EU’s trade deal with Washington despite criticism of the terms at home. After months of talks, the EU has reached a trade agreement with the US that sets a baseline 15% tariff on most exports, including cars, while steel and aluminum remain at 50%. The deal was reached at a meeting between Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Sunday. Both called it a “powerful” and “stabilizing” breakthrough. Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Meloni called the agreement a positive development.

“I think it’s positive that there’s an agreement,” Meloni, who had previously criticized Trump’s tariff drive and pledged to pursue a zero-for-zero deal, said. Italy is one of Europe’s top exporters to the US, with a trade surplus exceeding €40 billion ($46 billion). Opposition leaders, however, slammed Meloni for failing to secure better terms. Five Star Movement leader Giuseppe Conte wrote: “There is a winner – US President Trump – and a loser, or rather two: The EU and Giorgia Meloni.” He warned the tariffs could cost Italy €23 billion in exports and threaten 100,000 jobs.

Democratic MEP Stefano Bonaccini echoed the criticism, saying, “15% tariffs are better than 30% but worse than zero,” and warned of “tens of billions” in losses. Former Labor Minister Andrea Orlando called the deal a “rip-off,” saying Meloni’s friendship with Trump failed, while slamming von der Leyen as “either incompetent or acting in bad faith.” Meloni defended the deal, saying it helped avert a “head-on clash” with the US. She argued that the 15% tariff is “sustainable” as it will not add to previous tariffs, but will bring “stability.” Economists at the Kiel Institute warned of a drop in production and job losses across the EU, with Germany expected to take the biggest hit. The Federation of German Industries (BDI) called the deal an “inadequate compromise,” with the “only positive aspect” being the prevention of further escalation.

Read more …

“The least that could be done is to acknowledge this stinging failure rather than asking the French, who will be its first victims, to rejoice in it.”

• US-EU Trade Deal A ‘Fiasco’ – Le Pen (RT)

The new EU-US trade agreement is an economic and political “fiasco” that undermines the bloc’s sovereignty, veteran right-wing French politician Marine Le Pen has said. The agreement, finalized by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump on Sunday, averted a full-blown trade war between Washington and Brussels. Under its terms, the EU will commit to increased imports of US energy and military equipment, while the US reduces its proposed 30% tariffs to a flat 15% on most European exports. Le Pen, a key member of France’s National Rally party, the largest opposition group in the National Assembly, condemned the deal, calling it “a political, economic and moral fiasco” for the EU.

”Politically, because the European Union, with 27 member states, obtained worse conditions than the United Kingdom,” she said, referring to the fact that the UK agreed to 10% tariffs – which was widely regarded as a bad deal. Le Pen also accused Brussels of accepting unequal terms on exporting American gas and weapons that she claimed no patriotic French government would have agreed to. “This is an outright surrender for French industry and for our energy and military sovereignty.” She added that the deal sacrifices the interests of French farmers to benefit Germany’s automotive industry, pointing to “clauses forcing us to further open the single market to American agricultural products in exchange for reduced taxes on German automobile exports.”

“This globalization that denies and shatters sovereignty has been outdated for many years… The least that could be done is to acknowledge this stinging failure rather than asking the French, who will be its first victims, to rejoice in it.” Le Pen’s criticism was echoed by former Belgian Prime Minister and MEP Guy Verhofstadt, who called the agreement “scandalous” and “a disaster,” which failed to secure any concessions from the American side. Trump described the agreement as “probably the biggest deal ever reached in any capacity, trade or beyond trade.” Von der Leyen said the deal brings “certainty in uncertain times,” adding that a 15% rate “is the best we could get.”

Read more …

“This isn’t diplomacy. It’s surrender dressed in a suit.”

• Medvedev: Trump ‘Steamrolled, Humiliated’ Europe With One-Sided Deal (ZH)

Following high-stakes talks in Scotland between President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the two sides reached a landmark deal which sets a 15% US tariff on all European Union goods. This new rate is significantly lower than the 30% import tax Trump had previously threatened, with the EU also committing to opening its markets to certain American exports with zero tariffs. Von der Leyen subsequently said, “I want to thank President Trump personally for his personal commitment and leadership to achieve this breakthrough. He is a tough negotiator, but he is also a dealmaker.” The Kremlin has reacted, with former Russian President and current deputy chairman of the country’s security council Dmitry Medvedev in essence mocking the EU for signing a deal he says benefits only the United States, and which leaves Europe behind, looking like a “humiliated” junior partner. He also deemed the deal ‘anti-Russian’.

He highlighted that Brussels agreed to terms that involve significant trade concessions, expanded defense obligations, and energy agreements heavily favoring American exporters. Did anyone think it would be anything different with Trump in the room negotiating it? Trump managed to “crush” Europe without firing a single shot, Medvedev said: “This isn’t diplomacy. It’s surrender dressed in a suit.” The heavily slanted terms of the deal meant Trump had “wiped the floor with Europe,” Medvedev stated further in the Monday social media post. “One can only feel sorry for ordinary Europeans,” Medvedev wrote, nothing that EU leaders are only motivated by their blinding anti-Russian sentiment, given Brussels’ intention to terminate all purchases of Russian oil and gas – which is part of the deal.

Below is the list offered by Medvedev on what the ‘deal’ with the European Union actually represents:
1) totally humiliating for the Europeans as it only serves the United States by leaving the European market unprotected and zeroing out tariffs on US goods;
2) creates huge additional costs for industries and agriculture in many EU countries stemming from the need to pay for expensive US energy; and…
3) diverts a massive investment flow from Europe to the US, Medvedev specified.

But ultimately, Medvedev wrote, “the deal is clearly aimed against Russia, as it bans Russian oil and gas purchases. However, while for Trump, it is largely about business, for the mad old wench Europe, it is part of its neo-Nazi ideas, which is harmful to the well-being of its own citizens.” This has been a constant talking point from Moscow going back years. Ursula, blink repeatedly if Trump just shafted you! Make ‘back door’ gesture if know US gas far dearer than Russian!— RT (@RT_com) July 28, 2025. The Russian Security Council deputy chairman has long been probably the single most outspoken official in the Kremlin, but it’s widely believed he plays ‘bad cop’ to Putin’s ‘good cop’ – in the sense that he often issues the more hawkish or even mocking point of view on any given geopolitical or economic issue. Or rather, he states the quiet part out loud, from Moscow’s viewpoint.

Read more …

“..every new ultimatum constitutes a threat and a step toward hostilities between Russia and the US. “Don’t go down the Sleepy Joe [Biden] road!”

• Medvedev Tells Trump ‘Russia Isn’t Israel Or Iran’ (RT)

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has told US President Donald Trump that Russia is neither Israel nor Iran, and that every one of his threats is another step towards a potential conflict. The US president on Monday issued a more extreme ultimatum to Russia, demanding that Moscow reach a ceasefire with Kiev within “10 or 12 days.” Earlier this month, Trump threatened sweeping secondary sanctions against Russia’s trade partners unless a deal was reached by autumn. Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, said that Trump was “playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10…” In a post on X on Monday, he suggested Trump should remember two things: first, that “Russia isn’t Israel or even Iran,” and, second, that every new ultimatum constitutes a threat and a step toward hostilities between Russia and the US. “Don’t go down the Sleepy Joe [Biden] road!” he wrote.

During his election campaign last year, Trump repeatedly criticized his predecessor Joe Biden’s handling of the Ukraine conflict, warning that US policy under the former administration had brought the world to the brink of “World War III.” While Trump has re-engaged Russia diplomatically and pushed for Kiev to enter direct peace talks with Moscow, he has increasingly expressed impatience with the pace of negotiations. Earlier this month, after issuing his initial ultimatum, the president resumed US military aid to Ukraine through NATO.

Russia has long condemned the US-led military bloc’s arms supplies to Ukraine, arguing they make Kiev’s Western sponsors party to the conflict, which Moscow sees as a proxy war. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said that although Russia is essentially fighting a war against the entire West on its own, it will not back down from its key security demand in the conflict. “No dragging Ukraine into NATO, no NATO expansion at all,” the top diplomat said on Monday. “It has already expanded right up to our borders.”

Read more …

Trump doessn’t want war, he wants to talk to Russia, and to trade with it. He’ll have to find a way amid the bellicose voices.

• Trump Reduces Russia-Ukraine ‘Deadline’ To 10-12 Days (RT)

US President Donald Trump has sharply reduced the time frame he set for Russia and Ukraine to agree on a ceasefire, warning that Moscow now has just 10 to 12 days to reach a deal or face sweeping new sanctions. “I’m going to set a new deadline… about 10 or 12 days from today. There’s no reason to wait. I wanted to be generous, but we’re just not seeing any progress,” Trump told reporters on Monday in Scotland. He was sitting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The US president had originally given the two sides 50 days to negotiate an end to the conflict, threatening to impose 100% tariffs on Russian imports and secondary sanctions on countries and companies that continue to trade with Russia. That initial deadline was due to expire in early September.

Trump said he was “very disappointed” with Russian President Vladimir Putin and claimed he had come close to brokering a ceasefire on five separate occasions. “I’ve spoken to President Putin a lot – I’ve gotten along with him very well,” he added. The ultimatum, first issued on July 14, also included a warning that the US would resume arms deliveries to Ukraine, funded in part by NATO members, if no truce was achieved within the time frame. Moscow has responded by reaffirming its willingness to negotiate but said any talks must take into account the realities on the ground and the root causes of the conflict. Russian officials have dismissed Trump’s sanctions threats as counterproductive. “These signals serve only to prolong the war,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said earlier this month, urging Washington to pressure Kiev instead.

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has stated that even new sanctions would not alter Russia’s course, insisting the country will “continue to move along our independent, sovereign, and sustained path.” Meanwhile, direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev resumed in Istanbul in May, following a nearly three-year freeze. The latest round of talks took place last week, with modest progress on humanitarian issues, including agreements on the exchange of prisoners of war and civilians. However, no breakthrough on a ceasefire was achieved. Trump had previously not ruled out imposing sanctions before his deadline, saying last week that action could come “at any time.”

Read more …

“In World War I and World War II, we had allies. Now we have no allies on the battlefield. So we must rely on ourselves and not allow any weakness,”

• Russia Alone Against Entire West For First Time In History – Lavrov (RT)

Russia is fighting the West alone for the first time in history and must rely solely on its own strength, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Speaking at the ‘Territory of Meanings’ forum on Monday, Lavrov highlighted the unprecedented geopolitical landscape Russia found itself in following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, which led to a heated stand-off with the West. ”The main task is to defeat the enemy. For the first time in history, Russia is fighting alone against the entire West. In World War I and World War II, we had allies. Now we have no allies on the battlefield. So we must rely on ourselves and not allow any weakness,” he said.

Lavrov stressed that Russia will not back down from its core security demands which led to the Ukraine conflict. “We insist on what is our legitimate demand… no dragging Ukraine into NATO, no NATO expansion at all. It has already expanded right up to our borders, contrary to all promises and documents that were adopted,” he said, adding that a settlement of the conflict should also recognize the new territorial reality on the ground.

Lavrov also likened the West’s behavior to that of childhood bullies. “When you’re a kid messing around with other boys in the yard, sometimes a big kid, three or four years older, shows up and starts chasing the little ones,” he said. “That’s roughly what the West is doing to everyone else right now.” Moscow has stated on a number of occasions that NATO expansion and Ukraine’s aspirations to join the US-led military bloc were among the key reasons for the conflict. It has also warned that Western weapons deliveries to Ukraine only serve to prolong the hostilities without changing the outcome, while making NATO a direct party to the conflict.

Read more …

But, like anyone else, they don’t love a bully.

• I Love The Russian People – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has expressed his “love” for Russians and called them a “great people.” At the same time, he threatened Moscow with more sanctions and set a new deadline for settling the Ukraine conflict. Trump maintained he had “always gotten along with [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin” during a Q&A session with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Turnberry, Scotland on Monday. He praised Russia as a “rich” nation that could be “thriving like practically no other country” and spoke about the massive trade potential between Russia and the US. “I don’t want to do that to Russia, I love the Russian people,” he said when asked about potential new sanctions against Moscow.

He expressed his disappointment over the slow pace of the peace process between Moscow and Kiev and accused Russia of striking Ukrainian cities. Trump said he was “not interested in talking anymore” as his numerous “respectful and nice conversations” with Putin led to nothing. Trump’s words came as he set a new deadline for a Ukraine peace deal, which he said should be reached in “10 or 12 days” from Monday. Otherwise, Washington would impose new sanctions on Moscow. The previous deadline was expected to expire in early September. The new sanctions would include secondary restrictions and tariffs on countries and entities doing business with Russia.

Moscow has repeatedly stated throughout the conflict that it is open for dialogue and could start negotiations without any preconditions as long as the situation on the ground is taken into account and the root causes of the conflict are addressed. Earlier this month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the Ukraine conflict was a “difficult” one to resolve and cannot be settled “instantly.” Russia also warned that Trump’s new sanctions threats serve primarily “as signals to continue the war” for Kiev and called on Washington to exert pressure on Ukraine instead. Russia and Ukraine renewed direct talks in Istanbul in May and have since held three rounds of negotiations but have not reached an agreement on a ceasefire yet.

Read more …

“I was running against somebody that ran the files. If they had something, they would have released it.”

• Trump Drops a Truth Bomb About the Epstein Files (Margolis)

President Donald Trump dropped a truth bomb on Monday that Democrats desperately trying to weaponize the Jeffrey Epstein files won’t like: Nothing is incriminating about him in those records. And his explanation isn’t just compelling; it’s rock solid. Trump argued that if such evidence were real, the Biden administration would have already made it public. Speaking candidly during a visit to Turnberry, Scotland, Trump called out the handling of these files under the previous administration as a manufactured “hoax” designed to manipulate political outcomes, particularly the 2024 election. When a reporter pressed Trump on whether he’d been briefed on his alleged inclusion in the Epstein files, he didn’t hold back. He slammed former FBI Director James Comey, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Joe Biden himself as “the worst scum on Earth” responsible for running the files.

“Those files were run for four years by those people,” he emphasized. “If they had anything, I assume they would’ve released it. Those files were run by these people; they were run by my enemy. If there was anything in there, they would’ve used them for the election.” Trump made clear that the files were handled by partisan operatives out to get him. “Those files were run by the worst scum on earth. They were run by Comey. They were run by Garland. They were run by Biden, and all of the people that actually ran the government, including the autopen,” he said. “If they had anything, I assume they would have released it.” Pointing to the 2024 election as proof, Trump noted, “I was running against somebody that ran the files. If they had something, they would have released it.”

The Biden administration has already weaponized the federal government to go after Trump. If there were anything incriminating about Trump in the Epstein files, the Biden campaign would’ve dropped that info during the campaign to destroy his chances. Trump went on to warn about the potential for manipulated evidence, drawing a parallel to the now-debunked Steele dossier: “They can easily put something in the files that’s a phony—like, as an example, Christopher Steele… wrote a… dossier. We call it the fake news dossier. And the whole thing was a fake.” Trump blasted the DOJ and other officials who controlled the Epstein records, calling them “bad, sick people,” and questioned why, if damaging material existed, no one used it earlier.

“Why didn’t they use it when I was killing Joe? And then he gave out because he was 25 points down.” Trump’s logic here is bulletproof. The Biden administration stooped to unprecedented levels to take him down: unleashing the FBI, pushing bogus indictments, and even raiding his home. If it had even a shred of real evidence from the Epstein files tying Trump to any wrongdoing, it would have plastered that information across every headline in America before voters cast a single ballot. The fact that nothing has emerged, despite full control of the files by his political enemies, isn’t just telling; it’s definitive.

Read more …

“Tulsi Gabbard didn’t assume the role of Director of National Intelligence to play ceremonial dress-up.” —Toresays.com on “X”

• Jailhouse Blues (James Howard Kunstler)

You must suspect there’s some game afoot in this Epstein business. Only days ago, it was “fuggeddabowdit . . . nuthin’ there . . . get over it.” But then, only days later, the second-in-command at DOJ, Todd Blanche, formerly the president’s personal lawyer, was down in Tallahassee deposing Jeffrey Epstein’s second-in-command, Ghislaine Maxwell. (Note: a deposition is testimony outside of court, recorded under oath.) The Deputy Attorney General deposed her for two days, Friday and Saturday, a total of nine hours. You can do a lot of talking in nine hours. And were you shocked to learn — as has been broadly reported — that through all these years of EpsteinEpsteinEpstein, Ms. Maxwell has never been interviewed by any state or federal law enforcement official or government lawyer? How was that possible?

By the way, no government official has interviewed billionaire Les Wexner, Epstein’s chief benefactor, over all these years, either? How is that possible? (Follow the money, as they say.) Meanwhile, down in Florida, as reported by Brian O’Shea of The Daily Clout, it turns out that the federal district judge, Robin Rosenberg, who just ruled against Mr. Trump’s request to unseal the 2005 — 2007 Florida Epstein grand jury transcripts, is married to one Michael McCauliffe, former Palm Beach County State’s Attorney (equivalent of district attorney, DA), who helped negotiate the special 2008 “sweetheart” plea deal that allowed Epstein significant freedoms, such as frequent travel, including to his Little St. James Island, despite being under house arrest. Are you going, “Hmmmmmm. . . ? Any conflict of interest in that ruling? (Note: Current US AG Pam Bondi did not become Florida AG until 2011.)

So, it appears that there will now be two sets of “Epstein files” to sort out: 1) the DOJ’s file curated under AG Merrick Garland, and 2) whatever follows from never-before asked questions put to Ghislaine Maxwell in late July 2025. One thing you might infer: if the Merrick Garland files contained any defamatory “kompromat” about Donald Trump, wouldn’t it have been used during the election of 2024? Mr. Garland went along with every other ploy used to defame and convict Mr. Trump under color of law. But not that? Ergo, fuggeddabowdit.

Where the Epstein business goes now is anybody’s guess, but you have to doubt that it will go nowhere. Ms. Maxwell’s attorney, David O. Markus, stated to reporters that she “answered every single question asked of her” over the two days, emphasizing that she responded “honestly, truthfully, and to the best of her ability” without invoking any privileges or declining to answer. There is chatter on the Internet that Ms. Maxwell’s testimony affords an opportunity for the FBI / DOJ to open an entirely fresh Epstein investigation, untainted by whatever Merrick Garland was sitting on.

Okay, I reckon that’s enough for you to chew on about EpsteinEpsteinEpstein for today. Let’s turn to the other giant stinking dead carp wafting its miasma over Washington DC: RussiaRussiaRussia. CIA chief John Ratcliffe promised on Sunday to disclose the so-called “annex” files to John Durham’s special counsel report. Mr. Ratcliffe implied that the material is rather serious. He also emphasized that the statute of limitations will not apply in any forthcoming RussiaGate cases because the matter represents an ongoing (until even now) conspiracy. Mr. Ratcliffe, you may recall, before getting elected to Congress, was a US Attorney for the eastern district of Texas (as Chief of Anti-Terrorism and National Security), so he knows quite a bit about prosecuting federal cases.

Dunno about you, but I would like to know a little bit more about Christopher Wray’s activities regarding both Epstein and RussiaGate during his long tenure, seven years and five months (2017 – 2025) as FBI Director. In previous testimony before various committees of Congress, Mr. Wray, uniformly invoked “ongoing investigations” as the reason for not answering any germane questions about, well, anything and everything. Does he not deserve a session or two of interrogation with Kash Patel’s FBI agents, or depositions under oath with lawyers from the DOJ now, without the shield of protecting investigations of an agency he no longer runs? He has a lot to answer for, including the J-6 business and associated pipe-bomb matter — both of which might be construed as part of an ongoing conspiracy against a sitting president (and three-time candidate).

Is all this some “conspiracy theory”? No, an actual conspiracy as spelled out in the federal statutes: Conspiracy under Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, Conspiracy to defraud the United States. . . 18 U.S. Code § 241, Conspiracy against rights. . . and 18 U.S. Code § 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law. Add to that: perjury under oath, obstruction of justice, lying to the FBI. It’s a pretty rich menu. Someone, maybe more than a few someones, will be going to jail.

Read more …

Welcoming a British PM in his own country.

• Trump Welcomes British PM Keir Starmer to Turnberry, Scotland (CTH)

Earlier this morning President Donald Trump welcomed British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to Turnberry, Scotland where the two leaders will hold bilateral discussions on trade and foreign affairs. The video is prompted to 16:20. The bagpipes stop eventually in the video at 19:30. President Trump and Prime Minister Starmer take questions from the assembled press pool. President Trump calls out the British government for rampant illegal immigration, as Starmer tries to say his govt is deporting illegal migrants back to their home country. Questions centered heavily around the Israeli conflict with Hamas in Gaza. The plight of the Palestinians is a key focus point for the British people; an outcome of the mass Islamic migration that has taken place for the past two-decades in Great Britain. The population of Islamists in the U.K now drives the political priorities.

Toward the end of the video 28:00, President Trump notes the Russia/Ukraine conflict has led to a “disappointment in Vladimir Putin,” and a possibility that President Trump will reduce the 50-day deadline he gave to Russia. The majority of politicians within Great Britain want to expand the conflict with Russia as much as possible and bring the full NATO contingent into the war against Russia. President Trump has been reluctant to support expanded war as requested by the British, French and German group who formed a “coalition of the willing.” In addition to London being the Jihad capital of the region, Great Britain is also the home of the Fabian Socialists.

Read more …

Big Pharma does. Just ask: cui bono?

• Who Funds the WHO? (Fleetwood)

A new BMJ Global Health study has confirmed that the World Health Organization’s (WHO) private fundraising arm—the WHO Foundation—has received tens of millions of dollars from pharmaceutical giants, Big Tech companies, and anonymous sources, with nearly half the funding now untraceable. The study findings come after U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the United States will reject the WHO’s sweeping emergency powers treaty, warning that the same unelected body now seeking “global medical surveillance of every human being.” The BMJ Global Health study, published Wednesday, reads: “From its launch until the end of 2023, the foundation disclosed total donation receipts of US$82 783 930 overall, of which US$39 757 326 (48.0%) was from anonymous donations over US$100 000. In total, US$51 554 203 (62.3%) in anonymous donations were reported.”

The top-named donor was the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, long considered one of WHO’s most influential funders: “Donations varied by sector, with the largest named donations coming from the private philanthropic sector, including the Gates foundation and other family foundations, followed by social media companies, medical device companies and the banking/finance and pharmaceutical sectors.” Secretary Kennedy recently cut off U.S. funding to Bill Gates’ vaccine syndicate Gavi, citing peer-reviewed evidence that the DTP shot it promotes “may kill more children from other causes than it saves,” and condemning the alliance for treating vaccine safety as a PR problem instead of a public health priority. Moreover, a Gates Foundation–funded trial injected South African children with live tuberculosis-causing bacteria, infecting 260 kids and causing serious harm—all while excluding early post-vaccine infections from analysis and following a prior Gates-funded gain-of-function experiment that engineered TB to grow unchecked.

The WHO Foundation (WHOF), launched in 2020 to accept donations from entities the WHO cannot receive money from directly, now also counts Meta (Facebook), TikTok, Maybelline, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk among its known funders: “This included the announcement of a US$50 million commitment from the WHOF via contributions from Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, TikTok, Maybelline and a range of other partners.” A majority of funds aren’t even going to WHO programs—they’re going to the WHO Foundation’s own operational costs: “The largest overall category, by amount donated, was ‘WHO Foundation Operational Support’, which received just under US$40 million over the entire reporting period, representing a majority (approximately 56%) of all funding received by the Foundation to date.”

Even more concerning is the Foundation’s sharp drop in transparency, with its public reporting now rated as poor as controversial “dark money” think tanks. “In the first year of its operation… the WHOF would be rated ‘B’ for transparency… However, in the next two reporting periods, the WHOF would be assessed a ‘D’ for transparency…” “Nearly 80% of funds donated in January–December 2023 were from anonymous sources and in amounts of over US$100 000.” “Results show low and declining levels of transparency over time, potentially raising concerns about the level of outside influence and role of commercial interests in setting WHO priorities.” Though the Foundation claims to avoid tobacco and firearms money, the same is not true for fossil fuel, alcohol, sugar, or vaping interests:

“The current version of the WHOF gift policy sets out specific donor exclusions, yet only for tobacco and firearms manufacturers, while fossil fuel companies, alcohol producers, sugar sweetened beverage manufacturers and vaping companies, for example, are not mentioned in any form.” The Foundation even publicly advertises insider access to WHO: “Through its unparalleled access to WHO, the Foundation advances health equity by connecting and collaborating with visionary corporate partners to co-create solutions that have the highest impact.”The authors of the BMJ Global Health study—affiliated with the U.K.’s London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and University of Edinburgh—warn:

“This analysis of WHOF donor disclosures indicates levels of donor transparency akin to oft-criticised free market think tanks, with attendant risks for both undue influence and/or reputational damage for the WHOF, and by extension the WHO.” In the end, the WHO’s private fundraising arm isn’t just taking cash from Big Pharma and Big Tech—it’s running on a flood of untraceable money, shielding its true backers behind a wall of anonymity while claiming “unparalleled access” to global health power. How can the WHO claim neutrality when it’s bankrolled by pharmaceutical giants, Big Tech firms under scrutiny for censorship, and tens of millions in dark money from anonymous sources?

Read more …

“..this administration really is committed to systematically throwing out the suffocating groupthink and stagnation that have ruled in D.C. for decades.

• Six Months In, Here’s What Sets Trump 2.0 Apart (Charlie Kirk)

On Sunday, the second Trump administration turned six months old. President Trump’s first four years in the White House were already a big success, which is why I fought so hard to bring him back for a second go-round. Yet I think Trump’s second has already surpassed it in just one-eighth the time. Completely and instantly securing the U.S.-Mexico border after the four-year Biden invasion is one of the most important and impressive accomplishments in American presidential history. TV news said the president’s tough trade talk would crash the economy in days; instead the stock market hit record highs this very week and blue-collar wages are rising faster than they have in 60 years.

Under any other recent president, I am convinced the June Iran crisis would have ballooned into a full regime-change war, with far more money spent and many American lives lost. But under President Trump’s measured hand, America managed to strike a crippling blow to Iran’s nuclear program while suffering zero casualties and even bringing a ceasefire between Iran and Israel as part of the bargain. Yet when I think about the events of the past six months, it’s not the big wins I think about the most, but actually the small ones. They’re the triumphs that don’t necessarily grab the largest headlines that show this administration really is committed to systematically throwing out the suffocating groupthink and stagnation that have ruled in D.C. for decades.

Over and over, this administration is doing things that past Republicans could and should have done, yet inexplicably never did. For instance, all the way back in 1981, the outgoing Carter administration engineered a court ruling that abolished the federal government’s hugely successful hiring aptitude test on the grounds that it was (you already knew this was coming) racist. Presidents Reagan, Bush 41, or Bush 43 could have fought to undo that and restore merit-based hiring. Yet they never did, and over 45 years our government went rotten as DEI replaced merit. Now, this administration is finally acting to bring back merit in government. Imagine that! From Harvard to Hennepin County, this administration has begun toppling the race and sex-based discrimination that had taken root all over America in flagrant defiance of both our Constitution and historic American values.

It is purging DEI commissars from federal agencies, imposing uniform standards on the military, and sending out warnings to the private sector as well. This isn’t superficial – it’s the destruction in detail of a rotten, anti-American ideology. It would have been easy for Donald Trump to make a few speeches and sign a couple symbolic orders about “protecting women’s sports” – past Republican administrations would have settled for exactly that. But this administration has genuinely done the work to protect American children from the transgender mania, one of the great evils of our time.

Across America, health care providers are ending their involvement in child mutilation and similar treatments because of the dramatic increase in regulatory hostility from this administration. Children’s National Hospital in D.C., Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Stanford Medicine, and more have all stopped providing surgeries or puberty blockers to minors in the face of this administration. Where it matters most, the Trump administration has stepped up to save children from predators calling themselves “doctors.” For my entire life, Republicans loved to make a show of complaining about America sending billions in aid to foreign countries. But they never stopped it – until Trump, who actually delivered by cutting USAID down to size and keeping more of America’s money in America. The same goes for defunding NPR, PBS, and Planned Parenthood: long years of talk, until the Trump administration fought to make it actually happen.

It was obvious for almost 20 years that the TSA’s policy requiring passengers to remove their shoes before boarding a flight was a pointless bit of security theater, yet Presidents Bush, Obama, and Biden all kept the policy around anyway. This administration finally got rid of it. While the Biden administration treated the cryptocurrency industry as a borderline criminal enterprise, Trump signed the GENIUS Act, which positions America to be at the lead of this innovative industry. The administration hasn’t just said the right things. It has done the right things, in detail, to make sure its promises are delivered at the micro level. The administration even made showerheads great again. And it’s that commitment to the small things and common sense that will pay dividends over the next three and a half years. Because an administration that cares about the details of governing will make all of America great, too.

Read more …

“..AI is likely to increasingly seek more control in order to achieve its assigned tasks..”

• ‘Godfather of AI’ Warns Governments To Collaborate Before It’s Too Late (RT)

Artificial intelligence pioneer and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Geoffrey Hinton has urged governments worldwide to collaborate in training AI systems not to harm humanity, warning that the rapidly advancing technology will soon likely surpass human intelligence. Speaking at the World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC) in Shanghai on Saturday, Hinton said that despite divergent national interests, no country wants AI to dominate humanity. He noted that international cooperation is unlikely on offensive AI use – such as “cyberattacks, lethal autonomous weapons or fake videos for manipulating public opinion.” However, nations could form a “network of institutions” to guide the development of a highly intelligent AI “that doesn’t want to get rid of people,” Hinton added.

He compared this proposed cooperation to Soviet-US collaboration on nuclear non-proliferation during the Cold War. Hinton, often referred to as the “Godfather of AI,” likened AI development to “raising a tiger cub” that could become dangerous once it matures. “There’s only two options if you have a tiger cub as a pet. Figure out if you can train it so it never wants to kill you, or get rid of it,” the scientist said. He explained that AI is likely to increasingly seek more control in order to achieve its assigned tasks as it grows more intelligent, and simply “turning it off” when it outpaces humanity will not be an option. “We will be like three-year-olds and they will be like adults,” Hinton said.

Speaking to the press later in the day, he noted that it should be relatively easy for “rational” nations to cooperate on the subject, but said it may be “difficult” for the US under “its current administration.” On Wednesday, the White House announced its “action plan” to achieve “global dominance” in AI through investments, subsidies, and the removal of legal restrictions on the technology’s development. Beijing has announced its intention to establish an organization to coordinate international cooperation on AI. “We should strengthen coordination to form a global AI governance framework,” Chinese Premier Li Qiang said at the WAIC on Saturday.

Read more …

“Although I never thought of him in such an overt role. I’d only credited the fact that he was a homosexual rental boy in Chicago’s bathhouses.”

• Doug Casey on Global Disintegration (IM)

Matt Smith: All right, good morning, Doug. I think the biggest thing in the news is that Obama is a traitor. I mean, we know this officially now. Although a lot of this information had been uncovered in years past—about RussiaGate and all of that—the connections weren’t as clear as they are now, based on Tulsi’s release of information and what she’s told Trump. So much so that Trump felt quite confident recently, in an open forum at a press conference, to just outright call him a traitor. He said, “I’d like to say let’s give it time and just see, but we know he was a traitor.”

Doug Casey: I can’t wait to find out. Although I never thought of him in such an overt role. I’d only credited the fact that he was a homosexual rental boy in Chicago’s bathhouses. Too bad that’s been pretty well swept under the rug.

Matt Smith: I was always fixated on the citizenship or birth certificate thing personally. But you know, bathhouses, birth certificate, Columbia University—no one knew him when he went there. There are a lot of weird things in his past.

Doug Casey: That’s true. There are a lot of indications that he’s a genuine Manchurian Candidate. They don’t just come out of nowhere. But anybody can be elected president—or installed as president today. We almost had Kamala Harris, a total nothing-nobody who can’t even string together words into a coherent sentence.

Matt Smith: And we had Biden, who was unfit—incapable mentally.

Doug Casey: Yes, and they almost ran him instead of Kamala. This is all crazy. I guess the question is: Are they going to be able to prove that Obama was conducting a coup in the US? I’m not surprised, because coups occur—different types—all the time in all kinds of countries around the world. So why not the US? Although the US used to be unique in that it was formed to defend the average citizen against the government, that’s ancient history. That’s what the Bill of Rights is all about, which is unique, actually. But it’s a dead letter at this point. Another question is: Will Trump pursue this thing right to the end? Can they mount evidence? Can they find a fair venue to try Obama? And even if they find that he’s criminally liable for treason, will they prosecute him right to the end? Major scandal. Much bigger than Benedict Arnold.

Matt Smith: Yeah, and it’s weird to make these declarations without—you’d assume there would be cases. Like, the declaration wouldn’t be made before there are actually cases filed.

Doug Casey: I agree. And Tulsi Gabbard impresses me as a very levelheaded person who wouldn’t just fly off the handle. Of course, she’s a hardcore leftist who believes in all kinds of standard leftist things, but they don’t have a lot to do with her current position running the so-called intelligence community. It’s funny they call it a “community.” That sounds so benign and beneficial. Everybody likes communities. Our intelligence community is full of hardcore killers and sociopaths. I can’t wait to see how this plays out. It serves as a good distraction from the Epstein mess, that’s for sure.

Matt Smith: You’ve got to wonder—do they take this approach and really be aggressive? Because they can. Obviously, there’s a conspiracy there, which means all kinds of people could be swept up by this easily, and arrests could be made. I mean, one of the most aggressive charges they used against the J6 people was conspiracy to overthrow the government, or something like that. Some major thing, and they went after them super hard—morning raids and everything. If they really believe this, they could go after Comey, Clapper, Gina Haspel, and a whole bunch of people right away without even touching the president. Of course, J6 was just little people. That was just the peasants. You can round them up. But it’s hunting big game when you go after these major-league criminals.

Doug Casey: I hope they don’t go after Hillary too hard and heavy. God forbid that Tulsi commits suicide or has an accident. She could be added to a list of—how many here? Forty-five or fifty other possible Arkancides, as they say.

Matt Smith: So what’s your best guess on whether or not this will be something that serves as political theater that motivates the base for the next couple of years—appointing a special counsel, for instance, to investigate it—or will this actually turn into something real?

Doug Casey: I think it’s a coin flip. But it’s possible that this will make the big time. I mean, look at Watergate. Watergate was a big nothing. It was just a break-in for political reasons.

Matt Smith: One could say that was a coup.

Doug Casey: You could say that. And in that coup, it wasn’t the coup itself that was the problem. It was the cover-up that was.

Matt Smith: Well, what I mean is I think a lot of people used it against him and told Nixon—like all the Republicans in the Senate told him, “You don’t have the votes. You’ve got to get out of here,” you know, and he just walked away.

Doug Casey: There is a difference between what’s going on now and what happened in the Nixon days. Of course, nobody liked Nixon. I certainly don’t. He was a creepy guy and a disaster for the country. But the Democrats are really out-and-out communists at this point. I know that sounds inflammatory to say, but when it comes to their philosophical beliefs—yes, they’re all Marxists, ultra-hardcore leftists, socialists, statists, and what-have-you. And we’re on the ragged edge, I still think, of a civil war in the US because the Red and Blue people hate each other. It’s not just a bunch of leftist students like in the ’60s. Nasty attitudes are widely inseminated throughout US society. Yeah, we could have a civil war. And if you do prosecute these horrible people, it’s hard to say what their supporters will do. These things can take on a life of their own.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

zinc


bros

glyphosate

heart

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle May 3 2025

May 032025
 
 May 3, 2025  Posted by at 9:35 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Girl with a boat (Maya Picasso) 1938

 

• US Demands Direct Russia-Ukraine Talks (RT)
• Russia and Ukraine ‘Closer’ To Settlement – Rubio (RT)
• Ukraine Conflict ‘Not Going to End Any Time Soon’ – Vance (Sp.)
• Ukrainian MP Threatens Terror Attack On Red Square (RT)
• Brussels Floats Trade Solution To Trump – FT (RT)
• European Security Is Impossible Without Russia (Fetouri)
• Trump Claims US Did ‘More Than Any Other Country’ to Win World War II (Sp.)
• Ukraine Can’t Reclaim Lost Territory – Rubio (RT)
• The Hardest Working Man In The Trump Administration (Sarah Anderson)
• What’s Normal, Exactly? (James Howard Kunstler)
• We’re Gonna Lose the PR War Over Tariffs Until We Start Doing THIS (Pinsker)
• Germany’s AfD Party ‘Definitely Right-Wing Extremist’: Spy Agency (RMX)
• Germany ‘Has Rebuilt The Berlin Wall’ – Vance (RT)
• Germany Is Weaponizing WWII Memory Against Russia (Amar)
• Germany Is ‘Tyranny In Disguise’ – Rubio (RT)
• Odessa Massacre: Point of No Return Marked Ukraine’s Slide Into Nazism (Sp.)
• Trump Reportedly Turns To L3Harris For “Interim” Air Force One Jet (ZH)
• The Ghost in the Machine. AI and The Spectral Ontology of Value (Ruggeri)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1917982262869582328

Miller

RFK

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1918101908889206911
https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1918108357245751334

Full

 

 

 

 

As the week progresses, attention will increasingly shift to the consequences of the tariffs dispute. It’s been a month since Liberation day, and that’s the time Chinese goods need to arrive in the US – or not. The MSM will milk it not just for everything it is, but for everything they can make it appear to be.

As for Ukraine, the US needs to lose Zelensky and his Azov neo nazi support.

• US Demands Direct Russia-Ukraine Talks (RT)

The US will no longer serve as mediator in negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce has said. Speaking at a regular press briefing on Thursday, she stated it was time for the two parties to propose their own solutions and engage in direct talks. Trump had previously pledged to end the Ukraine conflict “within 24 hours” if elected, though he later described the claim as an “exaggeration.” Since taking office in January, he has pressed both sides for a ceasefire but has expressed frustration over the slow progress in the talks. Trump has warned that the US may withdraw from the peace process if it continues to falter. Earlier, Moscow signaled it’s ready to start direct negotiations with Kiev “without preconditions,” while Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered Russian forces to observe a short ceasefire during Victory Day celebrations next week.

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has branded the Russian truce announcement a “manipulation.” “We will not be the mediators,” Bruce told reporters when asked about Washington’s future role. “We certainly are still committed to it and we’ll help and do what we can, but we are not going to fly around the world at the drop of a hat to mediate meetings.” “It’s time for both of the nations involved in this conflict to come up with concrete proposals about how this conflict ends. It’s going to be up to them,” Bruce added. Her remarks contrasted with comments by US Vice President J.D. Vance, who said earlier this week that Washington planned to dedicate another 100 days to mediating a peace deal.

Media reports have claimed the US peace proposal includes recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea and its de-facto control over parts of four former Ukrainian regions that chose to join Russia. It also reportedly calls for “freezing” the conflict along current front lines. Commenting on Moscow’s decision to halt military operations next week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the pause should serve as “the start of direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” Kiev, however, demanded an immediate, unconditional 30-day ceasefire.

Read more …

“They’re closer, but they’re still far apart..”

• Russia and Ukraine ‘Closer’ To Settlement – Rubio (RT)

Russia and Ukraine are closer to a peace agreement than at any point in the past three years, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. He cautioned, however, that the sides still need to bridge numerous differences to end the conflict. In an interview with Fox News on Thursday, Rubio reflected on efforts by US President Donald Trump to settle the Ukraine conflict, a promise he had made while still on the campaign trail. “For a hundred days he has done efforts to bring about peace… Look, we’ve gotten closer. We – for the first time – we haven’t known this for three years – we kind of can see what it would take for Ukraine to stop. We can see what it would take for the Russians to stop,” Rubio said.

However, stark differences between Moscow and Kiev remain, the State Secretary noted. “They’re closer, but they’re still far apart. And it’s going to take a real breakthrough here very soon to make this possible… or I think the president is going to have to make a decision about how much more time we’re going to dedicate to this,” he added. His comments come as State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce affirmed that the US is committed to settling the conflict, but is “not going to fly around the world at the drop of a hat to mediate meetings.” Instead, she signaled that it is now up to Russia and Ukraine “to present and develop concrete ideas about how this conflict is going to end.” Last month, the Trump administration indicated that the US could withdraw from the peace process altogether if there is no clear indication of progress in the talks.

Earlier media reports suggested that the US had proposed a peace agreement that includes Washington’s recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, as well as “freezing” the conflict along the current front line and acknowledging Moscow’s control over large parts of the four former Ukrainian regions which voted to join Russia. The deal would also reportedly prevent Ukraine from joining NATO and initiate a phased removal of the sanctions imposed on Russia. Russia has maintained that any peace settlement must include recognition of the new territorial reality on the ground, Ukraine’s demilitarization and denazification, as well as assurances that Kiev will not join NATO. Ukraine, however, has consistently refused to acknowledge its former territories as part of Russia.

Read more …

“..Ukraine ditched the 2015 Minsk Agreements and the 2022 Istanbul peace deal, and has repeatedly ignored Russia’s calls for talks — including President Vladimir Putin’s 2024 peace proposal..”

• Ukraine Conflict ‘Not Going to End Any Time Soon’ – Vance (Sp.)

US Vice President JD Vance said Russia and Ukraine know each other’s terms for peace, and it is up to Moscow and Kiev to reach a deal. “For three years, these sides have fought, and each of them has said, no peace, we’re going to fight until the other guys are basically knocked out. What we’ve seen now in the last couple of weeks is each side has put down. This is our peace proposal. The Ukrainians did it. The Russians did it. And now I think the question is to see whether we can actually find some middle ground here for these guys to bring this conflict to a close,” Vance boasted about a ‘deal’ that doesn’t exist. He said it would be up to Russia and Ukraine to decide. “It’s not going anywhere. It’s not going to end any time soon,” Vance emphasized.

“When I say this deal, I mean getting these guys to actually propose a peace settlement,” Vance said — blissfully unaware that Ukraine ditched the 2015 Minsk Agreements and the 2022 Istanbul peace deal, and has repeatedly ignored Russia’s calls for talks — including President Vladimir Putin’s 2024 peace proposal. Russia has been conducting its special military operation since February 24, 2022. President Vladimir Putin has said the operation aims to “protect people subjected to genocide by the Kiev regime.” According to the president, the ultimate goal of the operation is to completely liberate Donbass and create conditions that guarantee Russia’s security: Ukraine must undergo demilitarization and denazification.

Moscow says arms supplies to Ukraine hinder the settlement and directly involve NATO countries in the conflict. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has stressed that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine will be a legitimate target for Russia. The top diplomat has called the US and NATO out for not only supplying weapons to Kiev, but also training personnel in the UK, Germany, Italy and other countries. The Kremlin has stated that Western arms supplies to Ukraine hinder peace talks.

Read more …

“..the final decision rests with Ukraine’s military leadership, taking into account the presence of foreign dignitaries from neutral countries..”

• Ukrainian MP Threatens Terror Attack On Red Square (RT)

Kiev could target Moscow’s Red Square during next week’s Victory Day celebrations, a Ukrainian lawmaker has suggested, despite Russia’s offer of a three-day ceasefire. May 9 marks the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II. On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a 72-hour ceasefire from May 8 to 10, citing “humanitarian considerations.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later described the truce as a chance to begin “direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” However, in an interview with Ukrainian media on Wednesday, Yury Pavlenko openly suggested that Ukraine could try to derail Victory Day, which is one of the most revered holidays in Russia, as well as many former Soviet republics.

”I think the time will come when we will strike Red Square – whether it happens this May 9 or sometime later, that time will come,” Pavlenko said, claiming that the Russian capital is full of “legitimate military targets… that have brought much grief to Ukrainian soil.” He noted that the final decision rests with Ukraine’s military leadership, taking into account the presence of foreign dignitaries from neutral countries. This year’s Victory Day parade is expected to be attended by Chinese President Xi Jinping, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, among others.

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has branded the Russian truce proposal a “manipulation,” while calling for a longer ceasefire of 30 days. “They are now concerned that their parade is in jeopardy and rightly so,” Zelensky said. “What they should worry about is that this war continues.” In response, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova suggested that Kiev “is literally planning terrorist attacks on air,” which she said undermines the prospects for peace talks. Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Kiev has conducted a number of drone attacks on Moscow. On May 3, 2023, Russia accused Ukraine of attempting to assassinate Putin by targeting the Kremlin with two drones, which were shot down before they could cause significant damage.

Read more …

US purchased $230 billion more from EU than vice versa. The European Trade Commissioner sees a $56 billion deficit problem.

• Brussels Floats Trade Solution To Trump – FT (RT)

The EU wants to substantially increase purchases of goods from the US, according to European Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic, as cited by Financial Times. The move could help the bloc secure the elimination of import tariffs proposed by US President Donald Trump, the official has said. As part of his sweeping ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs on major trading partners, Trump sharply raised duties on US imports from the 27-nation bloc. The US president sees the tariff campaign, which targeted over 90 countries, as a solution to what he calls unfair trade imbalances. If what we are looking at as a problem in the deficit is €50 billion ($56 billion), I believe that we can really … solve this problem very quickly through LNG purchases, through some agricultural products like soybeans, or other areas, Sefcovic said on Thursday in an interview with the newspaper.

He emphasized that the bloc would not accept the 10% tariffs on its goods being kept in place as a fair resolution. He also warned that it would be “very difficult” to strike a deal that is “clearly good and acceptable for our member states and our European parliament.” Earlier this year, the Trump administration announced a sweeping 20% tariff on all EU goods and a 25% tariff on all car imports in an effort to eliminate the trade deficit with the bloc. Brussels was set to introduce 25% retaliatory tariffs on US imports before Trump announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs to allow for talks. However, the 10% baseline tariff and 25% tariff on certain goods remain in place.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has offered Washington a deal whereby tariffs on all industrial goods would be removed. However, Trump has rejected the zero-for-zero tariffs proposal, saying that it doesn’t solve the problem of the trade imbalance. Trade volumes between the US and the EU amounted to $975.9 billion in 2024, according to official data tracked by the Office of US Trade Representative. The US purchased $605.8 billion worth of EU goods, while the bloc’s imports from the US amounted to $370.2 billion.

Read more …

Because it is a European country.

• European Security Is Impossible Without Russia (Fetouri)

The narrative around Russia’s role in European security has become increasingly distorted in recent decades. Once a central player in European geopolitics, Russia is now considered an outsider at best and an outright enemy at worst. Looking at Moscow through this narrowed prism has become the norm not the exception. It makes the focused observer wonder if European leaders really believe that much can be done without Russia, particularly security-wise. To say such a European view of Moscow is both unfair and short-sighted may be an understatement. It is only 80 years since the Soviet Union, of which Russia was the center, led the liberation of Europe from what was essentially the European evil of Nazism, which is coming back to haunt the old continent.

Do current European leaders really forget such recent history or do they, intentionally, want to rewrite it to suit their current agendas and future Europe, in another generation or two? There is an irony here: while some European leaders are intentionally casting Russia as a “non-European” entity, the historical and practical reality paints a starkly different picture – where Russia is not only a European country but an essential player in ensuring the continent’s stability and prosperity. What cannot be changed is this: Russia is and will always be as European as France or Germany. Any serious debate about security in Europe is meritless and factitious without acknowledging Russia’s pivotal role. Throughout history Europe needed some kind of balancing powers between its internal powers (such as France and Germany), and Russia has been key in maintaining the balance of power on the continent.

A case in point: had it not been for the Soviet Union defeating Nazi Germany, who knows what kind of Europe would have emerged from World War II? The Soviets sacrificed more than 27 million human lives – soldiers and civilians – to rid the world of Nazi Germany and help create a new Germany, even though Germany has never been fully denazified. The United States played a part in liberating Europe and some 190,000 of its soldiers were killed, but that does not make the US a natural ally of Europe more than Russia. After the war, Western Europe accepted US hegemony, but that does not change the fact that Russia is a European and neighborly country and should be part of any European context discussions.

After the Cold War ended, Russia became even more important to be considered European than even the United Kingdom. The UK, eventually, chose to be an extension of America geopolitically and ended up threatening the EU had it not left the superficially harmonic union. Even the claim that shared values unite Europe and America and Europe within NATO is more of a justification for excluding Moscow than a reality. What are the noble values the UK shared with America in invading Iraq or Afghanistan? Where are such shared values within the NATO alliance, led by the US, that compelled it to destroy Libya in 2011? In both cases Moscow was out of the calculation except as a potential adversary.

This negative image of Moscow across much of Europe has been on the rise, becoming what the Russians rightly describe as “Russophobia,” taking a life of its own after the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine. Today many European leaders have reinforced this binary view of Russia as a threat, despite its historical and cultural ties to Europe. It seems that, in modern European politics, the question of Russia’s European identity is too often answered with a resounding “no.” Portraying Russia as a non-European country is an unfair characterization loaded with adversarial connotations. Who can deny the simple geographical fact that the Russian Federation is part of Europe and that Moscow lies firmly within Europe? Yet European school textbooks hardly count Moscow as a European capital city. Commonly, Russia in this context is described as the “other,” implying exclusion.

Read more …

And WW! too.

• Trump Claims US Did ‘More Than Any Other Country’ to Win World War II (Sp.)

US President Donald Trump declared May 8 Victory Day, saying that the United States did “more than any other country” to win World War II. The Soviet Union bore the brunt of defeating Nazi Germany and its European allies — destroying the vast majority of German forces on the Eastern Front. With over 27 million dead, it was the Red Army’s relentless push from Stalingrad to Berlin that shattered Hitler’s war machine. The USSR also played a crucial role in Japan’s defeat, crushing the Kwantung Army in August 1945 — a key factor in Tokyo’s surrender.

“Many of our allies and friends are celebrating May 8th as Victory Day, but we did more than any other Country … I am hereby renaming May 8th as Victory Day for World War II and November 11th as Victory Day for World War I. We won both Wars, nobody was close to us in terms of strength, bravery, or military brilliance, but we never celebrate anything — That’s because we don’t have leaders anymore, that know how to do so! We are going to start celebrating our victories again!” Trump said on Truth Social on Friday. As for America’s so-called “military brilliance”? The US became the only country in history to use nuclear weapons — killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. World War I wasn’t much different: the US talked big, joined late, and still claimed victory. So much for all that “bravery.”

Read more …

“Should Kiev abandon plans to join the US-led military bloc and withdraw its troops from the four new territories, Moscow is ready to institute an immediate ceasefire..”

• Ukraine Can’t Reclaim Lost Territory – Rubio (RT)

Ukraine will not be able to reclaim its 2014 borders from Russia, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has publicly stated he will never recognize the lost territories, including Crimea, as Russian. The peninsula voted overwhelmingly to join Russia in 2014, shortly after the US-backed armed coup in Kiev. Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Lugansk regions held their own referendums in 2022 to become part of Russia. Earlier this week, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Keith Kellogg told Fox News that Kiev has expressed a willingness to cede land de facto, if not de jure, as part of a peace deal. “Ukraine can’t push the Russians all the way back to where they were in 2014,” Rubio said in an interview with Fox News on Thursday.

After months of US-brokered peace efforts, Washington has a pretty clear idea of what both sides want, the top US diplomat noted. “We kind of can see what it would take for Ukraine to stop. We can see what it would take for the Russians to stop,” he said, adding that Moscow’s and Kiev’s settlement demands are still “far apart.” “It’s going to take a real breakthrough here very soon to make this possible, or I think the President is going to have to make a decision about how much more time we’re going to dedicate to this,” Rubio said. Both Trump and Rubio have previously warned that the US could walk away from being a peace broker in the Ukraine conflict, if there is no progress soon.

“Not that a war in Ukraine is not important, but I would say what’s happening with China is more important,” Rubio said, adding that Iran is another US concern. Moscow has repeatedly stated that its peace terms include Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization and denazification, as well as for Kiev to give up its ambitions to join NATO. Also, ceding the new Russian regions of Kherson, Zaporozhye and the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics is not up for discussion, Russian President Vladimir Putin said last year. Should Kiev abandon plans to join the US-led military bloc and withdraw its troops from the four new territories, Moscow is ready to institute an immediate ceasefire, he added.

Read more …

“In recent years, it often seemed like he was the only adult in the room when it came to recognizing just how big of a problem China is for us..”

• The Hardest Working Man In The Trump Administration (Sarah Anderson)

I’ve heard various members of Donald Trump’s administration say that it’s hard to keep up with the president at the pace he’s been going since Jan. 20. But there may be one man in the cabinet who can do it. Marco Rubio. In case you missed the news on Thursday, Trump shook his administration up a bit by announcing that Mike Waltz would no longer be his national security advisor. A little while later, the president surprised pretty much everyone — including State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce, who was mid-briefing — when he posted on Truth Social that he’d be nominating Waltz to be the next United States Ambassador to the United Nations instead. In the same post, he announced that he would be appointing Rubio as acting national security advisor. If you’re keeping track at home, Rubio now serves four — four! — roles in the Trump administration.

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1918032465219776901?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1918032465219776901%7Ctwgr%5E131b83389bf4f01796a60ebe103fda880dc04efd%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fsarah-anderson%2F2025%2F05%2F02%2Fthe-hardest-working-man-in-the-trump-administration-n4939427

Of course, Trump nominated Rubio for Secretary of State almost immediately after he was elected in November, and he was confirmed hours after Trump was sworn in on Jan. 20. On Feb. 3, which seems like years ago now, the president announced that Rubio would become Acting Administrator of USAID, and that the State Department would absorb the agency. Since then, we’ve learned what a mess USAID was, and Rubio announced that about 83% of its programs would be canceled. Shortly after that, on Feb. 7, Trump fired the Archivist of the United States, Colleen Joy Shogan, and on Feb. 16, he announced that Rubio would take her place. And now he can add national security advisor to his resume. Not bad for the guy Trump once called “Little Marco.” Rubio’s new workload has become a major talking point online and throughout the media ever since Trump made the announcement.

The Guardian points out that Rubio is the “first person since Henry Kissinger to hold the national security adviser and secretary of state positions at the same time. In the article “Marco Rubio, Secretary of Everything,” the New York Times also writes, “The former senator from Florida is now the head of four government bodies. He has outdone Henry Kissinger and even Xi Jinping, China’s leader, who has only three titles.” (Pretty sure the Jinping reference was meant to be some sort of dig after skimming the article, but I didn’t read the whole thing carefully, but it’s the New York Times, so the odds are…) Heck, even People magazine wrote an entire article based on the fact that Rubio has four jobs now. nRubio himself appeared on “Hannity” on Fox News tonight and spoke briefly about it, and he posted, “I’m honored to serve under the leadership of @POTUS” on X.

And here I am, sitting in my bed with my laptop after midnight on Thursday, writing about it for PJ Media, even though I told a couple of our editors earlier that I wasn’t going to. Why am I doing that? Well…If you come here regularly, you might notice that I write about Rubio and the State Department often. There are a few reasons for that. First, I’ve been a huge Rubio fan since he became a senator. He’s a bit older than me, but I always felt like he understood my generation more than any other politician in my lifetime, and he spoke to us about topics that mattered to us. (I could dig a little deeper into this and maybe one day I will, but not tonight.) I always felt like he understood things in ways that most other people who supposedly represent the country never did. Not only was he book smart, as they say, but he possessed a lot of common sense. It’s hard to find that, well, anywhere, much less in Washington, D.C.

I know many of you are Rubio fans now, too. Every single time I write one of those articles, I see dozens of comments about how impressed most of you are with him so far. Back during the 2016 primary, he became the only presidential candidate whose campaign I’ve ever supported financially. I’ve defended him both privately and professionally at times when many conservatives turned on him, and when I hopped back on the Trump train last summer, I hoped the president would choose him for, if not vice president (which I know was an issue because of Florida), Secretary of State. One reason for that is China. In recent years, it often seemed like he was the only adult in the room when it came to recognizing just how big of a problem China is for us. You could hear that loud and clear during his Senate confirmation hearing in January.

Read more …

“The job here is to enforce the federal civil rights laws, not woke ideology.” — Harmeet Dhillon, US Assistant AG for the Civil Rights Division

• What’s Normal, Exactly? (James Howard Kunstler)

When a claque of deep state shills such as Norm Eisen, Chuck Schumer, Bill Kristol, David Brooks, and Larry Summers holler about Mr. Trump’s attempt to reform a depraved political culture as “an assault on norms,” are you not prompted to wonder what, exactly, those norms might be? Looks like they are describing a colossal matrix of racketeering operations in concert with an epic program of crypto-Marxist mind-fuckery, mountains of money purloined under color-of-law, swindles galore of practically every public enterprise, the capital city of a so-called republic fogged in gaslight to conceal a Satyricon of pedophilia, sodomy, and sado-masochism in every closet, cabinet, and pigeon-hole of the political class. So, along comes Mr. Trump for the second round, with a supernaturally able clean-up crew this time, and the monsters feeding off that depraved normality commence to shriek in mortal panic as the scaffold of their crimes gets methodically disassembled and secrets are revealed.

Many of you have been pouting over the lack of criminal prosecutions these first hundred days. Why is AG Ms. Bondi preening on Fox News when she should be banging-out subpoenas and arrest warrants, you ask? And what broom-closet is Dan Bongino hiding in over at the Hoover Building? How is Hillary Clinton still at-large in the land? Does Alejandro Mayorkas still make his Saturday excursions to the boutiques along M Street? Looks like the months of May and June are setting up to be the season of shocks and consequence. Item: James O’Keefe, founder of Project Veritas (he was cancelled from it) and now running O’Keefe Media Group, put out a mighty strange eighteen-second video this week. Looks like it was filmed in a basement somewhere. “I’m going dark, he says ruefully. “I’m not suicidal. Pray for me. This one scares me, guys.”

A week earlier, O’Keefe announced that he had bombshell recordings of public figures breaking the law, involving billions of dollars, which he expected would lead to indictments. What spooked him in the week since then? I guess we’ll have to stand by to find out, or see if JO’K was bluffing. Meanwhile Virginia Guiffre, a former Jeffrey Epstein teen sex slave, likewise said just over a week ago: “I am making it publicly known that in no way, shape, or form am I suicidal. If something happens to me, for the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me to protect them. Too many evil people want to see me quieted.” This was a month after she was injured in a traffic accident with a school bus in Western Australia. On April 24, she reportedly committed suicide at home, after release from the hospital. What do you suppose changed her mind?

An ominous silence surrounds the promised release of the Epstein case material, whatever it consists of: depositions, flight logs, photographs, video recordings of prominent people in compromising situations. Remember, not long after inauguration day, the FBI’s New York field office was found to be sitting on a huge trove of previously hidden Epstein case evidence. The DOJ swiftly “retired” the chief agent of the office, James Dennehy, who additionally had failed to cooperate with requests to disclose the names of agents involved in the Jan-6 investigations. Supposedly, since the discovery of the Epstein trove, a thousand agents were assigned to “process” it, redact the names of the innocent victims, so they say. Are they close to finishing?

Speaking of the J-6, 2021 matter, pressure is building for the Republican majority Congress to hold hearings on exactly what went on that fateful day. FBI Director Patel has yet to disclose how many government agents (not just FBI), and how many “confidential human sources” (i.e., provocateurs), were in the crowd around and inside the US Capitol. It’s getting to be past time to ask Mr. Patel for a straight answer on that in an official proceeding, and continue from there to related business, such as Nancy Pelosi’s failure to reinforce the Capitol Police with National Guard troops that day, and the strange doings around the DNC pipe bomb ploy few blocks away. Personally, I doubt that Mr. Patel is inclined to lie or dissemble about all that. But the natives are getting a little restless.

Mr. Kennedy at HHS is already pretty frisky in his role supervising the enormous cluster of agencies that have done so much to wreck the nation’s health in recent years. Goodbye fluoride in the drinking water. Hello to placebo testing for new drugs and vaccines. Welcome to a vigorous six-month campaign to determine a likely cause of the autism epidemic. RFK is even asking what exactly is in those aviation contrails that folks have been observing and complaining about for so many years. And then there was the bomb he dropped during this week’s cabinet meeting: that under Joe Biden, HHS acted as a major vector for the trafficking of children. Say, what??? Lotta people wondered, did Bobby really say that? And does he know exactly who in HHS is responsible. . . like, names attached? I guess we’ll find out.

Read more …

“As of today, Americans are thinking about tariffs though the lens of the mainstream media outlets..”

• We’re Gonna Lose the PR War Over Tariffs Until We Start Doing THIS (Pinsker)

I’ll begin with the counterargument: If everything goes according to plan, the PR war over tariffs will be irrelevant, because the ultimate “spin” is a complete and total victory. And there’s a clear path to the finish line, which we outlined a month ago:

“Trump’s best PR path forward is to do exactly what he just did: On day one, impose painful tariffs on everyone. This way, you frontload the bad news. And then, after a few weeks of economic turmoil, the other countries will (hopefully) come begging to renegotiate — their hat in hand — because the possibility of losing the rich, rewarding, ultra-lucrative U.S. marketplace makes ‘em panic. After a few weeks of horrible, devastating economic news (which, alas, we’re seeing now), the headlines will then change in a hurry: Every other day, Trump would have a new, positive tariff treaty to announce! After the first few countries cave, it will incentivize all the other nations to get their [tushies] in gear and get a deal done fast — lest they wait too long and are frozen out of the U.S. marketplace. Done right, it creates a win-win domino effect: The new American gold rush!”
However, there was a caveat:
“But it’s still a high-risk strategy for Trump, because there’s no guarantee the other top countries will quickly fold. Sure, we expect places like France to live up to their white-flag-waving reputations (“Je suis un lâche!”), but national pride is tricky to predict. In the foreign countries that viscerally loathe Trump, the politicians can score points by “standing up the American bully.”

We’re now one month removed from Liberation Day, and MAGA Nation certainly frontloaded the bad news. There was a lot of it. And the latest polls reflect it. Here’s a hodgepodge of headlines over the last seven days:
• Fox News: Trump poll numbers on economy fall during trade fight, survey finds
• Gallup News: Most Americans Skeptical About Benefits of Tariffs
• CNN: CNN Poll: A growing majority says Trump has made the economy worse, with most skeptical of his tariff plans
• ABC News: Nearly two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump tariffs
• The Hill: Almost 6 in 10 say Trump policies making economy worse
• Yahoo News: Poll: After 1st 100 days, Trump’s approval rating continues to crater as 57% say he’s ‘gone too far’ on tariffs
• CBS News: Trump’s first 100 days seen as bringing big changes, but still too much focus on tariffs — CBS News poll
• NBC News: Poll: Americans vent disappointment with Trump ahead of 100 day, especially on tariffs
• Reuters: Risk of global economic recession surges on US tariff shockwaves: Reuters poll
• Newsweek: Americans Lose Faith in Economy Amid Trump Tariffs

Not good, and it’s a credit to Trump that the polls weren’t worse. This entire month has been a loud, angry drumbeat of media negativity — and Americans weren’t well-educated about tariff policy or global trade deals beforehand, because it’s not a sexy topic. In those (boring) days pre-Trump, Bill O’Reilly on Fox News and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC almost never mentioned ‘em. So, it’s not like illegal immigration, where we’ve heard the different arguments a zillion times and have already settled on a conclusion (which is why the media’s negativity about that lovable Maryland family man failed to move the needle). But with tariffs, we’re still hearing the arguments. Some Americans for the first time ever.

Without the “institutional knowledge” (including, sadly, those lovely on-air tutorials from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies; he would be so helpful right now) to sort through the hysteria, the public is vulnerable to PR manipulation. As of today, Americans are thinking about tariffs though the lens of the mainstream media outlets. And those outlets are focusing on:
• The economy is cratering! Everything’s crashing!
• Trump is a power-hungry maniac and out of control!
• Inflation will explode! We’ll all be broke!
• Shelves will be bare!
• Tariffs are stupid and destructive, lowering America’s standing in the world!

That’s a problem.

Read more …

Reads a bit like: what if Kamala Harris had been elected president? (In Germany, she was). The divide between Germany and the US is gaping.

• Germany’s AfD Party ‘Definitely Right-Wing Extremist’: Spy Agency (RMX)

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been declared “definitely right-wing extremist,” by the powerful domestic spy agency, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). The party is reacting with outrage. The BfV claims that the party is pursuing efforts against the “free democratic order,” which the agency now says is “certain.” Previously, the party was only declared as a “suspected case,” with this new designation paving the way for not only a ban but also mass surveillance of the entire party, including all its members. With this new designation, the BfV can surveil members, including their emails, phone calls, and chats, without a warrant. In addition, the BfV can now legally infiltrate the entire party with informants and use other spy techniques. Already, other parts of the AfD at the state level were classified as “definitely right-wing extremist,” but the new designation now applies this label to the entire national party.

The party is reacting with outrage, with Alice Weidel, the co-leader of the party, writing: “The decision of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy!” Regarding the statement by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, AfD federal spokespersons Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla said: Today’s decision by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy: In current polls, the AfD is the strongest force. The federal government only has four days left in office, the intelligence agency doesn’t even have a president anymore. And the classification as a so-called suspected case is not yet legally binding. Nevertheless, the AfD, as an opposition party, is now being publicly discredited and criminalized shortly before the change of government. The associated, targeted interference in the democratic decision-making process is therefore clearly politically motivated. The AfD will continue to defend itself legally against these defamations that endanger democracy.”

The BfV, however, is attempting to justify its decision, which will be seen by many as an attack on the country’s largest opposition party. Due to the “extremist character of the entire party, which disregards human dignity,” the BfV noted in its statement. Vice presidents of the authority, Sinan Selen and Silke Willems, further indicated that statements and positions of the party “violate the principle of human dignity.” One of the key factors that the BfV is attempting to use to justify the designation is the AfD’s alleged position on “ethnic Germans.” “The ethnic-descendant understanding of the people prevailing in the party is not compatible with the free democratic basic order,” reads the statement from the BfV. “The AfD, for example, does not consider German citizens with a migration history from predominantly Muslim countries to be equal members of the German people, as ethnically defined by the party.”

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been declared “definitely right-wing extremist,” by the powerful domestic spy agency, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). The party is reacting with outrage. The BfV claims that the party is pursuing efforts against the “free democratic order,” which the agency now says is “certain.” Previously, the party was only declared as a “suspected case,” with this new designation paving the way for not only a ban but also mass surveillance of the entire party, including all its members. With this new designation, the BfV can surveil members, including their emails, phone calls, and chats, without a warrant. In addition, the BfV can now legally infiltrate the entire party with informants and use other spy techniques.

https://twitter.com/RMXnews/status/1888999118326108392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1888999118326108392%7Ctwgr%5E1c7ec0fa2146094423148b3c66b422bb2d906d25%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frmx.news%2Farticle%2Fbreaking-germanys-afd-party-is-declared-definitely-right-wing-extremist-by-bfv-spy-agency-paving-the-way-for-a-ban%2F

Already, other parts of the AfD at the state level were classified as “definitely right-wing extremist,” but the new designation now applies this label to the entire national party. The party is reacting with outrage, with Alice Weidel, the co-leader of the party, writing: “The decision of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy!” Regarding the statement by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, AfD federal spokespersons Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla said: Today’s decision by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy: In current polls, the AfD is the strongest force. The federal government only has four days left in office, the intelligence agency doesn’t even have a president anymore. And the classification as a so-called suspected case is not yet legally binding.

Nevertheless, the AfD, as an opposition party, is now being publicly discredited and criminalized shortly before the change of government. The associated, targeted interference in the democratic decision-making process is therefore clearly politically motivated. The AfD will continue to defend itself legally against these defamations that endanger democracy.” The BfV, however, is attempting to justify its decision, which will be seen by many as an attack on the country’s largest opposition party. Due to the “extremist character of the entire party, which disregards human dignity,” the BfV noted in its statement. Vice presidents of the authority, Sinan Selen and Silke Willems, further indicated that statements and positions of the party “violate the principle of human dignity.”

One of the key factors that the BfV is attempting to use to justify the designation is the AfD’s alleged position on “ethnic Germans.”“The ethnic-descendant understanding of the people prevailing in the party is not compatible with the free democratic basic order,” reads the statement from the BfV. “The AfD, for example, does not consider German citizens with a migration history from predominantly Muslim countries to be equal members of the German people, as ethnically defined by the party.”

Read more …

“The AfD is the most popular party in Germany, and by far the most representative of East Germany. Now the bureaucrats try to destroy it,” Vance wrote on X.”

• Germany ‘Has Rebuilt The Berlin Wall’ – Vance (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance has compared the German government’s treatment of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party to rebuilding the Berlin Wall. On Friday, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the BfV, classified the anti-immigration AfD as an “extremist” organization, citing “xenophobic, anti-minority, Islamophobic, and anti-Muslim statements made by leading party officials.” The label enables police to closely monitor the party’s activities. “The AfD is the most popular party in Germany, and by far the most representative of East Germany. Now the bureaucrats try to destroy it,” Vance wrote on X. “The West tore down the Berlin Wall together. And it has been rebuilt – not by the Soviets or the Russians, but by the German establishment,” he added.

The party’s co-leader, Alice Weidel, accused the government of attempting to quell dissent. “Since the AfD is the strongest party in polls now, they want to suppress the opposition & freedom of speech,” she wrote on X. AfD was founded in 2013 as a backlash to Germany’s handling of the eurozone debt crisis. It has since shifted focus to demanding tighter immigration and asylum laws and opposing the “woke agenda.” The party also criticizes NATO and has staged protests against sending weapons to Ukraine. AfD finished second in the federal elections in February, winning 152 seats in the 630-seat Bundestag. Last month, it topped opinion polls for the first time, with 26% support. The party is especially popular in the economically underdeveloped regions of former East Germany. AfD has also been embroiled in controversy, as some members have had links to far-right and neo-Nazi groups or used slogans associated with Nazi Germany.

Major German parties have refused to cooperate or form coalitions with AfD under the so-called “firewall” principle. Vance criticized efforts to isolate the party during his speech at the Munich Security Conference in February. “Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don’t,” the US vice president said. The Berlin Wall was a concrete barrier built by East Germany in 1961 to stop its citizens from fleeing to West Berlin. It became a powerful symbol of the Cold War and remained in place until it was torn down in 1989, leading to German reunification.

Read more …

Russia: 26 million deaths. US: just over 292,000.

• Germany Is Weaponizing WWII Memory Against Russia (Amar)

Eighty years ago, Germany suffered its worst self-induced military – as well as moral, political, cultural, you name it – catastrophe ever. First, Nazi Germany led the global fascist challenge that we call World War II. Then, Germany was not merely defeated but crushed by the combined efforts of, in order of importance, the Soviet Union, the US, and UK, to name only those powers that really mattered decisively for the outcome of the war in Europe. This Allied victory in Europe is celebrated in May. In the West, the commemorations peak on the 8th and in Russia, one day later. In Asia, things were different. World War II started earlier – in July 1937, not September 1939, and ended later – in August, not May, 1945. Regarding the war in Europe, the West has always, with varying intensity, sought to diminish the preponderant role of the Soviet Union – and within the latter, of Russia.

Concerning the war in Asia, the West’s main target of this weaponized forgetfulness has been China, rightly labeled “the forgotten ally” by historian Rana Mitter. China, like the Soviet Union and now Russia, has always dared challenge Western hegemony and especially US ‘primacy’. And, as with Russia and the former Soviet Union, it is this geopolitical independence that has led the West to deny the Chinese people’s real and massive World War II contribution and sacrifices, which were enormous (the death toll alone, to quote only one figure, is estimated at 12-20 million). But for now, back to the European part of the war. There, in historical reality, it was the Soviet Union that did the most – by far – to destroy Nazi Germany. And that is a simple, even quantifiable historical fact. Merely a decade ago, it was occasionally admitted even in Western mainstream media, such as America’s Washington Post and Britain’s Independent.

A few figures suffice to sketch just how predominant the Soviet share in the victory over Nazism was: Over the course of the war, in all its theaters, 17 to 18 million Germans served in the Nazi forces (including the Wehrmacht and the smaller but especially important and vicious Waffen-SS). At least 4 million German soldiers were killed in the fight against the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1945 alone. Estimates indicate that at least as many were injured, probably more; around 3 million became POWs. The upshot of this is simple: A massive chunk, some historians estimate up to 80%, of the total German fighting manpower of World War II – not only those who invaded the Soviet Union – was eliminated on what the Germans called the Eastern Front. Without going into easily available details, the picture is similar when we focus not on men but materiel.

Ask, for instance, Google’s Gemini AI in Deep Research mode, and it will sum it up thus: “It is evident that the Eastern Front absorbed the vast majority of Germany’s total tank losses throughout the war.” It turns out that the failure of Germany’s touted Leopard tank in the Ukraine conflict has a long tradition reaching back to Nazi Germany’s Panthers and Tigers: Russia, neutering German cats since 1941. Put simply, as with Sweden’s Gustav XII and France’s Napoleon, it was Russia and the Soviet Union that broke Hitler’s back. And at enormous cost and sacrifice: Current, solid figures put Soviet losses (military and civilian combined) at 26-27 million. (Compare, for instance, with the US: Military casualties, according to Encyclopedia Britannica, just over 292,000; civilian losses were negligible, even if every individual death is, of course, tragic.)

And now it is Germany – of all places – that has marred the run-up to this year’s May anniversary with an embarrassingly ugly scandal. Its essence is a German government attempt to crudely instrumentalize the commemorations to make them serve the propaganda war that has been part of the West’s proxy war in Ukraine, while accusing Russia of doing just that. In Germany, more and more often, every accusation is a confession, as they say about Israeli propaganda.

Read more …

“..officially designate AfD a “confirmed extremist entity.” This legal status allows the BfV to deploy surveillance and intelligence measures to monitor the party’s activities without restriction.”

• Germany Is ‘Tyranny In Disguise’ – Rubio (RT)

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has sharply criticized Berlin for designating Alternative for Germany (AfD), the country’s most popular party according to recent polling, as “extremist.” Such actions have nothing to do with democracy, he has warned. “Germany just gave its spy agency new powers to surveil the opposition,” America’s top diplomat wrote on X on Friday. “That’s not democracy – it’s tyranny in disguise.” Earlier in the day, the German domestic security service (BfV) announced the decision to officially designate AfD a “confirmed extremist entity.” This legal status allows the BfV to deploy surveillance and intelligence measures to monitor the party’s activities without restriction.

Explaining the move, the agency cited “the extremist nature of the entire party, which disregards human dignity.” It pointed to the party’s “prevailing understanding of the people based on ethnicity and descent,” which it said was “incompatible with the democratic basic order.” The AfD has long been known for its harsh anti-immigration stance. “What is truly extremist is not the popular AfD… but rather the establishment’s deadly open border immigration policies that the AfD opposes,” Rubio argued, calling on Berlin to “reverse its course.” The right-wing party has been enjoying steady support from Washington ever since US President Donald Trump entered the White House for his second term.

US Vice President J.D. Vance strongly criticized politicians who shun parties such as the AfD at the Munich Security Conference in February. US-based billionaire and Trump adviser Elon Musk has repeatedly openly expressed support for the party. In January, ahead of the German parliamentary vote, he hosted a livestream on X with AfD co-leader and then chancellor candidate, Alice Weidel. The party came in second during the February election, behind the center-right Christian Democrats, which ruled out any coalitions with the AfD. Recent polls show the two parties being neck-and-neck, with one survey published by Forsa Institute putting AfD one percent point ahead of their center-right rivals.

Read more …

“Ukraine’s drive to join Europe involved denying its heroic past, glorifying criminals and Nazi collaborators, and promoting the “Banderization” of society.”

• Odessa Massacre: Point of No Return Marked Ukraine’s Slide Into Nazism (Sp.)

On May 2, 2014, a pro-Maidan crowd outnumbering anti-Maidan protesters trapped dozens inside the Trade Union building and set it on fire with petrol bombs. At least 42 anti-Maidan activists died—either burned, asphyxiated, or killed by gunfire. The mass murder of innocent people in Odessa’s Trade Union house marked a “point of no return” for Ukraine, Ukrainian politics expert Alexander Dudchak told Sputnik. Those behind the West-backed coup that year were driven by Nazi-fueled “hatred for humanity.” Their goal was to build an “anti-Russia,” with Russophobia stoked from abroad. After the tragedy, “it became clear to those who disagreed with the [pro-Western Ukrainian] government that there was no way to defend their rights except through force.” Thus, the Odessa massacre can be seen as the turning point for all subsequent events.

“It became obvious what these forces represented – human-hating, pure Nazism, which came to power in Ukraine,” said Dudchak. Long before the Soviet Union’s collapse, NGOs and foreign funds, like the notorious Soros foundation, began distorting history to ideologically target the younger generation. Ukraine’s drive to join Europe involved denying its heroic past, glorifying criminals and Nazi collaborators, and promoting the “Banderization” of society. Despite the public’s strong preference for ties with former Soviet countries, a West-inspired coup took place, reshaping public consciousness. History was rewritten, dissent silenced through brutal methods, and media control imposed.

On May 2, 2014, Ukrainian nationalists locked anti-Maidan protesters, who opposed Euromaidan and Ukraine’s rapprochement with the European Union, in the Odessa Trade Union House and set the building on fire. Almost 50 people died, and some 250 protesters were injured in clashes with the radicals, according to the United Nations. The massacre was executed by the West’s protégés and under their control. “I don’t rule out that the West may have even written the script for this event. They needed to show the population what happens to those who try to oppose them. And that is what they did – with an animalistic cruelty,” concluded Dudchak.

Read more …

Boeing’s problems are all over the company. Engineers used to run the company; now it’s accountants.

• Trump Reportedly Turns To L3Harris For “Interim” Air Force One Jet (ZH)

Frustrated by repeated delays in Boeing’s new Air Force One production timeline, President Trump has reportedly commissioned defense contractor L3Harris Technologies to retrofit a Boeing 747 previously used by the Qatari government as an interim presidential aircraft. The Wall Street Journal reported that L3Harris has been tasked with retrofitting the Qatari 747 with communications systems and other equipment to transform the luxury aircraft into Air Force One. According to the people familiar with the matter, President Trump requested that L3Harris complete the needed retrofitting of the jumbo jet by as early as fall. In February, FOX Business’ Edward Lawrence confirmed that Boeing had suffered global supply chain snarls that changed project timings and delayed the completion date to 2029.

White House communications director Steven Cheung told FOX Business at the time: “It is ridiculous that the delivery of a new Air Force One airplane has been delayed for such a long time,” adding, “The president working on identifying ways to speed up the delivery of a new plane, which has been needed for a while.” Months later, WSJ’s L3Harris report may suggest that there were very limited options to speed up the Boeing delivery. Here’s more from the report:

“Before Trump’s inauguration, White House Military Office and senior Air Force officials considered canceling Boeing’s contract for the new planes, according to people familiar with the matter. White House officials under Trump have also discussed whether they can sue the plane manufacturer, some of the people said. Trump initially tapped the bloated defense contractor to build the next-generation presidential aircraft during his first term, aiming to replace the aging fleet. Boeing’s failure to deliver on time has become emblematic of the broader military-industrial complex: bloated, sluggish, and unaccountable. The military-industrial complex’s failures must urgently be corrected. For now, L3Harris is stepping in, aiming to deliver a retrofitted Qatari 747 as an interim Air Force One jet by this fall. America’s defense space needs more domestic competition if it wants to compete in the 2030s.

Read more …

“The manufactured presentation of the self (fabricated authenticity) is the ultimate neoliberal imperative: people are actively encouraged to become producers of themselves. The name of the game is “fake it till you make it.”

“..this state of affairs is undermining real engagement and driving an increasing number of frustrated and disillusioned users away from these platforms, leaving bots to interact with other bots, as advertisers already lament.”

• The Ghost in the Machine. AI and The Spectral Ontology of Value (Ruggeri)

By now it should be abundantly clear how social influencers operate. Self-promotion, exaggerated claims, and a well-crafted image can snowball into credibility before anyone checks credentials. They build parasocial relationships with their followers who feel like they know the influencer, even if they have never met. Influencers attempt to create an aura of individuality and authenticity through personal storytelling, share raw footage or sensational material, invite followers to “peek” into their lives encouraging voyeuristic engagement. However, this aura is even more fragile than the artificial aura mentioned by Walter Benjamin when in the 1930s he described the Hollywood-driven phenomenon of elevating actors to celebrity status, creating cult-like personas that compensated for the loss of aura in in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Not only is the influencers’ derivative content easily replicable, they too are vulnerable to replacement by AI-generated personas.

Benjamin recognized in the spell of the star’s personality “the phony spell of a commodity.” But most importantly, he warned that a medium that has a dual capacity to abolish distance between the audience and the depicted world while simultaneously detaching the audience from the physical world and its material conditions, is ideally suited to the aims of fascism. Benjamin was primarily referring to film and photography, but in an era of algorithmic reproduction controlled by a handful of tech companies his observations have become more relevant than ever.

Influencers leverage the bandwagon effect, that mix of conformity and fear of missing out. Once a persona gains momentum, with the help of thousands of bots whose cost is now less than a cent for basic accounts, humans jump on. Social media’s smoke and mirrors work because we are wired for stories, not audits. But with billions of automated bots flooding social media platforms, there is a roughly 50% chance that any account you engage with, whether by liking a post, commenting, or following, is a bot. Bots have become so sophisticated that it has become increasingly harder to detect them. As to the remaining accounts that are still operated by humans, about half of them publish content that is generated by artificial intelligence.

Even those with limited expertise on a given topic can produce persuasive posts and articles, while readers would need an AI tool such as GPTZero to identify their artificial origin. A simple prompt ensures that the AI-generated content they publish is aligned, and resonates, with their followers’ ideological leanings, interests and preferences. An article that appeared in a conservative news outlet can be automatically rewritten to please a liberal audience and vice versa. A paper published by an academic can be summarized and interspersed with jokes and colloquialism to appeal to a non-academic audience, three articles can be seamlessly meshed into one creating a cohesive piece that synthesizes their content, etc. You get the drift.

Shaped by a mix of human activity and AI-generated content, the Internet and social media now resemble a phantasmagoria, a make-believe optical show that projects ghostly images, fetishizes human desires and experiences, and intensifies narcissistic self-reference to create an illusion of authenticity. The manufactured presentation of the self (fabricated authenticity) is the ultimate neoliberal imperative: people are actively encouraged to become producers of themselves. The name of the game is “fake it till you make it.” Lack of qualifications or professional expertise is no barrier for aspiring influencers. Ambition, a background in marketing, a good knowledge of psychological manipulation techniques, the ability to leverage algorithms, and an initial investment in an army of bots to boost content are better guarantors of success.

Those who make the cut can rake in juicy contracts to promote products, services or a political agenda. The more engagement their hustle generates, the more data capital social media platforms accumulate. Unsurprisingly, this state of affairs is undermining real engagement and driving an increasing number of frustrated and disillusioned users away from these platforms, leaving bots to interact with other bots, as advertisers already lament.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Hydroxide

mRNA

Tom plays dead

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 24 2025

Apr 242025
 
 April 24, 2025  Posted by at 9:12 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  32 Responses »


Jean-François Millet The Angelus 1857

 

• Trump Excoriates Zelensky For Rejecting Crimea Proposal For Peace (ZH)
• US Gained ‘Better Understanding’ Of Russia’s Stance On Ukraine – Rubio (RT)
• Vance Ramps Up Pressure On Ukraine With Peace Plan That ‘Sharply Favors Russia’ (ZH)
• EU Refusing To Lift Russia Sanctions For Peace – Reuters (RT)
• Where Have Europe’s Pacifists Gone – Who Once Opposed NATO? (van den Ende)
• There Will Be No Ukrainian Peace Deal (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Bessent Calls For ‘Reforms’ Among ‘Bretton Woods Institutions’ (ZH)
• Musk and Bessent Had ‘WWE Fight’ In White House – Axios (RT)
• Judge Orders Correction Notices For Fired Probationary Workers (ET)
• Harvard: Take the Trump Deal, Before It’s Too Late (Victor Davis Hanson)
• World Economic Forum Opens Probe Into Founder as Klaus Schwab Resigns (DS)
• The Left’s Mount Rushmore (Al Perrotta)
• New Poll Data Confirms the Democrats’ Worst Fears (Margolis)
• HHS, FDA Announce Phase-Out Of All Artificial Food Dyes (ZH)
• Depression Cycle Arrives in 2025 & 2026 – Charles Nenner (USAW)
• Why U.S. Must Win AI Race Against China – Khosla (ZH)
• Ukraine Complicit in 2014 Massacre: European Court of Human Rights (Kuzmarov)

 

 

 

 

Amish
https://twitter.com/Nichole05507742/status/1914675572762140682
https://twitter.com/matt_vanswol/status/1914679392632033447

 

 

https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/1915003832062431232

Collum

Moon

66

 

 

40% of covid deaths are diabetics
https://twitter.com/toobaffled/status/1914932641180090504

 

 

 

 

The key to peace now is getting Europe out of the way. Trump can do that, but does he want that fight? Then again, does he have a choice?

• Trump Excoriates Zelensky For Rejecting Crimea Proposal For Peace (ZH)

Trump vs. Zelensky Round Two? Tensions initially looked to have cooled after the Zelensky-Vance-Trump February 28 verbal blow-up and showdown at the Oval Office (see clip below), but the spat is heating up once again, and is fast getting personal. President Trump has slammed President Zelensky in a Wednesday post on Truth Social, saying of the Ukrainian leader, “if he wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired”… and “He can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country.” The fiery denunciation appears in direct response to Zelensky the day prior rejecting Washington demands that Ukraine be ready to formally recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea. Trump continued, “It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about!”

The White House has this week been making it clear that the United States is ready to walk away from the peace process if it doesn’t have willing partners. All of this pressure seems aimed squarely at Kiev, given also Vice President Vance’s Wednesday remarks while in India. “We’ve issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it’s time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process,” Vance told the press pool while on the trip. “The only way to really stop the killing is for the armies to both put down their weapons, to freeze this thing and to get on with the business of actually building a better Russia and a better Ukraine.” Freezing the war now would certainly give Russian forces a huge advantage, given the immense territory in the East they now hold.

Trump in the fresh social media post further demanded that now is the time to “GET IT DONE” – referring to achieving a lasting settlement. And he coupled this with another swipe at Zelensky, saying the man has “no cards to play” – which has been a US admin theme going back to February. “I look forward to being able to help Ukraine, and Russia, get out of this Complete and Total MESS, that would have never started if I were President!” – Trump concluded in the post. Trump is clearly not happy in the wake of Zelensky’s Tuesday remarks wherein he asserted that Ukraine will not legally recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea under any circumstances,

“There is nothing to talk about. This violates our Constitution. This is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine,” Zelensky told reporters. But Trump is now calling this out as essentially BS – saying that no, this is the very thing in question that must be talked about if the war is to end. On a practical level, Russia is never going to give up Crimea regardless, given it has long been the historic home of the Russian Navy’s Black Sea fleet, and has an overwhelming Russian-speaking population. Will Zelensky respond to this latest dressing down by Trump? His PR handlers are likely urging him not to. The last time this happened in the wake of Zelensky’s visit to the White House, the US cut off weapons supplies and intelligence-sharing to Kiev for several days. But this spat and sparring could blow up further yet. Zelensky expressed hope that he could meet with Trump while in Rome for the Pope’s funeral on Saturday, but this is now looking less likely.

Read more …

“We have a better understanding of that now because we’ve actually spoken to them after three years of not speaking to them..”

• US Gained ‘Better Understanding’ Of Russia’s Stance On Ukraine – Rubio (RT)

Washington has gained a much better understanding of Russia’s position on the Ukraine conflict following the recent series of bilateral talks, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said. Rubio made the remarks on Wednesday in an interview with The Free Press, saying the US has been seeking to grasp what the Russian position is. “We have a better understanding of that now because we’ve actually spoken to them after three years of not speaking to them,” he stated. Ties between Moscow and Washington all but collapsed following the 2022 escalation of the Ukraine conflict under then-President Joe Biden. Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald Trump has distanced himself from Biden-era policies, pushing for a rapid resolution to the conflict and a reset in bilateral relations. The two sides have held several rounds of high-level talks in recent months.

Voicing hope for a peace deal, Rubio emphasized there’s “no military end” to the ongoing hostilities. “We have to be frank. Russia’s not just going to roll over Ukraine and take the whole country. And Ukraine’s not going to push them all the way back to where they were before 2014,” he stated. “We’ve done our best,” Rubio told the outlet. “This is not our war. We didn’t start this war. We’re trying to help everybody end it,” he said, expressing hope to “bring the two sides closer.” Rubio was expected at a high-level Ukraine meeting in London on Wednesday with UK, US, French, German and Ukrainian diplomats. However, later Rubio and Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff decided to skip the event. The UK Foreign Office later confirmed to AFP that the foreign ministers meeting had been indefinitely postponed, adding that “official level talks” will continue but behind closed doors. As part of a reported “final offer” to end the Ukraine conflict, Washington had planned to present a proposal in London recognizing Crimea as Russian “de jure” and acknowledging Moscow’s control over the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions.

The plan was also said to include the lifting of some sanctions against Russia and opposing NATO membership for Ukraine. On Tuesday, Vladimir Zelensky rejected any discussion of recognizing Crimea as Russian. Trump warned on Wednesday that Zelensky risked losing the entire country if he continued to stall talks. Moscow has maintained that the status of Crimea – which joined Russia in 2014 following a referendum held after the Western-backed coup in Kiev – and the four other former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia in 2022, is not up for negotiation. Russian officials also insist that any peace agreement must address the “root causes” of the conflict. President Vladimir Putin has also said that a viable ceasefire would require Western nations to stop arms deliveries to Ukraine.

Read more …

Ukraine -and Europe- chooses to forget they just lost a war.

• Vance Ramps Up Pressure On Ukraine With Peace Plan That ‘Sharply Favors Russia’ (ZH)

Vice President JD Vance while traveling in India on Wednesday issued some new and provocative remarks on the prospect of Ukraine peace, and Washington’s demands related to ending the war. The NY Times headlined is coverage of Vance’s new remarks by somewhat disparagingly calling it a “Plan for Ukraine That Sharply Favors Russia” — given that it calls for ‘freezing’ the front lines, which would leave Russian forces in control of the majority of the Donbass region in Eastern Ukraine. The Vice President reiterated to reporters that the United States would “walk away” from engaging in a peace process if both Ukraine and Russia refused to accept the American terms. The NY Times concludes, “But President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine was clearly the target.”

“We’ve issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it’s time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process,” Vance told the press pool. “The only way to really stop the killing is for the armies to both put down their weapons, to freeze this thing and to get on with the business of actually building a better Russia and a better Ukraine.” Here is the brief list of basics that Washington is demanding for its outline of peace: —a “freeze” of territorial lines in the three-plus year war —no path to NATO membership for Ukraine —formal recognition of Russia holding Crimea But it was only yesterday that Ukraine’s President Zelensky said he has rejected the possibility of ceding over Crimea, after the Trump administration reportedly offered this ‘gift’ to Putin of US recognition of Russian sovereignty over the strategic peninsula which has long been home to the Russian navy’s Black Sea fleet.

According to Ukrainian media: Ukraine will not legally recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea under any circumstances, President Volodymyr Zelensky said during a briefing in Kyiv on April 22. “There is nothing to talk about. This violates our Constitution. This is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine,” Zelensky told reporters. Zelensky added, “As soon as talks about Crimea and our sovereign territories begin, the talks enter the format that Russia wants – prolonging the war – because it will not be possible to agree on everything quickly.” Kiev has also recently accused Moscow of using negotiations as a smokescreen, also coming off the 30-hour Easter truce, which saw both sides accuse the other of many violations.

Commenting further of Vance’s fresh remarks, the NY Times writes, “It was the first time a U.S. official had publicly laid out a cease-fire deal in such stark terms and the comments appeared designed to increase pressure on Ukraine, which has long refused to accept Russia’s claims on its lands, particularly in Crimea.” Ukraine is meanwhile telling its Western backers that it is “ready to negotiate, but not to surrender.” According to fresh words of Ukraine’s vice PM Yulia Svyrydenko, “There will be no agreement that hands Russia the stronger foundations it needs to regroup and return with greater violence. A full ceasefire—on land, in the air, and at sea—is the necessary first step. If Russia opts for a limited pause, Ukraine will respond in kind.”

Read more …

The EU’s story is Russia will invade all of Europe if Ukraine does not get unlimited support. They will cruelly impoverish their own people for it. Unless these people call a halt to that.

• EU Refusing To Lift Russia Sanctions For Peace – Reuters (RT)

The EU has firmly rejected the idea of easing Ukraine-related sanctions against Russia before peace negotiations are concluded, Reuters reported on Wednesday, citing sources. Last week, the US shared with EU officials proposals aimed at facilitating a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. The initiative reportedly outlined potential terms to end the conflict, including the easing of sanctions on Moscow in the event of a lasting ceasefire. Brussels, however, “staunchly opposes” Russia’s request to lift EU sanctions before peace talks are concluded, Reuters wrote, citing European diplomats. Another sticking point is the US proposal to recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea – a suggestion the outlet described as a “non-starter” for both the EU and Kiev.

The EU’s stance is reportedly seen as diminishing the chances of any breakthrough in the peace negotiations, prompting senior US officials to skip a high-level meeting in London on Wednesday held for discussing the Ukraine conflict. The gathering was due to include top diplomats from the UK, US, France, Germany, and Ukraine but ended up being downgraded to involve lower-level officials. Both special envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are skipping the event. The US delegation is instead being led instead by General Keith Kellogg, another envoy of US President Donald Trump focused on Ukraine. Last month, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared the EU would not lift its sanctions against Russia for as long as the Ukraine conflict continues.

Also in March, the EU rejected a Russian demand to lift sanctions on Russian Agricultural Bank as part of the Black Sea ceasefire initiative discussed between Moscow and Washington. During the talks in Saudi Arabia, Russia and the US agreed to work toward reviving the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which, according to the Kremlin, would include the removal of Western restrictions against the agricultural bank and other financial institutions. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded that the EU’s refusal to lift sanctions on Russia demonstrates the bloc’s reluctance to end the Ukraine conflict. “If European countries don’t want to go down this path, it means they don’t want to go down the path of peace in unison with the efforts shown in Moscow and Washington,” he said at the time.

Read more …

The war industry has conquered Europe in record time.

• Where Have Europe’s Pacifists Gone – Who Once Opposed NATO? (van den Ende)

Where are they now—Europe’s pacifists? Why do they no longer gather in Belgium, in Brussels, NATO’s headquarters, where large demonstrations against the alliance once took place? These protests, led by pacifists, denounced NATO, war, militarization, and nuclear arms. The Belgian newspaper Le Soir recently posed an intriguing question: Why have the pacifists vanished? “The arms race has begun,” the article argues. “Like its European neighbors, Belgium is preparing to significantly increase military spending this year—without facing any opposition.” “We keep our word,” declares Francken, Belgium’s former Defense Minister. “Belgium will become a solidary ally with extra defense budgets for personnel, equipment, and infrastructure.” He claims the spending will also boost jobs and innovation. Belgium, after all, is a NATO founding member, alongside the Netherlands.

Some Belgian (former) pacifists have reacted sharply to the government’s plans: “Retirees must accept lower pensions, unemployment benefits are being slashed, the sick languish in poverty, nurses earn less and work longer for diminished pensions, hospitals lose subsidies—all to enrich that corrupt Zelensky gang in Kiev.” The same measures, they note, are being imposed in the Netherlands. But as the article points out, criticizing NATO now invites ridicule. Or does it go further than mockery? Across Western Europe—Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany—and in the Baltic states and Poland, dissent is met with more than scorn. People are arrested, elections are overturned, and societies drift toward totalitarianism—or worse, a resurgence of militarism and fascism unseen since 1945.

Europeans once insisted America should not meddle in their affairs. But it’s too late for that. EU governments, radicalized by waning U.S. interest in Europe, have already been co-opted. They should have spoken up years ago, when it became clear Europe was being used to wage wars in distant lands its citizens barely knew. Instead, they absorbed refugees (often unwillingly) and fell under what some call American colonization. Yet America wasn’t entirely wrong. In Munich last February, Vice President J.D. Vance called Europe a “totalitarian society,” singling out Germany. I can confirm his assessment was accurate—but it barely scratched the surface. The reality is far worse and deteriorating daily. Consider these examples: • A 16-year-old German girl was expelled from school by police for posting a pro-AfD TikTok video featuring the Smurfs (the right-wing party’s color is blue). • An AfD politician was fined for stating that migrants commit more gang rapes than German citizens. (The court didn’t dispute her facts but ruled they incited hatred.)

Germany once had a robust pacifist movement. In the 1970s and 80s, activists—many from what is now the Green Party (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)—protested NATO and nuclear weapons. Today, those same Greens, led by Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck, champion war and arms shipments. Their party program declares Germany must lead Europe, offering a “global counterweight” to China and Russia. The anti-war, anti-NATO movement has been absorbed into a party now pushing for war—especially against Russia, as Baerbock’s rhetoric makes clear. Or take a 2023 case where the EU’s High Representative expressed concern over “extrajudicial sentences against Serbs” who protested NATO in Kosovska Mitrovica. Kosovo’s Foreign Minister defended the arrests, claiming police had “clear evidence” the demonstrators participated in an “attack on NATO.”

So where have Europe’s pacifists gone—the ones who marched against war, militarization, and nuclear arms for decades? The Friedrich Naumann Foundation (banned in Russia) claims to have the answer. In an article, they declare: “The end of pacifism (as heard in a Bundestag debate) was historic. Hopefully, it marks the end of a moral and political error.” Has pacifism become a “political mistake”? Millions who oppose war have been misled for years by their own politicians—like the Greens, who traded peace for militarism. The world is upside down, yet Europe’s docile masses seem content as their pensions fund weapons. New Eastern Europe takes it further, arguing “Pacifism kills.” The outlet claims: “The problem isn’t pacifism itself, but its manipulation for purposes contrary to its ideals. While pacifist appeals to Russia (the aggressor) are justified, targeting Ukraine or both sides aids Moscow.”

In short: Pacifism helps Russia. The “hippies” of the 1960s live in a fantasy where peace is impossible, Russia is the villain, and Europe must defeat it. The campaign against pacifism mirrors the EU’s push for militarization. Europe is silencing pacifists—and dissidents—just as pre-WWII Germany did under fascism. New laws are emerging. In Germany, the proposed CDU/CSU-SPD coalition plans to “fight lies,” per their “Culture and Media“ working group. If you “lie” by government standards—say, by advocating peace with Russia or denying its “aggression”—you risk jail, fines, or online erasure. “The deliberate spread of false claims isn’t covered by free speech,” they assert.

Le Soir asked: Where are the pacifists? They’re still here—for now. But once Germany’s new government takes power, once the digital ID and CBDC (mandatory across Europe) launch this October, protests—online or in streets—will be surveilled. Small demonstrations in Germany and Amsterdam show resistance lingers. But soon, fear will silence them: fear for jobs, pensions, benefits, even children.

Read more …

PCR keeps wanting Putin to erase Ukraine. He’ll do it only if forced to. He may well be.

• There Will Be No Ukrainian Peace Deal (Paul Craig Roberts)

There cannot be a peace deal when President Trump only proposes that Russia keep Crimea, which Russia did not take in war but in an unanimous vote of the population in Crimea to be reunited with Russia from which Crimea had been torn. Trump has not included in the deal Russian Donbas, which also voted to be returned to Russia or the other Russian areas that Russian forces have liberated and have been reincorporated into Russia. In other words, so far, other than Crimea, President Trump has offered President Putin none of the former Russian territory that is now again part of Russia herself. Is the implication that Putin must hand back to Ukraine the territory from which Russian soldiers have driven out Ukrainian soldiers? So Putin’s 3+ years of war was all for nothing?

Zelensky himself, treated by Trump as Ukraine’s leader despite the fact that Zelensky’s term has expired and he is no longer legally or constitutionally the president of Ukraine, states that he will not even discuss recognizing Crimea as Russian territory: Crimea “is our territory, the territory of the people of Ukraine. We have nothing to talk about on this topic.” To understand how absurd Zelensky is, consider that Crimea is the home since the 1700s of the base of Russia’s Black Sea Navy, Russia’s access to the Mediterranean. As Zelensky appears to have a veto, even Trump’s partial concession to Russia has no chance. Trump threatens that he will walk away from the negotiations. That w0uld be a good thing if he takes American weapons and money when he goes.

Zelensky would be left to deal with Putin, perhaps an easy task as Putin and Lavrov continue to bleat for negotiations, neglecting their responsibility to win a war that has gone on for far too long drawing in the US and Europe. It seems Zelensky is relying on Britain and France to send their troops to continue the fight against Russia. The French president is talking about extending France’s nuclear umbrella to include Ukraine. Putin and Lavrov seem to prefer a negotiated deal to a military victory. Would the Kremlin accept a deal that requires Russia to give up battlefield successes won at a large cost in Russian life, the life of young men lost and gone and unavailable to create needed Russian population? Is it Putin’s hope for a Great Power Agreement that has prolonged the conflict?

A great power agreement happens only among great powers, but President Putin has convinced the West that Russia is irresolute, averse to using force, and only wants a negotiated settlement to the conflict with Ukraine, for which Putin will pay almost any price, no matter the humiliation. Russia’s inability to bring a war with Ukraine to a victorious conclusion after more than three years of fighting negates any recognition of Russia as a great power as far as the West is concerned. Even Britain and France feel confident to fight Russia. Several of the NATO countries are saying that they are preparing for war with Russia. The Baltic states are even interdicting Russian shipping. Putin’s conduct of the war has convinced the West that he is irresolute and averse to fighting. The choice facing Putin is: Surrender or win a victory and impose the peace.

Read more …

“Recent data shows the Chinese economy tilting even further away from consumption toward manufacturing. China’s economic system, with growth driven by manufacturing exports, will continue to create even more serious imbalances with its trading partners..”

• Bessent Calls For ‘Reforms’ Among ‘Bretton Woods Institutions’ (ZH)

Days after Scott Bessent dazzled JP Morgan with closed-door comments (aka not Main Street) that the tariff standoff with China is unsustainable, the US Treasury Secretary is set to deliver comments on Wednesday at the IIF Global Outlook Forum regarding the state of the global financial system as the Trump administration seeks to tamp down rhetoric over China. According to a copy of Bessent’s prepared remarks, he is set to tell the IIF that “America First does not mean America Alone,” and that the IMF must prioritize economic and financial sustainability. He is calling for IMF and World Bank reforms after “mission creep,” i.e. non-economic goals such as climate change and social justice, but that the Trump administration wants to work with them.

“Going forward, the Trump Administration will leverage U.S. leadership and influence at these institutions and push them to accomplish their important mandates,” Bessent said, adding “The United States will also demand that the management and staff of these institutions be accountable for demonstrating real progress.” Bessent – who blamed persistent U.S. trade deficits on foreign policy decisions that promote excess saving and low wages abroad, added that “The architects of Bretton Woods recognized that a global economy required global coordination,” and called for “key reforms to ensure the Bretton Woods institutions are serving their stakeholders—not the other way around.” He also encouraged “security-aligned trade,” suggesting that U.S. security partnerships should influence economic alignment – a strategic counter to China’s Belt and Road.

China Rebalancing Bessent also said that China “is in need of rebalancing.” “Recent data shows the Chinese economy tilting even further away from consumption toward manufacturing. China’s economic system, with growth driven by manufacturing exports, will continue to create even more serious imbalances with its trading partners if the status quo is allowed to continue. China’s current economic model is built on exporting its way out of its economic troubles. It’s an unsustainable model that is not only harming China but the entire world. China needs to change. The country knows it needs to change. Everyone knows it needs to change. And we want to help it change—because we need rebalancing too.” According to an anonymously sourced (of course) report by the WSJ minutes before Bessent’s speech (and which was immediately denied), the Trump administration “is considering slashing its steep tariffs on Chinese imports—in some cases by more than half—in a bid to de-escalate tensions with Beijing.”

President Trump hasn’t made a final determination, the people said, adding that the discussions remain fluid and several options are on the table. One senior White House official said the China tariffs were likely to come down to between roughly 50% and 65%. The administration is also considering a tiered approach similar to the one proposed by the House committee on China late last year: 35% levies for items the U.S. deems not a threat to national security, and at least 100% for items deemed as strategic to America’s interest, some of the people said. The bill proposed phasing in those levies over five years. -WSJ. Bessent’s comments also come after President Donald Trump softened his tone on the unfolding trade war between the world’s two largest economies – to which China’s foreign ministry spokesman, Guo Jiakun replied “our doors are wide open.”

According to Tuesday comments by Trump, “very high” tariffs on Chinese imports will “come down substantially, but it won’t be zero.” “I think we’re going to live together very happily and ideally work together, so I think it’s going to work out very well,” Trump told reporters at the White House. Trump notably excluded China from a pause on “reciprocal” tariffs that were extended to other trading partners in order to allow them time to negotiate – blaming China’s retaliatory actions for its exclusion. The China tariffs include a 125% reciprocal tariff on top of Trump’s original 20% tariff related to the fentanyl trade. Combined with pre-existing Section 301 tariffs, some Chinese goods face levies as high as 245%.

Read more …

“..Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting initiative, which Bessent claimed has failed to deliver on its promises.”

• Musk and Bessent Had ‘WWE Fight’ In White House – Axios (RT)

Tech billionaire Elon Musk and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent were involved in a heated shouting match inside the White House last week, reportedly trading expletives and personal insults during a confrontation over leadership of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), according to Axios. The incident reportedly unfolded in the West Wing on Thursday within earshot of President Donald Trump and visiting Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. The two men argued over Trump’s recent decision to name Gary Shapley, Musk’s preferred candidate, as acting IRS commissioner – a move that blindsided Bessent, who had lobbied for his deputy, Michael Faulkender. “It was two billionaire, middle-aged men thinking it was WWE in the hall of the West Wing,” one witness told Axios on Wednesday.

Musk reportedly accused Bessent – a former partner at Soros Fund Management and the founder of Key Square Group – of being a “Soros agent.” Bessent “roared” back, at one point allegedly shouting “F**k you,” to which Musk replied, “Say it louder.” The clash did not escalate into physical violence, but was loud enough to be heard in nearby offices, according to multiple sources. Witnesses said an aide had to physically step in between the two men to prevent the situation from intensifying. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt downplayed the incident, telling the New York Times that “disagreements are a normal part of any healthy policy process,” and that “ultimately, everyone knows they serve at the pleasure of President Trump.” Bessent ultimately came out on top, with Shapley replaced by Faulkender just days after the appointment. “Trust must be brought back to the IRS, and I am fully confident that [Deputy Secretary] Michael Faulkender is the right man for the moment,” Bessent said on X Friday afternoon.

“Gary Shapley’s passion and thoughtfulness for approaching ways to create durable and lasting reforms at the IRS is essential to our work, and he remains among my most important senior advisors at the [US Treasury] as we work together to rethink and reform the IRS.” The altercation highlights long-standing tensions between Musk and Bessent dating back to the presidential transition, when Musk unsuccessfully pushed for Howard Lutnick to lead the Treasury Department. Trump instead appointed Bessent and nominated Lutnick to head the Commerce Department. Since then, Musk and Bessent have clashed repeatedly over personnel and policy, including Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting initiative, which Bessent claimed has failed to deliver on its promises.

Read more …

Bookkeeping.

• Judge Orders Correction Notices For Fired Probationary Workers (ET)

A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to provide laid-off federal probationary employees with a written notice stating that they were not terminated for performance reasons but that it was part of a government-wide termination effort. U.S. District Judge William Alsup also ordered Acting Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Charles Ezell not to tell agencies to terminate “any federal employee or group of federal employees.” The judge wrote on April 18 that the firings of probationary workers followed an OPM template that states they were fired for job performance reasons. “Termination under the false pretense of performance is an injury that will persist for the working life of each civil servant,” wrote Alsup, who is based in San Francisco. “The stain created by OPM’s pretense will follow each employee through their careers and will limit their professional opportunities.”

The latest directive from the judge is part of a lawsuit that was filed by labor unions and nonprofits contesting the mass firings of thousands of probationary workers in February under President Donald Trump. Probationary workers are typically new hires or employees who were recently promoted and who must serve a trial period of one to two years before they receive full-term, or permanent, employment. “If a particular termination was in fact carried out after an individualized evaluation of that employee’s performance or fitness, the Chief Human Capital Officer (or equivalent) of that agency may instead submit … a declaration, under oath and seal, stating so and providing the individual reasoning underpinning that termination,” Alsup also wrote, setting a May 8 deadline to do so.

On April 8, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked an earlier order from Alsup that required the administration to return to work some of the terminated probationary federal employees who were terminated. The justices were responding to the Trump administration’s emergency appeal of Alsup’s ruling.

Read more …

“Does the university really want to get in a fight with the Trump administration and then bring all of this information about their endowments; their lack of intellectual diversity; their segregation; their lack of due process for people who undergo inquiries or accusations; their separate racial graduations, safe spaces, theme houses; the use of student loans? ”

• Harvard: Take the Trump Deal, Before It’s Too Late (Victor Davis Hanson)

We’ve talked about higher education before, but now it’s come into sharper focus with the Trump administration’s deadlock with Harvard University over its unwillingness or inability—whatever term we like to use—to meet the administration’s demands that it ensures an antisemitic-free campus that does not allow people to disrupt classes. It doesn’t use race, after the Supreme Court decision that went against Harvard and said that affirmative action was no longer legal. Columbia had the same type of disagreement, other campuses are. I don’t think it’s a wise thing for them to get into a fight with the federal government. If they are dependent on federal funding, these big private marquee universities—Columbia, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, Duke—and they want federal money, then the federal government is going to ask for some transparency. And we, the public, really don’t know much about it.

It’s like a rock, a traditional rock on moist ground. You don’t wanna turn it over because there’s going to be things underneath there that you would better not—it would be better not to be seen. And that’s what the public is going to learn about higher education. Now, what do I mean? I mean loans. These universities are raising tuition higher than the rate of inflation. And that started when the federal government said, “We will ensure these loans for students.” Once that happened, the moral hazard shifted away from the university. So, they have been gouging students for room and board. I’ll give you an example. Hillsdale College, its room, board, and tuition is about $45,000 a year. It takes no money. Harvard gets about $9 billion in total. Its room, board, and tuition is about $95,000. Same with Stanford.

They’re about double what Hillsdale charges. And one of the reasons is that they’re so dependent on federal money and therefore they can spend like drunken sailors. Remember, of that 1.7, about 10%, 8% are nonperforming and about maybe 14% are late. The public doesn’t know all that. But they’re paying for it—especially kids, the half of the cohort 18 to 30 that’s not going to college, they’re subsidizing this university boondoggle. The second thing is the university doesn’t really obey the first 10 amendments of the Constitution. If you get accused of particular crimes as a student, faculty member, let’s say, sexual harassment or untoward speech, hate speech—whatever the term they use—it’s very unlikely you’re going to get Fourth and Fifth, maybe Sixth Amendment protection.

That is, you’re not going to have an open hearing. You’re not going to be tried by a jury of your peers. You’re not going to necessarily have legal counsel. You’re not necessarily going to know who your accusers are. The affirmative action ruling by the Supreme Court outlawed the use of race in admissions. And we have civil rights statutes that also do that. But the universities do something funny. They have safe spaces. They have theme houses. And they have auxiliary graduations. But the common denominator, they’re predicated on race. So, a black theme house, a Latino theme house has almost very few people. Nobody would want a European, so-called white theme house or an alternate white graduation. And you would say, “Why not, Victor?” Because it would be considered racist, I suppose. But at Stanford, only 22% of the student body is white. Are they going to say, “Well, we’re one of the minorities now. Why don’t we do this?” That’s where it will lead if you enhance tribalism.

There’s no intellectual diversity. The National Association of Scholars did a study not long ago. They found not one of the 133 faculty members at Bryn Mawr was a Republican. At Williams, I think they found one or two. They found a lot of elite universities where there was nobody who openly acknowledged that they were a Republican. There are a couple of other things that are disturbing too. And that is the universities get individual faculty grants—Department of Energy, National Institutes of Health. And usually, in most private foundations, the university is not following their model. What I mean is, a private scholar at a think tank, they might deduct 15% for the use of the phone or office that they would get out of that federal grant. But universities like Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, they can go from 40% to 50% to 60% and they’re relying on that multimillion-dollar—I guess we’d call it—price gouging from the federal government.

And finally, these universities don’t have multimillion-dollar endowments anymore. They have multibillion-dollar—$30 billion, Stanford $53 billion. And they’re predicated—the income—on that. And sometimes they get almost 10%. They’re very good in investing. This $5 or $6 or $7 or $4 billion a year in income is tax-free, for the most part. Tax-free. And that’s predicated that they’re nonpolitical, they’re nonpartisan. But when you look at the makeup of the faculty and the use of race and gender, contrary to federal law, you can see they’re very partisan.

So, let me just sum up. Does the university really want to get in a fight with the Trump administration and then bring all of this information about their endowments; their lack of intellectual diversity; their segregation; their lack of due process for people who undergo inquiries or accusations; their separate racial graduations, safe spaces, theme houses; the use of student loans? I don’t think they want to do that. The public would be shocked. And it’s a losing proposition. If I were the presidents of these major universities, I would do this: I would make a deal with the Trump administration. And I would welcome it because then I would tell my radical students, “You can’t wear a mask. I’d like you to, but the federal government won’t let me.” Or, “We can’t have racially segregated dorms anymore, theme houses. I’d like to, but it’s against the law.” And that would be their way out. Is that going to happen? I don’t think so. And I think we’re going to see some accountability. And the universities are not going to like the consequences.

Read more …

For misusing funds, after having done just that, what, 50 years? Makes little sense. But they sure got rid of him in record time. The Great Reset.

• World Economic Forum Opens Probe Into Founder as Klaus Schwab Resigns (DS)

Klaus Schwab, the founder and chairman of the World Economic Forum, resigned on Easter Sunday amid a whistleblower report about alleged misuse of Forum funds, and the globalist organization’s board voted to launch an independent probe into allegations against him. “Following my recent announcement, and as I enter my 88th year, I have decided to step down from the position of Chair and as a member of the Board of Trustees, with immediate effect,” Schwab said in a statement Sunday. Schwab, 87, had previously announced that he would step down as the Forum’s chairman, and the Forum would launch a succession process to be completed by January 2027. The whistleblower report sped up that timeline. A Schwab family spokesperson denied the allegations in the whistleblower report, which claimed Schwab asked subordinates to withdraw thousands of dollars from ATMs on his behalf and used Forum funds to pay for private, in-room massages at hotels.

The report also alleged that Schwab’s wife, Hilde, a former employee of the organization, scheduled “token” meetings in order to justify luxury holiday travel, billing the Forum. The report also repeated concerns about how Schwab treated female employees, warning that his leadership allegedly allowed instances of sexual harassment and discriminatory behavior to go unchecked in the workplace. The Forum had previously investigated these concerns and disputed them. The World Economic Forum Board of Trustees met Sunday to accept Schwab’s resignation. Sources close to the matter told The Wall Street Journal that Schwab asked the board not to investigate the whistleblower report, but the board opened the probe, anyway. The Forum had been shaking up its leadership in recent weeks in response to a previous board probe into its workplace culture. Forum CEO Børge Brende said that investigation did not substantiate the allegations against Schwab.

This turmoil comes amid a growing global backlash to the World Economic Forum’s globalist vision. Newly-inaugurated President Donald Trump addressed the Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 23. In his speech, the president condemned the previous administration’s policies, which echoed the Forum’s advocacy. “What the world has witnessed in the past 72 hours is nothing less than a revolution of common sense,” Trump said. “My administration is acting with unprecedented speed to fix the disasters we’ve inherited from a totally inept group of people and to solve every single crisis facing our country.” Among other things, he touted his withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord—which the World Economic Forum supports—and his moves to “abolish all discriminatory diversity, equity, and inclusion nonsense”—another ideological initiative the Forum wholeheartedly backs.

Outgoing President Joe Biden awarded George Soros, the Hungarian American globalist billionaire, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. As I wrote in my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” Soros-funded groups infiltrated and advised the Biden administration, pushing it in a globalist direction. In addition to the Paris agreement and DEI programs, the World Economic Forum has advocated a host of social and political changes that critics say would empower elites at the expense of personal freedom and economic progress. Schwab co-wrote the book, “COVID-19: The Great Reset,” published in July 2020, which outlines how the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted social and economic systems and calls for sweeping changes “to create a more inclusive, resilient, and sustainable world going forward.”

Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts traveled to Davos, Switzerland, for the Forum’s annual meeting in 2024, and condemned its globalist advocacy. He faulted the World Economic Forum for claiming that climate change poses an existential threat to humanity, that illegal immigration is positive, and that there is no public safety threat in large American cities. “I will be candid and say the agenda that every single member of the administration needs to have is to compile a list of everything that has ever been proposed at the World Economic Forum and object to all of them wholesale,” Roberts said, speaking as a leader of America’s conservative movement. “Anyone not prepared to do that and take away this power of the unelected bureaucrats and give it back to the American people is unprepared to be part of the next conservative administration.”

Read more …

“The phrase “Maryland Dad” is said with the same reverence by the media as “Honest Abe.”

• The Left’s Mount Rushmore (Al Perrotta)

Carved into the stone of the Black Hills of South Dakota, four faces look down upon this great nation: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and Theodore Roosevelt. Four American heroes, revered, respected, and representing the noblest aspirations of the American people. The gentleman farmer-turned-general who took down the most powerful army in the world, then shepherded the newborn nation through its infancy. The folksy woodsman who freed a race of people and ensured the United States would move forward as one. The inventor, political philosopher, genius whose poetry turned a statement of independence into a declaration more powerful than any weapon against tyranny the world has ever known. The brash adventurer whose swagger and smarts best captures the can-do American spirit. This is America’s Mount Rushmore.

Sadly, today’s Left and it appears the entire Democratic Party have carved in recent days their own Mount Rushmore: Luigi Mangione, Karmelo Anthony, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and Mahmoud Khalil. A cold-blooded killer who shot a father of two in the back because he didn’t like the American health care system. A cold-blooded killer who allegedly stabbed a fellow teenager in the chest because he felt challenged and disrespected. An illegal immigrant, MS-13 gang-member, alleged human trafficker, who happened to be put back on the wrong plane back to his home country. And did we mention he’s an accused wife beater? An operative of a terrorist organization that promotes the genocide of Jews, who led violent protests against Jewish students … a guest in our country, who allegedly lied on his visa application. These are the Left’s new heroes. This is the Left’s new Mount Rushmore. (Sorry, George Floyd. You’re yesterday’s news.)

Approximately 3 million people a year visit Mount Rushmore. Visitor numbers for the Left’s Mount Rushmore aren’t quite that. Yet. But you did have a U.S. senator travel 2,000 miles to visit Abrego Garcia, with a gaggle of House Democrats soon following. You did have thousands visiting the courthouse holding pro-Hamas Columbia University student Khalil, and tens of thousands gathering around the country to protest his arrest. You did have over 13,400 people visiting the GiveSendGo site of Anthony, dropping enough coin to afford Anthony to not only pay his bail, but rent a $900,000 crib for his family and a hot new ride for himself. Over $455,000 raised because he stabbed a white kid in the chest. And you have countless women gathering at the courthouse to support and swoon over Mangione, the accused killer of UnitedHealth CEO Brian Thompson, like he is the freshly single member of a boy band.

Like the original Mount Rushmore, you can buy souvenirs for the Left’s Mount Rushmore. Don’t want a T-shirt of Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, or Roosevelt? You can get a St. Luigi T-shirt, mugs, and hats. Etsy’s full of “Free Mahmoud Khalil” T-shirts. A website was set up to sell Anthony swag. The phrase “Maryland Dad” is said with the same reverence by the media as “Honest Abe.” Mangione’s motto “Deny, Defend, Depose” is the Left’s new “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” This isn’t even about Mangione, Abrego Garcia, Anthony, or Khalil. Killers are going to kill, terrorists are going to terrorize, and gangbangers are going to gangbang. They no more earned the adoration than Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, and Roosevelt carved their own faces on Mount Rushmore. This isn’t even about the small fringe drawn to the worst among us. Even serial killers get love letters.

This is about the mindset of the Left that tears down statues of our Founders but lifts up lowlifes. Who throw their lot in with Maryland Dad to spite the Orange Man. Who declare that because America’s a racist nation it’s OK for a black kid to plunge a knife into a white kid. How is it that despite the carnage MS-13 has done in the state of Maryland, one of its senators, Chris Van Hollen, went to El Salvador on our dime in a failed bid to win Abrego Garcia’s release? And even after the Department of Justice dropped a load of documents from the Prince George’s County Police Department’s gang unit further proving Abrego Garcia’s MS-13 ties, after the Tennessee Star reported how he was pulled over in 2022, suspected of human trafficking, after documents were released where his wife swore he repeatedly beat her, Van Hollen vowed to continue to fight for his release. And indeed, met with him Thursday for a tropical sit-down as cozy as anything you’d see on “The Bachelor.”

Read more …

“I can’t remember the last time that people who voted on Election Day — the majority, uh, plurality of them — were Democrats.”

• New Poll Data Confirms the Democrats’ Worst Fears (Margolis)

Can you believe it? The Democrats, once the supposed champions of the working class, have exposed themselves as nothing more than elitist snobs who couldn’t care less about real Americans. Recent polling has confirmed what conservatives have known all along: the Democratic Party is now the domain of overeducated, snobby, wealthy liberals who look down on anyone who doesn’t share their “enlightened” worldview. Remember when Democrats at least pretended to care about the working class? Those days are long gone, replaced by a woke agenda that caters to the most unhinged elements of society. Now, they’re more interested in slobbering over MS-13 gangbangers than addressing the real concerns of everyday Americans.

Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik didn’t sugarcoat the situation during a conversation with Mark Halperin on 2WAY. The latest poll numbers, he explained, confirm what many on the Left have feared for months: the Democratic Party is in serious trouble. In a blunt, unflinching analysis, Sosnik laid out a series of hard truths that paint a grim picture of the party’s standing with American voters and underscore just how deep the erosion has become. First, Sosnik pointed to the seismic shift in party affiliation. “The electorate in 2024 was 6% less Democratic than compared to four years ago,” Halperin noted, asking if that level of movement was historically significant. Sosnik didn’t mince words: “The shift is significant, but more importantly… I can’t remember the last time that people who voted on Election Day — the majority, uh, plurality of them — were Democrats.”

He continued, “It shows a real erosion for the Democratic Party,” noting that many of the Democrats who backed Biden in 2020 simply didn’t show up this time around. That drop-off was made even more glaring when coupled with the latest favorability ratings. “Lowest net favorable rating since the ’90s,” Halperin remarked, prompting Sosnik to outline a trifecta of disasters driving the collapse in support: inflation, immigration, and cultural arrogance. On the economic front, Sosnik admitted, “We had the worst inflation in America since the early 1980s.” He added that by the time Election Day arrived, “everything… was on average 20% higher than when Biden took office.” That kind of economic pain, Sosnik argued, doesn’t just dent a party; it shatters its credibility.

But the damage didn’t stop there. Immigration, Sosnik said, became both a practical problem and a symbol. “There’s a concern that people, uh, for their own personal… safety and security… the immigration issue was sort of both a real problem for Democrats, but also… a proxy for just a general sense that there was a lawlessness with a Democratic administration.” That perception of disorder extended into the cities, where “these big cities around America that were largely… governed by Democrats” seemed unable — or unwilling — to maintain control.” Then came the cultural disconnect, the sense that Democrats had abandoned everyday Americans in favor of elite ideologies.

“A lot of people in America in the middle of the country thought Democrats were looking down on them,” Sosnik said bluntly. He attributed part of that disconnect to “how they talked, issues they cared about, all the DEI programs.” The result? A broadening sense among voters that Democrats “weren’t competent to govern.” Taken together, the conversation was less a diagnosis than an autopsy. The Democrats aren’t just facing a messaging problem; they’re grappling with a wholesale rejection from swaths of the electorate they once considered safe. The warnings have been mounting for years. Now, with favorability cratering and voters fleeing, the party is watching those warnings come to life.

Read more …

Biggest success story of the Trump team so far is probably Bobby Kennedy. And he’s got much more. He‘s also got a formidable team with guys like Bhattacharya and Makary. Who somewhat ironically became visible because of the Covid disaster.

• HHS, FDA Announce Phase-Out Of All Artificial Food Dyes (ZH)

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s quest to “Make America Healthy Again” grew far more substantial on Tuesday, with the announcement that the federal government will eliminate all petroleum-based synthetic food dyes by the end of 2026. The announcement came at a Washington DC news conference, with RFK Jr joined by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Marty Makary and National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya. The podium was flanked by “MAHA Moms” and their children; the moms are a coalition of outspoken advocates of the Trump administration’s health agenda.

Kennedy framed the move against artificial, petroleum-based dyes using forceful language: “For too long, some food producers have been feeding Americans petroleum-based chemicals without their knowledge or consent. These poisonous compounds offer no nutritional benefit and pose real, measurable dangers to our children’s health and development. That era is coming to an end. We’re restoring gold-standard science, applying common sense, and beginning to earn back the public’s trust. And we’re doing it by working with industry to get these toxic dyes out of the foods our families eat every day.”

The first two dyes in the crosshairs are Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B. The FDA is initiating a process to revoke their authorizations “within the coming months.” The FDA will also pressure food producers to eradicate Red No. 3 earlier than Jan 15, 2027. The Biden administration had already set that deadline for its removal from foods and beverages, after long-running concerns about its potential to cause cancer and interfere with hormonal functions. The FDA will also pursue the removal of the remaining six previously-approved petroleum-based dyes by the end of 2026.

Here’s a small sampling of foods these artificial dyes are used in today:
Blue No. 1: M&Ms, blue sports drinks
Blue No. 2: Cereals, candy
Citrus Red No 2: Enhancing the color of real orange rinds
Green No. 3: Mint candy, Sour Patch Kids
Orange B: Hot dog and sausage casings
Red Dye 40: Flamin’ Hot Cheetos, M&Ms, sports drinks, cereals
Yellow No. 5: Mountain Dew, Froot Loops, Doritos
Yellow No. 6: Reese’s Pieces, Cheetos,
Red Dye No. 3: Drinks, cakes, cookies, frozen desserts, frosting, icing

“For the last 50 years, American children have increasingly been living in a toxic soup of synthetic chemicals,” said Makary. Justifying the sweeping change, the former Johns Hopkins surgeon pointed to a Lancet study that found artificial colors cause “increased hyperactivity” in a study of 3-year-olds and 8- and a 9-year-old children. He also cautioned that there’s more to America’s health problems than petroleum-based food dyes: “There’s no one ingredient that accounts for the child chronic disease epidemic. And let’s be honest, taking petroleum-based food dyes out of the food supply is not a silver bullet that will instantly make America’s children healthy, but it is one important step.”

Read more …

” Nenner also thinks the US dollar is going to be okay and will not fall much more—for now. By the way, Nenner says he is up 40% so far in 2025.”

• Depression Cycle Arrives in 2025 & 2026 – Charles Nenner (USAW)

Renowned geopolitical and financial cycle expert Charles Nenner is not only predicting a big war cycle but a depression coming by the end of 2025 and into 2026. It’s not caused by the Trump tariffs; it’s just part of the cycle that Nenner follows. When does this big downturn start? Nenner explains, “In the next few months . . . and the end of this year will be a down year. 2026 will also be a down year. It’s going to be very serious. I wrote last year I expect the S&P to go down to 4,000. So, from 6,200 to 4,000 if you are in bad stocks, you could lose 50% of your money, and to get that back, you have to make 100% on what is left of your money. Then we can have a bounce and go lower again. If you look at the list of brokers, 99% are positive. They were talking about the S&P going to 6,800, and then they changed their minds when it came down.”

Nenner is predicting a down year for the stock market this year, but look out in 2026. Nenner says, “It will be much worse in 2026 because the cycles in 1928 and 1929 are in the same position as 2025 and 2026.” Can it shoot through 4,000 on the S&P? Nenner says, “Most definitely, I think so, yeah . . . we expect a bounce from there before it goes down again.” Beyond that, Nenner has long called for a DOW at 5,000. It’s nearly 39,000 today. Nenner says, “I calculated it at 5,000, yes, and I have not calculated it for the S&P.” That is pretty bearish, and before people pooh-pooh what Nenner is saying, listen to his logic on this subject.

Nenner explains, “Let’s take one simple assumption. If there is a big war between China and Tiawan, do you think the market goes up? Do you think there is a chance of it – 50/50? So, there is a 50/50 chance only based on this idea the markets are not going to do well. . . . Of course, China wants to take over Tiawan. . . . There is no history that it does not belong to China. . . . If US gets in a war with China, it will lose. . . US lost 15 out of 15 war games in simulated war with China.” Nenner still likes gold for the long term and has been predicting it’s rise. On silver, Nenner says, “Silver is behind, but starting in May, we expect silver to start catching up—finally.” Nenner thinks interest rates are still in a long-term trend up, but there can be pullbacks. Nenner also thinks the US dollar is going to be okay and will not fall much more—for now. By the way, Nenner says he is up 40% so far in 2025.

Read more …

“.. imagine China providing free doctors to the whole planet, free tutors to every child on the planet, and using, essentially, free goods and services to spread their political philosophy.”

• Why U.S. Must Win AI Race Against China – Khosla (ZH)

Venture capitalist Vinod Khosla has issued a grave warning, declaring that the United States is in a do-or-die AI race against China, with the specter of worldwide communist ideology looming if America falters. Khosla cautioned that failing to lead in AI could allow China’s authoritarian regime to impose its oppressive vision globally. “There’s another kind of risk I worry about even more” Khosla told X interviewer Mario Nawfal. “China can use AI in cyber warfare or physical warfare on the battlefield, but the one I worry about even more is the economic power that AI will give a nation that moves fast and wins the race.”

“Once you have economic power, I think it’s trivially easy by 2030 to imagine China providing free doctors to the whole planet, free tutors to every child on the planet, and using, essentially, free goods and services to spread their political philosophy.” Khosla, who co-founded Sun Microsystems and later became one of OpenAI’s earliest backers through his venture capital firm Khosla Ventures, went a step further by [calling] China’s possession of powerful AI a potentially deadly threat to the world. “The biggest risk is AI in Chinese hands—or any bad hands. The more powerful the entity, the bigger the risk,” the Indian-American technologist said. “If somebody used a nuclear weapon, it’s verifiable. AI, when used, may not be verifiable.”

President Donald Trump has made it a key priority for the U.S. to dominate AI. In January, Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,” aimed at solidifying U.S. dominance in AI by revoking what his administration deemed restrictive policies from President Joe Biden’s 2023 AI Executive Order. Trump’s order rescinded Biden’s framework, which emphasized oversight, risk mitigation, and equity, including requirements for companies to share safety test results with the government and address AI’s potential for discrimination. Instead, Trump’s directive prioritizes deregulation, calling for AI systems free from “ideological bias or engineered social agendas” to boost innovation, economic competitiveness, and national security.

It mandates a 180-day AI Action Plan, led by key advisors like AI and Crypto Czar David Sacks, to streamline policies and eliminate bureaucratic hurdles. Trump has promoted a $500 billion joint venture between OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank, which he described as “the largest AI infrastructure project in history.” The initiative aims to construct a nationwide network of data centers across the United States. “China is a competitor and others are competitors. We want it to be in this country,” Trump said at the White House announcement, joined by OpenAI’s Sam Altman, SoftBank’s Masayoshi Son, and Oracle’s Larry Ellison. “We have to get this stuff built,” the president added. “They have to produce a lot of electricity and we’ll make it possible for them to get that production done very easily at their own plants.”

Read more …

Fully unprovoked.

• Ukraine Complicit in 2014 Massacre: European Court of Human Rights (Kuzmarov)

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ordered the Ukrainian government to compensate the victims of a May 2014 arson attack on the Trade Unions Building in Odessa. The attack was carried out by fascist thugs who were empowered in the U.S.-NATO-backed Maidan coup in Ukraine. Some 42 people were killed during the burning of the Trade Unions Building and 170 more were injured. The victims were mainly anti-Maidan activists who supported the legitimate Ukrainian government led by Viktor Yanukovych that was overthrown in a February 2014 coup. A lawsuit was filed with the ECHR in Strasbourg by relatives of 25 of the arson victims, along with three survivors of the massacre, who were awarded a total of 114,700 Euros in compensation. One would have a hard time finding anything about the ECHR ruling in the U.S. and Western media.

Even supposedly left-wing and alternative outlets like Democracy Now and The Intercept have ignored the story along with more mainstream outlets. The only reports I could find were written by Jason Melanovski in the World Socialist Website (WSWS) and Kit Klarenberg in The Grayzone. The ECHR’s findings were especially significant because of its heavy anti-Russia bias. The court found that Ukrainian government officials were aware of the violence that far-right storm-troopers were preparing, and that, in addition to doing nothing, purposely withheld fire and emergency services as the Trade Unions Building was burning. (1) Later, they actively engaged in a cover-up. The cruelty of the perpetrators was apparent as they were captured on video physically attacking people who had jumped out of the Trade Unions Building to escape the flames and were badly injured.

A pregnant woman in the building was strangled with an electric cord and left with a swastika drawn from her blood on the wall. (2) Right-wing thugs surround leftist who escaped the Odessa Trade Unions Building during the fire. Afterwards, the man was savagely beaten, but he survived. [Source: 2mayodessa.org] The video and photos showed Ukrainian riot police standing by, doing nothing to stop or prevent the savage violence being carried out by the right-sector Banderites. The inadequacy of the Ukrainian government investigation was apparent in the fact that on-site inspection of the burned out Trade Unions Building only began two weeks after the massacre. The Trade Unions House remained freely accessible for 17 days afterwards, giving malicious actors plenty of time to manipulate, remove or plant incriminating evidence.

Serious omissions were noted in the securing and processing of forensic evidence. Some essential evidence had never been examined, and some examination reports had only recently been issued or remained pending eight years after the events (3). According to the Russian newspaper Pravda, the Odessa massacre was set in motion when right-sector radicals who valorized Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera attacked a tent camp in Kulikovo Pole in Odessa. These radicals were under the command of Andriy Parubiy, the pro-Nazi head of Kyiv’s national defense and security bureau at the time, who had been dispatched with 500 armed members of the Maidan Self-Defense militia to Odessa on the eve of the massacre (4). Odessa was one of the centers of resistance to the Maidan coup. Located near Transnistria, home to a Russian military base, it is the last major seaport of Ukraine, along with Nikolaev and Mariupol, and hosted Ukraine’s Black Sea Fleet.

The geopolitical website Katehon noted that the loss of Odessa would have cut off Ukraine from the sea, and that geostrategic considerations explain why Ukrainian neo-Nazis were given a carte blanche to intimidate the population of Odessa and carry out the Trade Unions Building massacre with impunity. The Katehon analyst wrote that “the agonizing death of more than 100 people, for which none of the perpetrators have been punished, was primarily a tool of intimidation. Following the massacre on May 2nd in Odessa, the pro-Russian movement was virtually destroyed.” (5) Prior to the massacre, Odessa residents had been collecting signatures for holding a referendum on the federalization of Ukraine and giving the Russian language state status after Ukraine tried to impose the Ukrainian language on the entire region.

[..] Intelligence specialist Gordon Duff wrote in The Intel Drop that the Odessa massacre was not an isolated event but a blueprint for a litany of atrocities that followed. These included:
• The firing by Ukrainian security forces on May 9, 2014, on peaceful protesters in Mariupol who were against the Maidan coup;
• The Ukrainian army’s shelling of homes, schools and hospitals in Sloviansk in June 2014 and carrying out summary executions and torture;
• The ambushing of a convoy of civilians trying to flee Luhansk in August 2014; and
• Ukraine’s firing of rockets at a city bus in Donetsk, resulting in the death of 13 civilians in January 2015.[8]

According to Duff, NATO personnel were on the ground during many of the above operations, advising and directing Ukrainian forces. Additionally, Duff wrote that:
• CIA cash from Afghan heroin trafficking was funneled into Ukraine and paid for weapons, training and Banderist paramilitaries.
• The staging for the Odessa and other massacres was done at the CIA rendition site in Poland, a massive 11,000-hectare facility where Ukrainian radicals were trained in torture, psychological operations and guerrilla warfare.
• Indoctrination of Banderist units took place in Gladiator Schools, financed through GOP campaign funds laundered via a major casino-owning family deeply involved in human trafficking through Macau.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

DMSO
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1914905633360318560

 

 

RFK
https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/1915054512252866990

 

 

2008
https://twitter.com/DiedSuddenly_/status/1914862355256693061

 

 

Fico
https://twitter.com/SaiKate108/status/1914951702404587544

 

 

Twins

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle April 19 2025

Apr 192025
 
 April 19, 2025  Posted by at 9:30 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  39 Responses »


Claude Monet Impression, sunrise 1872

 

• West Lost Proxy War To Russia – Orban (RT)
• US Proposes Leaving Former Ukrainian Territories Under Russian Control (RT)
• Trump Ready To Recognize Crimea As Russian After Warning He May Walk Away (ZH)
• Ukraine Ceasefire ‘Unrealistic’ For Now – Moscow (RT)
• Europe, You Can’t Sit on the Sidelines Anymore (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Trump Takes ‘Art Of The Deal’ To World Stage (Stepman)
• Tulsi Exposes a Terrifying Biden-Era Program Meant To Be Secret (Margolis)
• NATO To Abandon ‘Woke Language’ – Politico (RT)
• Kilmar for President! (James Howard Kunstler)
• IRS Hunter Biden Whistleblower Gary Shapley Ousted As Acting Commissioner (NYP)
• Indian PM Modi Dials Musk Ahead of Vance’s Visit (RT)
• Soros-Funded Groups Go To War Against DOGE (Tyler O’Neil)
• Trump Axes A Stricken World Order (Alastair Crooke)
• Trump’s Counterrevolution: Flood the Zone, Drain the Swamp (Victor Davis Hanson)
• There’s Real Evidence for Easter (Joecks)

 

 

 

 

MacGregor

Tucker

Meloni
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1912952813023297538

NGOs

Miiller

Bondi

VDH

Dowd
Basel III full implementation — June 30, 2025
Gold is being hardwired into global banking.

 

 

 

 

Much today about Trump leaving the ceasefire talks. Orban is the only voice who’s both right and willing to say it.

“..the West has lost but “European leaders are hesitant to admit” failure. He argued that this outcome will have a big impact on the entire West, as “losing a war is a serious thing.”

“..Trump “saved the US from a serious defeat.”

• West Lost Proxy War To Russia – Orban (RT)

The West has waged a “proxy war” against Russia via Ukraine and lost it, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said. Hungary, a member of the EU, has repeatedly criticized the bloc’s policies on the Ukraine conflict, particularly its sanctions on Moscow and weapons deliveries to Kiev. In an interview with OT YouTube channel published on Thursday, Orban said the whole “Western world” has thrown its weight behind Ukraine in its conflict with Russia, which he described as a “proxy war.” His assessment echoed that of Moscow, which has long characterized the hostilities as a de facto conflict with the West. According to the Hungarian prime minister, the West has lost but “European leaders are hesitant to admit” failure. He argued that this outcome will have a big impact on the entire West, as “losing a war is a serious thing.”

Orban went on to say that European leaders are “offering Ukraine to continue the war and in return receive European Union membership.” He argued that this would be problematic as Ukraine is no longer sovereign and cannot support itself. Regarding the US, the Hungarian prime minister said Washington is in a better position thanks to President Donald Trump’s approach, having broken with the Ukraine policies pursued by his predecessor, Joe Biden. According to Orban, Trump “saved the US from a serious defeat.” Speaking to Hungary’s Kossuth Radio last month, Orban described the EU’s policies on Ukraine as “rudderless.” He warned that Brussels, with its hardline position, risks becoming irrelevant as Trump actively works toward securing a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

Earlier in March, Orban told the YouTube channel Patriota that the EU was feeding Kiev “empty promises” as it “doesn’t have a single penny left… [to] continue arming Ukraine, maintaining the Ukrainian army, and funding the functioning of the Ukrainian state.” His comments came after Budapest refused to endorse a joint EU communique calling for an increase in military aid to Kiev.

Read more …

A start to the only viable solution. Which EU and Kiev will fight as long as you let them.

• US Proposes Leaving Former Ukrainian Territories Under Russian Control (RT)

The US has presented its allies with the details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter. The contours of the plan were outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday. The proposal reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the war, with the formerly Ukrainian territories held by Russia remaining under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested. One of the officials told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive settlement of the conflict. Moreover, Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian, the source suggested.

The Paris meetings involved senior officials from several countries. The US delegation was led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff. They met with French President Emmanuel Macron and also held discussions with top officials and negotiators from France, Germany, the UK, and Ukraine. Earlier on Friday, Rubio signaled Washington was ready to “move on” if a way to end the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev could not be found shortly. “We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters before departing from France.

Moscow has signaled a full ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, citing Kiev’s violations of previous deals. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation.” The diplomat also cited repeated Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes, implemented on March 18. “How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt at a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.

Read more …

“The war in Ukraine “has no military solution to it” as “neither side has some strategic capability to end this war quickly”, Rubio said.”

He’s wrong.

• Trump Ready To Recognize Crimea As Russian After Warning He May Walk Away (ZH)

President Trump warned he could walk way from efforts to end the war in Ukraine if a deal can’t be found soon, as Russia said a one-month pause on targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure had ended. “If for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say, you’re foolish,” Trump told reporters Friday in the Oval Office. “You’re fools, you’re horrible people, and we’re going to just take a pass. But hopefully we won’t have to do that.” While Trump did not say he has a “specific number of days” in mind by which he wanted to see an agreement before walking away, he needed to see quick progress. “I know when people are playing us, and I know when they’re not,” Trump said. “And I have to see an enthusiasm to want to end it. And I think I see that enthusiasm. I think I see it from both sides.”

His comments followed a meeting of US officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US special envoy Steve Witkoff, with representatives from France, Germany and the UK in Paris on Thursday, where the US indicated its aim was to secure a full ceasefire in Ukraine within weeks, according to people familiar. Following the meeting, Rubio said the US needed to see in “a matter of days” whether a deal was “doable in the short term…. because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters at Le Bourget airport outside of Paris on Friday morning, according to a transcript provided by the State Department. Rubio also said the European nations could help “move the ball” to get a resolution and that their ideas had been “very helpful and constructive.” “We had a good meeting yesterday,” he added. “But this isn’t going to go on forever.” The war in Ukraine “has no military solution to it” as “neither side has some strategic capability to end this war quickly”, Rubio said.

Trump, who predicted on the campaign trail that he could quickly secure a ceasefire, hits the 100-day mark of his second stint in the White House on April 30. Trump “has dedicated a lot of time and energy to this, and there are a lot of things going on in the world right now that we need to be focused on,” Rubio told reporters. “There are a lot of other really important things going on that deserve just as much if not more attention.” Bloomberg reports that Thursday’s talks in Paris also included a meeting between Witkoff and French president Emmanuel Macron and were attended by Ukrainian officials. US officials indicated they expected to make significant progress soon, and the participants agreed to work toward that. National security advisers and negotiators from Germany, France, the US and the UK plan to gather again in London next week to follow up on their discussions.

More importantly, Bloomberg also reported that the US presented its allies with details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end. The proposal, outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday, includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the conflict and leave former Ukrainian territories that are part of Russia under Moscow’s control. An official told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, which will certainly balk, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive conflict settlement as Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian.

The meetings came almost a week after Witkoff traveled to St. Petersburg, where he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin for almost five hours. He described the conversation as “compelling,” saying they discussed steps that could end the war and perhaps lead to business opportunities for Russia as well, including dropping sanctions. The US has presented its allies with details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter. The proposal, outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday, reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the conflict and leave former Ukrainian territories that are part of Russia under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested.

European officials have attempted to influence the outcome of peace efforts kicked off by the Trump administration, especially after being sidelined during recent bilateral talks between Russia and the US. So far they are failing: a follow up report from Bloomberg on Friday afternoon confirmed that the US is prepared to recognize Russian control of the Ukrainian region of Crimea as part of a broader peace agreement between Moscow and Kyiv. The concession is the latest signal that Trump is eager to rush through a ceasefire deal, and comes as he and Marco Rubio suggested on Friday that the administration is prepared to move on from its peace-brokering efforts unless progress is made quickly.

Read more …

“We need to determine very quickly now, and I’m talking about a matter of days, whether or not this is doable,” Rubio said..”

• Ukraine Ceasefire ‘Unrealistic’ For Now – Moscow (RT)

Russia and Ukraine are highly unlikely to agree to a full ceasefire at present, Vassily Nebenzia, Moscow’s envoy to the United Nations, has said. He cited Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered truce on energy infrastructure strikes as among the reasons. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Nebenzia addressed comments by US President Donald Trump, who said he expects a response from Russia on a ceasefire proposal as early as “this week.” “How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt on a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.

Moscow and Kiev agreed a 30-day moratorium on strikes on energy facilities following a phone call between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin last month. Russia, however, has accused Ukraine of repeatedly violating the ceasefire. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that the moratorium had expired, but that Putin had not yet announced a decision on further steps. Nebenzia noted that there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. According to Nebenzia, the deal was “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation [with Russia].” The envoy added that another concern is the feasibility of monitoring any potential ceasefire, as it is unclear who could take on this task.

His comments come amid diplomatic efforts between the US and Russia to resolve the Ukraine conflict. Earlier this month, US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff met with Putin in St. Petersburg, stating after the talks that a potential peace deal hinges on “these so-called five territories,” referring to former Ukrainian regions which overwhelmingly voted to join Russia. However, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has indicated that Washington could withdraw from peace negotiations if no progress is made soon. “We need to determine very quickly now, and I’m talking about a matter of days, whether or not this is doable,” Rubio said on Friday.

Read more …

It’s the only place where it can stay alive.

• Europe, You Can’t Sit on the Sidelines Anymore (Victor Davis Hanson)

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. I’d like to talk today about the role of China, the United States, and the European Union, or just Europe in general, in the context of these tariffs and the so-called trade wars. Right now, President Donald Trump has given a 90-day reprieve from high tariffs. I think that 10% tariffs are still in existence. And they are negotiating with a number of European countries and particularly, Asian dynamic economies, such as South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. In addition to that, they are targeting China with tit-for-tat tariffs. And we are maybe on the brink—nobody wants it, but we might be on the brink of a trade war, which we’ve addressed in earlier videos.

But here’s my point. What is the attitude of Europe? Roughly, China has a $1 trillion deficit with the world. We have about a $1 trillion deficit in trade with the world. But here’s the ratios. About a third of our deficit is with China, which makes up a third of their surplus. In addition to that, Europe makes up about a third of their surplus. So, China has called on Europe to join forces with it to prevent all of the retaliatory tariffs that the United States has threatened Europe, which has a $200 billion surplus with us, and China, which has a nearly high $300 billion, maybe even $400 billion, who knows? It’s kind of crazy, isn’t it, that these illiberal apparatchiks in China would think that a Western democracy would want to join them against the United States? I don’t think that’s gonna happen. But the European Left is very angry at the Trump administration.

So, Choice One might be, “Well, we don’t like the Chinese and we are an ally of the Americans, who subsidize our defense, but we detest the Trump administration. So maybe, (wink and nod) we’ll either be quiet or hope China wins that trade war and the United States, under the Trump administration, backs off all tariffs.” That would be a big mistake given their vulnerabilities they have with the United States vis-a-vis security. The second attitude might be the Europeans will just say, “We’ll lay low. We won’t say much at all. We’ll kind of drag out our tariff negotiations with the Trump administration. And we’ll let the Chinese and the United States battle it out. And if Trump should win and he lowers the amount of trade with China, maybe that will be an opening for us to replace China as the United States chief importer.” That is something that I don’t think will happen.

The third scenario is what I would suggest for the Europeans. They should say the following: “Despite our disagreements with the Trump administration, the United States is an ally. And we know that we have been as victimized by Chinese mercantilism, high tariffs, cheating on patents, copyrights, dumping, financial money manipulation—all the things the United States complains about, we do too. In fact, we as Europeans in a whole have about the same deficit with China as the United States does. So, we are kindred spirits. So, what we will do is, even though we have disagreements on our surplus with the United States and their efforts to reduce it, we will ally with the United States.” And that would represent about two-thirds of China’s total trade action or monetary value. And especially, if Japan and our allies in South Korea, Taiwan would join, then China would find out that about 85% of its trade is in a block. That is, they are united. And they have common complaints against China.

And China would not be able to say to the United States, “We’re going to cut deals with Vietnam and Japan and Taiwan and South Korea and the EU and leave you out in the cold.” Instead, the Europeans and, to a lesser extent, the Asian powerhouses would join the United States and say, “You know what? We’ve been quiet. We’re afraid of China. They’re bullies. But now that you’ve stood up, we’re embolden ourselves to air the same complaints as you are and hope that you win. And maybe a byproduct of reduced trade with China from the United States will open a door. So, even though we might have to lower our tariffs, there will be more opportunity in the American market with a less prominent Chinese trade profile that we can then be welcomed in as a kindred ally.” So, Europe has two or three choices in this proposed Chinese-American trade standoff. Nobody wants a trade war with anybody. No one wants it with China. But this is long overdue. And Europe has to decide what course they’re going to take. And for everybody’s sake, let’s hope they choose wisely.

Read more …

“Start with a big ask, create a sense of urgency, use leverage, don’t back down, make things happen. That’s how Trump is getting this all done.”

• Trump Takes ‘Art Of The Deal’ To World Stage (Stepman)

President Donald Trump, like one of his heroes Andrew Jackson, was born for a storm. Trump is disrupting national and international systems that no longer work for the American people. In the domestic realm, he’s launched a political counterrevolution on a scale of change not seen since the New Deal. But it isn’t just on the home front that Trump is making the greatest pivot.He’s dramatically shifting the global chess board. Instead of coasting on the “postwar order” that long ago morphed into the failing and incoherent post-Cold War order, Trump is using America’s still-considerable position in the world to reorient the focus of our national security. He’s doing this by using the skill that he long ago became famous for and that so many of his critics misunderstand. Start with a big ask, create a sense of urgency, use leverage, don’t back down, make things happen. That’s how Trump is getting this all done.

It’s the art of the deal, and it’s funny that so many commentators miss this given that Trump wrote a famous book about it and has been pulling off deals in the public eye for decades. What the 47th president is doing is renegotiating America’s position vis-à-vis both our international rivals and our allies. Whether it be on tariffs, or acquiring Greenland, or securing the Panama Canal, or peace with Russia and Iran, Trump is clearly aiming to reset America’s international situation. He’s doing this, I believe, to ensure that the United States and not Communist China will remain the most dominant country globally going forward. Let’s take the Greenland issue for instance. Greenland may seem irrelevant, but its position on the globe and considerable natural resources vital to a modern economy make it extremely important for U.S. security. Acquiring it would send a message to Americans that we are thinking big once again and a message to Russia and China that the U.S. means to prevent them from dominating the Arctic and threatening the U.S. mainland.

The U.S. has sought to acquire the massive Arctic island since at least the 1860s. When William H. Seward bought Alaska, he really wanted Greenland too. The U.S. became close to buying Greenland a few other times, but ultimately Denmark held onto it. Trump’s aggressive words may have unsettled U.S. relations with Denmark in the short term, but maybe that’s what’s needed to create pressure and a sense of urgency to get a deal done. Trump knows that the U.S. can offer Greenland more than any other nation, he can make the territory rich and provide long-term defense. It’s now more likely than ever that Greenland will go independent and fall under U.S. sway in one way or another. Now consider Panama. The Panama Canal has long been critical for American national security. Perhaps we should have never given it to Panama after building it in the first place, but here we are.

It’s clear that China has made major inroads into subtly influencing Panama. A Hong Kong-based company controls ports on both sides of the canal. What would happen if they even just delayed U.S. ships during a sudden military conflict in the Pacific? Not good. Trump’s strong rhetoric about retaking the canal and putting immediate pressure on the country has forced them to act. The Hong Kong company sold those ports (and over 40 others around the globe) to an American-led group of companies. China has blocked the sale, but there is a good chance that a deal will go through at some point. Panama has abandoned China’s Belt and Road investments and even recently agreed to allow some U.S. troops to be stationed in the country. The Panamanian government would clearly rather remain in the good graces of the U.S. rather than kowtow to China. The Monroe Doctrine is back and it should have never gone away.

Now consider Panama. The Panama Canal has long been critical for American national security. Perhaps we should have never given it to Panama after building it in the first place, but here we are. It’s clear that China has made major inroads into subtly influencing Panama. A Hong Kong-based company controls ports on both sides of the canal. What would happen if they even just delayed U.S. ships during a sudden military conflict in the Pacific? Not good. Trump’s strong rhetoric about retaking the canal and putting immediate pressure on the country has forced them to act. The Hong Kong company sold those ports (and over 40 others around the globe) to an American-led group of companies. China has blocked the sale, but there is a good chance that a deal will go through at some point.

Panama has abandoned China’s Belt and Road investments and even recently agreed to allow some U.S. troops to be stationed in the country. The Panamanian government would clearly rather remain in the good graces of the U.S. rather than kowtow to China. The Monroe Doctrine is back and it should have never gone away. Of course, where Trump has operated most dramatically and has taken the greatest risk is on trade. Trump threatened to put significant tariffs on virtually every nation on earth. This sent markets and countless political commentators into a panic. But at seemingly the last minute, Trump adjusted and froze the highest tariffs. He kept an enormous 145% tariff on China.

The turbulent tariff talk has resulted in China being economically singled out. U.S. trade partners around the globe are offering to reduce their tariffs on U.S. goods out of concern about losing access to the American domestic market. Countries are now being pushed into the position of doing business with China or America. And they can’t go back to being pass-throughs for Chinese goods.

Read more …

“While Biden was preaching “unity” from his teleprompter, his administration was quietly crafting plans to turn Big Tech into their personal censorship machine.”

• Tulsi Exposes a Terrifying Biden-Era Program Meant To Be Secret (Margolis)

They thought they could keep it hidden forever. Buried under layers of classification and bureaucratic doublespeak, the Biden administration’s masterplan for undermining American liberty was supposed to stay safely locked away from public scrutiny. But they didn’t count on Tulsi Gabbard. In a stunning move that has the DC establishment scrambling, Director of National Intelligence Gabbard just declassified what might be the most disturbing government document of the Biden era: their deceptively-named “Strategic Implementation Plan for Countering Domestic Terrorism.” Let’s cut through the bureaucratic noise and call this what it really is: a systematic blueprint for targeting and silencing conservative Americans. While Biden was preaching “unity” from his teleprompter, his administration was quietly crafting plans to turn Big Tech into their personal censorship machine.

The scheme reads like a progressive wish list: monitoring “suspicious” online speech (translation: conservative viewpoints), expanding federal watchlists to include Americans with the “wrong” political beliefs, and – you guessed it – finding new ways to chip away at Second Amendment rights. Don’t be fooled by their carefully crafted language about “protecting democracy.” The Government Accountability Office has confirmed these weren’t just ideas on paper—they were actively being implemented. How many Americans have already been labeled “suspicious” for nothing more than expressing conservative views? Heck, Tulsi Gabbard ended up on the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) terrorist watchlist under Joe Biden. Enough said.

The plan’s centerpiece? A comprehensive strategy to leverage federal power for pushing red flag laws and restricting access to firearms, all under the guise of preventing “lethal means.” Because apparently, in Biden’s America, exercising your Constitutional rights made you a potential threat under the guise of combating domestic terrorism. The strategic implementation plan (SIP) pushed agencies to crack down on what it labels “DT (domestic terrorism)-related content” online, encouraging collaboration with Big Tech to monitor, report, and censor speech—raising serious First Amendment concerns about free speech and assembly. You may remember that this practice was exposed after Elon Musk acquired Twitter, when the Twitter Files showed “extensive government efforts to silence dissenting views” on everything from COVID-19 to elections.

The report further reveals that agencies were told to “Share with relevant technology and other private-industry companies… relevant information on DT-related and associated transnational terrorist online content.” This wasn’t just government overreach, it was a calculated assault on the fundamental rights that make America exceptional. While the left was hyperventilating about “threats to democracy,” they were building the infrastructure for genuine governmental tyranny. Thanks to Gabbard’s courage in bringing this to light, we can finally see what Biden’s “moderate” administration was really planning behind closed doors. The question now isn’t just who approved this un-American scheme—it’s how many other similar programs are still hiding in classified files, waiting to be exposed.

The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves. But perhaps this revelation is exactly what America needs right now – a wake-up call about what happens when we let power-hungry bureaucrats operate in the shadows, far from public scrutiny and accountability. Remember this the next time you hear Democrats pontificating about “defending democracy.” They’ve shown us exactly what they mean by “democracy,” and it looks nothing like the Constitutional Republic our founders envisioned.

Read more …

”Everyone sees on the news where the Trump admin stands; you don’t want to do anything that shoots yourself in the foot..”

• NATO To Abandon ‘Woke Language’ – Politico (RT)

NATO staff are softening language related to climate, gender, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to avoid a potential backlash from the administration of US President Donald Trump, Politico has reported, citing sources familiar with the situation. Phrases concerning climate, as well as gender diversity and security, have been reworded in new NATO legislation drafted by its committees and working groups, using language deemed more palatable to Washington, the outlet said on Thursday. The Trump administration took sweeping action aimed at dismantling gender and DEI programs shortly after Trump assumed office in January. The new administration is working to cut funding for universities and dismantle federal programs that include DEI practices. It is also carrying out a purge within the Pentagon to eliminate these programs.

”Everyone sees on the news where the Trump admin stands; you don’t want to do anything that shoots yourself in the foot,” one NATO official told Politico. ”Green technologies” have reportedly been replaced with “innovative technologies,” while “climate” has been described as an “operational environment,” another official said. NATO officials are steering clear of any language referencing “gender” or “women, peace, and security” in an effort to secure approval from all 32 member countries, including the US, the outlet said. ”Everyone knows that the worst thing you can do is present it as a diversity issue,” one of the officials said. “It’s not a woke agenda, it’s part of a military agenda, and now more people are pricking up their ears to make sure it is spoken about in military terms.” The fight against “woke policies,” such as the promotion of gender reassignment treatment among minors, was a key part of Trump’s presidential campaign. He has signed multiple executive orders rolling back DEI initiatives since taking office.

Trump has also consistently criticized NATO countries, accusing them of “freeloading” on US military support. He has pushed for members to increase their defense spending target from the current 2% of GDP to 5%. On Tuesday, the Trump administration unveiled a plan to slash the State Department’s budget by nearly 50%, a reduction that would deeply affect contributions to NATO’s internal operations, the UN, and roughly 20 other international bodies. The proposal, put forward by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, seeks to reduce combined funding for the State Department and USAID from $54.4 billion to $28.4 billion for the next fiscal year. Among the most significant changes is the proposed elimination of financial support for nearly all international organizations, including the UN and NATO headquarters.

Read more …

“Autistic people contribute every day to our nation’s greatness.” —Senator Elizabeth Warren

• Kilmar for President! (James Howard Kunstler)

So, you wonder why Democrats are so anxious to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the USA. Is it to lead the national ticket in 2028? Who else have they got? Pete Buttigieg doesn’t have half of Kilmar’s charisma. AOC is just pretending to be Sandy-from-the-block — and everybody knows it. Who else best represents the party’s newest constituency: the undocumented (people unfairly deprived of documents by a cruel and careless bureaucracy)? Who best represents the Democratic Party’s number one policy goal: diversity fosterization! Kilmar, of course! Viva Kilmar!

It’s also pretty obvious by his recent actions, that Judge “Jeb” Boasberg is angling to be Kilmar’s running mate in ‘28. Perfect! He could fulfil the traditional role of vice-president by doing nothing for four years, which is exactly what people of non-color should do in the Democratic Party’s new national order. (Haven’t they already done enough?) Boasberg could set an example for the rest of America’s dwindling color-deficient population: quit hogging all the action, stop collecting all those dividends and annuities, step aside and give the other a chance at the American Dream!

Did you happen to notice how enterprising Kilmar Abrego Garcia has been since he boldly breached the border in 2011, fleeing persecution from the vicious gangs of his native El Salvador? Running a one-man jobs program, he crossed the country countless times indefatigably from Maryland to California in his mobile office — the legendary KAG SUV — seeking employment opportunities for young women of color otherwise condemned to clean hotel rooms and labor in senior care facilities filled with abusive people of non-color clinging pointlessly to life only to oppress their caretakers with never-ending demands for medication and extra portions of Jello.

Kilmar’s gritty organization, Mara Salvatrucha-13, has been among the Democratic Party’s most effective NGOs in a greater galaxy of justice-seeking ventures marshaled under the USAID umbrella — recently vandalized by Elon Musk’s DOGE band of pillaging oligarchs. MS-13, for short, was beloved among the undocumented for its fund-raising abilities, its networking expertise, and its relentless search for the missing documents the undocumented have been looking high-and-low for lo these many decades — rumored to be concealed in a vast underground complex in the Catoctin Mountains of Frederick County, MD. (More white peoples’ mischief!)

Thus, it came to pass that Kilmar Abrego Garcia, Maryland Dad-of-the-Year, was cruelly snatched from an MS-13 board meeting last month and transported without benefit of due process to the Salvadorean hell-hole known as CECOT (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo). And so, his Senator, Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) traveled this week to Central America on his one-man rescue mission. The Senator claimed he was detained miles from the gate of CECOT, and yet we have this photograph of Mr. Van Hollen meeting with Kilmar (and an unidentified aide) over Margaritas and pupusas at a cantina in the nearby town of Tecoluca. Asked to comment on the photo, El Savador’s Presidente, Nayib Bukele, declared: “Kilmar Abrego Garcia, miraculously risen from the ‘death camp’ & ‘torture!’ Now that he’s been confirmed healthy, he gets the honor of staying in El Salvador’s custody,” Mr. Bukele added.

Oh, so you say Señor Presidente! But not if “Jeb” Boasberg can help it. The dauntless super-judge has ordered Kilmar to be returned the USA pronto expressimo, or else he, the judge, is laying criminal contempt charges on the entire West Wing staff of Donald Trump’s White House. They will go to jail just like Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, two capos regime of Trump’s MAGA gang, did last year for the insolence of refusing to testify in Congress. Only, they will get life-without-parole! Lessons to be learned, ye miserable color-deficient, oppressors!

Alas, the DC federal district court is a bit short of enforcement officers, so Judge “Jeb” has enlisted the Harvard rowing crew to bring Kilmar back home. Kilmar will take the coxswain’s place in the racing shell as the crew rows up the Pacific Coast to their planned landing spot at Las Olas, CA, just south of San Diego. Joy will reign in Wokeville.

Having displayed such pluck at diplomacy, unnamed sources say Senator Van Hollen is under consideration for Secretary of State when Kilmar wins the 2028 election. Up until now, we’d been hoping for Senator Adam Schiff to fill that spot, but he has his hands full fighting the influence of the Soviet Union on the Trump cabinet. Looking forward, though, to the bold prosecutor, New York AG Letitia ‘Tish” James, moving into the top spot at DOJ, if her term for mortgage fraud ends before Jan-20, 2029. The Democratic Party — such bright prospects! Forward together, with Kilmar and company! Documents for all, at long last!

Read more …

That was fast! Trouble in the ranks?!

• IRS Hunter Biden Whistleblower Gary Shapley Ousted As Acting Commissioner (NYP)

Gary Shapley, who became a folk hero to conservatives when he revealed the Justice Department played favorites in its investigation of former first son Hunter Biden, was ousted from his role as acting IRS commissioner just days after being elevated to the position, sources familiar with the shake-up told The Post Friday. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has replaced Shapley with deputy treasury secretary Michael Faulkender following a power struggle with key Trump adviser Elon Musk over the appointment. The reorganization was first reported by the New York Times. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had pressed the White House for Shapley to take over the IRS. But Bessent felt left out of the decision-making — and asked President Trump if he could install Faulkender instead.

The acting commissioner will only be in place until former GOP congressman Billy Long can be vetted and confirmed by the Senate to lead the tax collection agency. “It’s no secret President Trump has put together a team of people who are incredibly passionate about the issues impacting our country,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. “Disagreements are a normal part of any healthy policy process, and ultimately everyone knows they serve at the pleasure of President Trump.” Shapley, who last month was tapped as a senior adviser to Bessent, was named acting IRS head after the departure of Melanie Krause, who resigned due to disagreements with the treasury secretary over the sharing of tax information on illegal immigrants with the Department of Homeland Security. While Krause left the IRS on Tuesday, Shapley remains in a senior position in the commissioner’s office despite being removed from the top interim role.

Musk had been lashing out at Bessent publicly before Shapley’s apparent demotion. On Thursday evening, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO posted on X in response to right-wing provocateur Laura Loomer that Bessent’s meetings with a purported “Trump hater” earlier this month were “troubling.” The line of attack came after Loomer had a White House meeting that precipitated the mass firing of several National Security Council staffers due to a lack of perceived loyalty to the president’s agenda. Musk had backed current Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick for the Treasury role, criticizing Bessent as a “business-as-usual choice.” Lutnick, by contrast, would “actually enact change,” Musk wrote on X before Bessent’s nomination.

Shapley and fellow IRS whistleblower Joseph Ziegler had testified before Congress in July 2023 that former President Joe Biden’s Justice Department had slow-walked a criminal probe of his son Hunter and blocked their tax team from taking certain investigatory steps. Among the damning claims were that Biden-appointed US attorneys based in Washington DC and Los Angeles had declined to bring charges against the then-first son, while then-Assistant Delaware US Attorney Lesley Wolf discouraged investigators from pursuing lines of questioning related to Joe Biden, saying at one point that there was “no specific criminality.”

Read more …

“Following the February meeting between Modi and Musk in Washington, the company started hiring in India..”

• Indian PM Modi Dials Musk Ahead of Vance’s Visit (RT)

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Friday that he has had a phone call with Elon Musk during which they discussed several issues, including collaboration on technology and innovation. The call comes ahead of a visit to New Delhi next week by US Vice President J.D. Vance as the two nations aim to resolve trade issues. “India remains committed to advancing our partnerships with the US in these domains,” Modi said on X. During a two-day visit to the US in February, Modi met with Musk, whose business empire includes Tesla and SpaceX. India’s Ministry of External Affairs stated at the time that Modi and Musk discussed enhancing collaboration between Indian and US entities in areas such as innovation, space exploration, artificial intelligence, and sustainable development. They also explored opportunities for increased cooperation in emerging technologies, entrepreneurship, and good governance, the ministry said.

Musk’s SpaceX has already signed agreements with the top two telecom operators in India – Reliance Jio and Airtel to start Starlink internet services to India. Tesla has also made a move toward entering the Indian market. Following the February meeting between Modi and Musk in Washington, the company started hiring in India, advertising 13 job openings on LinkedIn for various positions, including back-end and customer-facing roles, according to local media reports. Meanwhile, India is one of the first countries to have initiated formal discussions with Washington on a trade deal that would allow it to avoid being charged a higher reciprocal tariff. The two countries have agreed on a deadline for completing an agreement, according to a government official cited by Reuters.

Read more …

They should use their money and clout for something positive.

• Soros-Funded Groups Go To War Against DOGE (Tyler O’Neil)

The far-left groups that staffed and advised the Biden administration—a network that I call the Woketopus—are going to war against DOGE’s efforts to root out waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government. Activist groups like the Center for American Progress and the ACLU are working alongside unions like the AFL-CIO and the American Federation of Teachers to block DOGE through lawsuits or public campaigns. My book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” exposes how these activist groups—bankrolled through the Left’s dark money network by big donors like Hungarian American billionaire George Soros and his son, Alex—used the administrative state to force their woke agendas on the American people. The Trump administration is rooting woke ideology out of the federal government, so the Woketopus’ opposition comes as no surprise. Yet the campaign against DOGE seems particularly noteworthy, since DOGE represents an effort to tighten the government’s belt and make it more accountable to the people.

The Dark Money Playbook
A little-known and once secretive nonprofit called Governing for Impact appears to have orchestrated the Left’s campaigns against DOGE. As I document in the book, Governing for Impact began as a project of New Venture Fund, one of the nonprofit entities created by the for-profit company Arabella Advisors. Governing for Impact’s website did not even appear on Google in 2022, but the nonprofit bragged about hosting a “listening tour” that involved some of the most influential regulators in the Biden administration. The Open Society Foundations, which George Soros founded and which his son Alex now runs, funneled $9.98 million into Governing for Impact through New Venture Fund between 2019 and 2021. Rachel Klarman, Governing for Impact’s executive director, previously worked as a legal policy analyst at Democracy Forward, identifying and developing litigation challenging the first Trump administration’s actions on health care, labor, and education.

Perhaps it should be no surprise, then, that Governing for Impact published a series of memos laying out legal strategies to sue the second Trump administration, particularly on DOGE. The memo titled “Challenging DOGE,” published in February, lays out a strategy to claim that DOGE “lacks lawful authority to act as an agency.” “One potential legal claim would assert that DOGE, as embodied in [the U.S. Digital Service, the department Trump re-tasked to house DOGE], lacks any statutory authority,” since Congress did not pass a law explicitly creating DOGE. The memo admits that Trump has an alternate explanation for DOGE’s involvement, but it insists that the effort is unlawful. It goes on to state that since DOGE “lacks lawful authority to act as an agency,” it “cannot enter Economy Act agreements.” The Economy Act, signed in 1932, allows federal agencies to share resources.

The AFL-CIO, America’s largest union, filed a lawsuit against DOGE that same month, arguing that DOGE lacks the authority to place orders with other federal agencies under the Economy Act, The Washington Examiner reported. Not only did the AFL-CIO—one of the unions with influence in the Biden administration—bring this lawsuit, but its legal representation comes from none other than the Democracy Forward Foundation, Klarman’s former employer. Democratic lawyer Marc Elias, who recently challenged the U.S. Senate election results in Pennsylvania and who helped orchestrate the Trump-Russia hoax, chairs Democracy Forward’s board. Democracy Forward is representing many of the lawsuits against the Trump administration.

Other Woketopus Lawsuits Against DOGE
The American Federation of Government Employees—the largest public-sector union in the federal government and a member of the AFL-CIO—has filed multiple lawsuits against DOGE. In the first anti-DOGE lawsuit filed on Trump’s first day in office, AFGE joined Public Citizen and State Democracy Defenders Fund (a group led by Democratic lawyer Norm Eisen) in suing to make sure DOGE complies with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. AFGE teamed up with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees to sue Acting DOGE Administrator Charles Ezell to block the Trump administration’s offer for federal employees to resign in a buyout.

Read more …

“The ‘tariff solution’ had been pre-prepared by his team over recent years, and formed an integral part to a more complex framework..”

• Trump Axes A Stricken World Order (Alastair Crooke)

The Trump ‘shock’ – his ‘de-centring’ of America from serving as pivot to the post-war ‘order’ via the dollar – has triggered a deep cleavage between those who gained huge benefit from the status quo, on the one hand; and on the other, the MAGA faction who have come to regard the status quo as inimical – even an existential threat – to U.S. interests. The sides have descended into bitter, accusatory polarisation. It is one of the ironies of the moment that President Trump and right-wing Republicans have insisted on decrying – as a “resource curse” – the benefits of the Reserve Currency status that precisely brought the U.S. the wave of inward global savings that has permitted the U.S. to enjoy the unique privilege of printing money, without adverse consequence: Until now that is! Debt levels finally matter, it seems, even for the Leviathan.

Vice-President Vance now likens the Reserve Currency to a “parasite” that has eaten away the substance of its ‘host’ – the U.S. economy – by forcing an overvalued dollar. Just to be clear, President Trump believed there was no choice: Either he could upend the existing paradigm, at the cost of considerable pain for many of those dependent on the financialised system, or he could allow events to wend their way towards an inevitable U.S. economic collapse. Even those who understood the dilemma the U.S. faces, nonetheless have been somewhat shocked by the self-serving brazenness of him simply ‘tariffing the world’. Trump’s actions, (as many claim), were neither ‘spur of the moment’, nor whimsical. The ‘tariff solution’ had been pre-prepared by his team over recent years, and formed an integral part to a more complex framework – one that complemented the debt-reduction and revenue effects of tariffs, by a programme to coerce the repatriation of vanished manufacturing industry back to America.

Trump’s is a gamble that may, or may not, succeed: It risks a bigger financial crisis, as financial markets are over-leveraged and fragile. But what is clear is that the de-centring of America that will follow from his crude threats and humiliation of world leaders ultimately will cause a counter-reaction both for relations with the U.S., and also in global willingness to continue to hold U.S. assets (such as U.S. Treasuries). China’s defiance of Trump will set a ‘tone’, even for those who lack China’s ‘heft’. Why then should Trump take such a risk? Because, behind Trump’s boldfaced actions, notes Simplicius, lies a harsh reality facing many MAGA supporters:

“it remains inarguable that the American workforce has been gutted by the triple threat of mass migration; general worker anomie as consequence of cultural decay – and in particular, by the mass alienation and disenfranchisement of conservatively-minded men. These have been strongly contributing factors to the current crisis of doubt about the ability of ‘American manufacturing’ to ever return to a semblance of its previous glory, no matter how big an axe Trump takes to the stricken ‘World Order’”. Trump is mounting a Revolution in order to invert this reality – an end to the American anomie – by (Trump hopes) bringing back U.S. industry.

There is a current of western public opinion – “by no means limited to intellectuals”, nor to Americans alone – that despairs of their own country’s ‘lack of will’, or its inability to do what needs to be done – its fecklessness and its ‘crisis of competence’. These people hanker for a leadership believed to be tougher and more decisive – a longing for unconstrained power and ruthlessness.

One highly-placed Trump supporter puts it quite brutally: “We are now at a very important inflection point. If we are going to face ‘The Big Ugly’ with China, we cannot afford divided loyalties … It’s time to get mean, brutally, harshly mean. Delicate sensibilities must be dispatched like a feather in a hurricane”. It is no surprise that, against the general context of western nihilism, a mindset that admires power and ruthless technocratic solutions – almost ruthlessness for its own sake – could take hold. Take note – we are all in for a turbulent future.

Read more …

“..then the Left will say, “Well, how can we appeal to the public and get them all angry and frenzy and hysterical when some of our major celebrities, our political figures are in Mar-a-Lago?”

• Trump’s Counterrevolution: Flood the Zone, Drain the Swamp (Victor Davis Hanson)

We’re about—getting close to 90 days and even coming up close, in a week, 10 days, to the first 100 days of the Trump administration and this counterrevolution that he’s waging. I thought it might be wise just to see where we are as far as the political landscape and the dynamics of the progress of this counterrevolution. What is President Donald Trump trying to do? I think I would sum it up as flooding the zone. And that is, he’s going to try to propose and enact so many radical corrections or revolutions or reforms or recalibrations that his opposition doesn’t know where to start. So, abroad, he is looking at the Iran deal and he got rid of it. He put sanctions. He’s got maximum pressure. And now, the Iranian economy is about defunct. And they want to negotiate about this nuclear weapon. I don’t think they’re going to negotiate it away, but we’ll see.

And then, he’s dealing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin and trying to get a ceasefire. He’s basically dealt with the Houthis.On the domestic front, there is no more illegal immigration. He’s basically stopped it. Now, the task is what to do with the 12 million illegal aliens that came under former President Joe Biden. And what do you do with the 20 million-plus, maybe 30 million that were here already illegally but for a longer period of time? At the same time, he’s had a blanket mandate that in every Cabinet they will eliminate diversity, equity, inclusion and, by association, things like transsexual, biological males competing in women’s sports. Women—lowering the physical standards so women could compete and pass these very rigorous endurance physical tests so that they would be in combat units on an equal level. No problem that they can’t. But they have to have the same physical requirements as men.

I could go on, but you see what he is doing. He’s doing so many radical corrections in a way that a Romney or a McCain or the Bushes, even Ronald Reagan would not have dreamed of that he feels the opposition will say, “Well, what do we do? Should we reply here? Do we put our interest here? Should we do this?” And so, what is the strategy that the Left is using? They’re flooding the zone, too. But they’re doing it not with counterproposals. They don’t say, “This is what’s wrong with closing the border and we wanna reopen it. This is what’s wrong with the Houthis policy. This is what’s wrong with the trade deficit. This is what’s wrong”—no specific proposal. They’re just flooding it with hysteria, the Spartacus talk, late-night comedy trashing him, another person arrested saying that he wants to kill Donald Trump, keying Teslas, firebombing Tesla agencies, outrageous things from Hollywood stars, videos from Congress. All of a sudden—we didn’t even know who Rep. Jasmine Crockett was. She’s filled that void.

But what I’m saying is they want to be so rambunctious, so crazy, so 360 degrees unhinged that they’ll create an image or a malu—where everybody wants to get almost in a fetal position: “Please, please make it all go away. I don’t know what Trump is doing but it’s so disturbing. Everybody’s so angry.” That is their strategy. Now, what is Trump’s counterstrategy? His counterstrategy is to actually get people on the other side of the aisle in Congress or in the country at large or in the popular culture and try to at least be friendly to them so then they can say, “I don’t agree with Trump but what he’s doing might be needed.” So, we have Bill Maher going to Mar-a-Lago and actually saying very nice things about Donald Trump.

On the one hand, we have Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fighting with a bulwark of the Left at one time, fighting with left-wing people who were calling him all sorts of names and saying that he is illiberal. We had Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan. She was in the White House. Can you believe it? She was so embarrassed about a photo-op. She had to almost cover her face.But you can see what Trump is doing. He’s trying to get people from all sides of the Democratic and liberal progressive movement and not compromise them, but get in the picture, so then the Left will say, “Well, how can we appeal to the public and get them all angry and frenzy and hysterical when some of our major celebrities, our political figures are in Mar-a-Lago?”

Read more …

‘Tis the season.

• There’s Real Evidence for Easter (Joecks)

If you think politicians make outlandish claims, consider what Christians celebrate at Easter. They believe a man named Jesus was brutally tortured, murdered, and buried for three days before rising from the dead. Furthermore, they assert this man was also fully God and that your belief or lack of belief in him determines your eternal destiny. Christians have no video evidence or DNA tests to prove this. That’s understandable since Christians say the event Easter celebrates took place almost 2,000 years ago. Americans can’t even agree on things that happened two weeks ago. Isn’t Easter an ancient example of “fake news,” a myth propagated by people putting faith over historical realities? It’s a valid question. The answer starts with looking at the books of the New Testament. How can you determine if what you read today is what the author wrote 2,000 years ago?

That question isn’t unique to the Bible. There are no original copies of any ancient work. Historians use a twofold test to determine how accurately copyists transmitted a manuscript throughout the ages. Scholars look at how many copies exist and the number of years between the original and the earliest surviving copy. For example, Julius Caesar fought and won a series of battles against the Gauls from 58 to 50 B.C. He chronicled his conquests in “On the Gallic War.” Historians have 251 manuscripts of this book, and the earliest is from the ninth century, a gap of over 850 years. Plato was one of the most important ancient philosophers. He wrote a series of dialogues before he died in 348/347 B.C. Scholars have 210 manuscripts of those writings. The oldest is from 895 A.D., a gap of over 1,200 years.

Aside from the Bible, the ancient work with the greatest number of copies is Homer’s “Iliad,” created around 800 B.C. There are over 1,800 copies of it, and the earliest is from around 400 B.C., a gap of just 400 years. The books of the New Testament were written between 50 and 100 A.D. There are over 5,800 New Testament manuscripts in Greek and over 18,500 New Testament manuscripts in other languages. The time gap between authorship and the earliest manuscript is just 50 years. All statistics are from a 2014 review by Josh McDowell and Clay Jones. Try telling a history professor that there isn’t enough historical evidence to confirm Julius Caesar conquered the Gaels or that Plato wrote philosophy. Yet there is a much greater track record for the accurate transmittal of the books depicting the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

An accurate transmission doesn’t mean what is written is true. “The Iliad” is, after all, a work of fiction. A key group, however, did believe the events recorded in the writings that became the New Testament—its authors. Some even explicitly emphasized that their writings were trustworthy and accurate recordings. It wasn’t just idle talk. Their actions changed too.Jesus’ disciples abandoned him when he was arrested. Within weeks, however, those cowards became bold preachers of a gospel message that would transform the world. They didn’t preach to get rich. Rather their preaching led to imprisonments and executions. Faith doesn’t have to mean turning off your brain. Rather, having faith can be the step one takes based on the evidence, including the historical documentation of an empty tomb.

Happy Easter.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Vax

 

 

Makary
https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1912947217473626610

 

 

Solari
https://twitter.com/ChildrensHD/status/1913019646862643353

 

 

Stem cells
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1913200483205800187

 

 

Pelican
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1913080045389697360

 

 

Aeroponic
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1913149496256614820

 

 

Retriever
https://twitter.com/catshealdeprsn/status/1912891302414287214

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 18 2025

Feb 182025
 
 February 18, 2025  Posted by at 11:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  56 Responses »


René Magritte The muscles of the sky 1927

 

• “This Might Be The Biggest Fraud In History” (ZH)
• Musk’s DOGE Seeking Access To IRS Taxpayer Data (RT)
• DOGE Is Right To Defang the CFPB (RCW)
• The Genius of the DOGE Exposures (AmG)
• US, Russia Hold Peace Talks In Saudi Arabia Without Ukraine (ZH)
• US-Russia Meeting In Riyadh Will ‘Have No Results’ – Zelensky (RT)
• Ukraine Has No Bargaining Power in US-Russia Peace Talks (Sp.)
• Macron’s Ukraine Summit A Gathering of ‘Warmongers’ – Hungary FM (RT)
• Munich Conference ‘A Nightmare’ – Organizer (RT)
• US Imposing ‘Colonial’ Resource Deal On Ukraine (RT)
• Indian Strategy Puts Trump In Front of Putin (Helmer)
• Kiev Regime Attacks Chernobyl To Sabotage Peace Talks (SCF)
• J.D. Vance Delivers a Historic Defense of Free Speech (Turley)
• Vance Blasts ‘Orwellian’ German Laws (RT)
• Krakatoa Blows (James Howard Kunstler)
• The European Welfare State Is Collapsing (Lacalle)

 

 

 

 

TDS
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891677532056949195

Leavitt
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891685749398859982

Nerd army

Courts
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891244904191287350

Watters

Miller
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891576558462353742

poop

Nebenzia
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891586940870291605

 

 

 

 

334 million or 394 million.

• “This Might Be The Biggest Fraud In History” (ZH)

Elon Musk was expected to remain offline Sunday night into Monday morning as his xAI team prepared for the highly anticipated debut of “Grok 3,” scheduled for release Monday evening at 8 p.m. EST. However, the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), tasked with streamlining the federal bureaucracy, returned very excited to his social media platform around midnight, unveiling what “might be the biggest fraud in history.” Musk posted a spreadsheet of Social Security Administration data showing “numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!” The data shows that 20.789 million Americans are collecting social security benefits over the age of 100. Drilling down into the age buckets, benefits are still being paid out to folks over 140!

One X user pointed out that 2023 data showed the US population at around 334.9 million. However, Musk’s data (likely from DOGE’s ‘Big Balls’ analyst) shows 394 million names in the Social Security Administration database. Musk responded: “Yes, there are FAR more “eligible” social security numbers than there are citizens in the USA. This might be the biggest fraud in history.” “Maybe we pause payments to everyone 120+ until they can authenticate they’re among the living, to start,” Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.) wrote on X in response to Musk’s post. Collins is far too conservative. Lawmakers should freeze payments over the age bucket of 100 until a clear determination can be made where taxpayer funds are disappearing in this possible money pit that smells like fraud. “If DOGE’s numbers are right, $522B—1/3 of ALL spending on Social Security each year—is fraudulent,” X user Robert Sterling said.

At a DOGE press conference last week in the White House, Musk said: “If money is spent badly. If your taxpayer dollars are not spent in a sensible and frugal manner, then that’s not okay. Your tax dollars need to be spent wisely on the things that matter to the people,” Musk said. “It’s just common sense. It’s not Draconian or radical. I think it’s really just saying let’s look at each of the expenditures and say, is this actually in the best interest of the people, and if it is, it’s approved, if it’s not, we should think about it,” he added. “There’s crazy things, like, just a cursory examination of Social Security and we’ve got people in there that are about 150 years old,” Musk said. “Now, do you know anyone that’s 150? I don’t. OK. They should be on the Guinness Book of World Records, they’re missing out.”

“So, you know, that’s the case where, like, I think they’re probably dead is my guess, or they should be very famous. One of the two,” he added. It now appears DOGE’s Big Balls has been heard at work using AI to uncover possible fraud in federal entitlements. So far, we have not verified the data Musk shared on X, but confirmation could be just ahead.

Read more …

Protest! Protest!

• Musk’s DOGE Seeking Access To IRS Taxpayer Data (RT)

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is seeking access to a highly secured Internal Revenue Service (IRS) system that stores the personal tax records of millions of Americans, according to media reports. The examination of the IRS system, first reported by the Washington Post on Sunday, represents the latest move by Musk-led DOGE to overhaul US government agencies in a bid to eliminate wasteful state spending. The IRS systems house private financial data for taxpayers, including tax returns, Social Security numbers, addresses, banking details, and employment information. The Integrated Data Retrieval System, used by IRS employees, enables the review of tax information, issuance of notices, and updating of taxpayer records.

DOGE software engineer Gavin Kliger already worked at IRS headquarters on Thursday, the outlet reported, citing people familiar with the matter. He is set to serve as a senior adviser to the acting commissioner, though the tax agency is still finalizing the details of his role. According to the report, Kliger is expected to have broad access to IRS systems. However, as of Sunday, he had not yet gained access to sensitive tax agency data. “Waste, fraud, and abuse have been deeply entrenched in our broken system for far too long. It takes direct access to the system to identify and fix it,” White House spokesman Harrison Fields told The Post. DOGE remains committed to exposing fraud, ensuring that Americans are informed about how their “hard-earned” tax dollars are being spent by the government, he said.

Last week, Musk also alleged that federal workers were defrauding taxpayers. “We do find it rather odd that there are quite a few people in the bureaucracy who have ostensibly a salary of a few hundred thousand dollars, but somehow managed to accrue tens of millions of dollars in net worth while they are in that position,” Musk told reporters while in the Oval Office with US President Donald Trump. “We’re just curious as to where it came from.” The request has raised concerns within the government and among privacy experts, who warn that granting Musk access to Americans’ private taxpayer data could pose substantial risks.

The IRS is set to lay off thousands of probationary employees in the coming days, aligning with the Trump administration’s broader initiative to cut federal spending. The action is part of a series of workforce reductions ordered by Trump after he launched a campaign aimed at streamlining government operations. His administration has implemented measures such as a hiring freeze, offering buyouts to federal employees, and mandating agencies to collaborate with DOGE to identify and eliminate inefficiencies.

Read more …

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is not what it seems.

• DOGE Is Right To Defang the CFPB (RCW)

With a big tech-powered magnifying glass on federal websites, spending contracts, and government payment systems, Elon Musk’s band of DOGE system admins have been turning Washington inside out in their hunt for waste, fraud, and abuse. One of the most prized agencies on the chopping block is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, heralded by progressives as an indispensable force for helping consumers wronged by financial institutions, but derided by fintech investors and conservatives as little more than a government “shakedown agency.” Consumers will be better off without the CFPB breathing down the neck of American companies. Since the inauguration of President Trump, the CFPB’s temporary leadership put an immediate halt on all work, also informing the Federal Reserve, which directly funds the agency, that it would no longer seek new funding.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the intellectual force behind the agency’s founding, has been apoplectic. She’s argued that Trump is “firing the financial cop on the beat that makes sure your family doesn’t get scammed.” The origin of the CFPB goes back to the rubble of the 2008 financial crisis when legislators saw this proposed agency as a viable response to the populist backlash engulfing Washington and Wall Street. Instead of penalizing wrongdoers, Congress funded bank bailouts and launched a “watchdog” group. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act mandated new standards for lending, restricted capital that could be tapped for bank loans, and created the CFPB to police consumer finance. All functions performed by the five former federal banking supervisory agencies were rolled into the CFPB, granting it sole jurisdiction over non-depository firms and financial institutions with over $10 billion in assets.

This empowered the agency to issue regulatory guidance, demand information from financial institutions, and launch civil actions in federal court. Supporters of the CFPB point to an impressive record of close to $20 billion in consumer relief, as well as an additional $5 billion in civil penalties. Without the CFPB, fraudsters and scams would metastasize and consumer injustice would run wild, so they say. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. As a regulatory agency with civil litigation authority, the CFPB is emboldened to file high-dollar lawsuits against financial firms. An estimate of the CFPB’s database of enforcement actions reveals that roughly 85% of all cases are settled out of court before a final ruling. Companies often choose to settle, but this shouldn’t be mistaken for an admission of guilt. In a litigious society such as the United States where companies are routinely targeted in frivolous lawsuits, the court of public opinion matters just as much as the court of law.

Firms prefer settling cases over having their name dragged through the mud for months on end in the media, something tort lawyers call a “nuisance settlement.” These expected costs are baked into large firms’ financial projections and are sometimes factored into pricing their goods and services for consumers. The CFPB is more akin to a state-backed tort law firm that can tap the nation’s central bank for resources while exploiting its do-gooder reputation for easy PR victories. Rather than smart regulatory guidance to oversee a new generation of consumer finance firms, CFPB has relied on quick settlements out of court to squash innovative upstarts. While CFPB enforcement has been successful in penalizing banks and lenders for how loans are structured or advertised, it does not take much imagination to see how this has impacted the investing climate for new competitors. Since CFPB’s founding, there are now 35% fewer financial institutions remaining for consumers to choose from, down from 15,000 to just roughly 9,000 today.

While there is high consumer demand for fintech, payment apps, and account offerings, including Bitcoin and cryptocurrency banks, CFPB’s chilling actions have slowed that innovation, leading to the recent calls for the agency to be gutted. And they’re right. Most of CFPB’s functions are mirrored at the FTC on everything but finance. Regional Federal Reserve banks are also responsible for bank oversight and regulation, not to mention state banking regulators. Existing regulators have the reach, experience, and know-how to police would-be fraudsters and outright deceptive practices among banks. Why not let them? For consumers who want next-level services and financial products, there is no question that CFPB’s litigious approach has impacted their ability to access credit and financial services. There must be a better way to regulate our financial institutions and protect consumers than a tort law firm with government authority. Congress could fold elements of the CFPB into the FTC, OCC, or even FDIC, and bad actors will still be policed. Consumers deserve to be protected, and they will be, but they also deserve a regulatory structure that rewards innovation and brings financial products to market that they can choose between. The CFPB is due for defanging.

Read more …

“My advice to President Trump and Mr. Musk is: Keep highlighting the absurd spending. The American people will have your back.”

• The Genius of the DOGE Exposures (AmG)

The American people have rightly been appalled at the outrageous expenditures Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been exposing at USAID, which not only demonstrates the striking wastefulness of our government but also an ingenious public relations strategy by the Trump administration. When Americans learn that their tax dollars are going to fund egregious projects around the world, it lays a foundation for the public relations framework needed by the Trump administration to bring American public opinion along on the necessary journey of restructuring the government. It makes people’s blood boil. And it sets the tone for the effectiveness, and need for, the entire Trump efficiency program, even though the spending in absolute monetary terms on these insane USAID projects is fairly minor compared to the overall $6.9 trillion federal budget.

Let’s consider some of the USAID expenditures recently revealed:
$70,000 for the production of a “DEI musical” in Ireland
$47,000 for a “transgender opera” in Colombia
$2,000,000 for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala
$32,000 for a “transgender comic book” in Peru
Hundreds of millions to support “irrigation canals, farming equipment, and even fertilizer used to support the unprecedented poppy cultivation and heroin production in Afghanistan,” benefiting the Taliban
$40,000,000 to fund research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which gifted the world with the COVID virus

The creators of Monty Python could not have made this stuff up, although they came close in their “It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them!” sketch. It still makes me laugh. But that’s why Donald Trump and Elon Musk are highlighting these absurd expenditures. They are so ridiculous that they almost defy belief, and they serve to supercharge American anger and righteous indignation. Trump recognizes, as Ronald Reagan did, the importance of galvanizing American public opinion as an integral part of carrying out his agenda. By inflaming the public, he puts pressure on the craven Congress to go along with his efforts to enact sweeping changes that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to achieve.

No doubt when Musk sets his genius young elves to work applying their AI algorithms on the Department of Health and Human Services and the Defense Department’s budget data, they will find waste so massive that it dwarfs that of USAID’s $40 billion annual outlay. But it’s a bit harder for the public to grasp the wastefulness of the government paying many times the price that it should be paying for anti-aircraft missiles, say, or ineffective vaccines. From a public relations standpoint, it’s much easier to see the lunacy of the US taxpayer shelling out $2.5 million for an electric vehicle project in Vietnam or $1.5 million to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in Serbian workplaces.

We live in amazing times, led by an extraordinary team being assembled in the White House. Who would have imagined just a few years ago that a Kennedy family member would (likely) be holding a cabinet position as the head of HHS in a Republican administration? Ot that a prominent Democratic congresswoman and former Democratic presidential candidate would (likely) be the next Director of National Intelligence in that same Republican administration? Or that long-time liberal Democrat-voting, richest man in the world, Elon Musk, would be leading the effort of that administration to completely transform the government of the United States into a lean, mean, efficiently operating machine?

It all came about because of the vision and incredible tenacity of one individual—another former Democrat named Donald Trump, who survived a baptism of legal fire—and actual gunfire—by his political opponents to regain the presidency after all the “smart people” in Washington had written him off politically. More to the point, however, Trump’s career as a builder and, more importantly for the present discussion, as an unparalleled master of branding and public relations, has made him ideally suited to take on the gargantuan task at hand: bringing to heel an out-of-control government bureaucracy that will surely lead to this country’s destruction if not reined in.

Trump’s highly successful television show, The Apprentice, ran for a remarkable 15 years and caused the phrase, “You’re fired!”, to gain such familiarity that it stood beside such catchphrases as “Got milk?” and “Where’s the beef?” among the iconic popular expressions seared into Americans’ collective consciousness. And what more fitting expression to address a massively bloated and overpopulated federal bureaucracy desperately in need of draconian personnel cuts?

No one wishes ill on American citizens in government service, but there comes a point where the American body politic needs to make hard choices if the United States is to continue as a viable concern. And I don’t recall Democrats being nearly so exercised when Bill Clinton let 377,000 federal employees go after he assumed the presidency, using a buy-out program not so dissimilar to that offered by President Trump, which Democrats are inveighing against. Oh, how quickly Democrats forget. Remember when Clinton said, in his 1996 State of the Union speech, that “the era of big government is over”? Those were the days when Democrats still possessed a semblance of sanity.

The federal budget deficit in 2025 will be $1.8 trillion on outlays of $6.7 trillion, according to Congressional Budget Office data. And these deficits are cumulative. Every year that mountain of debt grows and currently stands at over $36 trillion. That is unsustainable. Approximately 13 percent of our federal budget just goes toward servicing our debt, with $2.6 billion per day on interest payments alone. When a single federal government employee, the recently resigned head of the Tennessee Valley Authority, has a total federal government compensation package of $10.5 million per year, then Houston, we have a problem. My advice to President Trump and Mr. Musk is: Keep highlighting the absurd spending. The American people will have your back.

Read more …

Already started today.

• US, Russia Hold Peace Talks In Saudi Arabia Without Ukraine (ZH)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has warned on X that “Europe’s security is at a turning point.” She continued in the statement she wrote while arriving in Paris for “crucial talks” with European counterparts on the Russia-Ukraine war, “Yes, it is about Ukraine – but it is also about us.” “We need an urgency mindset. We need a surge in defense,” she wrote. “And we need both of them now.” The words come immediately on the heels of von der Leyen telling the Munich Security Conference, “I will propose to activate the escape clause for defense investments. This will allow member states to substantially increase their defense expenditure.” Europe is also deeply concerned that it is getting cut out of peace talks toward a negotiated settlement to end the Ukraine war. They are worried President Zelensky himself is getting sidelined, after last week’s 90-minute Trump call with Putin.

Several media outlets reported on Sunday that initial talks will be held in Saudi Arabia, expected to kick off Tuesday, between Russian and American diplomats. Both sides have confirmed the talks: Moscow has confirmed that Russian FM Sergey Lavrov and Yuri Ushakov, a foreign policy adviser to Putin, will take part in talks with US officials in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday. Washington has also confirmed the meeting, saying Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and special envoy Steve Witkoff will attend. Lavrov says Russia is not considering territorial concessions to be given to Ukraine at the planned negotiations to end the war. It appears final details ahead of the high-level talks were hammered out in a Saturday phone call between Secretary of State Rubio and top Russian diplomat and security official Sergey Lavrov.

“The Secretary re-affirmed President Trump’s commitment to finding an end to the conflict in Ukraine. In addition, they discussed the opportunity to potentially work together on a number of other bilateral issues,” a readout of that call indicated. Crucially, Ukrainian officials have revealed were not invited to the talks in Saudi Arabia. Zelensky reiterated in a Sunday interview that he will “never accept any decisions between the United States and Russia about Ukraine” if Ukrainian officials aren’t at the table. As for a potential decision or concession amid the looming deal-making to end the war, European officials are saying President Trump will likely approve the withdrawal of US forces from Baltic states and possibly further to the West, in order to ease Russian fears of Washington encroachment, according to reporting in Al Jazeera.

As for the imminent US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia: Kyiv ‘knew nothing’ about US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia and won’t recognize their outcome if Ukraine is not part of them – Zelensky. Ukraine’s Kyiv Post is reporting the same: Ukraine was not informed about the negotiations in Saudi Arabia, will not participate in them, and will not recognize any agreements reached, — Zelensky Strangely, President Zelensky is actually currently in the Gulf region, visiting UAE, and he’s next traveling to Saudi Arabia—and yet he’s not going to be part of the the US-Russia talks. His office is stressing that his state visit to Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with the US talks, as it was planned in advance: Days before Svyrydenko’s announcement, Zelensky told reporters on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference that he intends to pay official visits to Saudia Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey, but has no plans to meet with any Russian or U.S. delegations in these countries.

“I will not meet with Russians, but then I will not meet with Americans there,” he said. That’s awkward, to say the least… Still, the Ukrainian leader has said these talks will “yield no results” without Ukraine’s direct representation and input. Many of his European backers agree, and have been urging Washington include Kiev in the negotiations. European leaders are meeting in Paris Monday, at President Macron’s invitation, for an urgent meeting assessing the Ukraine war and Europe’s defense readiness and security.

Read more …

From “Zelensky ‘refuses to recognize’” the talks, to “Zelensky demands Israel-style guarantees..”, to this, it all amounts to nothing. He’s done.

• US-Russia Meeting In Riyadh Will ‘Have No Results’ – Zelensky (RT)

Kiev will not take part in the US-Russia negotiations in Riyadh and considers them meaningless, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has said. Teams led by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio will meet on Tuesday in what will be the first high-level talks between the two countries over Ukraine since 2022. “Ukraine will not participate,” Zelensky told reporters on Monday, adding that Kiev “didn’t know anything” about the upcoming talks. “Ukraine views any negotiations about Ukraine that are being held without Ukraine as having no results,” he said. “We will not recognize such agreements.” Zelensky insisted that his own visit to Saudi Arabia on Tuesday has “no connection” to the meeting between US and Russian negotiators the same day. “The visit to the region was planned long before the US decided to meet Russia there,” he said, as quoted by Politico.

Putin’s top foreign policy aide, Yury Ushakov, confirmed on Monday that the negotiations with Americans will not involve third parties. Speaking to journalists on the tarmac in Riyadh, he said the talks aim to lay the groundwork for ending the Ukraine conflict and serve as a step toward “real normalization” of relations with the US. While the administration of former US President Joe Biden maintained unconditional military and financial support for Kiev, President Donald Trump has rejected his predecessor’s campaign to “isolate” Russia on the global stage and promised to end the conflict as soon as possible through a lasting ceasefire. Ukrainian and EU officials have said they were blindsided by Trump’s phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on February 12. They also criticized Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for ruling out NATO membership for Kiev and refusing to commit to the restoration of Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders.

Speaking at the Munich Security Conference last week, Hegseth said the Pentagon will not commit troops as part of any security guarantees offered to Kiev. He added that if peacekeepers are deployed to Ukraine, they will not be protected by NATO’s collective defense mechanism. Moscow has insisted that a peace settlement must address the “root causes” of the conflict, including Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said earlier this month that Zelensky, instead of “empty words,” must demonstrate willingness to hold good-faith negotiations. Putin reiterated last month that he does not consider Zelensky legitimate because his five-year presidential term expired in May 2024 and no new elections have been called due to martial law.

Read more …

None. Anyone feel sorry?

• Ukraine Has No Bargaining Power in US-Russia Peace Talks (Sp.)

Volodymyr Zelensky insists he won’t accept a US-Russia deal on Ukraine without Kiev’s input. But does his opinion matter?

• Ukraine today is a devastated country, deserted by much of its people and critically dependent on foreign aid.
• Over 6.1 million Ukrainian refugees had been registered in Europe by mid-2024, according to UN estimates. One can only guess how many Ukrainians opted not to register their refugee status out of fear of being deported and press-ganged into armed service.
• With the Ukrainian economy on its last legs, Kiev has received over $30 billion in US budget aid just to pay salaries to state employees.
• Foreign companies like Vanguard and BlackRock swept in to profit from this crisis, buying assets in Ukraine at bedrock prices. Much of Ukraine’s agricultural land is now Ukrainian in name only.
• Large proportions of Ukraine’s most valuable assets, such as natural resource deposits and industrial facilities, were located in the territories that chose to join Russia rather than submit to the rule of neo-Nazis in Kiev.
• Ukraine has been saddled with an enormous external debt due to all the credit it has been receiving from abroad. Now, Kiev faces the prospect of losing half of its natural resources to the US as repayment for the financing that turned out to be a loan.
• Foreign black market transplantologists have been operating in Ukraine for months now, harvesting organs from injured Ukrainian soldiers.
• US biowarfare experts treat Ukraine as their own playground where they can conduct dangerous research without the risk of a containment breach endangering American lives.
• US and British intelligence agencies took charge of the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) since 2014, making it subservient to the West.
• And although no one has said anything about deciding Ukraine’s fate without Kiev’s input, the question remains: how much does Zelensky’s opinion matter in this context?

Read more …

Nobody cares about Europe.

• Macron’s Ukraine Summit A Gathering of ‘Warmongers’ – Hungary FM (RT)

The European leaders that answered French President Emmanuel Macon’s call for an ‘emergency summit’ to discuss how to respond to being sidelined by US President Donald Trump are “warmongers,” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has warned. Moscow and Washington have announced the beginning of bilateral talks on Tuesday in Saudi Arabia ahead of a possible summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump in Riyadh. Macron called EU leaders for an emergency summit on the Ukraine conflict in Paris on Monday after Washington made it clear that the bloc would not be at the table when the US and Russia discuss peace. Speaking at a press conference in Kazakhstan on Monday Szijjarto said “We trust that the American-Russian negotiations will be successful, and we hope that this will lead to peace in Ukraine as soon as possible… However, we must also see that in Europe, those who do not want peace are organizing,” he added.

“Those who have been constantly adding fuel to the fire for the past three years are gathering in Paris today,” Szijjarto said, branding the participants “war-mongering countries that have followed a misguided strategy.” Since Trump’s reelection, his administration has signaled a shift in US foreign policy, focusing on minimizing American involvement in any potential armistice achieved in Ukraine. Washington is also aiming to shift the financial and logistical burden of supporting Kiev to its European allies, while demanding that the continent’s NATO members contribute more to collective defense. The US has circulated a document to gauge the willingness of its European allies to deploy peacekeeping troops to Ukraine, among other points, according to Reuters.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has stressed that he is ready to send British soldiers to provide security guarantees for Kiev, in the event of a ceasefire. Similarly, Macron has repeatedly brought up the possibility of putting Western boots on the ground, both as peacekeepers and combatants. Last year, the French leader suggested that sending troops was a possibility that could “legitimately” arise if Russian forces broke through the Ukrainian front line, and Kiev asked for help. Moscow has stressed that any Western forces deployed to Ukraine without a UN mandate would be considered as enemy combatants and legitimate targets.

Read more …

“..on Sunday, Heusgen became emotional, having to cut himself short. He was addressing the mounting pressures on the “rules-based order,” urging EU politicians to uphold it despite a visible rift with the US.”

• Munich Conference ‘A Nightmare’ – Organizer (RT)

Christoph Heusgen, chairman of the Munich Security Conference (MSC), has described the results of last week’s gathering as a “nightmare” for Washington’s European allies. He claimed that the US under President Donald Trump “lives on another planet,” referencing comments made by American Vice President J.D. Vance at the Germany-hosted event. Vance criticized EU nations for increasingly mirroring the USSR in their suppression of dissent and the detachment of elites from voters. He cautioned that if the trend continues, the US could withdraw its support for its European allies.

During an interview with ZDF on Sunday — his final day as MSC chairman — Heusgen noted that, at the very least, Europeans now have clarity about the Trump administration’s stance. He added that while some Republican senators expressed commitment to “trans-Atlantic unity” in contrast to Vance, they were also cautious in their public statements. EU officials reaffirmed their pledges to support Kiev at the MSC, while Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky called for a united European army, asserting that Ukraine could play a significant role in such an initiative. Heusgen advised Europeans to “do what Zelensky says” and stand together. However, skepticism remains among certain EU member states, such as Poland, regarding the concept of a transnational military force to serve as a European counterpart to NATO.

The Trump administration has signaled no intention of involving either NATO or the US in any future security arrangements in Ukraine following a potential ceasefire with Russia. Additionally, Washington has expressed interest in recouping expenditures related to the Ukraine conflict through privileged access to mineral resources under Kiev’s control. Zelensky has previously advocated various forms of security for Ukraine that even his staunchest supporters deem exceedingly ambitious — from full NATO membership to deploying a 200,000-strong foreign military contingent, the mass placement of Western missiles, and even a Ukrainian nuclear capability. As he concluded his closing remarks at the MSC on Sunday, Heusgen became emotional, having to cut himself short. He was addressing the mounting pressures on the “rules-based order,” urging EU politicians to uphold it despite a visible rift with the US.

Read more …

“..an unnamed official from an unidentified country told AP that “it’s a colonial agreement, and Zelensky cannot sign it.”

• US Imposing ‘Colonial’ Resource Deal On Ukraine (RT)

The US is trying to steamroll Kiev into a lopsided resource deal that evokes memories of the West’s colonial past, several media outlets have reported, citing officials familiar with the matter. Last fall, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky suggested that his country could agree to allow its Western backers to participate in the joint exploitation of vast deposits of rare earth minerals, including lithium, titanium, and graphite. The administration of US President Donald Trump apparently took up Zelensky on his offer, reportedly suggesting to Kiev that the US be granted 50% ownership of the country’s rare earth minerals and that American troops be deployed to defend them. However, Zelensky is said to have “politely declined” to sign a document granting the US control of half of Ukraine’s mineral reserves, seeking a “better deal” and arguing that the agreement did not provide any US security guarantees.

Commenting on the back-and-forth between Washington and Kiev, an unnamed official from an unidentified country told AP that “it’s a colonial agreement, and Zelensky cannot sign it.” Echoing this assessment, two unnamed officials told Bloomberg that Washington “was trying to ram through a one-sided deal” regarding Ukraine’s resources. One agency source compared the US attitude to Belgium’s colonial policy in Africa in the 19th century, when King Leopold II controlled the Congo as his personal fiefdom. An unnamed senior Ukrainian adviser cited by the Washington Post noted that he was “taken aback by the scale” of what the Trump administration demanded, also recalling the history of European colonialism in Africa. He warned that the deal “could also lead to the right to develop Ukraine’s resources being signed away for decades with no guarantees that investors would actually develop them.”

Despite this, Ukrainian officials are working on a counterproposal that would provide Washington with access to the country’s resources while also bolstering US security guarantees for Ukraine, according to Washington Post sources. In this vein, one senior Ukrainian official reportedly joked that Kiev would consider “almost anything” to maintain US support, including shipping Ukrainian eggs to America. Michael Waltz, Trump’s national security adviser, has defended the concept of a resource deal, arguing that the US “deserve[s] to have some type of payback for the billions they have invested in this war.” He suggested that Zelensky would be “very wise” to sign such an agreement. Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova suggested that the US was simply taking advantage of the Ukrainian leadership’s desire to “sell the country by auction.” “What Trump told Zelensky doesn’t even resemble a deal. It’s more like a command ‘fetch!’ – which the Kiev regime has been well trained to obey.”

Read more …

The Quad.

• Indian Strategy Puts Trump In Front of Putin (Helmer)

Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, is the first of President Vladimir Putin’s strategic allies to leave him to make whatever exit from the Ukraine war he can negotiate with President Donald Trump. Modi did this by saying as little as he could about Russia last week in Washington while preparing his own military, energy supply, sea lane and land route agreements with the US; altogether, according to Indian sources in Moscow, they enlarge India’s role in the escalating US war against China across the globe, and diminish Russia’s role significantly. “I have been in constant contact with both Russia and Ukraine. I have also visited both countries,” Modi said beside Trump at the White House on February 13.

“And many people are mistaken and they feel that India is neutral. I would like to clarify: India is not neutral. We have taken a side, and we have taken the side of peace…Ultimately, you have to come to the negotiating table, and India has constantly made efforts that there are talks that take place where both parties are present. It is only then that we will find a solution. The efforts being made by President Trump — I support them, I welcome them, and I would like that President Trump is successful as soon as possible so that the world is on the path to peace once again.”

This isn’t a statement of India’s support for Russia, according to Russian sources. It is not even India’s acknowledgement of the wars which the US and its allies are waging against Russia simultaneously on its western and eastern, northern and southern fronts. It’s India’s declaration that it aims to be on the US side in the multi-front war India is waging against China from the Pacific to the Indian Ocean. It is also a proclamation by Modi against the Arab, Iranian and Muslim resistance to the US and Israel on the Arabian Sea, the Red Sea, and the Persian Gulf.

“The prime minister and I,” said Trump, “reaffirmed that strong cooperation among the United States, India, Australia, and Japan [the Quad], and it’s crucial really to maintaining peace and prosperity, tranquillity even, in the Indo-Pacific.”“We will work together to enhance peace, stability, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific,” Modi replied, “The Quad will play a special role in this. During the Quad summit scheduled to be held in India this year, we will expand cooperation in new areas with our partner countries.”

A veteran Indian source in Moscow explains: “Indians are very pleased with the anti-China stand of the US. The last two years of relations with Russians have been bruising for Indians and a lot of top oil and gas managers are exasperated with the Russians. They would do anything to stop doing business with the Russians – this is not because of the sanctions, it is the Russians themselves! [From Modi’s visit to Washington] there is the general take that we cannot be throwing our lot with Russians because they are so unreliable now and are junior to the Chinese. Putin might have brokered the Ladakh moment, but all in all Indians prefer to deal with the US now. For now we know that the Americans call the shots.” Russia has been relegated. In Delhi now, Quad is major league; the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and BRICS are minor league.

“One thing that I deeply appreciate, and I learn from President Trump, is that he keeps the national interest supreme,” Modi said in his Oval Office remarks. “Like him, I also keep the national interest of India at the top of everything else.” The Indian media have interpreted this as more than compensating for the American put-downs Modi registered. “The President did not turn up to greet [Modi] when he arrived at the White House; Trump snubbed him by doubling down on reciprocal tariffs…Elon Musk insulted him by bringing his children to a business meeting… In the age of trivialisation through social media tattle and trolling, all of this is of little consequence… The broad consensus among more seasoned analysts and experts is that PM Modi disarmed a rampant US President…and advanced bilateral ties…The visit was actually a tour de force measured in terms of impact and outcomes.”

Read more …

“Once again, the neo-Nazi regime is simply doing everything possible to prevent the war from ending.”

• Kiev Regime Attacks Chernobyl To Sabotage Peace Talks (SCF)

In recent days, an incident involving a drone attack on the Chernobyl nuclear plant has generated controversy and debate. According to Ukrainian authorities, a Russian drone allegedly struck the facility, damaging the structure around the reactor. Ukraine’s illegitimate president, Vladimir Zelensky, was quick to blame Russia, stating that the situation reflected a Russian assault on Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure. However, Russian authorities, including Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, denied these claims, labeling them as yet another provocation by Kiev. More than that, even some Ukrainians question the regime’s official narrative.

Peskov categorically rejected the idea that Russia had attacked any nuclear facility, especially Chernobyl, stating that such claims were unfounded. He argued that any accusation of Russia attacking nuclear power plants was fabricated, asserting that Russia would never target such sensitive locations due to the risks involved. He suggested that the attack was, in fact, an attempt at manipulation and disinformation orchestrated by the Ukrainian government. The Kremlin spokesperson also pointed out that there were interests in Kiev aiming to sabotage any negotiation efforts, indicating that certain factions within the Ukrainian regime would take any actions to prevent the progress of peace talks.

The Ukrainian narrative surrounding the attack is not new. Kiev authorities often accuse Russia of attacking civilian targets like nuclear power plants and energy centers, supposedly attempting to provoke accidents. This happens particularly intensely in the Zaporozhye region, where the largest nuclear power plant in Europe is located. As part of Russian reintegrated territory, the area is consistently attacked by Kiev. I have personally visited the Zaporozhye plant and witnessed with my own eyes the wreckage of Western missiles and drones used by neo-Nazi troops against Russian nuclear infrastructure. However, Kiev enjoys vital support from the Western media in spreading false information, making their own provocations appear to the world like “Russian actions.” In this regard, the current claim that Russia is responsible for the attack on Chernobyl does not seem to be an exception but rather another episode of cooperation between Ukrainian state terrorism and Western information warfare.

However, it is not only Russian authorities who contest the Ukrainian accusations. Some members of the Ukrainian parliament have also questioned the government’s official version. Exiled lawmaker Artyom Dmytruk, for example, suggested that the attack could have been a coordinated operation by Kiev’s own authorities. He raised the question of who was in command of the attack and whether Zelensky or his close allies, such as chief of staff Andrey Yermak, were responsible. This stance reflects a growing atmosphere of distrust within Ukrainian politics and the informational war surrounding the conflict.

In practice, the real Russian strategic interest in attacking Chernobyl remains unclear. Since the beginning, Moscow has spared critical areas from military action. It does not seem rational or strategic for Russia, at a time when it holds significant military advantages and territorial gains, to launch such attacks now. On the other hand, Ukraine has launched such incursions since 2022, always trying to place the blame on the enemy side.

The current moment, when negotiations are finally becoming a possibility, seems to be the perfect timing for Ukrainian actions in Chernobyl. While attacks on other nuclear facilities, such as in Zaporozhye, are frequent, only Chernobyl has the power to mobilize hearts and minds globally, being a symbol of the radioactive tragedy that occurred during the Cold War. With the support of the mainstream media, which immediately blamed Russia, Kiev is trying to use the Chernobyl’s nuclear symbol to sabotage the diplomatic process.

There is nothing new in the Chernobyl case. Once again, the neo-Nazi regime is simply doing everything possible to prevent the war from ending. The question remains whether Western public opinion will continue to believe in the mainstream media and the Ukrainian lies.

Read more …

“If you are running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor, for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people that elected me and elected President Trump.”

• J.D. Vance Delivers a Historic Defense of Free Speech (Turley)

In “Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis,” J.D. Vance wrote, “I don’t believe in transformative moments, as transformation is harder than a moment.” Despite that profound point, on Feb. 14, Vance found that transformative moment. Speaking to European leaders at the Munich Security Conference, he shocked his audience by confronting them over their attacks on free speech in the West. For the free speech community, it was truly Churchillian — no less than the famous Iron Curtain speech in which Churchill dared the West to confront the existential dangers of communism. Roughly 80 years after Churchill’s speech, Vance called our allies to account not for the growing threat from countries like Russia or China, but from themselves.

To a clearly shocked audience, Vance declared that he was not worried about “external actors” but “the threat from within the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America.” Vance then pulled back the curtain on the censorship and anti-free-speech policies of the European Union and close allies ranging from the United Kingdom to Sweden. He also chastised one of the most vehemently anti-free speech figures in Europe, Thierry Breton, who led the EU efforts to control speech with draconian measures under the infamous Digital Services Act. Vance called out the hypocrisy of these nations asking for greater and greater military assistance “in the name of our shared democratic values” even as they eviscerate free speech, the very right that once defined Western Civilization. The point was crushing.

Before we further commit to the defense of Europe, he argued, we should agree on what we are defending. These European nations are erasing the very distinctions between us and our adversaries. In my recent book, I discussed many of the examples cited by the vice president. One of the most telling came from Canada last year, when the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau temporarily blocked the citizenship of Russian dissident Maria Kartasheva. The reason was that she had a conviction (after a trial in absentia) in Russia for condemning the Ukrainian war. The Canadian government declared that Kartasheva’s conviction in Russia aligns with a Criminal Code offense relating to false information in Canada.

In other words, her use of free speech could be prosecuted in Canada under its abusive Section 372(1) of the Criminal Code, punishing speech deemed to be “convey[ing] false information with the intent to alarm or injure anyone.” Vance ran through just a fraction of the parade of horribles, from Britain arresting people for silent prayers near abortion clinics to Sweden prosecuting a religious protester who burned a Koran, with Judge Göran Lundahl insisting that freedom of expression does not constitute a “free pass to do or say anything.” Apparently, it does not include acts once called blasphemy or insulting religion. Vance also mocked the underlying premise for speech crackdowns to combat “disinformation,” pointing out that these measures constitute a far greater threat to citizens in the West than any external threat.

He had the courage to say what has long been verboten on the restriction of speech to combat foreign influence: “if your democracy can be destroyed with a few hundred thousand dollars of digital advertising from a foreign country, then it wasn’t very strong to begin with.” In perhaps the greatest single declaration uttered by an American leader since John F. Kennedy in Germany declared “Ich bin ein Berliner,” he added: “If you are running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor, for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people that elected me and elected President Trump.” The reaction of the European diplomats was one of astonishment. Few even offered the usual polite applause. Instead, rows of smug leaders looked straight ahead with the same level of disgust as if Vance were the second coming of the Visogoths threatening the Pax Romana, or Roman Peace.

In a single speech, Vance shattered the hypocrisy of our allies’ calling for a defense of the West while abandoning Western values. They did not like it, and many in the American press joined in dismissing his address. He was called a “wrecking ball” for bringing up the anti-free speech movement that has swept over Europe. One German official declared “This is all so insane and worrying.” This is a diplomat from a nation that shredded free speech for decades, to the point of arresting people over their ringtones. Of course, our own anti-free speech voices were in attendance, too. Politico quoted one “former House Democratic staffer” who bravely attacked Vance anonymously: “I was aghast … He was blaming the victim. What the f— was that? I had my mouth open in a room full of people with their mouth open. That was bad.” No, it was not bad. It was glorious.

After Elon Musk purchased Twitter with the pledge to dismantle the company’s censorship system, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton turned to the EU, calling on it to use its Digital Service Act to force the censorship of her fellow American citizens. That did not leave many people agape. But Vance’s defense of free speech is considered a breathtaking outrage. In “Hillbilly Elergy,” Vance explained his lack of faith in transformative moments. “I’ve seen far too many people awash in a genuine desire to change, only to lose their mettle when they realized just how difficult change actually is,” he wrote. And there is no “genuine desire to change” in Europe. The appetite for censorship is now insatiable, and free speech is in a free fall.

In the midst of this crackdown, Vance spoke with a quintessentially American voice. It was clear, honest and unafraid. There was no pretense or evasion. It was a speech about who we are as a nation and the values that still define us — and no longer define our allies. They saw him as a virtual hillbilly, an American hayseed who does not understand transnational values. For the rest of us, it was a true elegy — part lament and part liberating.

Bravo, Mr. Vice President, Bravo.

Read more …

Europe needs its own Trump.

• Vance Blasts ‘Orwellian’ German Laws (RT)

The criminalization of free speech in the EU could put a “strain” on relations between Washington and its allies there, US Vice President J.D. Vance said on Monday, calling on Western nations on both sides of the Atlantic to “reject” such policies. “This is Orwellian,” the vice president wrote in a statement on X (formerly Twitter). He was referring to an interview with three German state prosecutors released by the US broadcaster CBS on Sunday. Focused on Germany’s efforts to fight offensive content on the internet, the interview included the prosecutors saying that insulting anyone in public or online is a crime in their country. The interview was recorded against the background of a series of coordinated raids recently launched by German police against some 50 individuals suspected of spreading hate speech online.

People found guilty of such crimes in the federal republic could face fines or even jail time in the event of repeat offenses, according to the prosecutors. “They don’t think it was illegal. And they say, ‘No, that’s my free speech’,” one of the prosecutors, Dr. Matthaus Fink, told CBS. “And we say, ‘No, you have free speech as well, but it also has its limits’.” The courts can also order the confiscation of their electronic devices, the prosecutors said. People are usually “shocked” when it happens, another prosecutor, Frank-Michael Laue, said. “It’s a kind of punishment if you lose your smartphone. It’s even worse than the fine you have to pay.”

The German Criminal Code states that anyone who “attacks the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously disparaging or slandering” them in a way that is “likely to disturb the public peace” can face up to five years behind bars. The legislation is primarily aimed against insults linked to one’s race, nationality, religion or ethnic background but is not limited to these. According to CBS, the German laws specifically prohibit the spread of malicious gossip, violent threats and fake quotes online. Reposting false information is punished as well, the broadcaster said, citing the prosecutors.

Vance responded to the interview by saying that “insulting someone is not a crime, and criminalizing speech is going to put real strain on European-US relationships.” He then called on “everyone in Europe and the US” to “reject this lunacy.” The statement came just days after the vice president sharply criticized Washington’s EU allies for abandoning their core values, including free speech, as well as fearing their own voters and failing to uphold democratic principles at the Munich Security Conference. His words were lauded by President Donald Trump, who called Vance’s speech “brilliant.” “In Europe they’re losing their wonderful right of freedom of speech,” Trump said on Friday.

Read more …

“Reality distortion is no longer working so well with Mr. Trump in the White House.”

• Krakatoa Blows (James Howard Kunstler)

You’ve got to wonder who at CBS-News thinks it’s a good idea to quadruple down on mendacious grandstanding when the network faces a $20-billion lawsuit from Donald Trump — for assisting Kamala Harris’s campaign (aka election interference) — while the FCC under new Commissioner Brendan Carr questions the network’s license to operate on the grounds of “news distortion” and violation of the broadcast news fairness doctrine.

So, on Sunday night February 16, CBS’s flagship news show, 60-Minutes, pitched a doubleheader of knowingly faked-up feature pieces intended to scramble American minds to benefit the Party of Chaos and its manager, the US Intel Blob. The first piece was a sob-story on how sad and unjust DOGE’s deconstruction of the USAID money-laundering operation is. Yeah, boo-hoo. They interviewed several part-timers and consultants pretending to be long-term employees of the outfit. Complete horse-shit, and they knew it. What really matters is that a whole lot of bureaucrat grifters (and politicians) won’t get paid anymore. . . and the Blob won’t be able to soften-up faraway nations for plunder with its color revolutions and other hijinks.

The second piece was a ringing endorsement of Germany’s current censorship campaign, arresting ordinary citizens for mean tweets. Their camera crew followed the German Gedankenpolizei entering apartments and seizing cell phones. The viewing audience was asked to shed tears for German Green Party politician, Renate Künast, who got dissed on “X” (“misogynist comments” and insults) — the same week that an Islamic immigrant maniac drove a car into a Munich crowd on-purpose, injuring 39 people, including two dead (one, a child). No mention of that incident on 60-Minutes, or, more generally, that illegal immigration is the big taboo subject behind all the censorship.

CBS actually preceded that gaslighting job with a bit of Sunday morning constructed Orwellian fake syllogistic idiocy by Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan, who said that free speech caused the Holocaust against the Jews. Her reasoning: free speech allowed the Nazis to gain power, therefore. . . Auschwitz . . . therefore, free speech is bad. Guest, Sec’y of State Marco Rubio, told her that he could not associate himself with her thesis. In fact, once in power, the Nazis totally controlled speech and news and did not permit other political parties to even exist. All of this, you understand, is just deliberate Gramscian distortion-and-perversion of language — black is white, up is down — to defeat any attempt at coherent public debate today.

The conclusion you might draw from all this is that CBS is terrified of free speech, and is trying desperately to hide the Blob’s long-running criminal racketeering activity — which they have aided and abetted for years and deserve to lose their license over, plus pay billions in penalties, and go out of business — a rather existential predicament.

Reality distortion is no longer working so well with Mr. Trump in the White House. Here is what’s behind the USAID brouhaha and why it matters. By 2016, the Blob had become a fullblown, independent, parasitical organism on US governance. It had several purposes: 1) to keep itself in perpetual power by paying off its voting blocs of “the poor and marginalized,” 2) to pay its corps of bureaucrat managers (of the “poor and marginalized”) handsome salaries to win their everlasting allegiance, and 3) to pay-off elected officials to keep voting the money flows for all that. All this created a massive class of Democratic Party activists dedicated to overthrowing the republic so as to usher-in their social equity nirvana. And all that was sheer hubris. More recently, nemesis arrived on the scene and all this institutional Blob power had to be diverted to a massive ass-covering operation, now in full, florid failure. And, worst of all for the Blobists, evidence of actual crime is accruing at a frightful, fast pace.

With the confirmation of Kash Patel later this week, Mr. Trump’s agency team will be complete. What follows will be a Krakatoa of revelation, drastically altering the climate of US politics for years to come. You should learn exactly how many FBI and CIA agents were moiling and roiling in the J-6 mob. You’ll find out what the J-6 DNC pipe bomb caper was all about. You’ll find out why RussiaGate was never properly investigated or adjudicated. . . how the Adam Schiff / Alexander Vindman / Eric Ciaramella impeachment op worked. . . how the Clinton Foundation made a zillion dollars . . . where all the money went that got poured into Ukraine. . . and much much more.

Read more …

“..a political class that would rather see high inflation and a weaker currency than reduce its grip on the economy.”

• The European Welfare State Is Collapsing (Lacalle)

Politicians in Europe are using the JD Vance and Trump external enemy excuse to disguise the existential problem of a system that is crumbling. The statist nightmare built around what politicians call “welfare state” has proven to be a subterfuge to multiply bureaucracy and create a dependent subclass. The welfare state was never sustainable but was created as an affordable luxury that rich economies could finance with strong economic growth and a solid productive sector. However, European governments overlooked the necessity of fostering economic growth and productivity to finance the welfare state. Furthermore, as left-wing populism permeated all segments of the European political landscape, politicians started to include more and more so-called “rights,” which became entitlement costs and subsidies, in a trend that led Europe to forget to create wealth and focus entirely on extractive and confiscatory policies.

We have seen a gradual destruction of the productive sector, asphyxiated by constantly raising taxes and bureaucratic and regulatory limitations, while government budgets expanded without control. The economy of the European Union operates on an inverted economic model. It puts entitlement spending as its pillar, instead of seeing that the welfare state is, at best, a consequence of wealth creation, not a cause. Without a thriving private sector, there is no welfare. Politicians should understand that you cannot provide citizens with social programs if the productive economy is weakened by political design. In the latest Eurostat estimates, the ratio of social insurance pension entitlements to GDP was between 200% and 400% in European economies. Unfunded financial commitments are so large they will only be paid in a massively weakened currency if the current economic policies continue.

France is the prime example of this “upside down” approach to the economy. Putting entitlement spending at the forefront of economic policies has led to decades of stagnation, high debt and deficit, and social discontent. Taxpayers are tired, and recipients of entitlements are relegated to a dependent subclass. The trick is the following: Government spending soars, and everything spent is justified under the banner of “social spending”. Deficit and debt rise, so the government increases taxes to balance the budget. If the economy grows, spending grows faster, and if the economy enters recession, the government spends even more to “protect” citizens. Thus, taxes rise even faster.

The constant process of expropriation of productive wealth becomes a burden on growth, investment, and productivity. Furthermore, more taxes generate lower incremental revenues and a demotivated business and workforce community that finds it impossible to thrive alongside the burden of bureaucracy and taxation. Macron says that Europe is “underleveraged.”. The statement is incorrect, of course, but it is even less believable when we look at all the unfunded commitments.

Europe needs to abandon the current high taxes and bureaucracy and cut unnecessary spending so the pension and healthcare systems remain viable. This means slashing budgets and eliminating political spending. However, no political party wants to do it because thousands of their members depend on government jobs. The situation is so desperate that European nations cannot even increase the much-needed defense budget despite acknowledging the urgency of improving investment in security.

Europe’s welfare state became the welfare of the state at the expense of its businesses and taxpayers. The European Union has human capital, great businesspeople, and entrepreneurs. However, it is being destroyed from the inside by a political class that would rather see high inflation and a weaker currency than reduce its grip on the economy.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Spike

 

 

Job cuts

 

 

Redfield
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891497832785535064

 

 

RFK
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891667385406587344

 

 

Pebble

 

 

Ray
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891554907410329863

 

 

O’Leary

 

 

Sopranos
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891295611552411923

 

 

Henry

 

 

Turtle
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891743199649001495

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 17 2025

Feb 172025
 
 February 17, 2025  Posted by at 10:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  53 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Agostina Segatori Sitting in the Café du Tambourin 1887

 

• Trump Says Russia Isn’t A Threat To NATO (RT)
• Trump Wants Ukraine Ceasefire By Easter (RT)
• Europe & Zelensky Throw Tantrum After US Sidelines Them From Russia Talks (ZH)
• Zelensky Is In A Very Bad Position – Tara Reade (RT)
• Trump Envoy Sets Timeline For Ukraine Peace Plan (RT)
• Trump’s Envoy Signals Possible Ukraine Concessions (RT)
• Ukraine c – Kremlin (RT)
• Russian Duma Speaker Predicts ‘Serious Changes’ For EU, Its Institutions (TASS)
• AfD Candidate For German Chancellor Seeks End To Russia Sanctions (TASS)
• Vance Meets Leader Of ‘Firewalled’ German AfD Party Backed By Musk (RT)
• Germany Is Self-Imploding (Victor Davis Hanson)
• From Rockefeller to Musk: How CEOs and Presidents Shape America (Bluey)
• House GOP Drafting Impeachment Articles Against Judges Blocking DOGE (ZH)
• Judge Declines to Halt Trump’s Firing of Inspectors General (ET)
• Trump Makes First Supreme Court Appeal In Test of Power To Fire Officials (BBC)
• Democrats and Unions Launch an Existential Fight Over Buyouts (Turley)
• Rand Paul Supports Fort Knox Physical Audit (ZH)

 

 

 

 

RFK NATO

Kudlow

Speaker

DOGE

Mearsheimer

1993-2025

 

 

 

 

The big word is out.

• Trump Says Russia Isn’t A Threat To NATO (RT)

US President Donald Trump has dismissed Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s claim that Russian President Vladimir Putin wants a temporary pause in the conflict with Kiev to regroup and launch a full-scale war against NATO. Moscow has repeatedly ruled out any short-term truce, insisting on a permanent, legally binding agreement that addresses the root causes of the Ukraine conflict. However, Zelensky has insisted that he knows “for sure” that Putin wants a brief pause to “prepare, train, take off some sanctions” before launching an attack not only on Ukraine but also on NATO states. “It can happen in summer, maybe in the beginning, maybe in the end of summer. I don’t know when he prepares it, but it will happen,” Zelensky said in an interview with NBC News’ Meet the Press on Saturday.

Trump, however, has brushed aside Zelensky’s warning, telling reporters on Sunday that he does not agree with the Ukrainian leader’s assessment at all. “No, I don’t agree. Not even a little bit,” Trump said, adding that he believes what Putin truly wants for his country is to “stop fighting.” “They’ve been fighting for a long time. They’ve done it before… They have a big, powerful machine. They defeated Hitler and they defeated Napoleon,” Trump added. “But I think he would like to stop fighting.” Trump also said he expects to meet Putin in person “very soon,” following their “long and hard” phone conversation last week, which was their first known direct interaction since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. He also called Zelensky to “inform” him of the discussion, during which the Ukrainian leader allegedly reaffirmed that Kiev is also prepared to seek a resolution to the conflict.

Russia will need to take Ukraine’s lack of independence into account in any future negotiations, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Sunday, recalling the failed 2014-2015 Minsk agreements. Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, also pointed to the collapse of the two prior arrangements, stating, “We are not gonna go down that path.” NATO has long described Russia as a direct threat in order to justify the bloc’s existence after the fall of the Soviet Union, and Western officials have repeatedly claimed that if Moscow wins the Ukraine conflict, it could attack other European countries.

Putin has dismissed the idea of a Russian attack on NATO as “nonsense,” telling US journalist Tucker Carlson last February that the bloc’s leaders are trying to scare their people with an imaginary threat, but that “smart people understand perfectly well that this is a fake.” Moscow has consistently opposed Ukraine’s NATO aspirations, citing the bloc’s eastward expansion as a threat to national security and describing it as a key factor behind the ongoing conflict with Kiev. Zelensky claimed at the Munich Security Conference that “right now the most influential member of NATO seems to be Putin because he seems able to block NATO decisions.” Trump has indicated that Washington will not support Kiev’s accession as part of a potential peace deal with Moscow, while his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, described Ukraine’s NATO ambitions as “unrealistic.”

Read more …

False flag time?

• Trump Wants Ukraine Ceasefire By Easter (RT)

The administration of US President Donald Trump is pushing for a ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict by April 20, Bloomberg wrote on Sunday, citing anonymous sources. A US peace plan could be forthcoming within weeks or even days, Keith Kellogg, Trump’s special envoy on Russia and Ukraine, said on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference on Saturday. ”The Trump administration has told European officials that it wants to secure a ceasefire in Ukraine by Easter,” Bloomberg said, citing sources briefed on the talks. According to the outlet, some European officials felt the pace of the negotiations was ambitious and possibly unrealistic. Talks are reportedly set to kick off with a meeting of Russian and US representatives in Saudi Arabia in the coming days.

Europe will not be given a place in the negotiations, Kellogg told top European diplomats on Saturday. Despite this, UK and EU officials fear the US expects them to shoulder the burden of Ukraine’s post-war security, Financial Times wrote on Thursday. The envoy justified the exclusion of Europe, citing the legacy of the Minsk-2 agreement between Ukraine and now Russian Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics in 2015. Germany and France stood as guarantors to the failed accord, which then German chancellor Angela Merkel later admitted was just meant to buy Kiev time to strengthen itself. “When you looked at Minsk-2, there was a lot of people at the table that really had no ability to execute some type of peace process, and it failed miserably. So we are not gonna go down that path,” Kellogg said.

Moscow has similarly underscored that it will not accept a temporary freeze of hostilities, like the Minsk accords, and insists on a permanent solution that addresses the fundamental causes of the conflict. Just days prior, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump held a phone conversation in the first such interaction since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. The two leaders could meet in Saudi Arabia by the end of this month, Newsweek wrote on Sunday, citing reports. Putin has previously stressed that Moscow has never shied away from peace talks, but emphasized that they have to be based on terms previously agreed in Istanbul in 2022, modified for the territorial “realities on the ground.” Russia has demanded that Ukraine embrace neutrality, demilitarize, denazify and remain free of nuclear weapons, among other points.

Read more …

I’m [from] a school of realism,” Kellogg said, regarding Europe having a seat at the table during negotiations. “I think that’s not going to happen.”

• Europe & Zelensky Throw Tantrum After US Sidelines Them From Russia Talks (ZH)

Europe will not be included in peace talks for Ukraine, President Donald Trump’s Ukraine envoy said on Feb. 15 after sending a questionnaire to European capitals asking what they could offer in security guarantees for Kyiv. As The Epoch Times’ Jacob Burg reports, on Sunday, France said it will host a summit of European leaders on Monday to discuss the Russia–Ukraine war and European security after retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, didn’t include Europe in negotiations over Ukraine’s future following years of war with Russia. France President Emmanuel Macron “will convene the main European countries to discuss European security,” Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot told France Inter radio. Barrot described the meeting as a working session and emphasized it should not be “overdramatized.” The office of the French presidency has not yet announced the meeting.

Macron has invited at least Britain, Germany, Poland, Italy, and Denmark, representing the Baltic and Scandinavian countries, the European Union leadership, and the NATO secretary general, according to six European diplomats. They said the purpose of the meeting is to discuss what immediate help can be given to Ukraine and the role Europe can play in providing both security guarantees to Kyiv and Europe at large. Trump called Russian President Vladimir Putin last week before consulting European or Ukrainian leaders, saying peace talks had begun. The Trump administration is pushing European allies in NATO to take a primary role in security guarantees for the region as the United States prioritizes border security and counters Chinese political and military influence.

At a global security conference in Munich, Kellogg said the United States would act as an intermediary in talks between Ukraine and Russia. “I’m [from] a school of realism,” Kellogg said, regarding Europe having a seat at the table during negotiations. “I think that’s not going to happen.” In trying to reassure Europeans, Kellogg said it doesn’t mean “their interests are not considered, used, or developed.” Some European leaders pushed back on being sidelined for talks. “There’s no way in which we can have discussions or negotiations about Ukraine, Ukraine’s future or European security structure, without Europeans,” Finland’s President Alexander Stubb told reporters in Munich. “But this means that Europe needs to get its act together. Europe needs to talk less and do more.”

The questionnaire Kellogg sent to Europeans “will force Europeans to think,” Stubb said. Kaja Kallas, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission, was more explicit stating that “if somebody agrees something and I mean, everybody else says ‘okay fine!’ you have agreed, but we will not follow this!” She added that EU’s position is “our importance” trumps any peace! NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte urged Europeans to get involved.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1891086302222618790

“And to my European friends, I would say, get into the debate, not by complaining that you might, yes or no, be at the table, but by coming up with concrete proposals, ideas, ramp up [defense] spending,” he said. Kellogg said that territorial concessions from Russia and targeting its oil revenues could be included in the talks over ending the war between it and Ukraine. “Russia is really a petro-state,” he said, adding that the West needs to do more in adequately enforcing sanctions against Russia. U.S. and Russian officials will meet in Saudi Arabia in the coming days for continued peace talks, according to Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas). After meeting with Vice President JD Vance in Germany on Feb. 14, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said his nation was not invited to the talks in Saudi Arabia and that Kyiv would consult with strategic partners before engaging with Russia.

“This is the war in Ukraine against us, and it is our human losses,” President Zelensky told Meet The Press this morning. “We are thankful for all the support, unity in the USA around Ukraine support, bipartisan unity, bipartisan support,” adding that “we are thankful for all of this, but there is no leader in the world who can really make a deal with Putin without us, about us.” “I will never accept any decisions between the United States and Russia about Ukraine. Never,” he exclaimed. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, and White House Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff will travel to Saudi Arabia, McCaul said. The talks are meant to arrange a meeting between Trump, Putin, and Zelensky to “finally bring peace and end this conflict,” he said.

Read more …

“Zelensky is probably trying to figure out an exit route, among other things..” [..] “I think he wouldn’t be elected, obviously.”

• Zelensky Is In A Very Bad Position – Tara Reade (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is far from being in a winning position at the moment, RT contributor Tara Reade has said. The former aide to Joe Biden specified that Washington is no longer fighting a proxy war against Russia via Kiev, making the Ukrainian leader useless to both the EU and the US. The comment comes after Russian President Vladimir Putin held a phone conversation with his US counterpart Donald Trump on Wednesday, the first known contact between the heads of state of the two nations since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. “Zelensky is probably trying to figure out an exit route, among other things,” Reade said, adding that running for president again was not an option for the former comedian. “I think he wouldn’t be elected, obviously.”

The Ukrainian leader’s presidential term expired in May 2024, but he has refused to hold elections, citing martial law. Trump has also acknowledged that Kiev will eventually have to hold elections and noted that Zelensky might not serve another term, saying his domestic poll numbers “aren’t particularly great, to put it mildly.” “He’s basically sacrificed a generation of men for what? To give rare earth minerals to the US? To give 22% of the lands to Russia?” Reade said, emphasizing that Zelensky was “in a very bad position.” The comment refers to recent statements made by Trump, who demanded the “equivalent of $500 billion worth of rare earths” from Kiev in exchange for what the president estimated to be “more than $300 billion” Washington had provided in aid since the escalation of the conflict with Moscow.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent presented Trump’s proposal to Zelensky during their meeting in Kiev earlier this week. According to multiple media reports, the deal outlines that Washington would receive a 50% stake in Ukraine’s rare earth minerals as compensation for the American aid. On Saturday, the Financial Times reported, citing people familiar with the negotiations, that Ukraine had rejected the bid, citing the lack of security guarantees. According to Ukraine’s Institute of Geology, the country’s deposits include lanthanum, cerium, neodymium, erbium and yttrium. However, Zelensky recently admitted that a large chunk of Ukraine’s mineral-rich territories, some 20%, is currently under Russian control.

NBC reported on Saturday, citing unnamed officials, that the White House could send troops to guard Ukraine’s rare earth minerals. The deployment of military forces could reportedly come after Russia and Ukraine reached a deal to end the ongoing conflict. Reade said the reported troop deployment is unlikely. “There’s a will for there to be a different relationship with Russia.” She highlighted that US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had said definitively “that there would be no US troops in Ukraine” and “US involvement in providing money and weapons was going to end.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1890845003464794254

Read more …

“..I’m not talking six months, I’m talking days and weeks..”

• Trump Envoy Sets Timeline For Ukraine Peace Plan (RT)

A US peace plan for Moscow and Kiev could come within days or weeks, President Donald Trump’s special envoy on Russia and Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, said Saturday on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference. In January, the WSJ reported that Trump had tasked Kellogg with outlining a settlement to the Ukraine conflict within 100 days. At the same time, the US president warned of new sanctions if Moscow refused an unspecified plan, but emphasized that he was “not looking to hurt Russia.” “You got to give us a bit of breathing space and time, but when I say that, I’m not talking six months, I’m talking days and weeks,” Kellogg projected as cited by CNBC, adding that he was “on Trump time.” “He’ll ask you to do this job today and he’ll want to know tomorrow why it isn’t solved,” Kellogg emphasized.

Earlier this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke by phone with his US counterpart, marking their first known high-level direct contact between Moscow and Washington since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. According to the Kremlin, the US leader expressed support for the swift cessation of hostilities and a peaceful resolution, while Putin mentioned the necessity of addressing the root causes of the conflict, but that a long-term settlement could be achieved through negotiations. Following the conversation, Trump wrote on his platform Truth Social that Washington and Moscow were immediately beginning discussions to resolve the conflict. Trump also said that American and Russian officials might meet during the conference in Munich, adding that Ukraine was also invited to participate. However, no such meeting was reported by the conference organizers or news outlets.

Read more …

Russia’s been very clear.

• Trump’s Envoy Signals Possible Ukraine Concessions (RT)

Territorial concessions may be part of future peace talks between Moscow and Kiev, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy on Russia and Ukraine has suggested. Speaking on Saturday at the Munich Security Conference, Keith Kellogg emphasized that while some things are off the table, compromise could play a role in the negotiations.“Some of [the concessions] are unrealistic to expect where you’d want to go to, but it’s territorial. It could be the engagement of refusing to use force, renouncement of the use of force into the future,” Kellogg said. He added that both Russia and Ukraine might have to make concessions during talks. Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously indicated that Moscow would be open to an immediate ceasefire and peace talks if Ukraine withdrew its troops from the Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions, which formally joined Russia following referendums in 2022.

However, in August 2024, Putin dismissed negotiations, citing the Ukrainian military presence in Russia’s Kursk Region. Kellogg also mentioned the necessity of “breaking alliances” between Russia and North Korea, Iran, and China, which he claims have strengthened over the past four years. Earlier this week, Putin spoke by phone with Trump, marking the first known high-level direct contact between Moscow and Washington since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022.

According to the Kremlin, Trump expressed support for the swift cessation of hostilities and a peaceful resolution, while Putin mentioned a need to address the root causes of the conflict, agreeing that a long-term settlement could be achieved through negotiations. Following the conversation, the US President wrote on his platform Truth Social that Washington and Moscow were immediately beginning discussions to end the fighting. Russia has yet to confirm any details, but according to multiple media reports, a US delegation – likely composed of national security officials – will travel to Saudi Arabia in the coming days for talks with their counterparts from Moscow. Trump also said that American and Russian officials might meet during the conference in Munich, adding that Ukraine was also invited to participate. However, no such meeting was reported by the conference organizers or news outlets.

Kellogg
https://twitter.com/i/status/1890830803657011239

Read more …

“That country cannot really answer for its words..”

• Ukraine Lacks Sovereignty – Kremlin (RT)

Russia will need to take Ukraine’s lack of independence into account in any future negotiations, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Given that in the past, Kiev backtracked on its promises at the behest of other countries, Moscow will need to consider this lack of autonomy in any upcoming talks, Peskov said in an interview published by Russia 1 TV journalist Pavel Zarubin on Sunday. “That country cannot really answer for its words,” the spokesman said. “Each time it is necessary to make a certain adjustment when negotiating with them, for their deficit of sovereignty and the deficit of trust in them. Which will not go anywhere,” Peskov added.

The Kremlin spokesman cited the ill-fated 2014-2015 Minsk Agreements and the failed negotiations Moscow and Kiev held in Istanbul in 2022, soon after the full-blown escalation of the Ukraine conflict. The Minsk ceasefire, which was ostensibly intended to freeze the conflict between Kiev and the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, was in fact only “an attempt to give Ukraine time” to build strength, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted to Die Zeit in 2022. “Ukraine would have been whole,” if the Minsk agreements had been followed, “and there would have been no civil war, and Russian people in the Donbass would have had no desire to separate from Ukraine,” Peskov claimed. Similarly, Moscow and Kiev had already agreed on several points during the initial peace talks in Istanbul in 2022, the spokesman added.

“The [papers] were ready, they were ready to be signed. Then another side said, no, you can’t. And they were thrown out,” he said. According to Ukrainian MP David Arakhamia, who was Kiev’s chief negotiator at the talks, then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson came in person to demand that nothing be signed and that Ukraine continue fighting. Moscow has ruled out any temporary solution akin to the Minsk agreements, insisting on a permanent, legally binding solution that addresses the core causes of the conflict. Any such settlement would need to be based on the points previously agreed upon in Istanbul, adjusted for the territorial “realities on the ground,” Russia has stated.

Read more …

“Democratic procedures in many EU countries have become window dressing. They have long been forgotten..”

• Russian Duma Speaker Predicts ‘Serious Changes’ For EU, Its Institutions (TASS)

State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin said the Munich Security Conference suggested that the EU and its international institutions are in for serious changes. “Analyzing what happened in Munich, we can say with certainty: There are serious changes in store for the EU and its international institutions, including parliamentary ones,” he wrote on Telegram. “They will be difficult and painful.” According to Volodin, US Vice President JD Vance gave an accurate assessment of the situation in European countries at the conference. “He was not supported. Conference participants were not ready to hear the truth about themselves,” the lawmaker said.

The Duma speaker also said the institution of democracy in the EU was in a poor state. “Democratic procedures in many EU countries have become window dressing. They have long been forgotten and ignored in pan-European structures,” he said. “Therefore, the healthy forces that want to meet the public demand for the renewal of power will wage an uphill battle. They will face all kinds of hurdles meant to prevent them from going through the election procedure. Just like it happened in Romania during the presidential campaign. Or in France and Germany, when undesirable political parties won. But change is inevitable,” Volodin said.

Read more …

“..the delivery of German tanks to Ukraine, which are now “being used against Russia for the first time since the Second World War,” shows that the German government has completely forgotten history.”

• AfD Candidate For German Chancellor Seeks End To Russia Sanctions (TASS)

Alice Weidel, a candidate for German chancellor from the Alternative for Germany, accused the government of stoking tensions with Russia over the recent three years with such moves as supplying arms to Ukraine, according to Bild. “What has the German government been doing with regard to Russia for the last three years? We have been intensifying the escalation spiral. We have opposed Russia verbally, financially and even with arms deliveries,” she said in an interview with the newspaper. According to the politician, the delivery of German tanks to Ukraine, which are now “being used against Russia for the first time since the Second World War,” shows that the German government has completely forgotten history.

Weidel also called for talks on the settlement of the Ukraine conflict to start swiftly and urged an end to the sanctions policy, which is crippling German economy. Germany is the second-largest arms supplier to Ukraine after the US. According to German government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit, Germany has provided 44 billion euros in various assistance to Ukraine since the start of the conflict. In the 2025 budget proposal, the country allocated 4 billion euros for the support, half the amount it spent this year. However, the Bundestag has yet to greenlight the budget proposal.

Read more …

For Scholz et el, that’s like meeting with the devil..

• Vance Meets Leader Of ‘Firewalled’ German AfD Party Backed By Musk (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance met with Alice Weidel, the leader of Germany’s ‘firewalled’ Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, on Friday. Vance was in the country to attend the annual Munich Security Conference. Their meeting reportedly lasted about half an hour and focused on the Ukraine conflict, German domestic policies, and freedom of speech, including the so-called ‘Brandmauer’, or “firewall against the right.” The term refers to a stance embraced by mainstream German parties that aims to prevent the right-wing powers from joining ruling coalitions in the country. News of the meeting came after Vance slammed European politicians for “fearing” their own voters by refusing to engage with right-wing parties in a speech on Friday. While he did not mention the AfD directly, he said European governments should drop “firewalls” and “embrace” public opinion or lose the right to be called democratic.

Vance referred to the recent endorsement of Weidel for German chancellor by Elon Musk, a close ally to US President Donald Trump, whose online presence at an AfD rally in Halle last month resulted in accusations of election interference from the German government. The vice president dismissed the allegations, painting Musk’s endorsement as an example of free speech, a core democratic value. He chided the European establishment for criticizing Musk, and said he feared free speech was “in retreat” across the continent.

The AfD denies being far-right, insisting that it promotes the interests of the German people with its anti-immigration stance. It has, however, been put under surveillance for suspected extremism by German intelligence. Despite the allegations, public support for the party has been growing, and it is currently polling in second place ahead of the German parliamentary election on February 23, with 21% of the public saying they support it. Weidel did not comment on her meeting with Vance, but praised his remarks in Munich in a post on X, saying they were “excellent” and applauding his comment regarding firewalls.

According to Reuters, citing Vance’s office, he met with leaders of all of Germany’s major political parties while in Munich, including Friedrich Merz, the head of the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU), which is currently leading in the polls. After meeting with Vance, Merz said in a post on X that he and the vice president “reaffirmed the special importance of transatlantic relations.” However, he later described Vance’s speech in Munich as “little short of interference.” Other German politicians have also criticized Vance for his remarks targeting their policies, with incumbent Chancellor Olaf Scholz posting on X that “the extreme right should be out of political decision-making processes” in Germany and stating that Vance had no right to give the country advice on the issue.

Read more …

“..we’re here 80 years after the rejection of the Morgenthau Plan and the German people, or the German leadership, have essentially updated it and inflicted it on themselves willingly..”

• Germany Is Self-Imploding (Victor Davis Hanson)

Hi, I’m Victor Davis Hanson, today I’d like to talk about the crisis facing Europe, specifically its self-implosion across the spectrum—energy, population, fertility, defense. Germany, for example, has been systematically shutting down its nuclear plants and, for a while, its natural gas electrical generation plants. It’s relying, believe it or not, more on oil and coal. But the net result of all of this deliberate turn to wind and solar, at the expense of fossil fuels and nuclear, is that it costs about four times more to use electricity in Germany than it does on average throughout the United States. That’s not the only problem. Germany is deindustrializing. And by that I mean it’s losing about 200,000 jobs in its auto industry due to these high energy prices and regulations. Its green mandates, especially electric vehicle mandates, have revolutionized the car industry, in the sense that they’re not selling abroad as they did in the past.

In addition to that, Germany’s disarmed. They only have about 125 attack aircraft. They have very few armored vehicles. Their active military is only about 180,000 soldiers. They have 84 million people in the country. The fertility rate is getting very close to 1.4. I know we have problems here in the United States at 1.6, but 1.4. And they don’t have borders. They have had a million to 2 million illegal aliens just prance into Germany, especially during the last years of the Merkel chancellorship. In terms of percentage of foreign-born, Germany has more foreign-born than does the United States, which doesn’t have a border in the south, at least until Donald Trump comes in. Twenty percent of the German population is foreign-born. Why am I mentioning all of this?

Because Germany represents the powerhouse, traditionally, of the European economy, and even culture, and it’s starting to implode. The euro, the benchmark of European financial health, is about, right now as I speak at the end of December, one dollar to one euro, and sometimes even less for the euro. That’s very strange because when I used to run a travel company to go to Europe—I remember in 2008, the euro was 1.6, almost 1.7 per the dollar. So what’s happening is that Germany is, I guess we would call it, undertaking a slow-motion suicide. But here’s the irony. In September 1944, at the height of World War II, the secretary of the treasury under the Roosevelt administration, Henry Morgenthau, had a plan for postwar Germany when it was defeated.

He didn’t want another war—the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71, World War I, World War II. He said, “Enough.” So what did he do? He submitted a plan that was going to deindustrialize Germany, depopulate Germany, change its borders. It was almost as if he was trying to turn it into something like Tacitus’ description of first-century A.D. Germany, as a pastoral, agrarian society. In fact, he explicitly said that. When Joseph Goebbels heard about this, he said, “Oh my God, this is a gift. We’re losing the war. We’ll tell all of the German people they want us to be permanently pastoral. We’ll starve to death. And even if they don’t like the Nazis, as we’ve destroyed the country, you’re losing more, they’ll fight.”

Thankfully, George Marshall, chief of staff of the Army; ex-President Herbert Hoover; and others went to the Roosevelt administration and said, “If you institute this plan, they’re going to fight to the death. And we have bombed Germany. So when we get into Germany, you’ll see that it’s almost depopulated now.”The net result was they canceled the Morgenthau Plan that would have permanently made Germany depopulated, disarmed, deindustrialized. What’s my point in bringing up this historical example? We the victors of World War II thought imposing a plan of deliberate deindustrialization, depopulization, disarmament, open borders, destroyed borders would be too Carthaginian, and so we backed off. And now we’re here 80 years after the rejection of the Morgenthau Plan and the German people, or the German leadership, have essentially updated it and inflicted it on themselves willingly, not by coercion. That’s a tragic irony and it’s something we should all take a very close look at.

Read more …

Trump has a much more acute sense of presidential time and how limited it is and how you need to use it quickly or you don’t maximize its value..”

• From Rockefeller to Musk: How CEOs and Presidents Shape America (Bluey)

One of America’s most successful businessmen is closely collaborating with the country’s commander-in-chief—with huge consequences for our government and economy. Elon Musk and President Donald Trump are the latest dynamic duo to showcase the role between private-sector CEO and America’s elected president. But they’re hardly alone in history. Presidential historian and former senior White House aide Tevi Troy writes about the complex relationships between corporate leaders and U.S. presidents in his latest book, “The Power and the Money: The Epic Clashes Between Commanders in Chief and Titans of Industry.” Troy spoke with The Daily Signal about the historical examples he’s studied and more recent events.

Less than a month into Trump’s second term, Troy already sees notable differences from Trump’s first term. He said Trump’s previous presidential experience is clearly shaping his leadership style and use of executive time. “It really is a remarkable opening to a presidency and shows the contrast between someone who goes into the presidency not sure what they’re to do, which included Trump’s first term, but also Bill Clinton at the beginning of his administration, and then someone who comes in with experience who says, ‘I know exactly what I’m going to do and I’m going to do it,’” said Troy, who is a senior fellow at the Ronald Reagan Institute. The presidential historian and author addressed the shifting dynamics between corporate America and the presidency, particularly with tech leaders like Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Sam Altman, and others who had front-row seats at Trump’s inauguration.

Troy explained that while these recent CEO moves toward Trump could be viewed as political opportunism, there’s more to the story. “The other side is how hostile the Biden administration was to these entities. Joe Biden even said, ‘I don’t like Mark Zuckerberg,’” Troy said. “Elon Musk had a whole bunch of regulatory actions targeting his companies.” Trump, meanwhile, appears to recognize that these corporate leaders—and their outsized role with artificial intelligence—will have far-reaching implications for American competitiveness. “We need to encourage AI so that America is the leader in AI going forward,” Troy said, suggesting that America’s free-market system provides an advantage over competitors like China, whose AI development is “handcuffed by the censorship of the Chinese Communist Party.”

Troy’s book, “The Power and the Money,” examines the relationships between 18 different CEOs and multiple presidents, offering insights into how these dynamics have shaped American policy and business over the past 150 years. For corporate leaders navigating today’s political landscape, Troy offered this advice: “CEOs need to increase their level of engagement in Washington, but decrease their level of partisanship. And that will allow them to be more influential over the course of multiple administrations.” As for Trump’s next four years, Troy has already observed a more strategic approach to staffing and time management in his second term. “Trump has a much more acute sense of presidential time and how limited it is and how you need to use it quickly or you don’t maximize its value,” Troy explained.

Troy praised Chief of Staff Susie Wiles for maintaining discipline within the White House. “The chief of staff role is hugely important. Susie Wiles … really brooked no nonsense during the campaign. You didn’t hear a lot of leaks. You didn’t hear a lot of infighting,” he said, contrasting this with Trump’s first term when he had four different chiefs of staff in four years. This might be most visible in Trump’s selection of staff, creating more cohesion at the White House and allowing him to move swiftly to implement his agenda.“The staff seem to be much more loyal to him. The first time there were a lot of people with a lot of different ideological perspectives,” Troy said, referencing his previous book “Fight House: Rivalries in the White House from Truman to Trump.”

Read more …

“They can’t do that, especially when they have a serious record of Democrat activism and being hardcore against President Trump..”

• House GOP Drafting Impeachment Articles Against Judges Blocking DOGE (ZH)

House Republicans are drafting articles of impeachment against Democrat judges that have blocked various actions by the Trump administration, including those who have halted efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). According to The Hill: “Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) said he is drafting articles of impeachment against Judge Paul Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York, who in a ruling last weekend temporarily restricted Musk and DOGE aides from accessing a Treasury Department payment system. Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) is working on an impeachment resolution against Rhode Island District Judge John McConnell Jr. over his ruling halting the Trump administration’s freeze on federal funding.

And Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), chair of the House Oversight Delivering on Government Efficiency Subcommittee, pledged in a hearing this week while referencing Engelmayer that “We will hold this judge and others who try to stop the will of the people and their elected leaders accountable.” “Our case for impeaching Judge Engelmayer is basically that he’s an activist judge trying to stop the Trump administration from, you know, executing their, you know, Article 2 powers to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed,” Crane told former Rep. Matt Gaetz earlier this week. Greene, meanwhile, said that she would support Engelmayer’s impeachment – arguing that judges can’t simply take power away from Cabinet secretaries.

“They can’t do that, especially when they have a serious record of Democrat activism and being hardcore against President Trump,” said Greene, adding “So, yeah, judges like that, they definitely should be impeached.” On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that “district court judges in liberal districts across the country are abusing their power to unilaterally block President Trump’s basic executive authority.” Engelmayer initially blocked everyone at the Treasury Department – including Secretary Scott Bessent, from accessing the agency’s database, however another judge overseeing the case later said that the order would not apply to Bessent. Rep. Clyde announced that he was working on impeachment articles, saying in a post on X that Judge McConnell Jr. is “a partisan activist weaponizing our judicial system to stop President Trump’s funding freeze on woke and wasteful government spending.”

It would take near-unanimous support from House Republicans to impeach one of the judges assuming no Democrats support the measure, while Democrat support would definitely be required to clear the 2/3 threshold to convict in the Senate. So basically, this is going nowhere. “Up till last Congress, the Speaker of the House had never been fired before,” said Crane. “I’m not a wait-and-see kind of guy — look around, hope somebody’s going to do something. I’m going to take action. And like I said, If this isn’t how we get to the, you know, the place that we need to be, I’m fine with that. But I’m not going to sit around and just, you know, watch these individuals stop President Trump from doing exactly what he told the American people he was going to do.”

Read more …

“..she chastised him for making everybody rush to a TRO when the matter could have been handled with a five-minute call with the Department of Justice..”

• Judge Declines to Halt Trump’s Firing of Inspectors General (ET)

A federal judge on Feb. 14 rejected an emergency bid by eight inspectors general fired by the Trump administration to have their jobs restored. District Judge of the District of Columbia Ana Reyes forced the attorney for the inspectors general to drop the request for a temporary restraining order during a virtual hearing, opting instead for an expedited schedule to hear their request for a preliminary injunction. Reyes expressed frustration that the plaintiff’s counsel, Seth Waxman, filed suit on Feb. 12 for the order requesting emergency same-day relief, which would have included backpay 21 days after the firings occurred, stating that her court’s staff was already overwhelmed with scores of other temporary restraining order requests. Demanding only yes or no answers, the judge asked several questions of Waxman.

He confirmed to her that the eight inspectors general were fired on Jan. 24 without Congress first being given a 30-day notice or “substantial rationale” for the termination and that they were able to retrieve all of their personal belongings. These former inspectors general were employed by the Defense, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, State, Education, Agriculture, and Labor departments and the Small Business Administration. The judge pointed out to Waxman that there was nothing stopping Trump from issuing that 30-day termination notice to Congress five minutes after a TRO (temporary restraining order) went through, this time with a written reason for their termination. Addressing the written complaint arguing the plaintiffs faced reputational damage, Reyes proposed that a 30-day return to the office with a written reason why they were unfit for their jobs could actually cause even more reputational harm than what was already given. All the public knows is that they were fired without cause, she said. There was no harm to their reputation because no cause, say of incompetence, was given, and such a termination could be seen as preferable.

She also criticized Waxman for referencing what he called a similar case in his written complaint, pointing out that the government employee who was fired in that instance was operating independently of the White House while his clients worked for agencies that took direction from the presidency. Reyes declined to even humor the merits of the temporary restraining order during the virtual hearing, which lasted less than 13 minutes, forcing the plaintiffs to drop it. When Waxman transitioned to an expedited briefing schedule, she chastised him for making everybody rush to a TRO when the matter could have been handled with a five-minute call with the Department of Justice. The defense counsel representing the heads of the various departments employing those inspectors general remained silent and opted not to weigh in on the matter.

Read more …

“..the agency finds that you are not fit for continued employment because your ability, knowledge and skills do not fit the agency’s current needs..”

• Trump Makes First Supreme Court Appeal In Test of Power To Fire Officials (BBC)

President Donald Trump’s attempts to shrink the federal bureaucracy are heading to the Supreme Court, according to US media.He has filed an emergency appeal to the country’s highest court to rule on whether he can fire the leader of an independent whistleblowing agency. Hampton Dellinger, head of the US Office of Special Counsel, sued the Trump administration after he was fired by email this month. Trump has also sacked more than a dozen inspectors general at various federal agencies along with the jobs of thousands of employees across the US government. Mr Dellinger, who was nominated by Joe Biden, the former president, argues that his removal broke a law that protects leaders of independent agencies from being fired by the president, “except in cases of neglect of duty, malfeasance or inefficiency”.

A federal judge in Washington DC issued a temporary order on Wednesday allowing Mr Dellinger to hold on to his position while the case is being considered. On Saturday, a divided US Court of Appeals in the nation’s capital rejected the Trump administration’s request to overrule the lower court. That has led to the justice department filing an emergency appeal to the conservative-dominated Supreme Court. It is the first case the president has taken to the justices since he took office last month. “This court should not allow lower courts to seize executive power by dictating to the president how long he must continue employing an agency head against his will,” Sarah M Harris, acting solicitor general, wrote in the filing provided by the Department of Justice to the Washington Post.

“Until now, as far as we are aware, no court in American history has wielded an injunction to force the president to retain an agency head,” the acting solicitor general wrote, according to the Associated Press news agency. The Republican president’s orders on immigration, transgender issues and government spending have also become bogged down in dozens of lawsuits in the lower courts. Those cases may ultimately wind up at the Supreme Court, too. Trump’s efforts to reduce and reshape the 2.3 million-strong civilian federal workforce continued over the weekend.Workers in various health agencies who are still within their probation periods received letters on Saturday evening informing them they would be terminated, sources told CBS News, the BBC’s US partner.

“Unfortunately, the agency finds that you are not fit for continued employment because your ability, knowledge and skills do not fit the agency’s current needs, and your performance has not been adequate to justify further employment at the agency,” read the letters. At least 9,500 workers at the departments of Health and Human Services, Energy, Veterans Affairs, Interior and Agriculture have been fired by Trump, according to a tally from Reuters news agency. Another 75,000 workers have taken a buyout offered to get them to leave voluntarily, according to the White House. The cost-cutting initiative has been led by department of government efficiency, or Doge, a task force led by Elon Musk.

Read more …

“..Musk is “taking away everything we have.” That is precisely what Americans asked for in reelecting Donald Trump…”

• Democrats and Unions Launch an Existential Fight Over Buyouts (Turley)

Thomas Paine once remarked, “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” With the approaching 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, much has clearly changed. President Donald Trump’s move to reduce government is now portrayed as evil in its own right. Elon Musk’s move to draw down various agencies was presented as a virtual return to the state of nature. Democratic members staged protests in front of various agencies to declare “war” and to accuse Trump of “destroying the government” by shrinking it. Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D., Md.) Rep. Kweisi Mfume, D-Ma, declared “Every time you hear DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, you just remember it is the department of government evil.”

Americans say Trump is keeping his promises
The coordinated efforts of Democratic leaders and the mainstream media have once again not resonated with the public. Trump, according to polls, is now at higher popularity levels than during his first term. And a strong majority of Americans say Trump is keeping his promises, including in his efforts to reduce government spending and waste. Those efforts include a generous buyout offer for federal employees. The Trump administration offered federal workers the chance to stay home for months while receiving full pay if they would agree to resign from government employment.It was an extremely clever move. The best way to shrink the government is to get people to leave voluntarily. But Trump and Musk also have warned that layoffs will follow if not enough federal workers accepted the buyout.

It is a type of self-deportation from government service. And it worked, with about 75,000 federal workers accepting Trump’s offer before the deal ended Wednesday. It worked so well, in fact, that Democrats rushed to stop the voluntary exodus by falsely suggesting that it was a scam. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., warned employees that Trump would “stiff you,” even though the offer comes with the authority of the federal government. His colleague, Mark Warner (D, Va.) added ominously for workers to “Think twice. Has this individual in his business world ever fulfilled his contracts or obligations to any workers in the past?” At the same time, unions (looking at a major reduction of force) have filed with Democratic groups to stop these employees from taking the offer. They found a favorable court with U.S. District Court Judge George O’Toole who enjoined the program.

However, after citywide celebrations over the injunction, the court then lifted the injunction on the buyout program, agreeing to allow the buyouts to go forward. Unions representing federal workers and liberal legal organizations are likely to now appeal O’Toole’s decision. The unions, which are facing a major reduction in dues-paying members, have a disturbing conflict of interest in trying to deny federal workers the benefits of an offer they chose to accept. The legal challenges to the buyout have relied on a plethora of arguments asserting that a president cannot allow employees to stay home and receive pay pending their departure from federal employment. Those arguments cited the Antideficiency Act, which bars agencies from spending beyond the money appropriated by Congress.

President has the authority to manage the executive branch
The counterargument is that money used for the buyouts was allocated to pay employees whose service normally continues year after year. Under Article II of the Constitution, the president is given ample discretion in running the executive branch, including the work status of federal employees. Congress clearly has a role in controlling use of the federal purse. For example, Congress can determine whether to allocate money to build certain Navy vessels. However, once the ships are built, it is the president who decides where to send them and who will serve on the crew. The commander in chief also can expand or shrink the size of the crew. Trump was well within his authority in offering to change employees’ duties while they look for new positions, and the employees had every right to agree to eight months of paid leave in exchange for their resignation from government service.

The opposition from Democrats and labor unions is the ultimate form of paternalism. In the name of protecting employees, opponents fought to prevent workers from accepting offers they believe are best for themselves and their families. Federal employees are entitled to protections in their employment. But they’re not entitled to permanent employment. Congress is entitled to appropriate money for specific purposes. But it is not entitled to manage the executive branch. Trump is very willing to fight on this hill. He holds a strong constitutional position and an even stronger political position.

For those who proclaimed themselves as defenders of democracy throughout last year’s election cycle, this is what democracy looks like. Voters made clear that they want changes in the size and the focus of government. Those voters are unlikely to be convinced by the warning of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., that Musk is “taking away everything we have.” That is precisely what Americans asked for in reelecting Donald Trump.

Read more …

Bigger mystery than Kennedy’s murder.

• Rand Paul Supports Fort Knox Physical Audit (ZH)

One of the biggest questions over the past 50 years is whether the gold at Fort Knox, Kentucky is really there, or if it’s been plundered. What we do know is that the last ‘audit’ of America’s gold stash was conducted on Sept. 23, 1974, when the US Treasury opened just one of its 15 vaults at Fort Knox so politicians and reporters could swarm the site for a two-hour photo-op with roughly 6% of the alleged amount held. Adding to the complete farce, none of the bars being passed around for the cameras were matched to a serial number, assayed or tested for purity, or even verified as US holdings – as foreign countries have previously stored their gold at Fort Knox as well.

Since then there has been no independent verification of the roughly 4,580 metric tons supposedly held by the Treasury outside of bullshit annual ‘vault seal checks’ that don’t actually analyze the gold (oh, and they’ve ‘lost’ seven of those) – various efforts have been raised to audit Fort Knox – most recently in 2021, when Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV) introduced (now-dead) legislation to audit America’s gold holdings with a full assay, inventory, and audit of all US gold – which would include a full account of gold transactions undertaken by the US government.

In 2010, former Libertarian Rep. Ron Paul called for an independent audit of Fort Knox. “It’d be nice for the American people to know whether or not the gold is there,” Paul said at the time.

With Elon Musk’s team at DOGE – including a gent who goes by the name “Big Balls” – investigating government-wide waste, fraud and abuse, we thought it might be helpful to point them towards Fort Knox… The suggestion immediately went viral on X, with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) indicating he’s on board – replying to Musk with “Let’s do it.” Musk and team need to get to the bottom of just how deep the rot goes…

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Arab jews

 

 

Toys
https://twitter.com/i/status/1891110279649366275

 

 

Grok

 

 

Hello

 

 

Thai cat
https://twitter.com/i/status/1890863657350783065

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries  Newer Entries