Jun 212024
 
 June 21, 2024  Posted by at 8:48 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , ,  54 Responses »


Claude Monet Water lilies 1904

 

West Could Ditch Zelensky Early Next Year – Putin (RT)
Zelensky Has No One Left to Turn to, Except Putin (DeMartino)
Zelensky Bans Another Ukrainian Opposition Party (RT)
Press Freedom ‘Shrinking’ In Ukraine – Reporters Without Borders (RT)
Russia Fears a NATO Attack. Here’s Why. (Istomin)
NATO ‘Moving Into Asia’ – Putin (RT)
Russia Could Arm North Korea – Putin (RT)
Western Property Could Be Seized – Zakharova (RT)
“We Need Icebreakers” – And More Strategic Partnerships (Pepe Escobar)
‘Strategic Defeat’ Means End Of Russia – Putin (RT)
Russia Will ‘Never’ Withdraw Troops – Putin (RT)
Missouri AG Sues New York State Over Trump Lawfare (ZH)
No Tax on Tips (RCW)
UK PM Owns $7 Million Home In California – Politico (RT)
French First Lady Transgender Libel Case Goes To Trial (RT)
Key Evidence Missing In Assange Snooping Case (RT)

 

 

 

 

Bannon Trump
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803545732223303793

 

 

Sachs

 

 

Attack mode

 

 

More attack mode

 

 

Omarosa is selling a book

 

 

Tapper 2020
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803795912377942091

 

 

Maldonado

 

 

 

 

“Zelensky remains of use to foreign sponsors only as long as he can enforce policies that will help Kiev prolong hostilities with Russia..”

West Could Ditch Zelensky Early Next Year – Putin (RT)

Ukraine’s supporters in the West will likely remove Vladimir Zelensky as soon as he outlives his usefulness, after pushing through all the necessary “unpopular decisions,” Russian President Vladimir Putin has predicted. Zelensky remains in power in Ukraine despite his term in office having officially expired on May 20. He opted not to hold a presidential election, citing martial law imposed due to the conflict with Russia. Putin has repeatedly stressed that the Ukrainian constitution does not provide for prolonging a president’s term, and explicitly states that elected lawmakers should retain their powers until a new parliament can be chosen by the Ukrainian people. On Thursday he reiterated, that the country’s laws clearly state that Zelensky’s “train has left” and that presidential power should be transferred to the speaker of the Verkhovna Rada.

“What are we even talking about? The West simply doesn’t want to replace him right now, the time has not come yet. I’ve already said it, but I think it’s obvious to anyone,” the Russian leader said at a press conference in Hanoi, Vietnam. “They will pin all unpopular decisions on him, including lowering the military age, and that’s it, then he will be replaced. I believe it will be sometime in the first half of next year,” he added. Putin echoed analysis shared by the Russian foreign intelligence service (SVR) earlier in the day, which claimed Zelensky will be scapegoated for the country’s inevitable military defeat. “It is becoming increasingly evident that the White House will soon shut down ‘Project Zelensky’,” the SVR stated on Thursday, noting that retired General Valery Zaluzhny, the former top commander of the armed forces, is a likely candidate to replace him.

Last week, Putin noted in a keynote speech on Russian foreign policy that Zelensky remains of use to foreign sponsors only as long as he can enforce policies that will help Kiev prolong hostilities with Russia. The Russian president also said any agreements signed by Zelensky with foreign nations after May 20, such as the recent bilateral ten-year security deal with the US, can be easily discarded by other parties, since he no longer has any legal authority to represent Ukraine.

Read more …

“..the armed forces, where they say approval of Zelensky has dropped to 17%…”

Zelensky Has No One Left to Turn to, Except Putin (DeMartino)

With an increasing number of Ukrainians turning against Volodymyr Zelensky, no chance to win the war and a so-called “international community” abandoning him, Zelensky is finding himself without allies and with no escape from the hell he created for his country. While according to the pro-Ukrainian Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) a small majority of Ukrainians still say they support Zelensky, that number is rapidly dropping, from 77% in September 2023 to just 56% in May. The poll authors, of the dystopian-named MOBILISE Project, speculated that the decrease in popularity could stem from the new mobilization law. “Zelensky’s approval rating fell throughout winter 2023/2024. This fall occurred in tandem with the introduction of new mobilization law,” it noted. It also notes that only 34% of Ukrainians said they support the mobilization law, while 52% disagreed with it. Rumors of an additional mobilization law lowering the age even more are likely to make the situation worse for Zelensky.

Keep in mind that these poll results are the work of the KIIS and MOBILISE, pro-Zelensky-regime organizations. Additionally, a different poll by another pro-Ukrainian organization, the Razumkov Centre, found that 64.5% of Ukrainians stated “You have to be very careful with people” when asked if most people can be trusted. Considering respondents are living in a war-torn country under martial law and full-scale mobilization, it is reasonable to question if every respondent felt safe giving anti-regime answers to pollsters. Nevertheless, the trend is too difficult for even pro-Ukrainian sources to spin convincingly into an endorsement of Zelensky. And the SVR said that the situation is even worse within the armed forces, where they say approval of Zelensky has dropped to 17%.

“[Ukrainians] are without electricity 80% of the day, rolling blackouts major cities… are being bombed. Infrastructure, valuable infrastructure being bombed,” explained documentarian Regis Tremblay on Sputnik’s The Critical Hour. “They’ve lost over 600,000, according to Douglas MacGregor and Scott Ritter, over 600,000 dead with a million wounded who cannot return to the front… This guy is a dead man walking. It’s only a matter of time now before he is no longer useful to the United States and they throw him under the bus.” The United States has a long history of supporting and then abandoning allies once they are no longer useful to them. Just a partial list reveals the grim possibilities that result from accepting US arms. Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Ngo Dinh Diem, all received US arms and all ended up dead at the hands of the US government. “Zelensky is no longer the president of Ukraine. His term ended and now he is an illegal president,” noted Tremblay.

With his military dwindling and dissatisfied, his people turning against him, and his allies shunning him, Zelensky might want to think about what he can do to achieve peace. Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin laid out his terms to begin negotiations, while Zelensky’s NATO benefactors rejected it outright; it was an olive branch he should strongly consider grabbing. “We are ready to continue our dialogue with the Ukrainian side. And it doesn’t matter where they take place – in Minsk, Istanbul or Switzerland,” Putin said at a press conference on Thursday while visiting Vietnam. “I do not think that such nihilism [by Ukraine and the West] regarding our proposals will remain forever. For sure, something will change, including our conditions, depending on the situation on the ground,” Putin added.

Read more …

There was still one left?

Zelensky Bans Another Ukrainian Opposition Party (RT)

A Ukrainian court has banned the Nash Krai (Our Land) political party and ordered the seizure of its assets at the request of the Ministry of Justice. The move is the latest in a crackdown on the opposition under Vladimir Zelensky’s administration. A panel of judges from the Eighth Administrative Court of Appeal issued the ruling on Wednesday, according to a statement. “The court satisfied the claims of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine: the activities of the political party Nash Krai were banned; the property, funds and other assets of the party, its regional, city, district organizations, primary cells and other structural units were transferred to the state,” the statement read.

The party was registered in August 2011 as the ‘Bloc Party’ and was renamed ‘Nash Krai’ in 2014. From 2015, the party positioned itself as a “group of local leaders and businessmen” who aimed to avoid political games and intrigue, according to RBK Ukraine. Only three of its members were elected to the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian parliament) as independents in 2019, but the party gained some 1,694 seats in regional administrations during local elections in 2020. Following the escalation with Russia in February 2022, Zelensky banned major political competition, including Opposition Platform – For Life (OPZZh), the second biggest party in terms of seats in the Verkhovna Rada. He also cracked down on the media, shutting down multiple television channels associated with his political opponents and consolidating nine of the largest TV networks into a single 24-hour state-run broadcast dubbed ‘Telemarathon’.

Zelensky’s presidential term expired on May 20, although he chose not to hold elections under the pretext of martial law imposed after the beginning of the conflict with Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin has noted the Ukrainian constitution has no provision for prolonging a president’s term in this way. It forbids holding elections during a period of emergency, and explicitly states lawmakers should retain their powers until a new parliament can be elected by the people, Putin said, calling the current Ukrainian political situation a “usurpation of power.”

Read more …

A joke.

Press Freedom ‘Shrinking’ In Ukraine – Reporters Without Borders (RT)

Independent media outlets are being subjected to growing pressure in Ukraine, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has warned. The non-profit group urged the government in Kiev to combat impunity for violent crimes against reporters and to end arbitrary restrictions regarding coverage of the conflict with Russia. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky signed a law in 2022 that significantly expanded the government’s media regulation powers, allowing for outlets to be temporarily banned. The legislation came under fire both domestically and in the West at the time. On Wednesday, RSF released a report titled ‘Shrinking press freedom in Ukraine: urgent need to implement a roadmap for the right to information’, which claimed that “political pressure and obstacles are mounting on the Ukrainian media.”

“Since the beginning of 2024, at least five journalists have been under surveillance or threatened because of publications on corruption,” the group estimated. The document details in particular how the threat of forcible enlistment into the Ukrainian armed forces has been used to silence reporters. Moreover, it accused Ukrainian authorities of directly interfering in the work of some media outlets. RSF cited the case of Ukrinform, which had a military representative installed at its helm last month. Around the same time, the existence of ‘stop lists’ of guests banned from being invited on air by the same media outlet was revealed, the report wrote. RSF went on to denounce a decree passed earlier this month that obliged journalists to submit any quotes and interviews with military personnel to a special center for strategic military communications for clearing.

“The pressure, threats and interference must stop… the Ukrainian media landscape remains fragile,” Jeanne Cavelier, head of RSF’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk, emphasized. Citing Ukrainian journalists and monitoring groups, the New York Times reported on Tuesday that the government in Kiev has increasingly been curtailing press freedoms, in a manner that cannot be justified by wartime security needs. According to the article, the authorities in Kiev are trying to ensure that the opposition, especially the party of former president Petro Poroshenko, does not receive positive coverage in the press, and that the government and the military are never criticized. The newspaper claimed that the Ukrainian government has also had “tense relationships” with Western media throughout the conflict, temporarily revoking military press passes for journalists from several outlets, following reports criticizing the military.

Read more …

“The belief that their situation will deteriorate over time leads states to take increasingly adventurous steps..”

Russia Fears a NATO Attack. Here’s Why. (Istomin)

A recent admission by US President Joe Biden is telling: “If we ever let Ukraine fail, mark my words, you will see Poland go, and you will see all these countries along Russia’s actual border negotiate on their own.” Thus, the good old ‘domino theory’ is back in the minds of Western strategists. The growing bitterness of Western countries towards Russia is consistent with the way in which they look at armed conflicts in terms of the logic of preventive war. Rather than linking interstate clashes to aggressive opportunism, this model sees escalation as a product of fears about the future. The belief that their situation will deteriorate over time leads states to take increasingly adventurous steps, up to and including the use of force. Throughout history, major wars have usually been the product of this preemptive logic – the desire to strike before an expected weakening.

For example, the collapse of the continental blockade system led Napoleon to attack Russia. German fears about the prospects for modernization of the Russian army were the trigger for the First World War. A similar dynamic can be seen today in the policy of the West, which has invested considerable resources in confronting Russia. The fact that Moscow doesn’t countenance losing in any way, but, on the contrary, is gradually moving towards achieving its goals, can only lead to frustration on the part of the US and its allies. This does not lead to reconciliation, but to the search for more effective means to hinder Russia. Having failed in its plans to destroy the Russian economy with restrictive measures and to inflict a strategic defeat on Moscow at the hands of Kiev, the West is moving ever closer to the brink of direct military confrontation. At the same time, it is becoming increasingly insensitive to the possible consequences of such a scenario.

Like casino players, the US and its allies are raising the stakes with each successive bet. The growing adventurism is clearly visible in the debate over the deployment of Western troops in Ukraine. Moreover, not only hysterical Western European leaders, but also seemingly more responsible American generals have begun to speak out on the issue. For example, the head of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Charles Brown, has concluded that the deployment of NATO troops to the country is inevitable. The West’s willingness to take risks is reinforced by its contradictory, if not schizophrenic, view of Russia. Public figures never tire of claiming that Moscow’s potential was greatly overestimated in the past and has been further weakened by the Ukraine operation. At the same time, without being aware of the dissonance, they justify the build-up of their own armed forces on the grounds of an increased Russian threat.

An Irish writer once labelled this sort of thinking as “Russophrenia.” The inconsistency is also evident in the portrayal of Russia as an insatiable expansionist intent on invading its neighbours, combined with a belief in its reverence for Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which guarantees that NATO members will provide mutual assistance in the event of an attack on one of them. The portrayal of Russia as a ‘paper tiger’ – an aggressive but weak actor – lays the groundwork for pre-emptive escalations to reverse the trends of confrontation unfavorable to the West. And they can be carried out not only in Ukraine. The idea of restricting Moscow’s access to the Baltic Sea, which ignores the inevitable response to threats to Kaliningrad, is evidence of this, and is regularly introduced into Western discussions.

Read more …

“..the Chinese Foreign Ministry also denounced NATO as a “walking war machine that causes chaos wherever it goes.”

NATO ‘Moving Into Asia’ – Putin (RT)

The US-led military bloc is increasingly shifting its focus on the Asia-Pacific, creating security threats not only to all countries in the region, but Russia as well, President Vladimir Putin said in Vietnam a day after signing a strategic partnership treaty with DPRK leader Kim Jong-un. Following a meeting with his Vietnamese counterpart To Lam on Thursday, Putin announced that the sides “showed mutual interest in building a reliable and adequate regional security architecture based on the principles of the non-use of force and a peaceful settlement of disputes, in which there will be no place for selective military-political blocs.” “The positions of Russia and Vietnam on these issues largely coincide or are close to each other,” Putin said. At a press conference later in the day, the Russian leader noted that the situation in the world is developing in such a way that requires strengthening cooperation with partners, “especially in those areas that we consider important, including taking into account what is happening in Asia.”

“We see what’s happening in Asia, right? A block system is being put together… NATO is already moving there as if to a permanent place of residence. This, of course, poses a threat to all countries in the region, including the Russian Federation. We are obliged to respond to this and we will do so,” he insisted. Russia reserves the right to provide arms to allies, as the West claims it can arm Ukraine with impunity, and could send long-range weapons to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and other countries, Putin added. Last month, in a thinly veiled reference to NATO and other Western-dominated organizations, Putin warned that the Asia-Pacific region is “no place for closed military and political alliances,” adding that both China and Russia deem the establishment of such blocs as “harmful and counterproductive.”

Back in 2021, the US, UK and Australia established the so-called AUKUS security partnership, which seeks to help Canberra acquire nuclear-powered submarines. Washington is reportedly attempting to fast-track Canada and Japan’s membership. Beijing has condemned the AUKUS pact as an attempt to build an “Asia-Pacific version of NATO,” with Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin arguing last year that it is based on a “Cold War mentality which will only motivate an arms race, damage the international nuclear nonproliferation regime, and harm regional stability and peace.” Earlier this year, the Chinese Foreign Ministry also denounced NATO as a “walking war machine that causes chaos wherever it goes.” Beijing has accused NATO of meddling in Asian affairs, saying the bloc is a “terrible monster” and has extended a “black hand” toward the region.

Read more …

“We don’t need a first strike..” [..] “Because our return strike is guaranteed to destroy any attacker.”

Russia Could Arm North Korea – Putin (RT)

Since the West claims it has the right to arm Ukraine with impunity, Russia reserves the same right and might send long-range precision weapons to the DPRK and other countries, President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin spoke with reporters in Hanoi following his meetings with the leadership of Vietnam on Thursday. One of the questions related to his previous suggestion that Moscow could send missiles to the adversaries of the West, in response to the US and its allies greenlighting Ukrainian strikes deep inside Russia. ”We do not rule out supplying weapons to other countries, including the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” Putin said. “Let the West think where they might end up.”

Western countries that have supplied long-range and other weapons to Ukraine have said they can’t be held responsible for how Kiev uses them, and insist that it does not make them parties to the conflict, Putin elaborated, adding that Russia therefore reserves the same right for itself. The Russian president also noted that Moscow is considering modifications to its doctrine on the use of atomic weapons, as the West appears to be working on low-yield weapons to lower the nuclear threshold. “We don’t need a first strike,” he said in response to another question. “Because our return strike is guaranteed to destroy any attacker.”

When asked about the peace terms he offered Ukraine last week, Putin said that Russia has always been willing to negotiate, while Kiev and its Western backers sabotaged both the Minsk process and the Istanbul talks. However, the terms he outlined will not be valid forever, Putin cautioned. ”Our terms will change depending on the situation on the ground,” the Russian president said. Putin arrived in Hanoi on Wednesday evening from Pyongyang, where he signed a strategic partnership treaty with DPRK leader Kim Jong-un. His trip to Vietnam has involved the strengthening of bilateral ties with Hanoi, including trade and nuclear energy cooperation.

Read more …

Euroclear.

Western Property Could Be Seized – Zakharova (RT)

Russia has a “wide arsenal” of political and economic countermeasures to respond to the potential confiscation of its sovereign assets, including a tit-for-tat seizure of Western property in Russia, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. The leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) nations agreed at last week’s summit in Apulia, Italy, to use interest from frozen Russian assets to secure a $50 billion loan for Kiev. Zakharova pointed out that Russia has a “significant” amount of Western funds and property under its jurisdiction. “All of it may be subject to Russian retaliatory policy and retaliatory actions. The arsenal of political and economic countermeasures is wide,” she told reporters at a regular press briefing on Wednesday. Russia, however, will not disclose the nature of the retaliatory actions, Zakharova added.

G7 countries have approved in principle a US plan to provide Ukraine with a $50 billion loan issued against frozen Russian assets, to help Kiev buy weapons and rebuild damaged infrastructure. The idea is to use nearly $300 billion in Russian sovereign funds frozen in the West in the wake of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, as the basis for the loan. G7 countries would use profits from the assets to cover the debt interest. Most of the frozen assets are being held in the EU. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said recently that the profits earned from the immobilized Russian assets amounts to around $3-$5 billion per year. The G7 intends to disburse the funds through multiple channels, directing them to Ukraine’s military, general budget, and reconstruction needs. Disagreements, however, remain among the US and its allies as to who will carry the loan risks if Western governments lose control over the Russian assets. Moscow has repeatedly said it will treat any attempt to tap into them as theft, and will retaliate.

Read more …

“..the high quality of life in Murmansk..”

“We Need Icebreakers” – And More Strategic Partnerships (Pepe Escobar)

The St. Petersburg forum offered a wealth of crucial sessions discussing connectivity corridors. One of the key ones was on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) – or, in Chinese terminology, the Arctic Silk Road: the number one future alternative to the Suez canal. With an array of main corporate actors in the room – for instance, from Rosneft, Novatek, Norilsk Nickel – as well as governors and ministers, the stage was set for a comprehensive debate. Top Putin adviser Igor Levitin set the tone: to facilitate seamless container transport, the federal government needs to invest in seaports and icebreakers; a comparison was made – in terms of technological challenge – to the building of the Trans-Siberian railway; and Levitin also stressed the endless expansion possibilities for city hubs such as Murmansk, Archangelsk and Vladivostok. Add to it that the NSR will connect with another fast-growing trans-Eurasia connectivity corridor: the INSTC (International North South Transportation Corridor), whose main actors are BRICS members Russia, Iran and India.

Alexey Chekunkov, minister for development of the Far East and the Arctic, plugged a trial run of the NSR, which costs the same as railway shipping without the bottlenecks. He praised the NSR as a “service” and coined the ultimate motto: “We need icebreakers!” Russia of course will be the leading player in the whole project, benefitting 2.5 million people who live in the North. Sultan Sulayem, CEO of Dubai-based cargo logistics and maritime services powerhouse DP World, confirmed that “the current supply chains are not reliable anymore”, as well as being inefficient; the NSR is “faster, more reliable and cheaper”. From Tokyo to London, the route runs for 24k km; via the NSR, it’s only 13k km. Sulayem is adamant: the NSR is a game-changer and “needs to be implemented now”.

Vladimir Panov, the special representative for the Arctic from Rosatom, confirmed that the Arctic is “a treasure chest”, and the NSR “will unlock it”. Rosatom will have all the necessary infrastructure in place “in five years or so”. He credited the fast pace of developments to the high-level Putin-Xi strategic dialogue – complete with the creation of a Russia-China working group.

Andrey Chibis, the governor of Murmansk, noted that this deep, key port for the NSR – the main container hub in the Arctic – “does not freeze”. He acknowledged the enormity of the logistical challenges – but at the same time that will attract a lot of skilled workers, considering the high quality of life in Murmansk. The building of the NSR indeed can be interpreted as a 21st century, accelerated version of the building of the Trans-Siberian railway in the late 19th/early 20th century. Under the overarching framework of Eurasia integration, the interconnections with other corridors will be endless – from the INSTC to BRI projects part of the Chinese New Silk Roads, the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and ASEAN. In a session focused on the Greater Eurasia Partnership (GEP) Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Pankin praised this concept of Eurasia “without dividing lines, uniting ancient civilizations, transportation corridors and a unified common space of 5 billion people”.

Inevitable connections were drawn – from GEP to the EAEU and the SCO, with the proliferation of multimodal transport and alternative payment systems. Khan Sohail, the deputy secretary-general of the SCO, remarked how virtually “everyday there are new announcements by China” – a long way “since the SCO was established 21 years ago”, then based exclusively on security. Big developments are expected at the SCO summit next month in Astana. Sergey Glazyev, the minister of macroeconomics at the Eurasia Economic Commission, part of the EAEU, praised the EAEU-SCO progressive integration and fast-developing transactions in baskets of national currencies, something “that was unchallengeable 10 years ago”. He admitted that even if GEP has not been formalized yet, facts on the ground are proving that Eurasia can be self-sufficient. GEP may be on the initial stage, but it’s fast advancing the process to “harmonize free trade”.

Read more …

1,000 years.

‘Strategic Defeat’ Means End Of Russia – Putin (RT)

The West must realize that defeating Russia is not only unlikely, but impossible due to the unity of its people who understand that it would spell the end of the country’s thousand-year history, President Vladimir Putin has argued. Speaking at a press conference in Hanoi following his meetings with the leadership of Vietnam on Thursday, Putin addressed the issue of Western powers “raising the temperature” of the Ukraine conflict through gradual escalation. “Apparently, they expect us to get scared at some point. But at the same time, they also say that they want to achieve a strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield. What does this mean for Russia? For Russia, this means the end of its statehood. This means the end of the thousand-year history of the Russian state. I think this is understandable for everyone,” Putin noted. And then the question arises: Why should we be afraid? Wouldn’t it be better to go all the way then? This is elementary logic.

Even though Putin repeatedly admitted that any conflict involving the use of nuclear weapons would have dire consequences for humanity, he has maintained that Moscow would be forced to defend itself using all available means if the country’s very existence was at stake. Back in 2018, he famously said that “as a citizen of Russia and the head of the Russian state I must ask myself: Why would we want a world without Russia?” The US and its allies have funneled weapons, ammunition, and equipment to Ukraine over the past two years, while insisting they are not a party to the conflict but want to inflict “a strategic defeat” on Moscow. In recent months, Washington, London, and other NATO members announced they were lifting restrictions on Kiev’s use of their weapons against Russia.

Citing the need to send the West a message, last month the Kremlin ordered the military to carry out drills in deploying non-strategic nuclear weapons. Asked on Thursday whether Russia could change its nuclear doctrine to include a clause on the possibility of launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike, Putin emphasized there was no need for that. “We do not need a preventive strike yet, because the enemy is guaranteed to be destroyed in a retaliatory strike,” he said.

Read more …

“..Kiev has an interest in our troops remaining there, because they don’t want to hold elections.”

Russia Will ‘Never’ Withdraw Troops – Putin (RT)

Ukraine’s demand for the withdrawal of Russian troops is only designed to perpetuate the conflict, because that’s the only way the current Kiev government can stay in power, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. Putin was speaking at a press conference in Hanoi following his meetings with the leadership of Vietnam on Thursday. Among other topics, he addressed the Ukraine conflict. “If negotiations are linked to the withdrawal of our troops, about which the Kiev regime dreams, then this will never happen,” Putin told reporters. “Because the Kiev regime does not want to relinquish power, does not want to hold normal elections according to the Ukrainian constitution, they will forever drag out the ceasefire talks,” the Russian president added. “This means that Kiev has an interest in our troops remaining there, because they don’t want to hold elections.”

As for attempts to “beat back” Russian troops from Kharkov, Putin said that Kiev’s orders to achieve a victory on the battlefield “at all costs” will mean it is Ukraine that will suffer. Kharkov, he said, is a tactical operation, which Ukraine is trying to portray as strategic. When asked about the Western rejection of the peace terms he offered Ukraine last week, Putin said that it was true to form. “I expected just such a reaction, at first,” he said. “What happens later, time will tell. It all depends on how the situation develops on the ground.” Russia has always been willing to negotiate, while Ukraine and its Western backers sabotaged the Minsk process and the Istanbul talks, Putin said, noting that the terms he outlined will not be valid forever.

According to the Russian president, Ukraine has to recognize Russian sovereignty over the entire territory of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, “as defined by their administrative borders at the time they joined Ukraine [in August 1991].” Kiev must withdraw its military from the four regions and inform Moscow in writing that it no longer plans to join NATO, before any ceasefire talks can begin, Putin said last Friday. Vladimir Zelensky has denounced the proposal as an “ultimatum,” insisting that the only way to end the conflict is based on his “peace formula,” which amounts to a Russian surrender. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg claimed that Putin’s offer was not “made in good faith,” and would cost Kiev “significantly more land,” while German Chancellor Olaf Scholz called it a “classic land grab” and an attempt to influence the ‘peace conference’ in Switzerland.

Read more …

This could have teeth.

Missouri AG Sues New York State Over Trump Lawfare (ZH)

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey on Thursday announced that he’s suing the State of New York over what he called a “direct attack on our democratic process through unconstitutional lawfare against President Trump.” “We have to fight back against a rogue prosecutor who is trying to take a presidential candidate off the campaign trail,” Bailey posted on X, adding “Stay tuned.” While Bailey didn’t elaborate, last month he accused the Biden DOJ of colluding with prosecutors in various Trump cases, filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in connection with his investigation.

“The investigations and subsequent prosecutions of former President Donald J. Trump appear to have been conducted in coordination with the United States Department of Justice,” Bailey posted in a lengthy thread on X. “This is demonstrated by the move of the third-highest ranking member of the Department of Justice, Matthew Colangelo, to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office in order to prosecute President Trump in December 2022,” Bailey continues.What’s more, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg worked hand-in-hand with NY Attorney General Letitia James in pursuing civil litigation against Trump, which he used to campaign on. Is Bailey about to become Trump’s Attorney General?

Read more …

” That signal says to lower-income workers across the country, “I understand your struggles, and I’m with you.”

No Tax on Tips (RCW)

Donald Trump is a master showman and marketer. He demonstrated those skills once again with his proposal to kill the tax on tips. It’s more than shrewd. It’s brilliant. After the hoorays from waiters and other service workers died down, political analysts weighed in. Their conclusion: this is a very smart way to gain an edge in Nevada, where the presidential race is close. That’s certainly true. But Trump’s proposal is much smarter and will have a bigger impact, not because of its impact on tips, as such, but because of the larger signal it sends. That signal says to lower-income workers across the country, “I understand your struggles, and I’m with you.” Trump’s proposal says that loud and clear. It is both a blow to the IRS (who doesn’t like that?) and a tangible demonstration of how the former president connects to everyday working people. That’s a much broader cohort than the folks who rely on tips.

President Biden has emphasized his own connection to working people. He does it every time he calls himself “Scranton Joe,” and says he was raised by every group in town except the Hmong and Aboriginal Australians. (Those groups surely would be included if they had enough voters in swing states.) This contest for the allegiance of the working class is central to American politics and has been since the days of Andrew Jackson. They have been central to the Democratic Party’s coalition since Franklin Roosevelt’s reelection in 1936. FDR solidified the party’s coalition. Every successful Democrat on the national level since then has counted on the working-class vote – and the ones who didn’t (most notably Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and George McGovern in 1972) lost in landslides.

Ronald Reagan, who’d been a New Deal Democrat as a young man mounted a frontal assault against the FDR alliance and launched a long-term shift in the process. Donald Trump has gone further. He has captured that constituency among whites, competes for them among Hispanics, and is eroding it, at least slightly, among black men. That shift in all three groups could have a huge impact in the swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nevada, and Arizona. This year’s election may well hinge on them, and even slight changes could alter the outcome. Trump’s challenge to the heart of the old Democratic coalition is part of a larger realignment in American voting patterns. That realignment is obvious in the wealthy suburbs, which have gradually switched from moderate Republican to moderate Democrat. The wedge issue there is the Republican Party’s social conservatism, which alienates more than it resonates in those areas.

The suburbs are up for grabs this year because of weak economic performance, persistent problems with public schools (which are linked to Democrats because of the party’s bond with teachers’ unions), and the Democratic Party’s move much further left. No matter how the suburbs vote this year, though, their longer-term shift is clear. An equally clear shift in the opposite direction is happening in working-class neighborhoods. Chicagoans call them the “bungalow belt.” They were once occupied by immigrants from Eastern Europe. They are now the home of second- and third-generation Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and pilgrims from Central America. Trump is emerging as an unlikely champion of that constituency. He knows they don’t want ideological indoctrination in public schools or control by teachers’ unions instead of parents. They want cheaper energy a lot more than they want electric vehicles, which are too expensive. And they damn sure don’t want some bureaucrat in Bethesda telling them they can’t cook on a gas stove. They recoil at the idea of non-elected officials pushing that agenda down their throats.

Read more …

After the worst election defeat in history he might want to move.

UK PM Owns $7 Million Home In California – Politico (RT)

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak owns a $7.2 million beach home in Santa Monica, California, where his opponents say he could move if he loses the general election next month, Politico reported on Wednesday. The UK Conservative Party is on course for a historic defeat in the upcoming vote, which would end its 14-year run in government, according to three major polls released on Wednesday. The polls predict an all-time low for the Tories and amid indicators that Sunak’s unpopularity has reached record levels. The prime minister called a snap election last month, claiming that his decision to call the vote was primarily motivated by economic factors such as a historic decline in British living standards, a rise in energy costs, and inflation.

The predicted landslide Labour victory has sparked speculation that Sunak could relocate to California if he finds himself “out of the top job,” the outlet said. “The Golden State has become an issue in the election campaign, so much so that ‘sending Sunak to California’ is political shorthand for ousting him from office,” Politico wrote. Sunak’s beach home overlooking the Pacific Ocean is located in a luxury apartment building in an elite area of Santa Monica, the outlet said. The outlet claimed that Sunak’s children would likely enroll in elite schools in the area, “rubbing shoulders with the children of celebrities” if Sunak opts to move straight after the election. The British prime minister has made no secret of his love for California, saying that living in the US had helped shape his mindset as a leader. After studying at Oxford, Sunak took an MBA at Stanford University in California, where he met his wife, Akshata Murty, the daughter of India’s sixth-richest man, and ran a hedge fund in Santa Monica.

US President Joe Biden even joked about Rishi Sunak’s home in California during a meeting in San Diego last year. “I want to welcome you back to California – he’s a Stanford man, and he still has a home here in California. That’s why I’m being very nice to you, maybe you can invite me to your home in California.” Sunak, however, has denied rumors that he is planning a move to California after a potential election defeat, pledging to stay in the UK regardless of the outcome. “It’s simply not true. I mean, it’s just simply not true,” Sunak said in an interview last month. He also dismissed claims that the early election had been arranged to suit his daughters’ schooling in the US.

Read more …

What a story.

French First Lady Transgender Libel Case Goes To Trial (RT)

Two women have gone on trial for defamation in France after claiming that President Emmauel Macron’s wife, Brigitte, was a man once named “Jean-Michel,” France24 reported on Thursday. Amandine Roy, a self-proclaimed spiritual medium, was questioned in a Paris court on Wednesday, while the second defendant, independent journalist Natacha Rey, cited illness and was absent. In a 2021 interview, Roy quizzed Rey on her YouTube channel, where the journalist aired the theory that Brigitte Macron was actually the transgender identity of her brother, Jean-Michel Trogneux. The interview was followed by a social media storm of claims that the French first lady, formerly named Brigitte Trogneux, was Jean-Michel under a new identity. Brigitte Macron filed lawsuits in 2022 after the video was posted, alleging it defamed her, invaded her and her brother’s privacy, and violated her public image.

The judge ruled there was no case for invasion of privacy or violation of image. The public defamation case had been pending since January 2022. Brigitte Macron’s lawyer, Jean Ennochi, is demanding €10,000 ($10,750) in compensation for both the first lady and her brother, according to France24. Neither President Macron nor his wife were present at the proceedings, the network noted. France’s first lady was born Brigitte Marie-Claude Trogneux to a family of chocolatiers from Amiens. She married banker Andre-Louis Auziere in 1974, and the couple had three children together. She met Emmanuel Macron when he was 15 and she was teaching literature at La Providence Jesuit high school in her hometown. She divorced Auziere in 2006 and married Macron – 24 years her junior – in 2007.

Read more …

“..Spanish police had not provided the complete files from a Samsung phone, which Morales apparently used to keep in touch with American intelligence…”

Key Evidence Missing In Assange Snooping Case (RT)

The Spanish case against a man whose firm allegedly snooped on Julian Assange for the US government has hit a roadblock over key evidence which has reportedly gone missing, according to the El Pais newspaper. The defendant, David Morales, is the owner of UC Global SL – a company hired to provide security at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the Wikileaks founder was holed up between 2012 and 2019. The company is accused of abusing its position by installing secret recording devices in the building, and reporting confidential details about Assange and his meetings to the CIA. An expose by the newspaper El Pais revealed the arrangement in 2019, leading to the businessman’s arrest.

On Wednesday, the outlet reported that Spanish police had not provided the complete files from a Samsung phone, which Morales apparently used to keep in touch with American intelligence. The absent data includes records of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Proton Mail and Skype communications. The device was seized in September 2019, when police searched Morales’ home in the Spanish city of Jerez de la Frontera, and its contents were supposedly copied on the spot. The police provided the Spanish High Court with a derivative Universal Forensic Data Report (UFDR) from the device, but not the complete original Universal Forensic Data Exchange (UFDX), El Pais said.

”It is extremely striking that the police unit has delivered the UFDR and UFDX files from the other devices and has not done so precisely from this one,” the public prosecutor’s office said. Judge Santiago Pedraz has ordered the police Cybercrime Unit to immediately recover the full data from the phone in his presence, and establish who was responsible for the situation. The abridged profile was shared through a cloud service used for storing evidence. Spanish authorities are aware of the importance of the phone records thanks to a protected witness, a former employee of UC Global SL. The UFDR reportedly includes some circumstantial evidence in the form of words recorded by the keyboard app Swiftkey.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Wayans Wade

 

 

SNL

 

 

Elon genuine
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803691601169903906

 

 

X news
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803634740538609717

 

 

Corbyn
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803705328124547222

 

 

Donziger

 

 

Honey
https://twitter.com/i/status/1803758343715959086

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 072023
 


Vincent van Gogh Self-Portrait with Straw Hat Aug-Sep 1887

 

Amid Fear of Trump ‘Dictatorship’, Some See Assassination (Robert Bridge)
The ‘Jan. 6 Jurisprudence’ About to Be Unleashed on Trump (Julie Kelly)
Israel Headed for Strategic Defeat in Gaza (Scott Ritter)
Erdogan Sees Netanyahu Balancing On Brink Of Collapse (TASS)
Putin Visits to UAE, Saudi Arabia Prompted by Global Dynamics of Gaza War (Sp.)
Russia Will Attack NATO – Biden (RT)
US Is Withholding Aid To Push Ukraine Towards Negotiations With Russia (MoA)
Is Ukraine Aid ‘Dead’? (Sp.)
Yellen Says Ukraine’s Defeat Would Be Fault of the US (Sp.)
US Aid To Ukraine Laundered Back To Military-Industrial Complex – Massie (RT)
Ukraine Won’t Get Operational Pause in Winter – Scott Ritter (Sp.)
Ramaswamy in GOP Presidential Debate Says Ukraine Conflict ‘Pointless’ (Sp.)
Hunter Biden Threatened With Contempt Of Congress If He Bails On Testimony
US State Dept Sued For Conspiring To Censor American Media Companies (ZH)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UNDER THE CLOUDS OF WAR, IT IS HUMANITY HANGING ON THE CROSS OF IRON

 

 

Nap/Ritter

 

 

 

 

Ireland

 

 

Escobar

 

 

 

 

First thing they did was try to undo everything Trump did.

“..by the end of his ninth day at the White House, Biden had signed 40 executive orders, actions, and presidential memorandum – an all-time record..”

Amid Fear of Trump ‘Dictatorship’, Some See Assassination (Robert Bridge)

As polls show Donald Trump has taken a broad lead over U.S. President Joe Biden in five battleground states, the Liberal media has shifted into full-panic mode, while making some not-so-subtle calls for the Orange Man’s ‘elimination.’ Whether real or imagined, Washington, D.C. appears to be heading for its own ‘Caesarian moment’ as the mainstream media is talking up the prospects of a dictatorship descending upon the fair land should a Trump restoration come to pass. “Are you afraid of a Donald Trump dictatorship,” asked Greg Sargent in an opinion piece in The Washington Post. “Well, know this: The only thing you have to fear is fear of Tyrannus Trumpus itself.”

Brace yourself, dear reader, for the remainder of the hit piece is littered with no less preposterous forms of government rule to describe Donald Trump, without ever providing an iota of proof to support the claims: “authoritarian rule,” “full-blown autocracy,” Trumpian tyranny,” “dictatorial intentions,” “despotism,” “threat to democracy,” “antidemocratic menace,” violent coup.” and “autocratic threat.” It’s just a little ironic that for all the Liberal handwringing over the possibility of The Donald seizing “autocratic powers” come November, there was no such consternation when Joe Biden behaved worse than any Caligula just hours after being elected in 2020.

The septuagenarian leader, alone at his desk and donning a black mask, signed off on dozens of executive orders that served as a death sentence for: a viable U.S.-Mexico border wall; the $9 billion, 1,200-mile Keystone XL pipeline from Canada that would have made America energy independent; biological males from using the female bathrooms and changing rooms, and a raft of other issues that were resolved without an ounce of congressional debate. Incredibly, by the end of his ninth day at the White House, Biden had signed 40 executive orders, actions, and presidential memorandum – an all-time record. Despite all of this, Biden is now acting like he is the Maginot Line against the possibility of all-out tyranny/ authoritarianism/ dictatorship/ autocracy, take your pick.

“If Trump wasn’t running, I’m not sure I’d be running. But we cannot let him win,” the 81-year-old Democrat told a fundraiser event in Massachusetts. In a cloud of self-righteousness and grand delusion, the Liberals sincerely believe that Trump is about to enjoy, in the words of Robert Kagan, the premier neocon who co-wrote the infamous tract Project for a New American Century, “a clear path to dictatorship in the United States, and it is getting shorter every day.” Unfortunately, Kagan didn’t think to apply the brakes there, but went on to provide an apocalyptic-sounding fender-bender that many people took as the latest call to ‘take out’ Trump, the upcoming “president for life.”

“Are we going to do anything about it? To shift metaphors, if we thought there was a 50 percent chance of an asteroid crashing into North America a year from now, would we be content to hope that it wouldn’t? Or would we be taking every conceivable measure to try to stop it, including many things that might not work but that, given the magnitude of the crisis, must be tried anyway?” [..] Maybe Trump, should he be re-elected, will focus his attention on media harassment. In the meantime, however, he seems to be having fun trolling his opponents. Trump mocked questions about ‘dictatorial rule’ this week, saying he would be a dictator only on “day one,” and then he’s going to shut down the border and get to drilling for oil. “After that, I’m not a dictator, OK?” It’s tempting to ask how the ancient Romans would have responded to such a deal.

Read more …

“..Washington “is the worst possible place for any Jan. 6 defendant, but especially Donald Trump, to have a trial.”

The ‘Jan. 6 Jurisprudence’ About to Be Unleashed on Trump (Julie Kelly)

Defense attorneys have coined the term “January 6 Jurisprudence” to describe the treatment received by the more than 1,200 defendants arrested so far in connection with the events of Jan. 6, 2021. This carve-out legal system involves the unprecedented and possibly unlawful use of a corporate evidence-tampering statute; excessive prison sentences and indefinite periods of pretrial incarceration; and the designation of nonviolent offenses as federal crimes of terrorism. A universal feature is the requirement that a Jan. 6 defendant, usually a supporter of Donald Trump, face trial in Washington, D.C., a city overwhelmingly populated by Democrats. Federal judges have denied every change of venue motion filed in Jan. 6 cases, arguing those who protested at the Capitol can get a fair trial in the nation’s capital. The results so far appear to contradict the court’s collective conclusion.

Court records show the jury selection process has repeatedly revealed a strong degree of bias against anyone tied to Jan. 6. At least 130 defendants have been convicted at trial – not one has been acquitted by a jury – and hundreds have been sentenced to prison time ranging from seven days to 22 years. Defense lawyers say this track record helps explain why the vast majority of defendants have opted for a plea deal rather than go to trial. This is the same environment that now awaits the former president as he prepares to stand trial in Washington on March 4, 2024 for election interference, in addition to an array of criminal and civil cases against him elsewhere. While Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team and Trump’s counsel spar over a number of issues, perhaps the biggest dispute will concern whether it will be possible to seat an impartial jury for the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee in a city that voted 92% for Joe Biden in 2020.

After Smith indicted Trump in August, a Jan. 6 defense attorney who is not representing the former president, J. Daniel Hull, told the New York Times that Washington “is the worst possible place for any Jan. 6 defendant, but especially Donald Trump, to have a trial.” U.S. District Court Judge Tanya S. Chutkan recently set a jury selection schedule for Smith’s four-count indictment against Trump for the events of Jan. 6. She ordered both parties to begin developing a questionnaire, due Jan. 9, 2024, that hundreds of D.C. residents will be asked to complete so the court can begin the initial step of weeding out unqualified jurors. Stakes are high for both sides. Trump’s lawyers must navigate constraints on how many jurors can be stricken from consideration to ensure their client gets a fair trial. The Department of Justice must convince the American people that a case brought by a Democratic administration and handled by a Democratic-appointed judge with a record of inflammatory statements about the former president will be heard by unbiased jurors.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees, among other rights, “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” In extreme cases, criminal defendants can petition to move their trial out of the prosecuting jurisdiction for a number of reasons, not the least of which is sustained, negative press coverage that taints the jury pool. Trump’s lawyers are not discussing their strategy publicly, but sources have indicated to RealClearInvestigations that the defense will file a change of venue motion in the next month or two. Given the partisan composition of Washington, saturation coverage of the former president’s ongoing legal woes, and the city’s relatively small population, Trump will have a strong argument in favor of moving the trial outside of the nation’s capital. Yet a review of Jan. 6 cases to date suggests the odds are against that. Not a single judge on the D.C. District Court has granted a change of venue motion even for high-profile trials such as those for members of the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, the so-called “militia” groups involved in the Capitol protest

Read more …

“War, the Prussian strategist Carl von Clausewitz famously noted, is politics by other means. Hamas has proven the maxim to its fullest extent, accomplishing politically that which could only be initiated by Israel’s criminal use of force against the Palestinian people.”

Israel Headed for Strategic Defeat in Gaza (Scott Ritter)

The attack carried out by Hamas on October 7 against Israeli military positions and settlements which, collectively, formed what is known as the “Gaza barrier system”, triggered a massive Israeli military response. There are two aspects of this cause-and-effect relationship that stand out. First, and perhaps most importantly, it was the goal and objective of Hamas to have Israel respond impulsively. Hamas did not have to think out of the box, so to speak, to imagine such a reaction—since 2006, it has been established and well-known Israeli policy to conduct military campaign based upon the premise of collective punishment of a civilian population. Moreover, given the Israeli predilection for revenge that dates to the massacre of Israeli athletes during the 1972 Munich summer Olympics, a massive military incursion into Gaza to hold to account those responsible for the October 7 attacks was likewise as predictable as snow falling in Siberia in the wintertime.

Second, and less predictable than the first, was the poor performance of the Israeli security establishment, including the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) and Israeli intelligence. Not only did the Israeli security forces fail to act on what appears to have been ample evidence pointing to a Hamas attack along the lines of that executed on October 7, but once the Hamas attack began, the failure of the IDF to defend against the attack, and the plodding, indiscriminate nature of the Israeli counterattack, which appears to have inflicted significant casualties on Israeli civilians that the Israeli authorities have attributed to the Hamas attackers, seriously eroded the notion of the invincibility and infallibility of the Israeli military and security establishment. But this was only the beginning of what would amount to a strategic Israeli defeat at the hands of Hamas. The Israelis proceeded to mobilize some 300,000 reservists, most of whom were sent to the Gaza front.

While these forces were assembled, the Israeli Air Force began a bombing campaign against the civilian infrastructure of Gaza, including hospitals, mosques, schools, and refugee camps, which shocked the world in terms of its lethality. By ignoring the fundamental precepts of international humanitarian law, Israel allowed itself to be characterized as a practitioner of genocide, and its actions against Gaza as war crimes. This is the core of the Hamas victory—the political defeat of Israel on the global stage, where international sympathies rapidly aligned with the people of Gaza and Palestine, and away from Israel. War, the Prussian strategist Carl von Clausewitz famously noted, is politics by other means. Hamas has proven the maxim to its fullest extent, accomplishing politically that which could only be initiated by Israel’s criminal use of force against the Palestinian people.

But even as international pressure began to accumulate for Israel to halt its offensive, Hamas was able to achieve what many outside observers had believed to be unthinkable—it fought the IDF to a standstill in Gaza itself, inflicting significant human and material losses on the IDF. After declaring that Israel would never agree to a ceasefire or an exchange of prisoners with Hamas, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suddenly caved into international pressure to sign up for what became a six-day “pause” where humanitarian goods were delivered to the Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and Palestinian prisoners held by Israel were exchanged for hostages seized by Hamas on October 7.

One of the major reasons for this decision lay not in the extreme pressure being put on Israel by the United States and its European allies for such an outcome, but the fact that the IDF was suffering serious losses on the battlefield in Gaza and along Israel’s northern border with Lebanon, where Hezbollah was engaged in military operations in support of Hamas. The casualties among Israeli main battle tanks were unsustainable, and the morale of the IDF soldiers was collapsing—indeed, Israel had to courts-martial two IDF officers who withdrew their battalion from the Gaza battlefield under pressure from Hamas.

Ritter

Read more …

“This coalition is breaking apart. Don’t think that they are strong, they will quit [politics]. We already said 50 to 60 days ago that Netanyahu is going away..”

Erdogan Sees Netanyahu Balancing On Brink Of Collapse (TASS)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is balancing on the verge of collapse, something that he may indicate any time soon, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said. “Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu is on the brink of collapse or bankruptcy right now. And he may make such an announcement at any moment,” the state-run Anadolu agency quoted the Turkish president as saying upon returning from Qatar. “And then there is the West which connives with the wrongdoings of both Netanyahu and his administration. Fortunately, the West has largely reconsidered its view of Israel since October 7,” Erdogan told Turkish journalists.

Erdogan described the ruling coalition in Israel as unhealthy. “This coalition is breaking apart. Don’t think that they are strong, they will quit [politics]. We already said 50 to 60 days ago that Netanyahu is going away,” the Turkish leader said. “Now, certain people emerge who are telling Israel: ‘We are tired of feeding you’,” he maintained. “Look at France that in the early days was making statements of support [for Israel]. Now French President [Emmanuel] Macron is making completely different statements,” the Turkish president said. “Many other Western countries, too, are no longer making the statements of the kind they were making in the first days [of the conflict],” Erdogan noted as he urged patience before the world revisits its attitude toward Israel’s actions.

Read more …

“For the Gulf States, relations with Russia are seen as an essential leverage in adapting to their changing relationship with the US..”

Putin Visits to UAE, Saudi Arabia Prompted by Global Dynamics of Gaza War (Sp.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in the United Arab Emirates on Wednesday to meet with UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and discuss bilateral, regional, and international affairs. As part of his brief Middle East tour, the Russian leader is also visiting Saudi Arabia, while later hosting Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in Moscow. Vladimir Putin’s visit to the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia could be used by the Arab countries “as a signal, perhaps to the West,” to show that “we have other options and we’re not really happy with your policy towards Gaza,” Abdulaziz Algashian, a Saudi political analyst, told Sputnik. The Russian President’s trip to the Middle East comes amid turbulent developments in the region, with the Russian leader acutely aware of the “international dynamics of the Gaza war,” pointed out Algashian. He added that the Arab countries might seek to “leverage this visit and relations with Russia” relative to the Palestinian issue.

“For the Gulf States, relations with Russia are seen as an essential leverage in adapting to their changing relationship with the US,” agreed Sami Hamdi, Saudi political analyst and head of the International Interest, a risk analysis group. “There are concerns in the Gulf capitals that the US is no longer committed to their security or their interests, and there is therefore a belief that relations with Russia are essential in order to both advance their interests by pursuing alternative alliance structures and simultaneously strongarm Washington into upholding its commitment to them,” he pointed out. Looking ahead, “the extent of future cooperation with Russia as it stands remains dependent on the nature of the US-Gulf relationship. Although Gulf States will preserve their ties, the eagerness to expand those ties will correlate and fluctuate in accordance with the nature of their relationship with the US,” the Saudi political analyst speculated.

On a broader scale, there are a wide swathe of reasons for why Vladimir Putin chose this moment to embark upon his first foray to the region since 2019, underscored Algashian, a research fellow with SEPAD international research network and collaborative project based at Lancaster University’s Richardson Institute. These range from the Middle East’s resentment over the West’s stance on Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza to a need for further “entrenching” of economic relations, the pundit stressed.

Read more …

“Washington’s speculations about a potential stand-off show that “[US] authorities have finally lost touch with reality..”

Russia Will Attack NATO – Biden (RT)

If Russia prevails in the Ukraine conflict, it may find itself in a position to launch an attack on NATO that could trigger a global conflict involving American troops, US President Joe Biden said on Wednesday, when he urged Congress to pass a $111 billion national security package. The bill, which was backed by Democrats, included aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. He also lashed out at Republicans – who have been reluctant to support the measure due to disputes over security at the southern US border, saying that by doing so, they “are willing to give [Russian President Vladimir] Putin the greatest gift he could hope for.” “If Putin takes Ukraine, he won’t stop there,” Biden argued. “If Putin attacks a NATO ally…, well, we’ve committed as a NATO member that we’d defend every inch of NATO territory,” he stated, adding that Washington would like to avert this kind of a stand-off because it could result in “American troops fighting Russian troops.”

However, Republicans remained unconvinced, blocking the spending package in the Senate, with the final vote being 49 in favor and 51 against. The measure was opposed by all GOP lawmakers, as well as independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who normally votes with Democrats, but this time expressed concerns about Israel’s military strategy in the conflict with Hamas. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also voted “no” in order to have a chance to reintroduce the package later. Moscow’s ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov, commenting on Biden’s remarks about a potential clash between Russia and NATO, suggested that “such bogeyman stories are fabricated in order to justify to taxpayers and sober-minded political forces the huge expenses for ‘containing’ the Russian Federation.” Washington’s speculations about a potential stand-off show that “[US] authorities have finally lost touch with reality,” he added. “This kind of provocative rhetoric is unacceptable for a responsible nuclear state.”

Biden

Read more …

“..the Republicans as well as the Democrats, likely in consent with the White House, have so far blocked all further aid.”

US Is Withholding Aid To Push Ukraine Towards Negotiations With Russia (MoA)

It would have been easy for the Democrats to commit a few billions for border security. But Biden wants to end the war in Ukraine. Starving it of money is the easiest way to push it towards negotiations. All this was planned by the Pentagon think tank RAND which, early this year, published a study about how to end the war in Ukraine: “Avoiding a Long War – U.S. Policy and the Trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict” (A 2019 study by RAND, Extending Russia – Competing from Advantageous Ground, had recommended to openly arm Ukraine to keep Russia busy. It has been the basis of U.S. Ukraine policy ever since.)

But in early 2023 RAND had turned a corner and argued that a prolonged war in Ukraine will be too costly for the U.S. to sustain: “The biggest Ukraine problem the White House currently has is President Vladimir Zelenski who has rejected any and all negotiations with Russia.” The RAND study had foreseen such a situation and had found ways to push Ukraine towards talks with Russia: “[T]he United States could decide to condition future military aid on a Ukrainian commitment to negotiations. Setting conditions on aid to Ukraine would address a primary source of Kyiv’s optimism that may be prolonging the war: a belief that Western aid will continue indefinitely or grow in quality and quantity. At the same time, the United States could also promise more aid for the postwar period to address Ukraine’s fears about the durability of peace. Washington has done so in other cases, …”

Linking aid to Ukrainian willingness to negotiate has been anathema in Western policy discussions and for good reason: Ukraine is defending itself against unprovoked Russian aggression. However, the U.S. calculus may change as the costs and risks of the war mount. And the use of this U.S. lever can be calibrated. For example, the United States could level off aid, not dramatically reduce it, if Ukraine does not negotiate. And, again, a decision to level off wartime support pending negotiations can be made in tandem with promises about postwar sustained increases in assistance over the long term. That was a nice plan. But how well the aid lever can be calibrated depends of course on Congress, not on the president’s say so.

There are also downsides to withholding or giving aid promises: “Clarifying the future of U.S. aid to Ukraine could create perverse incentives depending on how the policy is implemented. Committing to increased wartime assistance to Ukraine to reduce Russian optimism could embolden the Ukrainians to obstruct negotiations, blame failure on Moscow, and gain more Western support. Announcing a decrease or leveling off in assistance to Ukraine to reduce Kyiv’s optimism about the war could lead Russia to see the move as a signal of waning U.S. support for Ukraine. If it took this view, Russia might keep fighting in the hope that the United States would give up on Ukraine entirely. Although recognizing that Ukraine is fighting a defensive war for survival and Russia an aggressive war of aggrandizement, the United States would nonetheless have to carefully and dispassionately monitor events and target its efforts to create the intended effect on whichever side’s optimism is determined to be the key impediment to starting talks.

This would probably have been a good way to go if Biden had control over dispensing or withholding funds to Kiev. But the Republicans as well as the Democrats, likely in consent with the White House, have so far blocked all further aid. Their current path then seems to be a different one towards negotiations with Russia – regime change in Kiev. President Zelenski is unwilling to take up peace talks. If he can be pushed out of office during the next few months his likely replacement, General Zaluzny, will probably be more inclined to seek an end of the war. Thus the current tactic is to pressure Zelenski into leaving by withholding all future funds. If another Ukrainian leader comes in, aid might again flow to prevent a total takeover of the country by Russia. Still – the aid calibration would be a problem. So maybe giving up and leave, as Biden did in Afghanistan, might be the preferred option.

Read more …

“We remember the old quotes about the money being carted around in Iraq on palettes and not even weighed or metered… I think that that’s what’s happening again in Ukraine.”

Is Ukraine Aid ‘Dead’? (Sp.)

Investigative journalist Christopher Helali joined Sputnik’s Political Misfits program Wednesday to discuss the growing opposition within the United States towards continued funding for Ukraine’s proxy conflict against Russia. The reported size of the latest proposed foreign aid package – some $110.5 billion – provoked incredulity from host John Kiriakou. “What has the United States not given Ukraine that would have such an enormous price tag?” asked Kirkiakou. Helali said that the “aid package is not only military assistance but also funding for rebuilding, for infrastructure… it’s funding for Ukraine, it’s funding for Israel, it’s also… a very small amount for the Palestinians.”
However Helali clarified that “Ukraine is at the forefront,” noting that the lion’s share of funding in the bill was earmarked for the Kiev regime.

“This is funding for rearmament, for new weapons systems, and things like that,” the analyst stressed. Rampant corruption in Ukraine has repeatedly stymied aspirations to join the European Union and other international bodies. Some Western politicians also point out the very high level of corruption in Ukraine. The business dealings of Hunter Biden in Ukraine, the son of US President Joe Biden, have also come under harsh criticism. President Biden has claimed he had no involvement in his son’s business ventures. “But of course there’s no real oversight,” added Helali, “there’s been a lot of reporting – I’m sure you’ve all been seeing it – about the rampant corruption, some officials have been buying yachts and houses and all sorts of fine luxury items. I think it’s going to be held up because there’s a lot of questions around this amount of money.”

Helali noted the large amounts of money that have gone unaccounted for in previous US-backed military operations, saying, “We remember the old quotes about the money being carted around in Iraq on palettes and not even weighed or metered… I think that that’s what’s happening again in Ukraine.” Funding for Ukraine did in fact fail in the US Senate on Wednesday when the legislative body refused to advance a supplemental foreign aid bill. Republican legislators, led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Mike Johnson, have used the opportunity to call for increased funding for US border security to secure GOP support.

Helali said that increased border funding is a nonstarter for segments of the Democratic Party base, claiming they see US border policy as an ““instrument of oppression” and a “remnant of colonialism and US empire.” The journalist nevertheless believes the Biden administration will be forced to compromise on the issue, claiming, “I think eventually Democrats will have to cave because they need this funding.”

Read more …

Meet the new war expert.

Yellen Says Ukraine’s Defeat Would Be Fault of the US (Sp.)

US lawmakers are debating a $111 billion supplemental spending package, of which $61 billion would be included for Ukraine. The spending package would also include funding for Israel, Taiwan, and US border security. During a trip to Mexico City on Tuesday, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the US would be responsible for Ukraine’s defeat should Congress fail to approve US President Joe Biden’s latest supplemental spending package, according to media reports. “I’ve talked to members of Congress, my colleagues have. I think they understand this, that this is a dire situation and we can hold ourselves responsible for Ukraine’s defeat if we don’t manage to get this funding to Ukraine that’s needed, and I’m including direct budget support here because that’s utterly essential,” Yellen told the media.

At the US Institute of Peace this week, Andrey Yermak, President Vladimir Zelensky’s chief of staff, said not receiving this most recent spending package from the US exposes Ukraine to a “big risk” in losing its war. The package would include $61 billion to Ukraine, which is nearly as much as the US has already spent on helping to weaponize the country. The US government has spent more than $75 billion on Ukraine thus far, a figure that does not include all war-related spending which is estimated to be about $113 billion. “Ukraine is just running out of money,” Yellen said. “They’re spending more than every penny they’re taking in, in tax revenue, on military salaries and defense, and they wouldn’t have any schools or hospital or first responders if not for the money we’re sending to them to support them,” added the US Treasury Secretary.

[..] US House Speaker Mike Johnson said Republican support for the Biden Administration latest supplemental spending package will have to include permanent changes to the US border policy. Before any further spending, wrote Johnson, funding is first dependent upon “enactment of transformative change to our nation’s border security laws”. “Second,” Johnson wrote in a letter to Young, “Congress and the American people must be provided with answers to our repeated questions concerning: the Administration’s strategy to prevail in Ukraine; clearly defined and obtainable objectives; transparency and accountability for U.S. taxpayer dollars invested there; and what specific resources are required to achieve victory and a sustainable peace.”

Read more …

“But no one mentions that we have abetted the killing of an entire generation of Ukrainian men that will not be replaced. To fight a war that they cannot win..”

US Aid To Ukraine Laundered Back To Military-Industrial Complex – Massie (RT)

The US Congress is continuing to vote in favor of sending billions of dollars to Ukraine because a lot of those funds end up being laundered back to the US military-industrial complex, Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie has said. In an interview with Tucker Carlson on X (formerly Twitter) published on Wednesday, the politician was asked to explain why Washington continued to push for more funding for Ukraine despite it becoming obvious that Kiev’s forces “cannot win.” Massie, who has repeatedly voted against sending money to fund Kiev’s operations, alleged that a lot of the funds that are sent to Ukraine ultimately end up “enriching” people within specific US districts and “stockholders, some of whom are congressmen.”

“You know, people are getting rich, so let’s do it. It’s an immoral argument, but it is one. But that’s not the argument they’re making in public,” he said, noting that those supporting the funding of Ukraine with US tax dollars are instead arguing that it is a “moral obligation” to do so. “You’re a bad person if you’re against this,” he complained, referring to a statement recently made by US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, who suggested that failing to support “the fight for freedom in Ukraine” meant letting Russian President Vladimir Putin “prevail.” “But no one mentions that we have abetted the killing of an entire generation of Ukrainian men that will not be replaced. To fight a war that they cannot win,” Massie noted.

The congressman surmised that, in order to support the US government’s proposals on Ukraine aid, a person has to be “economically illiterate and morally deficient.” Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden has hit out against Republicans like Massie, who have refused to aid packages to Ukraine, calling the failure to support Kiev “absolutely crazy” and “against US interests.” The US leader has repeatedly pledged that Washington would support Kiev for “as long as it takes” in its conflict with Russia.

Read more …

“..The goal and objective of Russia is demilitarization. Demilitarization could have been done peacefully. Right now it’s being done violently. And it means the absolute destruction of the Ukrainian military. And that is going to happen this winter. It will be destroyed in its totality.”

Ukraine Won’t Get Operational Pause in Winter – Scott Ritter (Sp.)

It was expected that Zelensky would inform American congressmen about the latest developments on the ground in Ukraine and urge them to disburse over $60 billion for Ukraine.On the same day, the upper chamber failed to vote on a Ukraine aid bill because Democrats threw out GOP border reforms from it. In response, Republicans made it clear that they will not support any further assistance to Kiev unless border measures are included in the legislation. Meanwhile, the current Ukraine military package has almost been exhausted. There are also rumors in the Western press that NATO allies want Zelensky either to hold the talks or to freeze the conflict along the line of contact. Will the Kiev regime be forced to take a pause during the winter season?

“Well, what we won’t see is a pause,” Scott Ritter, former Marine intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector, told Sputnik. “I mean, the Ukrainians and even the collective West, they’re throwing terms out there like: ‘You know, it’s a frozen conflict. We fought them to a standstill.’ No, it’s not a frozen conflict and they haven’t fought the Russians to a standstill. Last winter, you know, the Ukrainians had their victory in Kharkov and Kherson. The Russians were consolidating their defenses, they had mobilized 300,000 men, and they were building the defenses. And so there was a pause that allowed [Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Gen. Valery] Zaluzhny to plan an operation. They had the luxury of time to build the nine, I think they actually built 12 brigades, equipped them, prepared them for this counteroffensive, etc.”

“Right now, we have a situation where the Russians are ready. Those 300,000 are fully trained. The majority of them have not been committed to the battlefield. In addition to that, over 450,000 volunteers and contract soldiers were absorbed. The Russians are at full strength with all the equipment, all the wherewithal. There will be no operational pause. The Ukrainians, on the other hand, have nothing to replace what’s happening. They’re now literally grabbing teenagers and pregnant women and putting them on the battlefield to fill the holes in the lines. There’s nothing coming behind, and the West is out of money. There’s no equipment. The Russians are not going to hit the pause button to give Ukraine a chance to catch their breath. The entire purpose of the Russian approach has been to grind the Ukrainians down to the point of exhaustion. And now we’re there.” [..] nobody is going to give Ukraine a pause, according to Ritter. While Moscow has repeatedly made it clear that it is open to constructive peace negotiations, the absence of Kiev’s initiative would mean the prolongation of the conflict, the former Marine officer believes.

“We’re going to see increasingly the elimination of cohesion on the battlefield as Ukrainians will retreat, as holes will be punched in the line. The Ukrainians are, I believe, in a very short period of time, going to be compelled to make a precipitous retreat back to more defensive positions. And that in itself is a very difficult military maneuver, one which Russia could exploit. You know, if they’re prepared to push them back even further, but this winter will be a winter of continued death and destruction for the Ukrainians. And the Russians will continue to put the pedal to the metal and keep putting the pressure on the Ukrainians. The goal and objective of Russia is demilitarization. Demilitarization could have been done peacefully. Right now it’s being done violently. And it means the absolute destruction of the Ukrainian military. And that is going to happen this winter. It will be destroyed in its totality.”

Read more …

Nikki=Corrupt

Ramaswamy in GOP Presidential Debate Says Ukraine Conflict ‘Pointless’ (Sp.)

US entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy during the fourth Republican primary presidential debate said the Ukraine conflict is pointless and slammed former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley for not backing efforts to reach a peace deal. “I was the first person to say we need a reasonable peace deal in Ukraine. Now a lot of the neocons are quietly coming along to that position, with the exceptions of Nikki Haley and [President] Joe Biden, who still support what I believe is a pointless war in Ukraine,” Ramaswamy said on Tuesday during the debate in Alabama. Ramaswamy and Haley were joined on stage by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie in what some expect to be the final debate of the 2024 primary. Haley maintains 9% support in the Republican Party primary, trailing former US President Donald Trump’s 64% support and DeSantis’ 16% support, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released in November.

Vivek Nikki
https://twitter.com/i/status/1732592114603794574

Read more …

“Hunter Biden is trying to play by his own rules instead of following the rules required of everyone else..”

Hunter Biden Threatened With Contempt Of Congress If He Bails On Testimony

Hunter Biden will be slapped with contempt of congress if he skips out on his Dec. 13 closed-door deposition, according to a Wednesday letter from House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Hunter’s defense attorney, Abbe D. Lowell. “Contrary to the assertions in your letter, there is no ‘choice’ for Mr. Biden to make; the subpoenas compel him to appear for a deposition on December 13. If Mr. Biden does not appear for his deposition on December 13, 2023, the Committees will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,” reads the letter, issued a week after Lowell suggested that Hunter should instead be allowed to testify publicly.

Hunter was subpoenaed on Nov. 8 to appear for a deposition before the committee. In response, Comer said: “Hunter Biden is trying to play by his own rules instead of following the rules required of everyone else,” adding “Our lawfully issued subpoena to Hunter Biden requires him to appear for a deposition on December 13.” Comer and Jordan are investigating extensive evidence that the Biden family was running an international influence peddling scheme, raking in tens of millions of dollars from foreign business partners despite no obvious product or service in exchange. House lawmakers are also seeking testimony from Hunter’s uncle James Biden, as well as multiple former business associates.

Read more …

“”The State Department is tasked with foreign relations and has no authority over domestic affairs..”

US State Dept Sued For Conspiring To Censor American Media Companies (ZH)

Following bombshell censorship revelations exposed over the last year, beginning with the Twitter Files, the state of Texas, The Daily Wire, and The Federalist have filed a lawsuit against the US State Department on Tuesday, alleging that the government agency funded censorship technology designed to bankrupt domestic media outlets which have disfavored political opinions. According to the Daily Wire’s Luke Rosiak; “The State Department is tasked with foreign relations and has no authority over domestic affairs, yet it took a government office designed for countering foreign terrorist propaganda, the Global Engagement Center (GEC), and unleashed it against Americans engaged in what it claimed was “disinformation,” according to the lawsuit, filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas on Tuesday night by the New Civil Liberties Alliance. It was “one of the most audacious, manipulative, secretive, and gravest abuses of power and infringements of First Amendment rights by the federal government in American history,” said the suit, which also names Secretary of State Antony Blinken and five other officials as defendants.”

Of note, the GEC, founded in 2011 under a different name to combat foreign propaganda in a counterterrorism capacity. In establishing the entity, Congress made clear that “none of the funds authorized” for the program “shall be used for purposes other than countering foreign propaganda.” They of course ignored all that, and turned its focus on Americans according to the complaint, using taxpayer funds to finance and promote censorship shops such as NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), which target conservative outlets – ZeroHege included – with the stated goal of killing ad revenue. “Through its Global Engagement Center, the State Department actively intervened in the news-media market to limit the reach and business viability of domestic news organizations by funding censorship technology and private censorship enterprises,” reads a Wednesday press release from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. “The State Department’s mission to obliterate the First Amendment is completely un-American. This agency will not get away with their illegal campaign to silence citizens and publications they disagree with.”

As the lawsuit explains, The Daily Wire, The Federalist, and other conservative news organizations were “branded ‘unreliable’ or ‘risky’ by the government-funded and government-promoted censorship enterprises… starving them of advertising revenue and reducing the circulation of their reporting and speech—all as a direct result of [the State Department’s] unlawful censorship scheme.” The outlets are being represented by The New Civil Liberties Alliance’s Mark Chenoweth, who said that “the federal government cannot do indirectly what the First Amendment forbids it from doing directly.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Piers Corbyn

 

 

Robert Frost

 

 

Cat paws

 

 

 

 

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