Jan 132025
 


Pablo Picasso Self portrait 1906

 

Trump Blew The Overton Window So Wide Open, Anything Seems Possible (Peters)
Trump’s Plan For Greenland ‘Not A Crazy Idea’ – Former Top NATO Commander (RT)
Greenland ‘Most Welcome’ To Join US – Musk (RT)
Trump Energizes Greenland Independence Movement (Mish)
Trump: California Fires ‘One Of The Worst Catastrophes’ In US History (JTN)
Ukraine Must Acknowledge Territorial ‘Reality’ – Trump Adviser Waltz (RT)
Biden Laying Russia Sanctions Trap For Trump – WaPo (RT)
Anti-Russian Sanctions Killing German Companies – Wagenknecht (RT)
Poles Tired Of Ukrainians – Defense Minister (RT)
The Walls Close in on Zelensky (Jim Rickards)
In the Western World You Become Respectable by Selling Out the People (PCR)
Weaponizing Law Enforcement Against Americans (Spivak)
Tulsi Gabbard Now Supports FISA-702 to Get Confirmed as Head of DNI (CTH)
Biden Eyes Preemptive Pardons Amid Trump’s Return (RT)
Vance Says Trump Won’t Issue Pardons for Violent Jan. 6 Defendants (ET)
Biden Calls Meta Decision to End Fact-Checking Program ‘Really Shameful’ (ET)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1878102416429883684

Cali Fire

How Trump was made a felon. Listen well.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1878395613018026473

JD
https://twitter.com/i/status/1878456747850956958

Tucker Newsom

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..the feasibility of a policy idea depends not on its inherent merits but on whether it falls within the range of public acceptance..”

Trump Blew The Overton Window So Wide Open, Anything Seems Possible (Peters)

“Wayne, would you like to be governor of Canada?” asked Trump, speaking with his buddy Gretzky, tugging at the Overton Window with all his might. “MAKE GREENLAND GREAT AGAIN,” the President-Elect tweeted on Truth Social, sending his oldest son north with a box of red hats. He wouldn’t rule out taking the Panama Canal by force. And with each such suggestion, the window widened further. The Overton Window is a concept in political science and sociology that refers to the range of policies or ideas considered acceptable in public discourse at a given time. Like most things in life, I learned about it rather late. “We’re going to be changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, which has a beautiful ring that covers a lot of territory, the Gulf of America. What a beautiful name,” Trump said at Mar-a-Lago, prying the window open so wide that nearly anything seems possible, plausible, probable.

Say such things enough times, amplify the words using our AI-enabled social media machines, and presto, nothing’s shocking. But not only that, AI will soon converge with quantum computing. “The Willow processor performed a computation in under five minutes that would take one of today’s fastest supercomputers 10 septillion years. It lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes, in line with the idea that we live in a multiverse,” wrote Google, presenting its latest breakthrough, cracking our perception of reality. As the window widens fully, not only is nothing impossible, but almost anything can seem reasonable. The right and left tails of every distribution lengthen and fatten. And we are left unanchored, adrift, in an endless sea of wild possibility, volatility. “I’m going to give you a report on drones about one day into the administration, because I think it’s ridiculous that they’re not telling you about what’s going on with the drones,” pledged the President-Elect.

Windows. John Overton posited that ideas travel through stages, moving from being seen as extreme or unthinkable to becoming widely accepted and adopted as policy. Democracy was once considered unthinkable. Universal suffrage too. Emancipation. Most things that matter have traveled this path.

Here are Overton’s six stages:
• Unthinkable – outside of acceptable thought.
• Radical – at the edge of discussion.
• Acceptable – starting to gain traction.
• Sensible – reasonable and widely discussed.
• Popular – widely supported.
• Policy – acted upon and implemented.

Overton introduced this framework to describe how the feasibility of a policy idea depends not on its inherent merits but on whether it falls within the range of public acceptance. He argued that public policy is constrained by this “window” of acceptable ideas and politicians tend to stay within the window to maintain public support. But what was yesterday’s unthinkable can become tomorrow’s policy as the window widens, shifts left, or right. And what moves the window is naturally tied into one of life’s great mysteries, the superorganism we call humanity. Overton’s framework helps us make sense of society, markets too, risks, opportunities. I try to look at emerging investment themes through this lens. With each move of the window, power structures shift, capital flows adjust, new winners emerge, incumbents struggle or fail. The nimble survive, thrive.

With such stakes, those with influence are desperate to guide the process. Politicians, propagandists, business leaders, religious leaders, union bosses, authors, artists, athletes, advocacy groups, lobbyists, social media influencers, and now AI. There was a time, not so long ago when it was radical or even unthinkable to call network news fake. No longer. And now we openly joke about Canada becoming our 51st state. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, but the window has widened. Greenland’s Prime Minister announced today that he’s ready to speak with Trump. I started trading in 1989 and never in that time has the Overton Window shifted this rapidly across so many dimensions. There’s no precedent for it in modern history. And this dynamic is becoming a new market fundamental.

But it’s not just Trump. Javier Millei has thrown open an anti-statist libertarian window that had been nailed shut for as long as I’ve been alive. Argentina had the best performing stock market in the world last year. This is breathtaking change. And in roughly two short years, we went from the FTX apocalypse to serious talk of strategic sovereign Bitcoin reserves. That window is wide open. Intertwined with both Millei and Bitcoin is radical talk of sovereign insolvency throughout the western world. Before it’s over, make no mistake, we’ll be talking about massive entitlement cuts. But for today, that idea is stuck in the unthinkable stage.

Read more …

The best idea for Greenland?!

Trump’s Plan For Greenland ‘Not A Crazy Idea’ – Former Top NATO Commander (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to acquire Greenland from Denmark is not a “crazy idea,” former NATO supreme allied commander in Europe, James Stavridis, has said. He, however, dismissed the possibility of military intervention, instead advocating for economic engagement as a means to strengthen ties with the region. Speaking at ‘The Cats Roundtable’ with John Catsimatidis on WABC 770 radio on Sunday, the retired admiral described Greenland as a “strategic goldmine for the United States,” highlighting its geopolitical position and abundant natural resources. “It sits at the very top of the North Atlantic. It protects approaches to our own country – the Atlantic Ocean – so it is geographically very important,” Stavridis said. He added that the region is rich in rare minerals and likely has vast oil and gas deposits.

“And it’s huge, a huge land mass. It’s three times the size of Texas,” he said, agreeing with the host that Greenland is “almost a better deal than Alaska.” “And here’s my point. We already almost bought Greenland,” Stavridis said. “We almost bought it at the same time when we bought Alaska, back in the 1860s. So it’s not a crazy idea.” The former NATO commander ruled out using “military force to attack Greenland or Denmark,” arguing that the US should focus on economic engagement to counter Russian and Chinese influence in the region. “We could do an awful lot in terms of business, investment, box out the Russians, box out the Chinese, and work very closely with Greenland,” he said. He added that Greenland “doesn’t have to become the 51st state, but it could certainly be an economic objective for us.”

Trump first floated the idea of purchasing Greenland in 2019, a proposal that was swiftly rejected by Danish and Greenlandic officials. He revived the idea last month, describing the ownership of the Arctic island as an absolute necessity” for US security. Greenlandic pro-independence prime minister, Mute Egede, ruled out selling the island but said on Friday that he was “ready to talk” with Trump. “We have a desire to be the master of our own house,” he said. Although Denmark rejected Trump’s proposal, Copenhagen has reportedly floated to Trump the possibility of boosting US military presence on Greenland, which already hosts an American base. A self-governing Danish territory since 1979, Greenland has gradually been pursuing greater sovereignty. The island currently has its own government, but Denmark retains control over foreign affairs and defense.

Read more …

US needs an arctic base.

Greenland ‘Most Welcome’ To Join US – Musk (RT)

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has expressed support for Greenland potentially becoming part of the United States, after incoming President Donald Trump renewed interest in acquiring the Danish self-governed island. Musk made the remarks on Sunday, writing on X: “If the people of Greenland want to be part of America, which I hope they do, they would be most welcome!” In doing so, he was responding to a recent poll by the University of Copenhagen indicating that the majority of Greenlanders favor independence. Musk’s comments came after Trump voiced support for the acquisition of the island, describing it as an “absolute necessity” and a “national security” matter. The president-elect first suggested purchasing Greenland during his first term in 2019, but the idea went nowhere at the time due to opposition both from Greenland and Denmark.

Greenlandic Prime Minister Mute Egede has rejected the possibility of selling the island to the US, but said on Friday that “we are ready to talk” with Trump. He noted that “we have a desire for independence, a desire to be the master of our own house… This is something everyone should respect.” On Saturday, Axios reported, citing sources, that Denmark, Washington’s NATO ally, had sent “private messages” to Trump signaling that it is open to discussing boosting US military presence in Greenland. The island of about 60,000 people is already home to a US military base and plays a key role in NATO’s defense because of its strategic location, which allows it to control vital Arctic shipping lanes that are gradually becoming more navigable due to global warming.

An autonomous territory of Denmark since 1979, Greenland has been gradually seeking more sovereignty. The island currently has its own government, but Denmark retains control over foreign affairs and defense. A 2019 poll indicated that 67.8% of Greenlanders favor independence from Denmark within the next two decades.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1878454609720606735

Read more …

They’ll always depend on someone. Just got to choose who.

Trump Energizes Greenland Independence Movement (Mish)

The Wall Street Journal reports “Trump’s Talk of Buying Greenland Energizes Island’s Independence Movement”. “Greenland is a self-ruling part of the Kingdom of Denmark. The Danish government says it is willing to grant Greenland full independence if there is local support, and recent Greenlandic elections and polls indicate there is. Trump’s recent threat of a trade war with Denmark is changing the negotiating dynamic, says Ulrik Pram Gad, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies. The Danish government now might be more open to agreeing a divorce deal that includes some continued payments to ease Greenland’s path to independence, he says. “My prognosis is that the Danish government will accept it in the next few years,” he says.

“An independent Greenland would then be free to forge its own security or economic ties with the U.S., Denmark or anyone else. In April, Greenland goes to the polls in a vote that could fire the starter gun on independence for the territory of 57,000 people. The last time elections were held, pro-independence parties got 80% of the vote. The prime minister of Greenland made a New Year’s address to the nation saying that a draft constitution for the country has been prepared and that the independence process should be triggered. “It is now time to take the next step for our country,” Múte Egede said. “Like other countries in the world, we must work to remove the obstacles to cooperation—which we can describe as the shackles of the colonial era—and move on.”

“A 2009 Danish law lays out how Greenland can take the first step in the process: It must notify the Danish government, the two must negotiate a divorce agreement and the deal must then be ratified by a referendum in Greenland. The Greenlandic government has commissioned legal experts to work out the details of how step one would work with a two- year deadline. Pro-independence campaigners in Greenland would like to adopt a “free association” model, similar to the relationship between the Marshall Islands and the U.S. or the Cook Islands and New Zealand. Some of Trump’s advisers have privately acknowledged a sale of Greenland is unlikely, but an expansion of U.S. military and financial presence on the island is a possibility. A poll in 2021 showed that 69% of Greenlanders favored more cooperation with the U.S., compared with 39% who favored tighter cooperation with China.”

Trump’s Offer to Buy Greenland. Some people thought I was crazy when I posted Trump’s Offer to Buy Greenland Is Not as Preposterous as it Sounds. A free association model may be more likely, but don’t rule out an outright purchase. There are only about 59,000 Greenland citizens. I proposed an offer of $2 million each. That would only be $118 billion. Greenland would be cheap at double the price if I am correct about the mineral deposits.

Critical Materials Risk Assessment. Our Department of Energy has placed some of the rare earth minerals we need for weapons systems, wind turbines, batteries, semiconductors, cell phones, and aircraft on a critical materials list. Nearly all of them are mined or refined in China. If Trump increases tariffs on China by 60 percent, China could easily shut down rare earth exports. I have been warning about this for years China controls more than 80% of the world’s supply of tungsten and about 90% of global magnesium production China has an effective monopoly over processing major heavy rare earths – Dysprosium (Dy) and Terbium (Tb), and Light Rare Earths – Neodymium (Nd) and Praseodymium (Pr).

On December 3, I commented China Halts Rare Exports Used by US Technology Companies and the Military. This is China’s advance salvo at Trump tariffs. It comes one day after the Biden administration expanded curbs on the sale of advanced American technology to China. The US gets rare earths from allies who get them from China. But don’t rule out the possibility that China shuts off all access.

Read more …

“There is death all over the place.”

Trump: California Fires ‘One Of The Worst Catastrophes’ In US History (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump blasted California and Los Angeles officials for their handling of the wildfires that have been raging for nearly a week. “The fires are still raging in L.A.,” Trump wrote on Truth Social early Sunday morning. “The incompetent pols have no idea how to put them out. Thousands of magnificent houses are gone, and many more will soon be lost. There is death all over the place.” He said that this is turning out to be “one of the worst catastrophes in the history of our Country.” “They just can’t put out the fires. What’s wrong with them?” he continued, according to The Hill. Last week Trump wrote on Truth Social that “Governor Gavin Newscum refused to sign the water restoration declaration put before him that would have allowed millions of gallons of water, from excess rain and snow melt from the North, to flow daily into many parts of California.”

“NO WATER IN THE FIRE HYDRANTS, NO MONEY IN FEMA. THIS IS WHAT JOE BIDEN IS LEAVING ME. THANKS JOE!” Trump posted later that day. Newsom pushed back on X regarding Trump’s claim about the water restoration declaration. Newsweek, among others, fact-checked the claim about the water restoration declaration and concluded, “The notion that Newsom therefore turned down a ‘declaration,’ referring to federal action that Trump introduced anyway, is not accurate. However, it is clear that the governor has opposed Trump’s actions on water policy, drawing a sharp response from Trump in turn.”

The death toll has climbed to 16 as of Saturday evening. LA County has declared a local health emergency as over 40,000 acres have burned, according to Cal Fire. While this is clearly a combination of natural and environmental phenomenon, arson, and government failure and mismanagement, this catastrophe will be analyzed and characterized for decades to come, often through a political lens as the region and the country come to grips with the realities and implications on the ground.

Read more …

They take it step by step.

Ukraine Must Acknowledge Territorial ‘Reality’ – Trump Adviser Waltz (RT)

It is not possible to “expel every Russian from every inch” of soil claimed by Ukraine, including the Crimean peninsula, incoming US National Security Adviser Michael Waltz has admitted. Acknowledging “that reality” has become a major step toward resolving the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, Waltz told ABC News in an interview on Sunday, adding that this idea is now in the process of being accepted by Ukraine’s backers. “Everybody knows that this [conflict] has to end somehow diplomatically. I just don’t think it’s realistic to say we’re going to expel every Russian from every inch of Ukrainian soil. Even Crimea – President[-elect Donald] Trump has acknowledged that reality, and I think it has been a huge step forward that the entire world is acknowledging that reality,” Waltz stated.

Waltz suggested that accepting the fact that returning to Ukraine’s original post-Soviet borders is unrealistic now opens the way to addressing the question of “how do we no longer perpetuate this conflict and how… we no longer allow it to escalate in a way that drags in the entire world.” The remarks appeared to be reminiscent of statements previously made by other close Trump allies, including his vice president, J.D. Vance. Shortly ahead of the November election, Vance suggested Kiev could end up in a situation where it decides to cede some lands to Russia.

The stance signaled by the incoming US administration sharply contrasts with the goal repeatedly proclaimed by Kiev of regaining the entirety of its post-Soviet territory. This has been accompanied by an explicit refusal by Ukraine to engage in any meaningful negotiations with Russia. Moscow, however, regards the five formerly Ukrainian regions, including Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as Crimea, as integral parts of its territory. Crimea broke away from Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Maidan coup in Kiev, joining Russia via a referendum shortly thereafter. The four other regions were incorporated into Russia in late 2022 after the local population overwhelmingly backed such a move during separate referendums. Last year, Moscow demanded that Kiev pull its troops out of the areas it still controls in its former regions in order to begin the long-stalled negotiation process.

Read more …

“Key obstacles include the legal framework under which the sanctions are authorized and the likelihood of strong congressional resistance..”

Biden Laying Russia Sanctions Trap For Trump – WaPo (RT)

The administration of US President Joe Biden has set a sanctions trap for President-elect Donald Trump, making it politically and legally challenging to roll back sweeping measures targeting Russia’s energy sector, according to a report by the Washington Post. The newspaper claims that Biden’s actions could create significant hurdles for Trump if he seeks to lift the restrictions. Key obstacles include the legal framework under which the sanctions are authorized and the likelihood of strong congressional resistance. Republican lawmakers have previously pushed for tougher penalties, potentially complicating Trump’s efforts to reverse course. “It’s entirely up to [the next administration] to determine whether, when, and on what terms they might lift any sanctions we put in place,” a senior Biden official is quoted as saying. However, current sanctions laws give Congress the power to block any move to ease restrictions.

This framework leaves Trump with limited options, potentially forcing him to maintain the pressure on Moscow despite his calls for a quick settlement in Ukraine. Michael Waltz, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, has argued for leveraging the sanctions to encourage Russian President Vladimir Putin into peace talks. In an article for The Economist before the election, Waltz wrote: “If [Putin] refuses to talk, Washington can… provide more weapons to Ukraine with fewer restrictions. Faced with this pressure, Mr. Putin will probably take the opportunity to wind the conflict down.” Targeting oil giants Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegas, as well as 183 oil tankers, the latest US measures are designed to strike at Russia’s energy industry, which helps fund its budget. They also tighten the US Treasury Department’s license, restricting Moscow’s ability to be paid in dollars for energy exports.

The timing – just days before Trump’s inauguration – has drawn accusations from Moscow of deliberate sabotage. “Of course, we are aware that the administration will try to leave the most difficult legacy possible in bilateral relations to Trump and his associates,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said ahead of the sanctions announcement. Biden officials have framed the sanctions as a long-term strategy. “We believe our actions are leaving a solid foundation upon which the next administration can build,” one official said, predicting the measures would cost Russia billions in monthly revenue and force “hard decisions” between sustaining its economy. With the sanctions tied to bipartisan legislation, any rollback is expected to face resistance in Congress, leaving Trump constrained as he takes office, the Washington Post added.

Read more …

“The sanctions have nothing to do with morality, they have nothing to do with human rights, they have nothing to do with the love of peace, they are simply a stimulus program for the US economy…”

Anti-Russian Sanctions Killing German Companies – Wagenknecht (RT)

Western sanctions imposed on Russia are “killing” German companies and enriching the American economy, Sahra Wagenknecht, the leader of Germany’s left-wing BSW party, said during an election conference on Sunday. The delegates of the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance – Reason and Justice (BSW) gathered in the city of Bonn to adopt the platform for the Bundestag election that will take place next month. During her speech, Wagenknecht refused to blame Russia for the ongoing Ukraine conflict. “The sanctions have nothing to do with morality, they have nothing to do with human rights, they have nothing to do with the love of peace, they are simply a stimulus program for the US economy and a killer program for German and European companies,” Wagenknecht said.

She called for the restoration of the gas imports from Russia. “We simply have to tie our energy imports with the criteria of the lowest price and not any kind of double standards or ideology,” she stated. The left-wing politician condemned Washington’s foreign policy, alerting the audience about “the blood trail of US proxy wars” around the globe. She stressed that the German chancellor must not be “a vassal” of the US. BSW co-leader Amira Mohamed Ali said that the party stands for “a strong, fair and sovereign Germany.” The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party held its conference in Riesa, Saxony on Saturday. The delegates rejected a motion condemning Russia and called for a diplomatic resolution of the conflict. The snap election was called after Germany’s ruling three-party coalition collapsed last month due to disagreements over the budget.

Read more …

“..especially when people here see young Ukrainian men driving the latest cars or staying in five-star hotels.”

Poles Tired Of Ukrainians – Defense Minister (RT)

Poles are “fatigued” of Ukrainian migrants in their country, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defense Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz has stated. The official partially attributed this sentiment to the sight of young men leading an ostentatious lifestyle in the EU nation instead of defending their homeland. Nearly a million Ukrainians currently reside in Poland, according to UN estimates. While Poland opened its doors to those fleeing the neighboring country following the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in February 2022, attitudes towards Ukrainians among Poles have somewhat soured since then. In an interview to the Financial Times published on Sunday, Kosiniak-Kamysz said: “Of course there is fatigue in Polish society, and it is understandable especially when people here see young Ukrainian men driving the latest cars or staying in five-star hotels.”

In October, the official voiced identical criticisms, arguing that young Ukrainian men flaunting their wealth were an affront to Polish taxpayers, who contribute to Warsaw’s military and financial aid to Kiev. Around the same time, the Center for Public Opinion Research published a poll indicating that some 67% of Polish citizens were in favor of deporting male Ukrainian migrants back home. Referring to a recent spat over the delivery of the remaining Polish MiG-29 fighter jets, the defense chief on Sunday also suggested that the Ukrainian leadership would do well to “remember that when others were only sending helmets, we sent tanks.”

In November 2024, Kosiniak-Kamysz similarly suggested that Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky had a “short memory.” A month prior, Kiev slammed its NATO backers, and Poland in particular, over their failure to provide previously promised Soviet-era warplanes. Warsaw clarified that it needed the remaining MiG-29 fighter jets to ensure its own security before the F-35s that it has ordered arrive. In his interview to the FT, Kosiniak-Kamysz also ruled out deploying Polish peacekeepers to Ukraine once Kiev and Moscow seal a truce, calling for “greater burden sharing and diversification within NATO” instead.

Read more …

“Trump has his work cut out for him. But he is the only person in the world today who stands a chance at ending this war.”

The Walls Close in on Zelensky (Jim Rickards)

The walls are closing in on Ukraine’s President Zelensky. In a meeting with allies in Germany this week, the embattled leader requested NATO troops on the ground in Ukraine. “Our goal is to find as many instruments as possible to force Russia into peace. I believe that such deployment of partners’ contingents is one of the best instruments. Let’s be more practical in making it possible.” Nothing about this proposal is “practical”. Even if Zelensky is speaking about peacekeeping troops as part of a settlement, which isn’t clear, it’s still a fundamentally crazy idea. Simply put, it would bring us to the brink of nuclear war. Of course, this isn’t the first time Zelensky has suggested that NATO should send troops to fight and die in this war. But this latest instance is noteworthy because it comes just ahead of President Trump’s inauguration. Given the circumstances, the move signals desperation.

President Trump has stood his ground on this issue thus far. Just this week he acknowledged that NATO’s courtship of Ukraine was a major cause of the war, noting that if Ukraine were to join the Western military alliance, “then Russia has somebody right on their doorstep, and I could understand their feelings about that.” Trump correctly blames Biden for promising Ukraine NATO membership and escalating the war. In early December, Trump’s team conveyed the message that Ukraine would need to make major concessions to end the war. Those concessions will probably involve giving up land already captured by Russia, agreeing to a form of disarmament, and pledging to never join NATO. This was an important shift, as it became clear even to the biggest hawks that Ukraine wasn’t going to recapture much, if any lost territory. And forget about Crimea.

Trump’s views on Ukraine are certainly unique in Washington D.C., But his base is ready for the war to end, and this issue was one of the keys to his landslide victory. Meanwhile, it’s unclear whether Zelensky and the Ukrainian deep state would agree to such concessions. It’s also unclear whether they truly have a say in the matter, unless they’re prepared to go it alone against Russia. But it’s also not clear if Russia would agree to such a deal. Putin could insist upon an end to sanctions on Russia, and a return of their frozen assets.There’s also a chance that Russia won’t want to give Ukraine a break to re-arm itself. NATO has already pulled a fast one on Russia once, during the Minsk accords from 2014-2021. Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel has admitted this peace deal was in actuality a stall tactic to give Ukraine more time to build its military capabilities.

So President Putin may want to press the attack, eliminate Ukraine’s military capabilities, and gain more territory. Russia is advancing along almost the entire frontline. Its use of hypersonic missiles, artillery, drones, and guided glide bombs has devastated Ukrainian strongholds. Ukrainian forces have been forced to fall back into far less favorable defensive positions, and this does not bode well for their outlook. The waste of life in this conflict is exponentially larger than the public has been told. In December of 2024, President Zelensky claimed that only 43,000 of his nation’s troops had been killed in the war so far. In truth, upwards of 600,000 Ukrainian soldiers have likely died. On paper, the Ukrainian army is over one million strong. But across the line, foxholes are empty. Where are all the soldiers?

Russia has likely lost at least 100,000 soldiers KIA as well, though they haven’t released any specific numbers. When the truth about this war comes out, it will shock anyone who is still paying attention at that point. Make no mistake. Trump has his work cut out for him. But he is the only person in the world today who stands a chance at ending this war. I believe he’ll get it done. But the cost in terms of geopolitical capital may be high.

Read more …

Paul Craig Roberts: “I keep waiting [for] the day that every member of the French Legion of Honor is arrested for being a patriot..”

In the Western World You Become Respectable by Selling Out the People (PCR)

Two themes to which I return are the difficulty of effecting change and the disappearance of ethnic nations in the West. What is going on right now in France is a story of both together. Marine Le Pen’s political party, National Rally (formerly National Front), is the largest French party, but it is kept from office by all other parties combining against it. Le Pen’s party has stood for French ethnicity as opposed to a diverse Tower of Babel. In Europe an ethnic-based national state has become associated with Hitler’s Third Reich. Consequently, the French establishment has branded the National Rally racist and even Nazi. By branding the National Rally in this way, the French establishment endeavors to make Le Pen’s party, not immigrant-invaders, the main threat to France. The French establishment and French left-wing have equated hating Le Pen with resisting fascism.

But it is not working. Native French are awakening to the fact that their civilization and their culture are being transformed by waves of immigrant-invaders and that France is ceasing to be French. So the French establishment has focused on Marine Le Pen herself with the lawfare made famous in America with the false indictments of Donald Trump. Le Pen faces the prospect of a devastating prison sentence plus five years of political ineligibility on the charge that she used European Parliament funds where she is represented to pay for National Front employees. All parties do the same thing, but the investigation was limited to Marine Le Pen. We are witnessing the French establishment’s selective use of law to eliminate a perceived threat.

On January 7 Le Pen’s father, Jean-Marie, the founder of the party, passed away. The French left-wing, or perhaps it was the Establishment, celebrated his death with fireworks on the Place de la Republique. French Establishment commitment to diversity, the EU, and globalism requires the death of a French patriot to be celebrated. I keep waiting [for] the day that every member of the French Legion of Honor is arrested for being a patriot. One would think that the insult to Jean-Marie and the sentencing of Marine would strengthen Le Pen’s party as France’s only representative. But according to an article by Pierre Levy the National Rally’s new leader, Jordan Bardella, craves respectability. He has succumbed to the temptation of gaining office by making the National Front acceptable to the establishment.

The question in my mind is: Will Trump also choose to become respectable? When change is desperately required, dictatorships are more easily overthrown than democracies. In democracies the system permits well-financed interest groups to dominate the countries political, legal, media, entertainment, and educational institutions. A ruling establishment becomes institutionalized in the countries’ institutions. Attempts to bring governance back to service to the people from service to the establishment requires the equivalent of a religious revival or the blood of a Leninist revolution, the consequences of which can be worst than what was overthrown. Over the course of my lifetime I have witnessed the dissolution of the belief system that is Western civilization. The voices that have attempted to defend civilization have been weak. The very definition of civilization has changed. Are Western peoples sufficiently aware and educated to face this challenge?

Read more …

“Above all, the administration must not redirect targeting—it must eradicate these stains on the American soul.”

Weaponizing Law Enforcement Against Americans (Spivak)

Reports released by two House committees in December shine a harsh light on the deceptions and oppressive tactics utilized by numerous federal agencies, the Intelligence Community, and leaders of the Democratic Party. During the last year of the first Trump Administration, agencies within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), State Department, and Justice Department (DOJ) initiated improper contacts with media in an effort to censor conservative views. These agencies also took steps to interfere in the 2020 election to benefit Joe Biden. The Biden-Harris Administration supercharged the weaponization of the federal government against the American people. With the active participation of the media, the administration followed a whole-of-government effort to collude with, and coerce, the media to suppress and censor conservatives and others who opposed progressive goals.

It threatened parents with terrorist “threat tagging” and visits from the FBI for speaking their minds, stretched statutory authority beyond recognition to prosecute Donald Trump and his supporters, harassed and penalized whistleblowers, invaded bank privacy, sent heavily armed federal agents into private homes, and brought an unprecedented barrage of litigation against states to force them into compliance with the administration’s unconstitutional goals. On December 17, 2024, the House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight (Administration Subcommittee) released its report on the events surrounding January 6, 2021 and the politicization of the Select Committee (January 6 Committee) established by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi to investigate those events. Three days later, the House Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government (Justice Subcommittee) released a 17,000-page final report detailing the administrative state’s and the Biden-Harris Administration’s repressive censorship enterprise and other abuses.

Based on the evidence described in these reports, there are two inescapable conclusions: (1) regardless of the administration in office, the Deep State in DHS, DoD, DOJ, IRS, the Intelligence Community, and other agencies have arrogated to themselves unconstitutional and unlawful powers to infringe individual liberties, expand rules, and use force to suppress conservatives’ goals, religion, and free speech; and (2) the Biden-Harris Administration, Pelosi, and leading Democrats endorsed, supported, facilitated, and led the expansion of these efforts. These reports are products of extensive investigations and include copious evidence. Though the Administration Subcommittee’s report can be faulted for its angry tone, a vainglorious pandering to its chairman, Barry Loudermilk, and sometimes hyperbolic conclusions, it provides compelling evidence of wrongdoing.

Broader in scope and more thoroughly researched, the Justice Subcommittee’s report is the product of a detailed inquiry into a broad betrayal of trust. Justice Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan is to be commended for uncovering problems and taking steps that have already ameliorated some of these practices. The findings in these reports show why the Trump Administration must clean house. That is why Trump has nominated sometimes controversial individuals such as Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, Pete Hegseth, Pam Bondi, John Ratcliffe, Russell Vought, and Rick Grenell. It explains Trump’s impulsive, properly withdrawn nomination of Matt Gaetz and the creation of DOGE as an advisor outside of government. It is why so many of Trump’s appointees have expressed concern about the agencies they have been selected to lead. Above all, the administration must not redirect targeting—it must eradicate these stains on the American soul.

Read more …

Feels like the Matrix.

Tulsi Gabbard Now Supports FISA-702 to Get Confirmed as Head of DNI (CTH)

As the story is told, and it aligns with every scintilla of researched data on the darkest and deepest elements of the Deep State, DNI nominee Tulsi Gabbard has reversed her position and will now support FISA-702, the warrantless searches of American communication and electronic metadata. Apparently the FISA process and the 702 aspect (specific to American citizens) is the line in the sand the Senate Select Intelligence Committee has drawn. If Tulsi Gabbard does not support it, her confirmation is in doubt. As a result, she has reportedly reversed her position and now supports it. This is absolutely par for the course.

It should be remembered, in the last reauthorization of FISA-702 congress exempted themselves from the warrantless search and surveillance system used by the U.S. Intelligence Apparatus. Congress forbids the FBI or any entity with access to the NSA database, from being allowed to use the process to search themselves or their staff. However, every other American does not enjoy this same protection. After spending years asking every representative of consequence why they support the FISA-702 process, I can tell you every one of them says they believe it is needed because the IC tells them there are just too many domestic terror threats that need to be monitored. It is impossible to find a person in DC who will forcefully try to stop FISA-702 reauthorization.

If you ask me why in hindsight, I now take the position that FISA-702 is the gateway to the massive surveillance system currently being put into place using Real ID and the AI facial recognition software provided by Palantir (CIA exploit). In essence, the gateway that allows the full-scale surveillance state, is opened by the prior authorization of FISA-702 that negates any 4th amendment protection. Why? Because all of the surveillance mechanisms within the network being updated and enhanced by AI search and capture, comes from the IC being allowed to exploit the NSA database. That same database access allowance is the targeting mechanism for FISA-702. If warrantless searches of the NSA database were stopped, the Palantir/IC and Tech Bro collaboration could hit a brick wall. Against this backdrop, the SSCI telling Tulsi Gabbard that her nomination approval is contingent upon her support for FISA-702, simply makes sense.

WASHINGTON DC – […] Multiple senators from both parties who met with the former Hawaii lawmaker in recent days told us they emerged from those sessions unsure about Gabbard’s position on the 702 program. During these meetings, senators have pressed Gabbard on her previous public statements on the issue, as well as her votes against 702 reauthorization throughout her eight years in Congress. GOP national security hawks in particular viewed this as problematic, we’re told, fueling renewed doubts about her confirmation prospects. Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, suggested on a WSJ podcast Wednesday that Gabbard should disavow her previous opposition to the 702 program.

“Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) also sent us a statement Thursday night supporting Gabbard’s 702 stance — a key indicator of how the GOP leadership is thinking about her nomination. “Tulsi Gabbard has assured me in our conversations that she supports Section 702 as recently amended and that she will follow the law and support its reauthorization as DNI,” Cotton said. That last part is important because, if confirmed as DNI, Gabbard would need to certify the statute annually in order for intelligence collection to continue under the 702 program. This is also a big part of the reason why the DC Deep State will easily confirm Kash Patel to be Donald Trump’s FBI Director. Kash Patel is a big believer in the value of FISA-702.”

Read more …

“Asked if he would pardon himself, Biden dismissed the idea, saying, “I didn’t do anything wrong.”

What does that say about those he did hand a pardon?

Biden Eyes Preemptive Pardons Amid Trump’s Return (RT)

US President Joe Biden is considering issuing preemptive pardons for individuals who may be targeted by the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump. Trump, who defeated Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election, is set to return to the White House on January 20. “There’s still consideration… but no decision,” Biden told reporters at the White House on Friday, in response to a question regarding potential preemptive pardons. “It depends on some of the language and expectations that Trump broadcasts in the last couple days here as to what he’s going to do.” Biden withdrew from the 2024 presidential race in July after concerns arose within the Democratic Party following a June debate performance against Trump which raised doubts about his viability as a candidate. He ultimately endorsed Harris, who lost the general election to the Republican candidate, Trump.

The president-elect has expressed intentions to prosecute perceived “enemies,” including Harris and “the most corrupt president in the history of the United States of America, Joe Biden, and the entire Biden crime family.” Trump also criticized Biden for pardoning his son Hunter in December. In a reversal of his pledge to not do so, Biden pardoned Hunter, who was convicted of tax evasion and gun charges and was set to be sentenced in December. Trump called the decision a “miscarriage of justice,” while referencing the people who were jailed for the January 6 Capitol riots. “Does the Pardon given by Joe to Hunter include the J-6 Hostages, who have now been imprisoned for years? Such an abuse and miscarriage of Justice!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. The president-elect also called for investigations into former President Barack Obama and Liz Cheney, a high-profile Republican critic of Trump.

Ahead of the November 2024 election, Trump threatened unprecedented prosecution for individuals he accused of potential election cheating. “Please beware this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials,” Trump posted on Truth Social. He previously claimed widespread fraud in the 2020 election. Trump also stated last year that he would fire Jack Smith, the Justice Department’s special counsel overseeing criminal investigations into the Republican president-elect. Smith resigned on Friday. Biden described Trump’s intentions to prosecute political opponents as “outrageous.” Asked if he would pardon himself, Biden dismissed the idea, saying, “I didn’t do anything wrong.”

The president likely possesses the constitutional authority to issue broad preemptive pardons for federal offenses committed in the past, even if charges have not yet been filed. However, this authority does not apply to state crimes or future offenses. The types of pardons Biden might consider would generally fall within his executive power.

Read more …

More pardons. But these ones are not pre-emptive.

Vance Says Trump Won’t Issue Pardons for Violent Jan. 6 Defendants (ET)

Vice President-elect JD Vance said on Jan. 12 that individuals who were violent during the U.S. Capitol breach on Jan. 6, 2021, “obviously” should not be pardoned. President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to use his clemency power for people who have been charged in connection with the incident over the past four years. Those who “protested peacefully” on Jan. 6 should receive a pardon, Vance told Fox News. He added that there is also a “little bit of a gray area” in some of those cases. “I think it’s very simple,” Vance said. “If you protested peacefully on Jan. 6 and you’ve had [Attorney General] Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice treat you like a gang member, you should be pardoned. If you committed violence on that day, obviously you shouldn’t be pardoned.”

More than 1,500 people have been charged with federal crimes in connection with the Capitol breach, according to Department of Justice records. A number of people were charged with misdemeanor offenses for entering the Capitol in an unauthorized manner, and some were charged with felonies. Leaders of the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys groups were convicted of seditious conspiracy for what prosecutors described as plots to use violence to stop the peaceful transfer of power from Trump to then-President-elect Joe Biden. Vance said on Jan. 12 that he believes that “a lot of people” have been “prosecuted unfairly” over the past several years. “We need to rectify that,” Vance said. “We’re very much committed to seeing the equal administration of law.”

Also on the morning of Jan. 12, Vance responded to critics on social media who said that his comments to Fox News didn’t go far enough, with some saying that all Jan. 6 defendants should be pardoned. “I’ve been defending these guys for years,” Vance wrote on social media platform X. “The president saying he’ll look at each case (and me saying the same) is not some walkback … I assure you, we care about people unjustly locked up. Yes, that includes people provoked and it includes people who got a garbage trial.” That comment came in response to a prominent conservative social media account’s statement on Jan. 12 that new footage has shown “cops shooting innocent J6 protesters and [Vance] goes on Fox News and tells the world that only non violent protesters should get pardoned … better rethink what you just said JD.” Vance noted that he donated to a Jan. 6 “political prisoner fund” and was criticized over it during his run for Ohio’s Senate seat.

In a wide-ranging news conference last week at his Florida Mar-a-Lago residence, Trump suggested that he would initiate “major pardons” for individuals arrested in the aftermath of Jan. 6. A reporter asked him, “You said on your first day of office you were going to pardon Jan. 6 defendants. Are you planning to pardon those who were charged with violent offenses?” “Well, we’re looking at it, and we have other people in there,” Trump said. “People that didn’t even walk into the building are in jail right now. “We’ll be looking at the whole thing. But I’ll be making major pardons, yes.” The president-elect has said on multiple occasions that he would carry out the pardons quickly after he is sworn into office on Jan. 20.

Read more …

Fake anger.

Biden Calls Meta Decision to End Fact-Checking Program ‘Really Shameful’ (ET)

President Joe Biden has shared his disapproval at Meta’s decision to do away with its current social media fact-checking program. This week Meta, which owns the Facebook and Instagram social media platforms, announced it would stop using its third-party fact-checking program for U.S.-based content review purposes. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he made the decision because the existing fact-checking program has become “too politically biased,” resulting in censorship and a loss of trust. “It’s time to get back to our roots around free expression on Facebook and Instagram,” he said in a Jan. 7 video statement. Asked for his opinion on the move at a Jan. 10 press conference, Biden said, “It’s just completely contrary to everything America is about.”

Up until this week, Meta had partnered with the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) to run its third-party fact-checking service. The IFCN is administered by the Poynter Institute, which also operates the PolitiFact fact-checking publication. “The idea that, you know, a billionaire can buy something and say ‘by the way from this point on, we’re not going to fact-check anything’ and you know when you have millions of people reading, going online reading this stuff it’s—anyway, I think it’s really shameful,” Biden said. Meta is not doing away with fact-checking outright. Rather, Zuckerberg said Meta’s platforms will move toward a “more comprehensive community notes” style system, similar to the one employed by social media platform X. He will start the new model in the United States.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1878485939091025933

Rather than relying on a fact-checking organization such as the IFCN to review content, X’s community notes feature allows users to weigh in directly. X users may suggest a fact-checking note on controversial posts on the platform, and then provide feedback on whether a suggested fact-checking note is itself accurate, and necessary for the particular post. Posts that have been flagged with sufficient community input display an attached fact-checking note explaining why the particular post is inaccurate or may be missing important context. Zuckerberg also announced that Meta’s content moderation team will be moved out of California to Texas “where there is less concern about the bias of our teams.” Zuckerberg and other Meta officers have defended the move as needed to restore free speech and expression to their platforms.

In a Jan. 7 blog post, Meta’s chief global affairs officer, Joel Kaplan, said as well-intentioned as their prior fact-checking efforts had been, “they have expanded over time to the point where we are making too many mistakes, frustrating our users, and too often getting in the way of the free expression we set out to enable.” “Too much harmless content gets censored, too many people find themselves wrongly locked up in ‘Facebook jail,’ and we are often too slow to respond when they do,” Kaplan said. Meta’s fact-checking and content moderation decisions had been a point of contention during the 2020 presidential election cycle.

In October 2020, the Meta platforms reduced the reach of posts linking to articles by The New York Post concerning a laptop that then-candidate Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, had reportedly abandoned at a Delaware computer repair shop. The New York Post’s articles detailed the contents of the laptop, including documents indicating the elder Biden had some level of interaction with his son’s foreign business partners. In a Jan. 10 interview with podcast host Joe Rogan, Zuckerberg alleged that officials in the Biden administration routinely contacted Meta, with demands that they remove or suppress certain content, including memes and satirical posts. “Basically these people from the Biden administration would call up our team and like scream at them and curse,” Zuckerberg said.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Starlink

 

 

Tumbling
https://twitter.com/i/status/1878690946340270500

 

 

little men
https://twitter.com/i/status/1878695718132813987

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jan 092025
 


Pablo Picasso Face female study 1925

 

Elon Musk Brands British PM ‘Evil’ (RT)
France Calls For EU Action Against Elon Musk (RT)
EU Ministers Plan Joint Trip To US (RT)
Trump Envoy Will Join Gaza Ceasefire Talks in Qatar (Antiwar)
Genocidal President, Genocidal Politics (Solomon)
Biden Confirms He’s Considering Preemptive Pardons (ZH)
Trump’s Ukraine Aide Sets 100-Day Timeline To End Conflict (RT)
Victor Davis Hanson: FBI “Afraid” Trump Will “Re-Examine” Conduct (ZH)
Klobuchar Repeats Common False Claim About January 6th (Turley)
Trump Asks Supreme Court To Halt Sentencing In Hush Money Case (ZH)
Guess Who Is Already Talking About Impeaching Trump Again (Margolis)
NATO Members Should Increase Defense Spending – Trump (RT)
Senate Democrats Attempt To Delay Tulsi Gabbard Confirmation Hearings (ZH)
DOJ Confirms It Will Release Jack Smith’s Report On Trump, But… (ZH)
FBI Is Still Hiding Details Of Russiagate (Maté)

 

 


And So Castles Made of Sand – by Mr. Fish

 

 

Rogan 2024
https://twitter.com/i/status/1877190941909438598

Water

Sachs

Reagan

Watters Zuck

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. 1 priority in Britain today: block any attempt at an inquiry. What a sad place.

Elon Musk Brands British PM ‘Evil’ (RT)

SpaceX CEO and X owner Elon Musk has hammered Prime Minister of Britain Keir Starmer for his refusal to prosecute Pakistani gangs involved in the mass rape of underage British girls, calling the PM “evil” incarnate. ”Starmer is evil,” Musk wrote on his social platform on Wednesday morning, above a meme condemning Starmer for demanding an investigation into former Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s lockdown-breaching parties during the Covid-19 pandemic, but declining to prosecute “politically protected UK rape gangs.” Musk has spent much of the last two weeks drawing attention to the UK’s so-called “grooming gangs,” and to the police departments, politicians, and prosecutors who allegedly failed to protect children from them.

The gangs in question systematically raped and tortured tens of thousands of underage girls in towns across northern England over the last two decades, according to multiple government and media reports. Almost all of the perpetrators were Pakistani men, and the victims white British girls. Successive governments declined to investigate the scandal – which received mainstream media attention after a series of reports by The Times in 2011 – and several police departments covered up the existence of the gangs, inquiries later found. “What was done to thousands of defenseless little girls in Britain was vile beyond belief,” Musk wrote in another post on Wednesday. “When the fathers of the little girls tried to save them, the authorities arrested their fathers,” he continued, referring to at least one infamous case in the town of Rotherham.

Starmer led the Crown Prosecutorial Service (CPS) from 2008 to 2013, at the height of the scandal. Under his leadership, the CPS was heavily criticized for declining to prosecute a gang in Rochdale, and police in Rotherham told a 2015 inquiry that they considered the CPS unwilling to bring charges against alleged perpetrators. Speaking to reporters on Monday, Starmer accused Musk of spreading “lies and misinformation” about his handling of the scandal. The PM claimed that he changed the CPS’ “whole prosecution approach” to cases of child sexual abuse and left the agency with the highest number in history of such prosecutions.

However, a BBC investigation noted that “the prime minister referred only to the broad category of child sex abuse prosecution data” and that CPS records do not distinguish between sexual abuse perpetrated by gangs and abuse perpetrated by individuals. The broadcaster also found that prosecutions under Starmer peaked at 4,794 between April 2010 and March 2011 but rose to 7,200 per year in 2016-2017, after Starmer left the CPS. Starmer’s already dismal approval rating has sunk even further since last week when Musk began attacking his handling of the rape gangs. According to a YouGov poll published on Monday, 63% of voters disapprove of his government’s performance, while just 16% approve, a fall of two points since December.

In a debate in parliament on Wednesday, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch demanded that an upcoming child protection bill include an amendment setting up a national inquiry into the gangs. Starmer rejected the proposition, arguing that a lengthy inquiry would stall the implementation of the rest of the bill. With Starmer’s Labour Party holding a 163-seat majority, the amendment is unlikely to pass “Now why would Keir Starmtrooper order his own party to block such an inquiry?” Musk wrote on X. “Because he is hiding terrible things. That is why.”

Read more …

Sure, ban X. Musk has his interview with AfD leader Alice Weidel later today. Can Germany ban it?

France Calls For EU Action Against Elon Musk (RT)

France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot has urged the EU executive branch to use existing legislation to crack down on outside interference. His comment to French media on Wednesday is related to US-based billionaire Elon Musk weighing in on European politics on his platform X (formerly Twitter). His words come a day after French President Emmanuel Macron slammed the owner of X for interfering in EU matters. He accused the world’s richest man of intervening directly in elections across the continent, including next month’s snap federal polls in Germany. “Either the European Commission applies with the greatest firmness the laws that we have to protect our unique space, or it does not, and then it should think about giving the capacity to do so back to EU member states,” Barrot said in an interview with France Inter radio, urging the lawmakers to “wake up.”

Asked whether the X platform could be banned in the bloc, the minister replied that a mechanism allowing the move “is laid out in our laws.” The foreign minister’s comments came ahead of a livestream conversation on X with the co-leader of the right-wing AfD (Alternative for Germany) party, Alice Weidel, scheduled for Thursday, where the South African-born tech mogul is set to participate as a host. On Monday, an EC spokesperson said the institution will investigate whether the conversation is in breach of the bloc’s social media rules. In December, Musk provoked major controversy by claiming in a post on X that “only the AfD can save Germany.” The statement was followed by an op-ed piece posted by the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag later that month, in which the entrepreneur defended the party against accusations of extremism and praised its economic policies.

Additionally, Musk sparked indignation across the block with a wave of verbal attacks on various political leaders. Last month, following a tragic attack at a Christmas market in Magdeburg, the billionaire demanded the immediate resignation of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, calling him an “incompetent fool.” Last week, the tech mogul lambasted British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, accusing him of failing to tackle the Pakistani grooming gang issue and refusing to properly investigate the mass rape of underage girls while head of the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service from 2008 to 2013. He also urged Washington to step in and “liberate” the Brits from their “tyrannical government.”

Read more …

They want to show unity where there is none.

Hopefully, Trump will invite Elon Musk into the room.

EU Ministers Plan Joint Trip To US (RT)

The foreign ministers of France, Germany and Poland are planning a joint trip to the US as a show of unity, Politico EU has reported. While the visit is still at the planning stage and no date has been set, the trio wants to arrive shortly after the January 20 inauguration of President Donald Trump, three EU diplomats told the outlet on condition of anonymity on Wednesday. Jean-Noel Barrot of France, Annalena Baerbock of Germany and Radoslaw Sikorski of Poland might even be accompanied by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, according to two of the diplomats. The idea behind the trip would be to make a “show of European unity,” one of the diplomats said. The EU has struggled to respond to Trump’s talk of the US taking over Greenland, an Arctic island that is currently an autonomous territory of Denmark.

The Danish government has ruled out selling the island and suggested it would be unacceptable of the US to take it from a fellow NATO member by force. “There is no question of the EU letting other nations in the world, whoever they may be, attack its sovereign borders,” Barrot has told France Inter radio. The European Commission, however, declined to take a position on the issue. French President Emmanuel Macron has argued that Trump won’t be able to resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict quickly and that the role of Washington should be to bring Moscow to the table. Barrot, who has been France’s foreign minister since September, is a holdover from Michel Barnier’s cabinet that lost parliamentary confidence in early December. Germany’s ‘traffic light’ coalition that Baerbock is part of crumbled in November and faces a general election in February.

The current government of Poland took power in December 2023 through post-electoral coalition-building. While still in the opposition, Sikorski caused a minor scandal by posting “Thank you, USA” after the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines which had delivered Russian gas to Germany. Trump has also rattled the European NATO members by declaring this week that their levels of military spending were too low. As many as 15 members of the bloc have failed to reach the minimum target of 2% of their GDP by mid-2024. According to the US president-elect, even that is nowhere near enough and they ought to be spending at least 5%, which none of the members of the bloc are currently capable of.

Read more …

Trump must put a leash on Bibi. And he knows it.

Trump Envoy Will Join Gaza Ceasefire Talks in Qatar (Antiwar)

President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, said Tuesday that he was traveling to Qatar to take part in Gaza hostage and ceasefire negotiations with Biden administration officials. Chances of a deal seem slim as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made clear he has no intention of ending the genocidal war, and Hamas is saying any deal must lead to a permanent ceasefire, but Witkoff insisted progress was being made. “We’re making a lot of progress, and I don’t want to say too much because I think they’re doing a really good job back in Doha,” Witkoff, a real estate investor, said at a press conference with Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Witkoff said he was “really hopeful that by the inaugural, we’ll have some good things to announce on behalf of the president.” When asked what has been impeding a deal, Witkoff declined to answer.

“I believe we’ve been on the verge of [a deal]. I don’t want to discuss what’s delayed it — no point to be negative in any way,” he said. Standing alongside Witkoff, Trump repeated his threat that there would be “all hell to pay” if Hamas doesn’t start releasing hostages by his inauguration on January 20. “If those hostages aren’t back — if they’re not back by the time I get into office — all hell will break out in the Middle East and it will not be good for Hamas and it will not be good, frankly, for anyone. All hell will break out. I don’t have to say anymore, but that’s what it is and they should have been back a long time ago,” Trump said. The president-elect has vowed to be a staunch supporter of Israel, as he was in his first term, and said on Monday that he was the “best friend that Israel ever had.”

According to media reports, Hamas has released a list of 34 hostages it is willing to release as part of the first phase of a ceasefire deal in exchange for the release of Palestinian prisoners. The Times of Israel reported that a potential deal that’s on the table would only involve a six to seven-week temporary ceasefire. Relatives of Israelis still held in Gaza are calling for the government to pursue a comprehensive deal that releases all the hostages and brings an end to the conflict. During previous rounds of negotiations, Netanyahu sabotaged the chances of a deal by constantly declaring that he wouldn’t agree to a permanent truce and adding new demands.

Read more …

“President Biden and his loyalists, who were especially motivated to pretend that he wasn’t really doing what he was really doing.”

Genocidal President, Genocidal Politics (Solomon)

When news broke over the weekend that President Biden just approved an $8 billion deal for shipping weapons to Israel, a nameless official vowed that “we will continue to provide the capabilities necessary for Israel’s defense.” Following the reports last month from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch concluding that Israeli actions in Gaza are genocide, Biden’s decision was a new low for his presidency. It’s logical to focus on Biden as an individual. His choices to keep sending huge quantities of weaponry to Israel have been pivotal and calamitous. But the presidential genocide and the active acquiescence of the vast majority of Congress are matched by the dominant media and overall politics of the United States.

Forty days after the Gaza war began, Anne Boyer announced her resignation as poetry editor of the New York Times Magazine. More than a year later, her statement illuminates why the moral credibility of so many liberal institutions has collapsed in the wake of Gaza’s destruction. While Boyer denounced “the Israeli state’s U.S.-backed war against the people of Gaza,” she emphatically chose to disassociate herself from the nation’s leading liberal news organization: “I can’t write about poetry amidst the ‘reasonable’ tones of those who aim to acclimatize us to this unreasonable suffering. No more ghoulish euphemisms. No more verbally sanitized hellscapes. No more warmongering lies.” The acclimatizing process soon became routine. It was most crucially abetted by President Biden and his loyalists, who were especially motivated to pretend that he wasn’t really doing what he was really doing.

For mainline journalists, the process required the willing suspension of belief in a consistent standard of language and humanity. When Boyer acutely grasped the dire significance of its Gaza coverage, she withdrew from “the newspaper of record.” Content analysis of the war’s first six weeks found that coverage by the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times had a steeply dehumanizing slant toward Palestinians. The three papers “disproportionately emphasized Israeli deaths in the conflict” and “used emotive language to describe the killings of Israelis, but not Palestinians,” a study by The Intercept showed. “The term ‘slaughter’ was used by editors and reporters to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 60 to 1, and ‘massacre’ was used to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 125 to 2. ‘Horrific’ was used to describe the killing of Israelis versus Palestinians 36 to 4.”

After a year of the Gaza war, Arab-American historian Rashid Khalidi said: “My objection to organs of opinion like the New York Times is that they see absolutely everything from an Israeli perspective. ‘How does it affect Israel, how do the Israelis see it?’ Israel is at the center of their worldview, and that’s true of our elites generally, all over the West. The Israelis have very shrewdly, by preventing direct reportage from Gaza, further enabled that Israelocentric perspective.” Khalidi summed up: “The mainstream media is as blind as it ever was, as willing to shill for any monstrous Israeli lie, to act as stenographers for power, repeating what is said in Washington.”

Read more …

Some people will refuse pardons. That makes the rest look extra very bad.

Biden Confirms He’s Considering Preemptive Pardons (ZH)

President Joe Biden in a Jan. 5 interview confirmed that he is considering whether to issue preemptive pardons. White House officials have said that Biden plans to issue additional pardons and commutations before his term ends. Preemptive pardons would differ from those Biden has already issued and those issued by other presidents in their final days in office. They would protect people from prosecution for charges that have not yet been brought, reports Zachary Stieber at The Epoch Times. “Some of your supporters have encouraged you to issue preemptive pardons to people like Liz Cheney and Anthony Fauci … will you do that?” USA TODAY’s Susan Page asked Biden during the interview. The individuals suggested have drawn criticism from President-elect Donald Trump, who is set to take office again on Jan. 20.

Biden referenced a meeting with Trump at the White House in November 2024. “I tried to make it clear that there was no need, and it was counterintuitive for his interest to go back and try to settle scores,” Biden said, recounting the conversation they had. Trump did not respond directly to that advice, according to the president. “He didn’t. But he didn’t say, ‘No, I’m going to…’ You know. He didn’t reinforce it. He just basically listened,” Biden said. “So you haven’t decided yet. You’re still assessing this issue?” Page asked. “No, I haven’t,” Biden responded. “A little bit of it depends on who he puts in what positions,” Biden said. The Trump transition team did not respond to a request for comment. Inquiries sent to the employers of Cheney and Fauci were not returned.

Biden in late 2024 pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, whom a jury convicted of federal gun charges and who pleaded guilty to intentionally failing to pay taxes. Biden later pardoned another 39 people and commuted the sentences of some 1,500 others, including 37 death row prisoners. One individual floated as a possible preemptive pardon candidate is Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state. Clinton, who mishandled confidential emails and whose campaign funded opposition research against Trump, was included in a list compiled by Kash Patel, Trump’s nominee for FBI director. The list, Patel has said, are participants in the so-called deep state.

Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, has said that he does not think Biden should preemptively pardon his wife. “I hope he won’t do that,” he said during a recent television appearance on Dec. 11. A Clinton Foundation spokesperson did not return a request for comment. Biden this month awarded Cheney, who was mentioned during the interview, a Presidential Citizens Medal for her work as vice chair of a House panel that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol. Biden said Cheney and other former officials who received the medal in the ceremony had “dedicated their careers to serving our democracy” and “served in difficult times with honor, decency and ensure our democracy delivers.”

Read more …

100 days is more than 24 hours.

Trump’s Ukraine Aide Sets 100-Day Timeline To End Conflict (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming special envoy has said he hopes to mediate a resolution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict within 100 days, starting on Inauguration Day on January 20. “I know I’m on the clock,” retired US Army lieutenant general Keith Kellogg told Fox News on Wednesday. “I would like to set a goal on a personal level, on a professional level. I would say let’s set it at 100 days and move your way back.” Kellogg stressed that Trump remains committed to restarting negotiations between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky to find a settlement to the fighting, which has claimed “enormous” casualties on both sides. “He’s not trying to give something to Putin or to the Russians. He’s actually trying to save Ukraine and save their sovereignty. And he’s going to make sure that it’s equitable and that it’s fair,” Kellogg said.

He argued that “the biggest mistake President [Joe] Biden made is the fact that he’s never engaged in any conversations with Putin.” “He hasn’t talked to him in over two years,” Kellogg said, adding that Trump “does talk to adversaries and allies alike.” Trump has repeatedly vowed to quickly mediate a successful peace deal, but offered little specifics. According to media reports, his team is considering freezing the conflict along the current front line. Negotiations between Moscow and Kiev broke down in spring 2022, with both sides accusing each other of making unrealistic demands. Putin stated that for any settlement to work, Ukraine must abandon its plans to join NATO and renounce its claims on Crimea and four other former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia.

Read more …

“They’re afraid that if they were Donald Trump and they had suffered what they did to him, they would be very frightened..”

Victor Davis Hanson: FBI “Afraid” Trump Will “Re-Examine” Conduct (ZH)

Victor Davis Hanson said on Monday that he thinks the FBI is “afraid” of the incoming Trump administration over the possibility that their shady dealings will be ‘re-examined.’ Speaking with Fox News on Monday about new evidence released of a suspect in the DC pipe bomb case, the Hoover Institution Senior Fellow told host Laura Ingraham; “I think they’re afraid the narrative changed over the four years, and they were afraid to release any information during the election. Now they feel that there’s a new administration and there might be some exposure or culpability. They’re afraid that if they were Donald Trump and they had suffered what they did to him, they would be very frightened the way they think,” adding “So they think Donald Trump is going to re-examine a lot of this.”

A new video published by the FBI’s DC Field Office shows a suspect appearing to plant a bomb near the Democratic National Committee. Hanson went on to call out what he said were the FBI’s “lies,” highlighting the neglect to immediately release Lt. Michael Byrd’s identity after fatally shooting Ashli Babbitt during the Jan. 6 riot. The senior fellow additionally cited the number of charges brought against attendees of the Jan. 6 attack compared to those not charged during the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) riots. -Daily Caller. “A lot of the things they said, Laura, were abject lies,” Hanson continued. “There were not four officers killed. There were not 10 people killed. There was only one violent death, we think, and that was a Trump supporter, Ashli Babbitt. Then there was no need to hide Officer Byrd’s identity. Anytime an officer lethally shoots an unarmed person in this country, they’re identified. For some reason, they wanted to suppress that.”

“They wanted to suppress the FBI video. They wanted to suppress the information about Lynn [sic] Cheney, maybe witness tampering, that’s alleged,” Hanson continued. “They wanted to suppress some of the erosion of the evidence. They didn’t tell us how many people were charged. It ended up [with] 1,500 felony charges. It was [an] almost 75% conviction rate. That never happens. Compare that with the 14,000 people that were arrested in 2020. Almost 90% of them were never charged or indicted. They were released. So there was a lot of things that they want to suppress.”

Read more …

How lies survive.

Klobuchar Repeats Common False Claim About January 6th (Turley)

Minnesota Democrat Sen. Amy Klobuchar this week was hit by a “community note” flagging a common false statement made about January 6th and how multiple officers were killed that day. Democratic leaders routinely refer to multiple deaths of officers when the only person to die on January 6th was Ashli Babbitt, a killing of an unarmed protester that remains controversial after a whitewashing by the Capitol Police. Klobuchar, who has been a vocal supporter of censorship to quell “disinformation” on social media, repeated the false narrative and declared that “Police officers were injured and killed.” Klobuchar joined other Democrats in repeating the claim in her post on X: “Four years ago, the electoral vote certification was interrupted by a violent mob. Police officers were injured and killed. Our democracy hung in the balance. I knew we had to do our duty and complete the count – and in the early hours of January 7th, we did.”

That posting quickly led to a “Community Note” by X that said, “No officers were killed.” Immediately after the riot, Democrats started to repeat this claim, particularly concerning the later death of U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. The New York Times helped spread the false claim that he died as a result of being hit with a fire extinguisher. In reality, Sicknick suffered two strokes and died of natural causes the day after the riot. As the note states, “The medical examiner found Sicknick died of natural causes which means ‘a disease alone causes death. If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural.’ Four other officers committed suicide days to months later.” While repeating this claim, Democrats also downplay the riot around the White House in the previous summer, including some like Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md), who has bizarrely insisted that the protests were “peaceful.”

While many today still claim that the protests were “entirely peaceful” and there was no “attack on the White House,” that claim is demonstrably false. It is only plausible if one looks at the level of violence at the start of the clearing operation as opposed to the prior 48 hours. There was, in fact, an exceptionally high number of officers injured during the protests. In addition to a reported 150 officers injured (including at least 49 Park Police officers around the White House), protesters caused extensive property damage including the torching of a historic structure and the attempted arson of St. John’s. The threat was so great that Trump had to be moved into the bunker because the Secret Service feared a breach of security around the White House.

Of course, January 6th was bad enough—it does not need embellishment. Many of us immediately condemned it at the time as a desecration of our traditions and values. It was a disgraceful riot that interrupted the constitutionally mandated transition of power. However, the repeated use of this false claim is a disservice to the public and a misuse of this national tragedy. This repetition is referred to by psychologists as creating the “illusion of truth.” If repeated enough times, the lie becomes the truth, and those who object are then attacked as “deniers” or “insurrectionist sympathizers.” On “misinformation,” Klobuchar has pushed social media companies to “take this crap off.” She has sponsored legislation to support censorship, particularly when it comes to the pandemic and COVID-19. She has stressed “how lethal misinformation can be and it is our responsibility to take action.” In this case, the lethality was the misinformation.

Read more …

“The Supreme Court requested a response from New York prosecutors by Thursday.”

Trump Asks Supreme Court To Halt Sentencing In Hush Money Case (ZH)

Donald Trump petitioned the US Supreme Court to postpone his sentencing in the Stormy Daniels/hush money case, scheduled for Friday, Jan. 10. This move comes after a New York appeals courts rejected his requests for a delay, including a recent denial from the state’s appeals court, the Epoch Times reported. This move comes after New York courts rejected his requests for a delay, including a recent denial from the state’s appeals court. Trump’s legal team filed an emergency request with the nation’s highest court on Wednesday, arguing that proceeding with the sentencing could cause “grave injustice and harm to the institution of the Presidency and the operations of the federal government,” according to The Associated Press.

The Supreme Court requested a response from New York prosecutors by Thursday. The case, presided over by New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, resulted in Trump’s conviction in May 2024 on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Merchan has indicated that he does not intend to impose jail time, fines, or probation at the sentencing, and in fact the only reason for the sentencing is so CNN/MSNBC can officially claim that Trump is a convicted felon.

Read more …

Can’t miss.

Guess Who Is Already Talking About Impeaching Trump Again (Margolis)

Donald Trump is set to make history on January 20, becoming the 47th president of the United States. After winning both the Electoral College and the popular vote, he enters this term with a stronger mandate than his first. Yet as sure as the sun rises, Democrats are gearing up for their favorite pastime: impeaching Trump. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) has already signaled as much. During an interview on CNN, Dana Bash pressed him on balancing governance with his previous focus on investigations into Trump’s conduct, and Schiff vowed to “push back” against Trump for any perceived “abuse of power.” Schiff responded hesitantly, initially stumbling over his words. “Well, I — look, I think we hope for the best. We keep a focus on trying to get positive, affirmative things done for the country,” he said.

However, he quickly pivoted, adding, “But a lot will depend on how he chooses to govern. If he violates the law, if he violates the Constitution, if he abuses his office, we will vigorously push back, fight back, stand up to him, as we had to do during his first term in office.” Schiff added, “My priority is to try to get things done for my California constituents.” Still, he noted that his constituents also “expect me to stand up to him when he attacks the Constitution or their freedom.” Despite claiming to focus on policy, Schiff’s rhetoric suggests that he is really gearing up for another round of battles with Trump, just as he did during Trump’s first term. This is the same man who lied about having seen evidence of Trump colluding with Russia. So obviously, the issue isn’t whether Trump violates the law; it’s whether Democrats can frame him for some violation of the law.

Remember, before Trump even stepped into the Oval Office, left-wing activists and their media allies were already speculating about his removal. Politico broached the topic of impeachment in April 2016, months before he won the presidency. Articles like “The Case for Donald Trump’s Impeachability” popped up before he was even sworn in. Vanity Fair explicitly reported on Dec. 15, 2016, that Democrats were “paving the way” to impeach him. The Washington Post didn’t even wait a full hour after Trump’s first inauguration, declaring less than 20 minutes into his presidency that the impeachment campaign had begun. For Democrats, impeachment has never been about legitimate concerns. Their motives have always been political: to stop Trump and appease their donor base. Despite their best efforts — including two failed impeachment attempts and numerous legal maneuvers to prevent him from being able to return to office — Trump’s support has endured, and his momentum has grown.

Their relentless attacks on him have only fatigued the public, including many on the left. You would think they’d try a new tactic for a change. For Democrats, simply holding the office of president seems to qualify as an “abuse of power” in Trump’s case. Unlike his first term, however, this time Trump has a Republican-controlled Senate to act as a firewall against such antics, ensuring that his agenda can proceed with fewer roadblocks. Trump’s victory isn’t just a win for his supporters; it’s a repudiation of the Left’s years-long campaign of lawfare and political gamesmanship. With the country increasingly weary of futile anti-Trump hysteria, Democrats might find that their impeachment rhetoric falls flat this time around. But don’t expect that to stop them — they’ve been plotting this for years, and they’re not about to stop now.

Read more …

No, they should all decrease it.

NATO Members Should Increase Defense Spending – Trump (RT)

NATO countries should start spending 5% of their GDP on defense, US President-elect Donald Trump said on Tuesday. European members of the US-led military bloc, he told a press conference, continue to spend “only a tiny fraction” of what Washington spends on defense, even though they are more affected by the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev. “It should be 5%, not 2%,” Trump told journalists at his Florida estate, referring to the spending threshold set by the bloc for its members. Some countries in the organization “have taken advantage of us,” the US president-elect said, repeating the statements he made during his first presidential term, when he pushed fellow NATO states to spend more on defense, arguing that the US would not protect them in case of a foreign aggression otherwise.

On Tuesday, Trump also spoke about a disparity in defense spending between various member countries. According to him, Washington was spending “billions and billions of dollars more … than Europe.” The president-elect then argued that the economy of the European NATO members combined is of a “similar size” to that of the US, adding that “they can all afford” an increase in defense spending. The US-led bloc simply “can’t do it at [a 2% threshold],” the president-elect said, without going into details about his reasoning behind that statement. He even warned that European NATO member states are currently “in a dangerous territory” and also claimed his previous insistence on fellow members’ defense-spend increases “saved” the bloc. According to a NATO report into defense spending published last June, none of the bloc’s members, including the US itself, currently spends 5% of their GDP on defense.

Poland was the NATO member with the largest relative level of defense spending, having allocated over 4% of its GDP to this concern. The US occupied third place in relative terms, behind Poland and Estonia, with just under 3.5% of its GDP spent on defense. As many as 15 members of the bloc, including Canada, Italy and France, continued to fall behind the organization’s 2% spending threshold as of June 2024, according to its own data. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has also spoken about bloc members’ need to increase this allocation in their budgets. “It is true that we spend more on defense now than we did a decade ago,” he said last month in Brussels, adding that the bloc nonetheless spends less on defense then during the Cold War, when “Europeans spent far more than 3% of their GDP” on it.

Asked about what new threshold he would consider sufficient, Rutte said “you have to go to at least 4%,” adding that “even with 4% you can’t defend yourselves, because then you would not have the latest technologies implemented… in your armies.” Trump’s latest reiterations come as German Chancellor Olaf Scholz sharply criticized a proposal by his Economy Minister Robert Habeck to drastically increase the nation’s defense budget. According to Scholz, the proposed increase would only end up as additional burden for the German taxpayers.

Read more …

Trump can’t afford to lose her.

Senate Democrats Attempt To Delay Tulsi Gabbard Confirmation Hearings (ZH)

Just days after the new members of the United States Senate were sworn into office, Democrats in the upper chamber have already taken steps to delay the confirmation hearings of one major nominee for President-elect Donald Trump’s second Cabinet. As reported by Axios, Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.), who serves as the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is delaying Republican efforts to hold confirmation hearings as early as next week for former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (R-Hawaii), President-elect Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence (DNI). Warner’s excuse for the delay is that the committee has allegedly not yet received certain materials from Gabbard, including her FBI background check, ethics disclosure, and her pre-hearing questionnaire. The background check, as per committee rules, must be submitted at least one week before the hearing is to take place.

However, Gabbard had in fact completed her background check last week. Furthermore, her confirmation could be much smoother than most due to her already possessing a security clearance. She also already submitted her pre-hearing questionnaire, but will submit a second one by Thursday due to Warner’s demands. As for the ethics report, logistical issues have prevented the timely delivery of such information due to the Washington D.C. area being struck by a heavy snowstorm on Monday, which has caused similar delays for other nominees. Despite Warner’s efforts to block the hearing, Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) reaffirmed that the Senate “intends to hold these hearings before Inauguration Day,” according to a spokesman. “The Intelligence Committee, the nominees, and the transition are diligently working toward that goal.”

“After the terrorist attacks on New Year’s Eve and New Years Day, it’s sad to see Sen. Warner and Democrats playing politics with Americans’ safety and our national security,” said Alexa Henning, a spokeswoman for the Trump-Vance transition. Gabbard has generally been considered one of President-elect Trump’s most controversial nominees. Originally a Democrat who rose to the rank of vice chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Gabbard came to be at odds with her own party over its deliberate suppression of the presidential campaigns of Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in 2016 and 2020. She left the House to run for President herself in 2020, then left the Democratic Party and switched to Independent. She became a vocal supporter of President Trump’s comeback bid in 2024, and switched her party affiliation to Republican shortly after his victory in November.

Fetterman

Read more …

Some logic:

“DOJ lawyers said in the new filing that whether Smith was unconstitutionally appointed is irrelevant because the issue at hand is how Garland handles Smith’s report..”

You mean the report that the Constitution says shouldn’t have existed?

DOJ Confirms It Will Release Jack Smith’s Report On Trump, But… (ZH)

Attorney General Merrick Garland plans to release only the volume of special counsel Jack Smith’s report dealing with Donald Trump’s plans to subvert the transfer of power after his loss in the 2020 election, holding back on sharing the Mar-a-Lago report while the president-elect’s two co-defendants still face trial. Garland’s decision all but assures the public will never see Smith’s report reviewing Trump’s mishandling of classified records at his Palm Beach, Fla., resort. However, the filing says the top members of the House and Senate Judiciary committees will be able to review the Mar-a-Lago report at the Department of Justice (DOJ)… so don’t be surprised when the leaks start.

As Zachary Stieber reports for The Epoch Times, DOJ officials said in a court filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit that AG Garland intends to release part one of the report, which deals with Trump, “in furtherance of the public interest in informing a co-equal branch and the public regarding this significant matter.” Smith has already transmitted the report to Garland, officials said. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon on Tuesday had ordered the department not to release the report until the 11th Circuit reviewed a motion by Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, Trump’s co-defendants in a federal case. While prosecutors dropped charges against Trump following his November 2024 election win, they are still pursuing Nauta, a former Trump aide, and De Oliveira, a manager at Trump’s resort in Florida.

Nauta and De Oliveira say Smith should be fired and that his report should not be released to the public, given he was found by Cannon to be unconstitutionally appointed. DOJ lawyers said in the new filing that whether Smith was unconstitutionally appointed is irrelevant because the issue at hand is how Garland handles Smith’s report. They also argued that Nauta and De Oliveira have no interest in part one, and do not have standing to block the publication of that part. “There is also no valid basis for this Court to pretermit the Attorney General’s discretion with respect to Volume One,” they wrote. Officials said that while part two of the report will not be made available to the public, a redacted version will be available for certain lawmakers to view in camera as long as the lawmakers agree not to publicly release any of the report’s contents.

Read more …

Enter Kash Patel.

FBI Is Still Hiding Details Of Russiagate (Maté)

Just two days before McCabe opened the May 2017 probe, the FBI, via Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, renewed contact with dossier author Christopher Steele despite having terminated him as a source back in November 2016. As RCI’s Paul Sperry has previously reported, this sudden outreach to Steele right before the opening of a new Trump-Russia conspiracy investigation indicated that the FBI was seeking to re-engage the Clinton-funded British operative to help it build a case against the president for espionage and obstruction of justice. At the time, the FBI was still relying on Steele’s fabrications for its surveillance warrants against Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page. The following month, the FBI filed the last of its four FISA court warrants based on Steele’s material. The Justice Department has since invalidated two of those warrants on the grounds that they were based on “material misstatements.”

The FBI re-enlisted Steele despite possessing information that thoroughly discredited him. Five months before it newly sought Steele’s help to investigate the sitting president, the FBI interviewed Igor Danchenko, whom Steele had used as his dossier’s key “sub-source.” In that January 2017 meeting, Danchenko told FBI agents that corroboration for the dossier’s claims was “zero”; that he had “no idea” where claims sourced to him came from; and that the Russia-Trump rumors he passed along to Steele came from alcohol-fueled “word of mouth and hearsay.” The FBI had also been unable to corroborate any of Steele’s incendiary claims.

A previously disclosed document also shows that former CIA Director John Brennan – who insistently advanced the Trump/Russia conspiracy theory – informed then-president Barack Obama in July 2016 that the Clinton campaign was planning to tie Trump to Russia in order to distract attention from the controversy over Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state. By that point, the Clinton campaign was already paying for the fabricated reports produced by Steele, who made contact with the FBI as early as July 5.

Although the newly declassified document attempts to suggest that the FBI had actionable intelligence to suspect Trump of being a Russian agent, McCabe’s subsequent comments indicate that there was no such evidence on offer. Instead, McCabe has said his counterintelligence probe of Trump was primarily motivated by the president’s firing of Comey. In a February 2019 interview with CBS News, McCabe explained his thinking as follows: “[T]he idea is, if the president committed obstruction of justice, fired the director of the of the FBI to negatively impact or to shut down our investigation of Russia’s malign activity and possibly in support of his campaign, as a counter intelligence investigator you have to ask yourself, ‘Why would a president of the United States do that?’ So all those same sorts of facts cause us to wonder is there an inappropriate relationship, a connection between this president and our most fearsome enemy, the government of Russia.”

McCabe therefore had no evidence that Trump had a “connection” to Russia, and in fact could only “wonder” if there was one. Yet because Trump had fired Comey, whose FBI was already investigating Trump’s campaign for Russia ties and relying on the Clinton-funded Steele dossier in the process, McCabe decided that he had grounds to order an espionage investigation of the commander in chief. With the official predicate for that May 2017 investigation still redacted by the FBI, McCabe’s public statements offer the only insider window into why it was opened. In all of the investigations related to alleged Russian interference to date, the Justice Department has pointedly avoided the question.

Despite inheriting McCabe’s probe – and debunking claims of a Trump-Russia conspiracy related to the 2016 election – Special Counsel Mueller made no mention of the Trump as Russian agent theory in his final report of March 2019. Without informing the public, the FBI closed down the Trump counterintelligence investigation the following month. The case’s closing Electronic Communication, which has previously been declassified in redacted form, states that the McCabe probe “was transferred to FBI personnel assisting” the Mueller team, and entailed the use of “a variety of investigative techniques.” An inquiry led by Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz of the FBI’s conduct during Crossfire Hurricane also ignored McCabe’s decision to investigate Trump as an agent of Russia.

And in a footnote in his final report of May 2023, John Durham – the Special Counsel appointed to launch a sweeping review of the Russia investigation – claimed that McCabe’s May 2017 probe was outside of his purview. By contrast, when it comes to Crossfire Hurricane, Durham’s report concluded that the FBI did not have a legitimate basis to launch that investigation, repeatedly ignored exculpatory evidence, and buried warnings that Clinton’s campaign was trying to frame Trump as a Russian conspirator. While the original Trump-Russia investigation has been discredited, the public remains in the dark about why the FBI launched a follow-up counterintelligence probe that targeted Trump while he was newly in the White House – and what ends it took to pursue it.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Panama
https://twitter.com/i/status/1876988453205746021

 

 

Stay at home dog
https://twitter.com/i/status/1876904648981831764

 

 

Eagle

 

 

Parrots

 

 

Street art

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 122024
 


Alfred Sisley A Village Street in Winter 1893

 

Trump Wants ‘Day One’ Changes To US Policy (RT)
Trump Told Zelensky He Wants ‘Immediate Ceasefire’ – Reuters (RT)
Trump Likely To Leave Ukraine With Financial Black Hole – NYT (RT)
FBI Director Chris Wray Resigns (ZH)
Sheriff’s Assn. Embraces Kash Patel As FBI director: ‘He’s A Butt Kicker’ (JTN)
RFK Jr. Wants To Prove CIA Killed His Uncle – Axios (RT)
Trump Mocks ‘Bidenomics’ (RT)
Tulsi Gabbard Goes On Offense With Trump’s Support As Assad Falls (JTN)
Democrats Ignore Tulsi Gabbard’s Request To Meet (RCW)
Giuliani Says Blanket Pardons From Biden Could End Up At Supreme Court (JTN)
Russia Tells Citizens To Avoid Visiting US (RT)
Euroclear Warns Of Risks If Russian Assets Seized (RT)
US Loan To Ukraine ‘Theft’ Of Russian Money – Deputy FM (RT)
Nothing Will Be Left Of Frozen Russian Funds – EU’s Kallas (RT)
US Media ‘Can’t Calm Down’ Over Loss Of Influence – RT editor-in-chief (RT)
Judge Rejects the Onion’s Purchase of Infowars in Bankruptcy Sale (ET)
Liberal World Order Is Over – Orban (RT)
Syria’s post-mortem: Terror, Occupation, and Palestine (Pepe Escobar)

 

 

 

 

NOTE: I noticed there are lots of RT articles today – again. I even looked for other pieces on the same topics. But I will leave in what RT covers better. It’s not propaganda, it’s a good news service, and Margarita Simonyan is an excellent Editor-in-Chief.

 

 

Kash
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866870168674062465

Waltz
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866650880868851891

Alina
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866592202211619003
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866559337172258879

Dershowitz

Stossel

 

 

 

 

“..plans to issue more than 25 executive orders on his first day in office..”

Trump Wants ‘Day One’ Changes To US Policy (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump plans to issue more than 25 executive orders on his first day in office, “dramatically” reshaping a number of government policies, Reuters has said. Executive orders are presidential directives instructing the US government what to do and how, within the boundaries of the constitution. Outgoing President Joe Biden began his term in 2021 by signing 17 such documents, mainly revoking policies Trump enacted during his first mandate. “The American people can bank on President Trump using his executive power on day one to deliver on the promises he made to them on the campaign trail,” Trump spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told Reuters on Wednesday.

Trump has told his aides he wants to make a “big splash” and act with greater scale and speed than in the first term, two anonymous sources told the agency, revealing the number of anticipated presidential actions. More orders will be issued in the following days and weeks, the sources said. According to Reuters, some of the first executive orders will focus on immigration enforcement, including resuming the construction of the wall on the border with Mexico. While this could face some pushback from states governed by Democrats, under the Biden administration it was established in court that immigration was entirely within the purview of the federal government. One planned executive order would end birthright citizenship, which the US has been granting to anyone born in the country based on a particular interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Trump aides told Reuters that the incoming administration will be ready to defend this in court.

Other rumored executive orders would deal with reversing the Biden administration’s promotion of “equity,” including transgender rules and racial preferences, as well as mandatory “diversity training” for federal contractors. One source from the State Department transition team described an executive order that would review hiring decisions based on identity rather than merit. Stephen Miller, recently announced as Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy, is reportedly coordinating the executive order effort. The measures are said to be based on drafts provided by think tanks such as the America First Policy Institute, the Conservative Partnership Institute and the Heritage Foundation. Many of Trump’s executive orders from the first term were challenged by Democrats in court. Even though most were eventually upheld, the delay meant they did not end up being implemented before Biden took over.

Read more …

“Trump “behaved in a friendly, respectful and open manner and appeared to be in listening mode.”

Trump Told Zelensky He Wants ‘Immediate Ceasefire’ – Reuters (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump has told Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and French President Emmanuel Macron that he wants an end to hostilities between Moscow and Kiev as soon as possible, Reuters reported on Wednesday, citing sources. The three met last week in Paris, where they held talks on the Ukraine crisis, despite Trump’s reported reluctance to attend the sit-down. Following the meeting, Trump claimed that Ukraine “would like to make a deal” to end the conflict with Russia. Zelensky, however, insisted that Kiev must first receive ironclad security guarantees while ruling out any territorial concessions. A Reuters source familiar with the matter said that during a 35-minute discussion that took place without advisers, Trump “behaved in a friendly, respectful and open manner and appeared to be in listening mode.”

Several sources also suggested that the president-elect appeared to be trying to build a personal rapport with his counterparts. According to four sources, the three leaders “did not discuss specific details of any vision for peace,” but Trump insisted that he “wanted an immediate ceasefire and negotiations to end the war quickly.” Neither the president-elect nor his team “have been forthcoming on how exactly they envisage a solution” to the conflict, the article added. However, a Ukrainian source told the agency that the issue of security guarantees to prevent a resumption of hostilities was raised during the meeting. Asked about Trump’s reaction, the source noted that “he’s thinking about all the details.” Trump vowed on the campaign trail that he would bring the Ukraine conflict to a swift end if reelected, even before he is sworn into office in January.

Last month, he announced that he would appoint retired Army General Keith Kellogg as a special envoy for Ukraine and Russia. Kellogg was reportedly one of the authors of a peace plan that would freeze the conflict along the current front line without recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over territories claimed by Ukraine while suspending Kiev’s NATO membership ambitions. Moscow has repeatedly ruled out freezing the conflict, stressing that all the goals of its military operation, including Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization and denazification, must be met. Russian President Vladimir Putin said this summer that Moscow would immediately declare a ceasefire and start peace talks once Kiev withdraws troops from all Russian territories, including the Donetsk and Lugansk republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye regions.

Read more …

Ukraine IS the black hole.

Trump Likely To Leave Ukraine With Financial Black Hole – NYT (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican Party are unlikely to provide Ukraine with the same level of financial support as the outgoing administration of President Joe Biden, the New York Times reported on Tuesday. Kiev has been heavily reliant on foreign aid throughout the conflict to keep its economy afloat. However, this support could be significantly reduced once Trump takes office in January, according to the outlet. The Republican has repeatedly signaled that he would “probably” reduce American spending on Ukraine and has instead been calling for an “immediate ceasefire” between Moscow and Kiev. Trump has also suggested that he would be able to resolve the conflict within 24 hours of taking office, although he has not provided concrete details about how he would achieve this.

Some believe he could use the threat of reduced US aid to force the Ukrainian leadership to begin negotiations with Moscow while simultaneously threatening to increase aid to pressure Russian President Vladimir Putin into talks. The New York Times prediction comes after the Biden administration has been spending its last weeks seemingly trying to leave Kiev with something for when Trump takes over. On Tuesday, the White House approved the transfer of some $20 billion to Ukraine in the form of a loan to be repaid using the interest generated by Russia’s frozen central bank assets. The loan is part of a broader $50 billion deal devised earlier by the G7 countries, which also includes a $20 billion EU commitment and another $10 billion to be split by the UK, Japan, and Canada.

Last month, Biden also wrote off about $4.7 billion in taxpayer-funded loans to Kiev. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said that the move is in the “national interest of the US and its EU, G7+ and NATO partners.” Trump, meanwhile, has insisted that any future aid to Kiev must be granted in the form of loans instead of taxpayer-funded gifts. The Ukrainian government is almost entirely reliant on Western aid to support its economy. As of October, Kiev’s public debt had exceeded $155 billion, according to the Ukrainian Finance Ministry, with over $111 billion represented by foreign liabilities. In September, Ukrainian MP Irina Gerashchenko reported that Kiev’s 2025 budget deficit is estimated to amount to some $37.6 billion, or nearly 20% of GDP. She stated that Ukraine expects to raise only $944 million from partners next year and stressed that without donor support the Ukrainian economy “will not survive.”

Read more …

Trump appointed Wray, who then directed the raid on Mar-a-Lago.

FBI Director Chris Wray Resigns (ZH)

Before President-elect Donald Trump could say “You’re Fired!” – FBI Director Christopher Wray has resigned, and will leave his post at the end of President Joe Biden’s term. Wray’s decision comes weeks after Trump nominated Kash Patel as his replacement. Patel, a fierce critic of the FBI, has said he would seek to shrink the agency’s power, close its Washington headquarters, fire its top ranks, and prosecute corrupt agents. While Wray’s departure was always in the cards, the move comes two days after Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) wrote an 11-page letter to Wray asking him to step down, accusing him of mismanagement and “failure to take control of the FBI.” “These failures are serious enough and their pattern widespread enough to have shattered my confidence in your leadership and the confidence and hope many others in Congress placed in you,” wrote Grassley.

As the Epoch Times notes further, in November 2022, Grassley published FBI documents showing that higher-ranking officials were sometimes penalized less severely than subordinates. Wray had addressed this disparity, saying in a Bureau-wide email on Dec. 11, 2020, that the agency “has zero tolerance for any form of sexual harassment or sexual misconduct.” On March 4, 2022, FBI Deputy Director Abbate warned all FBI employees: “Regardless of your rank and title, every one of us has the responsibility to treat everyone with dignity, respect, and professionalism. … Harassment of any kind will not be tolerated.” Grassley also mentioned in his letter his inquiry about the vetting of refugees from Afghanistan through the Operation Allies Welcome program.

In February 2022, the Department of Justice (DOJ) reported that the Department of Homeland Security had not cross-checked these evacuees against data from the Department of Defense. As a result, 50 individuals who had been flagged as “potentially significant security concerns” by the National Ground Intelligence Center were allowed into the United States. Requests to the FBI for further information were ignored, Grassley said. Wray said “in a classified multi-agency briefing to congressional staff” that he was unsure of the location of other refugees who might pose a threat, Grassley wrote. “I can’t sit here right now and tell you that we know where all are located at any given time,” Grassley quoted Wray as saying. He pointed out that one potential terror threat had been foiled when the FBI arrested Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi on Oct. 7 of this year. Tawhedi was allegedly planning a terror attack to disrupt the U.S. election on Nov. 5.

Grassley also accused Wray and the FBI of exercising a double standard by refusing to investigate President Joe Biden’s or former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information. President-elect Donald Trump appointed Wray in 2017 after firing the previous director, James Comey. In a recent interview with “Meet the Press,” Trump expressed displeasure over Wray’s performance. “He invaded my home,” Trump said, referring to the 2022 FBI raid on his Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago. Trump also cited Wray’s initial claim that his ear was struck by shrapnel instead of an assassin’s bullet, and waning public respect for the FBI as an institution. “I can’t say I’m thrilled,” he said.

The president-elect has already named Kash Patel the new FBI director, indicating that Wray’s time at the post is nearly over. However, Grassley wants Wray and Abbate to step down sooner. “For the good of the country, it’s time for you and your deputy to move on to the next chapter in your lives,” the letter says. The agency told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement: “The FBI has repeatedly demonstrated our commitment to responding to Congressional oversight and being transparent with the American people. “Director Wray and Deputy Director Abbate have taken strong actions toward achieving accountability in the areas mentioned in the letter and remain committed to sharing information about the continuously evolving threat environment facing our nation and the extraordinary work of the FBI.”

Read more …

“..the FBI is way too lawfare, way too weaponized and way too corrupt.”

Sheriff’s Assn. Embraces Kash Patel As FBI director: ‘He’s A Butt Kicker’ (JTN)

A prominent leader of an influential sheriff association on Tuesday publicly embraced President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for FBI Director, Kash Patel, claiming he was a “butt kicker.” Trump nominated Patel to replace current FBI Director Christopher Wray last month. But Wray, who was selected by Trump in 2017, can legally remain in his position until 2027. Former Arizona sheriff Richard Mack, who founded and leads the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, said his group has already endorsed Patel and encouraged the nominee to pick a sheriff as his deputy director. “We already endorsed him publicly, and we love that he’s there. He’s a butt kicker. That’s exactly what we need,” Mack said on the “Just The News, No Noise” TV show.

“There’s a lot of good sheriffs that really could help him clean Washington, D.C., up, but the FBI is way too lawfare, way too weaponized and way too corrupt.” Mack said he has connections to the FBI through his father, who retired from the bureau, and a cousin who was deputy director, and still believes the bureau needs some “revamping.” “I’d like to see [Patel] completely redo the FBI, abolish it and then bring back a few to keep it going where they’re really needed,” the former law enforcement officer said. “But the sheriffs and local officials and state officials can do a lot of what they’ve been doing, and there’s duplicity all over the place … We really have too many bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., and this bureaucratic nightmare needs to end.”

Read more …

“Shortly after RFK Jr. endorsed him in August, Trump promised to declassify the last of the documents pertaining to the JFK assassination through a new presidential commission.”

RFK Jr. Wants To Prove CIA Killed His Uncle – Axios (RT)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is lobbying for his daughter-in law to become deputy CIA director so she can get to the bottom of the assassination of his uncle, John F. Kennedy, the Washington outlet Axios has claimed. President Kennedy was fatally shot in Dallas, Texas in November 1963. The official investigation identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the sole suspect. Oswald himself was killed soon afterward by local resident Jack Ruby. RFK Jr. has long suspected the CIA of being behind the hit, however. “RFK believes that and wants to get to the bottom of it,” an anonymous Republican source told Axios on Wednesday, suggesting this rationale might be behind the proposal to nominate Amaryllis Fox Kennedy as deputy director of the CIA.

Fox Kennedy ran her father-in-law’s independent presidential campaign after the Democrats closed off their primaries. RFK Jr. ended up endorsing Republican Donald Trump, who won in November. The former Democrat has been nominated to head the Department of Health and Human Services in the next administration, while former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe has been tapped to head the CIA. According to Axios, RFK Jr. has been telling people that Fox Kennedy would help get to the truth about JFK. She has previous experience at the CIA, having been an undercover agent for almost a decade. Shortly after RFK Jr. endorsed him in August, Trump promised to declassify the last of the documents pertaining to the JFK assassination through a new presidential commission.

In an interview with Tucker Carlson in August 2023, RFK Jr. claimed that the CIA had the means, motive, and opportunity to murder his uncle and suggested the agency may have been behind the 1968 assassination of his father as well. According to RFK Jr., the commission that investigated the Dallas assassination and pinned it on Oswald was not really run by Justice Earl Warren but by Allen Dulles, the long-running CIA chief that JFK had sacked in November 1961. The CIA and Dulles had a personal vendetta against JFK because he had cracked down on their operations against Cuba after the 1962 missile crisis with the Soviet Union and threatened to purge the agency’s planning division, RFK Jr. has argued.

Read more …

“You pay taxes, I send it to Ukraine. They send it back to Hunter. Hunter gives it to me. Pardon Hunter.”

Trump Mocks ‘Bidenomics’ (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump has mocked his predecessor’s economic agenda, using a meme involving funding for Ukraine and the recently pardoned Hunter Biden. Earlier this month, President Joe Biden gave his son Hunter, a convicted felon who lied about his addiction to crack cocaine while applying for a gun license, a blanket pardon for anything he may have done between January 2014 and December 2024. Before pulling out of the US presidential race, Biden had insisted on multiple occasions that he would not pardon his son. Trump’s campaign slammed the decision as an example of how the current government has weaponized the justice system. On Tuesday evening, Trump shared a meme on his Truth Social platform, describing how ‘Bidenomics’ works in practice. It showed Biden standing beside a whiteboard with a list of items. “You pay taxes,” the list begins. “I send it to Ukraine. They send it back to Hunter. Hunter gives it to me. Pardon Hunter.”

Hunter Biden was paid millions of dollars to sit on the board of a Ukrainian gas company while his father was vice president of the US and lead on Washington’s relations with Kiev. According to the contents of a laptop the younger Biden forgot at a Delaware repair shop, 10% of all international contracts went to “the Big Guy,” widely assumed to be a reference to his father. Biden officially defeated Trump in 2020 and embarked on an ambitious plan to reinvent the US economy after the Covid-19 pandemic that his advisers dubbed ‘Bidenomics’. Vice President Kamala Harris, whom the Democrats put forth as their candidate this year, spent the campaign insisting that the economy was in great shape and that ‘Bidenomics’ was working. American voters apparently disagreed, handing Trump victories in the electoral college, popular vote, and all seven swing states.

Read more …

“The notion that we must just blindly accept and follow as truth, that which the government or those in power tells us is true goes against the very essence of our Constitution and Bill of Rights..”

Tulsi Gabbard Goes On Offense With Trump’s Support As Assad Falls (JTN)

With the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, Director of National Intelligence-designate Tulsi Gabbard is doubling down on her anti-intervention stance with backing from President-elect Donald Trump as she faces a contentious confirmation battle. Gabbard, a former Hawaii representative and veteran who served in the Middle East, left the Democratic Party after unsuccessfully seeking the party nomination for president in 2020. She joined the GOP ahead of the 2024 election and has become something of a Republican fan favorite among those opposed to foreign interventions. Her positions have roiled Democrats and establishment Republicans alike, with some going as far as to baselessly smear her as a “Russian asset.” She had previously attracted ire over her opposition to intervention in Syria, even should that leave the Assad regime in power.

After her nomination, Tulsi was expected to be on defense over Assad, but the stunning collapse of his government over the course of mere days and the complete evaporation of the Syrian Arab Army in the face of a renewed offensive from rebel groups based in the country’s northwest has changed the script entirely. While President Joe Biden has supported U.S. involvement in the Syrian transition process, Trump has called for keeping the U.S. out of the conflict entirely and signaled that the Assad regime’s collapse should bring Russian President Vladimir Putin to the table to end the war in Ukraine as well. “There was never much of a benefit in Syria for Russia, other than to make Obama look really stupid. In any event, Syria is a mess, but is not our friend, & THE UNITED STATES SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT. LET IT PLAY OUT. DO NOT GET INVOLVED!” Trump posted.

After Assad left Damascus, Trump opined that Russia had lost interest in protecting him due to Moscow’s focus on Ukraine and highlighted the estimated death tolls. “There should be an immediate ceasefire and negotiations should begin. Too many lives are being so needlessly wasted, too many families destroyed, and if it keeps going, it can turn into something much bigger, and far worse,” Trump then posted. “I know Vladimir well. This is his time to act. China can help. The World is waiting!” Trump’s calls for non-involvement and de-escalation of global conflicts seem to have given Gabbard the ammunition she needed to fight back against perceptions of herself as a foreign policy radical and portray her stances as in line with the White House’s main stream. “I stand in full support and wholeheartedly agree with the statements that President Trump has made over these last few days with regards to the developments in Syria,” Gabbard said.

A stalwart champion of the First Amendment, Gabbard’s nomination has some conservative Republicans jubilant, despite her prior time as a member of the opposing party. In 2022, Gabbard ruffled feathers with her appearance at the Reagan Dinner, hosted by the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). In that event, Gabbard highlighted the importance of free speech and excoriated efforts to crack down on “misinformation”, saying “the latest strategy and tactic that they’re using is to try to undermine our free speech by taking it upon themselves to say they’ve got the responsibility to protect us from so called misinformation.” “The notion that we must just blindly accept and follow as truth, that which the government or those in power tells us is true goes against the very essence of our Constitution and Bill of Rights,” she added.

Several GOP heavyweights, particularly in the lower chamber, have expressed hope for reform on federal censorship and surveillance efforts with her in charge of the nation’s intelligence. Freedom Caucus lawmakers Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., for instance, have opined that her position in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence could pave the way for significant reform to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act’s (FISA) Section 702, which allows for warrantless surveillance in limited cases. The provision has attracted scrutiny from conservative hardliners over the prospect that such surveillance may acquire information on American citizens. “Yeah, I think this is one where we can, we can actually have a chance to get it through,” Biggs said of FISA reform in light of Gabbard’s nomination. He made the remarks in November on the “Just the News, No Noise” television show.

“So again, having Tulsi at ODNI. I mean, she’s a champion of the First Amendment,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on the same program. “I mean having, this is what I love so much about President Trump’s elections, is he is putting people in these cabinet agencies, nominating people who have the attitude the American people elected, that American people voted for, which is we’re going to go serve the people, protect their liberties, make government actually more efficient smaller, working for the country and protecting their rights.”

“That, I think is great, and Tulsi believes in the First Amendment, free speech and freedom,” he added. “That’s why I’m hopeful. She’s going to be confirmed and be our next ODNI director.” Gabbard herself was placed on the Biden/Harris administration’s TSA’s terrorism watchlist, the “Quiet Skies” program, which monitors “elevated risks to aviation security.” Hawaii News Now reported that at least five agents and two explosive detection canine teams were following Gabbard and her husband in July.

Rand Paul
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866607629252112473

Read more …

“Trump remains unbothered by the meeting with Assad. Asked by NBC News if the meeting “compromises her,” the president-elect all but rolled his eyes.”

Individuals may sympathize with her, but the party as a whole -which she turned her back on- can not.

Democrats Ignore Tulsi Gabbard’s Request To Meet (RCW)

The return of Tulsi Gabbard to Capitol Hill began with breakfast in the Senate dining room courtesy of Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst, followed by back-to-back meetings with other Republicans, all of whom were happy to welcome the former Hawaii Democrat and discuss her nomination to lead the U.S. intelligence community. But members of her old political party, including one-time House colleagues, largely ignored her. It’s still early in the process, but Gabbard has been unable to schedule a single meeting with Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, outgoing chairman of the committee, has not responded to her requests for a meeting, according to a source directly familiar with Gabbard’s efforts. Others have replied to her outreach but remain hesitant about putting anything on the books. At least one Democrat scheduled a sit-down this week only to abruptly cancel.

The cold shoulder comes nearly a month after President-elect Donald Trump picked Gabbard to be his director of national intelligence, two years after she quit a Democratic Party that she called “an elitist cabal of warmongers,” and immediately after the fall of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. Gabbard met with the now-deposed dictator twice in 2017 while on a “fact-finding mission” to the war-torn country. These meetings proved to be an impediment when she ran for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 2020. “What do you say to Democratic voters who watched you go over there, and what do you say to military members who have been deployed repeatedly in Syria, pushing back against Assad?” Kasie Hunt asked two years later during an MSNBC interview. Gabbard replied that U.S. troops deployed there “without understanding what the clear mission or objective is.”

Gabbard added that Assad was “not the enemy of the United States because Syria does not pose a direct threat to the United States.” Hillary Clinton promptly accused Gabbard, then a major in the Hawaii National Guard, of being a “Russian asset.” The Republicans who will control the Senate next year do not see the meeting with Assad eight years ago as disqualifying or insurmountable. Despite the suggestion of Democrats such as Sen. Tammy Duckworth, who recently worried that Gabbard “couldn’t pass a background check,” Republicans point out that as a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserves, Gabbard already has a top-secret security clearance. More than 250 military veterans co-signed a letter published Monday endorsing her as “a warrior whose vote cannot be bought.” Trump remains unbothered by the meeting with Assad. Asked by NBC News if the meeting “compromises her,” the president-elect all but rolled his eyes.

“I met with Putin,” he said of the Russian president now sheltering the Syrian dictator. “I met with President Xi of China. I met with Kim Jong-un twice. Does that mean that I can’t be president?” Nonetheless, Gabbard will be grilled about her Syria meeting. Defense hawks, Republicans and Democrats alike, are expected to press her for details in committee and challenge her foreign policy views that some have described as “isolationist.” Allies of the president-elect prefer the term “America First.” And it is increasingly the new orthodoxy among a GOP base wary and weary of overseas entanglements. There is some evidence that skepticism of a muscular foreign policy has gained traction among younger Democrats and independents in the last four or five years. When Hillary Clinton questioned Gabbard’s logic and loyalty, Gabbard punched back.

In a series of tweets, she called the former secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee “the queen of warmongers” and “personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party.” Upstart presidential candidate Andrew Yang took Gabbard’s side. “Tulsi Gabbard deserves much more respect and thanks than this,” Yang tweeted. “She literally just got back from serving our country abroad.” As Gabbard made the rounds Monday, the nominee mostly ignored shouted questions from reporters. The only public statement Gabbard made was a reiteration of the Trump policy announced over the weekend that the U.S. would stay out of Syria.

“My own views and experiences have been shaped by my multiple deployments and seeing firsthand the cost of war and the threat of Islamist terrorism,” Gabbard said. “It’s one of the many reasons why I appreciate President Trump’s leadership and his election where he is fully committed, as he has said over and over, to bringing about an end to wars, demonstrating peace through strength and putting the national security interests and the safety, security and freedom of the American people, first and foremost.”

Read more …

Blanket pardon? “The King of England could only pardon what he knew about.”

Giuliani Says Blanket Pardons From Biden Could End Up At Supreme Court (JTN)

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said that if President Joe Biden issues blanket pardons, they could end up being challenged in the Supreme Court. “I think if he does it across the board….these blanket pardons of maybe eight to 10 people, then we’ll have a real Supreme Court test of whether the blanket pardon is unconstitutional,” Giuliani said on the “Just the News, No Noise” TV show. Biden earlier this month pardoned his son on gun and tax charges, as well as any other crimes committed in the last ten years, despite promising not to make such a move.

Congressman Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., predicted that Biden would pardon his brother James. Giuliani said that many law professors wrote against President Gerald Ford pardoning President Richard Nixon, arguing it wasn’t constitutional. “You cannot give a pardon for a crime that may be committed because the pardon power derives from the power of the King of England,” he said. “The King of England could only pardon what he knew about.”

Read more …

“..weaponizing its justice system to detain and imprison Russians on trumped up and politically motivated charges.”

Russia Tells Citizens To Avoid Visiting US (RT)

Russian nationals should avoid making non-essential trips to the US and allied countries, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said, warning that they could be “hunted down” by the American authorities for political reasons. Travelling to the US poses “serious risks” due to “the increasing confrontation in the Russian-American relations,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said during a regular press briefing on Wednesday. She stated that more Russian nationals were being “hunted down by American authorities, especially by secret services,” with Washington utilizing “fraudulent schemes” to lure Russians abroad in order to prosecute them for “political reasons.” “For the upcoming holidays and beyond, we strongly advise to avoid non-emergency visits to the US and allied countries, especially Canada and, with rare exception, the countries of the European Union,” Zakharova said.

“When staying abroad, you should avoid situations, in which you can become a victim of provocations and be detained under the pretense of supposedly violating local laws,” the spokeswoman added. Zakharova urged Russian citizens to consider potential “tragic incidents” on foreign soil when planning trips abroad, claiming that the US justice system “leaves no room for a fair trial.” The US has blacklisted multiple Russian nationals over the conflict in Ukraine, which led to the unprecedented level of tensions between the two countries. Even before the conflict broke out in February 2022, Moscow has frequently accused Washington of weaponizing its justice system to detain and imprison Russians on trumped up and politically motivated charges.

Famous cases include the prosecution of businessman Viktor Bout and pilot Konstantin Yaroshenko, who were released during prisoner swaps in 2022. Another high-profile incident involved activist and journalist Maria Butina, who was convicted of failing to register as a foreign agent in the US and was deported to Russia in 2019, after spending nearly 120 days behind bars. Several Russian citizens who were part of the last major prisoner swap in August were originally extradited to the US from European countries. Vadim Konoshchenok was arrested in Estonia on a US warrant, while Vladislav Klyushin was extradited from Switzerland in 2021. The August exchange also included Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and former US Marine Paul Whelan, both of whom were convicted of espionage in Russia.

Read more …

This will go awfully wrong.

Euroclear Warns Of Risks If Russian Assets Seized (RT)

Belgian-based clearinghouse Euroclear, which holds the bulk of Russia’s frozen assets, has said it does not want to be held liable if the EU confiscates the funds and hands them over to Ukraine. Euroclear immobilized an estimated €197 billion ($213 billion) in assets belonging to the Russian central bank as part of Ukraine-related sanctions. The frozen assets generated €5.15 billion in interest in the first three quarters of this fiscal year. Earlier this year, the EU decided to give Ukraine a chunk of that interest but stopped short of tapping the assets themselves. The move prompted renewed accusations of theft from Russia. Euroclear CEO Valerie Urbain told Bloomberg on Tuesday that any plan to seize the assets should also transfer all of the liabilities.

“We cannot be in the situation whereby the assets have been seized, but, in a couple of years, Russia comes and knocks at the door and says, ‘I want to recoup my securities,’ while the securities assets would have been gone,” she said. “If there is a confiscation of assets, everything should move, liabilities included.” Euroclear recently revealed having made a first payment of about €1.55 billion ($1.63 billion) to the European Fund for Ukraine in July from the interest generated by the Russian assets. That month, the European Commission announced an allocation of €1.5 billion to Kiev as a first tranche of aid. In October, the European Parliament approved a loan of up to €35 billion to Ukraine to be repaid with future revenues generated by the Russian funds. The loan is the EU’s part of a package the G7 agreed in June to provide Kiev with up to $50 billion in financial support.

The government of outgoing US President Joe Biden on Tuesday announced a transfer of Washington’s portion of the loan, totaling $20 billion, to Kiev. The funds are “paid for by the windfall proceeds earned from Russia’s own immobilized assets,” the Treasury Department said in a statement. Because US President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to cut aid to Kiev, the idea of using the assets themselves is likely to resurface, noted Bloomberg. According to Urbain, however, taking this step would threaten the euro’s role as a reserve currency and pose risks to the broader stability of the bloc’s finances. A similar warning was issued earlier by the president of the European Central Bank, Christine Lagarde.

On Tuesday, a delegation from the European Parliament arrived in Kiev to discuss the bloc’s financial aid to Ukraine.The head of the delegation, Iratxe Garcia, said that he had asked High Representative Kaja Kallas to “put forward a legal proposal to use the €200 billion of frozen Russian state assets in order to arm and reconstruct Ukraine.” During the meeting, Zelensky reiterated Kiev’s call to use the immobilized Russian funds to cover the cost of weapons for Ukraine, stating that $30 billion would be enough to “fully cover our skies.”

Read more …

“..this act falls under the classification of robbery [on the part] of an organized group..”

US Loan To Ukraine ‘Theft’ Of Russian Money – Deputy FM (RT)

The disbursement by the US of a $20 billion loan to Ukraine funded by Russia’s frozen central bank assets could be classified as theft, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has said. The US loan is part of a broader $50 billion G7 loan deal, which includes a separate $20 billion commitment by the EU and $10 billion to be split by G7 members Great Britain, Japan, and Canada. On Tuesday, the US Treasury Department announced the money had been transferred to a World Bank fund that will send it on to Kiev. “I can say that this act falls under the classification of robbery [on the part] of an organized group, I mean [on the part] of the Group of Seven,” Ryabkov told journalists on Wednesday. The US and its allies froze an estimated $300 billion in assets belonging to the Russian central bank following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022.

In June, the G7 members pledged a $50 billion loan for Kiev, with the frozen Russian assets to be used as collateral, to help Kiev buy weapons and rebuild its infrastructure. The agreement was finalized in October. Ukraine theoretically is expected to repay the multibillion-dollar G7 loan over 40 years. According to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, the loan transfer will provide Ukraine a “critical infusion of support.” The money covers around half of Kiev’s current deficit. The country’s state budget for next year, signed by Vladimir Zelensky into law last month, anticipates revenues of $49 billion and expenditures of $87 billion, putting the overall deficit at $38 billion. Zelensky said on Tuesday he was “deeply grateful” to Biden, Yellen, and lawmakers who supported using seized Russian assets to bolster Ukraine’s defense, describing their decision as a “powerful act of justice.”

A week earlier, the outgoing US president authorized a new $725 million military aid package for Ukraine and imposed additional economic sanctions on Russia. Moscow has repeatedly accused the West of “stealing” its money and warned that tapping these funds would be illegal and set a dangerous precedent. Finance Minister Anton Siluanov warned in October that Moscow would respond in kind to the West’s use of the income generated by its frozen central bank reserves. Last month, he said Russia would respond by using the income from the frozen assets of Western investors. The International Monetary Fund has also warned that any decisions regarding the seizure of frozen Russian assets should be backed with “sufficient legal support,” noting that without this, the move could undermine trust in the Western financial system.

Read more …

The EU needs diplomats, not warmongers.

Nothing Will Be Left Of Frozen Russian Funds – EU’s Kallas (RT)

The European Union’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, has expressed doubt that Russia will ever see its sovereign assets frozen by the bloc as part of Ukraine-related sanctions. In an interview with Politico on Tuesday, the EU’s new foreign policy chief admitted that Russia legally had a “legitimate claim” to the assets immobilized by the West since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. She added, however, that the bloc should use the cash to reconstruct Ukraine before handing back whatever remains. “But I doubt there is anything left over,” the former Estonian prime minister said. Kallas did not specify whether she was referring to the interest generated by Russian assets or to the assets themselves. Kallas took over the EU’s top diplomatic post from Josep Borrell on December 1. She has advocated for tougher sanctions on Russia and is known for her strident stance against Moscow.

The US and its allies have immobilized around $300 billion of assets belonging to the Russian central bank since 2022. The bulk of the funds, around €197 billion ($213 billion), is being held at the Brussels-based clearinghouse Euroclear, where they generated €5.15 billion ($5.55 billion) in interest in the first three-quarters of this fiscal year. Earlier this year, Brussels decided to give Ukraine a chunk of the interest. In July, the European Commission announced it would allocate €1.5 billion to Kiev, mainly for weapons, as the first tranche of aid. In a press release in October, Euroclear stated that it had made a first payment of about €1.55 billion ($1.63 billion) to the European Fund for Ukraine in July. The second tranche, expected to amount to €1.9 billion, could reportedly be disbursed next spring.

The G7 countries also agreed in June to give Kiev a $50 billion aid package financed by revenues from frozen Russian central bank assets. The EU and US both recently approved respective contributions of $35 billion and $20 billion to the package. Russia has repeatedly accused the West of “stealing” its money. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov on Tuesday described as “a robbery organized by the G7” the transfer of $20 billion to Kiev that was announced by the US Treasury the day before. Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said last month that Russia would use income from the frozen assets of Western investors in response to the moves by the US and EU.

Read more …

“..the states that sanction Russian news outlets are violating their own principles of freedom of speech and freedom of the press..”

US Media ‘Can’t Calm Down’ Over Loss Of Influence – RT editor-in-chief (RT)

The US media continues to be unsettled by a journalism course organized by the RT Academy in Africa, one month after its completion, RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan posted on Telegram on Wednesday. Her remarks came in response to a feature in the National Interest, a US-based bimonthly, titled ‘Combating Russia’s Global Disinformation Campaign’. The lengthy article, published earlier this week, warns Western media of the presumed dangers posed by Russian journalism, which is rapidly evolving and becoming influential in the countries of the Global South. According to the article, while Russia’s main tactic to compete with Western news media was previously to create alternative outlets such as RT and Sputnik, Moscow has recently changed course by introducing journalism training and fact-checking.

“Russia – with its eye particularly trained on the Global South – seems intent on advancing its own mirror image of Western journalism training, one in which Russian media practices are portrayed as the gold standard,” the article states. It names RT Academy, launched in February, as an example of such practices, recalling that it welcomed journalists from all over the world to train and had a course specifically for African participants in October. The article also claims Russia’s tactics “follow decades of effort by Moscow to ingratiate itself with journalists, especially in the Global South,” so as to challenge the Western narrative. The piece then offers Western news organizations advice on how to counter Russia’s growing influence, chiding them for overlooking the Global South and failing to provide enough of their own coverage there. Simonyan found the attention of Western press on RT Academy amusing.

“American media just can’t calm down. They are discussing our RT Academy course for journalists from Africa a month after its completion,” she stated in a Telegram post on Wednesday, adding a tongue-in-cheek: “You’re falling behind, comrades. We already have a course for journalists in Chinese in full swing.” Russian media, and RT in particular, has been repeatedly smeared and targeted in the West. MSNBC host Rachel Maddow last month claimed that US President-elect Donald Trump will try to turn the American media into an “American-accented version of RT,” suggesting that it would be the end of free press in the country.

BBC chief Tim Davie said in October that Russian media outlets were spreading “unchallenged propaganda” across the Global South. The US State Department has sanctioned a host of Russian news outlets over the past two years, including RT and its parent company, accusing the latter of acting as an extension of Russian intelligence. However, many experts, including some in the West, have criticized the incessant targeting of Russian media, noting that the states that sanction Russian news outlets are violating their own principles of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Read more …

“This should have been opened back up, and it should have been opened back up for everybody..”

Judge Rejects the Onion’s Purchase of Infowars in Bankruptcy Sale (ET)

A federal judge in Texas on Dec. 10 rejected the auction sale of Alex Jones’s Infowars website to satirical publication The Onion, ruling that the process did not result in the best possible bids and citing concerns about transparency in the auction. The Onion was named the winning bidder of Infowars’ assets during the Nov. 14 auction, part of a personal bankruptcy case Jones filed in late 2022 after he was ordered to pay nearly $1.5 billion in several defamation lawsuits. The lawsuits were filed against Jones in Connecticut and Texas by relatives of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, which Jones repeatedly claimed was staged as part of a government plot to increase gun control. A total of 20 children and six educators were killed in the shooting. Jones has since acknowledged that the shooting took place and was “100 percent real.”

He said that he attempted to correct the claims that he initially made, but that “[the media] won’t let me take it back.” Following a two-day hearing in Houston, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez said he would not approve the sale. He rejected claims by Jones that the bankruptcy auction was plagued with collusion and fraud but noted problems, not wrongdoing, with the auction process. The Onion’s bid of $1.75 million with additional incentives for Infowars’ assets was backed by the families of the massacre victims. The bid won despite a higher $3.5 million cash offer from First United American Companies, which runs a website in Jones’ name and sells nutritional supplements. The Connecticut-based Sandy Hook families, who are Jones’ largest creditors, augmented the Onion’s bid by agreeing to forgo $750,000 of the proceeds from the sale in favor of other creditors, providing the creditors with more money than First United’s higher cash offer.

That concession caused the bankruptcy trustee to value The Onion’s bid at $7 million overall. The judge said Christopher Murray, a court-appointed trustee who oversaw the auction made “a good-faith error” when he asked for final offers for Infowars instead of encouraging more back-and-forth bidding between The Onion and First United American Companies. “This should have been opened back up, and it should have been opened back up for everybody,” Lopez said. “It’s clear the trustee left the potential for a lot of money on the table.” Lopez also said the two offers for Infowars were just a fraction of the money that Jones has been ordered to pay in defamation lawsuits, and noted the extent of his debts. He left it up to the trustee to resolve the disputes between the creditors before making a new attempt to sell Infowars.

After winning the auction in November, The Onion said it planned to relaunch Infowars in January as a parody website alongside advertiser Everytown for Gun Safety, the largest gun violence prevention organization in the country. In a complaint filed in November, Jones urged the federal bankruptcy court in Texas to disqualify The Onion’s bid and instead recognize First United American Companies as the rightful winner of the auction. Lopez’s ruling puts The Onion’s plan to take possession of the Infowars website and its associated assets on hold. In a Dec. 11 social media statement, Ben Collins, CEO of The Onion’s parent company, Global Tetrahedron, said the publication is “deeply disappointed” but will “continue to seek a resolution that helps the Sandy Hook families receive a positive outcome for the horror they endured.”

Collins said the company will also continue to “seek a path” towards purchasing Infowars in the coming weeks. “It is part of our larger mission to make a better, funnier internet, regardless of the outcome of this case,” Collins said. Christopher Mattei, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families who sued Jones in Connecticut, also expressed disappointment over the judge’s ruling. “These families, who have already persevered through countless delays and roadblocks, remain resilient and determined as ever to hold Alex Jones and his corrupt businesses accountable for the harm he has caused,” Mattei said in a statement. “This decision doesn’t change the fact that, soon, Alex Jones will begin to pay his debt to these families and he will continue doing so for as long as it takes.”

Read more …

Hungary is “the westernmost Eastern and the easternmost Western nation..”

Liberal World Order Is Over – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has claimed that his country’s refusal to conform to liberal ideology will yield considerable benefits in the future. “The liberal world order is over,” he declared during a speech in Budapest on Tuesday. The conservative nationalist politician has been in power since 2010, winning successive elections on a platform of defying what he considers to be authoritarian rule by Brussels. EU leaders have accused Orban of undermining democracy in Hungary and harming the economic bloc’s solidarity on the Ukraine conflict. He has argued that Brussels’ policies have been disastrous for EU member states.

“As the changes come, only those nations can be winners that can bring the most out of themselves,” Orban told a gathering of university students, as quoted by his office. “Those who assimilate, fall into line, are unable to show their own values or discover the strength inherent in their national character will soon become irrelevant,” he added. Hungary is “the westernmost Eastern and the easternmost Western nation,” and it seeks to “connect to all the economic powerhouses of the world,” Orban said.

Budapest claims that the West’s response to the Ukraine conflict, including its attempts to punish Russia with economic sanctions, has caused a decline in living standards and other problems in Europe. Unlike other national leaders, who intend to support Kiev “for as long as it takes” to defeat Moscow, Orban has refused to send any military assistance and has attempted to mediate peace talks. Earlier this year, the prime minister made visits to Ukraine, Russia, China and the US during what he called a peace tour in a bid to facilitate negotiations. Orban expects US President-elect Donald Trump, whom he supports, to bring about radical changes on Ukraine after he is inaugurated in January.

Read more …

“After Aleppo fell, it became clear that Assad had no real intentions of staying in power, so we started to engage in diplomatic talks..”

Syria’s post-mortem: Terror, Occupation, and Palestine (Pepe Escobar)

The short headline defining the abrupt, swift end of Syria as we knew it would be: Eretz Israel meets new-Ottomanism. The subtitle? A win-win for the west, and a lethal blow against the Axis of Resistance. But to quote still-pervasive American pop culture, perhaps the owls are not what they seem. Let’s start with former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s surrender. Qatari diplomats, off the record, maintain that Assad tried to negotiate a transfer of power with the armed opposition that had launched a major military offensive in the days prior, starting with Aleppo, then swiftly headed southward toward Hama, Homs, aiming for Damascus. That’s what was discussed in detail between Russia, Iran, and Turkiye behind closed doors in Doha this past weekend, during the last sigh of the moribund “Astana process” to demilitarize Syria.

The transfer of power negotiation failed. Hence, Assad was offered asylum by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. That explains why both Iran and Russia instantly changed the terminology while still in Doha, and began to refer to the “legitimate opposition” in a bid to distinguish non-militant reformists from the armed extremists cutting a swathe across the state. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov – his body language telling everything about his anger – literally said, “Assad must negotiate with the legitimate opposition, which is on the UN list.” Very important: Lavrov did not mean Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the Salafi-jihadi, or Rent-a-Jihadi mob financed by the Turkish National Intelligence Organization (MIT) with weapons funded by Qatar, and fully supported by NATO and Tel Aviv.

What happened after the funeral in Doha was quite murky, suggesting a western intel remote-controlled coup, developing as fast as lightning, complete with reports of domestic betrayals. The original Astana idea was to keep Damascus safe and to have Ankara manage HTS. Yet Assad had already committed a serious strategic blunder, believing in lofty promises by NATO messaged through his newfound Arab leader friends in the UAE and Saudi Arabia. To his own astonishment, according to Syrian and regional officials, Assad finally realized how fragile his own position was, having turned down military assistance from his stalwart regional allies, Iran and Hezbollah, believing that his new Arab allies might keep him safe. The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) was in shambles after 13 years of war and ruthless US sanctions. Logistics were prey to deplorable corruption. The rot was systemic.

But importantly, while many were prepared to fight the foreign-backed terror groups once again, insiders say Assad never fully deployed his army to counterattack the onslaught. Tehran and Moscow tried everything – up to the last minute. In fact, Assad was already in deep trouble since his visit to Moscow on 29 November that reaped no tangible results. The Damascus establishment thus regarded Russia’s insistence that Assad must abandon his previous red lines on negotiating a political settlement as a de facto signal pointing to the end. Apart from doing nothing to prevent the increasing atrophy and collapse of the SAA, Assad did nothing to rein in Israel, which has been bombing Syria non-stop for years. Until the very last moment, Tehran was willing to help: two brigades were ready to get into Syria, but it would take at least two weeks to deploy them.

The Fars News Agency explained the mechanism in detail – from the Syrian leadership’s inexorable lack of motivation to fight the terror brigades to Assad ignoring serious warnings from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei since June, all the way to two months ago, with other Iranian officials warning that HTS and its foreign backers were preparing a blitzkrieg. According to the Iranians: “After Aleppo fell, it became clear that Assad had no real intentions of staying in power, so we started to engage in diplomatic talks with the opposition, and arranged the safe exit of our troops from Syria. If the SAA does not fight, neither will we risk our soldiers’ lives. Russia and the UAE had managed to convince him to step down, so there was nothing we could do.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Colossus

 

 

Box
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866861978154607060

 

 

Tractor
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866922481891807454

 

 

Overreact
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866527187026776325

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 112024
 


Johannes Vermeer Woman holding a balance 1662-63

 

Pressure Mounts For Support Of Trump’s Cabinet Picks During Honeymoon (JTN)
250 Conservative Veterans Sign Letter Backing Tulsi Gabbard Nomination (Hill)
Pete Hegseth Lashes Out At Media ‘Smear’ Campaign (RT)
Pete Hegseth Will Be Confirmed As Secretary of Defense, Predicts His Lawyer (JTN)
DOJ Spied On Kash Patel, Staffers Without Telling Courts (JTN)
How Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg Plans To Keep Trump Case Alive (ZH)
Giuliani Says Jury Verdict In Penny’s Case Is A Black Eye To Bragg (JTN)
Russia Close To Winning Ukraine Conflict – Spy Chief (RT)
Obstruction of Immigration Enforcement Could Prove Costly for Citizens (Turley)
Bernie Sanders Says Musk Is Right On Military Spending (JTN)
Boeing Reportedly Restarts 737 Max Production (ZH)
State Dep. Scrambles To Scuttle $100M Censorship Network Before Trump (ZH)
Putin-the-Unready Is Beginning to be Held Accountable (Paul Craig Roberts)
Elon Musk Jokes Bill Gates Could Go “Bankrupt” On Short Tesla Bet (ZH)
SCOTUS Asked to Block State From Probing Doctors Who Question COVID Policies (ET)
Western Conservatives Find Asylum In The Russian Federation (SCF)

 

 

 

 

Newt

Judge+Sachs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866257322798100761

Putin

Freak out

Elon AI

 

 

 

 

“..the first Democrat to join the House’s newly-formed DOGE caucus..”

Pressure Mounts For Support Of Trump’s Cabinet Picks During Honeymoon (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump seems to finally be enjoying the honeymoon period he didn’t get after his 2016 victory, with Democrats publicly expressing willingness to work with him on key initiatives and public polling showing broad approval of his plans. After winning the White House the first time, Trump didn’t experience the traditional polling bump and sense of public optimism that often comes with a new president. The post-2024 transition period, however, has been discernibly different. In a recent Rasmussen Reports survey, 55% of voters expressed the belief that Trump’s election win had given him a mandate to implement his agenda, while 32% disagreed and 13% were unsure. A separate Napolitan Institute survey, found that 53% approved of how Trump is handling the transition while 43% disapproved.

As he goes to war with some Senate Democrats and moderate Republicans over his Cabinet nominees, public support for his agenda seems to be giving him momentum to push through the controversial personnel picks who will implement it. Some Democrats, moreover, have expressed openness to specific nominees and interest in participating in some of his initiatives. The incoming commander-in-chief has repeatedly pointed to his landslide electoral victory that saw him carry both the Electoral College and the popular vote to support claims of a mandate for change. To that end, he has selected nominees for key departments with unconventional backgrounds and has rattled upper chamber lawmakers in doing so. The confirmation hearings won’t begin until January, but in the meantime, lawmakers face a pressure campaign from Trump supporters to get on board with his efforts.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., last week became the first Democrat to join the House’s newly-formed DOGE caucus, a group of lawmakers dedicated to trimming the size of the government and working with Trump’s planned Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). “I’ve been clear that there are ways we can reorganize our government to make it work better for the American people,” he said at the time. “The Caucus should look at the bureaucracy that the DHS has become and include recommendations to make Secret Service and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] independent federal agencies with a direct report to the White House.” Potentially driving lawmakers like Moskowitz to get on board with the DOGE agenda is public polling data suggesting it enjoys broad support. The Napolitan survey also found that 52% of Americans approve of the way Trump is managing the transition.

Some of the specific proposals from DOGE co-leaders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, such as bringing federal employees back to the office, have majority support. Fifty-seven percent of Americans backed requiring federal employees to cease remote work, while just 28% opposed the move in the Napolitan survey. Fifty-three percent backed firing those who refused to work in-person. Another 60% supported moving some federal agencies out of the Washington, D.C., area. The public is, at best, cautiously optimistic about DOGE’s prospects, even if they support its efforts. Only 45% think the new department can “easily eliminate” trillions in waste. Forty-nine percent think eliminating waste fraud and abuse will balance the budget.

At least some of Trump’s cabinet picks seem to have picked up support from upper chamber Democrats, notably Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., whom he tapped for Secretary of State. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., had positive words for the Florida Republican, as did other lawmakers across the aisle. “Unsurprisingly, the other team’s pick will have political differences than my own,” Fetterman said. “That being said, my colleague [Rubio] is a strong choice and I look forward to voting for his confirmation.” Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., moreover, has also expressed interest in Rubio’s potential confirmation. “I look forward to talking to him. You know, Marco Rubio, you have strange bedfellows, and you have strange alliances,” she said.

Fetterman also expressed openness to Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Oz and Fetterman squared off for one of the Keystone State’s Senate seats in 2022. Fetterman insisted he doesn’t have “any kind of bitterness” toward Oz and was “open to dialogue” on the issues relevant to CMS. To be sure, Democrats haven’t signed up to back some of his more contentious nominees. Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, R, had to drop his bid for Attorney General in the face of intransigent Democrats and moderate Republicans who refused to support him.Now, Defense Secretary-designate Pete Hegseth faces uncertain prospects as Democrats largely oppose him and some of the same Republicans concerned with Gaetz have not committed to his confirmation.

Read more …

“A warrior whose vote cannot be bought, and whose integrity cannot be folded,” the letter reads. “We are honored to call her one of our own.”

250 Conservative Veterans Sign Letter Backing Tulsi Gabbard Nomination (Hill)

More than 250 veterans have signed a letter supporting former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), President-elect Trump’s nominee to be director of national intelligence. The letter offers a fierce defense of Gabbard’s “lifelong devotion to service” and blasts critics who call into question her loyalty. “We are appalled by the baseless attacks questioning Tulsi’s loyalty to our great nation. For over 20 years and across multiple combat deployments, Tulsi has risked her life to defend the safety, security and freedom of the American people,” the letter reads. “These attacks insult not only her, but every one of us veterans who have served our country.” The support comes as Gabbard faces growing scrutiny for her past comments on Moscow and her 2017 visit with the former Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad.

Gabbard — who served in the House for eight years as a Democrat — has made remarks about the Russia-Ukraine war that were sympathetic to Moscow and echoed by Russian state news, which has praised her nomination. In the Middle East, Gabbard visited Syria in 2017 and said Assad was not an enemy of the U.S. — though she later labeled him a “brutal dictator.” The remarks have gained renewed attention in recent days, as the Syrian government collapsed and Assad was driven out of the country by rebels. The letter comes days after a group of nearly 100 former national security officials issued their own letter about Gabbard, urging the Senate to “carefully scrutinize” the former congresswoman. They raised concerns about her experience level, her past comments and meeting with Assad, and that she has “publicly cast doubt on U.S. intelligence reports.”

“Her sympathy for dictators like Vladimir Putin and Assad raises questions about her judgment and fitness,” the letter last week read. The veterans, in their letter Monday, push back against “so-called ‘experts’ in Washington” who have criticized Gabbard, saying their attacks are “baseless lies and smears.” “Unable and unwilling to challenge the substance of her views, her critics resort to baseless lies and smears, exposing the weakness of their arguments,” the letter reads. “Tulsi’s patriotism, shaped on the battlefield, mirrors the values and aspirations of the American people far more than the failed policies of so-called ‘experts’ in Washington, who have been part of the problem for too long.”

The veterans praise Trump in the letter for selecting Gabbard as the nominee, saying, “As Director of National Intelligence, she will be a fearless reformer and a true patriot, ensuring that the intelligence apparatus serves the American people and protects our Republic.” “We are deeply grateful to President Trump for appointing Tulsi Gabbard to this critical role and proud to stand beside her—a leader whose courage and convictions we know firsthand. A warrior whose vote cannot be bought, and whose integrity cannot be folded,” the letter reads. “We are honored to call her one of our own.” The letter was signed by former acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, both of whom served for short periods of time in the first Trump administration. Reps. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) and Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) signed the letter, as did Rep.-elect Abe Hamadeh (R-Ariz.).

Read more …

“They take something, then add anonymous sources, and contortions, and flat-out lies and then they try to try you in the media..”

Pete Hegseth Lashes Out At Media ‘Smear’ Campaign (RT)

Donald Trump’s nominee to be US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, has accused the media of staging a libel-based show trial to prevent him from becoming the next Pentagon chief. The US president-elect’s naming of Hegseth has led to a series of negative news reports that have raised questions about his fitness for the job and likelihood of being confirmed by the Senate. Among the accusations leveled at the army veteran and television presenter are alcohol abuse and sexual misconduct. In 2017, then Fox News host Hegseth was accused of raping an unnamed woman after a Republican convention in California. Police investigated the claim and did not file any charges. It was reported recently that Hegseth paid the woman an undisclosed sum, and both parties signed a confidentiality agreement. In an interview with Fox News on Monday, Hegseth insisted that “the left” is trying to use the case to stage a show trial in the media.

”This is what the left does… It’s the anatomy of a smear. They take something, then add anonymous sources, and contortions, and flat-out lies and then they try to try you in the media before you can even get into the doors with senators,” he said.Hegseth went on to say that Trump urged him to “keep fighting” and “stand up for the change that needs to come to the Defense Department.” During his re-election campaign, Trump accused the Democrats of damaging America’s standing on the world stage and vowed to restore the country’s prestige under a “peace through strength” banner.Under the US constitution, presidential appointments to significant offices must be confirmed by the upper chamber of the US Congress, the Senate. Historically, the Senate has confirmed most nominations, with only three exceptions in the past 100 years.

Hegseth

Read more …

“The most effective army is the one that the enemy does not want to face on the battle [field]..”

Pete Hegseth Will Be Confirmed As Secretary of Defense, Predicts His Lawyer (JTN)

Timothy Parlatore, the attorney for Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth, on Monday said that he believes his client has enough support in the Senate to get him confirmed early next year. President-elect Donald Trump nominated Hegseth, a former Fox News host, for the position last month, but reports of allegations of sexual misconduct and heavy drinking have threatened to derail his confirmation. Parlatore said that the nominee has had some positive discussions with Republican senators in recent weeks that have focused on policy, which have helped them feel more confident in confirming Hegseth. The lawyer did not have a specific count for how many Republicans are now on board with Hegseth, but said his team was “feeling very good” about the numbers.

The attorney also said that Hegseth had a good discussion with Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, who described the conversation on Monday as “encouraging.” “I think that once … you kind of strip away all of the anonymous, you know, fake claims, then that gives him the opportunity to sit down with Senator Ernst and others and start talking about policy,” Parlatore said on the “Just The News, No Noise” TV Show. “Let’s talk about what we’re going to actually do to improve the Pentagon. And I think that that is one place where the two of them really have found common ground.” Parlatore said that some of the policy ideas that Hegseth has would get “politics” out of the Defense Department, and that he is focused on returning the department to military readiness and projecting a strong military to deter enemies from attacking. “The most effective army is the one that the enemy does not want to face on the battle [field],” Parlatore said.

Read more …

“.. because the DOJ sought court approval ex parte to keep its surveillance secret, he wasn’t alerted until earlier this fall, six years after the initial subpoena.”

DOJ Spied On Kash Patel, Staffers Without Telling Courts (JTN)

The Justice Department spied on two House members and and several congressional staffers in a leak investigation without telling the courts, the agency’s inspector general found in a sweeping investigation released Tuesday. As a result, the department obtained phone records from the two members of Congress and 43 staff members including President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel, who worked as a staffer on the GOP-led House Intelligence Committee at the time. The department initiated the probe to investigate leaks to the media of FBI classified information as part of the now-discredited Trump-Russia probe which had recently been shared with Congress.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz found that the Justice Department, in filings with the court, did not reference “the fact that they related to requests for records of Members of Congress or congressional staffers,” despite implicating constitutional separation of powers between two government branches. Patel, who is poised to become the new director of the FBI if confirmed, previously sued former Trump Justice Department officials and FBI Director Christopher Wray, accusing them of violating his Fourth Amendment right to protection from unreasonable searches and seizures when they tried to obtain Patel’s personal records, Just the News previously reported. Patel said he was completely unaware of the subpoena until December 2022, when Google notified him about it.

Another former staffer, Jason Foster, previously told Just the News that he confirmed that the government successfully asked a federal court to hide its spying on Congress for five consecutive years. Foster is now the head of the Empower Oversight whistleblower center. In 2017 at the time of the secret surveillance, he was the chief investigative counsel for Sen. Chuck Grassley on the Senate Judiciary Committee. The seizure of his personal data occurred in 2017 while he worked for the Senate, and ordinarily under the original court order, Foster would have been notified a year later. But because the DOJ sought court approval ex parte to keep its surveillance secret, he wasn’t alerted until earlier this fall, six years after the initial subpoena.

Read more …

He should not be allowed to keep this hanging over Trump’s head.

How Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg Plans To Keep Trump Case Alive (ZH)

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg – who had a Biden DOJ plant in his legal case against former President Donald Trump – is trying to ensure his hush money case doesn’t vanish into thin air as Trump prepares for his return to the White House. According to court filings revealed Tuesday, Bragg’s office is fiercely opposed to dismissing the case outright but is open to pausing proceedings while Trump serves his second term as president. The 82-page legal brief, prosecutors’ most detailed argument yet, stops short of recommending an explicit course of action but outlines several ways to keep the case alive. Among them: delaying sentencing until after Trump leaves office in 2029 or freezing the case while leaving the jury’s guilty verdict intact, The Hill reports.

“The extreme remedy of dismissing the indictment and vacating the jury verdict is not warranted in light of multiple alternative accommodations that would fully address the concerns raised by presidential immunity,” wrote Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy. The filing comes as Trump, now president-elect, wages a legal battle to quash the 34 felony charges stemming from hush money payments to an adult film star. Trump’s lawyers claim his status as president-elect grants him immunity and demands immediate dismissal. Prosecutors, however, aren’t buying it. They argue that immunity doesn’t apply until Trump is inaugurated, meaning the case could theoretically proceed to sentencing before January 20, 2025 — a prospect Trump has vowed to fight tooth and nail. Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over Trump’s trial, will now decide the case’s fate, with a ruling expected any day.

The DA’s office acknowledged the complications of prosecuting a sitting president but stopped short of saying the case should be completely shelved. Trump was convicted by a Manhattan Jury ‘of his peers’ on 34 counts of falsifying business records, however his reelection to the highest office in the land has put a damper on prosecutors’ plans. Sentencing was initially scheduled for last month, only to be postponed indefinitely by Judge Merchan, making it increasingly unlikely Trump will face punishment anytime soon. That would leave open the possibility that Trump could still proceed to sentencing in 2029, after he leaves office. Alternatively, state prosecutors said the judge could terminate the case without tossing Trump’s conviction, noting a jury verdict removed the presumption of innocence, he was never sentenced and his conviction was “neither affirmed nor reversed” on appeal because of presidential immunity. -The Hill

Trump’s legal team is crying foul, claiming the prosecution disrupts his transition efforts and his ability to govern effectively. “Wrongly continuing proceedings in this failed lawfare case disrupts President Trump’s transition efforts and his preparations to wield the full Article II executive power authorized by the Constitution pursuant to the overwhelming national mandate granted to him by the American people on November 5, 2024,” Trump’s attorneys fumed in a recent filing. Prosecutors hit back, accusing Trump of using delay tactics to muddy the waters. “Having filed those motions to dismiss and then sought repeated adjournments of sentencing to permit their determination by this Court, it is particularly brazen for defendant to argue that the Supremacy Clause bars the Court from taking any action on the motions defendant himself filed,” Conroy wrote.

Read more …

“.. the judge had wanted the jury to convict Penny, but that jurors, who ride the subways, understood Penny acted to save others.”

Giuliani Says Jury Verdict In Penny’s Case Is A Black Eye To Bragg (JTN)

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Monday night claimed that a New York City jury sent a strong message to the city’s ruling elite by finding Daniel Penny clear of any wrongdoing in the death of Jordan Neely. Penny, a former Marine, was acquitted by the Manhattan jury earlier Monday, after he kneeled on Neely’s neck on a subway last year, which prosecutors argued resulted in the man’s death. The jury was deadlocked on a more serious charge last week, which resulted in the charge being dismissed, but they only debated the lesser charge briefly on Monday before finding Penny innocent. Giuliani said that the verdict was a “shocker” given how fast it was reached, but that it was “great day … for justice.” He also claimed the judge had wanted the jury to convict Penny, but that jurors, who ride the subways, understood Penny acted to save others.

“The jury of New Yorkers, and they ride the subways and you can be the most left wing wacko [but] you ride the subways, you’re scared,” Giuliani said on the “Just The News, No Noise” TV show. “And Penny, they know Penny did the right thing. This is a person to person, human reaction above the heads of the fools that have run the city for so long. The crazy, silly, criminal-loving liberals.” Giuliani also said that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg should have resigned or been removed from office the second he claimed he would not prosecute people “for beating up cops” or “resisting arrest.” “He’s probably not prosecuted half the cases that come before him,” Giuliani said. “He’s responsible for any number of murders in New York, and beatings. There are probably seven to 10,000 criminals walking the streets of New York that would not [be] if I were the mayor or Mike Bloomberg and Ray Kelly.”

The former mayor added that Neely, who has a history of mental illness and had been arrested himself in the past, should not have been on the street to begin with. “The person who caused this is number one, the New York system, and then the people who didn’t deal with his mental illness,” Giuliani said. “Mr. Penny didn’t have anything to do with this. He just tried to save people. [Neely’s] father had years to try to save us from this guy, and didn’t do a damn thing.”

Read more …

“..the regime of Vladimir Zelensky has completely lost its legitimacy and, as a result, its ability to be negotiated with.”

Russia Close To Winning Ukraine Conflict – Spy Chief (RT)

Kiev’s military is now close to complete collapse, the head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), Sergey Naryshkin has said, adding that the current Ukrainian government has completely lost its legitimacy and is unfit for talks. In an interview with the Russian magazine Razvedchik (“Spy”) released on Tuesday, Naryshkin reiterated that the Ukraine conflict is essentially not a battle against Kiev but rather a struggle against the collective West, and that Russia’s freedom and sovereignty is at stake. The intel chief expressed optimism about Russia’s progress on the battlefield. “The frontline situation is not in Kiev’s favor. The strategic initiative in all areas belongs to us, we are close to achieving our goals, while the Ukrainian army is on the verge of collapse.”

According to Naryshkin, the regime of Vladimir Zelensky has completely lost its legitimacy and, as a result, its ability to be negotiated with.” The Ukrainian leader’s presidential term expired this past May, after he refused to hold a new election, citing the ongoing martial law. Russian forces have been making steady progress in recent weeks. Ukrainian commanders, meanwhile, have been complaining about a lack of manpower and exhaustion in their ranks, despite the draft age having been lowered from 27 to 25 and mobilization rules tightened this past spring. Moscow has said that its main goals in the conflict are Ukraine’s neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification. It has also signaled that it is ready to declare an immediate ceasefire and begin peace talks as soon as Ukraine withdraws from all Russian territories, including Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye Regions.

Read more …

If woke is the only identity you have left…

Obstruction of Immigration Enforcement Could Prove Costly for Citizens (Turley)

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston recently became the latest Democratic leader to engage in a chest-pounding call to arms in resistance to the incoming Trump administration’s plan to deport people who entered the United States unlawfully. While a post-election poll by YouGov for CBS News shows that a massive 73% of adults want President-elect Donald Trump to prioritize the repatriation of illegal migrants, the mayor pledged to not only have Denver police “stationed at the county line to keep (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) out” but also that “you would have 50,000 Denverites there.” Johnston said it would be like a “Tiananmen Square moment” and answered yes when questioned whether he’d be ready to go to jail. That moment soon passed, however, as lawyers apparently explained to the mayor that armed resistance to the federal government is often called – wait for it – insurrection.

It appears that Johnston was not keen on becoming the Jefferson Davis of the left, so he backpedaled, stating, “Would I have taken it back if I could? Yes, I probably wouldn’t have used that image.” Yet, Johnston is not alone in pledging resistance to repatriation efforts. Cities are reaffirming or adopting sanctuary city status, including most recently Boston. The cities pledge to continue their ban on any cooperation with the federal government in detaining or removing unlawful migrants. Other mayors are pledging to use city funds to pay for the defense costs of those fighting deportation. The doubling down on sanctuary city promises will likely draw more migrants to those communities, which some mayors have welcomed despite the heavy costs of housing, education and other city services.

Immigration proved to be one of the top issues for voters in this year’s election, which brought control of both houses of Congress and the White House to the GOP. Citizens overwhelmingly supported new tough immigration measures, including deportations. With Democratic cities joining the “resistance,” they may find the costs even higher. Congress cannot compel cooperation without triggering constitutional concerns. In Federalist #46, James Madison recognized the right of state officials to oppose federal policies, including “the refusal to co-operate with officers of the Union.” In cases such as Printz v. United States (1997), which involved federal requirements that states cooperate on gun control measures, the Supreme Court enforced an anti-commandeering line that allowed states to refuse such federal orders.

However, this is a two-way street. Just as cities and states do not have to carry water for the federal government, the federal government does not have to supply the water to the states. The second Trump administration and Congress can play hardball by barring federal funds in various areas for these cities. With their status as sanctuary cities, housing, law enforcement and social programming costs will continue to rise. Many of those budgets are heavily infused with federal funding. However, if cities resist or frustrate federal policy, there are ample reasons why the federal government might restrict funding. Such measures can go too far. The Supreme Court has warned that financial penalties can be so coercive that they effectively commandeer states. However, the federal government is not required to spend money on services where costs are rising at least in part because of resistance to federal law.

Under constitutional law, the federal government cannot be a bully, but it does not have to be a chump.It’s clear that elected leaders like Johnston did not think very long or well before starting a war with the incoming administration. In addition to the possible loss of federal funds, acts of resistance can trigger criminal liability if they amount to actively shielding or hiding unlawful migrants sought by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Under federal immigration law, it is a felony when anyone in “knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation.”

That is not triggered by a simple refusal to cooperate, but some officials have been accused of crossing the line, including state judges. It also could endanger private groups that work closely with these cities in housing and transporting unlawful migrants. Moreover, as I wrote recently, Trump can cite a curious ally in this fight: Barack Obama. During the Obama administration, the federal government largely triumphed over states in barring their interference with federal immigration policies. Back then, Democrats supported President Obama in claiming that the federal government had overriding authority on immigration in cases like Arizona v. United States. The pressure on cities could grow if the Trump administration prioritizes members of violent gangs such as Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) or Tren de Aragua for deportation. To resist those efforts would be politically unpalatable in cities dealing with crime associated with such gangs. It could take years to hash out these efforts. However, if Denver’s Mayor Johnston is any measure of the resistance, the chest-pounding may decline when the federal funding dries up.

Read more …

“Last year, only 13 senators voted against the Military Industrial Complex and a defense budget full of waste and fraud. That must change.”

Bernie Sanders Says Musk Is Right On Military Spending (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency has energized Republicans, but it’s also receiving attention from some liberal lawmakers, including Bernie Sanders. Sanders, the independent from Vermont, wants to help Trump’s DOGE, which is co-led by Tesla CEO Elon Musk and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy. Sanders has his eye on the U.S. military budget. “Elon Musk is right,” Sanders wrote on X. “The Pentagon, with a budget of $886 billion, just failed its 7th audit in a row. It’s lost track of billions. Last year, only 13 senators voted against the Military Industrial Complex and a defense budget full of waste and fraud. That must change.”

Sanders’ comments come before the U.S. House is set to vote on a compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes nearly $900 billion to support U.S. military service members, infrastructure, and defense capabilities during the 2025 fiscal year. The 1,813-page document released Saturday by the Senate and House Armed Services Committees outlines U.S. defense policy priorities and their costs for 2025. Most of the proposed funds, $849.9 billion out of the $895.2 billion topline, would go to programs within the Department of Defense. Ramaswamy and Musk wrote in a November op-ed that the military is on their list. “The Pentagon recently failed its seventh consecutive audit, suggesting that the agency’s leadership has little idea how its annual budget of more than $800 billion is spent,” they wrote.

The U.S. Department of Defense’s annual audit once again resulted in a disclaimer opinion. That means the federal government’s largest agency can’t fully explain its spending. The disclaimer this year was expected. And it’s expected again next year. The Pentagon previously said it will be able to accurately account for its spending by 2027. Musk has gone even farther in his criticism of military spending. He called the military’s most expensive ever project, the F-35 stealth fighter, “obsolete.” “The F-35 design was broken at the requirements level, because it was required to be too many things to too many people,” Musk wrote on X. “This made it an expensive & complex jack of all trades, master of none. Success was never in the set of possible outcomes. And manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones anyway. Will just get pilots killed.”

In May, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found the cost of the Pentagon’s most expensive weapon system was projected to increase by more than 40% despite plans to use the stealth fighter less, in part because of reliability issues. The U.S. Department of Defense’s F-35 Lightning II is the most advanced and costly weapon system in the U.S. arsenal. It’s a joint, multinational program that includes the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, seven international partners and foreign military sales customers. The Pentagon has about 630 F-35s. It plans to buy about 1,800 more. And it intends to use them through 2088. DOD estimates the F-35 program will cost over $2 trillion to buy, operate, and sustain over its lifetime. The Pentagon hasn’t responded to Musk’s comments. Late last month, a reporter asked Defense Department Press Secretary Air Force Major General Pat Ryder about Musk’s comments on the F-35.

“Yeah, as I’m sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently a private citizen, I’m not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35.” Trump set lofty goals for the new group. “It will become, potentially, ‘The Manhattan Project,’ of our time,” Trump’s announcement said. “Republican politicians have dreamed about the objectives of ‘DOGE’ for a very long time.” The original Manhattan Project was a research and development project during the second World War that led to the creation of nuclear weapons. Ramaswamy and Musk have previously outlined their plans for DOGE, which could include mass federal layoffs and reductions in federal regulations. Musk and Ramaswamy said they won’t rely on action from Congress and will instead “focus particularly on driving change through executive action based on existing legislation rather than by passing new laws.”

Read more …

There will be another accident. And then?

Boeing Reportedly Restarts 737 Max Production (ZH)

Boeing has reportedly resumed production of its 737 Max aircraft at its Renton factory in Seattle, Washington, a little more than a month after a seven-week strike by 33,000 unionized factory workers concluded with a new contract. This marks a critical step in the company’s recovery efforts during a particularly turbulent year. Reuters was the first to report on Boeing’s restart of production of its best-selling commercial jet. According to three sources familiar with the situation, production at the Renton factory resumed last Friday. “Production resumed on Friday, said one of the sources, who all spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak with media. Boeing declined to comment.” -RTRS. Analysts at Jefferies forecast that Boeing will likely average around 29 737 Max jets per month in 2025, falling far short of the company’s pre-restriction goal of 56.

Earlier this year, the FAA capped 737 Max production at 38 per month due to safety vulnerabilities within Boeing’s production line at Renton. Two Max crashes, Covid travel downturn, supply chain snarls, financial challenges, and multiple Max jet incidents — including a door panel blowout on an Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9 — have been mounting headwinds for the struggling planemaker. On top of this all, a seven-week strike sent the company to the brink of a devastating stall. The good news is that Boeing is under new leadership, with newly appointed CEO Kelly Ortberg dismantling disastrous DEI initiatives and shifting the focus to safety as the era of wokeism comes to an abrupt end. As of mid-November, Goldman’s Noah Poponak and Anthony Valentini still had a “Buy” rating on the planemaker with a 12-month price target of $200.

“Our 12-month price target of $200 is derived from targeting a 4.5% free cash flow yield on 2026E free cash, discounted back one year at 12%. Key risks: (1) the pace of air traffic growth, (2) supply chain ability to ramp-up production, and (3) contract operating performance within the defense segment,” the analysts said. Shares of Boeing were up 1% to $158 handle in premarket trading. However, on the year, shares were down 40%. Shares have been locked in a multi-year lateral between $100 and $250 following the Max jet crashes. FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker recently told Reuters that he wouldn’t be surprised if it took the company a couple of months to ramp production at Renton to the FAA’s production limit.

Read more …

“[Elon] Musk put the GEC on the map in March 2023, when he deemed it to be the “worst offender in U.S. government”..

State Dep. Scrambles To Scuttle $100M Censorship Network Before Trump (ZH)

The State Department revealed in a Monday filing that they are “substantially likely” to shut down their $100M Global Engagement Center (GEC), which was revealed in early 2023 to have been funding a “disinformation” tracking group which worked to pressure advertisers to demonetize outlets it accuses of spreading “disinformation.” Except, they’re really just “realigning” the “Center’s staff and funding to other Department offices and bureaus for foreign information manipulation.” The move comes amid a lawsuit from Texas AG Ken Paxton and several conservative media outlets listed a GEC-funded “dynamic exclusion list” of websites it doesn’t like, which it would then distribute to ad tech companies – such as Microsoft’s Xandr – in order to try and “defund and downrank these worst offenders,” and deprive said sites of ad revenue.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1864036564579561767

As Headline News’ Ken Silva notes further; it’s unclear how the GEC’s closure will affect the lawsuit. Monday’s court filing said lawyers for all parties are still discussing the implications. [Elon] Musk put the GEC on the map in March 2023, when he deemed it to be the “worst offender in U.S. government” when it comes to censorship and media manipulation. According to revelations from the “Twitter Files”—a trove of internal records about the censorship decisiosn made within the social media company—the GEC funded groups such as the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, which in turn compiled blacklists of Twitter accounts that were supposedly tied to foreign disinformation campaigns. The Digital Forensic Research Lab sent those blacklists to Twitter so that the company could deactivate the accounts listed.

Federalist senior legal correspondent Margot Cleveland further revealed in April 2023 that the GEC marketed anti-conservative censorship products to private-sector tech firms. Cleveland also noted that the GEC apparently worked with infamous FBI Agent Elvis Chan, who was revealed in the Twitter Files to be in constant touch with the social media firm about censorship issues. Despite those scandals, Democrats had been pushing to renew the GEC’s $100 million budget before it expires at the end of the year. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who drafted the original legislation in 2016 that led to the GEC, argued last year that the censorship network was crucial to counter foreign disinformation. “There’s no way to combat Russian and Chinese misinformation without the GEC,” Murphy insisted.

Read more …

The Russians weren’t going to save Assad yet another time. Cost/benefit.

Putin-the-Unready Is Beginning to be Held Accountable (Paul Craig Roberts)

John Helmer’s December 8 report from Moscow substantiates my conclusion that the Russian government’s inability to acknowledge reality, instead relying on agreements with Russia’s enemies, results in failure . In Ukraine by trying to minimize conflict, the Kremlin maximized conflict. In Syria relying on diplomatic rather than military means resulted in a massive strategic defeat for Russia and Iran. The Middle East, where the correlation of forces were moving against US/Israeli dominance, has been lost to Greater Israel and US control of oil flows and waterways. From Moscow John Helmer reports that recriminations are running high for Putin’s loss of Syria. And it is not only Putin who is being held accountable but also the commanders of Russia’s forces in Syria, head of the General Staff General Valery Gerasimov, Russian military intelligence (GRU), and the Defense Ministry.

They are all damned for failure to detect, warn, and act to prevent the Israeli-American-Turkish overthrow of Assad and the Syrian government. The same group of failures are damned for failure to prevent the Israeli air force from preventing the resupply of Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards from providing reinforcements. Putin, like American presidents, puts the defense of Israel before the interests of his own country. Putin is so fearful of offending Israel that he constantly refused to provide his Syrian ally air defense from Israeli attacks. Now that Putin and Lavrov, essentially two 20th century American liberals, have brought a massive strategic defeat down on their heads and Iran’s, Russia’s last remaining Middle East ally, it is likely that Netanyahu and Trump’s Zionist appointees will behave more aggressively against Iran and Russia.

The Zionist are on a roll, having reversed their declining fortunes in one fell swoop while again Putin sat on his butt. As much as I admire Putin, he is certainly not proactive, or sometimes even aware, and thus lacks the leadership ability that a leader of a threatened country needs. Putin would be perfect in peace time, but he is not up to dealing with an existential threat. Putin and Lavrov are too fearful of offending someone to be able to act. I don’t know how far the recriminations will go. But if Washington should also succeed with its color revolution in Georgia, the Zionist neoconservatives could succeed in their plan to destabilize Putin. Whether Putin’s fall would help the neoconservative agenda depends on his replacement. The chance is high that Putin would be replaced with a more determined war leader. Regardless, the Russian defeat has caused a loss of confidence in Putin’s leadership, and it will encourage more provocations that are not good for peace.

Read more …

“If Tesla does become the world’s most valuable company by far, that short position will bankrupt even Bill Gates..”

Elon Musk Jokes Bill Gates Could Go “Bankrupt” On Short Tesla Bet (ZH)

The rivalry between two of America’s top billionaires, Elon Musk and Bill Gates, continued on Tuesday morning when Musk jokingly suggested on X that Gates’ alleged short position on Tesla might lead to his financial demise. “If Tesla does become the world’s most valuable company by far, that short position will bankrupt even Bill Gates,” Musk wrote on X, referring to a multi-billion dollar equity short Gates put on Tesla a couple of years ago.

According to Walter Isaacson’s 2023 biography of Musk, Gates held an undisclosed short position in Tesla, allegedly worth billions. In late 2023, Musk wrote on X: “Gates placed a massive bet on Tesla dying when our company was at one of its weakest moments several years ago. Such a big short position also drives the stock down for everyday investors,” adding, “To the best of my knowledge, Gates *still* has that massive bet against Tesla on the table. Someone should ask him if he does.” Musk noted, “The lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy of Gates who had the nerve to ask me to donate to his mostly window-dressing environmental causes, while simultaneously aiming to make $500M from Tesla’s demise, boggles the mind …”

[..] There is still no word on whether Gates has doubled or tripled down – or possibly cut his Tesla short bet. Tesla shares have surged 62.5% this year, primarily due to President-elect Donald Trump’s victory and Musk’s increasing relationship with the incoming administration. In terms of wealth, Bloomberg data shows Musk is number one on the Billionaire Index at $376.2 billion, while Gates is number six at $165.9 billion. Regarding Tesla, the company’s market capitalization is nearing $1.3 trillion, and it ranks eighth on the list of the world’s most valuable companies. Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas wrote in a June note that Tesla is much more than an EV company, with tailwinds in the powering up America theme in the era of AI data centers. Naomi Seibt, a German teen who denounces the woke agenda, wrote on X, “Can’t imagine a greater form of retribution than bankrupting the vaccine vegan.” Another X user asked: “Why would someone who constantly talks about protecting the environment short the stock of one of the most environmentally friendly companies on the planet?”

Read more …

“It’s a disfavored practice to go to a second Supreme Court justice after the first one has turned down the request, so it was a long shot..”

SCOTUS Asked to Block State From Probing Doctors Who Question COVID Policies (ET)

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas this week revived an emergency application to block the Washington Medical Commission from investigating licensed physicians in the state over their criticism of COVID-19 policies. The Washington state commission deems the doctors’ dissenting views on the disease as potentially dangerous misinformation that should be suppressed. The physicians counter that just because they have medical licenses they don’t forfeit their free speech rights under the First Amendment. The Dec. 4 order by Thomas regarding the application in Stockton v. Ferguson was unusual in that Justice Elena Kagan rejected the same application on Nov. 20. The applicants renewed their request in a court filing directed to Thomas on Nov. 22. Supreme Court rules allow an application that has been denied by one justice to be presented to another justice. Neither Thomas nor Kagan explained their respective decisions.

The application is now scheduled to be considered by all nine justices at the court’s private judicial conference on Jan. 10, 2025. The justices could grant an injunction against the commission, deny the injunction, or schedule the case for oral argument. As of Dec. 6, the Supreme Court had not requested a reply from the commission. The application was brought by former professional basketball player John Stockton along with Drs. Richard Eggleston, Thomas Siler, and Daniel Moynihan and another 50 unidentified medical doctors, as well as Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. President-elect Donald Trump, who will be inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2025, has nominated Kennedy to be secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy, an attorney, is also listed as co-counsel on the application.

The applicants filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, which denied the injunction on May 22. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the injunction on Sept. 3. An appeal remains pending in the Ninth Circuit. The application states that it concerns the state’s program that targets “Washington-licensed physicians for expressing public views on COVID-19 that diverge from prevailing orthodoxy.” The state calls the doctors’ viewpoint “misinformation” and claims that it may “regulate this speech,” which is something the Supreme Court ruled in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra (2018) that it cannot do, according to the application. “The Court should speak clearly and decisively to state actors, professional organizations, other non-state actors, and the national media: Public speech does not lose its constitutional protection from government action simply because it is uttered by a healthcare professional, even if it is at odds with medical orthodoxy,” the application stated.

In September 2021, based on its authority under Washington state’s Uniform Disciplinary Act, the Washington Medical Commission began enforcing a policy against doctors “for public speech critical of COVID-19 policies,” which has resulted in “disciplinary actions against at least ten healthcare practitioners,” it stated. Around the time the enforcement actions began, Washington Secretary of Health Dr. Umair A. Shah said, “It has never been more vital for trusted healthcare professionals to band together against the threat of misinformation.” “As we battle COVID-19, with so many tools at our disposal to protect ourselves and others, it is viral misinformation, rooted in unfounded scientific claims, that often stands in our way.”

The commission is prosecuting Eggleston and Siler for opinion articles that they wrote in The Lewiston Tribune and American Thinker, respectively, that criticized COVID-19 policies. The applicant Children’s Health Defense, which has a Washington state medical doctor as a member, joined the application because “[the nonprofit group] is actively involved in advocacy and protecting freedom of speech and Covid vaccine related issues and educates the public on these issues,” the application stated. The applicants’ attorney, Richard Jaffe of Sacramento, California, told The Epoch Times that he is “hopeful” about the application. “It’s a disfavored practice to go to a second Supreme Court justice after the first one has turned down the request, so it was a long shot,” he said.

But Thomas “seems to think it’s an important issue” that needs to be heard, Jaffe said. There are many articles in the mainstream media “talking about how they’re not sanctioning enough doctors for speaking out in public against vaccination or repeated boostering,” he said. “The country needs some guidance from the Supreme Court as to what the First Amendment means in terms of a physician’s free speech,” Jaffe said.

Read more …

“Offering asylum to these foreigners is simply giving ordinary people a chance to live in freedom..”

Western Conservatives Find Asylum In The Russian Federation (SCF)

Defending family and traditional values has long been a central guideline of Russian policy, both domestically and diplomatically. Moscow is expanding its efforts to counteract the degrading cultural influence of the West in the country, as well as offering a safe haven for foreigners interested in living in accordance with their ancestral values. Recently, President Vladimir Putin signed a decree that makes it easier to obtain visas and citizenship for conservative-minded citizens from countries of degrading neoliberal ideologies. The goal of the Russian initiative is above all humanitarian, providing an opportunity for like-minded citizens to live in peace, away from the psychological and ideological challenges imposed by Western countries that have adhered to the so-called “woke agenda”.

As part of this initiative, Russian state organizations have been implementing various initiatives to provide refuge to foreigners interested in living in the country. A major press conference was recently held, bringing together Russian and foreign citizens interested in sharing their experiences of living in accordance with traditional values in Russia. The conference was led by State Duma deputy Maria Butina, who currently heads the Russian Parliament’s Committee on International Relations, and brought together a number of foreigners and members of civil society, including businesspeople from different sectors. Together with Russian authorities and journalists, foreigners who have taken refuge in Russia were able to share their impressions of life in the country, job opportunities and other personal experiences.

Among the foreign citizens who participated in the event were some public figures, such as the German journalist Anna Lipp, who suffered severe persecution in her country due to her support for the special military operation in Ukraine, and Martin Held, an Austrian citizen and author of the social project “Moya Rossiya”. In addition to them, the Frenchman Alexander Stefanesco, businessman and founder of the project “Ruspatriation”, also participated in the conference, as well as several other distinguished foreigners who were well received in Russia due to their common mentality with the local people. As a result of the conference’s discussion, participants announced the creation of the “Welcome to Russia!” project, which aims to show Russian reality to foreigners interested in living in the country, as well as to assist with processes such as legal bureaucracy and cultural adaptation.

In the end, Russians and foreigners showed interest in contributing to the arrival of more conservative-minded citizens in Russia, which is welcomed by both migrants, who can finally live the way they believe is right, and by natives, who can interact with like-minded foreigners and develop deep cultural ties that strengthen Russia’s image as a civilizational pivot. There is certainly a deep strategic Russian interest in receiving such immigrants. In recent years, Russia has faced a major challenge in integrating thousands of immigrants from the post-Soviet space, mainly from the Caucasus and Central Asia, into its society. On the other hand, Western immigrants, who are almost always Christian and conservative, certainly show fewer cultural barriers to adaptation than Central Asians, which facilitates a balance in the migration scenario, avoiding tensions in public opinion regarding the reception of foreigners.

However, the main point of the Russian project is humanitarian. Conservative people are being persecuted in the Western Hemisphere simply because they do not agree with so-called “progressive” ideas, such as woke culture and the LGBT agenda. Offering asylum to these foreigners is simply giving ordinary people a chance to live in freedom, without the state violating their values and beliefs. In the past, the US has created a strong anti-Russian propaganda campaign advocating a false conservatism, which it justified by the claim that the USSR and post-Soviet Russia were examples of moral degradation. History has shown which side in the world arena really defends traditional values. Today, it is clear to an increasing number of Western citizens that it is not in the US or Europe that Christianity and conservatism are truly valued and protected.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Cat maze
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866310477749555559

 

 

Grass
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866327339568976354

 

 

Octopus
https://twitter.com/i/status/1866290032614809600

 

 

Spike

 

 

Change

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Dec 062024
 


Gerard Dou A woman playing a clavichord 1665

 

Trump Has Two Years To Push His Biggest Policies Through – Gingrich (JTN)
What the Trump Nominees Have Not Done—And Will Not Do (Victor Davis Hanson)
Trump Sticks With Hegseth As Ernst, Others Reportedly Eye Pentagon Post (JTN)
Trump Appoints David Sacks As New ‘White House AI & Crypto Czar’ (JTN)
Tulsi Gabbard A ‘Regular Reader’ of RT – ABC News (RT)
Impoundment, For Lack Of A Better Word, Is Good (I&I)
Democrat Calls For Biden ‘Blanket Pardon’ For Those Trump Could Target (JTN)
Lavrov-Tucker Interview: ‘For The Sake Of The Universe’ (ZH)
Lavrov Slams ‘Fantasies’ About Western Troops In Ukraine (RT)
Ukraine Preparing For End To Conflict (RT)
Zelensky Aide Visits US To Charm Trump Team – WSJ (RT)
Trump Team Cold With Ukrainians Over NATO – WSJ (RT)
Hungary Comments On Trump’s Desire To End Ukraine Conflict (RT)
Not Talking With Putin ‘Absurd’ – Scholz (RT)
West Backing Terrorists In Syria – Russia (RT)
The Syria Riddle: How It May Turn Into The First BRICS War (Pepe Escobar)
The Great Game in the Arctic (Anil Chopra)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1864708358894506175


https://twitter.com/i/status/1864406863980450163

Alex Jones

 

 

 

 

“Now we have to dance and that that’s really the key, and that the 2026 election is actually the key moment.”

Trump Has Two Years To Push His Biggest Policies Through – Gingrich (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump has a two-year window to push through some of his most contentious proposals, before midterm elections potentially see the Democrats return to legislative power and divide the government. Trump is set to return to the White House with a majority in both chambers of Congress and a generally sympathetic Supreme Court. The rapid-fire turnaround of his cabinet nominees, moreover, suggests a greater sense of urgency within the incoming White House than in the first administration. Democrats took the House during the 2018 midterms, effectively ending Trump’s hopes of securing major legislative wins. Republicans, for their part, managed to wrest the chamber from the Democrats in 2010 and largely stonewall further key agenda items. Now, some Republicans are mindful that their trifecta victory in 2024 likely only represents a brief opportunity to make a lasting impact and have warned that Republicans will only maintain control by successfully delivering on their promises.

The first time around, Trump’s major legislative victory was the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which slashed the corporate tax rate and doubled the standard deduction. He punted on key budget items, such as funding for a border wall, in favor of an omnibus spending package and ultimately failed to negotiate with House Democrats when they took over the lower chamber to secure it. That episode even saw the government go into a protracted shutdown. “I mean, we’re all here happy, but my primary message is that all we won was a ticket to the dance,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said this week at the American Legislative Exchange Council. “Now we have to dance and that that’s really the key, and that the 2026 election is actually the key moment.” The Georgia Republican was the 50th speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1995 through 1999 and was a leading figure in securing a Republican House for the first time in 40 years.

“If, like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, we can keep the House and maybe pick up a few seats, we are probably on the way to really creating a new stable majority,” he added. “If, like most times, the American people end up disappointed, our side doesn’t turn out and the Democrats pick up the house, then we’re back to politics as usual. So, what the brilliant nine-year effort of Donald Trump has done is given us a chance to truly change things.” Some incoming pro-Trump lawmakers are evidently aware of the potential for a political whiplash should Republicans fail to deliver and have hinted that Republicans will pursue the MAGA agenda with a close eye on 2026. “I’m confident Congress is going to back up President Trump 100% because we know, if we don’t secure our border, when we have this opportunity with [a] unified republican government, then what, at what point do we deserve re-election?” Rep.-elect Abe Hamadeh, R-Ariz., said in late November on the “John Solomon Reports” podcast.

“We’re able to collect, get the government that we wanted, and now we have to implement the change that the American people are demanding,” Hamadeh went on. “So that’s why I’m optimistic, not just, you know, for this next year or two, but even for a re-election in 2026 we are going to deliver the results that the American people demand.” The incoming Republican majorities, moreover, will feature many new faces in their leadership and include more Trump-aligned figures than in 2016. House Speaker Mike Johnson is expected to keep his post, which he secured late last year after former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., led an effort to boot Kevin McCarthy from the job. Trump’s first House Speaker was Paul Ryan, who left leadership after the GOP lost the House in 2018 and has since been a leading critic of the president-elect on the right.

In the Senate, moreover, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., will not lead the Republicans for the first time since 2007, though Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., was one of his top deputies. McConnell publicly feuded with Trump during and after his administration over a litany of issues, notably on foreign policy, Senate norms, presidential conduct, and budget matters. While he will likely remain an influential voice in the upper chamber, his departure from the top post potentially signals that the upper chamber may be poised for a shift in approach.

Generally regarded as a more centrist Republican, Thune ran between the conservative Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., and the more old-school Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, for leadership. Thune, for his part, has also pointed to 2026, but suggested that the prospect of looming midterms could prove advantageous to Republicans in a different manner. “I would think that the the election results were incredible repudiation of where they’ve been taking the country,” he said in mid-November. “And so it strikes me at least that Democrats, particularly if they have to run in 2026, might be inclined to help us on some of these issues. I think there’s that’s possibility always hope, hope that’s the case. We’ll find out soon enough.”

Read more …

“The current crew, not their proposed Trump replacements, prompted the sick and tired American people to demand different people..”

What the Trump Nominees Have Not Done—And Will Not Do (Victor Davis Hanson)

Deflated by the resounding November defeat, the left now believes it can magically rebound by destroying Donald Trump’s cabinet nominees. Many of Trump’s picks are well outside the usual Washington, DC/New York political, media, and corporate nexus. But that is precisely the point—to insert reformers into a bloated, incompetent, and weaponized government who are not part of it. Trump’s nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel, is already drawing severe criticism. His furious enemies cannot go after his resume, since he has spent a lifetime in private, congressional, and executive billets, both in investigations and intelligence. Instead, they claim he is too vindictive and does not reflect the ethos of the FBI. But what will Patel not do as the new director?

He will not serially lie under oath to federal investigators as did interim FBI Director Andrew McCabe, a current Patel critic. He will not forge an FBI court affidavit, as did convicted felon and agency lawyer Kevin Clinesmith. He will not claim amnesia 245 times under congressional oath to evade embarrassing admissions as did former Director James Comey. He will not partner with a foreign national to collect dirt and subvert a presidential campaign as the FBI did with Christopher Steele in 2016. He will not use the FBI to draft social media to suppress news unfavorable to a presidential candidate on the eve of an election. He would not have suppressed FBI knowledge that Hunter Biden’s laptop was genuine—to allow the lie to spread that it was “Russian disinformation” on the eve of the 2020 election. He will not raid the home of an ex-president with SWAT teams, surveil Catholics, monitor parents at school board meetings, or go after pro-life peaceful protestors.

Decorated combat veteran Pete Hegseth is another controversial nominee for secretary of defense. What will Hegseth likely not do? Go AWOL without notifying the president of a serious medical procedure as did current Secretary Lloyd Austin? Install race and gender criteria for promotion and mandate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training? Insinuate falsely that cabals of white supremacists had infiltrated the military—only to alienate that entire demographic and thus ensure the Pentagon came up 40,000 recruits short? Oversee the scramble from Kabul that saw $50 billion in U.S. military equipment abandoned to Taliban terrorists? Watch passively as a Chinese spy balloon traversed the continental United States for a week? Allow the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to promise his Chinese communist counterpart that the People’s Liberation Army would first be informed if the President of the United States was felt to issue a dangerous order?

Rotate into the Pentagon from a defense contractor boardship and then leave office to rotate back there to leverage procurement decisions? Oversee the Pentagon’s serial flunking of fiscal audits? Health and Human Services nominee Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is certainly a maverick. He may earn the most Democratic hits, given his former liberal credentials. But what will RFK also not do as HHS secretary? Oversee his agencies circumventing U.S. law by transferring money to communist China to help it produce lethal gain-of-function viruses of the COVID-19 sort—in the manner of Dr. Fauci? Organize scientists to go after critics of mandatory masking and defame them? Give pharmaceutical companies near-lifetime exemptions from legal jeopardy for rushing into production mRNA vaccines not traditionally vetted and tested? Leave office to monetize his HHS expertise and thus make millions from the pharmaceutical companies?

Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, former congressional representative and military veteran Tulsi Gabbard, will soon be defamed in congressional hearings. But what has Gabbard not done? Joined “51 former intelligence authorities” to lie on the eve of the 2020 election that the Hunter Biden laptop “had all the hallmarks” of a Russian information/disinformation operation”—in an effort to swing the election to incumbent Joe Biden? Lied under congressional oath like former DNI James Clapper, who claimed he only gave the “least untruthful answer” in congressional testimony? Encourage the FBI to monitor a presidential campaign in efforts to discredit it—in the manner of former CIA Director John Brennan, who lied not once but twice under oath? Fail to foresee the American meltdown in Kabul, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel, or the Houthis takeover of the Red Sea?

We are going to hear some outrageous things in the upcoming congressional confirmation hearings. But one thing we will not hear about are the crimes, deceptions, and utter incompetence of prior and current government grandees. The current crew, not their proposed Trump replacements, prompted the sick and tired American people to demand different people. Voters want novel approaches to reform a government that they not only no longer trust but also now deeply fear.

Read more …

“..they believe I threaten their institutional insanity. That is the only thing they are right about.”

Trump Sticks With Hegseth As Ernst, Others Reportedly Eye Pentagon Post (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump is standing by Pete Hegseth as he pushes back against allegations of sexual misconduct and appears to be locking up support among Senate Republicans for the Secretary of Defense post, but one upper chamber lawmaker is reportedly after the same job and pressuring Trump to back her instead. Trump has expressed his continued support for Hegseth multiple times this week, telling him to “keep fighting” for the nomination, even as Senate lawmakers openly discuss alternative candidates. “I spoke to Trump this morning,” Hegseth told reporters on Wednesday. “He supports us fully.” Hegseth’s nomination preceded that of former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., to serve as Attorney General. Gaetz’s nomination drew considerable attention away from Hegseth for its short duration. The Florida lawmaker pulled out of contention in the face of stiff Senate opposition and his own alleged misconduct.

But Trump seems more willing to let Hegseth make his case and to push back against hesitant Republicans, some of whom seem to be flipping his way. The New York Post on Wednesday reported that no Senate Republicans were outright against Hegseth’s confirmation. “There are zero ‘nos’ right now,” a GOP source told the outlet. But while no Senate Republican has openly opposed Hegseth for defense secretary, at least one seems to be eyeing the job for herself and some lawmakers are openly discussing the prospect of his replacement with Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla. The confirmation process will not formally begin until the Senate convenes in early January, giving Hegseth, awarded the Bronze Star for combat, roughly one month to make his case. In the meantime, the drama around his confirmation seems to have taken some of the pressure off of some of Trump’s other controversial nominees, like Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Kash Patel.

Trump and his team have thus far, resolutely supported Hegseth, with the president himself personally urging him to maintain his pursuit of the post. The Trump-Vance Transition Team, moreover, circulated a Wall Street Journal op-ed from Hegseth on Wednesday in which he pushed back on his media opponents and anonymous accusers. “The press is peddling anonymous story after anonymous story, all meant to smear me and tear me down,” Hegseth wrote in the op-ed. “It’s a textbook manufactured media takedown. They provide no evidence, no names, and they ignore the legions of people who speak on my behalf. They need to create a bogeyman, because they believe I threaten their institutional insanity. That is the only thing they are right about.” Hegseth himself has shown no signs of slowing down, posting an image of soldiers resting a helmet atop an upright rifle, apparently to honor a fallen comrade.

“Maybe it’s time for a [Secretary of Defense] who has… Led in combat. Been on patrol for days. Pulled a trigger. Heard bullets whiz by. Called in close air support. Led medevacs. Dodged IEDs. And understands—to his core—the power of this photo…because he’s been on that knee before,” Hegseth posted. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, made multiple calls to Trump before meeting Hegseth asking him to jettison the nominee before her meeting with him, The Federalist reported. One unnamed source told the outlet that “[s]he’s waging a campaign to replace Pete with herself.” “She’s constantly calling and nagging him,” another said. “It wasn’t just one time.” A representative for Ernst spoke to the outlet, calling the allegations of Ernst’s interference “Washington whispers” and highlighting her meeting with Hegseth.

“I am told that Joni Ernst is the ringleader seeking to derail Pete Hegseth’s nomination by President Trump for Defense Secretary,” conservative commentator Mark Levin posted on Wednesday.“ She has worked to organize Republican opposition in the Senate and deny Hegseth a roll call vote on his nomination. All she needs is 4 or 5 Republicans to go along with her. She has also been involved in a press campaign against Hegseth.” Ernst has not publicly indicated she would oppose Hegseth’s confirmation, but has not committed to supporting him either. She met with the Defense Secretary designate on Wednesday, after which she posted a statement that left her options open. “I appreciate Pete Hegseth’s service to our country, something we both share. Today, as part of the confirmation process, we had a frank and thorough conversation,” Ernst posted on X. Trump backers online are livid with Ernst over the alleged effort to thwart Hegseth and are considering the prospect of a primary challenge to her in 2026.

“We are learning a lot about Joni Ernst and the Senate establishment right now. Trump faithful are talking about finding a primary challenger. This is getting very serious,” Charlie Kirk wrote. “We’re going to primary you and you’ll get this result. Stop the nonsense. Confirm or get a primary,” wrote pro-Trump account “Catturd”, along with a picture of the primary results in which a Trump-backed primary challenger defeated former Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo. “Trump won Iowa with almost 56% of the vote. This is the kind of state where a primary makes sense and doesn’t put the majority in jeopardy. Ernst is up for re-election in 2026,” wrote commentator Lisa Boothe. Conservative heavyweight commentator Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service Special Agent, has amplified calls for a primary challenger to Ernst if she does not confirm Hegseth. He has further supported his confirmation and is rumored to be Trump’s pick to lead the Secret Service himself.

Read more …

“..Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency, two areas critical to the future of American competitiveness..”

Trump Appoints David Sacks As New ‘White House AI & Crypto Czar’ (JTN)

President-elect Donald Trump on Thursday announced that former PayPal Chief Operating Officer David Sacks would be in charge of artificial intelligence (AI) and cryptocurrency policy for the White House. Trump has been filling out critical roles in his next administration since he won reelection last month, including nominating his presidential Cabinet picks. Cabinet officials must be confirmed by the Senate. Sacks, who founded the enterprise social media company Yammer, will be in charge of safeguarding online “free speech,” and helping to crackdown on technological censorship, Trump said. “In this important role, David will guide policy for the Administration in Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency, two areas critical to the future of American competitiveness,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

“He will work on a legal framework so the Crypto industry has the clarity it has been asking for, and can thrive in the U.S.” The incoming president also announced that Sacks will lead the Presidential Council of Advisors for Science and Technology. “David has the knowledge, business experience, intelligence, and pragmatism to MAKE AMERICA GREAT in these two critical technologies,” Trump wrote in a subsequent post. “Congratulations, David.” Trump previously expressed doubts about cryptocurrency, even labeling it as a scam, according to Reuters, but embraced the technology during his presidential campaign.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1864845849551106261

Read more …

The director of national intelligence is supposed to go with what other people say instead of making up her own mind?!

Tulsi Gabbard A ‘Regular Reader’ of RT – ABC News (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to be director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has been an avid reader of RT news and continued to follow the Russian site long after the Washington banned the network, ABC News reported on Thursday. The article claimed that reading RT makes Gabbard unsuitable for the role in Trump’s forthcoming administration. The president-elect announced in mid-November that he wants Gabbard to take the top intelligence position, causing outrage among establishment officials, who branded the pick a major security threat. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz called Gabbard a “likely a Russian asset,” mirroring smears that the former Democratic Party member has endured for years.

Hillary Clinton infamously claimed in 2019 that Moscow “groomed” Gabard to run in the 2020 primary election, predicting that she would run as an independent later in that cycle. However, Gabbard endorsed Joe Biden, and dropped out of the race. ABC News suggested that Gabbard’s foreign policy positions “have been shaped not by some covert intelligence recruitment… but instead by her unorthodox media consumption habits.” Anonymous aides told the outlet that their former boss “regularly read and shared articles from the Russian news site RT” and disregarded the fact that in 2017 the US branded it “the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet.” ABC News added that “it was not clear to those former staffers whether or when she stopped frequenting the site.”

Gabbard, who served in the National Guard and is currently in the Army Reserve, has criticized the ‘forever wars’ that the US has been embroiled in over the years. She has argued that such conflicts do not serve American interests. While initially supporting Joe Biden’s handling of the Ukraine conflict, she later grew sceptical of the policy. That shift “has most galvanized her critics in the national security sphere,” ABC News said. The politician left the Democratic Party in 2022 and remained independent for two years. In October, she announced that she had joined the Republican Party, at a rally for Trump’s presidential campaign.

Read more …

Interesting.

Impoundment, For Lack Of A Better Word, Is Good (I&I)

If you’ve never heard the word “impoundment” before, you will – often – next year. And for good reason. Because this battle will determine whether government spending can ever be brought under control. Last year, President-elect Donald Trump said that “For 200 years under our system of government, it was undisputed that the president had the constitutional power to stop unnecessary spending through what is known as impoundment.” Since he’s been elected, he’s given every indication that he intends to reclaim this power. Indeed, the success of his “Department of Government Efficiency” run by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy depends heavily on Trump being able to spend less than Congress appropriates. This, of course, has the left freaking out. The grumblers say that Trump’s refusing to spend money Congress has authorized would be “unprecedented” and “a devastating power grab” that would “flip the power of the purse” and give Trump “authoritarian control” over the government.

There are just two big problems with these assertions. The first is that presidential impoundment dates back to the very beginnings of the nation. The second is that letting presidents impound funds appears to have been an effective tool for keeping federal spending under control. Impoundment is just a jargony word for instances where Congress appropriates a certain amount of money for a program in a given year, and the president refuses to spend all of it. A research paper published by the Center for Renewing America (CRA) provides a long and detailed historical account of impoundment, including its roots in English law and its use by presidents – Democrats and Republicans – throughout the nation’s history. Thomas Jefferson impounded funds. So did Madison, Buchanan, and Grant. Herbert Hoover, the CRA paper notes, “vigorously employed the impoundment power to decrease government spending in the midst of the Great Depression.”

FDR “refused to spend more than $500 million in public works funds on policy grounds.” Lyndon Johnson would “withhold appropriations that exceeded the president’s budget.” Even Trump-hating CNN admits that impoundment “occurred frequently in U.S. history, beginning in 1803 when Thomas Jefferson declined to buy gunboats to patrol the Mississippi as he negotiated the Louisiana Purchase with France.” While the Constitution forbids the president from spending more money than Congress has appropriated, there’s nothing in the Constitution that forbids the president from spending less. And lo and behold, the nation survived and thrived for nearly 200 years while the president had this authority. It wasn’t until 1974 that Congress stripped the president’s ability to impound funds. That year, lawmakers used the Watergate scandal and President Richard Nixon’s aggressive use of impoundment as an excuse to pass the Impoundment Control Act.

The law also created the Congressional Budget Office and the budget committees in the House and Senate, and “reasserted Congress’ power of the purse,” according to Democrats on the House Budget Committee. Well, what happened after Congress reasserted its power? Look at the two charts below. The first shows annual budget deficits as a share of GDP. The second shows the national debt as a share of GDP.

What do you see? In 1974, significant annual deficits became the norm. From 1947 to 1974, the federal deficit averaged 0.4% of GDP. Since 1974, deficits have averaged 3.8% of GDP. They’ve been close to 6% for President Joe Biden’s entire time in office. (Negative numbers in the chart are years when the government ran a surplus.) The nation’s debt, which had been trending downward as World War II debts were paid off, suddenly stopped declining in 1974. It’s been climbing fairly steadily ever since.

Trump is likely to challenge the Impoundment Control Act as unconstitutional. We hope he does, and that he succeeds, or at the very least forces Congress to fix that law. Because letting Congress have unlimited authority to set a floor on spending has been a fiscal disaster.

Read more …

Pandora’s box.

Democrat Calls For Biden ‘Blanket Pardon’ For Those Trump Could Target (JTN)

Democratic Pennsylvania Rep. Brendan Boyle on Wednesday asked President Joe Biden to issue a blanket pardon for law enforcement officials, military personnel, and other people President-elect Donald Trump could target in his next term. Biden issued a broad pardon for his son Hunter Biden on Sunday, which excused any crimes the younger Biden committed over a 10-year span that encompassed 2014 through 2024. The pardon means the first son cannot be prosecuted or sentenced for his tax charges, his federal gun charge, or any possible crime he committed while on the board of Burisma. Boyle claimed that Trump’s selection of Kash Patel as his next director of the FBI meant that he was looking to settle “personal scores,” instead of protecting Americans. Trump nominated Patel for the position last month.

“These patriots shouldn’t have to live in fear of political retribution for doing what’s right,” Boyle wrote in a statement. “That’s why I’m urging President Biden to issue a blanket pardon for anyone unjustly targeted by this vindictive scheme.” Patel, who has no current ties to the FBI, reportedly has plans to fire some high-ranking Justice Department officials and demote others, according to The Hill. “If we’re serious about stopping Trump’s authoritarian ambitions, we need to act decisively and use every tool at our disposal,” Boyle wrote. “Norms and traditions alone won’t stop him—Trump has shown time and again that he’s willing to ignore them to consolidate power and punish his opponents.” Boyle concluded that the “time for cautious restraint is over,” and pushed Biden to act quickly to “prevent Trump from abusing his power.”

Read more …

Just so everyone knows what a real diplomat is.

Lavrov-Tucker Interview: ‘For The Sake Of The Universe’ (ZH)

Tucker Carlson first unveiled Wednesday that he had traveled to Moscow to interview Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and the full interview has subsequently been published Thursday night. Among the most important messages conveyed was directed by Lavrov toward Washington and its allies, which “must understand that we would be ready to use any means not to allow them to succeed in what they call strategic defeat of Russia.” And referencing Russia’s recent use of its Oreshnik hypersonic missile, Lavrov expressed hope that Kiev’s backers took “seriously” the new weapon, for which Russia says there is no defense, as Moscow remains ready to use “any means” to defend itself. “We are sending signals and we hope that the last one, a couple of weeks ago, the signal with the new weapons system called Oreshnik… was taken seriously,” Lavrov emphasized. The very opening question posed by Tucker got straight to the main point which is surely on the minds of many viewers:

Tucker Carlson: Minister Lavrov, thank you for doing this. Do you believe the United States and Russia are at war with each other right now?

Sergey Lavrov: I wouldn’t say so. And in any case, this is not what we want. We would like to have normal relations with all our neighbors, of course, but generally with all countries especially with the great country like the United States. And President Vladimir Putin repeatedly expressed his respect for the American people, for the American history, for the American achievements in the world, and we don’t see any reason why Russia and the United States cannot cooperate for the sake of the universe.

Tucker Carlson: But the United States is funding a conflict that you’re involved in, of course, and now is allowing attacks on Russia itself. So that doesn’t constitute war?

Sergey Lavrov: Well, we officially are not at war. But what is going on in Ukraine is that some people call it hybrid war. I would call it hybrid war as well, but it is obvious that the Ukrainians would not be able to do what they’re doing with long-range modern weapons without direct participation of the American servicemen. And this is dangerous, no doubt about this. We don’t want to aggravate the situation, but since ATACMS and other long-range weapons are being used against mainland Russia as it were, we are sending signals. We hope that the last one, a couple of weeks ago, the signal with the new weapon system called Oreshnik was taken seriously.

Read more …

“The remarks come amid a string of media reports that suggested France and the UK have been considering deploying their troops to Ukraine.”

Lavrov Slams ‘Fantasies’ About Western Troops In Ukraine (RT)

The ongoing speculation about the potential deployment of troops to Ukraine by Western nations are “fantasies” that “only make the situation worse,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. The top diplomat delivered the remarks on Thursday during a press conference of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) ministerial meeting in Malta. “I believe that all these fantasies only make the situation worse and show that the people who are running around with such ideas stubbornly prefer not to hear the very clear warnings that [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin has repeatedly made publicly,” Lavrov stated. The remarks come amid a string of media reports that suggested France and the UK have been considering deploying their troops to Ukraine.

The force is reportedly supposed to act as peacekeepers to observe a ceasefire in the event of Moscow and Kiev engaging in talks. The topic has been also invoked by the German leadership, yet Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said the deployment of the country’s troops to Ukraine was “out of the question” before a “real ceasefire” was achieved. Lavrov also reiterated that Moscow welcomes any constructive initiatives to bring the Ukraine conflict to an end. However, Russia does not believe any Western-based organizations will be of any help, and is seeking to strengthen security for everyone in “our whole continent” of Eurasia, he said.

“All those initiatives floated by our partners on different continents, which are aimed at finding a political solution, they, of course, must take into account the issue of ensuring the security interests of each country and, of course, the issue of respecting human rights,” the top diplomat stressed. Relations between Russia and the collective West have changed and will not return to the situation prior to the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in early 2022, Lavrov warned. “All the previous years after the end of the Cold War, the West agreed on some right things, rhetorically praised these right things, but in reality grossly violated all the agreements and did everything to suppress the legitimate interests of Russia,” Lavrov said.

Read more …

“..Blinken argued that Kiev had “hard decisions” to make about further mobilization.”

Ukraine Preparing For End To Conflict (RT)

Kiev’s public opposition to Western calls that it draft 18-year-olds for military service is part of a strategy for winning an election if the conflict with Moscow ends next spring, the Ukrainian outlet Strana has claimed. Washington and its allies have publicly demanded the expansion of the draft to mobilize the 18-to-25 demographic, most recently on Wednesday, when US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made the argument in Brussels. According to sources in the Ukrainian presidency, however, Kiev has opposed this as part of “a strategy to prepare for the scenario of a quick end to the war and the election afterward,” Strana reported on Thursday. One possibility considered by Vladimir Zelensky is a negotiated end to the hostilities shortly after the inauguration of US President Donald Trump on January 20, the outlet said. The other option is that the talks will fail and the fighting will go on “for a long time.”

Public statements about lowering the mobilization age “are being made in case the war ends soon and there are elections, so that they can talk about how they saved the gene pool of the nation,” Strana’s source in Kiev said. In case the talks fail and the fighting continues, the mobilization will have to be expanded sooner or later, “and Bankovaya will go for it, finding hundreds of reasons to explain the change in position,” the outlet’s source added, referring to the address of the Ukrainian president’s office. Speaking to Reuters on Wednesday, Blinken argued that Kiev had “hard decisions” to make about further mobilization. Even if Ukraine got all the money and the ammunition it wanted from the West, Blinken said at a NATO press conference, “there have to be people on the front lines,” he said.

“Getting younger people into the fight, we think, many of us think, is necessary,” the US diplomat told Reuters. “Right now, 18- to 25-year-olds are not in the fight.” The Russian Defense Ministry has estimated Ukraine’s losses at more than 500,000 since February 2022, though Zelensky has publicly admitted to less than a tenth of that. Kiev has sought to mobilize another 160,000 fighters in the coming months, to replenish depleted frontline units, as Russian forces gain ground.

Read more …

“..Kiev could endorse his peace plans rather than being an obstacle..”

Zelensky Aide Visits US To Charm Trump Team – WSJ (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s right-hand man Andrey Yermak is trying to convince people close to US President-elect Donald Trump that Kiev could endorse his peace plans rather than being an obstacle, The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday. The Republican has claimed that he can resolve the Ukraine conflict in 24 hours after he returns to the Oval Office in January. Yermak, the chief of staff to the Ukrainian leader, is visiting the US to meet key figures picked by Donald Trump for his future administration, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and multiple news outlets have said. According to the WSJ, Kiev has arranged contacts with Susie Wiles, the co-chair of Trump’s election campaign who has been tapped to become White House chief of staff, Keith Kellogg, who Trump has picked to be a special envoy to Ukraine, and Mike Waltz, the incoming national security adviser.

Prior to the November presidential election, Zelensky caused a GOP outlash by visiting an arms factory in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, where he was received by Democrats. Republicans have accused the Ukrainian leader of campaigning for their rivals, with House Speaker Mike Johnson demanding that Kiev sack its ambassador to Washington, who organized the trip. The lobbying attempt by Yermak comes as Ukrainian forces are suffering from battlefield defeats and a shortage of reinforcements. In recent remarks, Zelensky has acknowledged that his country cannot beat Russia militarily and expressed a desire to restore control over all territories Kiev claims through diplomatic efforts.

According to CNN, Kiev has ordered the troops which occupy part of Kursk Region in Russia to hold on at all costs until Trump’s January 20 inauguration. The operation, which has resulted in almost 38,000 Ukrainian casualties, according to Kremlin estimates, was meant to secure a bargaining chip in future talks. Trump’s transition team has reportedly proposed freezing hostilities along the current front line and suspending Ukraine’s bid to join NATO for at least a decade. Moscow has said that no peace negotiations will happen as long as Ukrainian forces remain in Kursk Region. NATO’s intention to welcome Ukraine was a key cause of the conflict, Russian officials have maintained.

Read more …

“..the chances for compromise with Ukraine are currently “zero” and that this won’t change until “people in Kiev begin to understand there’s no way Russia will go the way they’ve suggested.”

Trump Team Cold With Ukrainians Over NATO – WSJ (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team is holding high-level talks with Ukrainian officials in Washington but NATO membership for Kiev is unlikely to be on the table, the Wall Street Journal has reported. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s closest adviser Andrey Yermak met on Wednesday with Trump’s choice as special envoy for Russia and Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, as well as incoming national security adviser Mike Waltz. While Kellogg has publicly expressed support for the Biden administration’s move to rush more weapons to Ukraine, believing it will give Trump “leverage” in future talks with Moscow, there has been little appetite among the president-elect’s team to offer Ukraine NATO membership, the paper said. “The Trump team has shown little interest in offering Ukraine membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,” the outlet wrote, noting that Zelensky still considers this a “vital security guarantee.”

Last week, a statement from the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry insisted that membership in the military bloc was “the only real security guarantee” for the country and that Kiev would not accept “any alternatives, surrogates or substitutes” for full membership. During his election campaign, Trump frequently promised he would end the Ukraine conflict within “24 hours,” but offered few details on how he would accomplish this. This week, however, Reuters reported that his advisers have now mapped out three possible plans to end the conflict, and all of them include Kiev ceding territory to Moscow and giving up on its aspiration to join NATO. According to WSJ’s report, Yermak traveled to Washington ready to communicate Ukraine’s “readiness for peace.” However, one person familiar with Kiev’s position told the outlet that it must be a “sustainable peace” and that a “temporary” arrangement will not serve US or Ukrainian interests.

Lucian Kim, a Ukraine analyst at International Crisis Group, told the outlet that Kiev might already recognize that NATO membership is not “right around the corner” but suggested that it may not make sense for them to concede this “before negotiations have even started.” On Thursday, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia Sergey Ryabkov told CNN that Moscow remains open to hearing Trump’s plans, but has not received any concrete proposals. He warned, however, that under no circumstances would Russia compromise on its core national interests. He also cautioned that the chances for compromise with Ukraine are currently “zero” and that this won’t change until “people in Kiev begin to understand there’s no way Russia will go the way they’ve suggested.”

Read more …

“..Hungary is “pressing hard so that Donald Trump’s goal of ending this war quickly becomes a reality..”

Hungary Comments On Trump’s Desire To End Ukraine Conflict (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s plans to resolve the Ukraine conflict could soon become a reality and Budapest intends to help the Republicans achieve that goal, Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Peter Szijjarto has said. Following a meeting in Washington on Wednesday with Trump’s candidate for National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, Szijjarto noted that the current US administration under President Joe Biden appears to only wish to prolong the Ukraine conflict and is trying to make it harder to establish peace after Trump takes office in January. Szijjarto stated that in the US, the Democrats appear to be “on the side of war” while the Republican party is “on the side of peace.” Because of this, the issue of establishing peace in Ukraine became one of the key topics in his conversations with Waltz, the Hungarian diplomat said.

”The American Republicans and we, Hungarian patriots, think similarly, and even in some cases completely identically, about the most important things in the world,” Szijjarto said, noting that this provides a “very stable basis” for future bilateral relations between the two countries. The diplomat added that Hungary is “pressing hard so that Donald Trump’s goal of ending this war quickly becomes a reality,” and warned that failure to achieve peace in Ukraine would increase the risk of escalation on a daily basis. “We can only hope that nothing will happen in Ukraine before January 20 that will irreversibly change the situation and significantly complicate efforts to achieve peace,” the Hungarian minister said.

Meanwhile, Moscow has said that it has yet to receive a detailed plan from Trump or his team regarding a potential resolution of the conflict. However, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has stated in an interview with CNN that Russia would carefully examine such a plan when it is submitted, but noted that it would not agree to any concessions that compromise its national security interests. Ryabkov also issued a warning to the outgoing Biden administration that Russia would respond to any provocations and urged the West not to underestimate Moscow’s resolve to defend its core interests using all means necessary.

Read more …

“Everybody knows that it would be absurd and a sign of unbelievable political weakness, if we in Germany and in Europe now waited for others to conduct these phone conversations, and we sort of commented on the news shown on TV.”

Not Talking With Putin ‘Absurd’ – Scholz (RT)

It would be absurd not to communicate with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine conflict, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said. By failing to do so, Germany and other EU states would be consigning themselves to irrelevance, he argued to lawmakers in Berlin. Scholz held a phone conversation with Putin in mid-November, which was their first in almost two years. The German head of government urged the Kremlin to withdraw its troops from territories claimed by Ukraine, reiterating his determination to support Kiev for “as long as necessary.” The Russian president, in turn, attributed the escalation of hostilities in 2022 to NATO’s “long-standing aggressive policy aimed at creating an anti-Russian bridgehead on Ukrainian territory.”

According to a readout published by the Kremlin, Putin also expressed readiness to engage in talks with Ukraine, stressing, however, that new territorial realities should be taken into account and the “root causes of the conflict” eliminated. During a Q&A session in the German parliament on Wednesday, an opposition MP from the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) voiced skepticism over last month’s call. Scholz responded by stating: “Everybody knows that it would be absurd and a sign of unbelievable political weakness, if we in Germany and in Europe now waited for others to conduct these phone conversations, and we sort of commented on the news shown on TV.” Scholz further insisted that Western European nations must talk to Moscow, despite a difference of opinion.

Previously commenting on the conversation, the German chancellor similarly dismissed criticisms that his outreach could undermine Western unity, arguing that diplomatic channels should remain open and saying that he expected to talk to Putin again. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has criticized the phone call between Scholz and Putin, claiming that it could weaken the Kremlin’s “isolation.” Putin said in late November that “there was nothing unusual” about his call with Scholz, with both officials laying out their positions on the Ukraine conflict. The Russian president added that some other Western leaders were “willing to resume” dialogue, stressing that he remained open to such overtures.

The phone conversation between Scholz and Putin received mixed reactions in the West. In a post on X, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk claimed that “no-one will stop Putin with phone calls.” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau emphasized the importance of maintaining a “level of engagement with counterparts who in many cases we disagree with.”

Read more …

“We would like to discuss with all our partners in this process the way to cut the channels of financing and arming” the terrorists..”

West Backing Terrorists In Syria – Russia (RT)

Russia has reports that the US and the UK might be implicated in supporting the al-Qaeda-affiliated militants currently on the offensive in Syria, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said. Hayat Tahrir-al-Sham (HTS) terrorist group, previously known as Jabhat al-Nusra, launched a surprise attack from Idlib last week and has since taken Aleppo and Hama. US journalist Tucker Carlson asked Lavrov who was supporting the terrorists in Syria, during the interview that aired on Thursday. ”Well, we have some information,” Lavrov said. “The information which is being floated and it’s in the public domain, mentions, among others, the Americans, the Brits. Some people say that Israel is interested in making this situation aggravated so that Gaza is not under very close scrutiny.” “It’s a complicated game. Many actors are involved,” the Russian diplomat added.

Lavrov explained to Carlson that Russia, Iran, and Türkiye brokered a ceasefire in Syria in 2017 and again in 2020, calling this Astana Format “a useful combination of players.” “The rules of the game are to help Syrians to come to terms with each other and to prevent separatist threats from getting strong,” the diplomat said. “That’s what the Americans are doing in the east of Syria when they groom some Kurdish separatists using the profits from oil and grain sold, the resources which they occupy.” “We would like to discuss with all our partners in this process the way to cut the channels of financing and arming” the terrorists, he added. Lavrov has already spoken with his Turkish and Iranian colleagues, he told Carlson, and intends to meet with them again on Friday at a conference in Qatar.

Russia will push for “strict implementation” of the deal concerning Idlib because that province of Syria is where the terrorists emerged from.“The arrangements reached in 2019 and 2020 provided for our Turkish friends to control the situation in the Idlib de-escalation zone and to separate the HTS from the opposition, which is non-terrorist and which cooperates with Türkiye,” Lavrov said. Military and security leaders of all three countries are also in contact with each other, Russia’s top diplomat added. Carlson sought a meeting with Lavrov, saying he was appalled that the US and Russia are inching closer to an open war over Ukraine. He also tried to get an interview with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky but this was blocked, reportedly by the US government.

Read more …

Complex. Pepe has a hard time too.

The Syria Riddle: How It May Turn Into The First BRICS War (Pepe Escobar)

The timeline tells the story. November 18: Ronen Bar, Israel’s Shin Bet chief, meets with heads of MIT, Turkey’s intel. November 25: NATO Chief Mark Rutte meets with Turkey’s Sultan Erdogan. November 26: Salafi-jihadis assembled by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), formerly Nusa Front, supported by Turkish intel, plus a hefty Rent-a-Jihadi coalition, launch a lightning-fast attack against Aleppo. The Rent-a-Jihadi offensive originated in Greater Idlibistan. That’s where tens of thousands of jihadis were holed up, according to the – now proven failed – 2020 Damascus-Moscow strategy, which Turkey had to grudgingly accept. The Rent-a-Jihadi mob comprises scores of mercenaries who crossed over from – where else – Turkey: Uighurs, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Ukrainians, even ISIS-K imports.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei, earlier their week, confirmed the Salafi-jihadi offensive was coordinated by US/Israel. Baghaei did not mention Turkey, even as he stressed the terror attack happened immediately after Israel accepted a ceasefire with Hezbollah – already broken by Tel Aviv dozens of times – and after Netanyahu publicly accused Syrian President Bashar al-Assad of “playing with fire” by allowing the transit of modern Iranian missiles and military equipment via Syria to Hezbollah. Right before the ceasefire, Tel Aviv smashed virtually all communication routes between Syria and Lebanon. Netanyahu subsequently stressed that the focus now is on “the Iranian threat”, essential to smash the Axis of Resistance. According to a Syrian special services source, talking to RIA Novosti, Ukrainian advisers played the key role in the capture of Aleppo – providing drones and American satellite navigation and electronic warfare systems, and teaching Syrian collaborators and Islamic Party of Turkestan operatives how to use them.

Syrian Arab Army (SAA) communications were completely jammed by these electronic warfare systems: “The assault groups and drones were equipped with encrypted GPS devices and extensive use of AI, so that the use and navigation of attack UAVs and kamikaze drones took place from a long distance.” The mechanism was set in place months ago. Kiev made a straightforward deal with Salafi-jihadis: drones in exchange for batches of takfiris to be weaponized against Russia in the US/NATO proxy war in Ukraine. What is Turkey really up to? The practical role of Turkey in the Salafi-jihadi Greater Idlibistan offensive is as murky as it gets. Over the past weekend, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, significantly also a former intel chief, denied any Turkish role. No one – apart from the NATO sphere – believes it. No Salafi-jihadi in northwest Syria can as much as strike a match without a Turkish intel green light – as the Ankara system funds and weaponizes them.

The official Turkey line is to support the Syrian – Salafi-jihadi – “opposition” as a whole while slightly deploring the Greater Idlibistan offensive. Once again, classic hedging. Yet the logical conclusion is that Ankara may have just buried the Astana process – by betraying their political partners Russia and Iran. Erdogan and Hakan Fidan, so far, have failed to explain to the whole of West Asia – as well as the Global South – how this sophisticated Rent-a-Jihadi op could have been set up by US/Israel without any knowledge whatsoever by Turkey. And in case this would have been a trap, Ankara simply has no sovereign power to denounce it.

Read more …

Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retired), an Indian Air Force veteran fighter test pilot and is the former Director-General of the Center for Air Power Studies in New Delhi.

The Great Game in the Arctic (Anil Chopra)

The Arctic region, still relatively unexplored, is recognized as a rich repository of untapped natural resources, particularly oil, gas, and marine life. It is also historically viewed as a potential flashpoint for great-power conflict. Russia has long maintained a dominant presence in the area. However, NATO’s expansion northward has compelled Moscow to significantly increase its military footprint. Growing superpower China has shown an escalating interest in Arctic affairs, while India, despite its geographical distance, has also established a foothold in the region. With increased US confrontation with both China and Russia, these two powers have fostered greater cooperation and coordination in Arctic matters. Covering over one sixth of the Earth’s landmass, the Arctic region encompasses the North Pole and is characterized by vast expanses of floating ice, with ridges that can reach up to 20 meters thick.

It is estimated to hold nearly 22% of the world’s undiscovered oil and natural gas reserves, with Russia accounting for 52% of the Arctic’s total energy resources and Norway holding 12%. Global industrialization and rising emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have resulted in increased temperatures, leading to rapid glacial melting. In 2024, the minimum extent of Arctic sea ice was recorded at 4.28 million square kilometers – approximately 1.8 million square kilometers below the long-term average. The rate of sea ice reduction is nearly 13% per decade, suggesting that the Arctic could become ice-free during the summer by 2040. The consequences of melting ice are profound, potentially raising sea levels and threatening many island territories and coastal cities. Climate change and global warming have garnered international attention, highlighted by discussions at recent forums such as COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan.

Unlike Antarctica, which is governed by a 1959 treaty allowing only peaceful activities, no analogous treaty exists for the Arctic. Established in 1996, the Arctic Council addresses issues pertinent to Arctic nations, comprising the United States, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia. Observer countries must acknowledge the sovereignty and jurisdiction of Arctic states while recognizing the extensive legal framework governing the Arctic Ocean. In May 2013, India became the 11th country to gain permanent observer status at the Arctic Council. Both Russia and the United States have long maintained military bases and surveillance systems in the Arctic, including nuclear deterrent capabilities.

Russia has operated nuclear-powered icebreakers in the region for some time. Although the Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation (AMEC) agreement between Russia, the US, and Norway facilitated the decommissioning of certain Soviet and US assets, the increasing interest from additional nations has sparked a new Cold War dynamics between the two primary powers. The cooperative atmosphere that once prevailed has deteriorated, particularly in light of geopolitical tensions stemming from the situation in Ukraine since 2014. Increased ice melting has begun opening the Arctic region for longer periods of time in summer months. There are three main routes that could revolutionise the international commercial shipping industry in the 21st century.

The Northern Sea Route (NSR) lies along the arctic coast of Russia. Ice clears up here first and therefore is available for longer. It also has the highest commercial potential: the route reduces the maritime distance between East Asia and Europe from 21,000 kilometres via the Suez Canal to 12,800 km. It implies a transit time saving of 10-15 days. NSR was used extensively for natural resource extraction and transportation during the Soviet Era. In 2009, two German ships led by a Russian icebreaker made the first commercial journey across the NSR from Busan in South Korea, to Rotterdam in Netherlands, establishing good commercial prospects.

The North West Passage (NWP) is another route between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, crossing Canada’s Arctic Archipelago that was first used in 2007. It may open for more regular use soon. While Canada claims it as an internal waterway, the US and others insist it is an international transit passage, and must allow free and unencumbered movement. This route could reduce shipping time between the Middle East and Western Europe to around 13,600 km compared to 24,000 km via the Panama Canal, however parts of the route are just 15 metres deep, thus reducing its viability. China seems to be interested in using this passage to eastern parts of US, as the Panama Canal too has ship size and tonnage restrictions. The third one is a potential Transpolar Sea Route (TSR) which could use the central part of the Arctic to directly link the Bering Strait and the Atlantic Ocean port of Murmansk. This route is hypothetical for now and may appear as climate change progresses.

Read more …

 

 

 

Rogan

 

 

Nodules
https://twitter.com/i/status/1864667844610244990

 

 

Dog&crow

 

 

Dog street
https://twitter.com/i/status/1864732510669713795

 

 

Dogball

 

 

Dog snow
https://twitter.com/i/status/1864386165266055356

 

 

Food

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nov 192024
 
 November 19, 2024  Posted by at 9:40 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  82 Responses »


Rembrandt van Rijn A woman bathing in a stream (Hendrickje) 1654

 

Biden Wants To Take World With Him – Russian State Duma Chair (RT)
Trump’s Security Chief Nominee Blasts Biden’s Ukraine Missile ‘Escalation’ (RT)
Has Biden Just Destroyed the World? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Biden Walks Off Into Jungle (RT)
‘Freezing’ Ukraine Conflict Unacceptable – Kremlin (RT)
The Great Trump Exhale (QTR)
Gabbard Could Help Change US Foreign Policy (John Kiriakou)
Ramaswamy Says Some Government Agencies Will Be ‘Deleted Outright’ (ET)
Trump Expands Search For Treasury Secretary (ZH)
CNN Mole People Can’t Deal With MAGA Posse At UFC (MN)
Beyond Consequence (James Howard Kunstler)
WSJ Issues Scathing Indictment Of How Democrats Blew It On Inflation (ZH)
Mad at the Election? Blame Obama (AmG)
Germany Has Become Europe’s Political Wasteland (Bordachev)
Gardening Against Evil Days (Helmer)

 

 

 

 

Trump

Gaetz

Vivek

Tucker
https://twitter.com/i/status/1858320988867350576

Speaker

Skripal
https://twitter.com/i/status/1858271372020990012

60 min

 

 

 

 

“..it appears that the elderly Biden, nearing the end of his life, is “dreaming of eternity” and wants to “pull America under with him, and maybe the entire world as well.”

Biden Wants To Take World With Him – Russian State Duma Chair (RT)

The outgoing President Joe Biden is taking the US and the rest of the world down with him by escalating the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, the chairman of the Russian State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, stated on Monday. Biden has reportedly removed US restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles, according to a New York Times report on Sunday, which described the move as “a significant escalation” that might “provoke a direct response from Moscow.” The White House has made no official statements on the matter. Volodin said it appears that the elderly Biden, nearing the end of his life, is “dreaming of eternity” and wants to “pull America under with him, and maybe the entire world as well.”

“If this happens, Russia will be forced to respond. The manner of the response will be up to the Ministry of Defense, but there will be one,” he said, adding that this might even include the use of “new weapons systems” that Russia has not previously deployed on Ukrainian territory. As for the Western weapons in question, they have already been used against Russia, Volodin noted. Their expanded use might cause some additional damage, but “it will not change the situation on the battlefield.” “It will only worsen the fate and future of Ukraine. And it will finally destroy Russian-American relations,” Volodin predicted. While Washington has made no official policy announcements, a number of European NATO members and public figures across the West hailed the Times report. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky said on Monday that long-range strikes against Russia were part of his “victory plan” and that “missiles will speak” very soon.

The US and its allies have put in some restrictions on the use of the weapons they supplied to Kiev since 2022, in order to maintain plausible deniability of their involvement in the conflict with Russia. Ukraine has demanded the removal of these limitations since this spring. Russian President Vladimir Putin warned in September that any use of Western weapons to strike deep inside Russia would “significantly change the nature of the conflict.” He noted that Ukraine does not have the capability to use such weapons itself, and would require foreign personnel to create targeting and firing solutions. This, Putin said, would mean that “NATO countries are directly involved in the military conflict” with Russia.

Putin

Read more …

“..It was not a matter of the US “giving permission” to Ukraine, but crossing the threshold of direct involvement, Putin told reporters in September..”

Trump’s Security Chief Nominee Blasts Biden’s Ukraine Missile ‘Escalation’ (RT)

Allowing Kiev to use US-supplied long-range weapons against Russia will only escalate the conflict that President-elect Donald Trump is trying to end, the incoming White House national security adviser, Mike Waltz, has said. The New York Times reported on Sunday that US President Joe Biden had given Ukraine permission to use ATACMS missiles against Russian territory. Washington has neither confirmed nor denied the anonymously sourced claim. Waltz, a former Green Beret and Florida congressman tapped by Trump to serve as his top aide, told Fox News on Monday that he was not briefed on the move by the outgoing administration, as he normally would be by tradition. “It’s another step up the escalation ladder,” Waltz told Fox host Brian Kilmeade.

“And nobody knows where this is going. North Korea is unleashing ballistic missiles, artillery, now tens of thousands of soldiers. “The administration responds by lifting this restriction. North Korea sends more soldiers. South Korea is now saying it may get engaged…” Ukraine has accused the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea of sending weapons and thousands of troops to aid Russia. Washington has accepted this claim at face value. “So this is a development, but it’s a tactical one,” Waltz added. “President Trump is talking grand strategy here. How do we get both sides to the table to end this war? What’s the framework for a deal, and who’s sitting at that table?” Trump is putting together an “all-star team” that will consider the broader strategic issues and the ways to “we drive this war to an end,” Waltz said.

The Republican president-elect campaigned on ending the Russia-Ukraine conflict, saying he would try to do so even before his January 20 inauguration. Many of his prominent backers have denounced Sunday’s rumored move by the outgoing President Joe Biden as an attempt to make any peace deal more difficult. Under Biden, the US has provided over $64 billion worth of weapons, ammunition and equipment to Ukraine to support Vladimir Zelensky’s war effort against Russia. Washington placed certain restrictions on the use of such weapons, and Zelensky has spent months demanding the lifting of the limitations, as part of his “victory plan.”

Moscow has repeatedly warned the US and its allies that any such move would amount to their open involvement in the hostilities. Russian President Vladimir Putin has pointed out that Kiev lacks the capability to use long-range missiles without NATO satellites and military personnel to develop targeting and firing solutions. It was not a matter of the US “giving permission” to Ukraine, but crossing the threshold of direct involvement, Putin told reporters in September. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova acknowledged on Monday that reports of Biden’s decision were still unconfirmed, but added that if Kiev actually used US missiles in such a way, Moscow’s response would be “adequate and tangible.”

Read more …

“Trump cannot lose the war in Ukraine unless he can present peace as an accomplishment.”

Has Biden Just Destroyed the World? (Paul Craig Roberts)

To make it impossible for Trump to enter office with good relations with Russia, in addition to “Russiagate,” as Gilbert Doctorow reminds us, the corrupt Obama regime unlawfully seized Russian consular properties in San Francisco, and I think elsewhere, in order to bring Trump into office with poisoned relations with Moscow. This time in November, 2024, the totally corrupt Biden Regime, has blocked any peaceful settlement negotiated by Trump of the Russian/Ukrainian conflict by reversing Biden’s decision and giving go ahead for the US/NATO to launch missiles from Ukrainian territory into Russia. The senile idiot, manipulated by his warmonger advisors, has possibly started WWIII. Recently in an interview with Russian television I expressed my opinion that such a trap was desired by the neoconservatives for Trump, but that I thought the Pentagon would block the approval.

There are so many reports that the Biden regime has given a green light to NATO launching missiles from Ukraine into Russia that the information must be correct. We hear it from Russian state television “news of the week.” We hear it from The Washington Post. We hear it from AP News. And so on. Here we have a classic example of how an outgoing administration can commit an incoming one and thereby forestall its electoral agenda. It is now happening before our eyes, although the whore American media will do everything possible to hide the truth. The question is: What will Putin do now if the red line that Putin says is the fatal one is actually crossed and Western missiles begin hitting targets inside Russia? Will it prove to be, like all other red lines Putin has declared, not to be real?

In light of Putin’s non-confrontational behavior, if the missile attacks begin prior to Trump’s inauguration, possibly Putin will wait and see what Trump does to reverse the decision before Putin releases death and destruction on the Western World. The crazed neoconservatives and Deep State have pressured Biden into a decision that places the entire world in a situation where destruction of all life possibly awaits. Why did a single American vote for such a cruel, inhuman, morally vacant, anti-American political Democrat party that is willing to risk life on earth for Washington’s hegemony and the profits of the military/security complex? Why did the European Union regret Trump’s election? Why does the Western media support actions that result in the end of the world? The final question and the most important one is: What can President-elect Trump do about it?

He can, prior to his inauguration, call Putin and tell him to hold off, that once inaugurated as President, he will reverse the policy and permit no missile attacks on Russia. Will Putin believe that Trump can deliver? Considering the war cabinet Trump has appointed, can Trump make a decision independently of his government? The situation is complicated by the fact that Trump’s appointees are aligned against Iran and for Israel. Neither Russia nor China can stand aside from an US/Israeli attack on Iran. Putin probably wonders if “Making America Great Again” also implies military dominance. Trump’s supporters are tired of losing wars. They want to win one. Trump cannot lose the war in Ukraine unless he can present peace as an accomplishment.

Read more …

Before okaying long range missiles in Ukraine, they sent Biden deep into the Amazon.

Biden Walks Off Into Jungle (RT)

Outgoing US President Joe Biden appears to have once again aimlessly wandered off stage after delivering a speech on climate change in the Amazon rainforest in Brazil on Sunday. A clip of the 81-year-old’s latest gaffe has gone viral on social media. Speaking at a press conference near Manaus, the largest city in the Brazilian Amazon, Biden wore a loose-fitting button-down shirt and his trademark aviator sunglasses. Throughout the address, the president talked about the dangers of climate change, the importance of rainforest conservation as well as the investments his administration has made into clean energy.

Biden stated that he is officially the first sitting US President to personally visit the Amazon rainforest and announced that his government would be launching a special financing coalition to mobilize at least $10 billion by 2030 in order to protect 20,000 square miles of land in the Amazon. However, after finishing his speech, Biden waved to the cameras, turned away from the podium and started walking away, heading straight into what appeared to be some dense greenery. The video of the aging president’s exit has since gone viral on social media, with one clip posted by the Pop Base account gaining over 26 million views by Monday morning. In the comments, many users expressed confusion over where Biden was going, with some claiming he had “wandered off into the Amazon.”

“Bruh did he just wave bye and disappear into the jungle?” one user wrote, with another asking why the president was in the Amazon at all. “He’s really doing all the side quests now that he can retire,” one person suggested. According to Newsweek, however, a full version of the video supposedly shows that Biden was not actually lost and had walked down a path that was not clearly visible in the clip. The outlet noted that several other members of the press later also walked out along the same path. While Biden’s team has not commented on the incident yet, if the US president was indeed lost, it wouldn’t be his first public mishap. The White House, however, had previously insisted that most of the videos of the aging leader getting confused or ‘frozen’ at public events had been manipulated, with Biden’s Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre dismissing them as “cheap fakes.”

Read more …

First: no nukes, no NATO, no nazis. Only then can we talk freeze.

‘Freezing’ Ukraine Conflict Unacceptable – Kremlin (RT)

Moscow vehemently rejects the possibility of freezing the Ukraine conflict, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Monday. He was responding to reports that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan plans to suggest the move during the G20 summit in Brazil. Bloomberg, citing sources familiar with Erdogan’s plans, claimed that the Turkish leader would suggest freezing the conflict “on current lines” and encourage Kiev to delay discussions about joining NATO for at least ten years as a “concession” to Moscow. He also reportedly plans to propose the creation of a demilitarized zone in Donbass, where international troops would be deployed to provide security guarantees for Ukraine. Asked to comment on the report, Peskov stated that Moscow had no information about any proposals being prepared by Erdogan. However, he said “any kind of freezing along the line of military conflict is unacceptable for the Russian side.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin previously outlined conditions for ending the hostilities, and those steps are “what needs to be done to stop the fighting,” the spokesperson added. In June, Putin set out conditions for peace negotiations with Kiev, which involved the complete removal of Ukrainian troops from all Russian territories, including the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions. They also involved Ukraine legally committing to never joining NATO or any other Western military blocs. Last week, during his first direct phone call with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in two years, Putin also reiterated that Moscow remains open to finding a political and diplomatic resolution to the Ukraine conflict, and said it was Kiev that was refusing to negotiate.

According to the Kremlin, the Russian president also emphasized that the crisis was the “direct result of NATO’s long-standing aggressive policy aimed at creating an anti-Russian bridgehead on Ukrainian territory, while ignoring our country’s interests in the field of security and trampling on the rights of Russian-speaking residents.” During the call, Putin emphasized that any potential settlement between Moscow and Kiev would inevitably have to take into account Russia’s security interests, recognize the new territorial realities, and “eliminate the root cause of the conflict.”

Read more …

“…the man that the media told us was Hitler nonstop has morphed into the people’s president.”

The Great Trump Exhale (QTR)

I think this election cycle President Trump won so handily, not only because his competition was grossly incompetent, but because it was far less taboo this time around to be a Trump supporter. In 2016, before President Trump had a chance to establish a four-year record for himself in office, it wasn’t popular to openly support him. His “Make America Great Again” hats were ridiculed as a cheap branding trick and the mainstream media was unrelenting in its quest to crucify not only Trump, but those who supported him. Throughout the last four years of political lunacy, which included wide-open borders, rising inflation, squandering of taxpayer cash, and multiple geopolitical dust-ups, it became far less of a faux pas to support Trump publicly. This period culminated in an internal coup that subverted the primary process, further reinforcing this shift.

Today, there are still scores of Democrats who believe Trump is irredeemable and repugnant, just as there are still plenty of news organizations that spend 24 hours a day attempting to make him look bad. But this election go-round, there were just too many Americans on the center-left, center, and center-right who decided that the humiliation they would need to endure by supporting Trump publicly paled in comparison to how insulted they felt by the current administration’s assumption that they would buy an entire campaign based on flip-flopping, outright lies, race hustling, and identity politics. For every one person that still found it inconceivable to support Trump publicly, there were two more, myself included, who simply could no longer endure having their character and intelligence insulted strictly because they backed a set of political ideals that, at any other point in recent history, would’ve been considered center-left, moderate or barely right-leaning.

With that sea change among the most crucial part of the voter base, inclusive of independents and many around the center of the political aisle, Trump won this election in a landslide. And Democrats, who had been told many times over that their political strategies were wearing thin, were forced to face undeniable, quantitative proof of just how much of the American public agreed with this assessment. As such, it’s undeniable that the nation has issued a collective exhale in response to the election results. Many people who voted for Trump, and who may have still been wondering whether it’s OK to express their political beliefs publicly without being called “garbage,” now know that they can: they are in the company of more than 70 million other voters and form the majority of the country. For years, Trump campaigned on the saying that his voters were the “silent majority.” This election proved him right.

It was risky for many high-profile people to come out and publicly endorse Donald Trump prior to this election, and is a testament to just how much the left has lost its way. Had Trump not won, many of these people would have been lambasted as “far-right wingers,” “purveyors of misinformation,” and people whose moral and ethical integrity should be called into question heading into another Democratic administration. But instead, with a Trump mandate, millions of Americans can exhale publicly and, like Joe Rogan said last week, finally just admit that no matter what everybody says, they just like President Trump. Rogan said on his podcast a couple of days ago: “…you’re getting what you get. That’s who the guy is and I like him. I’ve gone I’ve grown to like him. I had a much more negative opinion of him back in the day because it was There’s only so much you can pay attention to and do deep dives on right before you lose your f*cking mind and with him I was like It’s probably not good for the country.”

And what we saw last night at the UFC fight, where Trump had a great interaction with fighter Jon Jones, who handed him his belt after winning his fight, is that whether people like it or not, the man that the media told us was Hitler nonstop has morphed into the people’s president. This will be like a snowball rolling down a hill: the more people that come out and embrace Trump publicly, the more who will follow. Put simply, Trump is just winning people over. I wrote last week about how this election doesn’t just feel like the beginning of four years of change; it feels like it could be spearheading a populist/libertarian renaissance in the country that could last multiple election cycles. You could tell from his entrance to the fights last night that the nation is starting to feel the excitement for this potential, too. Seeing Trump at the fights last night was like the flyover before an NFL game. It was one of many moments over the last year while he was campaigning that people muttered: “We’re back. America is back.”

Read more …

“Not only is she ill-prepared and unqualified, but she traffics in conspiracy theories and cozies up to dictators like Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin.”

Gabbard Could Help Change US Foreign Policy (John Kiriakou)

President-elect Donald Trump this week stirred up the intelligence community with his picks of former Hawaii Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence (DNI) and former DNI and Texas Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe as C.I.A. director. Ratcliffe, a fierce partisan, is nonetheless the more traditional pick of the two. Gabbard spent her life as a Democrat, including eight years in the House before running for president in 2020, dropping out, changing her affiliation to “Independent,” and then changing it to Republican and endorsing Trump. She is the more controversial pick, not necessarily because of her politics, but because she is far more isolationist than most Democrats and she supports an immediate end to the war in Ukraine and engagement with North Korea, China and Syria.

Both Ratcliffe and Gabbard are likely to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate, according to The Washington Post. Neither is as controversial as, say, attorney general nominee Matt Gaetz, who was investigated a year ago for sex trafficking, or defense secretary nominee Peter Hegseth, a former Army captain who is currently a Fox News host and who has literally no experience running anything larger than his own household. While Democrats will likely oppose both Ratcliffe and Gabbard, if only because the two are MAGA Republicans who want to end U.S. financial and military support for Ukraine, Republicans now control 53 Senate seats, more than enough for confirmation, with room to lose a few. Publicly, Democrats aren’t saying much about Ratcliffe. He’s mostly a known quantity in Washington, having been DNI for a few months at the end of the first Trump administration. He’s a former member of the House Armed Services Committee and was also a member of Trump’s impeachment defense team.

Ratcliffe was initially dismissed as unqualified for the DNI job in 2019. He withdrew from consideration, but Trump renamed him a year later and he was finally approved by a sharply-divided Senate. His tenure was short, and he didn’t do anything either controversial or innovative in his few months in the job. Gabbard’s nomination has drawn far more ire, especially from Democrats. Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA), a former C.I.A. officer, said she was “appalled” by Gabbard’s nomination and added, “Not only is she ill-prepared and unqualified, but she traffics in conspiracy theories and cozies up to dictators like Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin.” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) called Gabbard’s nomination “incredibly reckless,” and added that “Putting someone with known sympathies for foreign adversaries (in the position) is not putting America’s interests first — it’s putting our security at risk.”

And Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) said, “Tulsi Gabbard’s deep ties to some of our nation’s most dangerous adversaries, including Bashar al-Assad of Syria and Vladimir Putin of Russia, make her an untrustworthy guardian of our nation’s most closely held secrets.” All of this is, in my own humble opinion, absurd. Democrats don’t like Gabbard because she never bought into the party’s anti-Russia hysteria, because she was never supportive of putting the U.S. and NATO on the brink of war with Russia in Ukraine, and because she doubted the Democratic Party’s assertion that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad gassed his own people, an allegation refuted by United Nations whistleblowers. That’s exactly what we need in a healthy democracy — somebody in a position of authority who makes decisions based on facts, not on what happens to be politically expedient.

We need a person willing to rein in the neoconservative/neoliberal intelligence and foreign policy establishment when they urge the president to double down on military action based on phony or incomplete intelligence. Gabbard may face one substantive challenge when she finally becomes DNI. That challenge will be in dealing with Secretary of State-designate Marco Rubio, currently a Republican senator from Florida. Rubio is a longtime mainstream neoconservative hawk, especially on China, although he has kowtowed to Trump successfully over the past eight years. Rubio and Gabbard have some clashing views, but Gabbard is as much a seasoned bureaucratic fighter as Rubio is. The question, then, will be who can more successfully get Trump’s ear.

Read more …

“Most of the people making these decisions from health care to the Department of Defense are failing on effectiveness because they have no accountability..”

Ramaswamy Says Some Government Agencies Will Be ‘Deleted Outright’ (ET)

President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to co-lead a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) said on Sunday that some federal agencies will be “deleted outright” and that contractors may see “massive cuts” in what they can charge when the incoming administration takes office next year. Last week, Trump named former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and Tesla CEO Elon Musk to lead the presidential advisory commission, DOGE. Their work must be completed no later than July 4, 2026, Trump said in his statement. Ramaswamy told Fox Business on Sunday that “there is massive waste, fraud, and abuse right now.” “Federal contractors are really exploiting the federal government,” he said. When Fox host Maria Bartiromo asked him whether entire government agencies will be closed, he responded in the affirmative.

“We expect mass reductions. We expect certain agencies to be deleted outright,“ Ramaswamy said. ”We expect mass reductions in force in areas of the federal government that are bloated. We expect massive cuts of all federal contractors and others who are overbilling the federal government. So, yes, we expect all of the above.” As a presidential candidate, Ramaswamy had called for totally eliminating or restructuring of several agencies, including the FBI, the Department of Education, the Internal Revenue Service, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Elaborating on Fox, Ramaswamy said that “failures of the executive branch need to be addressed.” “Unelected bureaucrats in the administrative state that was created through executive action” are running the government, he said, which needs to be fixed by the executive branch.

“This is about restoring self-governance and accountability in America as well. Elected leaders, if they make the wrong decisions, voters have a great choice. You can vote them out and remove them,” Ramaswamy said. “Most of the people making these decisions from health care to the Department of Defense are failing on effectiveness because they have no accountability. Historically, it’s been the view of many scholars to say that those people could not even be fired. Now, we take a different view with the environment the Supreme Court has given us in recent years, and we’re going to use that in a pretty extensive way to move quickly.” DOGE will not be an official government agency, meaning that both Ramaswamy and Musk are not considered Cabinet members in the incoming Trump administration and therefore not subject to the Senate confirmation.

Both Ramaswamy and Musk, as well as Tulsi Gabbard, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. joined the president-elect at a UFC event at New York City’s Madison Square Garden on Saturday night. Gabbard is Trump’s pick for director of national intelligence, while Trump nominated Kennedy to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Read more …

It looked like Bessent had it, but apparently there was too much opposition to him.

Trump Expands Search For Treasury Secretary (ZH)

The group of prospective Trump Treasury Secretary picks has expanded from two (Howard Lutnick and Scott Bessent – as we detailed here) to four (now including former Fed governor Kevin Warsh and Apollo Globla chief Marc Rowan). While we noted earlier that Elon Musk and RFK Jr. are pushing for Howard Lutnick, with Musk praising the Cantor Fitzgerald CEO as a disruptor compared to Key Square Group (and George Soros protégé) Scott Bessent – the latter of whom met with Trump on Friday, and has the backing of many including noted investor Kyle Bass; The FT reports that people close to the process said Kevin Warsh, a former Federal Reserve governor, Marc Rowan, chief executive of Apollo Global Management, and Bill Hagerty, the Tennessee senator, are also now in the running, along with Robert Lighthizer, the former US trade representative under Trump.

The FT continues to note that since Trump was elected, Bessent has been on the defensive about his commitment to enacting the president’s economic vision. In an opinion piece for Fox News last week, he described tariffs as “a means to finally stand up for Americans”. But his critics have seized on comments to the Financial Times that the president-elect’s agenda represented “maximalist” positions that were negotiating tools, as a sign he would be soft on the issue. Trump’s aides are reluctant to repeat the tensions over trade in Trump’s first administration, when Steven Mnuchin, then-Treasury secretary, frequently sought to moderate tariff plans for fear of disrupting markets. Several people familiar with the discussions inside Trump’s team said Lighthizer, who served as US trade representative in the first administration, had previously expressed interest in becoming Treasury secretary.

On Sunday the Coalition for a Prosperous America, a pro-tariff think-tank, backed Lighthizer publicly for Treasury secretary. “The next Treasury secretary must be 100 per cent aligned with President-elect Trump’s policy on tariffs,” it said in a post on X. “Former USTR Robert Lighthizer is a steadfast champion for the US economy and the best choice to carry out President Trump’s trade agenda.”

Marc Rowan
Rowan, 62, is a billionaire investor who leads Apollo Global Management, which he cofounded in the 1990s. It now has nearly $700 billion in assets under management. Apollo recently announced that it plans to double its assets under management to $1.5 trillion by 2029. The Journal, citing people familiar with the matter, reported that while the billionaire’s aides are in touch with Trump, Rowan isn’t actively trying to secure the Treasury Secretary role and hasn’t spoken to Trump personally about such a position. But the Times also wrote that Trump has been telling his staff that he’s impressed with Rowan, who Bloomberg estimates to be worth $10.9 billion. Rowan has said that US economic concerns must be fixed by what he called “wholesale change,” which he said Trump and his new administration would bring.

Kevin Warsh
Warsh, 54, is a former Morgan Stanley banker and one of the newer contenders. He was an economic advisor to President George W. Bush from 2002 to 2006 and a governor of the Federal Reserve Board from 2006 to 2011. During the latter period, Warsh was a central figure in shaping the nation’s response to the 2007-2008 financial crisis, working to rescue major ailing banks. Trump had been floating Warsh that year as a frontrunner for Fed chair. He eventually picked Jerome Powell for the role. More recently, he’s been working on Trump’s transition team, helping with economic policy and personnel, according to The Journal. Most recently, Warsh was outspoken in questioning The Fed’s independence with regard the 50bps rate-cut right before the election. “if that’s all true, maybe they’re not data-dependent.” “I do not want to be the person accusing them of politics … but when you don’t have a theory of the case and you don’t follow it, it is easy to get that accusation and it is harder … to defend them.”

Read more …

“They’re deathly afraid of ‘masculinity’ and strong personalities.”

CNN Mole People Can’t Deal With MAGA Posse At UFC (MN)

The MAGA crew took over UFC 309 in Madison Square Garden over the weekend, triggering demon energy woke seethery into action. Behold their media leaders, the CNN mole guys. Why do they all wear those thick heavy black rimmed glasses? Anyway, these guys, it doesn’t matter what their names are, lets call them Howard and Greg, couldn’t cope with president Trump leading out his transition team to uproariously loud cheering at the event. Howard said Trump was “giving supporter based permission structure,” by bringing his crew with him, while Greg said it was like ancient Rome with Caesar bringing his gladiators into the Colosseum. “It really looks like ancient Rome here. This is the conquering Republican Caesar who’s going into the Colosseum, and everyone’s cheering, and he’s got his political gladiators with him,” Howard excitedly whined, ignoring the fact that Julius Caesar was long dead when construction on the Colosseum began.

“That appearance isn’t just about him enjoying the applause. He’s sending a message to the Senate. For sure,” Greg continued blathering. “Not only are you entertained, but these are my people, and are you willing to fight?”Because here’s who I have,” Greg clamoured. It’s hilarious watching these people having a meltdown analysing Trump’s team and the UFC crowd having fun. They were having a well deserved day off, celebrating, watching the event and dancing to YMCA by the Village people, but the mole people want you to believe it’s some kind of scary authoritarian display of power. CBS News also couldn’t cope. The article states “Trump is a longtime UFC enthusiast and frequent attendee of major fights. He made promoting hypermasculine tones a signature of his campaign — as he looked to further widen the gap among male voters between himself and his Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris.”

“Trump and his top supporters embraced alpha-male terms and often accentuated them with vulgar and demeaning language.” It gets even more hilarious… “While campaigning, Trump appeared frequently on podcasts, gaming platforms, and with key supporters who described a vote for Trump as a way to demonstrate true manliness. While Trump taped a podcast with Rogan, who himself has spoken about hypermasculinity, Harris failed to do a similar appearance, citing scheduling conflicts.” They’re deathly afraid of ‘masculinity’ and strong personalities.

Read more …

“I don’t know why the Democrats lost. I don’t understand … Prices have come down, the economy is good. I don’t know why they voted against her, against the party.” — William Shatner (Captain Kirk)”

Beyond Consequence (James Howard Kunstler)

If you boil down everything the woked-up, psychopathic Democratic Party did the past eight years as it drove the country into a ditch, it all amounted to a Great Pretending. Whatever the party said, they knew it was not so. Whatever they did, they pretended the other side was doing. They lied lavishly, knowingly, and incessantly and now they are pretending to soul-search in a great public display of pretend humility as they await the dreaded reckoning. Case in point: the interview on PBS between the Aspen Institute’s former chief Walter Isaacson and Harvard civics philosophy prof Michael Sandel, “to make sense of Donald Trump’s Presidency.” Listen to them prattle about “the dignity of work,” “credentialist condescension,” and “income disparities.”

You know it was way worse than that: censorship, witch hunts, the gestapo FBI, a stupid money-pit war, medical fascism, the wide-open border, race-and gender hustles, state-sponsored riots, lawfare programmatically destroying lives, careers, reputations, and misuse of the news media (including PBS) to lie about all of it. These two pusillanimous pricks, pretending to be genteel, are the poster boys for a diseased polity. And behind the scenes now, in the C-suites of the big agencies, the faculty lounges of Higher Ed, the Zoom meet-ups of so many crypto-government NGOs, and especially in the Big Media board-rooms, the cries of anxiety and desperation signal a momentous end of something: the punking of America by a gang of vicious, criminal snobs. The aggregate insult alone deserves a world-class beat-down. They know it, and they know they are going to get it, and it will be satisfying to watch them rat each other out as judgment nears.

But even as all that plays out, and justice returns to the scene, Mr. Trump and Company face the enormous task of getting our nation’s house in order. The balance sheet is a catastrophe, we are functionally bankrupt, and “Joe Biden” has been busy destroying the value of our money in the futile attempt to work around all that. All the economic statistics rolled out to benefit Ms. Harris in the election are false. Something is underway that is too big to stop and it will express itself as ruinous inflation and economic depression in some wicked combo of the two. It will surely lead to epic rearrangements in everyday life. I will suggest a few examples. The people of this land have been deprived of purpose and meaning in an economy organized among giant enterprises and vast distances from wherever you live. To call ourselves “consumers” degrades us. We are citizens who have duties, responsibilities, and obligations to each other.

We are economic actors who can make choices and take risks, not passive units to be exploited. The people need an economic role in their locality: employer of neighbors, producer of useful goods and services, all the way down to faithful servants of something and someone. Monopolies and chain stores killed American towns and all the complex relations in them that furnished purpose, meaning, and livelihoods for the people in a rich ecosystem of production and services. Now it’s the monopolies and chain store’s turn to decline and die off — and they will in the course of things, but it would be foolish to try to prop them up. Let them go and let the people rebuild their networks of making-and-doing locally. It’s already happening.

The giant shopping malls that came along in the 1970s have already died, and there was no official campaign to rescue them, nor any official funeral. It just happened quietly in the background. The malls were a pure product of the combo of Boomer household formation and Happy Motoring. That’s ending now. What replaced the malls, strangely, is the new model of Garage Sale Nation. That will continue to evolve and elaborate itself, and integrate into what happens next — which will not be the A-I robot nirvana of endless leisure, but rather an era of tribulation. You can see it coming on all around you. So many things don’t work anymore. Medicine. School. The task of reorganizing them is monumental. It will generate plenty of friction and hardship.

The people also need a social role in their community: head of household, mother, mentor, public servant, caretaker, local hero. You need a place in this world to enact those roles, a location in it, at the proper scale, and it must be a place that is worthy of your affection. Too many places in the USA do not meet these requirements. They are ugly, sprawling, chaotic, and grotesque. The suburban template for development is a long-running fiasco, the anti-community, and MAGA’s psychological investment in it is, sadly, a mistake — though it is consistent with the psychology of previous investment (sunk costs).

Read more …

“..they overcorrected, flooding an already fragile economy with cash and setting the stage for soaring inflation that has burdened millions of Americans ever since.”

WSJ Issues Scathing Indictment Of How Democrats Blew It On Inflation (ZH)

The Wall Street Journal has issued a scathing postmortem analysis of how the Biden administration completely botched the economy and supercharged inflation. President Biden hadn’t even been inaugurated when he and his senior advisers made a monumental gamble in January 2021 that would reverberate through his presidency. Fresh on the heels of a $900 billion Covid-relief bill that Congress had approved weeks earlier, Biden proposed a $1.9 trillion stimulus bill. Biden and his team, many of whom had served in the Obama administration, claimed they were correcting their mistakes from 2009: spending too little to combat a major economic crisis. Instead, they overcorrected, flooding an already fragile economy with cash and setting the stage for soaring inflation that has burdened millions of Americans ever since.

Key among their policies was the American Rescue Plan (ARP) – a package which boosted the child tax credit, showered Americans with $1,400 per person, and directed $350 billion to state and local governments. The plan was passed against a backdrop of already unprecedented government spending. Americans were awash in federal aid from bipartisan measures under Trump, supply chains were breaking down, and businesses were struggling to rehire workers. The administration dismissed these concerns, prioritizing speed over prudence. The plan, of course, totally backfired. “If inflation had been less severe in that first year, if it had peaked at a lower level, could Vice President Harris have survived that? My intuition is yes,” said Michael Strain, head of economic-policy studies at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute.

On election day, approximately 40% of voters polled said the economy was their top issue – with those voters backing Donald Trump by a 22% margin. The White House is unrepentant, of course. “Any scenario that envisions less inflation from a reduced ARP also has to wrestle with slower growth, higher unemployment and more child poverty,” said White House Council of Economic Advisors chair, Jared Bernstein. “White House and Democratic officials have argued that overall U.S. economic outcomes were better than those achieved in nearly every other advanced economy. But politically, those arguments fell flat and gave Trump his opening. “It comes off as cold comfort to say that people have it worse in Germany, the U.K., France,” said Rep. Brendan Boyle (D., Pa.). “People naturally compare their experiences today to what things were like prepandemic.” -WSJ”

Read more …

“When he failed, they decided to send their message in a language that no one could misunderstand. They sent Trump.”

Mad at the Election? Blame Obama (AmG)

Liberals who are in the throes of capitulation and despair after Donald Trump’s crushing electoral and popular vote win can lay blame for their disastrous loss at the feet of one man: Barack Hussein Obama. Obama built the Trump wave. His failure to live up to the promises of his populist 2008 run has cursed the Democratic Party, probably for a generation. The Washington DC establishment in just two short months is going to get “scholonged” by an angry and vengeful Trump, ready to rain executive hellfire on the bureaucrats and institutions that have spent the last nine years fighting him tooth and nail. All of this could have been prevented. In 2008, Obama swept into power with a crushing electoral college and popular vote majority. He won Iowa, Florida, Ohio, and North Carolina. He even won Indiana. Democrats swept into power in Congress with a 74-seat lead in the House, nearly 59% of seats, and were gifted with a magical 60-seat filibuster-proof supermajority in the Senate.

This was a generational victory, a sign that voters were fed up with politics as usual and the failures of the GOP and the Washington and Wall Street establishment as such. This victory wasn’t just about electing the first Black president, though that was important: The policies and platform at stake appealed deeply to voters. It is worth remembering what exactly those policies were. Obama promised to end the war in Iraq, end the Afghanistan war with honor, help the economy by reducing health care costs (prioritizing “Main Street” over Wall Street), and bring about a new era of racial harmony. Moreover, Obama explicitly eschewed radical leftist politics. He explicitly defended traditional marriage. In his DNC nomination speech, he condemned employers who “undercut American wages by hiring illegal workers.” Obama ran a campaign on bringing “change” to DC. He made much of his status as a newcomer who lacked the “typical pedigree” of a candidate for the nation’s highest office.

Put another way, Obama won a decisive victory in 2008 by campaigning as a Washington outsider bent on ending foreign wars, boosting the economy by helping ordinary people, and being a moderate on social issues like abortion and gay marriage. Does this message sound familiar? It should. In broad measure, it is the same formula that brought Donald Trump to power in 2016 and has given him, like Obama, unified control over the executive and legislative branches after a crushing electoral and popular vote win. Obama’s hubris is the reason the Democratic Party stands here today—powerless in the face of “Orange Hitler.” Obama did not close Guantanamo Bay, he ended the Iraq War only to get sucked back in, killed Osama Bin Laden but kept troops in Afghanistan, started wars in Libya and Syria, and, most damningly, inflamed racial tensions when he had a chance to calm them.

Far from being a moderate on social issues, Obama was the president whose picks for the Supreme Court rammed gay marriage down Americans throats after it had suffered numerous state-level electoral setbacks, including in California of all places in the very election that brought Obama to power! Obama’s pledge to reduce health care costs in 2008 did not come with an individual mandate to purchase health insurance. The final bill that snaked its way through Congress and was signed into law did contain such a penalty. Instead of lowering health care costs, Americans watched as their premiums went up.

Instead of fewer foreign wars, we got more. Instead of declaring victory after the death of the mastermind behind 9/11, we got eight more years of war. On every front, Obama didn’t just fail to follow through on his mandate, he actively worked for the opposite outcome. Obama lacked the strength of character and will to follow through on his promises and to deliver the shake-up in Washington that he promised. He was more concerned with hanging out with celebrities and being cool than facing down his own Party’s bosses to deliver on the promises he made to the American people. Nancy Pelosi, 16 years later, still remains one of the most powerful figures in the Party. Americans sent a refined, urbane, grassroots college professor to do their bidding in DC. When he failed, they decided to send their message in a language that no one could misunderstand. They sent Trump.

Read more …

“..a natural product of the loss of any possibility of determining their own destiny.”

Germany Has Become Europe’s Political Wasteland (Bordachev)

Germany is a political void in the center of Europe, even though it contributes significantly to the global economy and is influential in trade. It’s also the Western country with which Russia has had the most historical, cultural and, until recently, economic contacts. A week ago the government in Berlin collapsed, and so far the leading German parties have agreed that early parliamentary elections will be in February 2025. It’s very likely that the next government will be led by the main opposition force, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). At the start of the election campaign, CDU leader Friedrich Merz publicly announced that – if he wins – he’ll issue an ultimatum to Moscow over Ukraine. He’s promised that if this ultimatum is not accepted within 24 hours, his government will provide the Kiev regime with cruise missiles to attack Russian territory.

The consequences of such a decision for Russian-Western relations are obvious. It is not surprising, therefore, that our main reaction was astonishment at the irresponsibility of such a high-ranking member of the German elite. There are even fears that Merz and those behind him intend to drag Germany into a destructive military conflict with Europe’s largest country. But all this German talk means nothing in practice. Without US authorisation, or direct orders from Washington, the leaders in Berlin are not only incapable of starting a major war in Europe, they are incapable even of adjusting their shoelaces. Any statements by German politicians, the fall and rise of governing coalitions there, should only be seen in the context of how the Berlin establishment is trying to find a role in the shadow of total American dominance.

It’s deeply symbolic that Chancellor Olaf Scholz took a decisive step towards the collapse of the governing coalition on 6 November, the day on which the domestic political balance of power in the United States changed radically. In the context of significant changes at the center, the peripheral political systems must react as sensitively as possible: at the level of how a branch of a large corporation reacts to a change in its general management. Berlin’s international position is defined by its crushing defeat in the Second World War, which ended any hope of determining its own future. Germany, like Japan and South Korea, is a country with a foreign occupying force on its territory, albeit under the NATO flag. The German elite, both political and economic, is, with few exceptions, even more integrated with the US than the British elite. To say nothing of those running France, Italy or other European countries.

Germany has no autonomy in determining its foreign policy, nor does it aspire to have any. It’s no coincidence that over the past two and a half years of the Ukraine crisis, it’s been Berlin that has provided the largest amount of military and financial aid to the Kiev regime. Almost ten times more than, say, France, whose president likes to make bellicose speeches. Naturally, the representatives of the German establishment look like pale copies of what we used to consider real politicians. And this is a natural product of the loss of any possibility of determining their own destiny. Of course, Berlin can still set the parameters of economic policy for the weak countries of the European Mediterranean. States such as Greece, Italy or Spain are given to Germany to ‘feed’ within the framework of the European Union and its single currency.

But even Poland, which has a special relationship with the US, has managed to avoid tying itself to Germany’s industrial grip. France is resisting slightly. But it is gradually sinking to the level of southern Europe. The UK has left the EU, but retains its position as the main representative of the US in Europe. It should be noted that such a state of affairs for Germany did not come about overnight. Even during the Cold War, the Federal Republic (FRG) was led by bright personalities. Under chancellors such as Willy Brandt (1969-1974), the Moscow Treaty was signed between the FRG and the USSR on the recognition of post-war borders in Europe. In the early 1970s, German politicians and business were able to persuade the US to allow Germany to establish energy cooperation with the Soviets. In our time, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder (1998-2005) pushed for European energy security based on German-Russian cooperation.

But all this came to an end with the global economic crisis of 2008-2013, after which the US began to tighten the screws on its allies. In the spring of 2022, Olaf Scholz, who had previously been committed to dialogue with Russia, fully supported the military-political confrontation created by the Americans over Ukraine. Now German politicians are not free to choose their own future. For most of them, with the exception of the non-systemic opposition, this is quite obvious. Why appoint bright personalities to the highest positions if nothing depends on their decisions? Gradually, the entire political system and the mood of the electorate are adapting to these conditions. The differences in the parties’ platforms are becoming blurred. Observers are already talking about the likelihood that the government will be formed by the Social Democrats and their main opponents from the CDU. This means that disagreements on fundamental issues are a thing of the past.

Only the technical aspects of forming a government need to be agreed upon, and the main goal of all efforts is to hold on to power as such. The united and sovereign German state existed for 74 years (1871-1945). Its revival as such is not possible: even if Russia and China would look favourably on it, the Anglo-Saxon world will not allow it for several reasons at once. Firstly, both German attempts – in the First and Second World Wars – to play a leading role in the West came close to succeeding. So nobody will give them a third chance. Just to be on the safe side. It should be borne in mind that the West takes order within its own community even more seriously than it does the defence of its privileges against the rest of humanity. Second, Germany’s position at the center of Europe, its huge industrial base and its industrious population make it an ideal partner for the US and Britain, the maritime trading powers. Politically insignificant, Germany can economically control much of the rest of Europe, but cannot dictate the substance.

Third, the revival of visible German independence is in the interests of Moscow and Beijing because it would split the ranks of the consolidated West. A small front of countries like Hungary, Slovakia or even one a little larger cannot create such a split. And the unity of the West under the leadership of the US is a fundamental obstacle to the implementation of the plans for a multipolar world order promoted by Russia and China. Germany is now a political wasteland in the heart of Europe. Tiny shoots of reason are, of course, breaking through the decades-old system based on pandering to the interests of American patrons. With some very obvious exceptions, the representatives of the non-systemic German opposition are talented people. But their prospects are still very dim because of the way things are manage. In the future, we can expect to re-establish some economic ties with Germany but we must treat it as a political colony of the US, rather than thinking about try to establish full inter-state relations with Berlin.

Read more …

An unknown side of Stalin.

Gardening Against Evil Days (Helmer)

In politics — the Kremlin is no exception — politicians don’t mean what they say. In gardening, the plants always mean what they say. Gardeners, obliged to record what that is, are more likely than politicians to tell the truth. In the records of Russian politicians since the Bolshevik Revolution, only one leading figure stands out as having the eye, ear, and nose for what plants have to tell. Not the present nor the founding one. The only gardener among them was, and remains, Joseph Stalin. Nothing has been found that he wrote himself on his gardening except perhaps for marginal comments in books he read. There is no mention of books on gardens or gardening in the classification system Stalin’s personal library adopted from 1925. He kept no garden diary. Without a diary recording the cycle of time and seasons, the planting map, colour scheme, productivity of bloom and fruit, infestation, life and death, he must have committed his observations – “he possessed unbelievably acute powers of observation” (US Ambassador George Kennan) – to memory, as peasants do.

Unlike the tsars who employed English, Scots, and French architects and plantsmen to create gardens in St. Petersburg and Moscow in the royal fashions of Europe, defying the Russian winter to display their power and affluence without shovelling for themselves, Stalin dug his gardens himself in the warm weather of his dacha at Gagra, on the Black Sea. There he was photographed with his spade tending parallel, raised beds of lemon trees. There is no sign of him wielding trowel and fork in the garden at Kuntsevo, his dacha near Moscow, where the photographs show him strolling in a semi-wild young forest or seated on a terrace in front of a hedge of viburnum. No record of Stalin digging at Kuntsevo has been found.

There is just one reminiscence of Stalin speaking to a visitor about his gardening. “Stalin is very fond of fruit trees. We came to a lemon bush. Joseph Vissarionovich carefully adjusted the bamboo stick to make it easier for the branches to hold large yellow fruits. ‘But many people thought that lemons would not grow here!’ [He said] Stalin planted the first bushes himself, took care of them himself. And now he has convinced many gardeners by his example. He talks about it in an enthusiastic voice and often makes fun of would-be gardeners. We came to a large tree. I don’t know it at all. ‘What is the name of this tree?’ I asked Stalin. ‘Oh, this is a wonderful plant! It’s called eucalyptus,’ Joseph Vissarionovich said, plucking leaves from the tree. He rubs the leaves on his hand and gives everyone a sniff. ‘Do you feel how strong the smell is? This is the smell that the malaria mosquito does not tolerate.’ Joseph Vissarionovich tells how, with the help of eucalyptus, the Americans got rid of the mosquito during the construction of the Panama Canal, how the same eucalyptus helped with the work in swampy Australia. I felt very embarrassed that I did not know this wonderful tree.”

Stalin read a great deal of philosophy, Roman and Russian history, art, and agronomy, and so he is bound to have reflected on the way in which the ideas of the classics he read took physical form in the gardens of the time. Especially so on the ancient idea of the paradise garden. It is this transference between thinking and digging, between the idea of paradise and the cultivation of it, which a new book, just published in London, explores in a radical way. Olivia Laing, author of The Garden Against Time, In Search of a Common Paradise, knows nothing whatever about Russia or its gardens or its politics – except for propaganda on the Ukraine war she has absorbed unquestioningly and briefly repeats from the London newspapers. That’s a personal fault; it’s not a dissuasion from the book of reflections she has written out from her garden diary to an end which Russians understand to aim at, not less than the English.

In this wartime it’s necessary to keep reflecting on this end, on the aesthetic and philosophical purpose of the paradise garden. Laing begins her book and her garden with John Milton’s lament for gardening in wartime – in his case, the English Civil War of 1642-46 and the counter-revolution of 1660. “More safe I Sing with mortal voice, unchang’d”, Milton observed at the beginning of Book 7 of his Paradise Lost, “to hoarce or mute, though fall’n on evil dayes/ On evil dayes though fall’n, and evil tongues;/in darkness and with dangers compast round,/And solitude.” At the same time, Laing records for herself and Stalin certainly knew, “what I loved, aside from the work of making [the paradise garden], was the self-forgetfulness of the labour, the immersion in a kind of trance of attention that was as unlike daily thinking as dream logic is to waking.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Grandma

 

 

Plane tech

 

 

Foal
https://twitter.com/i/status/1858438984684146947

 

 

Orangutan

 

 

Guilty

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nov 172024
 


Jerry Bywaters Oil Field Girls 1940

 

The Revolution of 2024 (Jeffrey A. Tucker)
Trump Will Bring Justice, Not Revenge (Jim Rickards)
Tulsi Gabbard, The New US Intel Chief (SCF)
RFK Jr. Is Poised To Save The Health And Lives Of Millions Of Americans (Hill)
What Could Trump 2.0 Mean for US Healthcare? (Sp.)
Why Voters Trusted The GOP More On Democracy (Turley)
Rachel Maddow Claims Trump is Trying To “Destroy The US Government” (MN)
Pentagon Spends $187 Mln on Audit, Fails Seventh Year in a Row (Sp.)
Trump Team To Write Off ‘Project Ukraine’ as Sunk Cost (Sp.)
Zelensky Wants To Intensify Military Draft (RT)
Ex-FM Warns Of Potential ‘Internal Collapse’ In Ukraine (RT)
Moscow Continues To Warn The West About The Risk Of Nuclear Escalation (SCF)
War Games Show UK’s Flagship Aircraft Carriers ‘Get Sunk’ Every Time (Sp.)
The Novichok Attack Was A British Operation, Not A Russian One (Helmer)
Climate-Change Debate ‘Heats Up’ With Collum, Keen, Fleckenstein (ZH)

 

 

 

 

Bannon

Rogan


https://twitter.com/i/status/1857708065191338428

Leavitt

Mollie
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857599848062628084

FBI J6
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857494322624737729

Alina
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857500858746835041

Jail

Trover

 

 

 

 

“We are barely ten days into the realization of what just transpired and the entire lay of the land seems different, like a tectonic shift in politics, culture, mood, and possibilities..”

The Revolution of 2024 (Jeffrey A. Tucker)

People are out and about, smiling at each other. It’s been true since the morning after the election, the results of which defied every prediction. Who doesn’t like to see the smug elites who have ruled the world for five awful years taken down a peg? More than that, there are hints of a return to sanity. Mainstream advertisers are suddenly returning to X, putting their economic interest above their tribalist loyalties. The editor of pro-lockdowns Scientific American, which had long blessed totalitarian measures as true science, has resigned. The attempt to pillage InfoWars and give it to The Onion has been reversed by a federal judge. That might be a fluke or might not be: maybe the lawfare is dialing back too. The cabinet of the incoming administration is being filled by voices that were fully censored for years. Employees are reportedly packing their bags at the FDA and other agencies.

Mainstream news commentators are sputtering around with less bravado than they have shown in years. CNN is firing major personalities. Trump is talking about abolishing the income tax and granting $10K in tax credits per homeschooled child, not to mention blowing up college accreditation systems, among other sweeping changes. The American Bastille day is coming, not only freeing the political prisoners of January 6 but also many of the unjustly persecuted including Ross Ulbricht, Roger Ver, and Ian Freeman, among so many others. That will be a day of rejoicing. Oh, and peace seems to have broken out in some contentious areas of the world, for now. What is happening? This is not the usual transfer of the resident of the White House. This is starting to look like an actual transfer of power, not just from Biden to Trump but from the permanent government – ensconced in many sectors – that has been long in hiding to an entirely new form of government responsive to actual voters.

As it turns out, there was no late surge for Kamala Harris. All the polls were wrong, and the rest was media blather. What was correct were the betting odds on Polymarket, and only days later, the FBI raided the 26-year-old founder’s home and confiscated his phone and laptop. There are still many millions of missing voters, people who supposedly showed up for Biden in 2020 but stayed home this time. Meanwhile, there has been a historic shift in all races, ethnicities, and regions, with even the possibility of flipping California from blue to red in the future. After decades of academic slicing and dicing of the population according to ever more eccentric identity buckets involving race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual interest, along with countless thousands of studies documenting deep complexity over intersectionality, the driving force of the election was simple: class, and the few intellectuals and some wealthy entrepreneurs who understand that.

The division was not really left vs right. It was workers vs laptoppers, wage earners vs six-figure stay-at-homers, bottom half vs top 5 percent, people with actual skills vs weaponized resume wielders, and those with affection for old-world values vs those whose educations have beaten it out of them for purposes of career advancement. The silent majority has never been so suddenly loud. It just so happened that the heavily privileged had come to inhabit easily identifiable sectors of American society and, in the end, had no choice but hitch the whole of the overclass wagon to the fortunes of a candidate like themselves (Kamala) but who was unable to pull off a compelling masquerade. Not even a parade of well-paid celebrity endorsements could save her from total rebuke at the polls. Sylvester Stallone called Trump a second George Washington but another reference point might be Andrew Jackson.

The overwhelming victory for Trump is on a scale not seen since 1828 when, four years after the presidency was stolen from Jackson, Old Hickory came back in a wild landslide and cleaned up Washington. Trump arrives in Washington with a mandate for the same, with 81% of the public demanding that the government shrink in size and power. It has all happened so quickly. We are barely ten days into the realization of what just transpired and the entire lay of the land seems different, like a tectonic shift in politics, culture, mood, and possibilities. We are even seeing blunt and open talk about the horrendous Covid response that so utterly demoralized the country and the world, after years of silence on the topic. We have promised hearings coming, and court cases galore now on fast track. The sudden coming together of three great sectors of anti-establishment fury – MAGA, MAHA, and DOGE – in the last two months of the election of 2024 is one for the ages.

It provides the beginnings of an answer to the great question on our minds for decades: how precisely does an authentic revolution take root in an industrialized Western democracy? Are elections capable of delivering real results? For now, the answer seems to be yes. That should thrill any responsible observer of social, cultural, economic, and political affairs. It means that the early architects of the American system were not wrong. The intolerable costs of political upheaval of ages past can be mitigated by planting power firmly in the hands of the people through the plebiscite. This was their view and their gamble. All the evidence of our time points to the wisdom of the idea. In the darkest days of the last year of the first Trump presidency, the bureaucracy was riding high, in full revenge mode against an elected government it hated and sought to overthrow. The agencies were passing strange edicts that felt like laws but no one knew for sure. You are essential, you are not. You must stay home, unless you have an emergency. Your elective surgery needs to wait. The kids cannot go to school. That European vacation cannot happen.

You can eat at a restaurant but only if you are six feet away from other patrons and you must put this China-made cloth on your mouth if you get up to go to the restroom. The flurry of edicts was mind-boggling. It felt like martial law, because it was some form of exactly that. The best research points to the astonishing reality that this was never really a public-health response but a scheme by security and intelligence sectors to enact some kind of global color revolution, which is why the policies were so similar the world over. It was indeed an awesome display of power, one that invaded all our communities, homes, and families. No one knows this better than Team Trump, even if there has been near silence on the topic for all these years. They have had time to put the pieces together and figure out what happened and why. And they carefully, and in seclusion worthy of a Cistercian monastery, plotted their return, leaving nothing to chance.

Read more …

“The departments and agencies that have been weaponized will be completely overhauled.”

Trump Will Bring Justice, Not Revenge (Jim Rickards)

The persecution and prosecution of President Donald Trump is finally winding down. Jack Smith, a primary player in the lawfare campaign against Trump, has filed to dismiss the case involving classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Rep. Jim Jordan has instructed Special Counsel Smith to preserve all records related to the cases. The Deep State tried everything to make Trump lose. In total, 91 frivolous felony charges were thrown at the former president. All so they could brand him a felon, tie up resources and prevent him from campaigning. Then there was the January 6th “insurrection”, multiple Russian collusion hoaxes and countless media lies. The Deep State even prosecuted his advisers, such as 75-year-old famed economist Peter Navarro, who was the first former White House official ever imprisoned on a contempt-of-court charge. This dignified gentleman was frog-marched into prison as part of a political persecution campaign.

The entire affair was a disgrace to the nation. On Election Day, Americans rejected this vile lawfare. And soon, it will be time for justice. With GOP control over both sides of the Congress and a near-landslide win, Trump has a mandate from the American people to pursue it aggressively. President Trump has not been shy about his intentions, stating, “The departments and agencies that have been weaponized will be completely overhauled.” On day one, he promised to reissue his executive order allowing the President to remove “rogue bureaucrats” from their positions. Trump promised to “wield that power very aggressively” against the Deep State. Our once and future President even promised to establish a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission”, opening the books on issues including the JFK assassination, illicit spying, and government corruption. I can’t wait to see what it uncovers. Trump’s recent speech was packed full of details on how he plans to drain the swamp. He starts strong and keeps going:

“This is how I will shatter the Deep State and restore government that is controlled by the people and for the people… Make every Inspector General’s office independent and physically separated from the departments they oversee so they do not become the protectors of the Deep State… Launch a major crackdown on government leakers who collude with the fake news to deliberately create false narratives and to subvert our government and our democracy… Clean out all of the corrupt actors in our national security and intelligence apparatus… Push a constitutional amendment to oppose term limits on members of Congress. “Shatter the Deep State”. No ambiguity there.

Some will call what is coming revenge. But this will not be revenge. It will be justice. The distinction is important. I would fully support justice here if the shoe was on the other foot, and the GOP were the offending party. This type of behavior simply cannot stand. It undermines and corrupts the entire system. Re-establishing a just and fair government is critical. It will be difficult, but I believe Trump will succeed this time. He has learned from the mistakes of his first term. Trump has the right people around today. He has already rejected the idea of inviting Nikki Haley or Mike Pompeo to join the new administration.

This is an excellent sign of things to come. Given the mandate, the appointment of Attorney General will be particularly important. I have my eye on Mike Davis. He is the exact type of person this position calls for. Tough as nails, fair, and dedicated to cleaning up the system. I’ve met the man, and he’s just the type of person required for this job. The stage is set for a historic draining of the swamp. Of course, there is still the potential for last-minute desperation moves by the Democrats, including their plan to disqualify Trump using the “insurrection clause”. But given my prediction that Congress will be controlled by Republicans, I think we’ll be in the clear in that department.

Read more …

“..in The Atlantic, an establishment mouthpiece, Gabbard was denounced as a “threat to the security of the United States.” That’s a staggering charge to levy on the person who is going to be head of national security..”

Tulsi Gabbard, The New US Intel Chief (SCF)

The nomination of Tulsi Gabbard as the United States intelligence supremo has sent shockwaves through the American and NATO establishments. The Western news media – always a dutiful echo chamber for deep-state policymakers – is reverberating with horror at her nomination by President-elect Donald Trump. That reaction is a good sign that something significant has happened. The potential appointment of Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence (DNI) could be the most consequential decision yet by Trump in forming his cabinet. If one move could signal the foreign policy direction under the 47th president, Gabbard’s nomination is the most salient and potentially the most constructive on the key issue of world peace. Time magazine headlined with the U.S. intelligence community’s response to Gabbard’s selection. “We are reeling,” it was reported. Reuters reported that the Western “spy world is vexed.” Meanwhile, in The Atlantic, an establishment mouthpiece, Gabbard was denounced as a “threat to the security of the United States.”

That’s a staggering charge to levy on the person who is going to be head of national security. It is almost hilarious to see the apoplectic reaction in the U.S. establishment and its servile mainstream media. CNN’s news anchor Jim Sciutto was distraught in sharing his concerns with colleague Richard Quest, remarking that Gabbard’s views “contradict” almost everything about U.S. foreign policies. If we may paraphrase that exchange, the sentiments were: Oh my God, how terrible! Whatever shall we say now about all the lies we have been spinning for years and getting fat salaries for? After all, as far as the U.S. corporate media are concerned, especially those channels and newspapers associated with the Democrats, the establishment, and the deep state intelligence apparatus, Tulsi Gabbard has been smeared as a “Russian asset.” It is indeed profoundly challenging – one might even say, earth-shattering – to the deep state if Gabbard becomes Director of National Intelligence.

As with Trump’s other cabinet picks, the nominations will have to be approved by Senate panels. So there is a while to go before her post is confirmed. A lot can change or be derailed. Trump’s cabinet picks this week have been keenly watched by observers trying to discern the future foreign policies of the next presidency, which begins in January after his inauguration. Trump’s early call-ups this week of hawkish figures Pete Hegseth for defense and Marco Rubio for secretary of state caused dismay among some critics of U.S. foreign policy who wanted a fundamental break from warmongering and hostility toward Russia, China, and Iran, among others. Then came Trump’s selection of Tulsi Gabbard. The former Congresswoman has gained wide popular American and international respect for her outspoken and independent criticism of U.S. militarism in the Middle East and Ukraine.

However, the U.S. political establishment and media have slandered her as a “traitor” and a “Russian asset” for her views criticizing Washington’s regime change wars in Syria and the Middle East. In 2017, Gabbard traveled to Syria and met with President Bashar al-Assad. She spoke out against Washington’s covert policy of sponsoring terrorist militia for regime change in Damascus. For telling the truth, she was vilified as an “apologist” for Assad. More recently, the “apologist” slur was thrown at her again after Gabbard opposed the U.S. and NATO’s arming of the Kiev regime and the proxy war against Russia. She said that the conflict in Ukraine could have been avoided if Russia’s security concerns about NATO’s threatening expansion had been taken into consideration. How refreshing to hear that sanity and objectivity.

In a twisted way, the CNN clapping seals are correct. Her views on the conflict in Ukraine do indeed contradict the U.S. establishment and media’s propaganda about “Russian aggression.” Her views unequivocally debunk the wall-to-wall “news” propaganda as false and serve as a warning to the public that NATO’s lies are dragging the world into a nuclear war. The role of Tulsi Gabbard in the second Trump administration – if she makes it through Senate vetting – cannot be overstated. In her DNI capacity, she is the intel supremo who oversees the CIA and NSA. Through her daily briefings to the president, Gabbard will play a crucial role in President Trump’s foreign policymaking. Given Trump’s freewheeling style, it can be fairly assumed that Gabbard’s input into policymaking will have much greater influence than the secretaries of defense or state. She will call the shots, and Trump will designate Hegseth, Rubio, and others to follow suit on the policies.

Wasserman

Read more …

“..the secretary of State, Defense, Treasury or Interior is a very important position. But measurable progress can often be incremental. But imagine being the “Secretary of Saving Human Lives.”

RFK Jr. Is Poised To Save The Health And Lives Of Millions Of Americans (Hill)

What is the value of someone who has the potential to literally save millions of lives and improve the health of tens of millions of children and adults? We may be on the verge of revolutionizing America’s failing health care system for the better, and two men will be responsible: President-elect Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Trump has long been a fan of Kennedy’s intellect, independence from special interests, passion, empathy and connection with the American people. Trump also no doubt realizes that Kennedy’s value to his incoming administration is immeasurable, as RFK Jr. can wear multiple hats of expertise. Trump has picked him to run the Department of Health and Human Services. And it is from under that HHS hat that Kennedy will transform our “sick-care” industry and literally save millions of lives in the process.

Anyone paying attention to the utter catastrophe that has become America’s “health care” industry knows that this is not political hyperbole or an exaggeration. It is an outright obscenity that we are losing so many Americans to entirely preventable causes. Three days before the election, I wrote about “The 2 decisions that crushed Harris’s momentum.” One was Harris’s selection of Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate. The other, and more important of the two, was Kennedy suspending his campaign and endorsing Trump. “One of the main reasons is the ‘mom vote,’” I wrote. “Kennedy’s endorsement will potentially bring millions of previously ambivalent female voters to the table for Trump. Why? Because they are moms who are worried about the health and wellbeing of their children and have long believed that Kennedy was one of the few people in public life who would protect those children. This is a much bigger deal than the media realizes or will acknowledge. It is a real game changer. Toward that end, these moms want Trump to win so he will bring Kennedy into his cabinet.”

After the column ran, I heard from many mothers confirming that exact point. Said one: “Yep, as one of those ‘mom votes’ who was dying to vote for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. I will now vote for the unity party.” After Kennedy got out of the race and Trump welcomed him with open arms, the two created what future historians may record as the most important health care movement in the history of our nation. It is a grassroots phenomenon spreading like wildfire as more and more parents and adults wake up to the chemicals and poisons being introduced into their bodies against their will. On Nov. 6, Kennedy posted: “President Trump has asked me to do three things: 1. Clean up the corruption in our government health agencies. 2. Return those agencies to their rich tradition of gold-standard, evidence-based science. 3. Make America Healthy Again by ending the chronic disease epidemic.”

In the speech announcing the suspension of his campaign and his unequivocal endorsement of Trump, Kennedy ticked off some truly horrifying statistics. “We spend more on health care than any country on Earth,” he said. “Nobody has a chronic disease burden like we have … Two-thirds of American adults and children suffer from chronic health issues. Fifty years ago, that number was less than 1 percent. So, we’ve gone from 1 percent to 66 percent. In America, 74 percent of Americans are now overweight or obese, and 50 percent of our children… Half of Americans have pre-diabetes or type two diabetes…And this is a crisis that 77 percent of our kids are too disabled to serve in the United States military. What is happening to our country and why isn’t this in the headlines every single day?…

“Cancer rates are skyrocketing in the young and the old. Young adult cancers are up 79 percent … So, what’s causing this suffering? I’ll name two culprits. First and the worst is ultra-processed food. About 70 percent of American children’s diet is ultra-processed. That means industrial manufactured in a factory … The second culprit is toxic chemicals in our food and our medicine, in our environment … The assault on our children’s cells and hormones is unrelenting.” Unfortunately, what is also “unrelenting” is the opposition to Kennedy from Big Pharma, Big Agriculture and special interests that realize hundreds of billions in profits at the direct expense of the health of every man, woman and child in America. In opposing that massive force, Kennedy is in the fight for our lives.

To be sure, being the secretary of State, Defense, Treasury or Interior is a very important position. But measurable progress can often be incremental. But imagine being the “Secretary of Saving Human Lives.” If Kennedy is even halfway successful in his quest to save the American people — and especially our children — from the life-robbing threats of ultra-processed foods and toxic chemicals, he can potentially save or improve tens of millions of lives over the next four years. That “cure” that will transcend every demographic and income level. Under the direction of Trump, Kennedy may turn ignorance to acceptance, acceptance to hope, hope to belief and belief to results. Again, what is the value of someone who literally has the potential to save millions of lives and improve the health of tens of millions of children and adults? I suspect we are about to find out.

RFK

Dr. Oz

Read more …

“If we can come up with a plan that’s going to cost our people, our population, less money, and provide better health care than Obamacare, then I would absolutely do it.”

What Could Trump 2.0 Mean for US Healthcare? (Sp.)

US President-elect Donald Trump has tapped Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be his Department of Health and Human Services Secretary tasked with fixing America’s raging health crisis. Donald Trump has promised to “bring down costs” and increase the quality of US healthcare. What changes can be expected?
• During his first term, Trump tried but failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA), aka Obamacare. Trump called Obamacare “lousy health care” and floated replacing it, saying, “If we can come up with a plan that’s going to cost our people, our population, less money, and provide better health care than Obamacare, then I would absolutely do it.”
• Trump has vowed to protect Medicare, the federal health insurance program for people aged 65 or older and younger people with disabilities.
• Cuts to Medicaid, the largest government health-insurance program that covers low-income Americans, may be expected under Trump.
• During his first term, Trump proposed cutting the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and eliminating the Medicaid expansion that was passed as part of the ACA.
• A work requirement might be added for some able-bodied adult beneficiaries, with federal spending on the program capped.
• Trump has promised to veto a federal abortion ban “under any circumstances”, saying, “It is up to the states to decide.”
• Trump didn’t rule out banning certain vaccines, promising to “make a decision” after Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – now tapped to be his HHS chief – hinted at the possibility of ending vaccine mandates. With an estimated 108,000 people dying from drug overdoses in the US last year, Trump blamed it on the migrant crisis. Although he criminalized all fentanyl-related substances in 2018, overdose deaths continued to soar.

Read more …

“..there is work to be done as a nation committed to the rule of law. We cannot win at any cost when that cost is the very thing that defines us.”

Why Voters Trusted The GOP More On Democracy (Turley)

“People violate laws any time they want.” Those words, shrugging off an alleged unlawful move last week, did not come from some Chicago gangbanger or Washington car thief. Those words of wisdom came from Democrat Commissioner Diane Marseglia in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. They came in response to the fact that the Democratic majority on the election commission had decided to ignore a binding state Supreme Court ruling in an attempt to engineer the election of Democratic incumbent Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.). Rather than prompting a degree of introspection, the loss of both houses of Congress and the White House has had a curious effect on many Democrats, dropping any pretense of protecting democracy over partisanship.

Despite polls showing that the public trusted former president Donald Trump more than Vice President Harris in combatting threats to democracy, Democrats made “saving democracy” the thrust of this election. The polls reflected a certain common sense of the public when harangued with predictions from President Biden, Harris and a host of politicians and pundits that this would likely be our last election. Few believed that after over two centuries as the most stable and successful democracy in history, all three branches would collapse in unison and embrace dictatorship. Even fewer believed the predictions of the rounding up of homosexuals, journalists and political critics for camps in what some described as an American Third Reich. American voters are not chumps and what they saw were strikingly anti-democratic positions from those claiming to be the defenders of democracy, including:

• Seeking to strip Trump from ballots under an unfounded theory rejected unanimously by the Supreme Court.
• Fighting to block opponents of Biden from ballots in the primary and general elections.
• Suing to keep Robert F. Kennedy on ballots after his withdrawal in swing states, in order to confuse voters and reduce the vote for Trump.
• Calling for blocking dozens of incumbent GOP officials and legislators from ballots as “insurrectionists.”
• “Protecting democracy” through the most extensive censorship in history and the blacklisting of opponents.
• Engaging in open and raw lawfare in the prosecutions of Trump in places like New York.

Each of these efforts ultimately failed to stop Trump and was opposed by a majority of voters even before the election. So now, Democrats are dropping the pretense of raw partisanship. That was evident in Bucks County, when a motion arose to reject a challenge to count provisional ballots, including undated or invalidly dated mail ballots. It should have been easy. To its credit, the majority-Democratic Pennsylvania Supreme Court had already refused a Democratic push to change the rules shortly before the election and to ignore the plain language of the election laws. In ordering the rejection of ballots without dates, Justice Kevin Doughtery (joined by Chief Justice Debra Todd) wrote a concurrence declaring “‘This Court will neither impose nor countenance substantial alterations to existing laws and procedures during the pendency of an ongoing election.’ We said those carefully chosen words only weeks ago. Yet they apparently were not heard in the Commonwealth Court, the very court where the bulk of election litigation unfolds.”

It is apparently still not being heard. In the Bucks County hearing, Marseglia spoke as she and Democratic Board chairman Robert Harvie, Jr., dismissed the earlier rulings in order to accept ballots without required signatures or mandatory dates. She declared that she would not second the motion to enforce the rulings “mostly because I think we all know that precedent by a court doesn’t matter anymore in this country and people violate laws any time they want. So, for me, if I violate this law, it’s because I want a court to pay attention to it.” That was a lot of words to say that she does not really seem to care if this is lawful. For his part, Casey has shown the same abandon as he clings to his Senate seat at any cost.

That cost, in this case, was an alliance with Marc Elias, the controversial Democratic lawyer at the center of the infamous Steele Dossier scandal. Elias has been sanctioned in court and criticized for his work to flip elections. He is known for baselessly blaming voting machine errors for electing Republicans and pushing gerrymandering plans rejected by the courts as anti-democratic. Casey is unlikely to change the result without counting defective or challenged ballots. Fortunately, law and precedent “does matter in this country.” There are still officials who can transcend their political preferences to maintain the rule of law. After the last presidential election, many Trump appointees ruled against the former president, and many Democratic judges rejected the effort to strip Trump from ballots.

That does not mean that Democrats who value the weaponization of law will not continue to embrace lawfare warriors like New York Attorney General Letitia James (D). Others will use the rage of these times as a license to ignore legal and ethical obligations altogether. They are arguably the saddest manifestation of our political discord. They are people who have not just lost faith in our system but in themselves. They have become untethered from any defining principle for their own conduct. This election has left them adrift in a sea of moral and legal relativism, with only their rage as a following wind. They cling to that rage as reason vanishes like a distant shore. For the rest of us, there is work to be done as a nation committed to the rule of law. We cannot win at any cost when that cost is the very thing that defines us.

Read more …

She’s lost it all. But she can’t stop herself.

Rachel Maddow Claims Trump is Trying To “Destroy The US Government” (MN)

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow took a break from claiming she’s about to be thrown into a concentration camp to charge that president Trump is attempting to “destroy” the government. Maddow said, “I think the idea of the authoritarian promise is that everything shrivels in government other than the will of the leader, right?” She further claimed “You don’t necessarily put a Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in charge if you’re hoping for great things from HHS.” “Matt Gaetz, he has explicitly proposed abolishing the Justice Department, not specifically abolishing the FBI and the ATF but talking about abolishing the Justice Department,” she added. Maddow continued to blather, “Tulsi Gabbard as the Director of National Intelligence is, I mean, the idea that Tulsi Gabbard, in a normal circumstance, could get a security clearance to be like a Walmart-style greeter at any U.S. intelligence agency, let alone get past the security barriers, is insane.”

“So, you do that because you want the worst for these agencies, because you want the worst for the U.S. government because you think that the U.S. government is worthless,” she asserted. Why would Trump do all this? Well it’s all a big conspiracy to become a dictator… or something. “That’s part of consolidating power, to make the U.S. government nothing other than the leader and people who will do what he says,” Maddow claimed. She continued, “Steve Bannon used to say, it’s a sort of Leninist project, right? Destroy the state. This is the cabinet that you nominate to, not to run the U.S. government, to do anything, but to destroy the U.S. government.” “So that the U.S. government can be fundamentally reimagined as something much more like a unitary authoritarian or autocratic, for lack of a better term, system,” Maddow concluded, ending her paranoid rant. Or maybe, just maybe, people voted for reform and gave Trump a mandate to implement that, meaning putting people outside of the Washington establishment furniture into key positions.

Yeah, probably more likely that, right. As we highlighted earlier, all the right people are big mad at Trump’s appointments. Add to that list the disgraced former CIA Director John Brennan, who parroted absurd claims that Gabbard is some kind of Russian asset. “Clearly, Tulsi Gabbard has taken actions and made statements over the past several years that raise serious questions about her common sense, judgment, and political sympathies,” Brennan proclaimed. “Cozying up to Putin as well as to Bashar al-Assad shows she doesn’t have the type of perspective needed for someone who is going to head up these 18 intelligence agencies,” he further declared, labelling Gabbard “an unserious pick for a serious position.”

This coming from a guy who pushed the Russia hoax for years, and claimed the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian psy op. He says everything is a Russian plot. His credibility is shot. Meanwhile, AOC ranted about Gabbard, ridiculously claiming she is “pro-war.” Anyone who has listened to Gabbard talk for more than five minutes knows this is the complete opposite of her actual position.

Read more …

“It has never passed, and is the only Cabinet-level department of the federal government never to do so.”

Pentagon Spends $187 Mln on Audit, Fails Seventh Year in a Row (Sp.)

This year’s financial review, carried out by the DoD’s Office of the Inspector General and an independent accounting firm, employed 1,700 auditors and cost $187 million – slightly more than the entire defense budget of the West African nation of Mauritania. The US spent a record $824 billion on defense in 2024, $27 billion more than a year earlier. The US Department of Defense has failed its seventh consecutive audit, with more than half of its departments unable to provide auditors with sufficient data to accurately evaluate the status of hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of assets under the Pentagon’s domain.

DoD comptroller and Chief Financial Officer Michael McCord – appointed by President Obama in 2014, and under whom the Pentagon failed every one of its independent audits since they began in 2017, assured in a statement that the Pentagon had “turned a corner in its understanding of the depth and breadth of its challenges” and promises to do better in the future. “Momentum is on our side, and throughout the Department there is strong commitment – and belief in our ability -to achieve an unmodified audit opinion,” McCord said. The Pentagon expects to receive a passing grade by 2028, as required in this year’s National Defense Authorization Act (the annual must-pass Congressional legislation approving the defense budget).

The audit’s failing grade was based on financial inspections of 28 subordinated bodies, with 15 receiving disclaimers (which means auditors were unable to obtain sufficient evidence to form an opinion on the financial statements being audited), nine unmodified audit opinions (that is, a reasonable level of assurance that financial statements represented a true and fair reflection of audit results), one a qualified opinion (issued when auditors identify material misstatements in financial statements), and three opinions which remain pending. Agencies that passed included the DoD’s Defense Commissary Agency (responsible for food supplies to servicemen and their families), the Defense Financial and Accounting Service (which oversees payments to servicemembers, employees, vendors and contractors), and the Defense Health Agency (supplying an ensuring the readiness of military medical commands).

The Defense Information Systems Agency, which provides IT and communications support to the services, the Military Retirement Fund, the National Reconnaissance Office (responsible for the operation of space and ground-based intelligence collection systems worldwide), the US Army Corps of Engineers’ Civil Works agency and the Defense Contract Audit Agency (responsible for contract audits and related financial advisory services) also passed. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency, mentioned in a series of damning intelligence briefings by Russia’s Radiological, Chemical and Biological Defense Troops on US illicit military biological activities in Ukraine and across the globe, also got a passing grade. McCord defended the results at a press conference on Friday.

“This was not a surprise and I know that on the surface it doesn’t sound like we are making progress,” he said. “I do not say we failed, as I said, we have about half clean opinions. We have half that our not clean opinions. So if someone had a report card that is half good and half not good, I don’t know that you call the student or the report card a failure,” he said. Passing an audit by the 2028 deadline is “achievable,” he said. Also this week, the DoD Inspector General’s Office calculated that Congress has now appropriated nearly $183 billion in assistance to Ukraine since February 2022, including $131.36 billion for security-related assistance and activities, and $43.84 billion for ‘governance and development’. The Department of Defense carried out its first independent audit in 2017, and has been legally mandated to do so since 2018. It has never passed, and is the only Cabinet-level department of the federal government never to do so.

Read more …

“They don’t feel “invested” in propping up Zelensky’s corrupt regime in the same way that the current Biden administration does..”

Trump Team To Write Off ‘Project Ukraine’ as Sunk Cost (Sp.)

Donald Trump repeated his pledge to end the Ukraine conflagration as he addressed a gala organized by the America First Policy Institute at his Mar-a-Lago resort on November 15, saying that “the conflict has got to stop.” There is a general consensus within President-elect Donald Trump’s team that the failed “Project Ukraine” needs to be shut down, British political analyst Alexander Mercouris speculated on his YouTube channel. “Overall, despite different opinions and nuances among them, they have reached a general consensus that ‘Project Ukraine’ has absorbed a huge amount of energy and resources on the part of the United States, but it has not delivered what it promised. Ukraine has not been successful on the battlefield, there has been no economic collapse in Russia, and President Putin is still very firmly in control of things in Moscow,” the expert said.

In his opinion, these people, who come from the business world in many cases, have taken a simple “cost-benefit view”, and have agreed that “the time has come to close the whole thing down.” They don’t feel “invested” in propping up Zelensky’s corrupt regime in the same way that the current Biden administration does, according to the analyst. “They are resisting falling for the sunk costs fallacy, the one that says that you have already invested so much in terms of funding, weapons and resources that you can’t stop now,” Mercouris noted. Trump repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he could end the fighting “in 24 hours” if reelected; he slammed US aid to Kiev, and vowed not to put US troops on the ground in Ukraine.

Read more …

“..numerous Ukrainian officials – as well as their backers in the West – have proposed that Kiev lower the draft age even further..”

Zelensky Wants To Intensify Military Draft (RT)

The tightening of mobilization rules earlier this year has failed to solve Ukraine’s manpower shortage on the battlefield, Vladimir Zelensky has admitted, adding that the relevant legislation should be adjusted. In an interview with Ukrainskoye Radio on Saturday, Zelensky said that Ukraine “has not mobilized” enough troops under two new laws were passed this spring after significant back-and-forth in parliament. The first lowered the draft age from 27 to 25, while the second cracked down on draft dodgers, forcing all citizens eligible for conscription to report to military authorities for “data clarification.”

At the same time, Zelensky rejected speculation that Ukraine had drafted half a million men while pointing to problems with the available replenishments for frontline units. “The brigades in the East are exhausted, rotation is needed. The guys are getting tired and leaving. They must be replaced with fresh units,” Zelensky said. He also admitted that the frontline situation is “really difficult” and that Russia has indeed managed to accomplish “slow progress.” Before this year’s tightening of the rules, Kiev had announced a general mobilization, barring most men between 18 and 60 from leaving the country. Recruitment has been marred by widespread bribery and draft-dodging, with some Ukrainians trying to flee the country at all costs, even at a serious risk to their lives.

Meanwhile, social media is filled with videos of military patrols trying to catch eligible men in the streets, shopping malls, and gyms, often resulting in clashes. Despite the intensification of the draft, Ukrainian soldiers have consistently complained of the lack of reinforcements and inadequate training for new recruits, leading to long rotations and exhaustion. In light of this, numerous Ukrainian officials – as well as their backers in the West – have proposed that Kiev lower the draft age even further. Some Ukrainian politicians have also argued that all the country’s citizens should dedicate themselves to fighting Russia either directly on the front lines or indirectly by helping the army in the rear.

Read more …

“..Trump “cannot afford for Ukraine to become his Afghanistan.”

Ex-FM Warns Of Potential ‘Internal Collapse’ In Ukraine (RT)

Ukraine could face civil unrest and even a full-blown “collapse” if US President-elect Donald Trump reverses the outgoing administration’s policy of unconditional support for Kiev, former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba has warned. The election of Trump on November 5 prompted fears in Kiev that Washington would end financial and military aid and would strong-arm the country into an unfavorable settlement with Russia. “If the money were to dry up, a new dynamic would come into play, and not all of it on the battlefield. True, bereft of funding, Ukraine could lose ground completely,” Kuleba wrote in an op-ed published in The Economist on Wednesday. He argued that Ukraine could plunge into a civil conflict if the US forces it to sign a bad peace deal.

“If the Trump administration then imposed unpalatable peace terms on Ukraine, and if Mr. Zelensky agreed (an unlikely scenario), part of Ukrainian society would resist. Domestic unrest would risk the country’s internal collapse,” Kuleba wrote. This would give Russian President Vladimir Putin “the victory he has long desired, painting Ukraine as a failed state,” Kuleba suggested, warning that Trump “cannot afford for Ukraine to become his Afghanistan.” Throughout his election campaign, Trump claimed that he would quickly mediate a peace agreement between Kiev and Moscow, without specifying the terms. During a televised debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, he refused to directly answer a question on whether he wants Ukraine to win. “I want the war to stop,” he said at the time.

In June, Reuters reported that two of Trump’s advisers had drawn up a plan to reach a ceasefire based on the current front lines. The Trump campaign distanced itself from any concrete proposals, however. Kiev has long insisted that a peace deal can only be based on Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s ‘peace formula’, which includes the restoration of the country’s 1991 borders. Russia has rejected these terms wholesale, insisting that Ukraine should drop its aspirations to join NATO in favor of becoming a neutral country and renounce its claims on Crimea and other regions which voted in referendums to join Russia. Speaking to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz over the phone on Friday, Putin reiterated that the conflict “was a direct result of NATO’s long-standing aggressive policy” of ignoring Russia’s security concerns.

Read more …

“..authorization of the use of long-range missiles against targets deep inside Russia would place Moscow and NATO facing the near inevitability of a nuclear confrontation..”

Moscow Continues To Warn The West About The Risk Of Nuclear Escalation (SCF)

Tensions over the issue of “deep” strikes continue to escalate. Kiev continues to demand permission to strike targets in the Russian Federation’s demilitarized zone, while Moscow continues to make it clear that it will interpret such maneuvers as a declaration of war by NATO. In a recent statement, Maria Zakharova, the spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, emphasized how Ukrainians and their partners are “playing with fire” with such threats, promising an “immediate and devastating” response in the event of a long-range strike.

The Russian government has repeatedly stated that the long-range weapons systems supplied by the West to Ukraine cannot be operated without the presence of NATO specialists, who would provide the necessary training and logistical support to the Ukrainians. This is because such weapons are not compatible with the Ukrainian military infrastructure, which depends on continuous intelligence support and strategic guidance provided by the Atlantic alliance. Moscow’s position is clear: authorizing the use of these missiles for strikes outside the official conflict zone, in addition to representing an expansion of Western involvement, would constitute direct NATO intervention in the conflict. Russia would regard any use of these weapons in such circumstances as a direct aggression against its sovereignty by the Western countries themselves, which would require an “immediate and devastating” retaliation.

The discussion about the deployment of Storm Shadow missiles and other advanced weapons systems in “deep” Russian territory is a clear demonstration of the dangerous game the West is playing, ignoring all the limits imposed by Russia. NATO’s role in the war in Ukraine has been a sensitive issue since the beginning of the conflict. Although Western powers insist on their position of supporting Ukraine as a legitimate right to defend it against what they call a Russian “invasion”, many analysts and officials point out that the interventions of the powers of the Atlantic alliance, both in terms of weapons and intelligence, have led to an unnecessary prolongation of the conflict, dragging Ukraine into a proxy war that puts the world on the brink of a nuclear confrontation.

By offering more powerful and sophisticated weapons, the West is not only strengthening Kiev’s military capabilities – which seem to have little strategic relevance at the moment – but also risks turning the local conflict into a war of global proportions. Moscow’s concern is legitimate, considering that the absence of limits on Western involvement in Ukraine could lead to a situation of unrestricted aggression against the Russian people, including even demilitarized cities far from the zone disputed by Kiev.

Indeed, the eventual authorization of the use of long-range missiles against targets deep inside Russia would place Moscow and NATO facing the near inevitability of a nuclear confrontation. As spokeswoman Zakharova has made clear, Russia is on high alert for the use of advanced missiles against its territory. Moscow has repeatedly stated that if such attacks occur, Russia’s response will be strong and decisive. This would not only imply a military escalation, but also a redefinition of relations between Russia and the West, with the possibility of unpredictable consequences for international stability.

The recent changes in Russia’s nuclear doctrine, allowing a nuclear response to deep strikes by non-nuclear powers supported by nuclear states (just like in the Ukraine-NATO case), were a clear attempt by Moscow to de-escalate the current situation through rhetoric and indirect deterrence. At first, the measure seemed sufficient to calm public pressure from some NATO figures for the authorization of the strikes. However, it is difficult to predict what the Democratic “administration” plans to do in its final days in power, and it is possible that Biden and his team will go into “suicide mode” and put the entire global security architecture at risk, despite Russian warnings.

Read more …

“..large assets like the aircraft carriers are under heightened scrutiny to decide whether they are still a vital staple for modern warfare.”

War Games Show UK’s Flagship Aircraft Carriers ‘Get Sunk’ Every Time (Sp.)

In a reflection of the UK’s host of internal political and economic problems, its Armed Forces have likewise been grappling with financial and operational woes. In most war games carried out by the UK military, its costly flagship aircraft carriers “get sunk”, The Times cited a source as saying. HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, commissioned into the Royal Navy in 2017 and 2019, respectively, together cost £6.2 billion. (approx. $7.8 billion) to build but are reportedly vulnerable to missiles. A “whole load of scenarios” was run during war games to test the Royal Navy’s “ability to survive” against an “overwhelming force”, a British military source was quoted as saying, adding: “We stretch everything to the limit. At some point you will get to a scenario where it [the carrier] is sunk.”

The report cited Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute, as speculating that the great stride made in missile technology development was the ability to “locate and track” aircraft carriers. This comes amid an ongoing Strategic Defence Review commissioned by Britain’s Labor Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and overseen by the Defence Secretary John Healey. The review is due in the first half of 2025. Both ministers and military chiefs have been pressured to implement cost-cutting measures due to financial constraints. Hence, large assets like the aircraft carriers are under heightened scrutiny to decide whether they are still a vital staple for modern warfare.

“There will be casualties,” a source hinted, indicating that the prospect of scrapping at least one of the carriers was raised. Former Minister for Defence Procurement Lord Lee of Trafford told the outlet that the military was struggling to afford the requisite numbers of F-35 aircraft for the carriers, along with escort ships and support vessels. Decades of defense cuts by successive British governments have left the country’s military understaffed and underequipped, resulting in delays in production and upgrades. The HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales have both been plagued by technical malfunctions, with humiliating breakdowns affecting Britain’s ability to participate in large-scale joint NATO drills. Furthermore, the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) is facing a £16.9 billion ($22.17 billion) deficit, the National Audit Office (NAO) revealed in 2023.

Read more …

“Hughes has also banned Yulia and Sergei Skripal from testifying at the Inquiry.”

The Novichok Attack Was A British Operation, Not A Russian One (Helmer)

Yulia Skripal communicated from her bedside at Salisbury District Hospital on March 8, 2018, four days after she and her father Sergei Skripal collapsed from a poison attack, that the attacker used a spray; and that the attack took place when she and her father were eating at a restaurant just minutes before their collapse on a bench outside. The implication of the Skripal evidence, revealed for the first time on Thursday, is that the attack on the Skripals was not perpetrated by Russian military agents who were photographed elsewhere in Salisbury town at the time; that the attacker or attackers were British agents; and that if their weapon was a nerve agent called Novichok, it came, not from Moscow, but from the UK Ministry of Defence chemical warfare laboratory at Porton Down. Porton Down’s subsequent evidence of Novichok contamination in blood samples, clothing, car, and home of the Skripals may therefore be interpreted as British in source, not Russian.

This evidence was revealed by a police witness testifying at the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry in London on November 14. The police officer, retired Detective Inspector Keith Asman was in 2018, and he remains today the chief of forensics for the Counter Terrorism Policing (CTPSE) group which combines the Metropolitan and regional police forces with the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and the Security Service (MI5). According to Asman’s new disclosure, Yulia Skripal had woken from a coma and confirmed to the doctor at her bedside that she remembered the circumstances of the attack on March 4. What she remembered, she signalled, was not (repeat not) the official British Government narrative that Russian agents had tried to kill them by poisoning the front door-handle of the family home. The new evidence was immediately dismissed by the Sturgess Inquiry lawyer assisting Anthony Hughes (titled Lord Hughes of Ombersley), the judge directing the Inquiry. “We see there,” the lawyer put to Asman as a leading question, “the suggestion, which we now know not to be right, of course”. — page 72.

Hughes then interrupted to tell the witness to disregard what Skripal had communicated. “If the record that you were given there is right, someone suggested to her ‘Had you been sprayed’. She didn’t come up with it herself.” — page 73. Hughes continued to direct the forensics chief to disregard the hearsay of Skripal. “Anyway the suggestion that she had been sprayed in the restaurant didn’t fit with your investigations? A. [Asman] No, sir. LORD HUGHES: Thank you.” So far in in the Inquiry which began public sessions on October 14, this is the first direct sign of suppression of evidence by Hughes. Hearsay, he indicates, should be disregarded if it comes from the target of attack, Yulia Skripal. However, hearsay from British Government officials, policemen, and chemical warfare agents at Porton Down must be accepted instead. Hughes has also banned Yulia and Sergei Skripal from testifying at the Inquiry. The lawyer appointed and paid by the Government to represent the Skripals in the inquiry hearings said nothing to acknowledge the new disclosure nor to challenge Hughes’s efforts to suppress it.

Read more …

“Climate change could be roaring but the naked eye can’t see it.”

Climate-Change Debate ‘Heats Up’ With Collum, Keen, Fleckenstein (ZH)

Steve Keen, while primarily an economist, is well-versed in the research and a firm believer in the danger climate change poses. Dave Collum, chemistry professor at Cornell, believes much of the science to be bogus. Legendary short-seller Bill Fleckenstein was kind enough to shepard them along. We hope you enjoy and that you give both Keen and Collum a fair shake: For those short on time, here were the highlights:

Poking holes in the ‘narrative’. Things heated up when Collum unleashed a flurry of charts documenting trends that run counter to what we hear from most climate alarmists: Today, we actually see fewer hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, and forest fires than decades past. Collum: “There’s no obvious change in the frequency of global hurricanes back to 1980… Back to 1990, it actually has a distinct downward trend… Here’s one that goes back to 1960. These are violent tornadoes. Again, downward trend.” “Climate change could be roaring but the naked eye can’t see it.”

“Potentially Suicidal”. Natural disasters aside, Keen brought his own charts showing the recent and rapid ascent of global temperature. If accurate, the rise in temperature in the last 150 years when viewed on an axis of millions of years is staggering. Keen: “That’s the real danger of climate change. We’ve built [civilization] in a stable period of the climate. We’re destroying that stability and thinking we can still have the social system we’ve designed… I just don’t think that’s true.”

Keen’s sources provided below: Judd, E. J., J. E. Tierney, D. J. Lunt, I. P. Montañez, B. T. Huber, S. L. Wing and P. J. Valdes (2024). “A 485-million-year history of Earth’s surface temperature.” Science 385(6715): eadk3705. https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.adk3705. Scotese, C. R., H. Song, B. J. W. Mills and D. G. Van Der Meer (2021). “Phanerozoic paleotemperatures: The earth’s changing climate during the last 540 million years.” Earth-Science Reviews 215: 103503. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103503

Green New Deal? Assuming humanity put all its resources and minds together to avert the Earth’s heating… can it be done? Fleckenstein asked our distinguished guests whether they would support a “Green New Deal” (massive public spending effort to combat climate change): Collum: “My dad taught me this: Never ask the government to spend your money. They’ll do a terrible job.” “If we were serious about climate change… They should never put guys like John Kerry in charge as Climate Czar.” “Steve’s enthusiastic about intervening as scientists. But here’s the question I have is who is going to make these tough calls? Who has the right to sign off the informed consent to say we are going to cover the world with a blanket of particles to block the sun?” Keen argued that — while governments are inefficient — we do not have a choice. Keen: “I’ll go on record on saying that if we continue down the trends we’re doing right now… we’re going to destroy civilization before 2050.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

SpaceX

 

 

Baron

 

 

Camelemon
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857448564957327748

 

 

Phare du Four

 

 

Coconut oil

 

 

Wolf

 

 

Doggy

 

 

Black hole
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857668215725285772

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nov 162024
 


Arnold Böcklin The Isle of Life 1888

 

This Time Trump Really Means Business (Lukyanov)
Your Trump Investment Guide (James Rickards)
The Great ‘Splainin’ Cometh (James Howard Kunstler)
Democratic Senators Demand Musk Be Probed For Russia Ties (RT)
There Are No “Easy Wars” Left To Fight (Alastair Crooke)
RFK Jr. vs. Big Pharma Goliath: Drug Makers, Big Food and the FDA (Sp.)
Has Matt Gaetz Been Set-up for Eviction from Public Life? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Tulsi Gabbard Right Pick to Shake-Up US Spy Agencies – Giraldi (Sp.)
Tulsi and the Establishment Meltdown (Tom Woods)
Trump Makes Brilliant Choice for the Next White House Counsel (Turley)
X Sees Return Of Major Advertisers Under Fire From FCC (ZH)
Germany’s AfD Urges UN to Investigate Nord Stream (Sp.)
Trump’s Win Means End Of Zelensky – Ukrainian MP (RT)
No Use Blaming Britain For Kiev’s War Policy – Ukrainian MP (RT)
Laboratory Head Given Licence To Lie In Novichok Show Trial (Helmer)
How Did A Puritanical Nation End Up Idolizing Transvestites? (Frascolla)

 

 

Wow.

 

 

Avengers

Blanche
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857197902713536723

Alina

Tuberville

Target
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857136364531429859

Vivek

Watters

Lara Logan start 5:00min

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps fitting that the best(?!) overview comes from Russia.

This Time Trump Really Means Business (Lukyanov)

US President-elect Donald Trump has moved quickly to form his proposed new administration. His team is better prepared to take power than it was in 2016 – when neither the candidate himself nor the vast majority of his supporters believed he could win. It’s too early to draw far-reaching conclusions, but in general, the composition of the preferred government reflects the ideological and political coalition that has gathered around the president-elect. From the outside, it may look motley, but so far it is all in line with Trump’s views. Contrary to the perception actively propagated by Trump’s opponents, he is not an unpredictable and inconsistent eccentric. More precisely, we should separate his character and mannerisms, which are flighty, from his overall worldview. The latter has not changed, not only in the years since Trump entered big politics, but more generally in his public life since the 1980s.

It suffices to look through the old interviews of the famed tycoon to see this: ‘Communism (in the broadest sense) is evil’, ‘the allies must pay up’, ‘the American leadership does not know how to make favorable deals but I do’, and so on. Trump’s personal qualities are important. But more importantly, in a somewhat cartoonish way, he embodies a set of classic Republican notions. America is at the center of the universe. However, not as a hegemon that rules everything, but simply as the best and most powerful country. It must be the strongest, including (or especially) militarily, in order to advance its interests wherever and whenever it needs to. Essentially, there is no need for Washington to get directly involved in world affairs at all. Profit is an absolute imperative for the future president (he is a businessman), and this does not contradict conservative ideals. America is a country built on the spirit of enterprise.

Hence his rejection of over-regulation and his general suspicion of the extensive powers of the bureaucracy. In this, Trump joins forces with the equally flamboyant libertarian Elon Musk, who promises to rid the state of a hodgepodge of bureaucrats. Musk himself is unlikely to be hanging around the president’s office for long, but politicians who think along these lines are likely to be there. An important difference between the new Trump cohort and traditional Republicans is a significantly lower degree of ideologization of politics in general and international politics in particular. Domestically, the rejection of an aggressive agenda in the spirit of the Woke movement and the imposition of the cult of minorities (which the Republicans call ‘Marxism’ and ‘communism’) plays an important role. It’s about imposition, because the human right to any lifestyle is not in itself questioned by conservatives.

For example, key figures around Trump – ardent supporter and former ambassador to Germany Ric Grenell and billionaire Peter Thiel – are married to men. In foreign policy, the conceptual difference is that Trump and his entourage do not believe, as the Biden White House does, that at the core of international relations is the struggle of democracies against autocracies. This does not mean ideological neutrality. The idea of the ‘free world’ and criticism of ‘communism’ (in which they include China, Cuba, Venezuela, and by inertia, Russia) plays an important role in the thinking of many Republicans. But the defining factor is something else – intolerance of those who for various reasons do not accept American supremacy.

Trump’s choice for national security adviser, Michael Waltz, for example, speaks negatively and disparagingly of Russia, but not in terms of a need to be ‘re-educated’, but because it interferes with America. Marco Rubio, who is being considered for secretary of state, does not oppose regime change in his ancestral homeland of Cuba, but is otherwise not a militant supporter of American intervention anywhere. The undoubted priority of the Trumpists and those who have joined them is to support Israel and confront its opponents, first and foremost Iran. Last year, Elise Stefanik, the likely US ambassador to the UN, publicly shamed the presidents of leading American universities in Congress for alleged anti-Semitism. It is worth remembering that the only really effective use of force in Trump’s first term was the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, the head of the special forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Trump is not a warrior. Threats, pressure, violent demonstrations – yes. A large-scale armed campaign and mass bloodshed – why? Perhaps because of the peculiarities of relations with China, which is clearly seen as the number one rival. Not in a military sense, but rather in the political and economic sphere, so any ‘war’ with it (forcing it to accept terms favorable to America) should be cold and ruthless. This also applies in part to Russia, though the situation is very different. All of this is neither good nor bad for Moscow. Or to put it another way, it’s both good and bad. But the main thing is that it is not the way it has been up to now.

Read more …

How far will Trump go in implementing The American System?

Your Trump Investment Guide (James Rickards)

Now that Trump is on his way to the White House as the 47th president, it’s not too soon to start building a portfolio that will outperform the stock market in the early years of the new Trump administration. This kind of active asset allocation requires close attention to prospective policy details and their possible impact on specific business models. Not all stocks will perform well under the new administration. Some will perform brilliantly. Let’s first review the likely Trump policies and then consider their impact on certain stocks and sectors. The Revival of the American System. Under the guidance of Trump advisors Robert Lighthizer (former U.S. Trade Representative) and Peter Navarro (former Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy), Trump will pursue a twenty-first-century version of what was originally known as the American System.

The American System was invented in 1790 by Alexander Hamilton and supported by a succession of U.S. presidents and leading political figures including George Washington, Henry Clay, John Quincy Adams, Abraham Lincoln, William McKinley, Calvin Coolidge, and Dwight Eisenhower. There were opponents who favored agrarian interests over manufacturing interests, including early members of what later became the Democratic Party such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and James Monroe. Yet, their financial failures, including the liquidation of the First Bank of the United States (an early central bank with limited powers) and difficulties in financing the War of 1812 led to the success of the mercantilist and manufacturing programs of the American System leaders.

The American System relied on the following policies:
• High tariffs to support manufacturing and high-paying jobs
• Infrastructure investment (public and private) to support productivity
• A strong army and navy to protect the U.S. but not to fight foreign wars
• A central bank with limited powers to provide liquidity to commerce

To the extent there was government spending, it was for productive projects such as canal and road building and later to support railroads. To the extent that early central banks existed, they were for secure lending to sound entities (including the U.S. government) and not for purposes such as printing money, fixing interest rates or “stimulus.” The entire program could be summarized as sound money, smart investment and a strong military in the service of high-paying American jobs. The American System prevailed from 1790 to 1962 with occasional periods of agrarian ascendency and some disruptions such as the Civil War. Beginning after World War I, the neo-liberal movement of Austrian economists and libertarians began to promote globalist policies of open borders, open capital accounts, and free trade. Of course, free trade is a myth because of subsidies and non-tariff barriers. Comparative advantage is obsolete because the factors of production are highly mobile.

Taiwan had no comparative advantage in semiconductors in 1979, but today they dominate global production. They made that happen through a Taiwanese version of the American System. In contrast, the neo-liberals were living an ideological fantasy in which globalism was to displace sovereignty. At a minimum, their goal was the encasement of sovereigns in a larger orb of multilateral institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO and the United Nations. Beginning with the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the Trade Act of 1974, and successive rounds under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (today the WTO), the U.S. embraced the neo-liberal consensus including drastic tariff cuts. As jobs moved offshore to take advantage of cheap labor, capital followed as direct foreign investment.

The result was the hollowing-out of U.S. manufacturing, wage stagnation, slower growth, greater debt, and a succession of failed wars. The open border policy of Biden-Harris is consistent with neo-liberal views on the end of sovereignty but is a death knell for American jobs and social cohesion. Trump, Lighthizer, Navarro, and others will return the United States to the pre-1962 glory days with the revival of the American System. Foreign companies will be free to sell goods to Americans but only if they are manufactured in the U.S. This will lead to a wave of inbound investment in the U.S., a reduction in U.S. trade deficits, a stronger dollar (as the world demands dollars to invest here), and higher wages for U.S. workers. Higher wages will raise real incomes, stimulate consumption, decrease income inequality and expand the tax base to help reduce deficits without raising tax rates.

Read more …

“The meltdown has gotten so heavy liberal bureaucrats are ready to form antigovernment militias and fretting about black helicopters” – Max Blumenthal

The Great ‘Splainin’ Cometh (James Howard Kunstler)

In July 27, 1794, the non-insane members of the Convention, or national legislative body in Paris, suddenly turned on the rabid Jacobin leader Maximillian Robespierre and overthrew his ruling tyrannical bunch — who had killed 40,000 of their fellow countrymen in the paranoid orgy known as The Reign of Terror. The next day, Robespierre rode the tumbrel to his own appointment with “the national razor” and the Thermidorian Reaction was on! By the way, in one of their many acts disordering French society, the Jacobins had changed the calendar, renamed all the months, and changed the weeks from seven to ten days (to eliminate Sundays as a holy day of rest in their anti-church crusade). Thus, Thermidor, the month of mid-summer. This was but a small part of their proto-communist agenda, but you see in it the flavor of their radical extremism.

The Woke Democrats of recent times were our Jacobins, and the election of November 5, 2024, marks the kick-off of America’s Thermidorian Reaction. The crazies have been overthrown and our country awaits a restoration of norms in culture and law. No more sexualizing of children, no more flood of criminal mutts across the US border, no more furtive censorship of public speech, no more creative lawfare, no more women on the battlefield, no more “anti-racist” racism in the workplace, no more intel takeover of everyone’s private life. . . you get the picture. Many abiding mysteries about how this happened — even of what exactly did happen — remain to be sorted out by law and by history. That is probably because so much of the Woke Revolution was provoked by state-of-the-art mind-fuckery out of the giant intel blob’s psy-ops lab.

This blob, you understand, had grown to be a colossal racketeering operation with many branches and ever-spreading roots, and it cast its spells over the populace to protect these interests — which, of course, involved huge revenue streams. Perhaps its most potent spell was the manipulation of women’s emotion, harnessing female psychodrama as the propellant for mass social discord. In a nation of absent fathers, damaged children, and broken male-female relations, Donald Trump was painted as the ultimate archetypal tyrant Daddy figure to deflect the public’s attention from the actual tyranny growing under the US intel blob and its Globalist sidekicks. Case in point: RussiaGate, a long-running hysteria of fabricated accusations, a fabulous medley of scurrilous gossip, engineered at the highest levels of our government for the express purpose of wrecking Mr. Trump’s first term in office. “Witch hunt” was exactly the right term.

Many more psychodramas followed, all of them artificially cooked up by various branches of the blob: impeachments #1 and #2; the FBI-induced J-6 riot and the fake House J-6 inquiry that followed; the roll-out of DOJ-inspired fake criminal and civil cases that tied-up Mr. Trump in courtrooms through the year, and most especially the hostile news media’s presentation of all these things as one great big everlasting frenzy of on-screen women shrieking at the Daddy-figure, Donald Trump, like thirteen-year-old girls in fugues of hormonal disruption. The voters, subject to years of trips laid on them, were eventually able to see through all this induced psychodrama as to how they were being manipulated, and on November 5, they finally revolted.

Their quandary was probably epitomized by the absurdity of watching men in women’s sports — spiking volleyballs on the girls’ heads, bashing them on the lacrosse field, humiliating them in the swim lanes — and, more to the point, being helpless to do anything about it, because the officials in-charge under “Joe Biden” said it must be, no matter what you think and feel about what you are seeing. The New York Times, your field-guide to blob-think, is warning its dwindling readership of psychodrama addicts that Donald Trump will now take out his “grievances” on the noble, self-sacrificing bureaucracy that manages things so well in this land. As usual, The Times misleads and misinforms. These are the grievances of the nation that has seen its law and its culture twisted into new orders of wickedness that leave daily life in the USA perverted, dishonored, and grotesquefied.

So now Mr. Trump has picked a cabinet that scares the blob to death — for good reason. They are aiming to systematically disarm and disassemble the blob. They are a team of serious and intelligent warriors and they mean business, in particular Gaetz, Gabbard, Kennedy, Ratcliffe, and Homan, with Elon and Vivek riding shotgun. (A new FBI Director has not yet been named.) You must wonder how the blob is planning to defend itself, for it surely will resist.

Many of us believe that the two recent assassination attempts against the now-President-elect were blob-sponsored operations. Everybody expects they’ll try again. But it’s possible that the American system still has enough mojo to self-correct. A whole lot of public officials have a whole lot of ‘splainin’ to do. It looks like they will be compelled to now, including the public health officers who brought us Covid-19 and the mandated, ineffective-and-harmful mRNA vaccines. There’s every reason to believe that the ‘splainin’ can take place in correct proceedings according to law: hearings, grand juries, courts. We do have actual laws against racketeering, abuse of power, election fraud, bribery, malicious prosecution, sedition, treason, and conspiracy to commit all those crimes. Pay attention: all that is distinct from lawfare, which is making-up crimes, faking crimes, and faking procedure. You are going to see a demonstration of how law differs from lawfare. It ought to have a salutary effect on our national esprit. And that should motivate us to get on with the job of repairing the damage done to our country.

Read more …

Seamlessly switching from Trump to Musk.

Democratic Senators Demand Musk Be Probed For Russia Ties (RT)

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk should be investigated over media claims that he communicated with several senior Russian officials in recent years, two top Democratic senators have demanded in a letter. Jack Reed, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Jeanne Shaheen, a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee, raised concerns about the media allegations in a letter to US Attorney General Merrick Garland and Pentagon Inspector General Robert Storch on Friday. In October, at the height of the US presidential election, the Wall Street Journal claimed that Musk had communicated with several top Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, as recently as this year.

Musk oversees billions of dollars in US government contracts as CEO of SpaceX. As the tech billionaire claims to hold top secret level security clearance, and manages extremely sensitive government contracts, his potential communication with Russia is a risk, the senators said. “These relationships between a well-known US adversary and Mr. Musk, a beneficiary of billions of dollars in US government funding, pose serious questions regarding Mr. Musk’s reliability as a government contractor and a clearance holder,” they wrote. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov blasted the pre-election WSJ claims about the billionaire’s alleged phone calls with Putin as “disinformation.” Historically, there was only one call between the two, he said.

“It was before 2022, they spoke over the telephone,” Peskov stated, adding that they discussed Russia’s scientific progress, and likely future developments. “There were no contacts between Musk and Putin after that, and all claims otherwise are false.” The spokesman noted the claims are likely related to the “extremely confrontational electoral political fight” in the US. After his victory in the US presidential race, Donald Trump announced that Musk will head the future Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The initiative will aim to cut trillions of dollars in “waste and fraud” in annual US government spending, “dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies,” Trump said on Thursday. Musk said his role in DOGE “is going to be a revolution.”

Read more …

“The Israeli media term it a ‘dream team’ for Netanyahu. It certainly looks that way.”

There Are No “Easy Wars” Left To Fight (Alastair Crooke)

Israelis, as a whole, are exhibiting a rosy assurance that they can harness Trump, if not to the full annexation of the Occupied Territories (Trump in his first term did not support such annexation), but rather, to ensnare him into a war on Iran. Many (even most) Israelis are raring for war on Iran and an aggrandisement of their territory (devoid of Arabs). They are believing the puffery that Iran ‘lies naked’, staggeringly vulnerable, before a U.S. and Israeli military strike. Trump’s Team nominations, so far, reveal a foreign policy squad of fierce supporters of Israel and of passionate hostility to Iran. The Israeli media term it a ‘dream team’ for Netanyahu. It certainly looks that way. The Israel Lobby could not have asked for more. They have got it. And with the new CIA chief, they get a known ultra China hawk as a bonus.

But in the domestic sphere the tone is precisely the converse: The key nomination for ‘cleaning the stables’ is Matt Gaetz as Attorney General; he is a real “bomb thrower”. And for the Intelligence clean-up, Tulsi Gabbard is appointed as Director of National Intelligence. All intelligence agencies will report to her, and she will be responsible for the President’s Daily briefing. The intel assessments may thus begin to reflect something closer to reality. The deep Inter-Agency structure has reason to be very afraid; they are panicking – especially over Gaetz. Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have the near impossible task of cutting out-of-control federal spending and currency printing. The System is deeply dependent on the bloat of government spending to keep the cogs and levers of the mammoth ‘security’ boondoggle whirring. It is not going to be yielded up without a bitter fight.

So, on the one hand, the Lobby gets a dream team (Israel), but on the other side (the domestic sphere), it gets a renegade team. This must be deliberate. Trump knows that Biden’s legacy of bloating GDP with government jobs and excessive public spending is the real ‘time bomb’ awaiting him. Again the withdrawal symptoms, as the drug of easy money is withdrawn, may prove incendiary. Moving to a structure of tariffs and low taxes will be disruptive. Whether deliberate or not, Trump is keeping his cards close to his chest. We have only glimpses of intent – and the water is being seriously muddied by the infamous ‘Inter-Agency’ grandees. For example, in respect to the Pentagon sanctioning private-sector contractors to work in Ukraine, this was done in coordination with “inter-agency stakeholders”.

The old nemesis that paralysed his first term again faces Trump. Then, during the Ukraine impeachment process, one witness (Vindman), when asked why he would not defer to the President’s explicit instructions, replied that whilst Trump has his view on Ukraine policy, that stance did NOT align with that of the ‘Inter-Agency’ agreed position. In plain language, Vindman denied that a U.S. president has agency in foreign policy formulation. In short, the ‘Inter-Agency structure’ was signalling to Trump that military support for Ukraine must continue. When the Washington Post published their detailed story of a Trump-Putin phone call – that the Kremlin emphatically states never happened – the deep structures of policy were simply telling Trump that it would be they who determine what the shape of the U.S. ‘solution’ for Ukraine would be.

Read more …

“If you work for the FDA and are part of this corrupt system, I have two messages for you: 1. Preserve your records, and 2. Pack your bags..”

RFK Jr. vs. Big Pharma Goliath: Drug Makers, Big Food and the FDA (Sp.)

Donald Trump has tapped Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for HHS chief – the top advisor to the president on health-related matters, and chief administrator overseeing the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, Medicare and Medicaid. Here’s what he can actually do to make real change. Fixing even a fraction of the problems contributing to America’s health crisis could prove daunting, with the nation facing an obesity epidemic (over 70% of American adults are obese or overweight), an addiction scourge (15% use illicit drugs, 20% suffer from alcohol dependency), a prescription drug crisis (66% use at least one prescription medication), contaminated drinking water (a concern for nearly half of the population), skyrocketing autism (which affects one in 36 children, compared to about one per 1,000 in the 1980s), and other serious health-related issues.

Kennedy has recognized the gargantuan scope of the challenge, saying in a recent interview that the US health care system as it’s presently set up means there’s “nothing more profitable” than keeping Americans sick “for life,” with chronic disease a big business he estimates to be worth some $4.3 trln (i.e. about five times the size of the US’s 2024 defense budget). Kennedy has yet to lay out the details of his agenda as potential Trump Health and Human Services Secretary, including for make good on promises to rein in Big Pharma, but has dropped important hints in recent interviews and speeches about:
• negotiating with drug companies on medication costs,
• barring major pharmaceuticals from being able to spend billions of dollars on television advertising, which he has characterized as a disguised form of lobbying and insurance against media criticism,
• ending vaccine mandates, at least for federal agencies and the military, and lobbying to do so at the state level, while preserving Americans’ rights to make an informed choice,
• reforming vaccine research standards. Kennedy has been outspoken in his criticism of former chief presidential medical advisor Anthony Fauci and others at the NIH over US-funded gain of function research thought to have ultimately caused the Covid crisis.

As Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kennedy would also be responsible for America’s food safety regulations, an area of government he has said repeatedly has been captured by big corporations. On this front, Kennedy could:
• encourage municipalities to get rid of fluoride in tap water, citing fluoride’s long-suspected impact IQ levels in children,
• push to ban or at least restrict artificial food coloring, additives and chemicals,
• restrict processed foods in school lunches, and roll back subsidies for corn and soy,
• end perceive FDA overregulation on “stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything else that advances human health and can’t be patented by Pharma,” as he suggested in a recent X post.
• RFK Jr. also wants federally-funded medical schools to focus more on nutrition, and to create a national fitness standard like the one promoted by his uncle – President John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy has promised to take on conflicts of interest between regulators and the entities they’re meant to be regulating – citing money given to the FDA by Big Pharma, and corporate links to health and dietary advisories. The HSS Secretary job requires Senate approval, meaning Kennedy’s selection could become a daunting uphill battle come January, especially if Big Pharma and Big Food use their lobbying muscle to pull strings to block his appointment. Battle lines are already being drawn, with GOP senators promising to give him a shot, calling his selection “a bad day for Big Pharma,” and his candidacy a “brilliant” move by Donald Trump. Senate Democrats have rushed to dub Kennedy a “fringe conspiracy theorist” spouting “outlandish views on basic scientific facts,” over his much-publicized vaccine hesitancy, and argued that his selection “would be nothing short of a disaster.”

Senior officials from agencies Kennedy would be tasked with overseeing also called him out, with Clinton-era HHS chief Donna Shalala saying he’s “totally unqualified” and “dangerous” to America and the world. Former Obama HHS chief Kathleen Sebilius, meanwhile, has expressed hopes that Kennedy would get bogged down in the agency’s bureaucracy. “He has no organizational management experience, and HHS is one of the largest domestic organizations,” she said, highlighting the agency’s 83,000 employee workforce and massive $1.7 trillion budget. Kennedy has expressed readiness to work with the HHS and its subordinate agencies, but warned naysayers in top jobs, including at the FDA, that he will not tolerate efforts to block his initiatives. “If you work for the FDA and are part of this corrupt system, I have two messages for you: 1. Preserve your records, and 2. Pack your bags,” he wrote in a tweet last month.

Read more …

“That the Democrats stood down from stealing the presidency in 2024 doesn’t mean they didn’t steal House and Senate seats..”

Has Matt Gaetz Been Set-up for Eviction from Public Life? (Paul Craig Roberts)

I have had a horrible thought. Of all of Trump’s appointees, Matt Gaetz and Robert Kennedy will be the most difficult to get confirmed. And Gaetz has resigned from the House of Representatives where he is the most effective member against the ruling establishment. Was his appointment as Attorney General a trick to get him out of public life? Robert Kennedy’s appointment was said to be in doubt because he would be hard to confirm, but so would Gaetz. Gaetz’s high profile powerful position scares to death the corrupt Justice (sic) Department, the corrupt FBI, the corrupt Democrats, and the corrupt ruling elites. Perhaps the Senate will let Trump have his appointments without confirmation as recess appointments, so non-confirmation is not an issue.

It is revealing that there were no confirmation worries about Trump’s appointments of his Zionist war cabinet. Some claim that it is not a war cabinet, that Stefanik, Waltz, Rubio, and Hegseth have been cured of their Zionism by Israel’s massacre of Palestinians. Perhaps, but I have not heard a recantation from a single one of the “die-for-Israel” crowd. Certainly, Huckabee, sent by Trump as ambassador to Israel, and Witkoff, sent by Trump as his Special Envoy to the Middle East, will not take exception to Israel’s claim to title to Palestine. So how are they going to bring about any Israeli restraint? Isn’t it curious that Trump didn’t appoint anyone inclined to rein-in Israel?

That the Democrats stood down from stealing the presidency in 2024 doesn’t mean they didn’t steal House and Senate seats. The Republicans barely did well enough to change a thin Democrat Senate majority into a thin Republican majority, and it seems there was little, if any, change in the House. In contrast, when Reagan won in 1980 the Republicans captured 12 Democrat seats in the Senate. It is suspicious that Trump’s convincing win did not carry over into Congress.

Trump is taking Republican members of Congress as appointees into his administration. Republican governors can appoint replacements until the next election, but the appointed replacements might be vulnerable as they were not elected. Matt Gaetz was secure in his base. Will his appointed replacement be as secure? We can be thankful that Trump has appointed some officials who fight for the correct causes. We can keep hoping that Trump will make a difference.


https://twitter.com/i/status/1857135399887405420

Read more …

“It is likely that Trump appointed her to shake up the intel community, which is regarded by many as the black heart of the deep state..”

Tulsi Gabbard Right Pick to Shake-Up US Spy Agencies – Giraldi (Sp.)

President-elect Donald Trump nominated the former Democratic congresswoman and a 21-year army reserve veteran to oversee the bewildering array of 18 US spy agencies in his incoming administration. “A foreign policy and national security appointment that has created considerable dissent is that of Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence [DNI],” Philip Giraldi, a former CIA operations officer with experience in Europe and the Middle East, told Sputnik. The CIA veteran said much of the dissent comes from inside the ‘intelligence community’, including active officers and former staff of organizations like the CIA and NSA. Objections to Gabbard’s nomination have focused on her lack of intelligence experience, claiming she will “be unable to perceive problems among an unruly 18-member intelligence community,” the pundit said.

But Giraldi countered that she was “smart, experienced and capable enough to gather her own staff around her that will guide her way through the shoals of Washington DC.” “To my mind, she is an excellent choice, coming from outside of the intelligence community ‘club,’ and could be an effective and ethical DNI,” he added. The former CIA officer noted that Gabbard is viewed as a “peace candidate” for her opposition to endless overseas wars, the US military occupation of parts of Syria and the demonization of China. But she is also known for her support for Israel, currently waging a war against the Palestinian territory of Gaza. “It is likely that Trump appointed her to shake up the intel community, which is regarded by many as the black heart of the deep state,” Giraldi said. “She will, of course, be both helped and handicapped by being provided with plenty of ‘direction’ by a president who is fundamentally ignorant of foreign policy and national security issues.”

Read more …

“If Gaetz gets in, I do believe he will cut the legs out from under the giant lawfare operation that has grown up around his office in recent years..”

Tulsi and the Establishment Meltdown (Tom Woods)

[..] let me say a quick something about Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence and Matt Gaetz as Attorney General. Tulsi is said to be “unqualified” because she doesn’t come from the existing cabal of liars and propagandists who have never told the American public the truth in their lives. Rep. Abigail Spanberger in particular is horrified at the prospect that our intelligence world might not bombard us 24 hours a day with lies that would insult a second grader: “As a former CIA case officer, I saw the men and women of the U.S. intelligence community put their lives on the line every day for this country — and I am appalled at the nomination of Tulsi Gabbard to lead DNI. Not only is she ill-prepared and unqualified, but she traffics [sic] in conspiracy theories and cozies up to dictators like Bashar-al Assad and Vladimir Putin. As a Member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am deeply concerned about what this nomination portends for our national security.”

Rep. Spanberger is a “former CIA case officer,” which means we should favor the opposite of whatever she says. She claims to be concerned about “conspiracy theories,” when it was contractors with her beloved CIA who spun the absurd theory that Russia had come up with the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop (honestly, if you’re going to pretend a foreign power invented a story, make it not as weird and random as “the president’s son had a laptop with stuff on it”). She is deeply worried about someone who “cozies up to dictators” — the CIA would never do that! It just installs them. Here’s what our friend Dave Smith had to say about the present situation:

“A lot of crazy things have happened in this country over the last few years, so you may have forgotten this one minor story from eight years ago: The US intelligence agencies framed the sitting US President for treason. They all knew that Donald Trump wasn’t involved in a conspiracy with the Russians, but they lied. Well, that President is back AND the boss of the Intelligence agencies is now, not only someone completely outside of that conspiracy, but someone who was slandered with that same accusation, by the same nasty woman whose campaign came up with the whole Trump frame job to begin with.”

Interesting times. As for Matt Gaetz, they really don’t like him. John Bolton says Gaetz “must be the worst nomination for a cabinet position in American history.” National Review Online has a predictable article against him. JD Vance snapped back: “The main issue with Matt Gaetz is that he used his office to prosecute his political opponents and authorized federal agents to harass parents who were peacefully protesting at school board meetings. Oh wait, that’s actually Merrick Garland, the current attorney general.” They’re appalled that the attorney general isn’t being chosen from D.C. swampdom, because that’s what they’ve come to expect. But John F. Kennedy didn’t do that, and neither did Ronald Reagan. If Gaetz gets in, I do believe he will cut the legs out from under the giant lawfare operation that has grown up around his office in recent years — and this, rather than genuine concerns about his qualifications (these people care about qualifications all of a sudden?) is what the people screaming about him are actually worried about.

Read more …

“Do not let his various degrees fool you. He is neither an egg-headed nor lace-curtained lawyer. He is an intellectual who knows how to scrap..”

Trump Makes Brilliant Choice for the Next White House Counsel (Turley)

President-elect Donald Trump’s nomination of Matt Gaetz as Attorney General has consumed most of the media attention in the last week. Indeed, it seems to have sucked the oxygen out of this city. The media frenzy over Gaetz and a couple of other nominations has served to brush over an appointment that should be universally praised: William McGinley as the next White House Counsel. I had the pleasure of teaching Bill at George Washington Law School, and he is ideal for this position, particularly at this critical time in our country. Bill was one of my students in first-year torts in the mid-1990s. He was a gifted student who knew early on that he wanted to work along the borderline of law and politics. It is an area where GW has long excelled, and Bill was quickly recognized as one of the rising stars among young Republican lawyers. (Notably, Bill attended my class a couple years after prior Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway).

Bill received a B.A. in history from UCLA and a master’s in history from California State University. During his first summer, when other students were seeking summer internships with firms, Bill clerked for the Republic National Committee (RNC) and delved into the world of law, politics, and policy. Upon his graduation, his rise in the profession can only be described as meteoric. At a young age, he would serve as Deputy General Counsel to the RNC and coordinate the national campaigns for candidates and ballot initiatives. He also served as counsel to the RNC Standing Committee on Rules, the powerful group that establishes the framework for the party and its conventions. Bill ultimately became the General Counsel to the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) before becoming a partner at some of the most prestigious law firms, including Patton Boggs and Jones Day.

He also remained active as an alumnus at GW Law School, supporting other students in pursuing their careers in Washington, D.C., and other cities. Bill has all the qualities of an ideal White House Counsel. He can offer the President the clarity of judgment and foresight needed in this position, which requires the authority to give needed direction on the best course for achieving goals and unwanted advice when needed. That is the model of past successful White House Counsels, like the late C. Boyden Gray. It requires the trust of a president that, while the advice is sometimes inconvenient, his counsel seeks to facilitate, not frustrate, his legacy.

Bill is a tenacious and seasoned fighter with the “street cred” to be taken seriously by everyone in this city. He also has a deep-seated love for the law and legal education. Trump found a White House counsel who knows this city and how to get things done despite the deep partisan divides. Do not let his various degrees fool you. He is neither an egg-headed nor lace-curtained lawyer. He is an intellectual who knows how to scrap. He is someone who not only has a deep understanding of history but also someone who knows how to make history. Trump picked wisely with Bill McGinley, and I am particularly proud of his success as a leader in our profession.

Read more …

“Section 230 only confers benefits on Big Tech companies when they operate, in the words of the statute, “in good faith.”

X Sees Return Of Major Advertisers Under Fire From FCC (ZH)

While Mark Cuban and other sore losers are leaving X to shout into the void, several major advertisers have returned to the platform. Comcast, IBM, Disney, Warner Brothers, Discovery and Lionsgate Entertainment have all resumed ad spending on the social media giant – albeit this is more of a toe-dip than a full recommitment. According to Adweek, the brands collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X from January to September 2024, a far cry from the $170 million spent during the same period in 2023. Either way, it’s an admission that pulling ad spend over ‘hate speech’ and ‘antisemitism’ was nothing more than a giant virtue signal, particularly considering Facebook and Instagram’s long history of providing a safe forum for child sexual abuse. While a global survey by Kantar of senior marketers across 20 countries found that 26% of them plan to cut spending on X in 2025, the 2024 election may have changed that.

“X’s owner now has the ear of the president-elect, a man who has a long history of helping his friends, and punishing his enemies,” said Max Willens, senior analyst at Emarketer. “Sending at least a trickle of ad spending toward X may be seen as good for business, albeit in an indirect way.” Speaking of the tide turning, the woke cabal of advertisers trying to starve conservative platforms out of a voice is now coming under fire (have we mentioned lately that we really appreciate our premium subscribers?). In a Wednesday letter to Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), Apple, and Meta, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr accused them of having “participated in a censorship cartel that included not only technology and social media companies but advertising, marketing, and so-called “fact-checking” organizations as well as the Biden-Harris Administration itself.”

“The relevant conduct extended from removing or blocking social media posts to suppress their information and viewpoints, including through efforts to delist them, lower their rankings, or harm their profitability.” Carr then suggested that their protection from liability under Section 230 may be on the line. “As you know, Big Tech’s prized liability shield, Section 230, is codified in the Communications Act, which the FCC administers. As relevant here, Section 230 only confers benefits on Big Tech companies when they operate, in the words of the statute, “in good faith.” Wow… Carr then set his sights on NewsGuard – which Jonathan Turley notes has been long accused by conservatives “of targeting conservative and libertarian sites and carrying out the agenda of its co-founder Steven Brill. Conversely, many media outlets have heralded his efforts to identify disinformation sites for advertisers and agencies.”

Basically, NewsGuard bombards conservative sites with struggle-session questionnaire emails demanding explanations for the slightest of indiscretions, after which they issue a “report card” that advertisers use to justify pulling ad spend. As Carr notes in the letter; “It is in this context that I am writing to obtain information about your work with the one specific organization – the Orwellian named NewsGuard. As exposed by the Twitter Files, NewsGuard is a for-profit company that operates as part of the broader censorship cartel. Indeed, NewsGuard bills itself as the Internet’s arbiter of truth or, as its co-founder put it, a “Vaccine Against Misinformation.” Newsguard purports to rate the credibility of news and information outlets and tells readers and advertisers which outlets they can trust.” Carr suggests following NewsGuard’s ratings may constitute a violation of Section 230 (this is huge).

Read more …

“..we need to find out if members of the German government were aware of this incident before or after it occurred..”

Germany’s AfD Urges UN to Investigate Nord Stream (Sp.)

The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has called on the United Nations to prosecute an inquiry into the Nord Sream pipelines explosions and find out whether government officials were aware of this incident, party’s co-chair Tino Chrupalla said. “We believe that the incident needs to be thoroughly investigated, and those responsible must be held accountable. In particular, we need to find out if members of the German government were aware of this incident before or after it occurred. We have called for the establishment of an inquiry commission in the European Parliament and are now calling for a UN investigation,” Chrupalla told Turkish newspaper Aydinlik.

The Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines, built to deliver gas under the Baltic Sea from Russia to Europe, were hit by explosions on September 26, 2022. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have not ruled out deliberate sabotage. The Russian Prosecutor General’s Office has opened an investigation into it as an act of international terrorism. Russia has repeatedly requested data on other countries’ investigations into the explosions, but never received it, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.

Read more …

“The Ukrainian leader governs like a king leading a “terrorist organization..”

Trump’s Win Means End Of Zelensky – Ukrainian MP (RT)

Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election means that Vladimir Zelensky will soon be removed from power, which will be great for Ukraine, exiled lawmaker Artyom Dmitruk has told RT. The Ukrainian MP fled from his home country earlier this year, saying he feared for his safety after taking a public stance against Kiev’s crackdown on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. He went to the UK and is currently fighting an extradition request, which he claims is based on fabricated charges issued at Zelensky’s orders. The Ukrainian leader governs like a king leading a “terrorist organization,” Dmitruk said in an interview on Thursday, citing the effects that Zelensky’s policies had on the country. The incumbent government does not care about Ukrainian lives, persecutes political opponents, and enriches officials through corruption, he alleged.

“This man, he has managed to steal more than all previous presidents who robbed Ukraine. His money certainly has more blood on it than anyone’s,” the lawmaker said. Zelensky’s team was counting on Vice President Kamala Harris winning the election, which would have allowed the grift to continue, Dmitruk believes. He sees Trump’s victory as “a clear signal that their power is coming to an end.” “Zelensky must go,” he asserted. “I say: liberate Ukraine from Zelensky. This is my key political slogan.” “As a citizen, I wish Ukrainian issues were decided by Ukraine itself,” he added. “But thanks to all our previous presidents we have lost… sovereignty. Unfortunately, others now have to decide for us.” Dmitruk does not expect Trump to end the conflict “in 24 hours,” which he said he would do if elected. But reaching a peace deal would secure the president-elect’s legacy, which gives him a strong incentive to deliver, he reasoned.

Read more …

“When given a choice between peace and war, Zelensky helped himself by choosing war..”

No Use Blaming Britain For Kiev’s War Policy – Ukrainian MP (RT)

Kiev’s confirmation that former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson derailed peace talks with Russia in 2022 is an attempt to avoid responsibility for Vladimir Zelensky’s decision to seek a military victory, exiled Ukrainian MP Artyom Dmitruk asserted in an interview with RT on Thursday. Moscow and Kiev held several rounds of talks shortly after the conflict escalated in February 2022. In Istanbul, the two sides preliminarily agreed a draft truce, but Kiev later rejected the document and pulled out of the talks. David Arakhamia, the Zelensky-allied MP who led the Ukrainian delegation, confirmed in November 2023 that Johnson, the British prime minister at the time, had advised Kiev not to sign anything and “just continue fighting.” “Don’t put your responsibility on Britain and Boris Johnson personally. What is that? Is that some hide-and-seek game?” Dmitruk, a vocal critic of Zelensky, said.

The Ukrainian leader’s popularity was rapidly dwindling before the hostilities with Russia started, the lawmaker pointed out. The conflict provided justification to remain in power and keep enriching himself and his inner circle, he alleged. Zelensky’s term as president expired in May, but he refused to transfer power to the parliament speaker as mandated by the Ukrainian constitution. “Terrifying things happen during war. Terrifying things that generate huge money, bigger than anything anyone could ever make in Ukraine. And he leads it all,” Dmitruk claimed. When given a choice between peace and war, Zelensky helped himself by choosing war, the MP stated.

Dmitruk fled from his home country earlier this year after publicly criticizing Kiev for its intensifying crackdown on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the country’s largest religious organization, to which Dmitruk belongs. He claims to be a victim of political persecution. The lawmaker described the ouster of Zelensky as a key condition that he hopes will clear the way for peace, a new election, and national reconciliation. He hopes that the expected change in US foreign policy under the incoming president, Donald Trump, will help facilitate that outcome.

Read more …

It gets crazier as we go along.

Laboratory Head Given Licence To Lie In Novichok Show Trial (Helmer)

Anthony Hughes, the retired judge (titled Lord Hughes of Ombersley) directing the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry in London, opened the questioning of a senior British Government chemical warfare agent on Wednesday by telling him “you’re not bound by your statement, but by all means use it to refresh your recollection” — page 5. This is a licence to lie. The head of chemical and biological analysis at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down was given the cipher MK26 to conceal his name — his face screened from view in the videotape of the hearing — to do just that. Hughes also arranged for his assisting counsel, Andrew O’Connor KC, to give the government official this version of the witness oath. “May I ask you,” O’Connor said, “whether you have had an opportunity to read through this statement before giving evidence today? A. Yes, I have. Q. Are its contents true to the best of your knowledge and belief? A. Yes, they are. Q. Thank you.”

As Hughes and O’Connor know very well, the official oath in British courtroom practice is that witness swears his testimony “shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” In this case, the judge and his lawyer gave the witness a licence not to tell the whole truth. Just in case these licences to lie and to evade the truth were spotted by the public, O’Connor told MK26 that he and Hughes accepted his “statement does not contain everything that you can say about these matters because there are some further issues, further material that is covered by the restriction [secrecy] orders. A. Yes, that’s correct. Q. As a result, it’s right, is it not, that you will be coming back when the Inquiry sits in its closed sessions to give further evidence and on that occasion you will be able to provide the Chair with the information which you cannot provide today? A. Yes.” — page 6.

According to the exhibits MK26 had signed for the Inquiry, of the two pages of witness statement he had signed to the police on July 16, 2018, everything has been blacked out except one short paragraph giving the official accreditation of the workshops MK26 headed at the DSTL Porton Down. A second witness statement MK26 signed for the Coroners Court on August 20, 2019, comprises five pages, but they have all been censored. The only lines which remain say: “I have complied with, and will continue to comply with, my duty to the court to provide independent assistance by way of objective unbiased opinion in relation to matters within my expertise.” At the Bar this is recognized as the Queen Gertrude defence for lying; it comes from “the lady doth protest too much, methinks”, the well-known line from Shakespeare’s Hamlet. A Defence Ministry employee cannot be independent, or objective, or unbiased in relation to his official work orders.

The political significance of the Porton Down lying has been international. It was the foundation of the claim the British Government made to its NATO allies five weeks after Sergei and Yulia Skripal’s collapse that the UK was the target of a Novichok attack by Russia. According to a letter sent to the NATO headquarters by Sir Mark Sedwill, then the Prime Minister’s national security advisor and supervisor of intelligence operations, “I would like to share with you and Allies further information regarding our assessment that it is highly likely that the Russian state was responsible for the Salisbury attack. Only Russia has the technical means, operational experience and the motive. The OPCW’s. [Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons] analysis matches the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory’s [DSTL Porton Down] own, confirming once again the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical of high purity that was used in Salisbury.

OPCW have always been clear that it was their role to identify what substance was used, not who was responsible… of course, the DSTL analysis does not identify the country or laboratory of origin of the agent used in this attack…We therefore continue to judge that only Russia has the technical means, operational experience and motive for the attack on the Skripals and that it is highly likely that the Russian state was responsible. There is no plausible alternative explanation.” Sedwill was lying. Porton Down was lying. OPCW repeated the lies it was given by the British. There was, there still is, a plausible alternative explanation. In his appearance at Hughes’s hearing this week, MK26 tried to conceal this with what an independent British organic chemist with comparable expertise to MK26 describes as “camouflage science – faulty assumptions, missing chemical names, speculative findings, a day of witchcraft.”

Read more …

Good question.

How Did A Puritanical Nation End Up Idolizing Transvestites? (Frascolla)

A cause cherished by Mary Shelley and Harriet Taylor Mill’s husband is the equality of women with men. As bad as feminism is, and as bad as the world is for most Western women (who can’t start a family or find fulfillment in their jobs), there’s no denying that, in the 19th century, marriage could leave women to a private despotism of bad husbands. In the 20th century, the Unitarians were advocating for the equality of black people and, later, for gay people. What did the feminist, black and gay causes have in common? The fact that they proposed social reforms that went against society (it’s worth remembering that the U.S. is a country with deep racist roots). In practice, the moral rule ends up being to go against society – and that’s why the U.S. ended up embracing transvestites and putting them to read stories in children’s libraries.

Why did this doctrine gain so much traction in the U.S.? For two reasons, the main one being political liberalism. The United States was even more liberal than England, since, unlike the latter, it never prohibited Catholicism by law. Thus, the United States had nothing remotely similar to the Inquisition, and Unitarianism enjoyed the same freedom as any other religion. There is no room, in the institutional history of the United States, for the category of heretic. Nothing is heresy, everything is religion. Unitarianism spread like wildfire. If in 1774 they founded the first church in England, in 1805 (only 31 years later), they already had the rectorship of Harvard, and in 1825 they already had the sixth president of the United States. The United States became independent and constituted itself as a nation in 1776, that is, only two years after the founding of the Unitarian Church in England. Thus, we can say that the country existed for less than 30 years free of great Unitarian influence.

If the United States, being liberal, cannot adhere to any religious creed, and does not have any strong leader (such as an Emperor or a Supreme Leader), power ends up falling into the hands of technocrats trained by the most important universities. Unitarianism has this convenience of not seeing itself as a religion among others; thus, its principles are easily secularized – so much so that Mill’s On Liberty is a typical work of Unitarianism, but it is not seen as such. In addition to being considered secular, Unitarianism ended up giving rise to theological liberalism (which we have already discussed) and spreading through various churches and even synagogues. Protestants of any denomination ended up being divided between fundamentalists (who denied science) and liberals (who repeated the Unitarians). That is why we see so much transvestites and rainbows in the Episcopal and Anglican Churches, even though the thing arose in the Unitarian Church: both adhered to liberalism, instead of fundamentalism.

In view of this, ladies and gentlemen, what we can conclude is that the adoration of transvestites is an inevitable consequence of liberalism, and that the Inquisition burned too few people.

Read more …

 

 


 

 

Stallone

 

 

duckpuppy
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857071025617285467

 

 

Paddle

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nov 152024
 


Arnold Böcklin The Isle of the Dead III 1883

 

Trump Picks RFK Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services (PCR)
Trump’s Foreign Policy Team May ‘Double Down on Stupid’ – Larry Johnson (Sp.)
Trump Team Members Irritated By Musk – NBC (RT)
Will Gabbard Be Able to Direct the Intelligence ‘Community’? (Ray McGovern)
Has America Lost Its Mind Or Will Trump Get It Right This Time? (Ryumshin)
Make Money Free Again (Ron Paul)
Infowars Auction Thrown Into Chaos After Judge Investigates Malarkey (ZH)
What Are Trump’s Chances to Make American Great Again? (Paul Craig Roberts)
Trump Team To Nuke EV Tax Credit As Musk’s Price-War Endgame Looms (ZH)
Tucker Carlson: Joe Rogan Has “Changed American History” (MN)
FEC Chairman: Biden DOJ Broke Federal Policies with Letter Targeting Musk (AmG)
Trump Vows To ‘Work Very Hard’ On Ukraine (RT)
Will Trump Stop Ukraine From Joining NATO? (van den Ende)
Ukrainian State-run Agency Scrubs Posts Bashing Tulsi Gabbard (RT)
Electric War Moves Beyond Putin Pause Button To Power Off Button (Helmer)
The State-Backed Settler War To Annex The West Bank (Inlakesh)
Some Elections Will Never Be ‘Democratic’ Enough For The West (Behanzin)
French Prosecutors Seek Prison Term And Election Ban For Le Pen (RT)

 

 

 

 

Rogan

Kirk

Gaetz

Barrack

Enten

Eva

CIA
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856754040505602131

Homan

Thiel Musk

 

 

 

 

“I am astonished and delighted. I hope it isn’t fake news.”

“It will be ironic if Kennedy restores our health but Trump’s foreign policy team destroys us in war.”

Trump Picks RFK Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services (PCR)

I am astonished and delighted. I hope it isn’t fake news. President-elect Donald Trump on Thursday said he is “thrilled to announce” Robert F. Kennedy Jr as his nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) in a statement on social media. “For too long, Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health,” Trump wrote on platform X, along with his announcement. “HHS will play a big role in helping ensure that everybody will be protected from harmful chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, pharmaceutical products, and food additives that have contributed to the overwhelming Health Crisis in this Country,” Trump wrote on Nov. 14.

If this is real, the media and Trump Transition Team certainly misled me about the impossibility of Bobby Kennedy in a power position that can bring down the criminal pharmaceutical industry. This is a victory even if Big Pharma, wielding its campaign contributions, forces the Senate to refuse to confirm Kennedy in office. Trump can go to the public with the names of the bought-and-paid-for corrupt Senators and ask why Americans elect people who knowingly serve corporate criminals who knowingly damage the health of the American people. The nomination of Kennedy is the most powerful of all of Trump’s appointments, with Matt Gaetz’s being second.

We will now see if the Republican Senate is with Trump or against Trump and the American people. If the Senate consents to recess appointment of Trump’s team, they are with the President. If they do not, they are against him and are part of the deadly enemy he and we must defeat. Kennedy’s nomination restores my hope that Trump might achieve something. Trump, Kennedy, Gaetz, and Gabbard are fighters, a rarity in a Republican administration. But I still have concern about what seems to be a foreign policy/military team that is too committed to Israel to achieve peace. It will be ironic if Kennedy restores our health but Trump’s foreign policy team destroys us in war.

Read more …

“They still believe, foolishly, naively, that they can easily split Russia from China..”

Trump’s Foreign Policy Team May ‘Double Down on Stupid’ – Larry Johnson (Sp.)

Days after his election victory over Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris, Republican President-elect Donald Trump began filling Cabinet positions and other key roles inside his future administration. Donald Trump’s foreign policy appointments for his incoming administration show that “he didn’t learn a thing during his first term,” Larry Johnson, retired CIA intelligence officer and State Department official, told Sputnik. “He talked one thing during the campaign about ending needless wars. And yet he is staffing himself with really a lot of young people who are locked up with old ideas,” Johnson noted. In his opinion, Pete Hegseth, Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, is just an absurd joke. Florida Congressman Michael Waltz, tapped as Trump’s national security advisor, is also a disaster, Johnson argued, underscoring that he “represents everything that Donald Trump said that Donald Trump stood against.”

New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, tapped to serve as US ambassador to the United Nations, “comes in with a very strident pro-Zionist point of view,” the expert remarked. With a foreign policy team like that, Johnson said, Trump is “going to double down on stupid” when it comes to most important international areas, such as Ukraine, the Middle East, and China. “He doesn’t understand that the world has changed. They still believe, foolishly, naively, that they can easily split Russia from China, that there’s no natural alliance between Russia and China so that we can we can manipulate Russia into joining with us to defeat China. They just don’t get it,” the ex-CIA analyst underscored.

“They believe that they can boss people around in the Middle East and control what they do. Not recognizing the fact that Saudi Arabia and Iran, who were at odds two years ago, have now reestablished diplomatic relationships, are exchanging defense ministers to visit each other’s capital, and are planning joint military exercises. The Organization of Islamic Countries has made it quite clear that there should be no normalizing any relations with Israel until there is a Palestinian state and the Palestinians are secure. The Trump team doesn’t get that… And they’re going to probably have to get punched in the face to wake up and grasp the new reality,” said Johnson.

Read more …

Oh yeah, they all hate him, right, NBC?!

“Trump joked that “Elon won’t go home. I can’t get rid of him.”

Trump Team Members Irritated By Musk – NBC (RT)

SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk is overstaying his welcome at US President-elect Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate and “behaving as if he’s a co-president,” sources close to the election winner have told NBC News. Trump’s team has denied that there is any tension between the pair. Musk joined Trump at Mar-a-Lago on election night and has spent much of the last week at the Florida resort assisting the transition team. The tech tycoon has weighed in on Trump’s cabinet appointments, and was present when Trump held phone calls with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, reportedly speaking directly to Zelensky at one point. Musk’s closeness to Trump has apparently irritated some of the president-elect’s transition staff, a source at Mar-a-Lago told NBC News on Wednesday.

“And he’s sure taking lots of credit for the president’s victory. Bragging about America PAC and X to anyone who will listen. He’s trying to make President Trump feel indebted to him. And the president is indebted to no one,” the source added. A second source said that Musk has an “opinion on and about everything” and that his insistence on sharing these opinions has started to annoy Trump’s most senior aides and advisers. “He wants to be seen as having a say in everything (even if he doesn’t),” the source said, adding that Musk’s aggressive lobbying may hurt his standing with the president-elect in the long run. Over the last week, multiple sources close to Trump have fed a steady stream of transition-related gossip to the media. It is unclear how accurate this gossip is, particularly in the case of Musk, who Trump speaks glowingly about.

“Elon Musk is a great guy, loaded with personality and ‘brainpower’,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Wednesday. “He is definitely a high IQ person, which is the reason that his really strong endorsement meant so much to me, and to MAGA. He’s at a beautiful Mar-a-Lago concert right now, and the crowd absolutely loves him,” Trump continued, adding that Musk’s contribution to his win “will never be forgotten.” “Elon Musk and President Trump are great friends and brilliant leaders working together to Make America Great Again. Elon Musk is a once in a generation business leader and our federal bureaucracy will certainly benefit from his ideas and efficiency,” a spokesperson for Trump told NBC.

At a meeting with House Republicans on Wednesday morning, Trump joked that “Elon won’t go home. I can’t get rid of him.” However, Trump went on to praise Musk for dedicating so much time and money to his campaign, and Republican lawmakers told NBC that his statement on how Musk “won’t go home” was made in jest. On Tuesday, Trump nominated Musk and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Although not an actual federal agency, DOGE will “provide advice and guidance” to the White House and Office of Management and Budget on how to eliminate regulations, slash government spending, and restructure other agencies, Trump said in a statement.

Read more …

“It would take a courageous and politically astute person and strong backing and trust from the president for any DNI to be able to fulfill the duty to “oversee and provide advice … on covert action programs.”

Will Gabbard Be Able to Direct the Intelligence ‘Community’? (Ray McGovern)

President-elect Donald Trump’s selection of Tulsi Gabbard to be director of national intelligence (DNI) will cause shockwaves in and among the 18 fiefdoms that now comprise the U.S. intelligence community. Gabbard will be fighting an uphill battle if she tries to herd those 18 cats into a cohesive whole and restore integrity to intelligence analysis. The hill’s incline will be still steeper, if she takes seriously her duty to warn the president of the frequently noxious blowback of C.I.A. covert actions. I cannot overcome the urge to quote from “The Princess Bride”: Good luck stormin’ the castle, Tulsi … It will take a miracle! In short, the odds are against her. Whether she succeeds depends, first and foremost, on how strongly the president backs her. Unlike most former DNIs, she has already demonstrated uncommon courage, as well as smarts and political skill. On the other hand, she has had virtually no experience managing a large institution, much less a “community” well versed in internecine warfare to protect individual rice bowls, and populated with careerist bureaucrats all too accustomed to telling the ultimate boss, the president, what he wants to hear.

Important Duties The DNI is in charge of preparing The President’s Daily Brief (PDB), National Intelligence Estimates and the annual Threat Assessment required by Congress. What is less well known is her role in covert action — a favorite of the C.I.A.’s clandestine service. Executive Order 12333 (July 2008) stipulates: “The Director of National Intelligence (DNI) shall oversee and provide advice to the President and the NSC with respect to all ongoing and proposed covert action programs.” Thus, what the EO says. My own experience suggests that this covert-action-related duty has been more honored in the breach than in the observance, so to speak. Director of Central Intelligence William Colby was, in my personal experience, the only director to give intelligence analysts a look at some covert action proposals and ask for comment. I served directly under Colby as an acting national intelligence officer in the mid-70s. Will DNI Tulsi Gabbard (assuming she is confirmed by the Senate) step up to this task? It would take uncommon courage. Was the current DNI, Avril Haines, informed beforehand that the C.I.A. would blow up the Nord Stream pipelines? If so, did she give it her blessing? Or was she kept in the dark?

Blowing Up Pipelines … My guess is that DNI Gabbard would have promptly recognized the folly in that C.I.A. “can-do” attitude/escapade and would have briefed the president on its longer-term implications. She is a good listener to analysts who she asks to brief her. I know that, too, from personal experience responding to her questions when she was one of Hawaii’s representatives in the House. It would take a courageous and politically astute person and strong backing and trust from the president for any DNI to be able to fulfill the duty to “oversee and provide advice … on covert action programs.”

… and Blowing Off the Analysts Sizable covert action programs require a sanity check from analysts with substantive expertise, as sad experience has shown. Recall the Bay of Bigs operation of April 1961. At President John Kennedy’s request, historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. investigated the affair. His conclusion, set down in a MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT dated June 30, 1961, speaks for itself: “The trouble with the Cuban [Bay of Pigs] operation, for example, was not that the intelligence and operations were combined, but precisely that the Cuban operation evaded systematic intelligence judgment. The Intelligence Branch (DDI) of the CIA was never informed of the existence of the Cuban operation. The Office of National Estimates was never asked to comment on the assumption, for example, that discontent had reached the point in Cuba where a successful landing operation would provoke uprisings behind the lines and defections from the Militia. I gather that if its opinion had been invited, DDI would have given quite a different estimate of the state of opinion in Cuba from that on which the operation was based. … The Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the Department of State knew even less about the Cuban operation.”

Tulsi

Read more …

“..one of the biggest comebacks since Lazarus..”

Has America Lost Its Mind Or Will Trump Get It Right This Time? (Ryumshin)

[..] .. there are indications that Trump’s new four-year term will at least be more meaningful than the previous one. Firstly, no one will dare question the legitimacy of the elected president. In 2016, Trump’s victory seemed unnatural (Clinton won the popular vote). This led people to see his presidency as a failure of the system and to speculate about foreign interference. Now Trump has safely won both the electoral and popular votes. The Democrats are unlikely to dispute this. There could be a flare-up of political tensions if Trump starts taking revenge on all those who have wronged him (which the Democrats are very afraid of). But I think a truce is more likely. The Democratic Party is facing a massive internal showdown, with a search for those responsible for its electoral woes. The president-elect has never been particularly eager to follow through on his threats (remember: Hillary Clinton wasn’t jailed).

Second, the Trump of 2024 is not the same as the Trump of 2016. Eight years ago, a somewhat naive businessman who thought running a government was as easy as building skyscrapers in Manhattan entered the White House. Since then, however, Trump has matured politically, learned to compromise and completely taken over the Republican Party. The bitter experience of his first administration, filled with random and often disagreeable people, suggests that this time he’ll have a clear plan of action and a suitable team under him. For Russia, the positions of Secretary of State and National Security Advisor are of particular interest. These are the people who will determine the foreign policy of the second Trump administration – and whether he will keep his promise to end the conflict in Ukraine. There is the former US ambassador to Germany, Ric Grenell. He hangs out in European right-wing circles, opposes Ukrainian membership in NATO and favors the creation of ‘autonomous zones’ there (i.e. recognizing Russia’s control over the south-east). Grenell is being considered for Secretary of State or National Security Adviser – if he takes either position, it would be rather good news for us. It would be doubly good if other foreign policy positions were filled by people with similar views (Marco Rubio or Bill Hagerty).

There’s also Trump’s former national security adviser, Robert O’Brien. He’s also a contender for the top job, but is seen as a ‘hawk’. O’Brien supports military aid to Ukraine, and his selection could be a sign that potential negotiations between Moscow and Washington will be difficult. Of course, whoever Trump picks, we should not expect a ‘‘ceasefire in 24 hours’ — that is, to put it mildly, an unrealistic exaggeration. But I believe that under him, serious settlement talks could actually begin in 2025. Well, at least there will be an attempt to start a peace process. The other question is what methods will the president use to achieve this? What will his proposal be and what will he ask of Russia in return for concessions? But it is probably too early to speculate about that. For now, let’s look at the new US president-elect’s first steps.

Read more …

“President Trump should work to eliminate the need for the Fed to keep interest rates low. He can do this by fighting for massive spending cuts, starting with the military-industrial complex..”

Make Money Free Again (Ron Paul)

Two days after Donald Trump became the first American since Grover Cleveland to win nonconsecutive presidential elections, the Federal Reserve announced a quarter percent cut in interest rates. Following this announcement, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell held a press conference where he said that he would not comply with any presidential request that he step down before his term ends in May of 2026. Powell claimed that the president lacks the legal authority to fire the Fed chairman. So, if President Trump tells Chairman Powell “you’re fired,” Powell could bring suit asking a court to review Trump’s action. President Trump and Chairman Powell are at odds over President Trump’s desire to require the Federal Reserve to consult with the president before changing interest rates or taking other significant actions. Powell is likely to do all he can to convince Congress to reject any legislation giving the president any type of official role in setting monetary policy.

After all, Chairman Powell is so protective of Fed autonomy that he opposes auditing the Fed on the grounds that it could threaten the Fed’s independence, even though there is nothing in the Audit the Fed legislation giving the president or Congress any new authority over the Fed’s conduct of monetary policy. Requiring the Fed to consult with the president regarding monetary policy would likely increase price inflation and dollar devaluation. Politicians usually like low interest rates because they associate low rates with economic growth. Politicians also want the Fed to keep rates low so the federal government can keep racking up huge amounts of debt. Without a central bank that is ready, willing, and able to monetize the federal debt, the welfare-warfare state would not exist.

Despite the claims of Chairman Powell and other central bank apologists, the Fed has never been free of political pressure. Presidents were trying to influence the Federal Reserve long before Donald Trump began posting “mean tweets” about Jerome Powell. Requiring the Fed to consult with the president would at least make the president’s efforts to influence monetary policy open and transparent. President Trump and other Fed critics such as Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren think they are more capable of determining the “correct” interest rate than the Fed. This ignores the fact that interest rates are the price of money and like all prices are shaped by a variety of constantly changing factors. When the Fed manipulates interest rates, it distorts the signals sent to investors. The result is the boom- bust business cycle.

The fiat system is also responsible for rising income inequality and the decline of the dollar’s purchasing power, which has lowered most Americans’ standard of living. President Trump should work to eliminate the need for the Fed to keep interest rates low. He can do this by fighting for massive spending cuts, starting with the military-industrial complex. He should also push Congress to pass the Audit the Fed bill. Additionally, President Trump should support legalizing all competing currencies. The forthcoming tax bill should include a provision exempting precious metals and cryptocurrencies from capital gains taxes. The key to making America great again is to make money free again.

Read more …

The trustee stiffed the Sandy Hook families to keep Jones’s frieds from buying his company.

Infowars Auction Thrown Into Chaos After Judge Investigates Malarkey (ZH)

(Update 2020ET): Just when you thought the least funny website on the planet, The Onion, had prevailed in the Infowars auction, the judge in the case put the brakes on the sale after it was revealed that the (anti-Jones) bankruptcy trustee did not accept the highest bid, and instead allowed the Sandy Hook families to ‘assist’ by pledging their massive judgement towards the auction – which Jones says is illegal. According to Jones, there should be some sort of a hearing to discuss this early next week. He believes that the judge is likely to order a new auction for sometime in January, where a Jones-allied group will have the opportunity to buy the company without the trustee picking their own winner regardless of actual bid. The saga continues…

(Update 1130ET): Hours after yesterday’s auction, Infowars.com is now down. We wish Alex Jones well on his next endeavor, which we’re guessing is going to be massive. The leftist-satirical rag The Onion announced on Thursday that it had won a bankruptcy auction to acquire Infowars – the website founded and operated by Alex Jones since 1999. On Wednesday, Jones said that the auction’s trustee could choose any bidder it wanted – not necessarily the high bidder. Jones announced the sale on X Thursday morning. “I just got word 15 minutes ago that my lawyers and folks met with the U.S. trustee over our bankruptcy this morning and they said they are shutting us down even without a court order this morning,” he said. “The Connecticut democrats with The Onion newspaper bought us.”

The Onion told the NY Times that the bid was sanctioned by the families of the victims of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, who won a $1.4 billion defamation lawsuit against Jones. The Onion did not disclose the price it paid for Infowars and its assets, including Jones’ production studio and supplement business. Ben Collins, CEO of The Onion parent company, Global Tetrahedron, says he plans to relaunch Infowars in January as a parody of itself, mocking “weird internet personalities.”

Infowars

Read more …

“Gaetz is no milk toast. He is a strong individual, the kind of person needed in such a critical office. My question is: does he have the seasoning..”

What Are Trump’s Chances to Make American Great Again? (Paul Craig Roberts)

No, MAGA Americans, I am not a party pooper. I am a realist. No, I am not trying to make Trump look bad. I was Trump’s defender against all the false accusations and indictments. I insisted that we had to stand up for Trump and elect him or never again would a presidential candidate take the side of the people against the Establishment. I warned over and over that Trump does not know Washington, and he has again proven me correct with his appointments of a war cabinet of Washington insiders, with no executive authority for Elon Musk and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Today (November 13) Trump’s announcements of appointees was a little better in the cases of Tulsi Gabbard and Matt Gaetz. When I say a little, I don’t imply any criticism of these two Americans. In Gabbard’s case, I don’t know what the executive power of the Director of National Intelligence is. Is Gabbard above the CIA, NSA, State Department, or is she a coordinator of information that she does not originate and control?

The Director of National Intelligence is a cabinet-level agency or department created in 2004 during the orchestrated hysteria of “Muslim terrorists.” It advises the president, the National Security Council, and the Homeland Security Council. Apparently, it has taken over the CIA’s function of providing the president’s daily briefing. Where it gets its information from is unclear. Is the National Intelligence Agency just a mouthpiece for the CIA? Regardless, Tulsi Gabbard’s voice is important, and the position gives her a voice. The same for Matt Gaetz’s appointment as US Attorney General. Gaetz is no milk toast. He is a strong individual, the kind of person needed in such a critical office. My question is: does he have the seasoning. I certainly don’t object if he does. I would have thought that some of Trump’s attorneys, illegally prosecuted by Biden’s totally corrupt Attorney General, would have been a better choice.

I think my choice would have been the Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton. He has experience as an attorney general, and he has challenged the Biden regime criminals on several fronts. This doesn’t mean that Gaetz can’t be successful. Perhaps Gaetz should insist that Paxton be appointed deputy attorney general. That would be a strong team, a team that could guarantee the Trump administration’s success. If Trump is to return America to the rule of law, those who weaponized law must be punished. Also on the 13th Trump appointed the Treasury Secretary. His name is Scott Bessent. He is a hedge fund manager who created a global investment fund. He might be a good pick. I don’t know. Bessent is a Southerner and, thereby, possibly possesses integrity. But his background indicates a man out for himself at the expense of other people: Yale University, George Soros Fund Management, a successful Soros destabilizer of the British pound and Japanese yen. In other words, a person out for his own benefit.

Perhaps he has reformed. But there is no indiction that he has any grasp of economic policy. Will he see his Treasury seat as a way to build relationships and to expand his opportunities to make money? Trump’s view seems to be that making money is what makes America great again. In my day the US Treasury Department was a policy organization. Today it is a police agency at work imposing sanctions and stealing the central bank reserves of “enemies.” When I was in the US Treasury, I had to tell my executive secretary that I did not want any more appointments with lobbyists telling me how I was to formulate policy to serve them. Being of years of experience, she told me: you won’t get the directorships, you won’t get the consultant fees. I told her I was there to serve the president and that was our job.

It is going to be a challenge for the administration Trump has assembled to make America great again. Trump is there to be tough for America. War is a likely outcome. The threatened world already sees it coming. Mohammed bin Salman, the ruler of Saudi Arabia has been conducting naval exercises with Iran. The Saudi ruler recently had talks with Putin about preventing Israeli/US attacks on Iran. It seems that the US has lost the Saudis and is on the verge of losing a war, the loss of which will disappoint Trump supporters looking to be made great again. My hope is that Trump can get enough done peacefully that the American people don’t give up hope, thereby empowering the ruling elite with the gift of a demoralized population.

Read more …

“..Tesla – the largest EV automaker in the US and the only one not reliant on EV credits for survival..”

Trump Team To Nuke EV Tax Credit As Musk’s Price-War Endgame Looms (ZH)

The final chapter of the electric vehicle price war, sparked by Tesla’s Elon Musk, hinges on President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to eliminate the $7,500 consumer tax credit. Sources with direct knowledge told Reuters that the Trump team has discussed ending the EV tax credit as part of broader tax reform legislation. Sources indicated that Tesla – the largest EV automaker in the US and the only one not reliant on EV credits for survival – told the Trump transition committee that it fully supports the federal government ending the subsidy. Here’s more from Reuters: Repealing the subsidy, which has been a signature measure of President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), is being discussed in meetings by an energy-policy transition team led by billionaire oilman Harold Hamm, founder of Continental Resources, and North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, the two sources said.

The group has had several meetings since Trump’s Nov. 5 election victory, including some at his Florida Mar-a-Lago club, where Tesla chief executive Elon Musk has also spent considerable time since the election. In mid-July, Trump stated at a campaign rally that he would “end the Electric Vehicle Mandate on Day One — thereby saving the US auto industry from complete obliteration, and saving US customers thousands of dollars per car.” On X, around that time, Musk explained to the Whole Mars Catalog why repealing the tax credit would only benefit Tesla: In October, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group representing all automotive brands besides Tesla, penned a letter expressing to lawmakers in Congress how crucial the EV tax credit is in “cementing the US as a global leader in the future of automotive technology and manufacturing.”

In the markets, Rivian shares tumbled by 10% in the early afternoon, while Tesla shares fell by 3.5%. We knew the playbook in July. Here it is again: “Musk’s strategy to win the EV price war: Build the largest EV business with taxpayer dollars, popularize EVs, allow other startups and OEMs to enter the market, and then support politicians who want to end EV subsidies, crushing the competition and leaving Tesla reigning supreme.”

Read more …

“Rogan is just willing to just sit there with interesting people and talk for three hours. That was the most affirming, reassuring thing I’ve seen in 35 years of media — that that worked.”

“I’m thrilled and proud to be Rogan’s friend. I admire him more than anybody in media — by far..”

Tucker Carlson: Joe Rogan Has “Changed American History” (MN)

During a recent discussion with Joe Polish, at the Genius Network Annual Event, Tucker Carlson heaped praise on Joe Rogan, going as far to say that the podcast king has changed American history. Tucker noted that “Rogan created the genre of podcasting. I’ve been in the media my whole life. Rogan used to be a sitcom actor, a standup comedian, and an MMA fighter. So he starts this thing called a podcast where he talks for like three hours.” Carlson admitted “I’m in television at a big network and I thought it was dumb. No one is going to listen to a three-hour podcast from some MMA fighter?” “I know, right?” Carlson said as the audience began to chuckle. “And this guy’s not even in our business! What’s he doing?” Carlson related, explaining his feelings at the time. “He completely changed not only American media but also American history.

He created a whole new genre — it would be like if one guy invented the newspaper or television, that’s how big what he did was,” Carlson urged. He continued, “And I will admit I did not see it coming, I did not understand it, I did not think it would work. And the fact that it did work says something so great and important about Americans. Rogan proved that Americans really want to learn.” “They’re not learning in school, they’re not learning in the rest of the media. It’s all shallow and dumb, about race and gender, it’s all lying,” Carlson further asserted. He continued, “Rogan is just willing to just sit there with interesting people and talk for three hours. That was the most affirming, reassuring thing I’ve seen in 35 years of media — that that worked.” “I’m thrilled and proud to be Rogan’s friend. I admire him more than anybody in media — by far,” Carlson concluded.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1856141962967212230

Read more …

“..an attempt “to intimidate and chill private citizens and organizations from campaigning on behalf of President Trump.”

FEC Chairman: Biden DOJ Broke Federal Policies with Letter Targeting Musk (AmG)

On Wednesday, the chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) admitted that the outgoing Biden-Harris Department of Justice (DOJ) violated federal policies and illegally targeted “perceived political opponents” by sending a threatening letter to Elon Musk. According to the Washington Examiner, FEC Chairman Sean Cooksey sent a letter to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, saying that the letter to Musk concerning his efforts to encourage people to support freedom of speech constituted an attempt “to intimidate and chill private citizens and organizations from campaigning on behalf of President Trump.” Cooksey also recommended that Horowitz, along with the DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), open investigations into the incident and “hold accountable any individuals responsible for any violations of federal law or department policies.”

The letter in question was sent to Musk by the DOJ just weeks before the election on November 5th. In it, DOJ officials warned Musk’s America PAC that the pledge to give away $1 million every day to a randomly-selected voter who signed the PAC’s petition in support of freedom of speech was allegedly a violation of federal law. The letter also accused Musk of making “a mockery of democracy.” Musk defended his PAC’s actions, pointing out that participants at the time did “not need to register as Republicans or vote in the Nov. 5 elections.” “The underlying motivation behind this stunt is obvious,” said Cooksey in his scathing letter to the DOJ. “Employees of President Biden’s Department of Justice wanted to stop an independent political committee from campaigning for President Trump in crucial swing states just prior to election day.”

Cooksey further accused the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section of deliberately leaking the Musk letter to the New York Times, which was a violation of the department’s media policies. “Writing such a letter and then leaking it also violates the department’s long-standing policy against the identification of uncharged parties and the disclosure of prejudicial information,” Cooksey continued. Elon Musk, the founder and owner of Tesla and SpaceX, as well as the owner of the social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter), is the wealthiest man in the world.

He was previously a Democrat who supported politicians such as Barack Obama, but has shifted further to the right in recent years, due primarily to the Democrats’ increasingly radical stances, including support for censorship and transgenderism. Musk gave his official endorsement of President-elect Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign following the assassination attempt against him on July 13th. President-elect Trump has since announced that Musk, alongside businessman and former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, will lead an entirely new federal agency called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), with the purpose of significantly reducing the size of the federal government over the course of the next two years. The agency plans to complete its work by July 4th, 2026, which will be the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States.

Read more …

“..the goals of its military operation – including Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification – must be met..”

Trump Vows To ‘Work Very Hard’ On Ukraine (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump has promised that his team will work hard to resolve the Ukraine conflict to prevent further bloodshed. Trump made the remarks at the America First Policy Institute gala at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida on Thursday. “We’re going to work in the Middle East, and we’re going to work very hard on Russia and Ukraine.” He went on to say that the conflict “has got to stop,” adding that he has seen a report claiming that “thousands of people… were killed” over the past three days. “They happen to be soldiers but whether they’re soldiers or they’re people sitting in towns, we’re going to work [on] it,” Trump said, without elaborating further. In the run-up to the presidential election, the Republican – who has been critical of unconditional US support for Kiev – promised to end the Ukraine conflict within 24 hours if elected, even before being sworn into office.

While that pledge remains far from fulfilled, media reports have claimed that Trump is already reshaping US policy on Ukraine. A Wall Street Journal report earlier this month indicated that one potential peace plan would force Ukraine to suspend its ambitions to join NATO for at least 20 years and would freeze the conflict along the current front lines in exchange for continued US military assistance to Kiev. In addition, Trump has nominated several critics of Ukraine aid for top government positions, including Senator Marco Rubio for secretary of state, Tulsi Gabbard for director of national intelligence, and Matt Gaetz for attorney general. The nominations must be confirmed by the Senate, which the Republicans regained control over in this year’s election.

Moscow has said it is open to dialogue, but has ruled out freezing the conflict, insisting that the goals of its military operation – including Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification – must be met. President Vladimir Putin has signaled that Russia is willing to immediately declare a ceasefire and start peace talks as soon as Kiev begins withdrawing troops from the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye, which voted in referendums to join the country in autumn 2022. Moscow has also ruled out talks with Kiev as long as Ukrainian troops occupy part of the border region of Kursk.

Bowes

Read more …

“President Biden could push the process of admitting Ukraine to NATO, and the current Congress or a future Congress could vote on it even after he is no longer in office.”

Will Trump Stop Ukraine From Joining NATO? (van den Ende)

President-elect Trump bragged during his election campaign that he could solve the Ukraine conflict in 24 hours once he is installed in the White House. Trump’s bombast is, of course, unrealistic. No war can be solved within 24 hours. There must be peace talks and, above all, a treaty to secure territory and people. And what about the thorny issue of Ukraine joining NATO? For Russia to make a durable peace, that issue must be erased. Will Trump stop Ukraine from joining NATO? For Ukraine to join NATO, the U.S. Senate must approve its membership, as must the other 31 NATO member states. Russia is adamant that Ukraine will not be permitted to join the U.S.-led military bloc. But let’s just consider how the U.S. and its NATO allies might procedurally attempt Ukraine’s membership.

Trump’s “America First” policy will have consequences for NATO. At this point, it is unclear whether a new Republican-dominated Congress will even vote on Ukraine’s admission to NATO. With the recent U.S. elections, the American people have chosen to change course, but will a change of course be allowed by the powers that be? Does it matter which party, Democrats or Republicans, are in Congress and governing America? Will the war hawks win again, perhaps? Trump is not in the White House yet. That won’t be until January 20, and there could be surprises from the outgoing Biden administration during the next two months. President Biden could push the process of admitting Ukraine to NATO, and the current Congress or a future Congress could vote on it even after he is no longer in office.

The U.S. Senate could also vote on a treaty to approve Ukraine’s membership in NATO as early as the next few weeks, although it could take years for the country to become a full member. Both Democrats and some Republicans hope that this solution would still allow Ukraine to join NATO. Many people forget in the “heat of the election show” that we’ve seen in recent weeks and the election hype around Donald Trump that both Democrats and Republicans support the proxy war against Russia and would like to see Ukraine join NATO. It was recently revealed that primarily Republicans in the House of Representatives — who chair the national security committees — have formally filed a request pressuring President Biden to lift remaining restrictions on Ukraine’s use of U.S.-supplied Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) long-range missiles.

Although Trump’s son, Donald Jr, recently said that there is no place for “war hawks” in the new government, there will probably be pro-Ukraine figures in cabinet positions. This includes Senator Lindsey Graham, a prominent member of the GOP and a big Trump supporter, who might be given a ministerial post. Graham candidly told CNN and CNBC that the Donbass is full of mineral resources that America wants its hands on and that access to such natural wealth was central to the conflict. The hawkish senator has also said, and make no mistake, he is a close political friend of Trump and will have a lot of influence in the next administration, that “Trump will give Ukraine a lot of leverage to end the war.” So, are Americans being fooled again? Thinking now that Trump is elected, the proxy war against Russia will be over quickly, only for the American warmongers to start another war, say, against Iran.

Read more …

“..someone who “for several years, has been working for foreign audience for the Kremlin money.”

Ukrainian State-run Agency Scrubs Posts Bashing Tulsi Gabbard (RT)

Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation (CCD) has quietly removed its news bulletins accusing former US Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of spreading fake news on behalf of Russia. The change came after US President-elect Donald Trump nominated Gabbard, a lieutenant colonel of the US Army Reserve, to oversee the CIA and the NSA as the director of national intelligence. Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council set up the CCD in March 2021 with the stated goal of fighting disinformation in news reports and on social media. In practice, the agency focuses on flagging and “debunking” stories that are critical to Ukraine and has accused many Russian and Western officials of spreading “fake news.” According to the news website Strana.ua, the CCD took down four of its bulletins mentioning Gabbard from social media, including one from April 2022 that described her as someone who “for several years, has been working for foreign audience for the Kremlin money.”

In a bulletin from June 2024, Gabbard was accused of spreading disinformation about Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, and a bulletin from February 2023 said that the politician was “espousing pro-Russian rhetoric.” The posts were removed on Thursday morning, Strana.ua said. As of the time of writing, the CCD’s 2022 post accusing Gabbard of taking “the Kremlin money” is still up on the National Security and Defense Council’s account on X. The link to the CCD bulletin is inactive, however. Kiev has repeatedly lashed out at Western public figures critical of Ukraine, including journalist Tucker Carlson and tech billionaire Elon Musk.

Gabbard, who has long opposed US military interventions in the Middle East and has accused Washington of warmongering, left the Democratic Party in 2022. Last month, she announced that she had joined the Republican Party and was backing Trump. In 2022, Gabbard argued that the conflict in Ukraine could have been avoided if the US “had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns” regarding Kiev’s aspirations to join NATO. She has since insisted that the conflict should be resolved through negotiations and that Ukraine should become a neutral country. Gabbard slammed Zelensky last year, accusing him of seizing “absolute control of Ukrainian media, outlawing opposition political parties.”

Read more …

“The temperature is dipping below freezing at night, the daylight hours are shorter, the electrical lighting and heating loads are going up.”

Electric War Moves Beyond Putin Pause Button To Power Off Button (Helmer)

This week’s announcements of emergency electricity rationing and scheduled power supply cuts in the farwestern Ukrainian regions of Volyn, Ivano-Frankivsk and Transcarpathia indicate that pinpoint drone targeting by the Russian General Staff is a new stage in the electric war since President Vladimir Putin put on pause long-range missile attacks on western Ukrainian power generation plants since August 26. On Tuesday, the regional Ukrainian media reported “restrictions will apply to businesses in the Ivano-Frankivsk and Volyn oblasts starting on 13 November, in five phases, and will be scheduled from 07:00 to 20:00. The restrictions are being implemented due to damage to critical infrastructure by Russian forces and decreasing temperatures.” The national utility Ukrenergo announced that from November 13 “GOPs [power limit schedules] are being introduced due to a shortage in the energy system in the Carpathian region”.

The deficit in the current demand-supply balance for electricity has also been compounded by the decline reported in the Ukrainian press of imports of power from cross-border sources in Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Moldova. The reported cutback this week defies the European Union (EU) agreement at the end of October for “an increase of the export capacity limit to Ukraine and Moldova to 2,100 megawatts (MW) during this winter. It represents an increase of 400 MW from the previous value [1,700 MW]…The 2,100 MW export capacity limit will apply from 1 December 2024.” “This is a temporary situation,” Ukraine’s energy minister Herman Halushchenko announced on Wednesday. “ ‘Unfortunately, restored generation facilities can occasionally fail. This has happened, but all these issues will be resolved, and the situation will stabilize,’ he stated. The minister also pointed to a significant reduction in electricity imports to Ukraine, which are currently down to about 100 MW.”

A military source comments: “The damage from the August attacks has not been repaired – just patched up. There have been strikes on transformer stations since. They’ve been smaller in scale but indicative of the [Russian] General Staff’s knowledge of the [Ukrainian] distribution grid vulnerabilities. The General Staff’s moves have complicated Ukrainian efforts to keep the power on. The Ukrainians are hiding how bad the situation is, including in terms of getting spares. The temperature is dipping below freezing at night, the daylight hours are shorter, the electrical lighting and heating loads are going up. The jury-rigged grid is unable to handle it without curtailments.”

Read more …

“..this attack will be particularly focused on completely erasing Palestinians from what is known as Area C, which constitutes roughly 60 percent of the West Bank. That escalation has already begun.”

The State-Backed Settler War To Annex The West Bank (Inlakesh)

Despite Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza and military aggression against Lebanon, Tel Aviv is preparing to unleash its fanatical Jewish settlers in a coordinated war against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, aiming to ethnically cleanse what remains of the territory and pave the way for further annexation. Adding fuel to the fire, billionaire Miriam Adelson, the wealthiest Israeli in the world, bankrolled Donald Trump’s “huge victory” in his successful presidential campaign with one clear condition: support for annexing the West Bank. Last month The Times of Israel noted that the wealthy widow “is carrying on a legacy she built with her late husband, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson,” and that “The Adelson family has long been one of the largest sources of campaign money for Republican candidates and has backed Trump during each of the last three general elections.”

Speaking to The Cradle, Ubai al-Aboudi, executive director of Palestinian rights group ‘Bisan Center,’ says that “the Israeli settlers are preparing to carry out a major attack, to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian population,” adding that this attack will be particularly focused on completely erasing Palestinians from what is known as Area C, which constitutes roughly 60 percent of the West Bank. That escalation has already begun. On 4 November, armed settlers launched a brazen assault on the Palestinian city of Al-Bireh, marking a surge in the violence that has gripped the West Bank. In October alone, settlers carried out at least 1,490 attacks against Palestinians, their property, and their land – often under the supervision and protection of occupation soldiers. In the past, extremist settler attacks against Palestinians were characterized by their spontaneous nature and uncoordinated thuggery, but this has begun to change.

During a recent interview with Israel’s Channel 7 News, West Bank Settlement Council leader Israel Gantz commented on a meeting he had with the recently sacked Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant: “We asked that the West Bank be treated as Jabalia, Rafah, and the villages of southern Lebanon were treated, which means displacing the residents, killing the terrorists in these villages, cleansing the terrorist infrastructure, confiscating the weapons and then returning them to their villages.” While the statement includes the idea of returning Palestinians to their villages, if such an operation replicated Gaza and southern Lebanon, there would be no village to return to. Gantz also requested that Palestinian villages bordering illegal Jewish settlements be ‘cleansed’ due to the potential security threat posed to Israelis living there – both ideas reportedly opposed by Gallant.

On 5 November, however, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu replaced Gallant and handed the defense minister position to long-time ally Israel Katz. While serving in his previous role as Israel’s foreign minister, Katz openly called for expelling Palestinians from their homes in the West Bank, unlike his predecessor.

Huckabee

Read more …

“It seems that this is less about fraud or malfunctions and more about disappointment over the defeat of their pro-Western Georgian political allies.”

Some Elections Will Never Be ‘Democratic’ Enough For The West (Behanzin)

We have witnessed a strong reaction from the United States and the European Union following the elections in Georgia held late last month. Their pro-Western candidate suffered a defeat, and these Western powers – particularly Washington and the European Council – have expressed doubts about the election’s legitimacy, even calling for an investigation into its conduct. It is legitimate to ask whether the right to validate the election results in this sovereign country lies in the hands of Washington or Brussels, while the Georgian people have expressed themselves democratically. This situation once again raises the crucial issue of foreign powers intervening in the internal affairs of sovereign nations. For several years, the United States, often followed by its European allies, has taken the liberty of intervening in the electoral processes of various countries under the pretext of ensuring “democracy.”

However, this posture of self-proclaimed guardians of democracy becomes inconsistent if it only applies to elections that serve their interests. In Georgia, the people voted and chose to place their trust in Georgian Dream, a local party which seeks to build pragmatic relations with Russia and managed to gather broad popular support. The Georgian Dream party secured 54% of the votes. International observers present noted that the electoral process adhered to democratic standards, despite unfounded accusations made by some external actors. So why, in this context, do Washington and Brussels suddenly feel the need to question the results? It seems that this is less about fraud or malfunctions and more about disappointment over the defeat of their pro-Western Georgian political allies.

In short, for some Western powers, when they do not win an election, they adopt a strategy aimed at delegitimizing the results through unfounded doubts and calls for investigations. This eerily recalls similar situations, such as the one experienced during the presidential election in July 2024 in Venezuela. US interference in the internal affairs of other countries is well-documented, but it is paradoxical to see Europe blindly following this path. In recent decades, Europe, once proud of its independent stance on the global stage, seems, with its puppet leaders in Brussels, to have gradually aligned itself with American policies, to the point where it is now perceived as merely a relay for Washington’s interests. This trend is visible in its foreign policy, particularly during major crises, where Brussels seems increasingly dependent on the American line.

In the Georgian case, the European reaction is particularly troubling. Why is the European Union, which claims to promote peace and international stability, suddenly seeking to question a democratic election simply because the results do not align with its political expectations? This attitude reflects a deep contradiction between the so-called “democratic values” that Europe claims to defend and the actual practices on the ground. If the Georgian situation is such a problem for Brussels, perhaps the president of the European Council should personally travel to Georgia to conduct this much-demanded investigation. More seriously, is it truly the mandate of the European Union to question the sovereignty and the will expressed by the Georgian people? What about respecting the democratic processes it claims to uphold?

Read more …

Germany, France, they do the same thing. AFTER sinking their economies.

French Prosecutors Seek Prison Term And Election Ban For Le Pen (RT)

French prosecutors have asked a judge to slap former National Rally party leader Marine Le Pen with a five-year prison term and a ban from running for public office in an embezzlement case. Le Pen and 24 other current and former members of the right-wing National Rally are accused of using €3 million ($3.3 million) in European Parliament money intended for payments to parliamentary assistants to fund work on internal party business from 2004 to 2016, in violation of EU law. All of the defendants have denied any wrongdoing. During the proceedings in Paris on Wednesday, the prosecutors argued that Le Pen should receive the harshest punishment as she was a member of the European Parliament and the leader of the National Rally when some of the alleged violations took place. She led the party, which was previously called the National Front, from 2011 to 2021 and still remains a member.

Three years of Le Pen’s sentence would be suspended, and the other two could be served with an electronic bracelet, the prosecutors said. They also asked for her to be fined €300,000 ($316,000). The prosecutors said the five-year ban on running for office should be implemented immediately, before the defense can appeal the ruling. This means that if found guilty, Le Pen would be disqualified from the presidential election in 2027. During the trial, which began in late September, she announced plans to run for president for the third time. “It is clear that the only thing the public prosecutors wanted was Marine Le Pen’s exclusion from political life,” Le Pen told reporters after the hearings.

National Rally leader Jordan Bardella, who is not a defendant in the case, took to X to accuse the prosecutors of an “assault on democracy,” saying they are “seeking to persecute and take revenge on Marine Le Pen.” The prosecutors also requested that the National Rally be fined €2 million, and that all of the others who are accused receive bans from running for public office from one to five years. The defense will now present its arguments to the judge until the trial concludes on November 27. A verdict is expected in early 2025. In the 2022 election, Le Pen lost to President Emmanuel Macron in the second round 58.55% to 41.45%.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Friends AI
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856787925859443045

 

 

NZ

 

 

Dog hide
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856794488443957279

 

 

King&son

 

 

Tank

 

 

Molly

 

 

Salt mine

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nov 142024
 


Diego Velázquez The Spinners 1655-60

 

RINOs Keep Senate As Thune Beats Rick Scott To Replace McConnell (ZH)
Marco Rubio Doesn’t Even Speak MAGA (Marsden)
Jack Smith To Resign In Defeat Before Trump Takes Office (ZH)
Advertisers Plan Return To X To Get In “Good Graces Of Elon” (ZH)
Heritage Picks Up the Pieces With Trump After Project 2025 (Wegmann)
The Establishment Is Disarming the Trump Insurrection (Paul Craig Roberts)
Congress Should Fire Jerome Powell (McMaken)
“Remember, Remember, the 5th of November” (Turley)
Marc Elias and the Demise of the Faux “Save Democracy” Movement (Turley)
The Guardian Accuses Musk Of ‘Racism’ And Quits X (RT)
Trump To Appoint ‘Special Envoy’ To End Ukraine Conflict – Fox (RT)
Trump Has ‘Deep Disdain’ For Zelensky – The Hill (RT)
This Is Why Trump’s Approach To Ukraine Is So Different (Lukyanov)
Ukrainian Defenses ‘Crumbling’ In Donbass – FT (RT)
Russian Gas Rejecters Will Repent – Serbian President (RT)
The Truth About Trump’s “24 Hour” Peace Deal In Ukraine (Jay)
Zelensky Insulated From Truth By His Officials – The Economist (RT)
Short On Troops, Israel Turns To Mercenaries (Al-Omari)
The CDC Planned Quarantine Camps Nationwide (Jeffrey A. Tucker)

 

 

 

 

Hegseth

https://twitter.com/i/status/1856507774198292807
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856547051116388693

Elon Rogan

Candace

Alina

Waste

Bash

TMZ
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856542948999012652

CNN

No, not Joe..

 

 

 

 

“..a victory for the post-Trump establishment..”

RINOs Keep Senate As Thune Beats Rick Scott To Replace McConnell (ZH)

President Trump’s mandate just got a little more complicated, as longtime never-Trumper John Thune (R-SD) was just elected Senate majority leader, setting the stage for him to replace Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the longest-serving GOP leader who has held the top spot for the past 18 years. Thune, the Senate GOP whip and the #2 ranking member since 2019, largely managed operation of the Senate floor since McConnell suffered a concussion in 2023. As Axios notes, Thune’s win “is a victory for the post-Trump establishment,” as he’s “not a natural, true-believer Trump guy like Rick Scott and his supporters are.” Several of Trump’s most prominent supporters, including Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson and RFK Jr. had endorsed Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) in the race. John Cornyn, an underdog to Thune, ended up finishing in a close second. Needless to say, things just got more complicated for MAGA…

Read more …

“They need a guy who can talk the same language as the neocon desk jockeys at the State Department..”

Marco Rubio Doesn’t Even Speak MAGA (Marsden)

Of all the people that US President-elect Donald Trump could have picked as America’s chief diplomat, he’s chosen Marco Rubio, Florida senator and neocon talking-point guzzler. Guess it sort of makes sense on one level. They need a guy who can talk the same language as the neocon desk jockeys at the State Department. Kind of like an African Grey parrot who can speak English with humans but also bird language with other birds. The bird-brains at State speak mainly neocon, like Rubio. And he could be the MAGA-to-neocon translator for Trump, packaging the 47th president’s vision in a way that’s palatable enough for them to not spend the entire time trying to regime-change him, like they did last time he was elected. But how well does Rubio even speak MAGA – the language of Trump’s non-interventionist, America First, and pro-peace base? Not very well, if his record is any indication.

Case in point: Back when the Nord Stream pipelines were mysteriously blown up, Rubio was one of the first out of the starting blocks to blame Russia for blowing up their own economic lifeline to Europe. But he quickly tripped over his own shoelaces. “The only people in that region who have both the motive and the capability to have done it are Russian or Russian forces. So I think, for me, it’s not an intelligence matter at this point. It’s a common sense matter,” Rubio said in the wake of the attack. It turns out that even the dumbest establishment fixtures didn’t buy the narrative of “Russia blew up its own pipeline.” Apparently, they consider it to be even less of a viable scenario than some drunken Ukrainians with Aquaman-grade diving skills blasting through concrete and steel in highly monitored waters, despite Zelensky trying to stop them at the behest of the CIA, of course.

And then punishing the general they claim to be responsible for the operation, Valery Zaluzhny, by sending him to… London, where he’s currently Ukrainian ambassador to Britain. Guess Western officials and intelligence sources went to the trouble of making all that up to hide Russia’s involvement. Because that’s the only way that Marco Rubio’s confident assertions could be considered credible. Or maybe the actual responsibility lies with another nation state that has the same kind of capabilities? Who could that possibly be? Rubio is apparently so indoctrinated that he simply can’t imagine. Either that, or he does know and is being deliberately dishonest.

Back in 2021, Rubio was literally calling on Biden and Germany to do something to stop the pipeline. “US Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) sent a letter to President Joe Biden, ahead of his meeting with Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, asking him to convey to her ‘that there is broad bipartisan support for preventing the completion of yet another pipeline that bypasses Ukraine.’” Rubio also highlighted that “completing the Nord Stream 2 pipeline will only endanger our democratic allies in East and Central Europe and embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin in his aggression towards them,” he wrote. So, Putin, “emboldened” by Nord Stream, according to Rubio, then decided to just blow it up? Yeah, okay.

Read more …

“you can’t fire me, I quit!”

Jack Smith To Resign In Defeat Before Trump Takes Office (ZH)

A defeated special counsel Jack Smith and his team are planning to resign before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, the NY Times reports, citing a source familiar with the matter. The news comes days after Smith moved to pause his J6 case against Donald Trump and vacate all remaining deadlines. According to the new report, Smith’s office has been looking at the best path forward in winding down its work on the two outstanding federal criminal cases against Trump – as the DOJ has a longstanding policy not to charge or prosecute a sitting president with a crime. Smith’s departure is more of a “you can’t fire me, I quit!” after Trump vowed to fire him within “two seconds” of being sworn in. “We got immunity at the Supreme Court. It’s so easy. I would fire him within two seconds. He’ll be one of the first things addressed,” Trump told radio host Hugh Hewitt last month.

Department regulations require Smith to file a report summarizing his investigation and decisions – though it’s not clear how quickly he can finish his work – or whether it could be made public before President Biden leaves office – however several officials told the NY Times that he has no intention of lingering any longer than he has to, and has told career prosecutors and FBI agents who are not directly involved in the case that they can start planning their departures over the next few weeks. On Friday, GOP lawmakers told DOJ officials to preserve all of their communications for investigators – who view Smith and crew as the embodiment of a Democratic effort to use lawfare as part of a weaponized Justice Department. According to Smith, he needs until Dec. 2 to figure out how exactly to wind down his J6 case, as well as another case in which he charged Trump with mishandling classified national security documents after leaving office. The latter case was dismissed by Judge Aileen Cannon of the Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, FL – a decision which is currently under appeal in federal court in Atlanta.

Read more …

“Dark money-funded fact-checkers allegedly created false reports to discourage companies from advertising on the platform..”

Advertisers Plan Return To X To Get In “Good Graces Of Elon” (ZH)

Donald Trump is set to return to the White House in January. Ahead of his return, the former president announced that Elon Musk would lead the new “Department of Government Efficiency” in his second administration. With Musk’s close ties to Trump, advertisers are expected to flock back to X to gain access to the administration. The Financial Times recently spoke with media executives who revealed that some brands are preparing to advertise on X again, particularly due to Musk’s connections with the incoming administration. Lou Paskalis, CEO of the marketing consultancy AJL Advisory and a former media executive at Bank of America, explained that marketers plan to reallocate spending dollars on X as a form of “political leverage.” He noted that some companies are seeking government contracts and trying to get in the “good graces of Elon.”

“It could be seen as an official channel for White House communications,” another advertising agency chief told FT, adding that Trump’s victory has shifted significant power and legitimacy into Musk’s hands. However, only some are optimistic. One media director described X as a “mess,” questioning, “Which brand will take the risk?” Musk’s $44 billion acquisition of X initially triggered chaos in ad monetization. Dark money-funded fact-checkers allegedly created false reports to discourage companies from advertising on the platform, attempting to starve it of ad revenue.

The problem for Soros-funded Media Matters and other far-left organizations was that Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, could support X operations for a long time. Musk famously told brands that pulled their ads to “go f**k yourself” at the DealBook Conference and has since announced plans to sue the so-called advertising censorship cartel. Richard Exon, founder of the ad agency Joint, said, “Trump’s victory may well mean brands give X a second chance in 2025,” though he cautioned that they “will be wise to proceed with extreme caution.” Meanwhile, as X cements its role as a central hub for distributing news to Americans, legacy media outlets like CNN and MSNBC are imploding.

Read more …

“There is no door, and there is no key, for Project 2025 into the Trump-Vance transition..”

Heritage Picks Up the Pieces With Trump After Project 2025 (Wegmann)

As Donald Trump paused briefly to fix his tie in a floor-length mirror at the Palm Beach Convention Center, a thousand miles away inside the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., staff rushed to quickly put out a prepared statement congratulating the president-elect. Exactly 15 minutes before Trump walked on stage, and while most of the television networks were still waiting to project the winner, an email from Heritage landed in the inboxes of political reporters everywhere. “We look forward to this historic term,” wrote Kevin Roberts, “during which President Trump has an opportunity to make America great, healthy, safe, and prosperous once again.” Added the Heritage chief, “the entire conservative movement stands united behind him.” But does Trump need them in his administration? Does Trump want them after the campaign headaches they caused?

As the Republican candidate closed in on 270 electoral votes, Roberts told RealClearPolitics that the drama was in the past. “The political season is behind us, and we’re now in the policy-making season,” he said. After all, added the Project 2025 architect, “Heritage as an enterprise exists for the policy, not the politics.” Ahead of the second Trump season, he believes the relationship with the president-elect has been repaired. “We will leave the political decisions to the smart campaign people, but now that we’re in the policy-making world,” he said, “I don’t see how you have a conservative administration without, not just Heritage, but the 110 other groups that are part of the project.”

Heritage has worked with every Republican president since Ronald Reagan to staff their administrations and stock their libraries with policy proposals. Trump quickly embraced the think tank during his first term, heralding them as “titans in the fight to defend, promote, and preserve our great American heritage.” But the conservative behemoth may have jeopardized that special relationship when liberals turned their efforts to plan for a second Trump term into an effective campaign foil. “Just google Project 2025,” Vice President Kamala Harris said of the thinktank’s blueprint for how Trump ought to govern if returned to the White House. At nearly every campaign stop, the Democratic nominee would urge voters to go “read the plans for yourself.” And voters did. A lot of them. At one point in the home stretch of this campaign, Google searches for “Project 2025” exceeded those for “Taylor Swift.”

The 900-page collection of white papers went viral, and Trump’s campaign was spooked. Denunciations from Republicans followed, including from Howard Lutnick, who declared anyone associated with the Heritage endeavor “radioactive.” “There is no door, and there is no key, for Project 2025 into the Trump-Vance transition,” Lutnick told RCP ahead of the October vice-presidential debate. The CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald would know: Trump named him and Linda McMahon as co-chairs of his transition. She handles the policy. He oversees personnel. “So, if someone tried to send me a resume,” Lutnick said of staff associated with the endeavor, “they’d get an ‘I’m sorry’ back. Radioactive means ‘no thank you.’”

Read more …

We’re not there yet.

The Establishment Is Disarming the Trump Insurrection (Paul Craig Roberts)

It is dangerous for Trump supporters to think that the battle is over with the election victory. The battle has not begun, and it never will if Trump cannot put together a fighting administration. There are about 4,000 political appointees in the Executive branch, 1,200 of which have to be confirmed in office by the Senate. The confirmation power gives the Senate input in controlling staffing in a presidential administration. Trump and his transition team do not know 1,200 people, much less 4,000. Desperate to get a government underway, their inquiries will result in input from many sources, especially from the ruling establishment. At best a president and transition team can only focus on a few key areas where the president’s key agendas are. Even here Trump is not doing a great job.

Let’s start with the war front. Trump has said he can immediately stop the war in Ukraine and the Israeli-Hamas-Hezbollah-Iran war in the Middle East. But Trump’s appointees to US Ambassador to the UN, National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, US Ambassador to Israel, and Secretary of Defense are war hawks. UN Ambassador Elise Stefanik is a warmonger for Israel. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz has called for enforcing the energy sanctions on Russia and taking the handcuffs off long-range missiles provided to Ukraine. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is a warmonger. Trump has appointed Mike Huckabee US Ambassador to Israel to the great delight of Israeli extremists. Huckabee has said that Israel has title to Palestine. Trump has appointed Steven Witkoff Special Envoy to the Middle East. Witkoff who is Jewish is tasked with dealing with the Iranian threat, the Israel–Hamas war, the Israel–Hezbollah fighting, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

For Defense Secretary Trump has chosen Fox News co-host and commentator Pete Hegseth, a non-Woke masculine man without faith in a DEI military. The downside is that he believes in the official narratives constructed by the military/security complex and neoconservatives of America’s Russian, Chinese, and Iranian enemies. He describes Iran as “an evil regime” and wants to modernize the US military so that it is a match for China’s. It seems we are in for a rise in the defense budget and no closed bases, an obstacle to Musk’s plan to cut $2.5 trillion from the budget. Together with Stefanik, Waltz, and Rubio, Hegseth gives Trump a quattro for war. Do any of these Trump appointees have the flexibility to see the Russian, Iranian, Chinese, and Palestinian point of view?

In his comments about John Bolton, Trump indicated that he thinks presenting adversaries with war mongers is what will bring them to concessions. I doubt this will work with Russia, China, and Iran. Let’s now look at the prospects for RFK Jr. and Elon Musk. The UK newspaper, The Telegraph, reports that Trump’s advisors are distancing Trump from Bobby Kennedy. As I predicted would happen, Trump’s advisors are questioning whether Kennedy can be confirmed. The Big Pharma and fluoride lobbies have asserted their muscle, and it looks like Trump’s advisors are backing down. They lack the intelligence to see that Big Pharma’s blocking of Kennedy would play into Trump’s hands. But as we all know, Republicans simply are not fighters. Most in Congress are RINOs and they are not going to burn their bridges with the Establishment.

The Telegraph is an unreliable newspaper as its totally incorrect coverage of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict demonstrated. The Telegraph’s report could be a Big Pharma plant that seeks to raise questions in the minds of those on the transition team about Bobby Kennedy. Trump transition team member Howard Lutnick had already announced that Bobby would not be getting a job. Instead of having executive authority as Secretary of Health and Human Services or as Director of the Food and Drug Administration, Bobby will collect data on vaccines. It seems Big Pharma and agri-business have killed any improvement in the safety of medicines and food during Trump’s second term.

It seems that Elon Musk also is to be denied a position of executive authority. Initial reports were that the person ideally suited to be Director of the Office of Management and Budget was to be made head of a Commission on Government Efficiency. The commission has now become a new cabinet department, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) jointly led by Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. Trump says that “these two wonderful Americans will pave the way for my Administration to dismantle government bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure federal agencies.” How are they going to do that if they have no executive power over spending? It is paradoxical that Trump begins his assault on government bureaucracy and waste by creating a new bureaucracy. The way to control the budget is to appoint Musk Director of the Office of Management and budget. What Trump has done is to create a new government bureaucracy that will grow and grow and grow.

Read more …

“Trump could leave Powell in his position on the Fed’s 7-member Board of Governors but demote him from his role as chair [..] “That’s a subtle question that has never been tested,”

Congress Should Fire Jerome Powell (McMaken)

There were a few seemingly tense moments at the FOMC press conference on Thursday when two reporters asked Jerome Powell about the prospect of Donald Trump asking Powell to resign. The first reporter asked “would you resign if asked to do so by Donald Trump?” To this, Powell responded with a resounding “no” followed by silence. A few moments later, Powell was asked by another reporter if it was lawful for Trump to either remove or “demote”—that is, remove Powell as chairman, but leave him on the Board of Governors—Powell. To this, Powell responded with a forceful “not permitted under the law.” Apparently, Powell wished to leave no ambiguity whatsoever about this position that he cannot be removed or demoted by a sitting president. It would agree that the spirit of the law here is that a president not be able to remove a Fed chairman, except for some kind of misconduct. But, ambiguity remains.

Even Alan Blinder, a proponent of the myth of “Fed independence,” admits that in the world of political reality, Trump could potentially remove Powell: “Experts who spoke to ABC News acknowledged that some legal ambiguity looms over what type of conduct warrants sufficient cause for removal, but they said a policy dispute is unlikely to meet such a standard. Still, Trump could attempt to push out Powell and test how courts interpret the law, experts added, noting that the case could end up with the conservative-majority Supreme Court. “Trump could try and he might try,” Alan Blinder, a professor of economics at Princeton University and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve. “It’s very unlikely that he has that authority, but if he takes this to the Supreme Court, I don’t know what to think of the Supreme Court.” Instead, Trump could leave Powell in his position on the Fed’s 7-member Board of Governors but demote him from his role as chair, Blinder said. “That’s a subtle question that has never been tested,” Blinder said, acknowledging a lack of clarity about whether it would be allowed. “We can’t answer that quite as definitively.”

In any case, Trump would likely have to expend some serious political capital if he wants to remove Powell via presidential power. Yet, Powell’s defiance ought to provoke us to ask why wealthy, pampered, out-of-touch technocrats like Jerome Powell get to act like their removal constitutes some sort of transgression. Central bankers are just bureaucrats, and their removal ought to be regarded with no more trepidation than the removal of an undersecretary of agriculture. Regardless of what Trump’s legal powers may be, it is clear that Congress has the power to remove Powell, just as Congress has the power to abolish the central bank altogether. The Congress ought to abolish the Fed entirely, of course, but if members lack the stomach for that heroic act, Congress can begin with amending the Federal Reserve Act to make it clear that the chairman of the Fed is not a Holy Person, untouchable by the mere mortals who are actually elected to run the federal government.

There are many ways Congress could approach this issue. For example, Congress could rewrite the law to allow Congress to remove the Fed chairman with a majority vote in either house. It doesn’t really matter, so long as central bankers get the message that they’re not special. While Congress is at it, it could make a few other crucial changes as well. Congress should prohibit the Fed from buying any assets of any kind. This would end the Fed’s habit of buying up mortgage-backed securities and government securities to prop up the banker class and Powell’s buddies—i.e., Janet Yellen—at the Treasury. It would also end the Fed’s ability to manipulate interest rates since the Fed’s main tool here is its “open market operations.” A second key change that is very necessary is removing the Fed’s so called “dual mandate.” As the Fed likes to often mention, the Fed has a dual mandate of both “stable prices” and “maximum employment.”

Congress should immediately abolish the mandate for “maximum employment” because the only purpose this has ever served has been as an excuse for the central bank to inflate the money supply. As is abundantly clear from Fed press conferences and publications, the Fed routinely justifies its dovish policy in terms of fulfilling its mandate to maximize inflation. That is, the Fed often says something to the effect of “we’re embracing easy-money policy because our dual mandate to maximize employment says we have to.” Congress should just delete the mandate. (By the way, the Fed actually has a third mandate. It’s to ensure “moderate long-term interest rates.” Getting rid of the Fed’s power to purchase assets probably nullifies this mandate in any case, but Congress might as well remove any doubt and totally prohibit the Fed from manipulating interest rates of any kind.)

Read more …

All they had to run on was abortion. And still:

“Trump won white women voters by eight points at 53 percent..”

“Remember, Remember, the 5th of November” (Turley)

Democracy appears to be losing its appeal on the left. After campaigning on panic politics and predicting the imminent death of democracy, some on the left are now calling to burn the system down in light of Republicans not only taking both houses and the White House but Trump likely winning the popular vote. Some seem to believe that what happened on November 5th is a license to become a modern version of Guy Fawkes (“Remember, remember, the 5th of November; Gunpowder, treason and plot; I see no reason; Why gunpowder treason; Should ever be forgot”). Protesters after the election called for tearing down the system as a whole, insisting that “Trump is not an individual. He’s a figurehead of a system that’s rotten.” Even before the election, law professors and law deans called for a break from the Constitution. Those voices will likely be amplified after the massive electoral loss by Democrats.

Others are seeking to evade the results of the election to still bring Harris to power. CNN’s Bakari Sellers wants to pressure Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor to resign and replace her with Harris. Former Harris aide Jamal Simmons wants Biden to resign to allow Harris to become president despite the vote of the majority. It is an ironic twist after Democratic politicians and pundits repeated the mantra that, if we did not elect Harris, this might be our last election. After losing that election, democracy appears to be the problem. The majority of Americans voting for Trump have been called “anti-American” by Gov. Hochul. Other politicians and pundits have called them racists, misogynists, or weaklings seeking domination by strongmen and bullies. The problem is now with young and minority voters. Trump won white women voters by eight points at 53 percent. Harris actually fell slightly in the support of women overall.

Conversely, roughly 43 percent of men voted for Harris. Forty percent of women under 30 voted for Trump. Even CNN reports that Trump’s performance was the best among young people (18-29 years old) in 20 years, Black voters in 48 years, and Hispanic voters in more than 50 years. So, it appears that it is time to move on. The call for Biden to simply do what the public did not want to do (in making Harris president) is particularly ironic. Many voters were repulsed by the Democrats simply making Harris the nominee after all the primaries were over. This was the candidate who could not garner any appreciable votes in the prior presidential primaries before being made Vice President by Biden. Now, the idea is that she would be elevated by the unilateral act of Biden.

Without a hint of self-awareness or recognition of the hypocrisy, Simmons insisted that this would “Fulfill [Biden’s] last promise — to be transitional.” Most people understood that to mean democratically transitional in opening the way for the election of new leadership. He did so after he was forced to step aside after winning every Democratic primary and tens of millions of votes. Nevertheless, Simmons argued that “Democrats have to learn drama and transparency and doing things that the public wanna see is the time.” That would certainly be dramatic as well as anti-Democratic. Yet, Simmons explained that “this is the moment for us to change the entire perspective of how Democrats operate.” Indeed, it would. It would confirm that the Democratic Party is an effective oligarchy, the very thing that they just campaigned against.

Sellers is more modest. He just wants Harris on the Supreme Court. At no point in history has anyone suggested that Harris was a leading legal mind. Nothing in her history suggests that she is a competent, let alone promising, candidate for the highest court. Harris has previously suggested her support for possible radical changes on the Court, including court packing. She is also a decidedly anti-free speech figure in American politics. None of that matters any more than the results of the election. Harris would be put on the Court not due to any specific talents or skills but because it would be “consequential.” He wrapped up by saying “let Republicans go crazy, ape, I’m even mentioning that option.”

Read more …

“..not only rejected but ridiculed the Elias Law Group for one of its challenges. Judge James Peterson (an Obama appointee) said that the argument “simply does not make any sense.”

Marc Elias and the Demise of the Faux “Save Democracy” Movement (Turley)

Marc Elias is back and that is not good news. Despite the Pennsylvania race being called by the AP almost a week ago, Elias is working with Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) to try to change that outcome. It is not surprising that Casey was left with Elias. For many, Elias is a notorious figure who captures the hypocrisy of the “save democracy” crowd. Elias is an attorney who has been sanctioned in court and denounced by critics as a Democratic “dirty trickster” and even an “election denier.” Despite his checkered history, Elias remains the go-to lawyer for many Democratic campaigns. It was Elias who was the general counsel to the Clinton presidential campaign when it funded the infamous Steele dossier and pushed the false Alfa Bank conspiracy. (His fellow Perkins Coie partner, Michael Sussmann, was indicted but acquitted in a criminal trial.)

During the campaign, reporters asked about the possible connection to the campaign, but Clinton campaign officials denied any involvement in the Steele Dossier. When journalists discovered after the election that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the Steele dossier as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to Perkins Coie, they met with nothing but shrugs from the Clinton staff. New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said at the time that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.” Elias was back when John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, was questioned by Congress on the Steele dossier and denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS.

Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the misleading information given to Congress. The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee were ultimately sanctioned by the FEC over the handling of the funding of the dossier through his prior firm. (I previously discussed the comparison to the criminal charges against Trump for treating the mislabeling of payments as “legal expenses.”). The Democratic National Committee reportedly later cut ties with Elias. Nevertheless, other Democrats continued to hire Elias despite his checkered past. He unsuccessfully led efforts to challenge Democratic losses. Elias also was the subject of intense criticism after a tweet that some have called inherently racist. Elias continued to be accused of not defending but thwarting democracy.

In Maryland, Elias filed in support of an abusive gerrymandering of the election districts that a court found not only violated Maryland law but the state constitution’s equal protection, free speech and free elections clauses. The court found that the map pushed by Elias “subverts the will of those governed.” His work for New York redistricting was ridiculed as not only ignoring the express will of the voters to end such gerrymandering but effectively negating the votes of Republican voters. His work for New York redistricting was ridiculed as not only ignoring the express will of the voters to end such gerrymandering but effectively negating the votes of Republican voters. In 2024, the Chief Judge of the Western District of Wisconsin not only rejected but ridiculed the Elias Law Group for one of its challenges. Judge James Peterson (an Obama appointee) said that the argument “simply does not make any sense.”

The point is that it does not have to make sense. Democratic campaigns fund Elias and his various profitable enterprises to seek to change the outcome of called elections. That is the case with Casey. Trump won Pennsylvania’s presidential election, and Dave McCormick received tens of thousands more votes. With 99 percent of the votes counted, even Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer relented in reversing his decision to bar McCormick from the orientation for new senators. What is most striking is the strategy of Elias. The state has roughly 87,000 provisional ballots to count, but those ballots were generally challenged for defects or suspected invalidity. Even if they were to count, it is unlikely that they will break so overwhelmingly for Casey to overturn the result. Indeed, only about 30,000 were coming from Casey strongholds in Philadelphia and Allegheny County. However, Elias just wants to get within .5% to trigger a mandatory recount.

Read more …

“Its journalists will still use the platform for “news gathering purposes” and X embeds will still appear in Guardian articles..”

The Guardian Accuses Musk Of ‘Racism’ And Quits X (RT)

The Guardian has announced that it will no longer post on X, calling Elon Musk’s social media platform a “toxic” source of “far-right conspiracy theories and racism.” Conservative users accused the liberal British newspaper of “throwing in the towel” when confronted with free speech. In an explanation to readers on Wednesday, the paper said that “the benefits of being on X are now outweighed by the negatives and that resources could be better used promoting our journalism elsewhere.” The Guardian said it had considered the decision for some time, “given the often disturbing content promoted or found on the platform, including far-right conspiracy theories and racism.” X “is a toxic media platform,” the newspaper declared, claiming that the decision to quit was finally made after the US presidential election, in which Elon Musk used the site’s influence “to shape political discourse.”

The Guardian has more than 80 accounts on X with approximately 27 million followers. Its journalists will still use the platform for “news gathering purposes” and X embeds will still appear in Guardian articles, the paper said. Musk purchased Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, rebranding it as X and rolling back most of its censorship policies. Pro-censorship activists and NGOs have claimed that this losing of restrictions has allowed so-called “hate speech” to flourish on the platform, a claim denied by the billionaire. Last month, journalists Matt Taibbi and Paul Thacker revealed that one of these NGOs – the Center for Countering Digital Hate – was lobbying top Democrats in Washington to “kill” X, and pressuring regulators in the UK and EU to “impose consequences for harmful content” shared on the platform.

The Guardian’s announcement came three months after several Labour Party lawmakers in the UK quit X, accusing Musk’s platform of inciting a spate of nationwide rioting after a teenager of Rwandan descent stabbed three children to death and injured ten others in the town of Southport, near Liverpool. The newspaper’s decision has been mocked by conservatives and right-wingers on X. “The Guardian didn’t have a problem with the previous Twitter regime censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story to ‘shape political discourse’ and interfere in an election,” commentator Paul Joseph Watson wrote. “Elon allows free speech, and they have a tantrum.” Under X’s previous management, “many of us would get banned weekly (in some cases, daily) but we never left. As soon as Elon turns the tables a little bit, leftists throw in the towel,” another commenter wrote.

Read more …

Seems to make sense.

Trump To Appoint ‘Special Envoy’ To End Ukraine Conflict – Fox (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump will appoint a special envoy to lead negotiations on resolving the Ukraine conflict, Fox News reported on Wednesday. Trump had previously said he would speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the near future. “You’re going to see a very senior special envoy, someone with a lot of credibility, who will be given a task to find a resolution, to get to a peace settlement,” an anonymous source told Fox, adding: “You’re going to see that in short order.” In the week since he defeated Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump has announced a flurry of names that he intends to appoint to senior cabinet and advisory positions. The incoming president announced earlier this week that he would appoint real estate developer Steven Witkoff as his special envoy to the Middle East, saying Witkoff would be “an unrelenting voice for peace” in the region.

Throughout his campaign, Trump repeatedly promised to end the Ukraine conflict “in 24 hours” if elected. He has not explained how he would do this, although he has claimed that he would use his “great relationship” with Putin, and with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, to broker a peace deal. Trump spoke to Zelensky last week, and told NBC News that he would likely speak to Putin in the near future. Putin congratulated Trump on his electoral victory last Thursday, telling reporters that he was ready to speak to the president-elect. While the Kremlin has repeatedly downplayed suggestions that Trump could easily end the conflict with Kiev, Putin said Trump’s statements on the matter “deserve attention, at the very least.”

It is unclear what kind of resolution Trump will push for in the conflict. On the campaign trail, Vice President-elect J.D. Vance suggested that a ceasefire could be declared and a demilitarized zone established along the current 1,300km front line, with Ukraine being denied NATO membership. According to a Wall Street Journal report last week, Trump’s advisers support some version of this plan, and are encouraging the president-elect to present it to Zelensky and Putin. Moscow maintains that any settlement must begin with Ukraine ceasing military operations and acknowledging the “territorial reality” that it will never regain control of the Russian regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye, as well as Crimea. In addition, the Kremlin insists that the goals of its military operation – which include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification – will be achieved.

Read more …

“..he said the Russian president was among the world leaders who are at the “top of their game,” adding that this is something that the US “does not have.”

Trump Has ‘Deep Disdain’ For Zelensky – The Hill (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump despises Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, while showing “affinity” with Russian President Vladimir Putin, The Hill’s columnists have claimed. Trump’s return to the White House in January 2025 could have “huge” implications for international politics, with the “most dramatic change” likely affecting Washington’s policy on the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, the outlet’s opinion contributors, Robert Hamilton and Dan Perry, suggested in an article on Tuesday. Hamilton is a retired colonel, who now heads Eurasia research at Philadelphia-based think tank, the Foreign Policy Research Institute. The article’s co-author, Perry, is AP’s former chief editor in Europe, Africa and the Middle East. The administration of outgoing US President Joe Biden has “backed Ukraine’s sovereignty,” but Kiev was still “frustrated” by Washington’s reluctance to allow it to use Western long-range weapons to strike deep inside Russian territory, they said.

But Trump “will likely be far worse” for Ukraine, Hamilton and Perry warned. The president-elect “has long demonstrated affinity for Vladimir Putin, while harboring deep disdain for Ukraine’s President Vladimir Zelensky,” they claimed. According to the columnists, Trump’s hostility towards the Ukrainian leader stems from his first term in office, when the Republican was impeached in 2019 after allegedly pressuring Zelensky to investigate the activities of Biden and his son Hunter in Ukraine. “The stage could be set for Trump to reduce aid to Ukraine to push Zelensky into negotiations with Russia,” they suggested. The possible abandonment of Ukraine by the new US administration “risks Putin perceiving a green light to pursue further expansions,” and could “trigger an earthquake in European politics,” Hamilton and Perry suggested.

“The EU would face a difficult choice: step in to fill the void left by the US and rapidly bolster its own defense and aid mechanisms for Ukraine, or risk Russian expansionism moving unchecked,” they wrote. Moscow has repeatedly denied claims that it is planning to attack NATO countries, with Putin recently describing warnings about Russian aggression towards the EU as “nonsense” aimed at alarming citizens and raising defense budgets in the West. During his reelection campaign, Trump stated on several occasions that he had “good” relations with Putin. In late October, he said the Russian president was among the world leaders who are at the “top of their game,” adding that this is something that the US “does not have.” Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un are “tough, smart, streetwise” people, the Republican said.

Last week, the Russian president congratulated Trump on winning a second term. Putin said he had been “impressed” by his behavior during an attempt on his life in July, when then-candidate Trump rose to his feet and raised his fist after a bullet grazed his ear. “He is a courageous person,” he said. Speaking of Trump’s claims that he would swiftly end the conflict between Moscow and Kiev if he were reelected, Putin said such statements “deserve attention, at the very least.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Sunday that, compared to Biden, Trump is “less predictable” and it’s unclear whether he will follow through on his election promises.

Read more …

Fyodor Lukyanov, the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club.

This Is Why Trump’s Approach To Ukraine Is So Different (Lukyanov)

Donald Trump formulates his political course using memes. Strategies, programs and action plans are then drawn up by people around him. But the impetus comes from the main character’s pronouncements. That’s why we hear the US president-elect promise to end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. It sounds unrealistic, to say the least, but it reflects his desire. Which is obviously a conscious one. Which means it shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. It’s a pointless exercise to speculate on the basis of leaks and anonymous comments from people – supposedly – close to Trump about what he really has in mind. In all likelihood, he doesn’t yet know himself what he will do. What matters is something else: how Trump’s approach to Ukraine will differ from that of the current presidential administration, and whether he even understands rapprochement.

With regards to the first of these, the difference is stark. President Joe Biden and his team represent a cohort of politicians whose views were shaped by the end of the Cold War. America’s ideological and moral righteousness – and its unquestioned power superiority – determined not even the possibility, but rather the necessity of world domination. The emergence of rival powers that could challenge certain elements of the liberal world order has been met with fierce resistance. That’s because this setup didn’t allow for any deviation from its basic principles and refused to allow for compromise on fundamental issues. Russia’s actions in Ukraine are seen as an encroachment on the very essence of the liberal order. Hence the call for Moscow’s “strategic defeat.” Trump stands for a change in positioning. Instead of global dominance, there will a vigorous defense of specific American interests. Priority will be given to those that bring clear benefits (not in the long term, but now).

Belief in the primacy of domestic over foreign policy, which has always characterized Trump’s supporters and has now spread throughout the Republican Party, means that the choice of international issues is going to be selective. Preserving the moral and political hegemony of the US is not an end in itself, but a tool. In such a system of priorities, the Ukrainian project loses the destiny it has in the eyes of the adherents of the liberal order. It becomes a pawn in a larger game. Another peculiarity of the president-elect is that even his detractors largely admit that he doesn’t see war as an acceptable tool. Yes, he’ll use hard bargaining, muscle-flexing and coercive pressure (as practiced in his usual business). But not destructive armed conflict, because that is irrational. Trump doesn’t seem to have a twisted heart when he talks about the need to stop the bloodshed in Ukraine and Gaza. Now let’s look at his methods. Trump’s previous term offers two examples of his approach to regional conflicts.

One was the ‘Abraham Accords’, an agreement that facilitated formal relations between Israel and a number of Arab countries. The second was the meetings with Kim Jong-un, including a full-fledged summit in Hanoi. vThe first was the result of shuttle diplomacy by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. The powerful financial interests of America, the Gulf monarchies and Israel led to a series of shady political deals. The current situation in the region is many times worse than it was then, but it cannot be said that the arrangements have collapsed. The framework is still in place. But such a foundation can hardly be considered a model. The system of relations in the Middle East is very special, and the scale of the Ukraine conflict is incomparably greater. The second example is negative. Trump hastily tried to shift the systemic confrontation by resorting to a spectacle. The bet was on pleasing the ego of the interlocutor – the first North Korean leader to meet with a US president. It didn’t work, because beyond that there was no idea how to solve the real complex problems.

Read more …

“Moscow’s forces are now advancing at a faster rate than at any point since the escalation of the conflict in 2022..”

Ukrainian Defenses ‘Crumbling’ In Donbass – FT (RT)

Ukrainian officials admit that Russian forces are advancing in Donbass faster than at any time since the escalation of the conflict, and Kiev says its defenses are collapsing due to manpower shortages, the Financial Times reported on Wednesday. Ukrainian military officials as well as international experts expect the conflict to enter a critical phase in the coming months, according to the newspaper, as both sides are fighting for territorial advantage ahead of Donald Trump’s inauguration. The article suggested that a “key battle is also shaping up in Russia’s Kursk Region,” parts of which Ukraine invaded in August, deploying some of its best-equipped units. The invading force was ultimately contained by Russian troops and is currently being beaten back, according to Moscow. While Kiev is channeling resources to reinforce its incursion into Kursk Region, the country’s defenses in Donbass are “crumbling” due to manpower and ammunition shortages, the outlet noted.

The Russian forces have intensified attacks in the east in recent months, where Ukrainian troops have been unable to hold the line. “The average age is already above 40 in various brigades and there doesn’t seem to be enough reinforcements arriving on the front line,” Franz-Stefan Gady, a military analyst and fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London who recently visited Ukraine, told the FT. Moscow’s forces are now advancing at a faster rate than at any point since the escalation of the conflict in 2022, the newspaper said. They have been making great strides in Donbass over the past few weeks, taking over a significant number of villages and key settlements, such as the heavily fortified mining town of Ugledar, according to Russia’s Defense Ministry.

A commander of an artillery unit told the FT this week that Ukraine’s troops are facing a severe push back in the Donetsk region as the Russian forces are “attacking from three sides.” The commander said his troops “are ready to pull back… but we do not have the order from the top yet.” To make up for the shortage of soldiers, Kiev is sending air force pilots, engineers, medics and surgeons to the front line as manpower, especially infantry, remains Ukraine’s biggest challenge, the outlet said, citing commanders and analysts. More than a million Ukrainians have been reportedly drafted since the start of the conflict, and another 160,000 are expected to be mobilized over the next three months. Moscow has repeatedly accused the Ukrainian government of sacrificing its citizens to serve the interests of its Western backers, while also describing the conflict as a US-triggered proxy war against Russia, which Washington intends to wage “to the last Ukrainian.”

Read more …

“..those who have banned Russian gas “will stand in line before Moscow to ask: ‘give us back gas so we can survive the winter.’”

Russian Gas Rejecters Will Repent – Serbian President (RT)

Countries that have banned Russian natural gas could soon have to beg Moscow to resume deliveries after Washington stops sending its liquefied natural gas (LNG), Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic predicted on Tuesday. Speaking at the UN Climate Change Conference in Baku, Azerbaijan, Vucic suggested that in three or four years, the US could completely stop its LNG exports to meet its own increased demand, caused by energy-hungry artificial intelligence and the rapid spread of charging stations for electric vehicles. The Serbian leader claimed that if such a thing happens, those who have banned Russian gas “will stand in line before Moscow to ask: ‘give us back gas so we can survive the winter.’” Vucic noted that since the victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential election last week, the oil price has dipped, while gas prices have surged.

After the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, the EU moved to ban cheap Russian pipeline gas and replaced it with much more costly LNG. Last year, the US was the largest LNG supplier to the EU, representing almost 50% of its total LNG imports, having tripled the supply volume since 2021, according to European Council data. Previously, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that the EU “lacks brains” and that its leaders continue to take “politicized” and “ill-considered” steps that “work to the detriment of their own interests and only benefit US politics and economy.”

Putin specifically criticized EU politicians for abandoning Russian gas amid sanctions linked to the Ukraine conflict. He described such policies as “incomprehensible”, particularly as the same officials have “made so much noise” about green goals while restarting coal plants to offset the energy crisis that they themselves had caused. The Financial Times warned last week that the EU’s decision to ban Russian pipeline gas and increase its reliance on LNG could put the bloc’s energy supplies at risk this winter. “Anything can happen. You just need a few supply disruptions and things could go horribly wrong,” one analyst told the paper.

Read more …

“Trump will not hesitate to pull the U.S. out of NATO, albeit temporarily to make his point. Trump will also insist that the 300 billion dollars of Russian assets that the EU holds should be unfrozen and given back to its rightful owner..”

The Truth About Trump’s “24 Hour” Peace Deal In Ukraine (Jay)

The cat is finally out of the bag. As the EU now comes to terms with a Trump win in Washington, it has to face its hardest dilemma to date: whether to continue supporting President Zelensky in Ukraine and keep the war going there, or face realities and shut down the racket and work on a peace deal. It really comes down to two relationships. One with the U.S. itself and its administrations; and two, with Trump himself. Trump has claimed that he will stop the Ukraine war in 24 hours. Contrary to many reports he has even explained how we would do it, by simply shutting off all military aid to Zelensky. This move throws a spotlight on a prickly subject once again of how EU countries play such a minor role to the U.S. The former gets a free ride on being part of a global defence bloc, while the latter picks up most of the bill.

It is little secret that most of the weapons which are keeping the war going on the Ukraine side are from the U.S. If that supply is abruptly halted, then the world’s media will be forced to look at the equation and report on Trump’s chief complaint that the deal between the U.S. and EU countries is unfair and needs rejigging. The minimum spending of 2% of countries’ GDP is probably unrealistic and would need to be hiked to 4 or even 5 percent if there were to be some sort of balance on defence spending and equal responsibility for the so-called “peace keeping” initiatives that the West indulges itself with, which in all cases always ends in troubled hotspots around the world becoming even more of a threat than they were before U.S.-led intervention.

Who could have imagined that the Taliban would be in power now in Afghanistan after the U.S.-led NATO coalition (plus a few others like Australia) cost over 2 trillion USD and 2500 dead U.S. soldiers? Biden may be gone, but the news archive clip of Afghans running alongside a U.S. air transport plane as it takes off will be remembered and watched perhaps in decades to come as a chilling reminder how U.S. intervention usually fails. However, Old Europe has its own ideas about Ukraine and Trump. EU leaders, leading up to the U.S. election, quickly patched together and passed a number of aid packages for Ukraine which a number of experts, like Ian Proud, the former UK diplomat, claim would keep the war going for about a year with or without the U.S. lifeline.

This, once it is realized in the coming days, will anger Trump even more and put him in a position where his first contacts with the EU and its leaders will be a confrontational one. His chief task to keep his word on the 24 hours claim, will be to tell the EU to cancel its own pledges to Zelensky which will immediately remind the entire world who is still calling the shots in the West. If they resist, Trump will not hesitate to pull the U.S. out of NATO, albeit temporarily to make his point. Trump will also insist that the 300 billion dollars of Russian assets that the EU holds should be unfrozen and given back to its rightful owner. As part of a new deal to get peace in Ukraine, the U.S. will have to show some good will on its part and it will be Trump who will be the guarantor for the Europeans, making sure that they don’t “do a Minsk” and sign papers only to double cross those who are on the other side of the negotiating table.

Read more …

“It’s not even that he’s being kept in a warm bath,” he said. “He’s being kept in a sauna.”

Zelensky Insulated From Truth By His Officials – The Economist (RT)

The Ukrainian military and civilian leadership are keeping Vladimir Zelensky in the dark about the desperate situation of his country in the conflict with Russia, The Economist reported on Tuesday, citing sources. As Kiev is forced to gradually yield to Russian troops, and with the prospects of continued US military aid unclear following Donald Trump’s election victory, the “deteriorating situation on the front lines is already rippling through society,” the outlet reported. According to The Economist, to avoid spreading panic and defeatism, the Ukrainian military is attempting to censor the most negative news from the front line. One unnamed senior military official confirmed this, telling the magazine that some Ukrainian leaders are seeking to insulate Zelensky from the hard truth. “It’s not even that he’s being kept in a warm bath,” he said. “He’s being kept in a sauna.”

Military chaplain Dmitry Povorotny also told The Economist that many newly arrived soldiers are reluctant to continue the struggle. “There are a lot of unmotivated men. They are fighting because that’s the only way they stay alive,” he remarked. The outlet noted that many in Kiev are paying particular attention to two dates – January 20 and May 25. The first is the day of Trump’s inauguration, which could potentially pave the way for a ceasefire, while the second is the earliest potential date for an election. The presidential election in Ukraine was supposed to take place in the spring but was canceled by Zelensky, who cited the conflict with Russia. His term officially expired in May, with Moscow questioning his legitimacy.

Ukraine has denied making any preparations for a vote, although The Economist reported that “some groundwork appears to have begun,” with local officials purportedly seeking to keep it under wraps to avoid Kiev’s wrath. Meanwhile, media reports have indicated that Trump, who has claimed he could swiftly end the Ukraine conflict upon taking office, plans to push Kiev to suspend its NATO ambitions and freeze the hostilities along the current front line. Ukrainian media reports have suggested that if this were the case, and Russia were to agree, Zelensky would have little choice other than to accept the deal. Russian officials, however, have ruled out the freezing of the conflict. President Vladimir Putin has said that any peace talks with Kiev could begin once it withdraws its troops from Russia’s Donbass as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, which overwhelmingly voted to join the country in the autumn of 2022.

Read more …

“Offered monthly salaries ranging between €4,000 to €5,000 and fast-tracked German citizenship, many have joined the fight.”

Short On Troops, Israel Turns To Mercenaries (Al-Omari)

Facing increasing domestic pressure to reveal the true extent of their military losses in Gaza and Lebanon, Israeli officials have released figures that are likely to only reveal minimal numbers. The data claims that since the beginning of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October 2023, around 12,000 soldiers and officers have been injured or forced into rehabilitation under the occupation state’s Ministry of Defense. This includes 910 wounded during what Israel calls a “limited ground maneuver” launched by Tel Aviv on the Lebanese border, in addition to the deaths of over 760 officers and soldiers and 140 left completely disabled. These admissions, although selective, have stirred growing skepticism within Israeli society, already at its most politically divided since the inception of the state in 1948. Following the sacking of Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, questions are mounting: how does Israel plan to sustain its fighting force amidst the Lebanese resistance’s deadly daily attacks on them?

Opposition against compulsory military service from religious groups, particularly the Haredim, has compounded the army’s challenges – so has the removal of Gallant, an army dropout rate soaring above 17 percent, a wave of reverse immigration that has reached one million people in a single year, the highest since 1948, and increasing reluctance among shell-shocked reservists to return to the horror of battlefields in Gaza and the Lebanese border. The treacherous northern front, especially, has become a symbol of perpetual fear for Israeli soldiers stationed there against Hezbollah, as history repeats itself in south Lebanon. The “huge shortage” of capable fighters has forced Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to explore a range of unconventional options, especially after the Haredim conscription law passed in mid-July proved insufficient in addressing the manpower gap.

Many of these options are centered around utilizing tens of thousands of mercenaries, drawing on assistance from western intelligence agencies, and enlisting unconventional fighters, including Jewish militias. For the past seven decades, successive Israeli administrations have been reluctant to encourage a wholesale migration or naturalization of African Jews – the ‘Falasha’ from Ethiopia – to an Israel rife with racism, citing their ‘lower status’ to Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews. As a result, only around 80,000 Ethiopian Jews, 20,000 of whom were born in the occupation state, hold Israeli citizenship. But today, desperate for manpower, the Ministry of Defense has begun granting amnesty to Falasha currently imprisoned for attempting illegal entry into Israel or for overstaying their visas.

These men, aged between 18 and 40, are being fast-tracked for citizenship on the condition that they enlist. The Zionist organization ‘Al-Harith’ has also been active in Ethiopia, recruiting and training Ethiopian Jews with promises of citizenship, job opportunities, and residence within Israel after the war. It is estimated that by October 2024, more than 17,000 Falasha, including only 1,400 women, have been recruited. Another initiative by the Netanyahu administration involves cooperation with German intelligence and Zionist organizations in Germany to recruit asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria. Over the past seven months, the Values Initiative Association and the German–Israeli Association (DIG) have worked to enlist these refugees from war-torn Muslim-majority countries as mercenaries for Israel.

Offered monthly salaries ranging between €4,000 to €5,000 and fast-tracked German citizenship, many have joined the fight. Reports suggest that around 4,000 immigrants were naturalized between September and October alone. This shift highlights a significant change in Berlin’s position – which once served as a mediator in prisoner exchange deals between Israel and Palestinian or Lebanese factions, but now vocally and materially leads global support of Israeli military objectives, under the guise of a moral obligation toward the occupation state. Germany’s policy of supporting genocide in Gaza and terror in Lebanon was expressed by none other than Berlin’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock during her recent visit to Lebanon and then in her speech in the German Parliament, the Bundestag, in late September:

Read more …

“..physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population” allows authorities “to prioritize the use of the limited available resources.”

The CDC Planned Quarantine Camps Nationwide (Jeffrey A. Tucker)

Consider the vaccine passports alone. Six cities were locked down to include only the vaccinated in public indoor places. They were New York City, Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, Washington, D.C., and Seattle. The plan was to enforce this with a vaccine passport. It broke. Once the news leaked that the shot didn’t stop infection or transmission, the planners lost public support and the scheme collapsed. It was undoubtedly planned to be permanent and nationwide if not worldwide. Instead, the scheme had to be dialed back. Features of the CDC’s edicts did incredible damage. It imposed the rent moratorium. It decreed the ridiculous “six feet of distance” and mask mandates. It forced Plexiglas as the interface for commercial transactions. It implied that mail-in balloting must be the norm, which probably flipped the election. It delayed the reopening as long as possible. It was sadistic.

Even with all that, worse was planned. On July 26, 2020, with the George Floyd riots having finally settled down, the CDC issued a plan for establishing nationwide quarantine camps. People were to be isolated, given only food and some cleaning supplies. They would be banned from participating in any religious services. The plan included contingencies for preventing suicide. There were no provisions made for any legal appeals or even the right to legal counsel. The plan’s authors were unnamed but included 26 footnotes. It was completely official. The document was only removed on about March 26, 2023. During the entire intervening time, the plan survived on the CDC’s public site with little to no public notice or controversy. It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.”

“This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings. This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available.”

By absence of empirical data, the meaning is: nothing like this has ever been tried. The point of the document was to map out how it could be possible and alert authorities to possible pitfalls to be avoided. The meaning of “shielding” is “to reduce the number of severe Covid-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (‘high-risk’) and the general population (‘low-risk’). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector, or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.” In other words, this is what used to be concentration camps.

Who are these people who would be rounded up? They are “older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions.” Who determines this? Public health authorities. The purpose? The CDC explains: “physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population” allows authorities “to prioritize the use of the limited available resources.” This sounds a lot like condemning people to death in the name of protecting them.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

3D

 

 

PuppyKitten

 

 

Thank you
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856361314349920342

 

 

Taxi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856385211317268937

 

 

Sea horse

 

 

Dog flood
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856408879699014011

 

 

Kangal

 

 

Bowling
https://twitter.com/i/status/1856659212492833107

 

 

 

 

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