Menu Icon

Debt Rattle March 8 2025

Mar 082025
 
 March 8, 2025  Posted by at 11:05 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  35 Responses »


Gustave Courbet The man made mad by fear 1844

 

• ‘Party of Insanity and Hate’: US Democrats Show Their True Colors (Bridge)
• Every Vote for a Democrat Is an Attack on America (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Bill O’Reilly Reveals the Dark Future Trump Created for the Democrats (MN)
• Bill Ackman Says Democrats Need “Complete Reboot” (ZH)
• Dems and Blob Together (James Howard Kunstler)
• The Geopolitics of Peace (Jeffrey Sachs)
• Trump v. Atlanticism: Understanding Russiagate (One-Legged Parrot)
• ‘We’re Out Of There’ If Ukraine Doesn’t Want Peace – Trump (RT)
• Trump Mulls Pulling US Troops Out Of Germany – Telegraph (RT)
• US Business Wants Easing Of Russia Sanctions (RT)
• EU ‘Can’t Afford’ To Support Ukraine – Orban (RT)
• Trump Calls For ‘Getting Rid’ Of Nuclear Weapons (RT)
• Poland Should Have Its Own Nukes – PM Tusk (RT)
• Musk Fired-Up About Rand Paul’s Rescission Idea To Slash $500 Billion (ZH)
• Putin Ceasefire Conditions Unacceptable To Ukraine (ZH)
• Ukraine Cut Off From US Satellite Imagery – Media (RT)
• EU Militarization A Deep Concern – Kremlin (RT)
• New EU Carbon Market Set to Hit Households and Small Businesses (Kennedy)

 

 

 

 

Golden age

Dore

Trump Putin https://twitter.com/i/status/1898077744313122915

Elon Rogan

Rogan https://twitter.com/i/status/1897766932914352450

Nap Mearsheimer

War bonds https://twitter.com/i/status/1897892858092568692

Pepe

 

 

 

 

I collected a few articles on how people view the Democrats’ future. Bill O’Reilly says it may take 5 elections before the Dems can win one. And well, if you go into an election with Kamala Harris as your main asset, helped along by guys in girls’ locker rooms… (Hate of) Trump has become the Democrats’ sole identity. They even complain that Trump wants to be nice for kids with cancer and brain-damage.

On the other side of the pond, Jeffrey Sachs laments that Europe has no voice of its own, the way it did in the early 1990’s. But it does have that voice: it belongs to Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas. It’s very much pro-war and anti-Trump and anti-Russia. It’s a voice for which peace is a four-letter word. It’s very eerily similar to that of the US dems.

Europe is on course for a major battle with Trump, and his entire administration. He’s working hard for peace, and they want war. There’s even talk of issuing war bonds. Trump will fight them hard.

• ‘Party of Insanity and Hate’: US Democrats Show Their True Colors (Bridge)

During Donald Trump’s address to Congress, the president made reference to a young man in the audience who survived one of the worst medical scourges of all time. Yet that distinction could not get the Democrats off their feet. “Joining us in the gallery tonight is a young man who truly loves our police,” Trump began. “His name is D.J. Daniel, he is 13 years old and he has always dreamed of becoming a police officer. But in 2018, D.J. was diagnosed with brain cancer; the doctors gave him five months at most to live. That was more than six years ago.” Trump continued, saying he would grant the young man the greatest honor of them all by asking the new Secret Service director to make him an agent of the US Secret Service. Needless to say, it was not the time or place for political grandstanding.

But the Democratic Party reared its ugly head and refused to stand for the young man who was seated in the president’s guest suite accompanied by his father, who held up his son with a proud smile. Social media quickly lit up across the board, condemning the Democrats. “A terminally ill child with brain cancer is given an honorary Secret Service award and the Democrats refuse to stand or clap for the child,” Trump administration official Ric Grennell tweeted regarding the magic moment between the 13-year-old and the president. “Democrats refused to stand for the brain cancer surviving kid! How awful can one party be?” Outkick founder Clay Travis tweeted. Donald Trump Jr. also blasted Democrats for their silence. “If you can’t stand up and cheer for a kid with brain cancer being made an honorary member of the Secret Service, then you might be a deeply disturbed and f—ed up person!!!” he tweeted.

In fact, one of the times that a Democrat rose from his seat came when Democratic Rep. Al Green of Texas broke with decorum and heckled Trump so obnoxiously that he was kicked out of the session by security. Indeed, the Democrats came away from the 99-minute address looking once again as the “party of insanity and hate,” as White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt dubbed them. Refusing to stand for a young cancer survivor was only one of many clues as to what makes the Democratic Party tick these days. They refused to applaud Trump’s remarks on issues including “the capturing of an ISIS terrorist,” “recognizing only two sexes,” “Americans joining the military in record numbers,” “securing our border,” “pursuing peace in Ukraine,” and “defeating inflation.”

In more than one way, Trump owned the moment. He showed the world why the American people put him back in office by a large margin. In the quest for restoring the American Dream, he is bringing back decency and common sense, putting American interests above those of other nations. The Democrats revealed whose side they are on, and it’s not the American people. And it’s going to take a long time for the Republicans to undo the damage that the Democrats have done to the country under the Biden administration. Illegal immigration for one. Under four years of Democratic rule, the US-Mexico border was left wide open, allowing for millions of illegal aliens – many of them violent gang members – to pour into the country.

Trump also paid tribute to the families of Laken Riley, a Georgia nursing student who was murdered by an illegal immigrant last year, and Jocelyn Nungaray, a 12-year-old girl who was sexually assaulted and murdered by illegal aliens. Trump noted how the men charged for the 12-year-old’s death were a part of Tren de Aragua, a notorious Venezuelan gang. Trump also honored the family of slain firefighter Corey Comperatore, who was shot during the Republican’s July 13, 2024, rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump described how Comperatore gave his life to defend his family, who were sitting in the balcony in the president’s guest seating area.

“Corey is looking down on his three beautiful ladies right now, and he’s cheering you on. He loves you. He is cheering you on,” he said. “Corey was taken from us much too soon, but his destiny was to leave us all with a shining example of the selfless devotion of a true American patriot,” he continued. “It was love like Corey’s that built our country, and it’s love like Corey’s that is going to make our country more majestic than ever before.” Once again it became apparent where the interest of the audience lay and it was not on the side of love or compassion. As the right side of the gallery rose in salute to the fallen father, most liberals laid back in their seats.

Read more …

“The way Democrat grift works is first appropriate money for some cause; then create a bunch of “charities” to receive the money.”

• Every Vote for a Democrat Is an Attack on America (Paul Craig Roberts)

America has only one enemy–the Democrat Party, an anti-American party, an anti-white party, a party of national destruction and replacement of America with a Tower of Babel, a party committed to the destruction of normality and its replacement with Sodom and Gomorrah perversity, an ideological party alienated from the country it is destroying. It uses the taxpayers’ money to attack America. A $375 Billion EPA slush fund handled by John Podesta gave billions of dollars to “charities” founded to collect the money and use it to undermine the United States. The way Democrat grift works is first appropriate money for some cause; then create a bunch of “charities” to receive the money.

The “charities” pay high salaries to the Democrats and their families and friends who created the “charities,” and they use the taxpayers’ money to advance woke issues such as transgender advocacy and operations, drag queen shows for school kids, early sexualization of children, teaching white kids they are racists, and to support media lie machines. Corrupt Democrat judges are rushing to prevent Trump from ending the use of taxpayers’ money to attack taxpayers’ beliefs, values, and lives. NY Post reports that Democrat John Podesta handed out $375 billion in this way. Trump’s efforts to stop this blatant robbery of the US taxpayer is what Democrat judges like Amir Ali, a last minute Biden DEI appointee and a dual citizen, are issuing injunctions to kill.

When we have judges who are dual citizens, whose legal system are they representing? Dual citizenship judges and government officials erode national sovereignty. Under Democrat misrule, what sense does it make to have a military to protect the borders when they are kept wide open for immigrant-invaders? Under the corrupt anti-American Biden regime our country was overrun by millions of invaders while taxpayers were forced to spend trillions of dollars on “national defense” that was used to protect the borders of Ukraine and to expand the borders of Israel. Everywhere in the Western world governments are not only equating illegal immigrants with citizens but also elevating immigrant-invaders above citizens. For example, a Chinese Immigrant-invader became mayor of Boston, Massachusetts. She now tells illegals that Boston is your home. “You belong here.”

And still American citizens vote for Democrats. How can a population this stupid be made great again? The Starmer government in the UK is hatching laws that punish immigrant-invaders with lighter sentences than given to white British citizens, thereby creating privileges for immigrant-invaders in place of equality under law. Skin color trumps equality under law. How can white British citizens accept such insults from “their” government? Clearly, it is not their government. It is their enemy. In the UK there is the scandal of both Labour and Conservative governments refusing for 30 years to stop the gang rape of white British children by immigrant invaders.

In Sweden, Norway, Germany women are not safe from rapists, and the governments do nothing about it because it would be “racist” to hold immigrant-invaders accountable to law. In no European country other than Hungary does the government represent the people. The EU is a joke. NATO is a joke. Whatever is being protected, it is not the ethnic citizenships of the countries. The EU and NATO are in fact enemies of the ethnic populations that comprise Europeans. The facts are hidden by governments and media. As George Orwell said, the purpose of the media is “to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” Western governments have spent decades creating The Camp of the Saints. And their insouciant populations have voted for them. How can a mess this large be cleaned up?

Read more …

“When you are hating someone, you lose all perspective, you lose all feeling, you’re consumed.”

• Bill O’Reilly Reveals the Dark Future Trump Created for the Democrats (MN)

Bestselling political author Bill O’Reilly says Donald Trump has driven the Democratic Party to the edge of total collapse. On Wednesday night’s episode of Cuomo, O’Reilly laid out exactly why the Democrats are in freefall — comparing their current situation to the collapse of the Republican Party in 1931, when Herbert Hoover’s response to the Great Depression left Americans furious. “I think the Democratic Party is on the verge of collapse. And I liken it to 1931, when Herbert Hoover and the Republican Party basically said to the very suffering American people in the Depression, ‘We’re not helping you. You got to do it on your own. It’s all about self-reliance. We’re not going to give you any safety nets.’ That led to five consecutive Democratic wins. Five,” O’Reilly stressed.

“[It wasn’t] until Dwight Eisenhower, 20 years later, did the Republicans recover. I see the same scenario for the Democrats.” What’s the driving force behind the Democrats’ collapse? O’Reilly pointed to their obsessive hatred of Trump, explaining that it has clouded their judgment so much that they’ve lost all sense of reality and purpose. “What happened [to the Democratic Party]?” O’Reilly asked. “What happened was Trump hatred,” he explained. “And that’s what the headline is of the speech [Tuesday] night. When you are hating someone, you lose all perspective, you lose all feeling, you’re consumed.”

O’Reilly even tied this kind of blind hatred to historical evil. “And I wrote a book, it’s going to be out in September, called Confronting Evil. And these people who did all these terrible things, they all had one thing in common. They hated. They were just haters across the board. That’s what you saw in that chamber last night.” If O’Reilly is right, Democrats could find themselves locked out of the White House for 20 years or longer. It turns out that when your entire platform revolves around hating and opposing Trump, you no longer have a platform worth running on. Good riddance.

Read more …

“I would say I’m more optimistic about the economy and the country than I have been in a long time..”

• Bill Ackman Says Democrats Need “Complete Reboot” (ZH)

Billionaire investor Bill Ackman called for a “complete reboot” of the Democratic Party, insisting that many of its officials must “resign in disgrace.” Ackman, founder of the hedge fund Pershing Square Capital Management, made the sharp remarks during a recent interview with Jonathan Boyar on The World According to Boyar podcast. “They really put themselves in a hole. Democratic Party needs a complete reboot,” Ackman said bluntly when asked about the poor state of the party. “The problem is that leadership and people in power generally don’t like to give up power. But this is a case where a lot of people need to resign in disgrace. Party needs a complete reboot. They continue to double down on all of the mistakes and policies that were made before.”

“If I were a member of the Democratic Party, the leadership, I would be saying we love this effort to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in our government. DOJ is great,” the Wall Street titan added. We just want to make sure there are some checks and balances. Please keep us informed as opposed to marching and opposing and telling staff members not to respond to emails, stuff like that. That’s just sort of one of many. I don’t think of myself ever really as a member of a party. I don’t think of myself as a member of the Republican Party. I have had to check a box in order to vote in New York City on occasion. I’ve always been kind of a centrist.” “The Democratic Party has not done itself a service in the last four years and probably longer than that. In terms of the best candidates,” he concluded.

Ackman broke with the Democrats in the 2024 election by endorsing President Donald Trump and has since expressed optimism about the U.S. economy under the new Republican administration. “I’m very bullish on America. I’m kind of bearish on Europe,” the hedge fund manager recently told CNBC. “And I think they need to make some fairly dramatic changes politically and otherwise. One of the more powerful charts, look at the market cap of companies, the number of companies above $500 billion or whatever here versus Europe.” “I would say I’m more optimistic about the economy and the country than I have been in a long time,” he added.

Ackman’s criticism of the Democrats aligns with growing voter dissatisfaction, as many within the party hold it in low esteem. A plurality of voters (40%) believe the Democratic Party has no clear strategy for countering Trump, according to a survey by the liberal firm Blueprint, first reported by POLITICO. Another 24% said the party does have an ineffective plan. “Voters correctly identified that the Democratic Party has lost its way,” said pollster Evan Roth Smith. “The Democratic response [Tuesday] night was more or less a continuation of what we’ve seen from Democrats so far. Which is, there was nothing overtly wrong about it, but it didn’t actually do anything to ameliorate this core issue Democrats face, which is voters aren’t quite sure what we stand for and would like us to get back to the basic principles of the party.”

Read more …

“Why be a Democrat if you can’t retire with millions of dollars? Hell hath no fury like a politician exposed!” —Dinesh D’Souza

• Dems and Blob Together (James Howard Kunstler)

If the Jacobins of Paris, 1794, had not been bum-rushed to the “national razor,” perhaps they would have acted-out as clownishly in defeat as America’s Democratic Party does right now after their election debacle of 2024. Imagine Robespierre in Harlequin drag riding backwards on a goat over the Pont Neuf to do handsprings and a juggling act in the Parvis de Notre-Dame. Alas, foiled by the guillotine. . . . Now imagine Rep. Al Green (9th Texas Dist) shaking his cane and hollering curses at the rostrum in Tuesday night’s joint session of Congress. Two days later, he carried on again in the well of Congress as Speaker Johnson read out his bill of censure and a motley mob of Mr. Green’s fellow Dems gathered ‘round to sing We Shall Overcome — the once stately Civil Rights movement reduced to abject farce. Such things are really happening.

The Dems’ game has been revealed. The revenue stream for their national wrecking operations is suddenly cut off and it’s game-over. Everybody can see how this worked now. You funnel vast amounts of US taxpayer dollars into Non-Governmental Organizations, NGOs, spin off more NGOs below them, and add extra layers of subsidiary NGOs, and all of them pay their staffs of Dem Party foot-soldiers for do-nothing jobs — leaving plenty of time for riots and real-estate investing — a splendid racket that worked for years to support the insane antics of the Woke-Jacobin revolution. (And you paid for it.) The catch is: an org that gets government money is hardly non-governmental. Wouldn’t you think there’s some law against that? Thus, Exhibit A: in September 2022, Dem luminary John Podesta was put in-charge of a $369-billion fund out of “Joe Biden’s” so-called Inflation Reduction Act, tagged for climate change action.

Conceptualize further: that’s three-hundred-sixty-nine-thousand-million dollars (!), a lot of millions, disbursed among tens of thousands of NGOs and their contractors. It boggles the mind that the government could even manage to cream-off such a fortune out of our nation’s alleged aggregate productivity. It was, in reality, money conjured out of thin air: debt. Before long, you are going to find out where it all went, and the picture will not be a pretty one: Into the NGO laundromat and straight out to Democratic Party members’ bank accounts, one of the greatest grifts in our history. Of course, your grandchildren are on the hook for all the debt behind it. Do you think our DC Federal District judges would serve better presiding over these matters than spending years hunting down J-6 “paraders”?

Without that bonanza of conjured money for laying trips on the rest of us, the Democratic Party has nothing, not a single credible idea, not any plausible leadership, really no reason to exist. It has been for years nothing more than a gigantic grift engine extracting the remaining wealth out of our republic. So, what you are seeing acted out on the DC streets and the well of Congress and on the angst-filled cable news networks is the kind of ghost-dance that attends the death of a great political machine. Buh-bye. . . .

Read more …

“This is an edited transcript of Professor Jeffrey Sachs’ speech in the European Parliament at an event titled “The Geopolitics of Peace,” hosted by former U.N. Assistant Secretary General and current BSW MEP Michael von der Schulenburg, on Feb. 19, 2025. The transcript has been edited for clarity and annotated.”

• The Geopolitics of Peace (Jeffrey Sachs)

I’ve watched the events very close-up in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, Russia and Ukraine, very closely for the last 36 years. I was an adviser to the Polish government in 1989, to President Gorbachev’s economic team in 1990 and 1991, to President Yeltsin’s economic team in 1991 to 1993 and to President Kuchma’s economic team in Ukraine in 1993 to 1994. I helped introduce the Estonian currency. I helped several countries in former Yugoslavia, especially Slovenia. After the Maidan, I was asked by the new government [in Ukraine] to come to Kyiv, and I was taken around the Maidan, and I learned a lot of things firsthand. I’ve been in touch with Russian leaders for more than 30 years. I also know the American political leadership close-up. Our previous secretary of treasury, Janet Yellen, was my wonderful macroeconomics teacher 52 years ago. We have been friends for a half century.

I know these people. I say this because what I want to explain in my point of view is not second-hand. It’s not ideology. It’s what I’ve seen with my own eyes and experienced during this period. I want to share with you my understanding of the events that have befallen Europe in many contexts and I’ll include not only the Ukraine crisis, but also Serbia 1999, the wars in the Middle East, including Iraq, Syria, the wars in Africa, including Sudan, Somalia, Libya. These are to a very significant extent the result of deeply misguided U.S. policies. What I will say may well surprise you, but I speak from experience and knowledge of these events. These are wars that the United States has led and caused. And this has been true for more than 30 years now. The United States came to the view, especially during 1990-91, and then with the end of the Soviet Union, that the U.S. now runs the world, and that the U.S. does not have to heed anybody’s views, red-lines, concerns, security viewpoints, international obligations, or any U.N. framework. I’m sorry to put it so plainly, but I do want you to understand.

I tried very hard in 1991 to get *financial help for Gorbachev who I think was the greatest statesman of our modern time. (*This became part of a project led by Professor Graham Allison at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government with Gorbachev economic advisor Grigory Yavlinsky and published in the book Window of Opportunity: The Grand Bargain for Democracy in the Soviet Union, Pantheon Books, 1991.) I recently read the archived memo of the National Security Council discussion of my proposal on June 3, 1991, reading for the first time how the White House completely dismissed it, and essentially laughed off the table my plea for the U.S. to help the Soviet Union with financial stabilization and with financial aid to make its reforms. The memo documents* that the U.S. government decided to do the very minimum to prevent disaster, but just the minimum.

(*Richard Darman, at the OMB, put it this way. “In defining the U.S. interest, we need to be somewhat Machiavellian. What is the minimum amount necessary to mollify a regime with which we wish to work on other ma]ers? In other words, what is the bare minimum to keep things moving? I don’t believe we need to worry about the U.S.S.R.’s decomposition. If this is our internal understanding, then we can go ahead publicly.” Later, Darman adds, “I want to seem serious while not fooling ourselves. We have enough ingredients already for a good PR package.” Emphasis in original.) They decided that it’s not the U.S. job to help. Quite the contrary. (See my paper “How the Neocons Chose Hegemony Over Peace in the Early 1990s.”)

When the Soviet Union ended in 1991, the view became even more exaggerated. And I can name chapter and verse, but the view was we [the U.S.] run the show. [Dick] Cheney, [Paul] Wolfowitz, and many other names that you will have come to know literally believed this is now a U.S. world, and we will do as we want. We will clean up from the former Soviet Union. We will take out any remaining Soviet-era allies. Countries like Iraq, Syria, and so forth will go. And we’ve been experiencing this foreign policy for now essentially 33 years. Europe has paid a heavy price for this because Europe has not had any foreign policy during this period that I can figure out. No voice, no unity, no clarity, no European interests, only American loyalty.

There were moments where there were disagreements and, I think, very wonderful disagreements. The last time of significance was 2003 in the lead-up to the Iraq war when France and Germany said we don’t support the United States going around the U.N. Security Council for this war. That war was directly concocted by Netanyahu and his colleagues in the U.S. Pentagon. (See Dennis Fritz’s book, Deadly Betrayal: The Truth about why the United States Invaded Iraq, OR Books, 2024.)

I’m not saying that it was a link or mutuality. I’m saying it was a war carried out for Israel. It was a war that Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith coordinated with [Israeli leader] Benjamin Netanyahu. And that was the last time that Europe had a voice. I spoke with European leaders then, and they were very clear, and it was quite wonderful to hear their opposition an unacceptable war. Europe lost its voice entirely after that, but especially in 2008. What happened after 1991, and to bring us to 2008, is that the United States decided that unipolarity meant that NATO would enlarge somewhere from Brussels to Vladivostok, step by step.

Read more …

Atlanticism=Deep State=Blob.

• Trump v. Atlanticism: Understanding Russiagate (One-Legged Parrot)

Last month, President Trump bypassed Europe, NATO, and the entire postwar order and opened a conversation directly with Russia. In doing so, he defied Washington’s established foreign policy paradigm that had been in place since the 1940s. “They” always feared he would go there, and “they” tried to prevent it by a never-ending string of investigations, prosecutions, and impeachments. The “they” Trump defied is called on X “the Deep State” which is a colorful nickname. It has a real name, too: “Atlanticism,” after the Atlantic Charter entered by Roosevelt and Churchill. It is the “A” in “North Atlantic Treaty Organization.” In high-toned treatises, Atlanticism described a form of empire built upon American hegemony. The moral justification was ostensibly based on American benevolence, a projection of virtue that relied on propaganda. It’s closest historical analog, though, was colonialism.

The lands occupied by Atlanticist ideology traded in American currency. NATO existed to deter the Soviet threat. But it was also an occupying army. There were not colonial governments. There was, instead, strict control of information, puppet governments, and election interference. When Trump questioned the continuing need for NATO in 2016, institutions with a financial stake in Atlanticism performed a Cold War soft power operation against him. Western intelligence agencies mobilized to connect Trump to Russia, leading to a series of political dirty tricks. Russiagate was not merely bureaucratic haplessness masquerading as foreign intrigue. It was, instead, the sclerotic postwar spy apparatus targeting an American presidential candidate and then president.

In 2024, Trump won the presidency again, in part out of the electorate’s disgust over the dirty tricks. Upon returning to the Oval Office, he deliberately refocused foreign policy on the American hemisphere. He Truth Socialed aggressively about Canada, Mexico, Greenland, and Panama, sending his new Secretary of State on his first diplomatic mission to negotiate better rates on passage through the Panama Canal after threatening to take it back by force. President Trump was steering the ship of state back to the foreign policy of The Monroe Doctrine, in which America’s focus was on problems in its own hemisphere – and not on “democracy” movements abroad. The new Trump administration made clear that Ukraine would not be invited into NATO, which would have obligated the United States to send troops half a world away to fight Russia. There is credible reporting that President Trump has also started to deny the NATO proxy warriors in Ukraine encryption codes needed to attack Russia with drones and missiles.

With no American cavalry coming to save the day and President Trump cultivating an independent diplomatic relationship with Russia, the most rational path in Ukraine is to negotiate a ceasefire. Whatever its intentions – and they were arguably altruistic – Atlanticism became a Frankenstein monster that took its initial design to its rational conclusion that threatened existence. We scratched the surface of what that means in USAID, Soft Power, And How Solzhenitsyn Predicted This Crisis. The following is based on a compilation of essays written between 2016-2020 connecting Russiagate to Atlanticism. It includes links to original sources and some updates. To understand the malevolence of Atlanticism, it is essential to grasp the wild details of the putsch it attempted in President Trump’s first term. Following is the craziest story ever told in the history of American politics. Now that President Trump has closed the circle by embarking on a new foreign policy, it is relevant to revisit the story from beginning to end with the benefit of additional context.

Read more …

“I have to know that they want to settle [the conflict]..” “If they don’t want to settle, we’re out of there, because we want them to settle.”

• ‘We’re Out Of There’ If Ukraine Doesn’t Want Peace – Trump (RT)

Washington will cease all assistance to Kiev if it fails to demonstrate its commitment to reaching peace with Moscow, US President Donald Trump has said. Trump also stated that Russia has been more cooperative than Ukraine when it comes to a potential settlement of the conflict. “I have to know that they want to settle [the conflict],” Trump told journalists on Friday in response to a question about US military aid to Kiev. The president said that he did not currently know if Kiev was truly committed to peace. “If they don’t want to settle, we’re out of there, because we want them to settle.”

Washington has so far had more productive communication with Moscow on a potential resolution of the conflict, even though Russia “has all the cards” and Ukraine has none, the president said. Trump added that he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin does want peace. “I think we’re doing very well with Russia,” the US president said, adding that he was “finding it more difficult … to deal with Ukraine.”

Read more …

“Trump is angry that they [Europe] appear to be pushing for war..”

• Trump Mulls Pulling US Troops Out Of Germany – Telegraph (RT)

US President Donald Trump is considering withdrawing American troops from Germany and redeploying them to Hungary, The Telegraph reported on Friday, citing a person close to the White House. The US has more than 35,000 personnel stationed in dozens of bases in Germany. The NATO member also hosts American nuclear weapons. Trump reportedly could remove the troops or move them elsewhere, as his administration has split with many of its allies in Europe over how to deal with Russia and resolve the Ukraine conflict. While the US president stressed the need to reach a ceasefire as soon as possible and blamed Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky for the hostilities, the UK and many EU members reaffirmed their commitment to back Kiev.

“Trump is angry that they [Europe] appear to be pushing for war,” a source told The Telegraph. US national security spokesman Brian Hughes told the newspaper that “while no specific announcement is imminent, the US military is always considering the redeployment of troops around the world to best address current threats to our interests.” Trump has repeatedly accused Germany of not spending enough on its own defense, while his adviser, tech billionaire Elon Musk, openly endorsed the opposition Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in the recent parliamentary election. Vice President J.D. Vance also ruffled feathers last month when he criticized Germany’s free speech laws during a high-profile conference in Munich.

Friedrich Merz, Germany’s chancellor-designate, has argued that Trump deliberately escalated his contentious February 28 meeting with Zelensky in the Oval Office. After winning the election last month, Merz stated that Germany could no longer rely on the US for its defense. “We must now show that we are in a position to act independently in Europe,” he said. Earlier this week, Hungary blocked a joint EU statement promising more military aid for Ukraine. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban sided with Trump during his public spat with Zelensky. “Today, President Donald Trump stood bravely for peace. Even if it was difficult for many to digest,” he wrote on X.

Read more …

“..US companies lost more than $300 billion by leaving the Russian market..”

• US Business Wants Easing Of Russia Sanctions (RT)

The American Chamber of Commerce in Russia (AmCham) has called on the US government to ease the sanctions on Russia, according to its chief, Robert Agee. He argued that restrictions in aviation, investment, and banking are harming both American and Russian businesses. In an interview with the Russian business daily RBK on Friday, Agee welcomed the dialogue between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, after a three-year hiatus in ties due to tensions over the Ukraine conflict. In light of US signals that it is willing to normalize relations with Moscow, the AmCham is preparing a report for the US government outlining challenges for American businesses in Russia, as well as exploring possibilities for lifting some of the sanctions, Agee said.

One of the AmCham’s main requests is to remove sanctions in the aviation sector, including the supply of spare parts and technical support, with Agee stressing that the restrictions in this field mostly affect ordinary citizens. He also called for the lifting of investment restrictions, which he said have prevented American companies from expanding their operations in Russia. Banking sanctions remain another key concern, as they have made cross-border transactions increasingly difficult and costly, the AmCham head said. He also criticized the sanctions on imports of luxury goods, including American cosmetics, to Russia, calling them counterproductive and harmful to US companies that have lost market share.

While these represent the chamber’s top priorities, Agee noted that other issues also require attention. He did not rule out the return of US businesses to Russia, adding that companies which maintained a skeleton presence in the country or retained buy-out options would have an easier time re-entering the market compared to those that completed an asset sell-out when emotions were running high. Kirill Dmitriev, the CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, earlier estimated that US companies lost more than $300 billion by leaving the Russian market. Agee suggested that this figure could be correct, depending on the metrics that were taken into account.

Agee’s comments come after Reuters reported earlier this week that the White House had directed the State and Treasury departments to draft proposals for easing certain restrictions on Russia. The potential relief could reportedly apply to specific Russian entities and individuals, including some business leaders. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said Moscow has yet to receive official statements from Washington regarding sanctions relief, while stressing that Russia has always viewed Western sanctions as “illegal.”

Read more …

“..more nations are beginning to realize that there are no available funds..”

• EU ‘Can’t Afford’ To Support Ukraine – Orban (RT)

The EU does not have the financial capacity to continue aiding Ukraine, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban warned in an interview with Kossuth Radio on Thursday. He argued that the bloc’s budget will be stretched too thin if it moves forward with all its planned initiatives, including another support package for Kiev, financing its EU membership bid, and ramping up European defense spending. Orban’s remarks came after he vetoed the EU’s proposed €30 billion ($32 billion) military aid package for Ukraine at an emergency European Council meeting earlier in the day. Despite support for the proposal from the other 26 EU leaders, Orban argued that it effectively greenlighted the continuation of the conflict.

In his interview, the prime minister outlined the mounting financial burdens the bloc faces if it does not change course. First, he said, the EU would be responsible for funding Ukraine’s military, as “the Ukrainians don’t have a penny for that.” Second, Brussels would have to bankroll the Ukrainian government, including salaries and pensions, because “Ukraine, as a state, is not functioning.” Third, the bloc would need to fund Ukraine’s EU membership bid, with no clear estimate of how much it could cost. Lastly, Orban pointed out that the EU has approved the ReArm Europe initiative, which calls for up to €800 billion in new defense spending. “If I add all this up, there isn’t that much money in the bloc. So this won’t work like that… I think the bottom line is that we can’t afford this,” Orban stated, urging EU leaders to reconsider their stance on Ukraine.

The bloc’s Ukraine support package is expected to be revisited at the next EU leaders’ summit later this month. However, Orban suggested that even then, the proposal is unlikely to pass, as more nations are beginning to realize that there are no available funds. Orban’s remarks come as EU leaders grow increasingly concerned over the impact of US President Donald Trump’s recent policy shift on Ukraine. According to media reports, the White House has frozen new military aid to Kiev, a move Trump had been warning about for weeks. He also urged European nations to take on greater responsibility for Ukraine’s war effort and their own defense, repeatedly stating that he wants the conflict to end as soon as possible so he can focus on domestic policy.

Orban

Read more …

“We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully, much more productive.”

• Trump Calls For ‘Getting Rid’ Of Nuclear Weapons (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said all countries should abandon nuclear weapons instead of engaging in an arms race. “It’d be great if everybody would get rid of their nuclear weapons,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday, according to Anadolu. “Russia and us have by far the most. China will have an equal amount within four or five years, and it would be great if we could all denuclearize, because the power of nuclear weapons is crazy. It’s crazy.” “I would very much like to start those talks,” Trump added. “Denuclearization would be incredible.” Last month, Trump argued that a nuclear arms race would be wasteful and that the US has “no reason” to build new weapons. “We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully, much more productive.”

The comments come amid tensions between Russia and NATO, as well as Trump’s trade war with China. In a speech earlier this week, French President Emmanuel Macron labeled Russia “a threat to France and Europe” and suggested that France could extend its nuclear umbrella to protect other EU member states. The Kremlin has condemned his words as “highly confrontational.” During Trump’s first term in office, the US withdrew from the landmark Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty signed in 1987 by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev. Russia has condemned the withdrawal and denied Washington’s accusations that it was secretly violating the accord.

In 2023, Russia announced the deployment of its nuclear weapons in Belarus, citing tensions with NATO. A year later, President Vladimir Putin revised Russia’s official nuclear doctrine, lowering the threshold for using nuclear weapons. Moscow also warned that it could resume nuclear tests if the US does it first. In January, the US announced the deployment of upgraded nuclear bombs in its bases in Europe. According to media reports, the Pentagon also plans to station nuclear weapons in the UK. Russia has urged all nuclear powers to act responsibly. “We have never started discussions on what to do with nuclear weapons or whether they can be used,” Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in December. “There can be no winners in a nuclear war, which is why it should never happen.”

Read more …

“..Tusk also called for Poland to withdraw from international treaties banning anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions.”

• Poland Should Have Its Own Nukes – PM Tusk (RT)

Poland should pursue the acquisition of nuclear weapons, possibly through participation in France’s nuclear umbrella initiative, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has said. On Friday, Tusk told the Polish parliament that the country needs to access advanced military capabilities to bolster national defense. His remarks come after French President Emmanuel Macron proposed earlier this week extending France’s nuclear deterrent to other EU members in order to address the supposed “threat” posed by Russia. According to Tusk, Warsaw is already having “serious discussions” with Paris about the nuclear umbrella idea. “Poland needs to pursue the most modern capabilities related to nuclear weapons as well as modern unconventional weapons,” he stated.

Warsaw does not care about being criticized over its military buildup and will take whatever steps it deems necessary to strengthen its defense, the prime minister declared. Tusk also called for Poland to withdraw from international treaties banning anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions. If enacted, this would allow the Polish military to reintroduce such weapons into its arsenal, despite widespread international opposition to their use. On Wednesday, Tusk urged the EU to ramp up military spending in order to outpace Moscow in an arms race, suggesting on X that “Russia will lose it like the Soviet Union 40 years ago.” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has also recently called for a significant increase in EU defense spending, further reinforcing the trend toward military expansion.

Moscow has vehemently condemned Tusk’s recent statements, stressing that Russia will not engage in any sort of arms race. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said that the “confrontational, even militaristic” rhetoric coming out of Paris and Warsaw was regrettable. Russia has repeatedly rejected claims that it poses a military threat to any European countries. President Vladimir Putin has dismissed such suggestions as “nonsense” being perpetuated by EU leaders to scare their populations and justify larger military budgets. Calls for more defense spending in the EU come as US President Donald Trump has urged European NATO members to play a larger role in ensuring their own defense. At the same time, he has also criticized the idea of an arms race and suggested that all countries should completely get rid of their nuclear weapons.

Read more …

“Rescission offers a means by which presidents can collaborate with Congress to cancel previously-appropriated spending..”

• Musk Fired-Up About Rand Paul’s Rescission Idea To Slash $500 Billion (ZH)

Seeking to codify spending cuts pursued by his Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk held a closed-door lunch with Republican senators on Wednesday. Musk was said to be “elated” with Sen. Rand Paul’s recommendation to make the cuts stick with a relatively expeditious budget-slashing technique called “rescission.” The approach could guide DOGE cuts around federal judges who consider executive-branch-initiated spending cuts as exceeding constitutional authority. Rescission offers a means by which presidents can collaborate with Congress to cancel previously-appropriated spending. Enabled by Title X of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the rarely-used process starts with the president sending a special message to Congress, providing specific details about which budgetary authorities he wants to rescind.

With Republicans holding a narrow 53-47 Senate majority, one of the most attractive aspects of rescission is that it doesn’t require 60 votes — a simple majority suffices to grant the president’s wish. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley told reporters that Musk was “elated” with Paul’s proposal: “I think he didn’t realize it could be done at 51.” According to South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham, it was the first time Musk had heard of the rescission process. He said Musk reacted by triumphantly lifting his arms into the air. The approach promises to immunize DOGE spending cuts from federal judges who are skeptical about the executive branch’s power to cut spending that was duly authorized by Congress. This week has seen two major developments that demonstrate the strength of that judicial headwind:

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court rejected the administration request that it negate a lower court’s temporary injunction against Trump’s freezing of almost $2 billion in foreign aid. In effect, the ruling compels the White House to re-open the spigots, as directed by Judge Amir Ali. On Thursday, a Rhode Island US District Judge indefinitely blocked President Trump’s freeze on federal grants and loans, arguing in his ruling that the White House had “put itself above Congress” and undermined democracy. Rescission is an alternative to “impoundment,” by which presidents unilaterally delay Congressionally-directed spending. First used by Thomas Jefferson, the method was restricted by the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) after Democrats felt President Nixon was abusing it. Trump has called ICA “a disaster of a law” and vowed to “do everything I can to challenge [it] in court, and if necessary, get Congress to overturn it.”

However, as noted above, the same law provides the opportunity for rescission, which means Trump can use ICA to his advantage. Up to this point, Trump has pursued impoundment, but Paul says that increasingly looks like a dead end. Pointing to the Supreme Court’s fresh ruling against the administration, Paul said, “My message to Elon was, let’s get over the impoundment idea. Let’s send it back as a rescission package, because then we’ll get … 51 senators, or 50 senators [plus the tie-breaking vote of Vice President JD Vance] to cut the spending.” That’s not to say rescission will be a layup. The move was attempted once during Trump’s first administration, only to be derailed by two nay votes from Republican senators. One of them, Maine’s Susan Collins, now chairs the Appropriations committee (the other, Richard Burr, left office.) Last time around,

Collins said she felt rescission took too much power from Congress — despite the fact that the rescission process itself springs from an act of Congress. Paul suggested that Trump will need to push harder than he did in 2018: “We lost that battle. But I don’t think they tried very hard. I don’t think they came and lobbied us. I don’t think they came and talked to us.” Paul told reporters that the lunch discussion with Musk focused on the concept rather than nailing down dollar amounts. However, Paul said the White House and Republican legislators should strive to slash at least $100 billion and perhaps up to $500 billion from a budget that’s currently around $7 billion — or about 23% of GDP.

Talking to Reason last month, leading deficit-Hawk Paul scoffed at critics who claimed DOGE’s initial several-billion-dollar saving opportunities were insignificant against the backdrop of such a huge budget: “Why would we still not start with the most egregious stuff and get rid of it? Ultimately, how do you get to better spending? You get better people in government, or you give them less money. I don’t think we can really expect to get better people, less bureaucrats in government….The only way you get less waste is to give them less money to spend.” Now, Paul is working hard to put up numbers that will silence critics on the right — and trigger wailing and gnashing of teeth on the left. More power to him.

Read more …

Been obvious for 3 years. But make impossible demands, and you keep the war going…

• Putin Ceasefire Conditions Unacceptable To Ukraine (ZH)

The game of headline pong is firing on all cylinders this morning, because moments after stocks slumped and oil spiked after Trump threatened new tariffs on Russia (even though virtually every possible product and service out of Russia is already sanctioned and tariffed by Western nations), Bloomberg reported the opposite, claiming that Putin is “willing to discuss a temporary truce in Ukraine, provided there is progress toward a final peace settlement” citing Russian sources. Algos read “temporary truce” and immediately slammed oil, the same oil they had spiked just an hour earlier after Trump’s threat. The only problem is that they did so before reading the rest of report which basically said… well, nothing new at all, to wit:

In the first signal of a positive response from President Vladimir Putin to US counterpart Donald Trump’s call for a ceasefire, the offer was conveyed at last month’s talks in Saudi Arabia between top Russian and American officials, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing internal policy. In order to agree to a cessation of hostilities, there would have to be a clear understanding about the framework principles of the final peace accord, two people with knowledge of the matter said. … and the punchline: Russia will insist in particular on establishing the parameters of an eventual peacekeeping mission, including agreement on which countries would take part, said another person familiar with the issue. …

Russia has said it won’t accept the presence of NATO troops on Ukrainian soil, rejecting a proposal by European countries to put together a “coalition of the willing” to help monitor any peace accord. It doesn’t object to countries such as China that have been neutral in the conflict deploying forces to Ukraine, the two people said.In other words, this is about as actionable as Zelensky saying he will resign as president the moment Ukraine enters NATO, which of course is a non-starter to Russia. Likewise, Russia’s “conditions” for a ceasefire are completely unacceptable (at least as of this moment) to Europe. And just to underscore this, Russia on Thursday rejected a Franco-British plan for a partial one-month truce covering air and maritime operations including a halt to strikes targeting energy infrastructure.

The details emerged as the US and Ukraine plan to meet in Saudi Arabia next week for their first direct talks since Trump’s Oval Office bust-up with President Volodymyr Zelenskiy last week. US special envoy Steve Witkoff said the meeting aims to reach “a framework for a peace agreement and an initial ceasefire.”Since his Jan. 20 inauguration, Trump has overturned US policy on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to try to bring a rapid end to the three-year-long war that’s Europe’s worst conflict in 80 years. He held phone talks with Putin last month and the pair agreed to hold a summit, though no date has been set yet. Trump abandoned US support for Ukraine’s eventual entry into NATO, and his top officials said it was unrealistic to expect a return of all Ukrainian territory seized by Russia since 2014.

After the confrontation with Zelenskiy at the White House, Trump paused military aid to Ukraine and has suspended some intelligence-sharing with Kyiv, shocking European allies who say the US risks rewarding Russia’s aggression in starting the February 2022 invasion. Putin has repeatedly brushed aside Trump’s bid for a quick halt to the war. During his annual news conference in December, he said: “We don’t need a truce — we need peace: long-term, durable, with guarantees for the Russian Federation and its citizens.”

Earlier: US and Russian delegations have in the last three weeks had two rounds of ‘successful’ face-to-face talks, but President Trump is trying to keep up the pressure on Moscow, also as preparations are reportedly moving fast toward a landmark Trump-Putin bilateral meeting. Trump sent a strong warning and message on Friday, writing on Truth Social, “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely ‘pounding’ Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.” Of course, there are already far-reaching sanctions on Russia’s banking sector, but the threat of more punitive action to come on top of what Biden put in place was accompanied by a warning to get to the table before it’s “too late”. “To Russia and Ukraine, get to the table right now, before it is too late,” Trump added. This message seemed also geared toward building or maintaining leverage. These “large-scale” sanctions would be on top of an already significant and unprecedented sanctions regimen applied as a result of the Ukraine war.

Yet Trump plainly spoke the reality during last Friday’s meeting with Zelensky at the White House – stressing multiple times that Ukraine has “no cards” to play. Indeed as far as battlefield momentum goes, Russia holds all the cards. Much of the international media has been focused on back-and-forth statements on the diplomatic front, but the Kremlin has continued proclaiming consistent gains in the Donbass area. As for the latest TASS reports Friday:Russian troops liberated four communities in the Donetsk region over the week of March 1-7 in the special military operation in Ukraine, Russia’s Defense Ministry reported on Friday. “Battlegroup Center units improved their tactical position and liberated the settlement of Andreyevka in the Donetsk People’s Republic… Battlegroup East units kept advancing deep into the enemy’s defenses and liberated the settlements of Skudnoye, Burlatskoye and Privolnoye in the Donetsk People’s Republic,” the ministry said in a statement.

Overnight also saw more major Russian strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. This included more drone assaults. Russia’s defense ministry newly states that “Last night, the Russian Armed Forces delivered a combined strike by air-launched, sea-and ground-based long-range precision weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles on facilities of gas and power supply infrastructure of Ukraine’s military-industrial sector. The goal of the strike was achieved. All the targets were struck.” As for potential new Russia sanctions, the timing is a bit ironic and Moscow is likely to pass over it in silence, seeing in it a ‘bluff’ toward building up negotiating leverage. After all Trump actually started the week by drawing up options for sanctions relief on Russia. He’s doing a carrot-and-stick approach for both the Moscow and Kiev sides, it appears. The Kremlin is unlikely to take this new threat very seriously.

Read more …

“..the restriction had been introduced “in response to an administrative request.”

• Ukraine Cut Off From US Satellite Imagery – Media (RT)

Ukraine has lost access to US satellite imagery after American space technology company Maxar blocked Kiev’s use of its services, a local media outlet reported on Friday. The move follows Washington’s recent decision to freeze military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine. Ukrainian media outlet Militarnyi has claimed that several anonymous Maxar users have confirmed that they have been denied access to the service. The company has reportedly explained that the restriction had been introduced “in response to an administrative request.” The outlet noted that the limit appears to apply to both government and private users, adding that the request cited by the company likely refers to US President Donald Trump’s order to cease all intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

Maxar, according to Militarnyi, has been one of the leading providers of high-resolution commercial satellite imagery to Ukraine’s armed forces who used it to track the movements of Russian troops, assess battlefield conditions and damage to key infrastructure. The US company has not yet confirmed the alleged restriction of services. The report comes as Washington has halted the delivery of billions of dollars worth of military aid to Ukraine, while the CIA has confirmed that intelligence sharing with Kiev has been suspended. The decision to freeze military support for Ukraine follows last week’s heated meeting between Trump, US Vice President J.D. Vance and Zelensky at the White House. During the exchange, Trump accused Zelensky of ingratitude and “gambling with World War III” by refusing to seek peace with Russia.

The Ukrainian leader was asked to leave the US capital and return only when he was ready for serious negotiations. On Wednesday, during his address to the US Congress, Trump claimed that he had received a letter from Zelensky in which he had apparently agreed to come to the negotiating table in the near future in order to work towards a peace agreement. Moscow has welcomed Washington’s suspension of military aid to Kiev, noting that such steps could potentially encourage Ukraine to seek a peaceful resolution to the conflict. At the same time, the Kremlin has expressed cautious optimism about Zelensky’s supposed U-turn on negotiations with Moscow, noting that the Ukrainian leader has yet to lift his legal ban on such contacts.

Read more …

“..Macron claimed on Wednesday that Russia poses a direct threat to France and the entire EU. He echoed von der Leyen’s calls for a significant increase in defense spending..”

• EU Militarization A Deep Concern – Kremlin (RT)

The Kremlin has condemned the EU’s plan to increase defense spending across the bloc, calling it a path towards confrontation that hinders peace efforts with Ukraine. During an emergency summit in Brussels on Thursday, EU leaders endorsed a €800 billion plan to “rearm Europe” proposed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. ”The European Union is actively discussing its militarization, specifically in the defense sector,” the Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated on Friday. The measures are “primarily aimed at Russia, which is, of course, a matter of deep concern,” he added.

French President Emmanuel Macron claimed on Wednesday that Russia poses a direct threat to France and the entire EU. He echoed von der Leyen’s calls for a significant increase in defense spending to counter perceived danger posed by Moscow. Macron’s comments adhered to the conventional Western narrative portraying Russia as the unprovoked aggressor in the Ukraine conflict and claiming that Moscow has ambitions of conquest in Ukraine and beyond into EU and NATO states. Russia has repeatedly and categorically denied the claims. Moscow will however, take measures to safeguard its security in response to the bloc, Peskov has warned.

“The kind of confrontational rhetoric and confrontational plans that we are now seeing in Brussels and in European capitals strike a seriously discordant note with intentions to find a peaceful resolution in Ukraine,” Peskov added. Russia and the United States launched negotiations last month to try and settle the Ukraine conflict, sidelining the EU. The move sparked condemnation from the bloc. Moscow has argued the EU’s aggressive stance made it unfit to take part in peace talks. Trump has also reportedly halted American military aid to Ukraine, leaving Brussels jostling for funds to support Kiev. Moscow maintains that Western aid prolongs the war without altering its outcome.

Read more …

Borrow ¢800 billion for warfare, and then make life much more expensive. Golden.

• New EU Carbon Market Set to Hit Households and Small Businesses (Kennedy)

The European Union’s new emissions trading system, expected to take effect in 2027, is set to hike prices for home heating and transportation, research firm BloombergNEF says in a new report. The new EU Emissions Trading System for buildings, road transport, and small industry, dubbed ETS2, is scheduled to become fully operational in 2027. ETS2 will cover and address the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fuel combustion in buildings, road transport, and additional sectors, mainly small industry not covered by the existing Emissions Trading System – EU ETS. “So far, emission reductions in those sectors have been insufficient to put the EU on a firm path towards its 2050 climate neutrality goal. The carbon price set by the ETS2 will provide a market incentive for investments in building renovations and low-emissions mobility,” the European Commission says.

Although it will be a ‘cap and trade’ system like the existing EU ETS, the ETS2 will cover emissions upstream. This means that it will be fuel suppliers, rather than end consumers such as households or car users, that will be required to monitor and report their emissions. User may not pay directly, but fuel suppliers are likely to pass on the higher costs due to the carbon emissions trading. Two years after the 2027 launch, the price of CO2 could jump to as much as $161 (149 euros) per metric ton in 2029, according to BloombergNEF’s analysis. This would be more than double the current price of CO2 under the existing EU ETS trading system for emissions from industry and power plants.

The carbon price in EU ETS2 could hike costs for road transportation by 27%, while bills for home heating could spike by as much as 41%, BNEF’s analysis has found. “Ambitious targets and high costs risk making households and small businesses the losers,” the report reads.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Statins

 

 

Kory

 

 

Wifi

 

 

Paws

 

 

Parrot https://twitter.com/i/status/1897986664590348732

 

 

Gazelle

 

 

Fountain

 

 

Kaprekar https://twitter.com/i/status/1897991996620370205

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle February 26 2024

Feb 262024
 
 February 26, 2024  Posted by at 9:51 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  68 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Pink peach trees (Souvenir de mauve) 1888

 

• Why War Bonds Are Returning in Europe (Luongo)
• Surge of “Little Green Men,” and Metal is Poised to Strike (Trader Stef)
• Ukraine War: Zelensky Says 31,000 Troops Killed (BBC)
• Kiev Demanded Victory Plan From Military With No Resources – Zaluzhny Aid (RT)
• Putin Defeated US Plan For Russia – Nuland (RT)
• Most Ukraine Aid ‘Goes Right Back’ To US – Nuland (RT)
• The Untold Half of the Zaluzhny Story (Snider)
• CIA Built “12 Secret Spy Bases” In Ukraine – NYT (ZH)
• Xi Isn’t Destroying China’s Economy – He’s Changing It (Fomenko)
• EU Must Find ‘Enormous Amount’ Of Money To Face Global Challenges – Draghi
• 10 Ways A Second Trump Term Could Be More Extreme Than The First (Pol.)
• Fani Willis Demands Judge Reject Cellphone Evidence (ZH)
• The Show Trial against Julian Assange (Scheidler)
• If We Don’t Keep Sending Billions To Ukraine, The War Might End (BBee)

 

 

 

 

Orf

 

 

KSP

 

 

 

 

Mike Benz 3 minutes https://twitter.com/i/status/1758743460025389427

 

 

AI Tucker Carlson narrating The Lord of the Rings

 

 

 

 

 

 

Excellent from Tom Luongo. Who, interestingly, seems to put power relations on their head. With the demise of EU industry, we think the US is in charge. But:

“..Europe wants the US to be a vassal after spending itself to death fighting the phantom menace of Putin. Eurobonds are the real story. The rest is just noise..”

• Why War Bonds Are Returning in Europe (Luongo)

The fate of these SURE bonds and all future EC bond issuances hangs in the balance here. In fact, the future of the EU itself hangs in the balance. And that’s why I was contacted by Sputnik News yesterday to give my thoughts on this subject. “Eurobonds are the Holy Grail for European integration,” Tom Luongo, financial and geopolitical analyst, told Sputnik. “PM Kallas is telling you what the plan is. The EU’s Achilles’ heel is the euro itself and its lack of central taxing authority.” “Eurobonds, issued through the European Commission, of this type are another way of handing that authority to Brussels, bypassing member state central banks and legislatures,” he added. “If one was cynical, which I am, one would suspect that the EU’s support for the war in Ukraine was mostly driven by this desire to centralize power in Brussels,” Luongo argued. “You start a war in Ukraine by purposefully crossing Russia’s red lines, drive inflation up locally, and empty the military coffers of all the post-WWII weapons and ammunition that is now outdated. (…)

If you are losing, as you are now, you play up the threat of Russia not stopping at Ukraine to justify shifting your domestic spending to a military build-up, issuing Eurobonds to pay for it.” This plan for war bonds was shepherded by the usual suspects for EU militarization, French President Emmanuel Macron and EU President Charles Michel. And I want to stress here that nothing about this project is economic. It is purely political. They will expend whatever political capital they must to force this outcome on the people of Europe. To folks like Macron, Michel, Ursula Von der Leyen and their bosses, European bourgeoisie and proletariats alike are just tax cattle. No wonder they are so against them eating beef. So, let’s connect another couple of dots. Because now it should be obvious that this is why they threatened Hungary’s Viktor Orban with economic devastation for holding up their $50 billion aid package for Ukraine.

They need to keep Ukraine going to justify now spending another $100+ billion to launder into failing French and German banks sitting on massive losses from all the debt they bought during the NIRP (Negative Interest Rate Policy) period. This is just the beginning of their plans for transferring sovereignty out of the hands of the member states and handing it to Brussels. But to sell this to global investors they have to prove to the world they have all the wayward voices under control. Sovereign debt is secured through taxation and the productive capacity of the population. At this point the EU has neither. Now when I think about what all the principle players have been harping about for the past couple of weeks the common theme was NATO uber alles. This was echoed by everyone from President Biden at his latest press conference and Vice President Harris at Munich, to Hillary Clinton, clearly on more than a proof of life tour.

We had Alexei Navalny’s death used to raise money for war. Reports of Russia shooting US satellites out of orbit. Locusts! It never stops with these people. There’s always a convenient Russian or Chinese bogeyman lurking behind every headline. But the underlying theme is to keep the money flowing into NATO. Trump’s comments on standing aside if Putin attacked a NATO country that didn’t pay its way were used by all of them to breathlessly support MOAR NATO. But, in the end, this is just about the exercise of raw power against domestic populations. Putin and his army are no more a threat to Berlin than they are a threat to Kiev at this point. NATO, and the plans to morph it into a global police force under UN control, is the reason for all of this. Europe wants the US to be a vassal after spending itself to death fighting the phantom menace of Putin. Eurobonds are the real story. The rest is just noise.

Read more …

“..Those who are using nuclear blackmail against us should know that the wind rose can turn around.”

• Surge of “Little Green Men,” and Metal is Poised to Strike (Trader Stef)

Yesterday, NATO’s Secretary General Stoltenberg interviewed with Radio Free Europe and noted in the context of discussing F-16s that Ukraine has the right to self-defense, including “striking legitimate Russian military targets outside Ukraine.” It’s not a coincidence that Stoltenberg expressed that point of view after Ukraine experienced the sudden collapse of Avdiivka that I covered in the “Surge of ‘Little Green Men,’ and Metal is Poised to Strike” Part XVIII and its Twitter thread. Russia has repeatedly expressed that existing international law grants the right to militarily strike a third party or nation state’s infrastructure that provides weapons and/or logistical support to an enemy during war. In the context of the NATO’s proxy war with Russia in Ukraine, that includes striking U.S., NATO members, and allied territory.

It was also made clear that any weapon systems delivered by third parties through Ukraine would be targeted upon identification, which already occurred on numerous occasions using conventional weaponry and hypersonic missiles armed with non-nuclear warheads. Don’t you think the U.S. striking Iran-backed proxies and supply lines in the Middle East that supported Hamas in its war against Israel validates Russia’s legal authority to strike NATO territory? Putin has been exceptionally restrained based on circumstances surrounding the war in Ukraine and the proliferation of legacy media narratives. “Medvedev predicts Apocalypse in event of Russia-NATO war… “Leaders should tell the bitter truth to their voters instead of treating them as brainless idiots. They should explain to them what will really happen instead of repeating the deceitful mantra about readiness for a war with Russia.” – Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev, Feb. 2024”

The issue with Ukraine utilizing F-16s to strike Russian troop positions or target inside Russia proper is it no longer has a sovereign airbase capable of supporting F-16s (Col. Douglas Macgregor’s Aug. 2023 analyses). It also lacks the integrated space-based and land-based communications technology required to execute sorties that must be supported by NATO or U.S. AWACS, miscellaneous functions and intelligence from NATO members, and spare parts and supplies support from the U.S. If an attempt is made to buildout a new or existing airfield, Russia will incinerate that location in the same way it already disabled Ukraine’s airbases and air force. That leaves a distinct possibility of F-16s entering the battlespace via a third-party nation. The moment any fighter jets are detected within Ukraine, in its airspace, or approaching the battlefield frontline they will be targeted and destroyed.

That scenario immediately raises the possibility of NATO activating its Article 5 provision for war against Russia, then war will be declared on the collective West by Russia and its strategic allies. Putin openly admits that Russia cannot match NATO’s combined conventional military strength despite its own superior manufacturing base and logistical advantages, so any attack by NATO would be considered an “existential threat.” That opens the door to tactical nuclear weapons being used to blunt the enemy on a battlefield. Where it goes from there depends on the collective West’s response, which will be answered in kind by Russia.

“I would like to remind those who make such statements regarding Russia that our country has different types of weapons as well, and some of them are more modern than the weapons NATO countries have. In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us. This is not a bluff. The citizens of Russia can rest assured that the territorial integrity of our Motherland, our independence and freedom will be defended – I repeat – by all the systems available to us. Those who are using nuclear blackmail against us should know that the wind rose can turn around.” – Putin, Sep. 2023

Read more …

Guys like Col. Macgregor and Scott Ritter insist it’s at least 10 times that.

Big Serge on X: “Obviously Zelensky’s new claim that total Ukrainian losses are only 31,000 would seem to be starkly at odds with their December statement that the AFU needs 20,000 replacements per month to keep up with burn.”

• Ukraine War: Zelensky Says 31,000 Troops Killed (BBC)

Ukraine’s president says 31,000 soldiers have been killed since Russia’s full-scale invasion began. Volodymyr Zelensky said he would not give the number of wounded as that would help Russian military planning. Typically, Ukrainian officials do not make public the numbers of servicepeople killed in the war. It comes after the defence minister said half of all Western aid for Ukraine has been delayed, costing lives and territory. “At the moment, commitment does not constitute delivery,” Rustam Umerov said in a televised address on Sunday. Ukraine is currently experiencing a variety of setbacks in its mission to drive Russia from its territory. Mr Umerov said that the lack of supplies put Ukraine at a further disadvantage “in the mathematics of war”. “We do everything possible and impossible but without timely supply it harms us,” he said.

German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius warned in November that plans to deliver a million artillery shells by March would not be met. In January, the European Union (EU) said just over half of these would reach Ukraine by the deadline and that the full promised amount would not be there until the end of 2024. The EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, blamed a lack of production capacity but Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said allies had been stepping this up. Ukrainian forces have often complained of shortages in their war with Russia. President Volodymyr Zelensky said one of the reasons Ukraine’s highly anticipated counter-offensive did not start earlier last year was the lack of weapons. That counter-offensive largely failed – one of a number of setbacks Kyiv has faced after some early successes in repelling Russia after it invaded in February 2022.

Last week, it was announced that troops had withdrawn from the key eastern town of Avdiivka – Moscow’s biggest win in months. Mr Zelensky also blamed this partly on faltering Western weapon supplies. The Biden administration, meanwhile, has said the hold-up in Congress of a $60bn aid package for Ukraine led to the fall of the town. Despite the delay, Ukraine’s prime minister sounded an optimistic note. “We are deeply convinced that the United States will not abandon Ukraine in terms of both financial support and military, armed support,” Denys Shmyal said on Sunday. His comments come after Mr Zelensky pressed members of the G7 – the world’s richest democracies – to increase their “vital support” in order for his country to win the war. “You know perfectly well that we need all this in time, and we count on you,” he said at a virtual meeting.

Read more …

When you let a piano playing penis overrule and replace your popular top general…

• Kiev Demanded Victory Plan From Military With No Resources – Zaluzhny Aid (RT)

The Ukrainian government wanted the military to figure out how Kiev could defeat Russia but failed to provide data on what resources it had to achieve that goal, an adviser to former Ukrainian commander-in-chief Valery Zaluzhny has said. In an interview with The New York Times published on Saturday, General Viktor Nazarov offered a glimpse into one of the reasons for the rift between the country’s military and civilian authorities last year. He noted that army officials were troubled by demands from the government in Kiev, which wanted them to draw “a road map for victory without telling them the amount of men, ammunition and reserves they would have to execute any plan.” The general lamented that this was one of the factors the civilian authorities “did not understand or did not want to understand” when they asked the military without any strategic reserves to come up with strategic plans.

Nazarov’s comments echoed the remarks of his ex-boss prior to his sacking. In an opinion piece for CNN earlier this month, Zaluzhny blasted “imperfections of the regulatory framework,” as well as the partial monopolization of the national defense industry, which he said resulted in production bottlenecks and exacerbated dependence on foreign arms shipments. In his November article for the Economist, the ex-top commander also suggested that the conflict was now at “a stalemate,” with both sides having the technological capability to know what the other one is doing, making any advances on the battlefield problematic. Zelensky fired Zaluzhny, who oversaw Ukraine’s botched counteroffensive last year, as well as several other top commanders earlier this month. The Ukrainian president has described the decision as “a reboot,” noting that “some things were not changing over the recent period of time.”

Some media reports, however, suggested that Zelensky wanted to get rid of Zaluzhny as a potential political rival who was popular with the rank and file. Zaluzhny was replaced by General Aleksandr Syrsky, whom Politico described as a “butcher” unpopular with the troops who supposedly resented his willingness to throw them into “fruitless assaults.” Even before Ukraine’s chaotic retreat from the strategic Donbass city of Avdeevka, Syrsky admitted that Kiev was in a “difficult” frontline situation. He has also said that Ukraine has now “transitioned” from offensive actions to strategic defense. However, commenting on the top brass reshuffle, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that Moscow did not expect it to have any significant impact on the battlefield.

Read more …

The CIA had control of the Kremlin under Yeltsin. They thought they had it made. Then they themselves selected Putin.

• Putin Defeated US Plan For Russia – Nuland (RT)

Vladimir Putin’s Russia is “not the Russia that we wanted,” Acting US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland has told CNN. Nuland explained that Washington wanted a compliant leader in the Kremlin who would “westernize” the country. “It’s not the Russia that, frankly, we wanted,” Nuland told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Thursday. “We wanted a partner that was going to be westernizing, that was going to be European. But that’s not what Putin has done.” Putin’s predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, enjoyed Washington’s support as he oversaw the rushed privatization of the Russian economy in the 1990s. Yeltsin’s reforms saw the rise of the so-called ‘oligarchs’, who amassed huge fortunes selling Russia’s natural resources to Western buyers, while the majority of the population dealt with declining life expectancy, soaring crime and homicide rates, and the collapse of the ruble.

Putin, who first took office in 2000, is widely credited with taming the oligarchs, imposing public order, and reversing the economic and social decline of the 1990s. Putin initially sought friendly relations with the West, telling American journalist Tucker Carlson earlier this month that he asked then-US President Bill Clinton whether Russia could one day join NATO, only to be rejected. Putin nevertheless reached out to Clinton’s successor, George W. Bush, with a proposal that the US, Russia, and Europe jointly create a missile defense system. While Bush’s team initially expressed interest, Putin said that “in the end they just told us to get lost.”

A combination of NATO expansion, American support for jihadist groups in the Caucuses, and Nuland’s orchestration of the coup d’etat in Ukraine in 2014 made it clear that the US and its allies were not interested in cooperation, Putin told Carlson. Nuland told Amanpour that Putin has “destroyed his own country” by intervening in Ukraine, and that the US will “continue to tighten the noose on him,” presumably by supplying Kiev with weapons and imposing additional economic sanctions on Moscow.

However, successive rounds of sanctions have failed to “crater” the Russian economy, as US President Joe Biden predicted they would in 2022. Instead, the International Monetary Fund predicts that Russia’s economy will grow by 2.6% in 2024, while the US’ will expand by 2.1%. Likewise, the unprecedented influx of Western arms failed to rescue Ukraine’s summer counteroffensive from failure. The operation fizzled out in the autumn after Kiev lost around 160,000 men and failed to retake any of its lost territory, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. Russian officials have repeatedly said that they are ready to negotiate an end to the conflict, but that Ukraine must accept the loss of its former territories and commit to neutrality.

Read more …

How to grow your economy on top of dead bodies..

• Most Ukraine Aid ‘Goes Right Back’ To US – Nuland (RT)

Washington spends most of the money allocated as aid for Ukraine on weapons production at home, Acting US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland said in an interview with CNN this week. Commenting on the pending aid package which Congress failed to approve before going on winter recess, Nuland said she has “strong confidence” that it will pass, as it addresses America’s own interests. “We have to remember that the bulk of this money is going right back into the US economy, to make weapons, including good-paying jobs in some forty states across the US,” she stated, adding that support for Ukraine in America “is still strong.” Lawmakers in the House of Representatives blocked a bill requested by US President Joe Biden for an aid package for Kiev worth $60 billion, most of which is earmarked for weapons, earlier this month.

They are expected to restart discussions on the package after they reconvene on February 28. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken also recently said that roughly 90% of the financial assistance for Ukraine is spent on domestic production of weapons and equipment. At a press conference on December 20, he said additional tranches would “benefit American business, local communities, and strengthen the US defense industrial base.” According to Germany’s Kiel Institute, which tracks international support for Kiev, Washington allocated nearly €68 billion ($73.7 billion) in aid for Ukraine between January 24, 2022 and January 15, 2024, including roughly €43 billion ($46.6 billion) in military aid. However, Kiev has been increasingly demanding more aid from its Western backers.

Several days ago, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky warned visiting American legislators that Kiev would “lose the war” against Russia without Washington’s assistance, according to US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Russia has criticized the US and other Western states for their military support for Kiev, arguing that it is only dragging out the conflict. According to a recent survey from the Harris Poll and the Quincy Institute, a growing number of Americans do not support US military aid to Kiev unless it is tied to peace talks. Only 22% of respondents said Washington should continue ‘unconditionally’ providing Ukraine with financial assistance, while 48% said new funding must be conditioned on progress toward a diplomatic solution. Around 30% said the US should halt all aid.

Read more …

Everything new about Zaluzhny is now censored and silenced.

• The Untold Half of the Zaluzhny Story (Snider)

There were probably many reasons why Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky fired Ukraine’s popular commander in chief of the armed forces, Valerii Zaluzhny, on February 8, but one of the biggest seems to have been a disagreement over how to go forward in a war that seemed to have overwhelmingly turned against them. Zelensky spoke of a need for “the same vision of the war,” and Zaluzhny said “a decision was made about the need to change approaches and strategy.” When the war began, Zelensky said that Ukraine “will definitely win” but stressed life over land. “Our land is important, yes, but ultimately it’s just territory.” He said that “Victory is being able to save as many lives as possible. Yes, to save as many lives as possible, because without this nothing would make sense.” But actions speak louder than words. Zelensky began to define victory as the reclamation, not only of land lost during the war, but of Crimea and all of Ukraine’s pre-2014 territory.

Zelensky insisted that Ukraine stay on the offensive. He insisted on moving forward, “Whether it’s by a kilometer or 500 meters, but forward every day.” Zaluzhny saw Zelensky’s strategy of fighting for Bakhmut and Avdiivka at any cost as a strategic disaster that was costing Ukraine too much in weapons and in lives. Zaluzhny argued for preserving lives over forfeitable territory, lest Ukraine lose its land and its army. In General Oleksandr Syrsky, Zelensky found the commander who would execute his vision and carry out his orders. Syrsky fought the Battle of Bakhmut. His performance there, and in other battles, gave him the reputation of a commander who is willing to give orders that lead to little real gain and lots of real loss of life. “Some soldiers say his orders are unreasonable, at times sending men to their obvious deaths,” The Washington Post reports. According to The Economist, he “has a reputation for being willing to engage the enemy, even if the cost in men and machines is high.”

His reported willingness to put “his men in danger to reach his military goals” has earned him the nicknames “Butcher” and General 200, 200 being the code for a soldier’s corpse. Syrsky is also seen as being a commander who is close to Zelensky and who will not question his orders. The replacement of Zaluzhny by Syrsky signals Zelensky’s intent to push ahead with the suicidal war of attrition and fight for every inch of land despite the cost in lives. Aware of the optics of the choice in the public and, perhaps especially in the armed forces, Kiev assuaged the perception of Syrsky as “being indifferent to military casualties.” In his first statement as commander in chief, Syrsky said, “The lives and well-being of our servicemen have always been and remain the main asset of the Ukrainian army.”

But, again, actions speak louder than words. General Syrsky’s first words were about protecting the lives of his men, but his first actions were about fighting for every inch of territory. On February 11, just three days after the change in command, Syrsky ordered the reinforcement and defence of Avdiivka, a strategic town that faced imminent loss to the Russian army and enormous loss of Ukrainian lives. Zaluzhny would have withdrawn his troops, preserved lives and moved the front to more defensible positions. Syrsky deployed the 3rd Separate Assault Brigade, one of the best armed and trained and most successful brigades in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. It did not go well. It went exactly as Zaluzhny said it would, and Syrsky was forced to respond exactly as Zaluzhny had said they should. But now the response was carried out in disarray instead of in an orderly, planned fashion. Perhaps Zelensky should have stuck with Zaluzhny.

In sending in reinforcements instead of retreating, Syrsky said the “goal of our operation is to exhaust the enemy, inflict maximum losses on him.” The opposite happened. Less than a week later, on February 17, Syrsky announced the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Avdiivka. “Based on the operational situation around Avdiyivka, in order to avoid encirclement and preserve the lives and health of servicemen,” he said, “I decided to withdraw our units from the city and move to defense on more favorable lines…The life of military personnel is the highest value.” That’s exactly what Zaluzhny advised Zelensky to do. But the situation was worse than at first reported. Zaluzhny would have preplanned the retreat and executed it according to a plan. Zelensky and Skysky’s stubbornness turned the already costly loss into a disaster.

Read more …

I doubt the NYT piece told Russia anything they didn’t already know.

• CIA Built “12 Secret Spy Bases” In Ukraine – NYT (ZH)

On Sunday The New York Times published an explosive and very belated full admission that US intelligence has not only been instrumental in Ukraine wartime decision-making, but has established and financed high tech command-and-control spy centers, and was doing so long prior to the Feb. 24 Russian invasion of two years ago. Among the biggest revelations is that the program was established a decade ago and spans three different American presidents. The Times says the CIA program to modernize Ukraine’s intelligence services has “transformed” the former Soviet state and its capabilities into “Washington’s most important intelligence partners against the Kremlin today.” This has included the agency having secretly trained and equipped Ukrainian intelligence officers spanning back to just after the 2014 Maidan coup events, as well constructing a network of 12 secret bases along the Russian border—work which began eight years ago.

These intelligence bases, from which Russian commanders’ communications can be swept up and Russian spy satellites monitored, are being used launch and track cross-border drone and missile attacks on Russian territory. This means that with the disclosure of the longtime “closely guarded secret” the world just got a big step closer to WW3, given it means the CIA is largely responsible for the effectiveness of the recent spate of attacks which have included direct drone hits on key oil refineries and energy infrastructure. “Without them [the CIA and elite commandoes it’s trained], there would have been no way for us to resist the Russians, or to beat them,” according to Ivan Bakanov, former head of the SBU, which is Ukraine’s domestic intelligence agency.

A main source of the NYT revelations—disclosures which might come as no surprise to those never willing to so easily swallow the mainstream ‘official’ narrative of events—is identified as a top intelligence commander named Gen. Serhii Dvoretskiy. Clearly, Kiev and Washington now want world to know of the deep intelligence relationship they tried to conceal for over the past decade. It is perhaps a kind of warning to Moscow at a moment Ukraine’s forces are in retreat: the US is fighting hand in glove with the Ukrainians. And yet the revelations contained in the NY Times report also confirm what President Putin has precisely accused Washington of all along.

[..] Among the most interesting and curious moments of the NYT report is a description of the CIA program’s expanse under the Trump administration. The report suggests that the true scope may have even been hidden from Trump. The Russian hawks in his administration quietly did the ‘dirty work’, we are told: “The election of Trump in November 2016 put the Ukrainians and their CIA partners on edge. Trump praised Putin and dismissed Russia’s role in election interference. He was suspicious of Ukraine and later tried to pressure its president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, to investigate his Democratic rival, Biden, resulting in Trump’s first impeachment.”

The report then emphasizes, “But whatever Trump said and did, his administration often went in the other direction. This is because Trump had put Russia hawks in key positions, including Mike Pompeo as CIA director and John Bolton as national security adviser.” And further, “They visited Kyiv to underline their full support for the secret partnership, which expanded to include more specialized training programs and the building of additional secret bases.” Given the attempt to place Trump in a negative light (he had to be ‘tiptoed around’…), it will be interesting to see how he and his campaign respond to the report. But more consequential will be the reaction of Putin and the Kremlin in the coming days.

Read more …

“..Xi Jinping deliberately set about changing the structure of China’s economy in order to end a growth boom based solely on real estate and debt..”

• Xi Isn’t Destroying China’s Economy – He’s Changing It (Fomenko)

If there’s one thoroughly unoriginal strand of thought on China present in the mainstream media today, it is the idea that China’s economy has been wrecked, and that Xi Jinping’s policies are to blame. Such commentary, pushed by every major mainstream outlet on a weekly basis, frequently promotes a narrative of the “end” of China’s rise, often talks about “decline” and squarely places responsibility on Xi Jinping, who supposedly ended the dynamic of an open and prosperous China for increasingly centralized, authoritarian rule and a return to communist fundamentals. Such an article was pushed this week by the editorial board of the Washington Post, in a piece titled “Xi is tanking China’s economy. That’s bad for the US”. The article was hardly original in its premise, stating the above argument pretty much word for word.

When this argument is pushed, it always conveniently ignores the broader context that the world economy is in dire straits, and moreover the more pressing elephant in the room, that American foreign policy has been deliberately detrimental if not outright antagonistic to global economic prospects as a whole. The idea of this narrative is to push the psychological warfare aspect that China is failing in order to dampen the optimism of businesses, undermine the Chinese economy and therefore push US foreign policy goals. This deliberately paints over the geopolitical, economic, and domestic considerations which have all driven a change in China’s own strategy and position. It is easy to denounce the “tyrannical rule of Xi Jinping” in a cliché and blame him for everything that has apparently gone wrong, but more difficult to paint an assessment as to why China’s internal and external environment today is not the same as it was ten years ago.

First, what is always, always ignored is that Xi Jinping deliberately set about changing the structure of China’s economy in order to end a growth boom based solely on real estate and debt. The newspapers love to waffle on about the “real estate crisis” and Evergrande, but can you imagine how big the problem would have been had previous policies been continued and China pushed for obscene 10% growth targets based on an explosion of debt? Xi Jinping ended this and initiated a process of deleveraging which deliberately slowed down China’s economic growth to around 6% when he came to power. Why? Because debt is not a sustainable mechanism and his policy has been literally to push the real estate industry into a managed recession, even if that has short-term repercussions.

Secondly, Xi Jinping’s policy has been to reinvent China’s economy to meet upcoming challenges by transforming it from a low end, export, real estate boom economy, into a high-end technological powerhouse. Instead of investing aimlessly in local government real estate booms, China has redirected state money to building up high-value industries including renewable energy, computing, semiconductors, automobiles, aviation, among other things. It is primarily this bid to become the global technological leader (by default of size) that has triggered the backlash from the US on an economic level and thus the bid to try and cripple China’s technological advance through export controls, which in fact show little evidence of working.

In addition to that, the global economic environment China operates in, has changed. The US has terminated its longstanding policy of open economic integration in favor of protectionism, bloc alignment, and the geopoliticization of supply chains. It has, in turn, created geopolitical conflicts with Russia and China and demanded its allies cut or reduce economic ties to the targeted countries. In doing so, the US has also attacked Beijing on a number of fronts using issues such as Xinjiang, Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong as weapons to smear China’s image, implement sanctions, and of course an all-embracing campaign of negative publicity to create uncertainty and destroy the optimism of China’s rise.

These policies inevitably have consequences on Beijing, which makes the country feel less secure, more suspicious, and therefore less open to the outside world. That isn’t as much a possible indictment of Xi Jinping as it is a structural reality of politics. The CIA for example, is relentless in trying to strengthen its presence in China, but if China arrests someone or links them to spying, the media will respond by calling Beijing paranoid, insecure and coercive, showing how the narrative will skewer the country no matter what. However, the point still remains that it is more challenging for China to grow in this environment than it was before. New challenges create new policies, and when the mainstream media pretend that Xi is the instigator of all the change and “spoiling” China’s chances, they are simply lying on multiple levels. It is a multifaceted psychological warfare campaign which opts for simple explanations rather than telling you the bigger picture of why China changed.

Read more …

“Draghi stressed the necessity to channel European private savings, because “public money will never be enough..”

• EU Must Find ‘Enormous Amount’ Of Money To Face Global Challenges – Draghi

The European Union needs to invest an “enormous amount of money in a relatively short time” to deal with the deep challenges the bloc is facing, former European Central Bank President Mario Draghi said on Saturday. Draghi, who has been tasked with producing a high-level report on the EU’s competitiveness, met with EU ministers on Saturday in Ghent, Belgium, to discuss the best way to come up with the needed funds. He presented EU governments with his diagnosis: The three pillars the EU has relied on — energy from Russia, exports from China, and the U.S. defense apparatus — are no longer as solid as before, and on the green and digital transitions alone the EU would have to spend €500 billion a year.

The funding gap between Europe and the United States in terms of investment is equivalent to half a trillion euros a year, and a third of that would be public money, Draghi told the ministers, according to his assistant. All the participants appeared to agree on what needs to change to boost EU competitiveness, from lowering energy prices to reducing regulatory burdens, but divisions emerged when talking about public money. “They made clear that a lot of discussions would be needed in the months to come,” the Draghi aide said, adding that Draghi called for “bold action” on the matter of investments. Draghi stressed the necessity to channel European private savings, because “public money will never be enough,” but he also put on the table options to find funds at the EU level, according to the aide.

The EU could create a new common cash facility, such as debt or loans, or use private partnerships where the European Investment Bank would have a role to play. French President Emmanuel Macron and others support the idea of new common debt. EU Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni has pitched many times the idea of a sort of second Next Generation EU fund, but the proposal has not generated enthusiasm among all countries. Asked about the need for new common funds earlier this month, Germany’s Economy Secretary Sven Giegold told POLITICO: “It’s well known” that the German government is in favor of “increasing the spending path into research and development, climate, innovation and so on, which is certainly needed in global competition. But as you know, at the moment, about 70 percent of the EU budget does not go into these future-oriented sectors.”

Read more …

Trump the dictator has become a prominent narrative..

• 10 Ways A Second Trump Term Could Be More Extreme Than The First (Pol.)

Trump’s campaign has repeatedly dismissed media reports about his potential second-term agenda, saying in a statement in November that policy recommendations from his conservative allies “are certainly appreciated and can be enormously helpful” but “are just that — recommendations.” “Unless a second term priority is articulated by President Trump himself, or is officially communicated by the campaign, it is not authorized in any way,” the statement from campaign advisers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita said. But both supporters and critics of the ex-president predict that a reelected Trump would wage a more focused and aggressive attack on the status quo. This time, they say, he would be far more knowledgeable about the mechanics of wielding executive power. Having placed so many conservatives in federal judgeships, he would face less resistance from the courts. And he would be more determined to place loyalists, not rules-obsessed traditionalists, in senior roles.

Trump’s second term would be “dramatically more comprehensive and more aggressive and more determined to profoundly change the establishment,” said former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who wrote a 2017 book called “Understanding Trump.” The outside proposals drawing so much attention “are worth being aware of,” he said, “because they give you a sense of what it would mean to put Trumpism into effect.” President Joe Biden’s campaign said voters need to be informed about proposals that would “undermine democracy, rip away rights and freedoms, and make Americans’ lives as miserable as humanly possible if Trump is reelected.” “Americans should know the stakes of this election,” Biden campaign spokesperson Seth Schuster said in a statement to POLITICO, “and Trump has made them as clear as day.”

These are among the policy changes that both fans and foes of the former president say people can expect if Trump wins in November: As a candidate, Trump has both claimed credit for the demise of Roe v. Wade and cast himself as a moderate on abortion rights — and he has frustrated anti-abortion groups by refusing to openly embrace or rule out a national ban. Yet those same groups, in collaboration with veterans of Trump’s previous administration, are drafting plans for a sprawling anti-abortion agenda that would all but outlaw the procedure from coast to coast, including in states whose laws or constitutions guarantee reproductive rights. The proposals would go far beyond his first-term anti-abortion policies — which Biden has since lifted — and would lean heavily on executive branch actions, bypassing a stymied Congress.

The prospect terrifies abortion rights supporters, who see a second Trump administration as a threat to all the work they’ve done during the last two years to restore and defend abortion access at the state level. Their reasons for worry grew after The New York Times reported this month that Trump has privately told aides and supporters that he could support a national abortion ban after the 16th week of pregnancy. “We cannot ballot initiative our way out of this fundamental crisis of rights,” said Deirdre Schifeling, chief political and advocacy officer for the American Civil Liberties Union, one of many groups bracing for Trump and a Republican Congress to attempt to override state abortion protections. “I have no doubt that they would try to impose a federal abortion ban, restrict birth control, and do lots of things that are way out of step with what people in this country want.”

Read more …

From what I understand the system is far more precise than she lets on. It doesn’t place you somewhere in the neighborhood, but at an exact location.

• Fani Willis Demands Judge Reject Cellphone Evidence (ZH)

Fulton County DA Fani Willis is reeling after evidence was submitted to the court suggesting that she and special prosecutor Nathan Wade lied about when their romantic relationship began. To recap, Wade and Willis claimed that their relationship began sometime in early 2022 – after Willis hired Wade to help her go after Trump in the Georgia election interference case. Wade’s cell phone records disprove their official story, however. As The Reactionary notes, “Trump’s attorneys were able to obtain, by subpoena to AT&T, Wade’s cell phone records from 1/1/2021 through 11/30/2021. Wade’s location data was analyzed by an investigator hired by the attorneys – an analytical tool which generated geolocation data that pinpointed Wade’s presence at DA Willis’s South Fulton Condo during that time period.

Here are the highlights: • Wade and Willis exchanged “over 2000 voice calls and just under 12,000 texts messages” from January 1, 2021 through November 30, 2021. • Geolocation data indicates Wade was at DA Willis’s condo “at least 35 occasions”. The data revealed he was “stationary” at the condo “and not in transit.” • Wade’s visits to DA Willis’s condo were corroborated by texts and phone calls. According to the report: On November 29, 2021, “following a call from Ms. Willis at 11:32 PM, while the call continued, [Wade’s] phone left the East Cobb area just after midnight and arrived within the geofence located on the Dogwood address [the condo] at 12:43 AM on November 30, 2021. The phone remained there until 4:55 AM.” • On September 11, 2021, Wade arrived at the condo address at approximately 10:45 PM. He left the address at 3:28 AM and arrived at his Marietta residence at 4:05 AM. He then texted DA Willis at 4:20 AM.”

Now, Fani wants the evidence tossed – claiming that some of the data is inadmissible for technical or procedural reasons. Willis argued in a response that the cell phone data fails to “prove anything relevant,” and should be tossed because it contains “both telephone records that have not been admitted into evidence and an affidavit and other documents containing unqualified opinion evidence.” Because of this, Willis argues that the court should exclude the new information, or at least consider her “rebuttal evidence that demonstrates the unreliability of the unqualified opinion evidence improperly introduced by Defendant Trump.” She also claims that the new evidence is inadmissible because the defense counsel provided no written notice of its introduction, no summary of the expert’s testimony, and no information as to the expert’s qualifications. And even if he’s legit, the phone records don’t prove anything.

“The records do nothing more than demonstrate that Special Prosecutor Wade’s telephone was located somewhere within a densely populated multiple-mile radius where various residences, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, and other businesses are located,” she wrote, adding that the records may have even been obtained illegally. In a Saturday post to Truth Social, Trump argued that the new evidence shows that Willis is full of shit and should be disqualified. “Based on the fact that District Attorney Fani Willis and her Lover were together long prior to the filing date of their Fake Lawsuit against me and many other innocent people, despite their sworn testimony to the contrary, this case must be determined as OVER and, of no further force or effect,” he wrote. “Among other things, in close coordination and conjunction with the DOJ and White House (numerous 8-hour meetings between the Biden people and them in D.C.!), this case was all about stealing close to $1 Million Dollars for Lover Wade, and Election Interference, whereby a vicious and heinous attack is made on Crooked Joe Biden’s Political Opponent.”

Judge Kaplan https://twitter.com/i/status/1761760801957044394

Read more …

Placing Assange in the tradition of Ellsberg and Seymour Hersh.

• The Show Trial against Julian Assange (Scheidler)

The revelations of whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning and journalists such as Julian Assange have shown that in the shadow of the so-called war on terror, a vast parallel universe has emerged in recent decades that is obsessed with the illegal spying on its own citizens and the arbitrary imprisonment, torture and killing of political opponents. This world is largely beyond democratic control, indeed it is undermining the democratic order from within. However, this development is not entirely new. In 1971, leaks revealed a secret FBI program for spying on, infiltrating and disrupting civil rights and anti-war movements, which became known as COINTELPRO. In the same year, the New York Times published the Pentagon Papers leaked by whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, which showed that four successive US administrations had systematically lied to their citizens about the extent and motives of the Vietnam War and the massive war crimes committed by the US military.

In 1974, Seymour Hersh revealed the CIA’s secret programs to assassinate foreign heads of state and the covert operation to spy on hundreds of thousands of opponents of the war, which ran under the code name “Operation CHAOS”. Driven by these reports, the US Congress convened in 1975 the Church Committee, which carried out a comprehensive review of the secret operations and led to greater parliamentary control of the services. Julian Assange is part of this venerable journalistic tradition and has made a decisive contribution to its renewed flourishing. However, there is one important difference to the 1970s: Today, the most important investigative journalist of his generation is openly persecuted, criminalized and deprived of his freedom. When states declare the investigation of crimes to be a crime itself, society enters a dangerous downward spiral, at the end of which new forms of totalitarian rule can emerge. As early as 2012, Assange remarked, at the time with regard to the increasingly comprehensive surveillance technologies: “We have all the ingredients for a turnkey totalitarian state”.

If the US authorities succeed in convicting a journalist for exposing war crimes, this would have another serious consequence. In the future, it would become even more difficult and dangerous to expose the sordid reality of wars, especially those wars that Western governments like to sell as civilizing missions with the help of embedded journalists. If we do not learn the truth about these wars, it becomes much easier to wage them. Truth is the most important instrument of peace. Julian Assange has not yet been extradited and sentenced. Over the years, a remarkable international movement has formed for his release and the defense of press freedom. Many parliamentarians around the world are also raising their voices. The Australian parliament, for example, supported by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, passed a resolution by a large majority calling for Assange’s release. A group of over 80 members of the German parliament have joined in.

However, the German government is still refusing to exert any serious pressure on Joe Biden’s government, which continues to persecute Assange. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, who as the Green Party’s candidate for chancellor had spoken out in favor of freeing Assange, has persistently avoided questions on the subject since joining the government. Her ministry has left questions from MPs about the case unanswered for months, only to then make elusive rhetorical excuses. The leading politicians of the governing German coalition, who like to loudly present themselves as the guardians of democracy and the rule of law, must finally take action in this case of political justice and unequivocally demand the release of Julian Assange before it is too late. However, this would require overcoming the cowering attitude towards the godfather in Washington and actually standing up for the much-vaunted values of democracy.

Read more …

“This is America. We can’t let this happen..”

• If We Don’t Keep Sending Billions To Ukraine, The War Might End (BBee)

Congress issued a dire warning to the American people Friday, sternly reminding voters that if they do not keep sending billions of tax dollars to Ukraine, the war might end. “This is America. We can’t let this happen,” said Senator Chuck Schumer in a press conference. “Our donors at Lockheed Martin, General Dynamic, Teledyne, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Burisma are running out of patience. If we don’t inject their weapon supply chains with fresh cash immediately, Ukraine and Russia might be forced to broker a peace deal.” “I shudder at the thought.”

Foreign policy experts concurred that essential defense contractors and Ukrainian shell companies will run out of money to launder within a few weeks, which might force the hands of Russian and Ukrainian leaders to sign a peace treaty and stop slaughtering each other. “I don’t want to imagine a world where people on the other side of the globe aren’t killing each other with American weapons,” said Secretary of State Blinken. “I urge Congress to put aside their differences and support this endless war. For America.” At publishing time, Republicans had shown willingness to send more funding to Ukraine in exchange for a promise of future conversations to plan potential negotiations to secure the southern border maybe someday.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Crow

 

 

Bus

 

 

Prince

 

 

Cat bottle

 

 

Monitor

 

 

KIndness

 

 

This intrigues me

 

 

 

 

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