Trump supporters in China are up in arms and raging about a possible indictment: "Trump, America needs you"

While speaking to supporters in Long Island, Gov. Ron DeSantis decried Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, but did not use Trump's name. Former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.Alon Skuy/AFP via Getty Images and Scott Olson/Getty Images Gov. Ron DeSantis spoke to a crowd Saturday about former President Donald Trump's indictment.  DeSantis, however, did not mention Trump's name in the 50-minute speech.  He also appeared to use the speech as an opportunity to criticize Trump — though again without naming him. Gov. Ron DeSantis used a Saturday stop in Long Island to stick up for former President Donald Trump following his indictment, but the Florida politician avoided using Trump's name in the nearly hour-long speech. DeSantis called Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr., who convened the grand jury that voted to indict Trump on Thursday, "a menace to society" according to the New York Post, coming to Trump's defense but only ever calling him "a former president of the United States.""His whole thing is he doesn't want people to be in jail, he wants to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors...And then he turns around, does a flimsy indictment against a former president of the United States," DeSantis said of Bragg, according to the New York Post.Trump is the first ex-president to ever be charged with a crime after an investigation into a $130,000 payment made to the adult-film actress Stormy Daniels. Following the historic indictment, Republicans and Trump allies came to the former president's defense by calling it a "politically motivated prosecution" and taking aim at Bragg and his criminal-justice-focused policies.DeSantis also backed Trump — although he wasn't always so supportive. The Florida governor took to Twitter to lambaste Bragg on Friday, but again, did not mention Trump's name."How do you take down trump when you're literally afraid to say his NAME?" political journalist Molly Jong-Fast wrote on Twitter Saturday.—Molly Jong-Fast (@MollyJongFast) April 1, 2023 DeSantis also appeared to take a shot at the former president, whose four-year term was often mired in scandal. "For over four years, we don't have leaks, we don't have palace intrigue... We just execute the agenda," DeSantis said to the crowd, according to the New York Post.DeSantis is likely entering the 2024 race for the White House; Trump announced his candidacy last year.Trump has been using multiple opportunities over the past few months to disparage his potential rival, concocting petty nicknames and questioning his decision to endorse him for governor in 2018.Following his indictment, Trump's popularity over DeSantis has grown, according to a Yahoo News/YouGov poll in which Trump beat DeSantis by 26 percentage points among registered Republican voters and Independents who lean Republican. Trump is expected to voluntarily turn himself in on Tuesday in New York for his arraignment.Representatives for Trump and DeSantis did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

The guests sat in awkward silence until Trump's audio reconnected. He then said: "What happened was that the radical left was working on the phone." Michael Flynn, Donald Trump and Roger Stone.Dustin Franz/Getty Images, Alex Wong/Getty Images, Win McNamee/Getty Images Donald Trump claimed left-wing forces interrupted his prayer call with Roger Stone and Michael Flynn. Trump was abruptly cut off during the call. Guests sat in awkward silence until Trump reconnected.  When Trump got back on the call, he blamed being disconnected on the "radical left," without evidence. An online prayer session organized by a pro-trump Christian group ran into technical difficulties. Former President Donald Trump, who was the guest of honor on the call, immediately blamed it on the "radical left."The "Pastors For Trump National Prayer Call," held on Monday invited guests like Trump ally Roger Stone and retired Gen. Michael Flynn, a Trump-era national security adviser, and Trump himself. A recording of the call was uploaded to Youtube on Monday. Shortly after Trump joined the call, host Jackson Lahmeyer, who describes himself as a pastor and entrepreneur, asked him what specific prayer request Trump had for the pastors on the call.At that point, Trump's audio disconnected. The guests sat in awkward silence for a couple of minutes before Trump managed to reconnect to the call."Okay, I guess we have some phone miscommunication. And I think what happened was that the radical left was working on the phone. There is no question about it," Trump claimed, without providing further evidence.Speaking to The Daily Beast's Zachary Petrizzo, Lahmeyer blamed "trolls" for flooding the "backstage" of the prayer call."Everything froze on our end," Lahmeyer told The Daily Beast. "I think the system got overloaded with the number of viewers." Steven Cheung, Trump's spokesman, did not address Insider's query whether there was any proof of hackers messing with the call when reached for comment. The prayer call was held to pray for Trump as he faces a potential indictment in New York regarding hush money payments to the adult film actress Stormy Daniels. Trump claimed without evidence in a Saturday Truth Social post that he will be arrested on Tuesday, and called on his supporters to protest on his behalf.During the prayer call, Stone said that Trump was the victim of a "weaponized judicial process" in which a "routine campaign finance violation" was being used to unfairly target him.Stone has been a long-time Trump ally. He was present at Trump's 2024 re-election announcement at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach in November, which was attended by very few congressmen. He was also sentenced to 40 months in prison for making false statements and tampering with evidence in an investigation into Trump, a sentence Trump commuted. Michael Flynn, who was briefly Trump's national security advisor, pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his communications with Russia. He was pardoned in 2020 by Trump. Flynn is also known for his links to the QAnon conspiracy theory, and for pushing a wild, unsubstantiated theory that COVID-19 vaccines are being snuck into salad dressing. Flynn claimed during the prayer call on Monday that Trump is saving the country from going along a "godless path."Cheung said of the call: "Millions of Americans are praying for President Trump because he is the only one standing in the way of radical, liberal prosecutors abusing their power from targeting citizens they disagree with."Stone, Flynn, and Lahmeyer did not immediately respond to Insider's requests for comment sent outside regular business hours. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

"If Trump is arrested, it will signal the corruption of the American spirit," wrote one person on the Twitter-like Weibo platform. Donald Trump.Win McNamee/Getty Images Donald Trump has found an unlikely group of supporters — in China. There was a deluge of support for Trump on Weibo after he said he may be arrested on Tuesday. Trump-loving Chinese users urged him to fight the indictment, calling him a "comrade" and a "king." Former President Donald Trump has found a group of ardent supporters on Chinese social media as his claims of a looming arrest ricocheted across the Internet. On Saturday, news of a possible Trump indictment skyrocketed to the top of the charts on the Twitter-like Weibo platform at 11.30 p.m., Beijing time. The hashtag "Trump says he'll be arrested soon" was the 5th most-read topic on Weibo on Saturday night, with more than 59 million views.This was moments after Trump wrote Saturday on Truth Social that he will be arrested in New York next week. Trump's claim about a possible arrest was not based on any facts released by the Manhattan District Attorney's office. Susan Necheles, the former president's lead defense attorney, said Saturday no information came from the Manhattan DA's office that Trump would be "arrested," as Trump claimed, but was cautious not to directly dispute her clients' Truth Social post, Insider reported. "President Trump is basing this on press reports," Necheles told Insider.With the hashtag going viral on Weibo, there was also an outpouring of support for Trump on the platform. A slew of Trump-loving Weibo commenters — who made up the majority of the hundreds of posts seen by Insider — encouraged him to not give up and fight any criminal indictment with all his strength. "Donald Trump, don't back down. America is big enough to be split into two. Do what you need to do, MAGA!" read one comment."If Trump is arrested, it will signal the corruption of the American spirit," another comment read. "Trump, America needs you," a Weibo commenter wrote.Some Weibo commenters called on his "redneck supporters" to "rally around their king." Others called Trump their "comrade" — a term commonly used to refer to Chinese officials, including Chinese leader Xi Jinping — and encouraged him to "move forward bravely."Trump's detractors did speak up on Weibo too, but they were far outnumbered by his supporters."I'm looking forward to the old asshole being arrested and imprisoned," read one comment. "This lunatic needs to be locked up, or he'll be spouting nonsense all day long," another Weibo user wrote. And some Weibo commenters just thought the whole idea of Trump being indicted was exciting, likening his possible arrest to events on a reality TV show. "How fun! When does the broadcast begin?" read a comment from one Weibo user.  Weibo is a platform that is tightly controlled and rigorously censored by the Chinese government. That the viral thread — and the above comments — were not quickly scrubbed from the platform is a good indicator that such pro-Trump discourse is something the Chinese government is allowing to happen. It is not surprising that some Chinese people don't want Trump to be indicted, or for a possible jail term to derail his 2024 presidential ambitions.Researchers from the Brookings Institution think tank wrote in 2016 that some segments of the Chinese populace saw Trump as a boon for Beijing, viewing him as the presidential candidate who would focus more on boosting trade ties. CNN reported in 2020 that some Chinese social media users viewed Trump as a better candidate than President Joe Biden — surmising that he would help build China up by ruining America. Meanwhile, a possible indictment in New York now looms over Trump.Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is investigating if Trump's payments to the adult film actress, Stormy Daniels, violate New York election and document laws. Bragg is also investigating if these payments should be considered an illegal Trump campaign expense.Daniels says she had an affair with Trump in 2006. Trump has consistently denied that he ever had an affair with Daniels. He also denies that he paid her $130,000 to keep quiet about the relationship before the 2016 election.A spokesman for Trump and representatives for Weibo at Sina did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Insider. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Biden pledged to recalibrate the US-Saudi relationship over Khashoggi's brutal murder, but the oil crisis sparked by the Russia-Ukraine war has changed his stance. President Joe Biden is expected to meet with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the near future.Bernd von Jutrczenka/Getty Images Hatice Cengiz, Jamal Khashoggi's fiancée, criticized Biden for his expected visit with MBS. "Biden's decision to meet MBS is horribly upsetting to me," Cengiz told CNN. Biden pledged to recalibrate the US-Saudi relationship over Khashoggi's murder, but the Ukraine war has changed his stance. Jamal Khashoggi's fiancée excoriated President Joe Biden over his expected trip to Saudi Arabia, which would likely include a face-to-face meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman — the de facto ruler of the kingdom who the US explicitly implicated in the 2018 brutal murder of the journalist. Hatice Cengiz said that by meeting with MBS, as the Saudi leader is often called, Biden would insult defenders of human rights across the world. "President Biden's decision to meet MBS is horribly upsetting to me and supporters of freedom and justice everywhere," Hatice Cengiz said in a statement to CNN. Foreign policy experts and veteran diplomats have also questioned the wisdom of Biden's planned visit to Saudi Arabia."A presidential trip to Saudi Arabia right now is going to be confirmation, validation not just that it's business as usual but that MBS got away with murder," Aaron David Miller, a former US diplomat who advised multiple secretaries of state on the Middle East, told Insider last week.Dalia Dassa Kaye, a senior fellow at UCLA Burkle Center on International Relations, told Insider that Biden traveling to the kingdom would be a "serious mistake," adding, "This is a bad deal for Biden — he's risking his reputation and compromising on principles for modest returns."Khashoggi was killed in October 2018 in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. The Saudi journalist went to the consulate under the impression that he would obtain a document that would allow him to marry Cengiz. His killing by Saudi agents sparked outrage in Washington and pushed many congressional lawmakers to call for the US to dramatically reassess its relations with the kingdom. Biden entered the White House pledging to recalibrate the US-Saudi relationship, vowing to make the oil-rich country a "pariah."After years of President Donald Trump ensuring that MBS did not face consequences for the murder of Khashoggi — who was a Washington Post columnist and US resident when he was killed — the Biden administration released a declassified intelligence report that directly tied the Saudi crown prince to the killing. The Biden administration imposed sanctions in concert with the release of the report but stopped short of slapping any penalties on MBS. Biden also said the US would cease support for the Saudi-led coalition in the Yemen war, and snubbed MBS by stating he would only communicate in an official capacity with Salman.There were early signs that Biden would make good on his pledges — though critics, including Democrats in Congress, have accused him of falling short on issues like Yemen due to ongoing arms sales to the Saudis.But the Russia-Ukraine war and the ensuing oil crisis, which has seen gas prices skyrocket, has pushed Biden into a corner. With midterms on the horizon, Biden is now seeking Riyadh's help in addressing the crisis. According to reporting from CNN, senior US officials have relayed to the Saudi government that the Biden administration is prepared to embrace a "reset" of the relationship between Washington and Riyadh. That effectively means allowing shared interests to trump punishing MBS over Khashoggi's murder. "Both sides have decided that for the sake of achieving peace and stability in the Middle East, we need to move past it," an unnamed senior US official told CNN in reference to Khashoggi's killing. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

"Gradually, ...Then Suddenly!" Authored by Jim Quinn via The Burning Platform blog, “How did you go bankrupt?” Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.” - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises “I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty.”  – John Adams Hemingway’s famous quote about going bankrupt connects with so many because it is true on a personal basis and a civilization basis. It applies to individuals and empires in decline – like the American democracy. John Adams realized two centuries ago democracy was no better than monarchy or aristocracy over the long haul. We were handed a Republic by Franklin and his fellow revolutionaries, but we failed to keep it almost from the very birth of this nation. As we rush towards our World War 3 rendezvous with destiny, aided and abetted by politicians placed in power by globalist billionaires hellbent on the destruction of our way of life, so they own everything and you own nothing, I can’t help but ponder who is to blame and could we have avoided this dystopian outcome. The United States has been going bankrupt gradually for the last fifty years, both financially, intellectually, and morally. Nixon closing the gold window in 1971 and opening the debt door to morally bankrupt bankers and politicians set in motion a downward spiral accelerating at hyper-speed as we speak. The American Empire was born in the shattered global debris of World War II with the Bretton Woods agreement, which left the USD as the dominant currency in world trade, specifically as the settlement currency for all oil transactions. The empire has been sustained by currency supremacy, military might, and until 1980, manufacturing superiority. Once the most highly educated nation on the planet, decades of lowering the bar, less than mediocre union teachers, and replacing education with indoctrination, has created generations of ignorant zombies incapable and uninterested in critical thought. The road to bankruptcy was very gradual at the outset of empire, with the national debt topping out at $269 billion, 119% of GDP, in 1946. In 1960 it had only grown to $286 billion but had dropped to 54% of GDP. Rebuilding the world and being the dominant economic power paid huge dividends. After a decade of guns, butter and welfare programs, the debt grew to $398 billion, but continued to drop as a percentage of GDP to 35% in 1971. After decoupling from gold, the national debt soared to $908 billion by 1980, inflation surged to 15%, and Volcker had to raise interest rates to 20% to avert disaster. What happened over the next forty years was mind boggling in its recklessness, shortsightedness, and acquiescence to the Wall Street cabal. These decade-by-decade increases were obscene: 1980               $908B            32% of GDP 1990               $3.2T              54% of GDP 2000               $5.7T              52% of GDP 2010               $13.6T            90% of GDP 2020               $27.8T            129% of GDP Today             $30.3T            130% of GDP Rogoff and Reinhart postulated in 2010 that once a country passes 90% of GDP, economic growth slows dramatically, and the chances of financial crisis increase exponentially. With annual GDP growth of about 2% since 2010, their theory has proven accurate. Now we approach the existential financial crisis which could initiate the “going bankrupt suddenly” phase of our empire of debt. Larry Kotlikoff, Harvard, and Wharton educated economic professor at Boston University, estimates the unfunded welfare liabilities of the United States exceeds $210 trillion. We are a long way from when our Founders handed us a republic. “American money was never more sound, or banking more free, than 200 years ago. Since then, it’s been a long steady decline from the gold standard and competitive banking to our Fed-run system of inflated paper currency, deposit insurance, and perpetually shaky banks on the dole.” – Lew Rockwell There is no conceivable way this debt can ever be repaid, therefore it will not. It’s just pure math, which the average dumbed down American chooses not to question or dispute. In their own lives they need to make enough income to make their mortgage payment and car loan payment. It’s the same for the government. The only way debt obligations can be met is for tax revenue to exceed expenses. Borrowing to make debt and interest payments is unsustainable, reckless, and an example of imperial empire arrogance. The only unknown now is whether the debt is defaulted upon, it is hyperinflated away, or some sort of debt jubilee and currency collapse makes it mute. No matter the solution, the people will bear the brunt of the pain and drastic diminishment of their standard of living. Those in control will position themselves to benefit from whatever scheme is implemented to eliminate the debt. The current trend of running trillions in deficits per year is unsustainable and already resulting in raging inflation, declining GDP, and pushing the world towards a global depression. There is no disputing the facts I have presented. These facts trump the willful ignorance of the masses and the false narratives of the ruling class, along with their media mouthpieces pretending all is well. Those controlling the levers of power know this shitshow can’t go on. They have fully exhausted their propaganda tools, financial derivative schemes, and monetary machinations, leaving them nothing but crashing the system and implementing a Great Reset, which would keep them in control and the rest of us in squalor and subservience. We’ve been on the road to perdition for a long time, but we came to a peak on that highway in 2019 and the path has been straight down since, with our chariot of fire accelerating at breakneck speed towards its final destination with catastrophe and ruin. The rise and fall of the American Empire will be far more rapid than the rise and fall of the Roman Empire. With the inept and reckless leadership in place presently, I only hope we still have a nation after they successfully provoke World War 3. The gradually part of going bankrupt is over. Since the end of fiscal year 2019, our fearless leaders have added $7.6 trillion to the national debt, a 33% increase in less than three years. Meanwhile, the duplicitous Fed has added $5 trillion to their balance sheet, a 125% increase, while keeping interest rates at zero and creating a tsunami of inflation, crushing the poor and middle class. But at least the Wall Street bankers are raking in record bonuses, while still sucking at the teat of Fed QE to infinity. The blatant disregard for the lives of average Americans, while propping up the Wall Street cabal, billionaire oligarchs, and corrupt politicians should be met with pitchforks and torches in a just world. But that is not the world we occupy. The last time inflation was this high (15% as measured in 1980), Volker jacked the Fed Funds rate to 20%. Spineless Jerome Powell has the Fed Funds rate at .33% today. It’s almost as if they are promoting record high inflation to make the national debt load less burdensome. Destroying the finances of hundreds of millions, creating global energy and food shortages, and instigating World War 3 as a consequence of their actions is just a minor irritation for the global elite. In fact, it appears to be part of Schwab’s Great Reset plan. At first it seemed outrageous to think anyone would want famine, starvation, energy shortages, economic depression, and global war, but watching the insane decision making of politicians, trumpeted by the Deep State bootlickers in the media, has convinced me this is chapter 2 in their Great Reset book of horrors. Once you wrap your head around how vile, evil, and demented those who are pulling the strings behind this Great Reset are, your eyes are open to how far they are willing to go to institute their plan. It appears they will stop at nothing, kill as many people as necessary, create maximum chaos and pain, wreck any civic cohesiveness left, and destroy all moral and legitimate norms of society, in order to increase their control, power and wealth on this earth. They hold all the cards. They control the governments, corporations, banks, legacy media, social media, entertainment industries, military industrial complex, sickcare Big Pharma complex, and the mental processes of the masses through their mind control/propaganda technology. Their hubris and arrogance have reached peak altitude and exuberance. They believe they are invincible. That will be their fatal weakness. The sheer cavalcade of lies, misinformation, purposely created chaos, engineered conflict, and financial market manipulation, make the daily intrigues confusing and open to misinterpretation. There are various factions competing to control the future course of history. There is not a clear good versus evil battle underway. Sometimes it is tough to distinguish the New World Order Great Reset crowd from those opposing Schwab and his Davos billionaire satanists. I know we would like to root for the good guys, but there are no good guys running any country on this earth. Only bad guys, willing to sell their souls, are ever elevated to positions of power. They are selected by oligarchs, not elected by the people. The western propaganda spewing media machine specializes in demonizing those they are paid to demonize (Putin, Trump, non-vaxxers), while glorifying anyone the ruling elite have chosen to use to further their agenda (Zelensky, Fauci, vaxxers). Putin is most certainly a bad guy, ruthless in his consolidation of power, serious in enforcing his beliefs through political or military measures, and willing to use any means necessary to achieve his aims. But he is only one of many bad men leading their countries across the globe. The Panama Papers show Zelinsky to be a corrupt puppet of Ukrainian oligarchs. He was a two-bit actor installed by the US, Soros, and NATO to play a role. As a reward, he has millions parked in offshore bank accounts and a $35 million mansion in Florida. He’s such a democratic icon, he’s spent the last eight years bombing Russian speaking civilians in Donbass and Donetsk, and he outlawed all opposition political parties and media outlets last week. It seems our far-left media outlets have no problem supporting actual far-right Nazis in Ukraine, as long as they are paid to do so. They are nothing but faux-journalist whores. The fact is Biden, Trudeau, Macron, Johnson, Erdogan, Xi, and the leaders of every country in the world are bad guys. Venezuela and Iran were evil, until our gas prices hit $4.25 a gallon because of Biden’s Russian sanctions. Now Biden is frantically negotiating with these “bad guys” to get their oil. Orwell nailed it seven decades ago with: “The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.” – Orwell – 1984 We have always been at war with Russia, supporting the noble democracy of Ukraine, and fully supportive of those benevolent dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, and China when in our economic interest, no matter how many people they kill, imprison, or behead. Of course, if you don’t toe the line of the petrodollar, you get Iraq’d, Libya’d, or Syria’d. Those in control of the message just move from villain to villain in the their never ending narrative. First Trump, then Covid, then the anti-vaxxers, and now Putin. The real villains are the media and those who manipulate the minds of the masses to achieve their insidious aims. Hypocrisy is not a characteristic that registers with empires in their late stages. Bribing, bullying, and bombing are what the American Empire does to enforce their waning power upon other nations. The over-the-top sanctions against Russia have accelerated the American decline into bankruptcy, while ignorant Americans remain distracted by their iGadgets, NCAA tournament pools and the latest season of American Idol. Every conflict is manufactured to benefit the global oligarchs, the military industrial complex, and those seeking to keep the masses enslaved in debt and distracted by technology, entertainment, and hatred towards whoever they are directed to hate by the government/media propaganda machine. It’s always about wealth, power, and control. The key financial arrangement sustaining the American Empire, even as it internally crumbles from cultural rot, institutionalized corruption, and glorified ignorance of reality, is the global dominance of the U.S. dollar in trade. This is why the empire’s bankruptcy has been gradual and to many, unnoticeable. But Dementia Joe has accidentally, or purposefully as part of the Great Reset agenda, set in motion the rapid spiral into bankruptcy and collapse of the short-lived America Empire (1946 – 2022). By creating a global energy crisis over a border dispute 6,000 miles from our shores, with no strategic interest to our country, Biden has initiated the final countdown of the petrodollar as the global settlement currency for all energy transactions. Petrodollar warfare has been the policy of the U.S. for decades as economic imperialism has been enforced militarily against Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, and Venezuela. Trying to enforce this policy against Russia will be a bridge too far. And the consequences are already being felt. Biden’s sanctions against Russian energy are backfiring and will bring an end to the petrodollar regime. Russia is demanding payment from Europe for their oil, gas, and coal in rubles, rather than USD. Any propaganda being peddled about the U.S. filling the gap is nothing but bullshit, as proven by this chart:   Via  Eurostat.   Russia supplies 47% of the EU coal demand, 41% of their natural gas demand, and 27% of their oil demand. They will pay Russia in rubles or have their societies grind to a halt, with starvation, chaos, depression, and revolution as the result. This doesn’t even consider Russian wheat and fertilizer exports, vital to Africa and the Middle East. Living within the propaganda bubble encasing the United States, where only the Deep State surveillance state sanctioned narrative is allowed to be broadcast by the dying legacy media and controlled social media propaganda platforms, you would be under the mistaken belief the entire world is in lockstep with Biden and his Great Reset cronies. The vast majority of the world (countries in gray in the map below) are not supporting the sanctions imposed by Biden. As already noted, even the European countries in yellow are ignoring the energy sanctions. Biden has pushed Russia and China closer together, with the petroyuan rising as an alternative to the petrodollar. India has reached agreement with Russia regarding oil imports. Africa and South America, with all their natural resources, have told Biden to shove it. America’s bullying tactics are now giving rise to alternative currency schemes, such as cryptocurrencies and discussions about a gold backed yuan and gold backed ruble. We stand on the precipice of a global conflagration, with talk of nuclear war bantered about by unserious low-IQ government bureaucrats, vacuous bimbo journalists and talking heads on the boob tube, and spurred on by the despicable hero worship of the textbook symbol of this farce – a sitcom actor who played a president in a TV show, funded by a billionaire oligarch, who was installed as president of Ukraine in a campaign funded by that billionaire, has ruled as a U.S. puppet, and who the Hollywood elite wanted to share the stage with the most dim-witted virtue signaling narcissists on the planet at the Oscars to call for the West to intervene in his losing battle and start World War 3. Instead they virtue signaled their support for Zelensky during the ceremonies. The Hollywood elite ignore the actual Nazis fighting for Zelensky, his banning of political opponents and media outlets, and his government not allowing transgenders to flee the country because they are men. He belongs on-stage at the Oscars with the freaks, frauds, degenerates, pedophiles, and hypocritical scumbags who make up the American entertainment industry. He would have gotten a standing ovation for being such a glorious upstanding symbol of democracy, freedom, and the transvestite way. He could have stripped down, grabbed his guitar, and performed for a worldwide audience, while begging for missiles, fighter jets, tanks and drones. We should all be laughing at this farce, but Zelensky and his handlers, Biden and his handlers, along with the other EU/NATO jokers and fools, have chosen to provoke Putin into war, and are now ratcheting up the rhetoric and sanctions to the point where a wider conflict is all but ensured. These reckless psychopaths clearly have not studied history or human nature when it comes to how wars can escalate rapidly with unanticipated outcomes and death on a massive scale. In a recent communication with writer Margaret Anna Alice, she described perfectly why we are headed into a horrific period in history, as the bloodiest chapter of this Fourth Turning hurtles towards its climax: “The lethal combination of incompetency, obliviousness, hubris, psychopathy, narcissism, megalomania, and every other dark triad trait is on full display in those purporting to be our leaders.” With it being quite apparent there are no good guy leaders in the world, trying to figure out the least worst outcome of this current episode of As the World Burns becomes difficult to grasp. I am convinced this engineered conflict in Ukraine is part of the bigger Great Reset plan of the global elites. But writers I respect have differing viewpoints on whether Putin is playing his part in this scheme for a new world order or whether he and Xi are partnering to fight Soros, Schwab, Gates, and the Global Reset co-conspirators. Based on what I’ve observed, I don’t believe all these bad men have the exact same goals for how the world should be run and who should run it. But no matter who wins, the winners want more power, more wealth, more control, and an autocracy, with them calling the shots. When I take into account all that has happened since 2014, who has been calling the shots, who was getting paid off, and the families implicated in this Ukrainian debacle, I conclude the Great Reset collaborators see this war as the next step (after the Covid scamdemic) in their Great Reset – purposely provoking Putin into attacking and now believing they can bleed him dry by funneling arms and cash into Ukraine. Why did the Clinton Foundation receive more “donations” from the Ukraine, prior to the 2014 CIA coup, than any country on earth? Biden was involved in the coup to overthrow a democratically elected president, friendly towards Russia. There was no conflict within Ukraine prior to the coup. No death. No destruction. So, who is to blame for the bloodshed now? It’s not Putin. Biden’s crackhead son raked in millions from selling influence to the “Big Guy”, with the U.S. installed puppet presidents doing as they were told by Soros and his U.S. surveillance state agents. There has been a simmering conflict since Putin annexed Crimea, shortly after the coup, and Ukraine began attacking the eastern Russian speaking provinces. The ratcheting up of attacks in those eastern provinces and the rhetoric about Ukraine joining NATO is what provoked Putin to attack. Despite the all-out propaganda campaign, Russia is winning and will win against Ukraine alone. This is the point in history when the Great Reset acolytes have decided they can accomplish multiple goals by turning Ukraine into a nightmarish quagmire of death and destruction, fueled by a never ending flow of armaments into this war zone, as a means to overthrow Putin, create food shortages, raise the cost of fossil fuels to astronomical heights, implement further restrictions on civil rights, increase technological controls over the populace, and institute a Chinese like social credit scoring system to enforce obedience and compliance with government demands. The Ukrainian people are just cannon fodder to these evil men. After two years of demanding submission from the peasants regarding lockdowns, masking and vaccine mandates, the ruling elite believe they will be able to enforce food and energy restrictions with the same ease upon the American people. This is where I believe their master plan goes awry. Putin will not be cowed by Biden’s toothless sanctions, empty threats, and pathetic tough guy rhetoric. He will use any means necessary to defeat his foes. Economic sanctions are an act of war. Supplying his enemy with weapons to kill Russians is an act of war. NATO and the U.S. are one miscalculation away from starting WW3. At a minimum, Biden has pushed China and Russia into closer cooperation as a new economic bloc. Biden’s weakness and inability to comprehend global strategy has probably convinced China they can annex Taiwan without the U.S. intervening in a meaningful way, other than easily avoided sanctions and threats. The new world order may end up revolving around China, with Russia and India as strategic partners and the U.S. and EU as outcasts. The underlying anger in the country is bubbling to the surface. The raging inflation is crushing poor and middle-class families. Food and energy are the two largest monthly expenditures for families struggling to survive in this Federal Reserve induced billionaire boom society. When diesel fuel supplies dwindle to nothing, destroying our just in time, truck dependent supply chain, and real food shortages start inflicting real pain, civil disobedience and rioting will occur which will make the BLM riots looks like child’s play. When people no longer have anything to lose, they will lose it and start looking for the culprits who stole their livelihoods and future. I don’t believe their propaganda machine will be able to convince the masses this was the fault of Trump or right wing conspiracists. Their pain and suffering are due to Federal Reserve bankers, corrupt politicians of the uni-party, and the media who has lied to them non-stop for the last decade. Woke is going to mean something different in the near future. Pugnacious Putin has unwittingly, or possibly purposefully, initiated the “sudden” phase of the demise of the crumbling American Empire. A PR campaign and “USD subsidies” (aka bribes) to foreign countries will not save us now. Biden lit the fuse, and it is just a matter of when it blows. And does it just blow up the remnants of our empire, or the whole world? No one knows the answer to that question, but the future of civilization on earth depends on the answer. Most of the world continues to go about their daily lives staring at their phones, oblivious to the danger of having angry senile sociopaths and egomaniacal billionaires controlling the use of nuclear weapons. We are one rash arrogant choice by a low IQ psychopath politician from the final scene in the Planet of the Apes. “You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!” – George Taylor Are we destined to be victims? This Ukraine war has revealed both parties fully support never ending war. Left and right media outlets have been spewing the anti-Russian propaganda in lockstep. What has been set in motion will not be fixed at the ballot box, as if voting matters anymore in this empire of lies and deceit. Armed insurrection would not prevail with the current configuration of our society. The only option is to organize in local communities of like-minded people to try and survive the coming storm. Get out of cities. Prep as much as you are able, with enough food, water, and fuel to sustain your family for an extended period of time. Stock up on guns, ammo, cash, gold, silver, and barterable items. On whatever plot of land you occupy, try to raise some food, and if possible become friendly with local farmers. No one can escape what is coming, as it will be global in nature, but you can take steps now to increase your chances of survival. Our republic has degenerated into despotism, we’ve willingly relinquished our freedoms and liberties for the supposed safety and security of a Big Brother surveillance state, and now we will suffer the consequences of these cowardly actions. Life in America is about to become far harder than our generations of snowflakes ever anticipated. Those with no survival skills will not survive. If you are not prepared in mind, body, and spirit for what is coming, your future will be bleak. Only those already awake are likely to read this anyway, so good luck and Godspeed to you all. “A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”  - John Adams “Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.” -  Aristotle *  *  * The corrupt establishment will do anything to suppress sites like the Burning Platform from revealing the truth. The corporate media does this by demonetizing sites like mine by blackballing the site from advertising revenue. If you get value from this site, please keep it running with a donation. Tyler Durden Mon, 03/28/2022 - 17:40.....»»

In 2016, researchers found unexplained connections between a Trump Organization server and the Russian Alfa Bank. They remain a mystery. John Durham in 2006. AP Photo/Bob Child In 2016, researchers found unexplained connections between a Trump Organization server and the Russian Alfa Bank. Special Counsel John Durham indicated a lawyer last month, accusing him of lying about the story's origins. Several investigations have produced different explanations for the server connections, but they remain unresolved. See more stories on Insider's business page. In September, the Justice Department brought an indictment against a cybersecurity lawyer with connections to the Democratic Party, accusing him of lying to the FBI in 2016 when he peddled a story about how the Trump Organization had hidden connections with a Russian bank.The charges came from an investigation led by John Durham, who former Attorney General Bill Barr had appointed to investigate the origins of the FBI investigation into former President Donald Trump's ties to Russia.As president, Trump hoped that Durham would "go after" former FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and others he blamed for the Mueller probe. For vague reasons, he also wanted Durham to investigate former President Barack Obama and now-President Joe Biden, his opponent in the 2020 presidential election. Barr appointed Durham as special counsel, ensuring that the investigation would continue after Biden took office.The recent indictment gave oxygen to Trump supporters who saw the Mueller investigation as a "witch hunt," but legal experts are skeptical about the charges. The indictment also fails to resolve one of the lingering mysteries from the 2016 election, first laid out in a Slate article: Why was there a digital connection between a Trump Organization server and a Russian bank in the first place?Mysterious connections between 'mail1.trump-email.com' and a Russian bankIn 2016, cybersecurity researchers at Georgia Tech and the information security firms Neustar and Zetalytics made an unusual finding.They found that between May and July 2016, a server belonging to the Trump Organization had been communicating almost exclusively with a server belonging to the medical company Spectrum Health, as well as two servers belonging to Alfa Bank, the largest financial institution in Russia.The researchers - who The New York Times has identified as Zetalytic chief data scientist April Lorenzen and Georgia Tech computer scientists Manos Antonakakis and David Dagon - made their findings by studying DNS (Domain Name System) logs, which records device connections over the internet. The logs included a server with the name "mail1.trump-email.com," which had been registered to the Trump Organization. US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands at a joint press conference in Helsinki, Finland, on July 16, 2018. Chris McGrath/Getty Images The researchers also found that a Russian-made smartphone seldom seen in the US had been used on networks that had also been used by people at the White House and Trump Tower, according to the Times.The group shared their findings with Rodney Joffe, who was an executive at Neustar, an information security firm that provided the DNS logs the researchers used. Joffe is a cybersecurity expert in his own right, having worked for the Justice Department for 12 years and received an award from the FBI in 2013 for helping crack cybercrimes. None of the data allowed for researchers to see the actual contents of the communications between the purported Trump Organization server and the server belonging to Alfa Bank. So Joffe gave the information about the mysterious connections to his lawyer, Michael A. Sussman, who shared them with the FBI.Three possible explanations for the mysterious connectionsDurham's indictment claims Sussman misled the FBI about his clients, saying he represented not just Joffe but also Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign.Sussman had represented the Democratic National Committee in 2016 for issues related to Russia's hacking of its servers. The Durham indictment says Sussman billed the Clinton campaign, not Joffe, for his discussions regarding the mysterious server connections.But the indictment does not deny that those connections existed. And while the Mueller report found numerous links between Trump associates and Russian officials, there remains no definitive explanation of the server communications.Over the past four years, cybersecurity researchers and government investigations have settled on several theories for the links:The Trump Organization and Alfa Bank had secret communications and took steps to obfuscate them. The group of researchers who uncovered the connections in the first place put forward this hypothesis.The communications were initiated by Hospitality Marketing, a third-party email marketing firm used by the Trump Organization to send mass marketing emails for its hotels. According to a Senate Intelligence Committee report, Jae Cho, the Trump Organization's corporate IT director, as well as Alfa Bank gave this explanation. But there are a few wrinkles:The Senate report partially redacts the section discussing its findings regarding the server links, so we don't have a full understanding of its conclusion.The FBI settled on a similar explanation, according to a 2016 New York Times article, but later Justice Department investigations didn't embrace the finding.A 500-page 2019 Justice Department Inspector General report that said the FBI found no cyber links between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank but did not put forth the marketing email explanation.The Mueller investigation found that Alfa Bank officials with links to the Russian government had sought connections with Trump, but the investigation's report did not address the server issue.There "was likely human interaction and coordination" between people working for the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank. This was the finding of a separate Senate analysis, commissioned by the Armed Services Committee.According to the analysis, the Trump Organization-registered server wasn't configured to send mass emails. It had actually been configured to receive emails, unlike most marketing servers, and had internet activity that wasn't consistent with what would be expected from marketing emails, the analysis found.While the report found that Choe's explanation didn't entirely stand up, it didn't put forth a comprehensive alternative explanation.Joffe also provided the researchers' findings about the Russian-made smartphone to the CIA, according to the New York Times. It's not clear whether the agency ever investigated those findings.Durham may be using the indictment to tell a storyThe indictment Durham filed in September spends pages and pages alleging an alternative history for how the Trump Organization-Alfa Bank story came to be.It's what Lawfare's Benjamin Wittes refers to as a "speaking indictment" used by prosecutors to tell a larger story to the public. And according to the story set forth in Durham's indictment, the kerfuffle about Trump Organization's server's connections with Alfa Bank were advanced by the Clinton campaign, not independent researchers. The Alfa Bank logo is seen on top of a building in Kiev. Pavlo Gonchar/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images Will this "speaking indictment" actually result in a conviction against Sussman? Legal experts told Insider's C. Ryan Barber that Durham will have a tough time. The indictment names only one witness, who has given different characterizations of Sussman's role over time. Sussman has pleaded not guilty to the charges against him."The cynic in me says they don't care if they lose, they just want all this backstory to get out there. They don't care about Sussmann," Barbara McQuade, a former US attorney, told Insider. "What they really want is to get this whole backstory to get out about how these tech experts were trying to poison public opinion about Donald Trump and his ties to a Russian bank."The researchers who first observed the connections between the servers still apparently believe in their hypothesis that Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization may had covered up communications between them."The findings of the researchers were true then and remain true today; reports that these findings were innocuous or a hoax are simply wrong," lawyers for Dagon told the Times.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Soros-Aligned Texas DA Sidesteps Removal Trial By Resigning, Announces Senate Run Against Ted Cruz Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), A George Soros-aligned Texas district attorney who faced removal from office for failing to prosecute cases, including high-profile cases of murder and rape, has resigned. George Soros arrives to deliver a speech on the sideline of the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 24, 2019. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images) Nueces County District Attorney Mark Gonzalez, a Democrat, announced his resignation in a Sept. 5 letter to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, who will name his replacement. At the same time, Mr. Gonzalez announced a run for U.S. Senate to unseat Republican Senator Ted Cruz, according to local media. Mr. Gonzalez sidestepped a civil lawsuit scheduled in December to remove him from office for "incompetence and official misconduct under the guise of prosecutorial discretion" and failure to give bond. The lawsuit claimed Mr. Gonzalez "nullified" the law, abused his authority, and violated his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitutions and laws of the United States and Texas. The complaint was initially filed in January by Citizens Defending Freedom state director Colby Wiltse, a resident of Nueces County. County attorney Jenny Dorsey endorsed the filing in February, allowing it to move forward. "This is a great day for justice in Nueces County," Mr. Wiltse said in a statement after Mr. Gonzalez made his announcement. "Mark Gonzalez, like many of the Soros-aligned District Attorneys across the country, redefined the role of the district attorney in the name of social justice, often at the cost of public safety in the communities they swear an oath to protect." In his resignation letter, Mr. Gonzalez criticized "MAGA-aligned political radicals" working to oust him—an apparent harbinger of his Senate run. Colby Wiltse asks members of a School Health Advisory County during an April 10, 2022 meeting to reject a sex ed curriculum proposed for ages 15–19 in public schools in Corpus Christi, Texas. (Courtesy of Colby Wiltse, executive director of County Citizens Defending Freedom, Nueces County) Colby Wiltse asks members of a School Health Advisory County during an April 10, 2022 meeting to reject a sex ed curriculum proposed for ages 15–19 in public schools in Corpus Christi, Texas. (Courtesy of Colby Wiltse, executive director of County Citizens Defending Freedom, Nueces County) In the letter, Mr. Gonzalez said he refused "to play this rigged Republican game, particularly considering the Republicans' hypocrisy, as their presumptive presidential nominee is under indictment in four jurisdictions across this beautiful country and no less revered." Mr. Gonzales, who pleaded guilty to a DWI at 19, painted himself in the letter as a man of the people who had overcome a privileged system skewed to reward the rich. "They want to use me as a sacrificial lamb to send a foreboding message to other duly elected DAs in Texas who exercise their discretion, intending to chill their constitutional and statutory authority to dispense their job duties as they see fit," he stated. Mr. Gonzalez, a poster boy for Fair and Just Prosecution funded by Democrat mega-donor Soros, was accused of mishandling several high-profile cases as a Texas DA. Delayed justice One involved the 2016 murder of Breanna Wood, 21, whose body was discovered wrapped in plastic inside a box at an abandoned oil field trailer near Robstown, Texas, according to local news reports. Law enforcement charged Wood's ex-boyfriend, Joseph Tejeda, with her murder. The victim was discovered with a gunshot wound to the back of her head and broken arms, according to court records. But more than five years after the murder, Mr. Tejeda and two other defendants had not been tried in the case that had initially involved the arrest of seven people. The victim's mother, Fallon Wood, became frustrated and spoke about the delays exacerbated by the pandemic as the cases stalled. In October 2021, Ms. Wood alleged Mr. Gonzalez blocked her personal email address, according to local news accounts. As a result, Ms. Wood filed a grievance with the Texas Attorney General's Office and the Texas State Bar. The Texas Attorney General's Office eventually took over the case. Mr. Tejeda pleaded guilty on Aug. 11 to murder charges and received a 25-year sentence. Lost evidence The case against a Corpus Christi obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Juan Villarreal, accused of sexually assaulting more than a dozen women, was dismissed in February after the Nueces County district attorney's office allegedly lost evidence. The lawsuit to remove Mr. Gonzalez contends he failed to establish proper procedures for handling evidence in the case with 14 alleged victims of sexual assault. Some 865 felony-level cases were dismissed between 2021-2022 under Mr. Gonzales's watch, including attempted murder, aggravated assault, sexual assault, family violence, and aggravated robbery, according to the lawsuit. Almost 2,000 misdemeanors, including family violence, assault, and DUIs, were dismissed during the same period, the lawsuit stated. It will be up to Mr. Abbott's office to appoint a new district attorney. The resignation marks a victory for conservatives who have become increasingly alarmed by Soros-aligned DAs that critics say ignore victims while coddling criminals in the name of social justice. Conservatives have launched recall campaigns, such as the one that successfully removed San Franciso DA Chesa Boudin, or taken legal action against several. Farida Baig, whose father Shahid Ali Baig was murdered in 1980, speaks at a press conference by supporters of an effort to recall Los Angeles District Attorney Gascon in Los Angeles on Dec. 6, 2021. (Mario Tama/Getty Images) However, proponents of prison reform believe ending mass incarceration is the civil rights issue of our time. Groups like The Sentencing Project contend the justice system is racist and must be abolished. Mr. Gonzalez, who already launched a Senate campaign video, was recently touted in Rolling Stone as an abortion rights champion who refused to prosecute women seeking abortions, which are now illegal in Texas. He told the publication that as a father of four girls, no man or legislator should be able to tell them "what to do with their bodies." It's still being determined if Mr. Gonzalez's resignation will take effect immediately, according to Ms. Dorsey, who, as county attorney, is awaiting direction from Mr. Abbott's office. "We are all finding that out together. We are waiting to hear how the governor is going to move forward," she said. The governor's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Tyler Durden Sun, 09/10/2023 - 11:30.....»»

Daniel Ellsberg's death at a 92 was announced Friday. The history-making whistleblower leaked the Pentagon Papers in 1971. Former Pentagon employee Daniel Ellsberg poses for photographs in central London, November 1, 2004. REUTERS/Stephen Hird SH/ASA/DL Daniel Ellsberg, the whistleblower behind the Pentagon Papers, died at 92, his family said Friday. Ellsberg is remembered as an anti-war hero who demanded consequences for abuses of power. He faced trials in Boston and Los Angeles on federal charges for espionage and theft. NEW YORK (AP) — Daniel Ellsberg, the history-making whistleblower who by leaking the Pentagon Papers revealed longtime government doubts and deceit about the Vietnam War and inspired acts of retaliation by President Richard Nixon that helped lead to his resignation, has died. He was 92.Ellsberg, whose actions led to a landmark First Amendment ruling by the Supreme Court, had disclosed in February that he was terminally ill with pancreatic cancer. His family announced his death Friday morning in a letter released by a spokeswoman, Julia Pacetti."He was not in pain, and was surrounded by loving family," the letter reads in part. "Thank you, everyone, for your outpouring of love, appreciation and well-wishes to Dan in the previous months. It all warmed his heart at the end of his life."Until the early 1970s, when he disclosed that he was the source for the stunning media reports on the 47-volume, 7,000-page Defense Department study of the U.S. role in Indochina, Ellsberg was a well-placed member of the government-military elite. He was a Harvard graduate and self-defined "cold warrior" who served as a private and government consultant on Vietnam throughout the 1960s, risked his life on the battlefield, received the highest security clearances and came to be trusted by officials in Democratic and Republican administrations.He was especially valued, he would later note, for his "talent for discretion."But like millions of other Americans, in and out of government, he had turned against the yearslong war in Vietnam, the government's claims that the battle was winnable and that a victory for the North Vietnamese over the U.S.-backed South would lead to the spread of communism throughout the region. Unlike so many other war opponents, he was in a special position to make a difference."An entire generation of Vietnam-era insiders had become just as disillusioned as I with a war they saw as hopeless and interminable," he wrote in his 2002 memoir, "Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers." "By 1968, if not earlier, they all wanted, as I did, to see us out of this war."The Pentagon Papers had been commissioned in 1967 by then-Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara, a leading public advocate of the war who wanted to leave behind a comprehensive history of the U.S. and Vietnam and to help his successors avoid the kinds of mistakes he would only admit to long after. The papers covered more than 20 years, from France's failed efforts at colonization in the 1940s and 1950s to the growing involvement of the U.S., including the bombing raids and deployment of hundreds of thousands of ground troops during Lyndon Johnson's administration.Ellsberg was among those asked to work on the study, focusing on 1961, when the newly-elected President John F. Kennedy began adding advisers and support units.As much as anyone, Ellsberg embodied the individual of conscience — who answered only to his sense of right and wrong, even if the price was his own freedom. David Halberstam, the late author and Vietnam War correspondent who had known Ellsberg since both were posted overseas, would describe him as no ordinary convert. He was highly intelligent, obsessively curious and profoundly sensitive, a born proselytizer who "saw political events in terms of moral absolutes" and demanded consequences for abuses of power.As much as anyone, Ellsberg also embodied the fall of American idealism in foreign policy in the 1960s and 1970s and the upending of the post-World War II consensus that Communism, real or suspected, should be opposed worldwide.The Pentagon Papers were first published in The New York Times in June 1971, with The Washington Post, The Associated Press and more than a dozen others following. They documented that the U.S. had defied a 1954 settlement barring a foreign military presence in Vietnam, questioned whether South Vietnam had a viable government, secretly expanded the war to neighboring countries and had plotted to send American soldiers even as Johnson vowed he wouldn't.The Johnson administration had dramatically and covertly escalated the war despite the "judgment of the Government's intelligence community that the measures would not" weaken the North Vietnamese, wrote the Times' Neil Sheehan, a former Vietnam correspondent who later wrote a Pulitzer Prize-winning book on the war, "A Bright Shining Lie."The leaker's identity became a national guessing game and Ellsberg proved an obvious suspect, because of his access to the papers and his public condemnation of the war over the previous two years. With the FBI in pursuit, Ellsberg turned himself in to authorities in Boston, became a hero to the antiwar movement and a traitor to the war's supporters, labeled the "most dangerous man in America" by National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, with whom Ellsberg had once been friendly.The papers themselves were seen by many as an indictment not just of a given president or party, but of a generation of political leadership. The historian and philosopher Hannah Arendt would note that growing mistrust of the government during the Vietnam era, "the credibility gap," had "opened into an abyss.""The quicksand of lying statements of all sorts, deceptions as well as self-deceptions, is apt to engulf any reader who wishes to probe this material, which, unhappily, he must recognize as the infrastructure of nearly a decade of United States foreign and domestic policy," she wrote.The Nixon administration quickly tried to block further publication on the grounds that the papers would compromise national security, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the newspapers on June 30, 1971, a major First Amendment ruling rejecting prior restraint. Nixon himself, initially unconcerned because the papers predated his time in office, was determined to punish Ellsberg and formed a renegade team of White House "plumbers," endowed with a stash of White House "hush money" and the mission of preventing future leaks."You can't drop it," Nixon fumed privately to his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. "You can't let the Jew steal that stuff and get away with it. You understand?"Ellsberg faced trials in Boston and Los Angeles on federal charges for espionage and theft, with a possible sentence of more than 100 years. He had expected to go to jail, but was spared, in part, by Nixon's rage and the excesses of those around him. The Boston case ended in a mistrial because the government wiretapped conversations between a defense witness and his attorney. Charges in the Los Angeles trial were dismissed after Judge Matthew Byrne learned that White House "plumbers" G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt had burglarized the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist in Beverly Hills, California.Byrne ruled that "the bizarre events have incurably infected the prosecution of this case."Meanwhile, the "plumbers" continued their crime wave, notably the June 1972 break-in of the Democratic Party's national headquarters, at the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C. The Watergate scandal didn't prevent Nixon from a landslide reelection in 1972, but would expand rapidly during his second term and culminate in his resignation in August 1974. U.S. combat troops had already left Vietnam and the North Vietnamese captured the Southern capital, Saigon, in April 1975."Without Nixon's obsession with me, he would have stayed in office," Ellsberg told The Associated Press in 1999. "And had he not been removed from office, he would have continued the bombing (in Vietnam)."Ellsberg's story was depicted in the 2009 documentary "The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers." The movie had its West Coast premiere only a few blocks from the Rand Corp. headquarters in Santa Monica, Ellsberg former workplace. He sent college students with fliers to urge old colleagues to attend the screening, but none attended.Ellsberg was born in Chicago in 1931, to Jewish parents who converted to Christian Science. His father was an unemployed engineer in the early years of the Great Depression and the family later moved to suburban Detroit, where his father worked in a plant making B-24 bombers. Daniel held vivid memories of learning that the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941, and of reports of the Nazis bombing London and the U.S. bombing Germany and Japan.In his teens, Ellsberg found himself in agreement with Harry Truman and other "Cold War liberals," believing in civil rights and economic justice at home, and containing the Soviet Union overseas. He was also shaped profoundly by personal tragedy. During a car trip in 1946, his father nodded off at the wheel and crashed into a sidewall, killing Ellsberg's mother and younger sister. Ellsberg would look back with a sense of loss and mistrust — his father, the authority figure, had failed to keep his family safe.With thoughts of becoming a labor organizer, Ellsberg won a scholarship to Harvard University and graduated summa cum laude. He served in the Marines as an act of defiance against his Ivy League background, but eventually returned to Harvard and earned a doctorate in economics. In 1959, he became a strategic analyst at the Rand Corp., a global policy think tank based in Santa Monica, California, and consulted for the Defense Department and the White House on nuclear weapons, nuclear war plans and crisis decision-making. Ellsberg spent two years in the mid-1960s with the State Department in Vietnam, where he learned first-hand how casually military and political officials lied and became convinced the conflict was unwinnable, in part through the firefights with the North Vietnamese that he survived.Encouraged by a close friend from Rand, researcher Anthony J. Russo, Ellsberg had decided by the fall of 1969 that the Nixon administration would continue the policies of other presidents and that the McNamara study needed to be seen. His life would soon resemble an espionage thriller.Ellsberg removed some of the bound, classified volumes from his safe in the Rand offices, placed them in his briefcase and walked past security guards and a sign reading "Loose Lips Sink Ships." With Russo's girlfriend owning an advertising agency, Ellsberg spent months copying the documents on an office Xerox machine, sometimes helped by his teenage son Robert. On occasion, the office alarm would mistakenly ring, police would show up, and leave soon after. Ellsberg became so worried that he began slicing off the "Top Secret" markings from the papers, in case authorities wanted to inspect more closely.Leaking to the Times was not his first choice. He had hoped that government officials, including Kissinger, would read the study and realize the war was hopeless. Legislators turning him down included Sen. William J. Fulbright of Arkansas, the longtime chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. George McGovern of South Dakota, who in 1972 would run for president as an antiwar candidate.A final plot twist was unknown to Ellsberg until decades later. He had showed some of the report to Marcus Raskin and Ralph Stavins of the liberal think tank the Institute for Policy Studies before approaching Sheehan. Only in the early 2000s did he learn that Raskin and Stavins, who had recommended that he speak with Sheehan, had already given some of the papers to the Times reporter. Sheehan, who died in 2021, also defied Ellsberg's request not to make duplicate copies and did not give him advance notice before the first Times report ran."It was just luck that he didn't get the whistle blown on the whole damn thing," Sheehan later said of Ellsberg, whom he regarded as "out of control."In his later years, a spry, silver-haired Ellsberg became a prominent free speech and anti-Iraq war activist, drawing parallels between U.S. involvement in Iraq and Vietnam, and called for impeachment of President George W. Bush. He expressed similar fears about Afghanistan during the Obama administration, saying it had the potential to become "Vietnamistan" if the U.S. increased troops there.He was active in campaigns to prevent nuclear arms proliferation and drew upon his history in government for the 2017 book "The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner," in which he included a once-top secret document showing that the U.S. had considered launching nuclear attacks on the Chinese in 1958. He also defended other leakers and whistleblowers, among them WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden, the government contractor who disclosed details of secret U.S. surveillance programs and is now living in Russia."Many of the people whistle-blowers work with know the same things and actually regard the information in the same way — that it's wrong — but they keep their mouths shut," Ellsberg told The New York Times in 2023.On Friday, Snowden tweeted that he had spoken with Ellsberg last month and found him more concerned about the world's fate than about his own."He assessed the risk of a nuclear exchange to be escalating beyond 10%," Snowden wrote. "He had hoped to dedicate his final hours to reducing it, for all those he would leave behind. A hero to the end."Ellsberg is survived by his second wife, the journalist Patricia Marx, and three children, two from his first marriage. He and Marx wedded in 1970, the year before the Pentagon Papers were made public. In a New York Times wedding announcement, he was identified as a "senior research fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Center for International Studies, where he was writing a critical study of United States involvement in Vietnam."Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Donald Trump faces a total of 91 counts in 5 indictments in criminal cases all handed down this year in New York, Georgia, Florida, and Washington DC. Former President Donald Trump has been indicted five times, facing a total of 91 criminal charges in four cases.Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA/Pool/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images Former President Donald Trump now faces a shocking total of 91 criminal counts against him.  The nearly 100 felony counts stem from five indictments in four criminal cases handed down this year.  Trump is the first and only former president to be charged criminally.  Donald Trump is now facing 91 criminal charges across five indictments — a whopping total for the first ex-president to face criminal prosecution. The massive number of charges stems from four criminal indictments filed against Trump this year by both state and federal authorities. Hush-money settlement to Stormy DanielsThe first criminal case against trump is a state case connected to a $130,000 hush-money payment to the adult film actress Stormy Daniels.Trump was indicted in March for his alleged role in the payment and is expected to go to trial in March 2024.The charges are: 34 counts of falsifying business records.Classified documentsIn a June indictment, federal prosecutors alleged Trump took classified documents with him from the White House to Mar-a-Lago, then tried to foil the government's efforts to get them back. He was charged with 37 felonies in that case over the alleged "willful retention of national defense information."Later that month, a superseding indictment in the case dropped, adding three additional counts against the former President, bringing the total in the classified documents case to 40. That case goes to trial in May 2024. The charges are: 32 counts of willful retention of national defense information for alleged violations of the Espionage Act.1 count of conspiracy to obstruct justice.1 count of withholding a document or record1 count of corruptly concealing a document or record1 count of concealing a document in a federal investigation1 count of scheme to conceal1 count of false statements and representations1 count of altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing an object1 count of altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing a document, record, or other objectJanuary 6 Capitol insurrection Trump was hit with four charges in connection with his involvement in the January 6 Capitol riot and his attempt to overturn the 2020 election in August. The indictment also mentioned six co-conspirators who weren't indicted.The trial date for the case hasn't been set. The charges are:One count of conspiracy to defraud the United States.One count of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.One count of obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.One count of conspiracy against rights. Georgia false electors On Monday, Trump was indicted in Georgia in connection with his attempts to overturn the 2020 election in the state. Trump faces 13 felony charges in the RICO case — a type of criminal case usually used against organized crime — and 18 other Trump allies were also charged.The charges include: One count of violation of the Georgia RICO Act. Three counts of solicitation of violation of oath by public officer. Two counts of conspiracy to commit false statements and writings. Two counts of conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree. Two counts of false statements and writings.One count of conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer. One count of conspiracy to commit filing false documents. One count of filing false documents. That comes to a grand total of 91 felony counts against the former president, who is running for the GOP nomination to take back the White House in 2024. He could face years of both federal and state prison time if he is convicted on one — or many — of these 91 counts., but he'd still be able to run for office and even be president if he were convicted.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

What Really Happened On January 6 Authored by Douglas Schwartz via AmericanThinker.com, Much of the January 6, 2021 mythology is wrong, on the right and left.   The J6 relevance continues, as the basis for Trump's impeachment and indictment.   Tucker Carlson's unaired interview with Steven Sund, Capitol Police chief on J6, is probative.  Carlson intended to air the interview the day he was fired.  Sund, and the sergeants at arms of the House and Senate, "resigned" on January 7.  These lifelong, consummate law enforcement professionals were at the top of their profession.  Carlson elicited Sund's insistence he was denied intelligence indicating that wholesale violence was planned: "This didn't have to happen.  Everything appears to be a cover-up."   Sund reported that the crowd was filled with federal agents during "a planned, coordinated attack."  Carlson just re-interviewed Sund.  (Must viewing.)   Carlson: "a systematic denial of intelligence and support."  Were these three officials fired to create convenient scapegoats?  Was the intent to silence them before installing compliant replacements?  Pelosi's J6 committee destroyed evidence.  Sund revealed that whistleblowers have been forced out (Capitol employees lack whistleblower protections). Many on the right assume that everyone indicted was innocent of seditious conspiracy.  The original and superseding indictments of Oath Keepers defendants appear to dispel that idea:  While certain Oath Keepers members and affiliates inside of Washington, D.C., breached the Capitol grounds and building, others remained stationed just outside of the city in QRF [Quick Reaction Force] teams.  The QRF teams were prepared to rapidly transport firearms and other weapons into Washington, D.C., in support of operations aimed at using force to stop the lawful transfer of presidential power.   The indictments describe individuals playing Rambo, with firearms, ammo, encrypted messaging, short-wave radios, scopes, military attire, and night-vision devices, much of this stashed across the Potomac in Virginia.  They split into two attention-grabbing "stacks" for their Capitol assault: Members of Stack One ... equipped themselves with communication devices and reinforced vests, helmets, goggles, and other tactical gear. ... Stack Two ... equipped themselves with battle apparel and gear, including hard-knuckle tactical gloves, tactical vests, ballistic goggles, radios, chemical sprays ... fatigues, goggles, scissors, a large stick, and [an] 82-pound German Shepherd. ... Sometime on or after January 6, 2021, RHODES deleted from his cellular telephone certain media, files, and communications that showed his involvement in the conduct alleged.  On January 8, 2021, RHODES encouraged co-conspirators to delete media, files, and communications that showed their involvement in the conduct alleged herein. Oath Keepers leader Rhodes made purchases of firearms and related equipment totaling $22,000 in the week before J6.  In the eight days afterward (pre-inauguration), another $17,000 was spent.  Many suspected Yale Law grad Rhodes of being an agent provocateur, an assumption now unclear after his 18-year sentence.  The total indicted is 1,105 and climbing weekly, after "the largest criminal investigation in U.S. history." Only 17 were charged with seditious conspiracy: Oath Keepers and Proud Boys.  Hardly a vast right-wing conspiracy.  The current Capitol Police chief is fuming at Carlson for characterizing the protest as largely peaceful.  Both are correct.  There were two sets of protesters: the 99.9% peaceful and the violent. On January 7, prior to being canned, Sund released an official statement: United States Capitol Police officers and our law enforcement partners responded valiantly when faced with thousands of individuals involved in violent riotous actions as they stormed the United States Capitol Building.  These individuals actively attacked United States Capitol Police Officers and other uniformed law enforcement officers with metal pipes, discharged chemical irritants, and took up other weapons against our officers. ... This was an attack ... was pre-planned, and involved participants from a number of states who came well equipped, coordinated, and prepared to carry out a violent insurrection at the United States Capitol.  I witnessed insurgents beating police officers with fists, pipes, sticks, bats, metal barricades, and flag poles.  These criminals came prepared for war.  They came with weapons, chemical munitions and explosives.  They came with shields, ballistic protection, and tactical gear.  They came with their own radio system to coordinate the attack, as well as climbing gear and other equipment to defeat the Capitol's security features. Was this a MAGA crowd or experienced, organized Antifa subversives?  Congress reconvened that evening, finishing certifying Electoral College results at 3:44 A.M.  In debate remarks, Representative Matt Gaetz stated: I don't know if the reports are true, but The Washington Times just reported some pretty compelling evidence from a facial recognition company showing that some people who breached the Capitol today were not Trump supporters.  They were masquerading as Trump supporters, and, in fact, were members of the violent terrorist group Antifa. The truth was known then and has since been buried.  Sund's 400-page book released in January relates a bizarre December 31 call from an agitated Maxine Waters:  Representative Waters then asked what seemed like the most random question: What were we going to do "to prevent protesters from climbing on top of the Capitol?"  She's concerned about people climbing on the building? ... We had never had protesters climb on top of the Capitol. Waters's prescience was fascinating.  FBI director Wray was evasive in congressional testimony.  Firing the three law enforcement officials provides additional evidence of a cover-up to permit narrative engineering.  The media worked overtime to deny Antifa connections, referring to "the Antifa lie."  The facts are known: federal actors were present in force, perhaps coordinating with Antifa (AKA rebranded violent commies).  Even false-flag Antifa were present. Communist agitators have long subverted Washington protests.  President Hoover on the 1932 Bonus March: I wish to state emphatically that the extraordinary proportion of criminal, Communist, and nonveteran elements amongst the marchers as shown by this report, should not be taken to reflect upon the many thousands of honest, law-abiding men who came to Washington with full right of presentation of their views to the Congress.  This better element and their leaders acted at all times to restrain crime and violence, but after the adjournment of Congress a large portion of them returned to their homes and gradually these better elements lost control.  This report should correct the many misstatements of fact as to this incident with which the country has been flooded. President Trump could state much the same.  Hoover estimated that over 900 Bonus Marchers were "ex-convicts and Communists." Until Republicans awaken, false-flag ambushes will repeat.  Nineteen thirty-two's conspirators were outside government; today's are embedded.  The J6 "select" committee, like the Warren Commission, served to obfuscate.  The truth finally leaked out on August 3.  It was an inside job.  Mitch McConnell was in the middle of it.  Actions of the DHS were beyond suspicious.  Rhodes's stacks served to attract maximum attention.  Like Ray Epps, Rhodes never entered the building.  Some who should have been arrested have been ignored.  Not one Antifa asset has been prosecuted.  Much violence was instigated by police, perhaps inadvertently. There is still more to discover.  Twenty twenty election fraud, COVID tyranny, and J6 chaos suggest sophisticated, orchestrated operations, related aspects of desperate efforts to Keep America Crooked.  That desperation leaves telltale evidence. Tyler Durden Sun, 08/13/2023 - 12:45.....»»

Ellsberg's death at a 92 was announced Friday. The history-making whistleblower leaked the Pentagon Papers in 1971. Former Pentagon employee Daniel Ellsberg poses for photographs in central London, November 1, 2004. REUTERS/Stephen Hird SH/ASA/DL Daniel Ellsberg, the whistleblower behind the Pentagon Papers, died at 92, his family said Friday. Ellsberg is remembered as an anti-war hero who demanded consequences for abuses of power. He faced trials in Boston and Los Angeles on federal charges for espionage and theft. NEW YORK (AP) — Daniel Ellsberg, the history-making whistleblower who by leaking the Pentagon Papers revealed longtime government doubts and deceit about the Vietnam War and inspired acts of retaliation by President Richard Nixon that helped lead to his resignation, has died. He was 92.Ellsberg, whose actions led to a landmark First Amendment ruling by the Supreme Court, had disclosed in February that he was terminally ill with pancreatic cancer. His family announced his death Friday morning in a letter released by a spokeswoman, Julia Pacetti."He was not in pain, and was surrounded by loving family," the letter reads in part. "Thank you, everyone, for your outpouring of love, appreciation and well-wishes to Dan in the previous months. It all warmed his heart at the end of his life."Until the early 1970s, when he disclosed that he was the source for the stunning media reports on the 47-volume, 7,000-page Defense Department study of the U.S. role in Indochina, Ellsberg was a well-placed member of the government-military elite. He was a Harvard graduate and self-defined "cold warrior" who served as a private and government consultant on Vietnam throughout the 1960s, risked his life on the battlefield, received the highest security clearances and came to be trusted by officials in Democratic and Republican administrations.He was especially valued, he would later note, for his "talent for discretion."But like millions of other Americans, in and out of government, he had turned against the yearslong war in Vietnam, the government's claims that the battle was winnable and that a victory for the North Vietnamese over the U.S.-backed South would lead to the spread of communism throughout the region. Unlike so many other war opponents, he was in a special position to make a difference."An entire generation of Vietnam-era insiders had become just as disillusioned as I with a war they saw as hopeless and interminable," he wrote in his 2002 memoir, "Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers." "By 1968, if not earlier, they all wanted, as I did, to see us out of this war."The Pentagon Papers had been commissioned in 1967 by then-Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara, a leading public advocate of the war who wanted to leave behind a comprehensive history of the U.S. and Vietnam and to help his successors avoid the kinds of mistakes he would only admit to long after. The papers covered more than 20 years, from France's failed efforts at colonization in the 1940s and 1950s to the growing involvement of the U.S., including the bombing raids and deployment of hundreds of thousands of ground troops during Lyndon Johnson's administration.Ellsberg was among those asked to work on the study, focusing on 1961, when the newly-elected President John F. Kennedy began adding advisers and support units.As much as anyone, Ellsberg embodied the individual of conscience — who answered only to his sense of right and wrong, even if the price was his own freedom. David Halberstam, the late author and Vietnam War correspondent who had known Ellsberg since both were posted overseas, would describe him as no ordinary convert. He was highly intelligent, obsessively curious and profoundly sensitive, a born proselytizer who "saw political events in terms of moral absolutes" and demanded consequences for abuses of power.As much as anyone, Ellsberg also embodied the fall of American idealism in foreign policy in the 1960s and 1970s and the upending of the post-World War II consensus that Communism, real or suspected, should be opposed worldwide.The Pentagon Papers were first published in The New York Times in June 1971, with The Washington Post, The Associated Press and more than a dozen others following. They documented that the U.S. had defied a 1954 settlement barring a foreign military presence in Vietnam, questioned whether South Vietnam had a viable government, secretly expanded the war to neighboring countries and had plotted to send American soldiers even as Johnson vowed he wouldn't.The Johnson administration had dramatically and covertly escalated the war despite the "judgment of the Government's intelligence community that the measures would not" weaken the North Vietnamese, wrote the Times' Neil Sheehan, a former Vietnam correspondent who later wrote a Pulitzer Prize-winning book on the war, "A Bright Shining Lie."The leaker's identity became a national guessing game and Ellsberg proved an obvious suspect, because of his access to the papers and his public condemnation of the war over the previous two years. With the FBI in pursuit, Ellsberg turned himself in to authorities in Boston, became a hero to the antiwar movement and a traitor to the war's supporters, labeled the "most dangerous man in America" by National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, with whom Ellsberg had once been friendly.The papers themselves were seen by many as an indictment not just of a given president or party, but of a generation of political leadership. The historian and philosopher Hannah Arendt would note that growing mistrust of the government during the Vietnam era, "the credibility gap," had "opened into an abyss.""The quicksand of lying statements of all sorts, deceptions as well as self-deceptions, is apt to engulf any reader who wishes to probe this material, which, unhappily, he must recognize as the infrastructure of nearly a decade of United States foreign and domestic policy," she wrote.The Nixon administration quickly tried to block further publication on the grounds that the papers would compromise national security, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the newspapers on June 30, 1971, a major First Amendment ruling rejecting prior restraint. Nixon himself, initially unconcerned because the papers predated his time in office, was determined to punish Ellsberg and formed a renegade team of White House "plumbers," endowed with a stash of White House "hush money" and the mission of preventing future leaks."You can't drop it," Nixon fumed privately to his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. "You can't let the Jew steal that stuff and get away with it. You understand?"Ellsberg faced trials in Boston and Los Angeles on federal charges for espionage and theft, with a possible sentence of more than 100 years. He had expected to go to jail, but was spared, in part, by Nixon's rage and the excesses of those around him. The Boston case ended in a mistrial because the government wiretapped conversations between a defense witness and his attorney. Charges in the Los Angeles trial were dismissed after Judge Matthew Byrne learned that White House "plumbers" G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt had burglarized the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist in Beverly Hills, California.Byrne ruled that "the bizarre events have incurably infected the prosecution of this case."Meanwhile, the "plumbers" continued their crime wave, notably the June 1972 break-in of the Democratic Party's national headquarters, at the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C. The Watergate scandal didn't prevent Nixon from a landslide reelection in 1972, but would expand rapidly during his second term and culminate in his resignation in August 1974. U.S. combat troops had already left Vietnam and the North Vietnamese captured the Southern capital, Saigon, in April 1975."Without Nixon's obsession with me, he would have stayed in office," Ellsberg told The Associated Press in 1999. "And had he not been removed from office, he would have continued the bombing (in Vietnam)."Ellsberg's story was depicted in the 2009 documentary "The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers." The movie had its West Coast premiere only a few blocks from the Rand Corp. headquarters in Santa Monica, Ellsberg former workplace. He sent college students with fliers to urge old colleagues to attend the screening, but none attended.Ellsberg was born in Chicago in 1931, to Jewish parents who converted to Christian Science. His father was an unemployed engineer in the early years of the Great Depression and the family later moved to suburban Detroit, where his father worked in a plant making B-24 bombers. Daniel held vivid memories of learning that the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941, and of reports of the Nazis bombing London and the U.S. bombing Germany and Japan.In his teens, Ellsberg found himself in agreement with Harry Truman and other "Cold War liberals," believing in civil rights and economic justice at home, and containing the Soviet Union overseas. He was also shaped profoundly by personal tragedy. During a car trip in 1946, his father nodded off at the wheel and crashed into a sidewall, killing Ellsberg's mother and younger sister. Ellsberg would look back with a sense of loss and mistrust — his father, the authority figure, had failed to keep his family safe.With thoughts of becoming a labor organizer, Ellsberg won a scholarship to Harvard University and graduated summa cum laude. He served in the Marines as an act of defiance against his Ivy League background, but eventually returned to Harvard and earned a doctorate in economics. In 1959, he became a strategic analyst at the Rand Corp., a global policy think tank based in Santa Monica, California, and consulted for the Defense Department and the White House on nuclear weapons, nuclear war plans and crisis decision-making. Ellsberg spent two years in the mid-1960s with the State Department in Vietnam, where he learned first-hand how casually military and political officials lied and became convinced the conflict was unwinnable, in part through the firefights with the North Vietnamese that he survived.Encouraged by a close friend from Rand, researcher Anthony J. Russo, Ellsberg had decided by the fall of 1969 that the Nixon administration would continue the policies of other presidents and that the McNamara study needed to be seen. His life would soon resemble an espionage thriller.Ellsberg removed some of the bound, classified volumes from his safe in the Rand offices, placed them in his briefcase and walked past security guards and a sign reading "Loose Lips Sink Ships." With Russo's girlfriend owning an advertising agency, Ellsberg spent months copying the documents on an office Xerox machine, sometimes helped by his teenage son Robert. On occasion, the office alarm would mistakenly ring, police would show up, and leave soon after. Ellsberg became so worried that he began slicing off the "Top Secret" markings from the papers, in case authorities wanted to inspect more closely.Leaking to the Times was not his first choice. He had hoped that government officials, including Kissinger, would read the study and realize the war was hopeless. Legislators turning him down included Sen. William J. Fulbright of Arkansas, the longtime chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. George McGovern of South Dakota, who in 1972 would run for president as an antiwar candidate.A final plot twist was unknown to Ellsberg until decades later. He had showed some of the report to Marcus Raskin and Ralph Stavins of the liberal think tank the Institute for Policy Studies before approaching Sheehan. Only in the early 2000s did he learn that Raskin and Stavins, who had recommended that he speak with Sheehan, had already given some of the papers to the Times reporter. Sheehan, who died in 2021, also defied Ellsberg's request not to make duplicate copies and did not give him advance notice before the first Times report ran."It was just luck that he didn't get the whistle blown on the whole damn thing," Sheehan later said of Ellsberg, whom he regarded as "out of control."In his later years, a spry, silver-haired Ellsberg became a prominent free speech and anti-Iraq war activist, drawing parallels between U.S. involvement in Iraq and Vietnam, and called for impeachment of President George W. Bush. He expressed similar fears about Afghanistan during the Obama administration, saying it had the potential to become "Vietnamistan" if the U.S. increased troops there.He was active in campaigns to prevent nuclear arms proliferation and drew upon his history in government for the 2017 book "The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner," in which he included a once-top secret document showing that the U.S. had considered launching nuclear attacks on the Chinese in 1958. He also defended other leakers and whistleblowers, among them WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden, the government contractor who disclosed details of secret U.S. surveillance programs and is now living in Russia."Many of the people whistle-blowers work with know the same things and actually regard the information in the same way — that it's wrong — but they keep their mouths shut," Ellsberg told The New York Times in 2023.On Friday, Snowden tweeted that he had spoken with Ellsberg last month and found him more concerned about the world's fate than about his own."He assessed the risk of a nuclear exchange to be escalating beyond 10%," Snowden wrote. "He had hoped to dedicate his final hours to reducing it, for all those he would leave behind. A hero to the end."Ellsberg is survived by his second wife, the journalist Patricia Marx, and three children, two from his first marriage. He and Marx wedded in 1970, the year before the Pentagon Papers were made public. In a New York Times wedding announcement, he was identified as a "senior research fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Center for International Studies, where he was writing a critical study of United States involvement in Vietnam."Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

The Strange Pandemic Of 'White' Disparagement Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness, All of a sudden, the obsession with whites as a Satanic collective has become a national fad... One of the tenets of the early civil rights movement some 65 years ago was ending racial stereotyping. When Martin Luther King, Jr. called for emphasizing the “content of our character” over “the color of our skin,” the subtext was “stop judging people as a faceless collective on the basis of their superficial appearance and instead look to them as individuals with unique characters.” It is tragic that King’s plea for an integrated, assimilated society, in which race became incidental, not essential to our personas, has mostly been abandoned by the Left in favor of racial stereotyping, collective guilting, and scapegoating by race and gender. Indeed, many of the old Confederate pathologies—fixation on racial essence, obsession with genealogy, nullification of federal laws, states’ rights, and segregated spaces and ceremonies—are now rehabilitated by woke activists. In that larger landscape, the collective adjective and noun “white” now has also been redefined and mainstreamed as a pejorative to the point of banality. “White” followed by a string of subsequent oppressive nouns—“rage,” “supremacy,” “privilege”—has become a twitch on campus. Diversity, equity, and inclusion deans and provosts cannot write a memo, issue a communique, or sign a directive without a reference to “white” something or other. Like the mysterious omnipresence of transgenderism in popular culture, all of a sudden, the obsession with whites as a Satanic collective has become a national fad—a pet-rock or hula-hoop-like collective madness. Yet such an addiction remains bizarre in a variety of ways. Millions in the present are now to be libeled as oppressors by the contemporary self-described oppressed—supposedly for what some whites who are mostly now dead once did to now mostly dead others. Yet what does “white” really mean anymore? Is it an adjective or noun indicating color? Culture? Race? Ethnicity? Is white defined as three-quarters, one-half, or one-quarter paleness? Is it an overarching state of mind that encompasses both “Duck Dynasty” and “The West Wing”? Certainly, in a multiracial, intermarried nation, with 50 million residents not even born in America, the term is a construct that can mean almost anything and thus nothing much at all. Hispanics are often lumped in with other “marginalized” peoples as part of the vast diversity coalition. Yet most Latinos are indistinguishable from Italian-, Arab-, Greek- or Portuguese-Americans, who, in turn, are all usually considered part of the “white” majority. Does a mere accent mark or trilled “R” transmogrify a blue-eyed Argentinian-American into the preferred nonwhite, diversity collective? In our crazy racially categorized society, had George Zimmerman just adopted his maternal surname Mesa and Hispanicized George to Jorge, then a “Jorge Mesa” might not have been so easily demonized as what the New York Times slurred as a “white” Hispanic following his deadly confrontation with Trayvon Martin in 2012.  The controversial City University of New York firebrand and graduation speaker Fatima Mousa Mohammed recently railed against capitalism, Zionism, Israel—and, of course, “white supremacy.” Yet she herself is whiter than white. She is now an elite with a law degree. Is she then a beneficiary of “white privilege”? Or do her radical politics trump skin color and earn her exemption? Is a snarly, divisive Joe Biden, barking at the moon about “ultra-MAGA” and “semi-fascist” white monsters, then, not a purveyor and beneficiary of white supremacy by virtue of his woke politics? I know a lot of white mechanics, forklift drivers, and assembly workers. I have never heard one employ one of Biden’s racial putdowns like “boy” or “junkie.” Do they enjoy white privilege in some way the Biden family consortium does not—despite Joe’s past fulsome praise of iconic segregationists or his Corn-Pop fables of black youth petting his golden hairs on his sun-tanned white legs, or Hunter’s taboos about dating Asian women? “The View’s” Sonny Hostin has created a mini-career in imaging all the ways in which she can smear “white” women as demonic (“White women, in particular, want to protect this patriarchy”) as she thinks up new Hitlerian gas metaphors of dehumanization, such as white women resembling “roaches voting for Raid.” When the media wishes to attack black conservatives like Larry Elder, it now can call them “white supremacists.” When it wishes to warp the news for its woke agendas, it assures us that a Latino mass-murderer was a “white supremacist” and then, in Pavlovian fashion, academics follow with essays assuring us that their “research” proves Hispanics too can be white supremacists. The creation of false racial identities is an accurate touchstone of perceived collective racialized privilege. “Passing” for white in the racist days of Jim Crow reflected a means of escaping racist segregation and discrimination for blacks. Now the increasing trend of whites seeking to pass for nonwhites—Elizabeth Warren, Ward Churchill, Rachel Dolezal—reflects a self-interested and careerist assessment that nonwhite status is advantageous. In college admissions, are applicants more likely to massage a non-white or white identity for perceived advantage? Is the racist ossified “one-drop rule” or “one-sixteenth” genealogy now rebooted as helpful proof of proving white or nonwhite heritage? Then we come to the absurdity of lumping together 330 million diverse Americans, with ancestries that are often quite antithetical—Serbians and Albanians, Turks and Armenians, Israelis and Syrians, Germans and French. Are all these ancient antagonists reduced now to white automatons of a sinister collective borg? Arrive as an immigrant from Hungary or Estonia, and—presto!—you are culpable for creating supposed monsters of the past like Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, whose statues must be toppled or defaced? Arrive the same day from Oaxaca and you are somehow exempt from such reparatory burdens? Immigration, at least, is immune from the academic perversion of research, and simply reflects realities on the ground. Millions of immigrants instinctively vote with their feet. We are told the U.S. current population is 67 percent to 70 percent “white” while yearly immigrants, legal and illegal, may total upwards of 90 percent nonwhite. But how is this paradox possible? Given the loud global warnings about “white rage” and “white supremacy,” why would millions of nonwhites risk their lives to reach a country where they would be assured of being subservient to “white privilege”? Can it instead be true that they simply do not believe what media and political elites tell them, given they have learned from prior immigrants that far from being at risk, they will have opportunities impossible in their native countries? Do not new arrivals risk their lives to enter the United States because they rightly assume that a so-called white majority country strangely, unlike their own tribal homelands in China or Mexico, does not fixate on race but instead encourages those who do not look like the majority to join their commonwealth—in a way the Mexican Constitution, for example, traditionally did not? Class apparently now means nothing. Does the white mechanic in Provo supposedly think like the Pelosi family—as a fellow “white” person? Are Barack Obama’s “clingers,” Hillary Clinton’s “deplorables” and “irredeemables,” and Joe Biden’s “semi-fascists,” “Ultra-MAGAs,” “dregs,” and “chumps” all of the same mentality? Do they share the same values as those embraced by Hunter Biden, Jane Fonda, and Adam Schiff, by virtue of some mystical bonds of whiteness? Where are the data to support the charge of imperious whiteness? Do so-called raging whites commit hate crimes in numbers greater than their demographics? In fact, they are underrepresented. Do purported whites hunt down people of color as if we are all living in 1920s rural Mississippi? In fact, in relatively rare interracial violent crime, whites are up to 10 times more likely to be victims of black- or Hispanic-perpetrated violence than agents themselves of interracial assault. Do white supremacists send poor people of color abroad, as often argued, to die in rich white men’s wars? In fact, white males died in Iraq and Afghanistan at twice their numbers in the general population. Is that asymmetry proof of what Mark Milley and Lloyd Austin pontificated about in fixating on white privilege? How do we adjudicate or define “proportionate representation”? What is disproportionate? Would it be the more than 70 percent of African Americans in many professional sports at six times their percentages of the population? Or perhaps the current admission statistics of the incoming class at Stanford University, where the university boasts that just 22 percent of its 2026 class is so-called white? Is it white privilege, rage, or supremacy that explains why seven of the current 25 cabinet and cabinet-level secretaries of the U.S. government are heterosexual white males? Does white privilege reveal why Asian Americans, on average, enjoy an annual median household income some $25,000 higher than their white counterparts? Are whites, by virtue of their supposed privileged caste, immune from suicide? In fact, the so-called white suicide rate is more than double the rate of blacks and Hispanics. Do supremacy and privilege explain why two-thirds of the annual opioid overdose deaths are among whites? Perhaps to substantiate the boilerplate of “white supremacy” and “white rage,” we might look to efforts at retro-segregation? Are privileged whites insisting on white-only college graduations? Perhaps they are demanding set-aside spaces on campuses, where they feel “safer” and can enjoy racial affinities and solidarity by excluding others? In fact, there are racially segregated spaces on campuses, but they tend to exclude whites. Perhaps the Left means white supremacy is a euphemism for a return to segregated housing and redlined neighborhoods. In fact, there are racially segregated dorms on campuses, the so-called “theme houses,” but again these were demanded by nonwhites. We are told that it is not safe for the diverse to be around white people, given their supposed violent proclivities. But that certainly seems not to be the case for our elites. The Obamas often lecture the country on housing discrimination and the historic efforts of whites to self-congregate and exclude. But the ex-president owns four expensive homes, in Kalorama D.C., Martha’s Vineyard, Hawaii, and Chicago. Yet he is least likely to reside in his richly diverse Chicago neighborhood and apparently feels more at home with the mostly white neighbors of his other three estates. Indeed, some of the most severe critics of “white privilege” and “white rage” are themselves ensconced in white neighborhoods, such as the Duchess of Sussex or LeBron James. When Oprah Winfrey damns white supremacy in graduation speeches, is her subtext a snarl at her fellow billionaire neighbors in Montecito? So what is going on with the contemporary fixation on white, white, white? Why are there so many Duke Lacrosse, Covington kids, Tawana Brawley, and Jussie Smollett cases, as if the dearth of white oppressors and the multitude of would-be oppressed requires the fabrication of so-called white hate crimes? Why does Joe Biden lecture the country on its supposedly greatest terrorist threat of “white supremacy”—this from the most racialist president of the modern era, who sets himself up as the judge of who is and who “ain’t black”? This rebooted white collective stereotype seems to be the obsession of two general groups. One cadre is the elite professional, left-wing whites. By any definition of income and status, its members are quite blessed and privileged. For them, voicing the new white pejorative is a sort of psychological mechanism that excuses their own guilt-ridden privilege, by fobbing purported toxic “whiteness” onto an amorphous “semi-fascist” other, while virtue signaling they are not like “them.” “Them,” of course, are those who live and work in places like East Palestine, Ohio, and who have zero privilege but, by the Obama-Clinton-Biden standards, are culturally and socially deplorable. Such “white rage” and “white supremacist” mantras are also careerist cues that signal, as with party membership of the old Soviet nomenklatura, that they are correct and now audited for raises, promotions, and rewards.  The second group is composed of the wealthy, left-wing minority elites in politics, media, entertainment, sports, and government service. For the Al Sharptons and “squad” members of the world, damning “white, white, white” bogeymen alleviates them of any painful analysis of inequality, such as the role of endemic illegitimacy and absent fathers in nearly ensuring a lack of parity. It is hard work to buck the teachers’ unions and set up K-12 charter schools in the inner city that focus on math, science, and languages to ensure parity. But it is easy and cheap—and far more lucrative—to blast the SAT test as “racist” and demand reparative admissions to Yale or Harvard. For the racialist careerist, the less racism there is to find, all the more essential it is to root it out somehow, somewhere. So, here arrives a new genre of manufactured hate crimes, whose logic is “even if it did not happen, it reminds us that it could have happened.” The dearth of actual racism also demands a new set of adjectives that serve as something like sophisticated detectors to discover otherwise invisible natural gas fumes. The adjective “systemic” means only the select can now spot racism. Like air, it is everywhere but invisible and thus requires battalions of diversity, equity, and inclusion inspectors to use their training to expose it in the common atmosphere. “Microaggressions” exist as a tacit admission there are no aggressions as we commonly define them. No matter—there are still hints that there might be some racial aggression, once experts redefine words and gestures to ferret out micro-racists in our midst. Where does this all lead? We are wasting trillions of dollars in capital, labor, and time in tribal cannibalism as our friends abroad watch in horror, and our enemies savor our decline into collective suicide—while we sink into debt, our cities turn medieval, our border disappears, our criminal justice system collapses, and our military chases its tail. We know from history the ultimate destination of tribal chauvinism, and it is not pretty. Once a society retribalizes, it descends into a Hobbesian war of all against all. Everyone eventually seeks out or manufactures a tribal identity for self-protection. Tribalism operates on the principles of proliferation: if a neighboring nation goes nuclear, then everyone in the neighborhood must too. Unless some passengers on our runaway train force our engineers to hit the brakes, we are headed over the cliff into Yugoslavia. Tyler Durden Mon, 06/05/2023 - 17:40.....»»

The Voter Registration Machine Flipping The States Blue Authored by Hayden Ludwig via American Greatness, New documents reveal the Center for Election Innovation and Research’s true purpose: Juicing Democrat registration in the states, thanks to data provided by ERIC. In modern elections, the candidate who can turn out the bigger base is usually the winner. Put differently, the campaign with better voter data holds the trump card. For more than a decade now, Democrats unquestionably have owned that trump card and used it to carve deep inroads into once solidly red states such as Arizona, North Carolina, and Georgia, while Republicans have looked on in bafflement. It’s no secret why the Left is winning elections despite shrinking in the polls: They register new voters in droves, and conservatives do not. More than 160 million people cast a ballot in the 2020 election. Yet there may be as many as 60 million more eligible-but-unregistered individuals (EBUs) out there—people who could lawfully vote but may not until they register in their state. They’re typically hard to reach and politically disinterested. Yet the party that can tap into this electoral goldmine—that is, identify and reach these potential voters—would be unbeatable. For years, that party has been the Democrats. It may soon be the Republicans. Here’s why. Permanent Democratic Power In 2010, the Supreme Court ushered in a torrent of new political spending through its Citizens United v. FEC decision. “Progressives” who were convinced that big business would back Republicans to the hilt saw doom written on the wall. To counter this Republican tide, groups such as the Brennan Center proposed adding “millions of new voters onto the rolls through a modernized registration system—starting in 2010.” In short, they needed to balloon the Democratic Party’s ranks to survive a GOP onslaught—an onslaught that never came. “Voter registration modernization” proved a euphemism for inserting operatives into state election machinery. But EBU data is protected behind layers of federal privacy laws and across multiple state agencies (e.g. motor vehicle departments) and thus not available to political groups. It was Pew Charitable Trusts, a powerful left-of-center funder, that discovered the back door. Between 2010 and 2012, Pew incubated the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit that billed itself as the solution to an entirely different problem presented to the states: Maintaining their voter rolls, which are notoriously inaccurate and constantly in flux. For a fee, ERIC would graciously warehouse states’ voter roll data and identify potential double voters using sophisticated data-matching software. That’s the sales pitch, anyway. In truth, ERIC makes the removal of ineligible voters entirely optional and tedious, while mandating member states spend hundreds of thousands in taxpayer dollars to register new voters. Far from streamlining voter rolls, ERIC expands them, which is why non-ERIC states have cleaner rolls than their ERIC counterparts. More furtively, ERIC would also gain access to invaluable data on tens of millions of EBUs—a database that no other group in the world has access to. But how to use it? Project Get-Out-The-Vote We know from public records requests that ERIC soon established a data-sharing agreement with a heretofore obscure nonprofit, the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR). Amazingly, the corporate leftist media continues to claim this inconvenient fact is “without evidence.” ERIC and CEIR share a founder: David Becker, a partisan elections lawyer who previously worked for the far-left People for the American Way and the Justice Department’s voting rights arm. Becker is well known as a “hardcore leftist” who can’t “stand conservatives.” Yet Pew presented him as the nonpartisan face of its ERIC project. Becker spent four years persuading nearly two-thirds of the states to join ERIC before departing to found CEIR in 2016. Yet until recently, Becker remained a nonvoting member of ERIC’s board, courtesy of a carve-out in ERIC’s bylaws made specifically for him to ensure continued oversight of the ostensibly “neutral” and state-led organization. If ERIC is the face presentable to election officials, CEIR is Becker’s policy shop. The group was founded with seed capital from the Hewlett Foundation and eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, who routed the cash through Arabella Advisors’ massive “dark money” network. More funding may have come from Pew, which continued to fund CEIR’s “sister” group, ERIC, for years. We know that CEIR’s other co-founder, Amy Cohen, led Pew’s Google-funded Voting Information Project, part of the “voter registration modernization” push. Yet strangely, Cohen never appears in CEIR’s disclosures as a paid employee, perhaps because her salary was paid by Pew. CEIR supports vote-by-mail expansion and ever-earlier voting. It also pushes the lie that conservatives and Trump supporters are a threat to election workers while barring center-right reporters from its press conferences. Becker himself dismisses critics as “fueled by disinformation” because we “want our democracy to fail.” CEIR received $70 million from Mark Zuckerberg in 2020, funds that drove Democratic turnout in Maryland and helped subsidize ERIC’s voter registration mandate in other states. Pennsylvania received $13 million, Michigan $12 million, New York $5 million, Georgia $5.6 million, and Arizona $4.8 million. How each grant was spent remains largely unknown, despite watchdog groups’ best efforts. But CEIR’s founding documents reveal the truth about its origins. It was created to encourage ERIC membership and “work closely with ERIC” to register millions of new voters using exclusive EBU data in order to “turn non-voters into active participants” in future elections. Imagine having a picture-perfect map of everyone—both registered and unregistered—living within your state’s borders. A campaign knows that an individual’s age, race, county of residence, and marital status are enough to strongly indicate how that person will vote. How difficult would it be to only target your own party’s likely voters? Armed with this near-perfect picture of every person living in ERIC’s 32 member states—more than 200 million Americans—there is nothing stopping CEIR from doing it exactly that: registering only its preferred voters. If that sounds far-fetched, consider that in 2020 alone, the left-wing groups funneled $434 million through a vast array of tax-exempt nonprofits, such as Stacey Abrams’ Fair Fight in Georgia, that do nothing but register new Democrats. Virtually all of that money came from the Tides, Ford, Open Society, Wyss, and Buffett Foundations, among other donors supposedly engaged in charity. These organizations would be near-worthless without EBU data, which is only available through ERIC. So where do they acquire it? The smart money would pin it on Becker’s CEIR. CEIR operates virtually in the dark with little scrutiny from the “progressive” press, who are less interested in covering CEIR’s misdeeds than covering for them. Contrast that with the work of investigative reporters like Todd Shepherd of the right-leaning outlet Broad + Liberty. He recently reported that Pennsylvania transferred partial data profiles of hundreds of thousands of EBUs to CEIR in 2020. That information would have proved invaluable to partisan groups active in Pennsylvania that year. Yet CEIR refuses to say what it did with the trove of voter data. But CEIR’s founding documents give us every reason to believe this is precisely what it’s doing. It’s up to Becker and Co. to convince the public that it isn’t misusing this priceless data, despite having the means, motive, and opportunity to do so. A Right-Wing Wrecking Ball So what can conservatives do to level the playing field? A good axiom in warfare applies here: Turn your enemy’s strength into his greatest weakness.  Japan famously turned many Pacific islands into impenetrable fortresses in World War II and dared U.S. forces to attack them. Instead, we sailed around them to take weaker targets and let the garrisons starve. After Rome’s devastating defeat at the hands of Hannibal’s mighty army in the Second Punic War, Rome divided its legions into smaller forces to cover more ground. Like wolves wearing out a bear, they could be everywhere while the Carthaginians could not. Hannibal lost.  Likewise, we won’t defeat this powerful cabal in a single battle, but by nibbling it to death. The House should demand to know why the IRS refuses to strip these groups of their tax exemption for trespassing the law on biased voter registration campaigns. Conservative legislatures ought to hold hearings on out-of-state nonprofits running partisan registration drives in their jurisdiction. The states can tighten rules about who gets to register voters the same way they restrict ballot harvesting—either restricting it to family members or banning it altogether. Where there’s room for abuse, the Left will abuse the law. Watchdogs and citizens can and should file complaints with the IRS and FEC against these groups. Conservatives are used to being attacked for their political views; very few leftists have ever faced the same kind of scrutiny. They can also demand 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) groups’ annual Form 990 disclosures, which reveal how much they took in and spent. (Here is a template and some guidelines.) To date, nine states—Ohio, Florida, Missouri, West Virginia, Louisiana, Texas, Iowa, Alabama, and Alaska—have left or are about to leave ERIC. Their leaders know that they don’t need ERIC to maintain good voter rolls because they already have the tools necessary for the job. That leaves Arizona, Georgia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin for election integrity advocates to address. The good news? In almost all cases, the decision to leave ERIC is entirely within the purview of the governor and secretary of state. Red states with a blue governor can look to the others on this list for legislation to leave ERIC without the governor’s consent. Every one of these states to depart is one less state transmitting EBU data to the Left’s registration machine. Tyler Durden Fri, 05/12/2023 - 19:00.....»»

If convicted, Amazon Labor Union vice president Derrick Palmer may be ineligible to serve in union leadership. Amazon Labor Union vice president Derrick Palmer stands at a bus stop in front of the Amazon warehouse he helped unionize in 2022.Erika Martinez/Insider Police bodycam video shows Derrick Palmer, the vice president of the Amazon Labor Union, admitting to strangling his girlfriend. If convicted, he could face the possibility of being barred from serving as a union officer. The criminal case comes amid tumult and disputes within the union about its leadership. The second-highest-ranking official in the Amazon Labor Union is facing felony charges over claims that he strangled his girlfriend last year, according to police records and body-cam video obtained by Insider.Derrick Palmer, the union's vice president, was indicted in New Jersey in October on two counts of second-degree aggravated assault, according to previously unreported court documents from Union County Superior Court. The indictment accused him of strangling a domestic partner twice in the same evening in early May 2022.If convicted, Palmer could be barred from union leadership roles under a 1959 federal law that prevents people convicted of certain violent offenses from serving as union officers for up to 13 years, though it's not clear whether that law will apply — or be enforced — in this specific scenario. The charges against Palmer are the latest potentially damaging revelation about the leadership of the Amazon Labor Union, the only union to successfully organize an Amazon facility. The grassroots labor organization won a landmark vote at a Staten Island warehouse last year, vaulting Palmer and union president Chris Smalls to national fame.Their unlikely victory over a company that has spent tens of millions of dollars on union-busting activities landed the "two best friends" on Time Magazine's list of the 100 most influential people of 2022, with a profile written by Bernie Sanders. But in recent months, cracks have begun to appear in the duo's image.Last month, Insider reported that Smalls had been caught on video fighting an Amazon employee outside the Staten Island warehouse. The video also showed Palmer restraining the employee as Smalls hit him. Smalls was arrested last year on assault allegations unrelated to the fight outside the warehouse and taken to court over some $20,000 in overdue child support, which he eventually paid. Some core union members are questioning Smalls' leadership, saying he seems more focused on fame than a union contract.Insider's reporting also raised questions about how the union spent the more than $400,000 it raised on GoFundMe, more than half of which is not accounted for in the union's required financial disclosures. Smalls previously declined to comment to Insider on the record regarding his arrest and late child support payments, and said his fight outside the warehouse "isn't news for the public."Palmer, who continues to work at Amazon's Staten Island fulfillment center, has a lower profile than Smalls. But Palmer, Smalls, and two other early Amazon Labor Union supporters launched a nonprofit that aims to start labor organizing workers at companies other than Amazon, according to an interview with one of its founders and the nonprofit's incorporating documents.Palmer speaks at a union rally in April 2022.Seth Wenig/APWhen reached via email by Insider for comment on the charges against Palmer, Smalls responded: "Listen I'm so sick of your racism stop contacting me about nonsense." He added, "Stop attacking Black leaders because you have nothing better to write about for Christ sake and leave me the fuck alone."Palmer's attorney, Pamela Brause, declined to comment. Palmer did not respond to questions.Bodycam footage from a late-night domestic disturbance callAt about 1:30 a.m on May 4, 2022, police were called to an apartment complex in Elizabeth, New Jersey where Palmer lived with his girlfriend. Body camera footage obtained by Insider shows four officers entering a unit with broken glass on the floor and overturned furniture. Yelling can be heard in the background.The video shows the officers encountering Palmer and his girlfriend arguing in a bedroom, at which point they separate them. Insider is not naming the woman because she is alleged to be a victim of domestic violence. She did not respond to multiple requests for comment. In the video, Palmer told the officers that his girlfriend pushed him, threw glass items at him, and kicked in the bedroom door during the course of their fight.The woman told the officers that Palmer had repeatedly assaulted her. "He's constantly putting his hands on me, God as my witness," she said. "He grabs my neck sometimes, he pushes me to the fucking wall, I'm not even joking. He punches on me, like, this is not a joke." On that night, she said, Palmer had strangled her for "a good 10 seconds," causing her to wave her arms to indicate that she couldn't breathe. She said she didn't pass out, but later told investigators she felt "dizzy" and "lightheaded."The video shows Palmer acknowledging that he choked and pushed his girlfriend."Did you choke her? Did you push her back?" one officer asked."I did, I'm not gonna lie," Palmer replied. "But it's like yo, why you hitting me? Why you throwing stuff at me?"On the body camera footage, police can be heard saying they didn't see marks on Palmer's girlfriend's neck. Their written report, however, says "red welts" eventually developed on her neck, and police took three photos of the marks. The city of Elizabeth refused to provide the photos to Insider, citing state law barring the release of investigative records.Palmer was arrested shortly thereafter. The video doesn't show him being advised of his right to remain silent, which could render his statements inadmissible. His attorneys, in court papers, have indicated that they may raise that as an issue.Palmer, left, and Amazon Labor Union president Chris Smalls arrive at an Ebony magazine gala in October 2022.Robin L Marshall/Getty ImagesProsecutors take strangulation seriously in New Jersey, said Andrew Olesnycky, a defense lawyer who previously supervised domestic violence cases as a Union County prosecutor. He noted that in 2021, the state made strangulation punishable by up to 10 years in prison."Strangulation has been identified as one of the greatest red flags of future serious harm, up to and including homicide," said Olesnycky, who clarified that he was speaking generally and not about the case against Palmer.Federal law may prevent Palmer from leading the ALUProsecutors have offered Palmer a plea deal, according to court documents. If he accepts prosecutors' bargain, Palmer would plead guilty to third-degree aggravated assault with a domestic violence surcharge, spend up to 364 days in a Union County jail, and agree to attend a diversion program for perpetrators of domestic assault.But the case might not end there for Palmer.A 1959 law, passed amid a backlash to organized labor's rising influence, bars people who have been convicted of a range of criminal offenses from serving as a union officer. Among the criminal convictions that can result in union officers being removed from their roles are "assault which inflicts grievous bodily injury" and "assault with intent to kill."It's not clear whether the initial charges against Palmer or the plea offer meet either of those standards. The Office of Labor-Management Standards, an agency within the Department of Labor, determines whether a criminal conviction meets the standards laid out in the law for the removal of a union officer. That ruling can also be appealed. It is "really rare" for union officers to be removed due to an assault conviction, said John Logan, a professor at San Francisco State University's school of labor and employment studies. Historically, union officers removed under the law have been convicted of fraud, embezzlement, or extortion, Logan said. If Palmer is convicted, and the government deems him ineligible for union leadership, it's not clear who could take his place. According to the ALU's constitution, board vacancies "shall be filled by appointment by the President," who is Smalls.Do you have a tip or insight to share? Contact reporter Jack Newsham via the encrypted messaging app Signal (+1-314-971-1627) or email  (jnewsham@insider.com).Contact reporter Katherine Long via Signal (+1-206-375-9280) or email (klong@insider.com).Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

If convicted, Amazon Labor Union vice president Derrick Palmer may be ineligible to serve in union leadership. Amazon Labor Union vice president Derrick Palmer stands at a bus stop in front of the Amazon warehouse he helped unionize in 2022.Erika Martinez/Insider Police bodycam video shows Derrick Palmer, the vice-president of the Amazon Labor Union, admitting to strangling his girlfriend. If convicted, he could face the possibility of being barred from serving as a union officer. The criminal case comes amid tumult and disputes within the union about its leadership. The second-highest-ranking official in the Amazon Labor Union is facing felony charges over claims that he strangled his girlfriend last year, according to police records and body-cam video obtained by Insider.Derrick Palmer, the union's vice-president, was indicted in New Jersey in October on two counts of second-degree aggravated assault, according to previously unreported court documents from Union County Superior Court. The indictment accused him of strangling a domestic partner twice in the same evening in early May 2022.If convicted, Palmer could be barred from union leadership roles under a 1959 federal law that prevents people convicted of certain violent offenses from serving as union officers for up to 13 years, though it's not clear whether that law will apply — or be enforced — in this specific scenario. The charges against Palmer are the latest potentially damaging revelation about the leadership of the Amazon Labor Union, the only union to successfully organize an Amazon facility. The grassroots labor organization won a landmark vote at a Staten Island warehouse last year, vaulting Palmer and union president Chris Smalls to national fame.Their unlikely victory over a company that has spent tens of millions of dollars on union-busting activities landed the "two best friends" on Time Magazine's list of the 100 most influential people of 2022, with a profile written by Bernie Sanders. But in recent months, cracks have begun to appear in the duo's image.Last month, Insider reported that Smalls had been caught on video fighting an Amazon employee outside the Staten Island warehouse. The video also showed Palmer restraining the employee as Smalls hit him. Smalls was arrested last year on assault allegations unrelated to the fight outside the warehouse and taken to court over some $20,000 in overdue child support, which he eventually paid. Some core union members are questioning Smalls' leadership, saying he seems more focused on fame than a union contract.Insider's reporting also raised questions about how the union spent the more than $400,000 it raised on GoFundMe, more than half of which is not accounted for in the union's required financial disclosures. Smalls previously declined to comment to Insider on the record regarding his arrest and late child support payments, and said his fight outside the warehouse "isn't news for the public."Palmer, who continues to work at Amazon's Staten Island fulfillment center, has a lower profile than Smalls. But Palmer, Smalls, and two other early Amazon Labor Union supporters launched a nonprofit that aims to start labor organizing workers at companies other than Amazon, according to an interview with one of its founders and the nonprofit's incorporating documents.Palmer speaks at a union rally in April 2022.Seth Wenig/APWhen reached via email by Insider for comment on the charges against Palmer, Smalls responded: "Listen I'm so sick of your racism stop contacting me about nonsense." He added, "Stop attacking Black leaders because you have nothing better to write about for Christ sake and leave me the fuck alone."Palmer's attorney, Pamela Brause, declined to comment. Palmer did not respond to questions.Bodycam footage from a late-night domestic disturbance callAt about 1:30 a.m on May 4, 2022, police were called to an apartment complex in Elizabeth, New Jersey where Palmer lived with his girlfriend. Body camera footage obtained by Insider shows four officers entering a unit with broken glass on the floor and overturned furniture. Yelling can be heard in the background.The video shows the officers encountering Palmer and his girlfriend arguing in a bedroom, at which point they separate them. Insider is not naming the woman because she is alleged to be a victim of domestic violence. She did not respond to multiple requests for comment. In the video, Palmer told the officers that his girlfriend pushed him, threw glass items at him, and kicked in the bedroom door during the course of their fight.The woman told the officers that Palmer had repeatedly assaulted her. "He's constantly putting his hands on me, God as my witness," she said. "He grabs my neck sometimes, he pushes me to the fucking wall, I'm not even joking. He punches on me, like, this is not a joke." On that night, she said, Palmer had strangled her for "a good 10 seconds," causing her to wave her arms to indicate that she couldn't breathe. She said she didn't pass out, but later told investigators she felt "dizzy" and "lightheaded."The video shows Palmer acknowledging that he choked and pushed his girlfriend."Did you choke her? Did you push her back?" one officer asked."I did, I'm not gonna lie," Palmer replied. "But it's like yo, why you hitting me? Why you throwing stuff at me?"On the body camera footage, police can be heard saying they didn't see marks on Palmer's girlfriend's neck. Their written report, however, says "red welts" eventually developed on her neck, and police took three photos of the marks. The city of Elizabeth refused to provide the photos to Insider, citing state law barring the release of investigative records.Palmer was arrested shortly thereafter. The video doesn't show him being advised of his right to remain silent, which could render his statements inadmissible. His attorneys, in court papers, have indicated that they may raise that as an issue.Palmer, left, and Amazon Labor Union president Chris Smalls arrive at an Ebony magazine gala in October 2022.Robin L Marshall/Getty ImagesProsecutors take strangulation seriously in New Jersey, said Andrew Olesnycky, a defense lawyer who previously supervised domestic violence cases as a Union County prosecutor. He noted that in 2021, the state made strangulation punishable by up to 10 years in prison."Strangulation has been identified as one of the greatest red flags of future serious harm, up to and including homicide," said Olesnycky, who clarified that he was speaking generally and not about the case against Palmer.Federal law may prevent Palmer from leading the ALUProsecutors have offered Palmer a plea deal, according to court documents. If he accepts prosecutors' bargain, Palmer would plead guilty to third-degree aggravated assault with a domestic violence surcharge, spend up to 364 days in a Union County jail, and agree to attend a diversion program for perpetrators of domestic assault.But the case might not end there for Palmer.A 1959 law, passed amid a backlash to organized labor's rising influence, bars people who have been convicted of a range of criminal offenses from serving as a union officer. Among the criminal convictions that can result in union officers being removed from their roles are "assault which inflicts grievous bodily injury" and "assault with intent to kill."It's not clear whether the initial charges against Palmer or the plea offer meet either of those standards. The Office of Labor-Management Standards, an agency within the Department of Labor, determines whether a criminal conviction meets the standards laid out in the law for the removal of a union officer. That ruling can also be appealed. It is "really rare" for union officers to be removed due to an assault conviction, said John Logan, a professor at San Francisco State University's school of labor and employment studies. Historically, union officers removed under the law have been convicted of fraud, embezzlement, or extortion, Logan said. If Palmer is convicted, and the government deems him ineligible for union leadership, it's not clear who could take his place. According to the ALU's constitution, board vacancies "shall be filled by appointment by the President," who is Smalls.Do you have a tip or insight to share? Contact reporter Jack Newsham via the encrypted messaging app Signal (+1-314-971-1627) or email  (jnewsham@insider.com).Contact reporter Katherine Long via Signal (+1-206-375-9280) or email (klong@insider.com).Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

"It's just the latest iteration of the Republican Party being owned by this guy," says a Dem consultant, "and paying the electoral price for it." U.S. Reps. Lauren Boebert and Rep. George Santos on the House floor in January 2023. Both have defended Trump after his indictment and both are seen as vulnerable in 2024.Evelyn Hockstein/REUTERS Republicans facing tough 2024 races are defending Donald Trump against criminal charges. They are attacking what they say is a political prosecution or restating their support for him. Democrats are betting their defense of Trump will hurt them in competitive 2024 races. Republicans who are facing tough races in 2024 are defending Donald Trump against his criminal charges, either by assailing what they say is a political prosecution or offering full-throated support for the former president. And Democrats are betting they'll pay for it.The day Trump was arraigned in New York on felony charges, two GOP House members from New York — Reps. Mike Lawler and Marc Molinaro – attacked Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, with Molinaro accusing him of pursuing a "political vendetta." Rep. Mike Garcia, of California, appeared to invoke a comparison to Joseph Stalin's reign of terror in Russia. Embattled Rep. George Santos, embroiled in his own series of scandals, showed up at a pro-Trump rally in Manhattan and tweeted "that's what real supporters do" using the hashtag "#Trump2024NowMorethanEver."Trump's indictment in New York on charges of 34 felony counts of falsification of business records leaves vulnerable down-ballot Republicans in a predicament: Avoid the topic and risk losing pro-Trump voters in a potential GOP primary, or defend him now and risk losing swing voters later in a general election.The GOP once again boxed in by TrumpWhile some vulnerable Republicans have remained quiet, others have weighed in with comments that Democrats expect will age poorly."It's the latest iteration of the Republican Party being owned by this guy and paying the electoral price for it," said Shripal Shah, a partner at Left Hook and a former spokesperson for both the House and Senate Democrats' campaign arms. "I think it helps Democrats across the board, in both House and Senate races. Just like in 2022 — when you have to embrace everything about Trumpism in order to survive a primary you're doing so at your own peril."Republicans are still reluctant to criticize Trump, even after he lashed out against federal law enforcement. Only three of the 18 Republicans who represent districts that President Joe Biden won in 2020 — Molinaro, Rep. Young Kim of California and Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon — would go on the record with Punchbowl News to distance themselves from Trump's call to defund the FBI and Department of Justice.The 2024 elections are still a long way off and it's unclear which issues will motivate voters the most. But Democrats are betting that MAGA-charged politics will be a loser."Voters overwhelmingly rejected Trump and MAGA extremism in 2020 and 2022, but having learned nothing, House Republicans are eagerly showing voters that they are still at the mercy of one disgraced ex-president, even as he calls to defund federal law enforcement," Tommy Garcia, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told Insider. "It's dangerous and will likely cost them."Spokespeople for the National Republican Congressional Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee did not respond to a request for comment.Prosecuting Trump polls wellMost Americans — 60%— approve of Trump's indictment, according to a CNN poll, though about three-quarters said politics played some role in it. About 4 in 10 said they thought he acted illegally in making alleged hush-money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election, while 33%said he acted unethically but not illegally.MAGA booster Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado called that poll "as fake as Biden's White House play set." Boebert, who only narrowly won her 2022 election in a Trump 2020 district, called on her Twitter followers to be vocal about "this assault on our nation." —Rep. Lauren Boebert (@RepBoebert) April 4, 2023Boebert is on House Democrats' list of 31 vulnerable Republicans and two competitive open seats that they are targeting to take back control of the House in 2024.Senate Democrats face a tough election cycle with 20 Democrat-controlled seats and three independent seats up for election, but they're expecting to see Trump playing a role in messy primaries on the Republican side.In Pennsylvania, former gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano, a potential Senate candidate, called out the "weaponizing of our Justice system against the leading Republican candidate for president is unprecedented, disconcerting and dangerous." He also retweeted a supporter who criticized a potential opponent, David McCormick, for being "completely silent" on Trump's indictment and arrest and called him a "coward.""Donald Trump's indictment is intensifying Senate Republicans' nasty primary dynamics across the map — exacerbating their intra-party fighting and pushing GOP Senate candidates further away from the voters who will decide the general election," Nora Keefe, a Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spokesperson, told Insider.Biden hasn't commented on Trump's charges, and Democrats in Congress are treading carefully. Democrats shouldn't get ahead of the judicial process, said Rodell Mollineau, a cofounder and partner at Rokk Solutions in Washington, DC. They should say Trump deserves his day in court and "be the party of the rule of law," he said.If it comes out that this was political overreach or a stretch, he said, "this is where I think it becomes more problematic for our side."Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Stormy Daniels told The Times of London that Donald Trump's indictment could bring more divide and violence. Stormy Daniels attends the 2019 Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas, Nevada, in January 2019.Gabe Ginsberg/Getty Image Adult actress Stormy Daniels is at the heart of Donald Trump's recent indictment. She told The Times of London that the news is 'vindication' but also 'bittersweet.' Daniels also cautioned that the indictment could 'divide people' and bring violence. Stormy Daniels, the porn star at the center of Donald Trump's indictment, said she's aware of the absurdity behind her role in the criminal charges brought against the former US president.But she said also found it "poetic," invoking an infamous line Trump said about women years before he was a presidential candidate."I am fully aware of the insanity of it being a porn star," Daniels told The Times of London in an interview. "But it's also poetic; this pussy grabbed back."The reference stems from a 2005 conversation with Billy Bush of "Access Hollywood," during which Trump was caught on the hot mic boasting that he could "grab" women "by the pussy.""When you're a star they let you do it," Trump could be heard saying. The audio leaked a month before the 2016 election.Daniels became an unlikely figure in an already unprecedented event in which a former US president — and presidential candidate — faces criminal charges. Though the exact charges are not yet known, the indictment is likely related to a $130,000 "hush-money" payment that Trump's former personal lawyer Michael Cohen made to Daniels days before the 2016 election.The Wall Street Journal first reported in 2018 that the payment was made to silence Daniels about an alleged affair that occurred in 2006.The Manhattan district attorney's office has been investigating Trump's personal and business finances for nearly five years, including the hush-money payment.The crime in question likely has to do with how Trump handled a payment reimbursing Cohen for the hush-money payment to Daniels. Former lead Manhattan prosecutor Mark Pomerantz wrote in his book, "People vs. Donald Trump," that the reimbursement was classified as "legal fees."In New York, falsifying business records is a low-level felony.Daniels has since been on a victory lap after reports of a looming indictment of Trump first surfaced.She tweeted up a storm, mocking Trump supporters about "giving him a ride straight to jail," and claimed that her "Team Stormy" merch has seen a boost in sales since the indictment was announced.In her interview with The Times of London, she called the indictment "vindication" but also said that it was  "bittersweet.""He's done so much worse that he should have been taken down [for] before," she told the publication.Daniels also cautioned that the indictment could "continue to divide people and bring them up in arms.""Whatever the outcome is, it's going to cause violence, and there's going to be injuries and death," she told The Times. "There's the potential for a lot of good to come from this. But either way, a lot of bad is going to come from it, too."A spokesperson for Daniels and Trump's lawyer did not respond to a request for comment.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Trump is being advised not to implicate himself in case violence erupts, two sources close to Trump told Rolling Stone. Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a rally at the Waco Regional Airport on March 25, 2023 in Waco, Texas.Brandon Bell/Getty Images Trump allies are asking him to chill out with his explosive public remarks, per Rolling Stone. The former president has been asking his confidantes what they think of his social media posts. Advisors are now trying to stop Trump from implicating himself if violence occurs, per Rolling Stone. Close allies of former President Donald Trump have privately advised him to tone down his rhetoric about a possible indictment in New York, Rolling Stone reported.Fearing he'd implicate himself, aides are trying to steer Trump away from making social media posts or public comments that could be interpreted as calls for violence, the outlet wrote, citing two anonymous sources close to Trump.The sources added that Trump has asked several confidants what they think of his recent explosive posts on social media, per Rolling Stone. "At the end of the day, Trump is going to be Trump, and you can't stop him from doing everything you might not do yourself," said one Rolling Stone source. "I could do without the 'death and destruction' talk, you know?"The source added that Trump's inner circle tried to rein in his aggressive rhetoric, to avoid giving his critics ammunition to say he is inciting or encouraging violence.The aides' message to Trump was "two-fold and it's a message I think he gets," the person added, per the outlet.Trump is currently facing the possibility of being indicted by a New York grand jury. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is investigating his involvement in a hush money payment made to the adult film actress, Stormy Daniels.The former president was earlier accused of alluding to and promoting violence after he posted an article on Truth Social that contained an image of him holding a baseball bat, digitally stitched together with a separate photo of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.The post containing the image of Trump with the baseball bat has since been deleted from Trump's Truth Social account. Joe Tacopina, the lawyer representing Trump in the New York case, admitted on Sunday the post was "ill advised."Trump's other raging remarks directed at the investigation, such as his warning of "potential death and destruction" if he were indicted, sre still up on Truth Social.He's also repeatedly attacked Bragg, accusing the prosecutor — without evidence or substantiation — of using the justice system for partisan purposes. In one such post, Trump claimed Bragg "IS JUST CARRYING OUT THE PLANS OF THE RADICAL LEFT LUNATICS. OUR COUNTRY IS BEING DESTROYED, AS THEY TELL US TO BE PEACEFUL!"Meanwhile, the Manhattan district attorney's office has received a deluge of death threats from angry Trump supporters. The prosecutor's office was also mailed a package containing "suspicious white powder" on Friday. This was a week after Trump on March 18 called for people to protest if he gets arrested. A representative for Trump did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Trump DJ-ed at a party and was seen cruising around Mar-a-Lago in his golf cart, reported The New York Times, citing people close to Trump. Former President Donald Trump arrives for the pro-am at the Bedminster Invitational LIV Golf tournament in Bedminster, NJ., Thursday, July 28, 2022.AP Photo/Seth Wenig Donald Trump is still living a relaxed lifestyle, despite facing a possible indictment, per NYT. He was seen cruising around Mar-a-Lago in a golf cart and attending a party, per the outlet. People recently near Trump said he seems disconnected from the legal storm brewing around him, per NYT. Former President Donald Trump frequently appears disconnected from the looming prospect of his indictment and is often absorbed in leisure activities at his Mar-a-Lago resort, reported The New York Times journalists Michael Bender and Maggie Haberman.Citing several people who have spent time with Trump in the last few days, The Times reported that the former president was seen cruising around Mar-a-Lago in his golf cart.In another recent instance, Trump took on the role of unofficial DJ at an evening party, playing "The Phantom of the Opera" and songs by the Rolling Stones from his handpicked Spotify playlists, The Times wrote.Trump faces a possible indictment by a New York grand jury, as the Manhattan district attorney's office investigates the hush-money case involving porn star Stormy Daniels.He took to Truth Social on Saturday morning to claim without substantiation that he would be "arrested" on Tuesday. Contrary to Trump's claim, he was neither arrested nor indicted on Tuesday.The Times reported that Trump immediately went golfing after making the social media post, leaving his legal team to answer the public's confusion.After golfing on Saturday, Trump then flew to Oklahoma to watch collegiate wrestling, The Times reported. "He's entirely focused on the wrestlers," one staff member said, per the outlet.On Tuesday evening, Trump posted a video of himself attending the wrestling matches over the weekend, where he shook hands and snapped photos with athletes.His lawyer, Joe Tacopina, told Insider's Jacob Shamsian on Tuesday that the former president is "going about business as usual, doing what he does" despite the threat of a criminal indictment.Still, Trump has at least been partially involved in devising his legal playbook for the possible indictment, discussing the hush-money case every day last week, The Guardian reported.The former president has been regularly raging on social media against Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg's investigation, insisting that he's committed "NO CRIME OF ANY KIND" and throwing insults at Bragg.He's asked supporters to sign a petition against his possible arrest — while asking them to donate money to his 2024 presidential campaign. A representative for Trump did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment sent outside regular business hours. Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

China Threatens US With "Conflict And Confrontation" As Xi Issues "Unusually Blunt" Rebuke Of US Policy In an unexpectedly sharp escalation of diplomatic rhetoric, China's foreign minister said that the US should change its "distorted" attitude towards China or "conflict and confrontation" will follow, while defending the country's stance on the war in Ukraine and defending its close ties with Russia. Speaking at a news conference on the sidelines of an annual parliament meeting in Beijing, Foreign minister Qin Gang took an uncharacteristically direct swipe at the US, and said that the U.S. had been engaging in suppression and containment of China rather than engaging in fair, rule-based competition. Foreign Minister Qin Gang "The United States' perception and views of China are seriously distorted," said Qin, a trusted aide to President Xi Jinping and until recently China's ambassador in Washington. "It regards China as its primary rival and the most consequential geopolitical challenge. This is like the first button in the shirt being put wrong." The U.S. says it is establishing guardrails for relations and is not seeking conflict but Qin said what that meant in practice was that China was not supposed to respond with words or action when slandered or attacked. "That is just impossible," Qin told his first news conference since becoming foreign minister in late December. U.S. officials often speak of establishing guardrails in the bilateral relationship to prevent tensions from escalating into crises. Qin's comments struck the same the tough tone of his predecessor, Wang Yi, now China's most senior diplomat after being made director of the Foreign Affairs Commission Office at the turn of the year. "If the United States does not hit the brakes, and continues to speed down the wrong path, no amount of guardrails can prevent derailment, which will become conflict and confrontation, and who will bear the catastrophic consequences?" Qin also likened Sino-U.S. competition to a race between two Olympic athletes."If one side, instead of focusing on giving one's best, always tries to trip the other up, even to the extent that they must enter the Paralympics, then this is not fair competition," he said, effectively suggesting that Biden is handicapped. While relations between the two superpowers have been deteriorating for years over a number of issues including Taiwan, trade and more recently the war in Ukraine, they worsened dramatically last month after the United States shot down a balloon off the U.S. East Coast that it says was a Chinese spying craft. During Qin's nearly two-hour news conference, he answered questions submitted in advance and made a robust defence of "wolf warrior diplomacy", an assertive and often abrasive stance adopted by China's diplomats since 2020. "When jackals and wolves are blocking the way, and hungry wolves are attacking us, Chinese diplomats must then dance with the wolves and protect and defend our home and country," he said. Qin also said that an "invisible hand" was pushing for the escalation of the war in Ukraine "to serve certain geopolitical agendas", without specifying who he was referring to. He reiterated China's call for dialogue to end the war. China struck a "no limits" partnership with Russia last year, weeks before its invasion of Ukraine, and China has blamed NATO expansion for triggering the war, echoing Russia's complaint. Additionally, China has declined to condemn the invasion and has fiercely defended its stance on Ukraine, despite Western criticism of its failure to single Russia out as the aggressor. While China has vehemently denied U.S. accusations that it has been considering supplying Russia with weapons, Qin said China had to advance its relations with Russia as the world becomes more turbulent and close interactions between President Xi Jinping and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, anchored the neighbours' relations. He did not give a definite answer when asked if Xi would visit Russia after China's "Two Sessions" event, which goes on for one more week. He did, however, say that the Ukraine crisis has a complex history and cause. In essence, it is an eruption of the problems built up in the security governance of Europe. "The Ukraine crisis is a tragedy that could have been avoided. But it has come to where it stands today. There are hard lessons that all parties should truly reflect upon." The Ukraine crisis is a tragedy that could have been avoided. But it has come to where it stands today. There are hard lessons that all parties should truly reflect upon. pic.twitter.com/orc0koUwWt — Hua Chunying 华春莹 (@SpokespersonCHN) March 7, 2023 Naturally, Qin also mentioned Taiwan, saying that "If the US truly expects a peaceful Taiwan Strait, it should stop containing China by exploiting the Taiwan question, return to the fundamental of the one-China principle, honor its political commitment to China, and unequivocally oppose and forestall Taiwan independence." Qin also warned that mishandling of the Taiwan question will shake the very foundation of China-US relations: "Separatism for Taiwan independence is as incompatible with peace and stability of the Taiwan Strait as fire with water." "For peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, its real threat is the separatist forces for Taiwan independence, its solid anchor is the one-China principle, and its genuine guardrails are the three China-US joint communiqués." The foreign minister then made several key observations, exposing US hypocrisy: "The Chinese people have every right to ask: Why does the US talk at length about respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity on Ukraine, while disrespecting China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity on the Taiwan question?" "Why does the US ask China not to provide weapons to Russia, while it keeps selling arms to Taiwan in violation of the August 17 Communiqué?" Why does the US keep on professing the maintenance of regional peace and stability, while covertly formulating a “plan for the destruction of Taiwan”? The bottom line: "The Taiwan question is the core of the core interests of China, the bedrock of the political foundation of China-US relations, and the first red line that must not be crossed in China-US relations." Asked whether it was possible that China and Russia would abandon the U.S. dollar and euro for bilateral trade, Qin said countries should use whatever currency was efficient, safe and credible. China has been looking to internationalize its currency, the yuan, which gained popularity in Russia last year after Western sanctions shut Russia's banks and many of its companies out of the dollar and euro payment systems. "Currencies should not be the trump card for unilateral sanctions, still less a disguise for bullying or coercion," Qin said, clearly referring to the weaponization of the US dollar in the aftermath of the Ukraine war. * * * It wasn't just the foreign minister lashing out at the US: Chinese leader Xi Jinping also issued what the WSJ dubbed an "unusually blunt rebuke" of U.S. policy on Monday, blaming what he termed a Washington-led campaign to suppress China for recent challenges facing his country. “Western countries—led by the U.S.—have implemented all-round containment, encirclement and suppression against us, bringing unprecedentedly severe challenges to our country’s development,” Xi was quoted by state media as saying on Monday, the WSJ reported. Xi’s comments marked an unusual departure for a leader who has generally refrained from directly criticizing the U.S. in public remarks—even as his decadelong leadership has demonstrated a pessimistic view of the bilateral relationship. The accusation of U.S. suppression of China’s development over the past five years comes as Mr. Xi faces charges from investors that China’s economy has been damaged by his policies, including the emphasis on national security. The comments were part of a speech to members of China’s top political advisory body during an annual legislative session in Beijing, according to a Chinese-language readout published by the official Xinhua News Agency. As the WSJ notes, "while Xi has mentioned the U.S. in critical tones during internal speeches, such remarks have often filtered out through subordinates relaying his messages for broader audiences, within the party and beyond." In statements made in public settings or directly reported by state media, Xi has typically been more measured and vague regarding the U.S. and other Western countries, referring to them as “certain” countries rather than naming them explicitly. Not this time: by directly accusing the U.S. of seeking containment, a term loaded with Cold War meaning, Xi appears to be associating himself more closely with nationalist rhetoric—widely used by lower-ranking officials and state media—that attacks Washington, at a time when bilateral tensions continue to simmer over trade, technology, geopolitical influence and discordant views on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The English-language version of Xi’s speech reported by Xinhua didn’t refer to containment or the U.S. Instead, it quoted him telling fellow officials to “have the courage to fight as the country faces profound and complex changes in both the domestic and international landscape.” The accusations by Xi against the U.S., delivered to an audience that includes politically connected businesspeople, appeared in part to be an effort by Xi to shift blame away from his own policymaking, including tough Covid controls that have weakened the economy and pressure on technology companies that cost the industry some of its dynamism. Tyler Durden Tue, 03/07/2023 - 09:20.....»»