Aggregatore di feed

International Man: The official story surrounding Charlie Kirk’s assassination has been eclipsed by the flurry of information that something bigger and more nefarious could be at play.

Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and journalist Max Blumenthal have made serious claims about powerful donors who were displeased with Kirk in the days before his death.

What do you make of all this?

Doug Casey: First, let me say that I was only marginally familiar with Charlie before this. I wasn’t his market, and he was just a name. And even now, all I really know is snippets of his speeches. I could go back and listen to his podcasts. But what he actually said or believed isn’t that important. What’s important is what people think he said or believed. The Wokesters clearly hate him.

From what I can tell, he seems like a decent, sincere guy—well-read, thoughtful, well-intentioned. But I’m automatically suspicious of anyone who’s been out trying to change the world since age eighteen.

Has anyone assisted him in his quest?

My understanding is that most of his funding, which was substantial, came from Zionists. He was always a huge fan of the Republican Party.

That’s understandable in that it’s a better alternative than the completely toxic Democratic Party. I presume he supported Israel because it’s ethnically European, has always presented itself as a US ally, and evangelical Christians believe it will play a part in immanentizing the eschaton.

All we know, however, is what we see and hear in the media. And Charlie was a media phenomenon. But, it’s said, he was changing his views towards Israel. He was feeling controlled by them and felt threatened. Some say that Israel took him out because he was going off the reservation and questioning their party line. Independent thinkers are dangerous and unwelcome in the world of realpolitik.

I don’t, however, think Tel Aviv arranged his shooting. Not because they’re loath to assassinate anyone who might be a threat; they do that promiscuously, anywhere in the world. Rather, because the risk of getting caught would be humongously out of proportion to any possible gain.

If I were writing a screenplay, I’d probably finger a radical coterie in the White House. Charlie’s death could create a martyr, energize “the base” against the Left, and justify lots of new laws.

So who done it?

At least since JFK, for the last 60 or so years, almost all of the assassinations and mass murders in the US have been indeterminate. Sure, they all have cover stories. In the case of JFK, was Oswald the killer? I’ve always doubted that. With RFK, was Sirhan Sirhan his killer? There’s a lot of doubt about that. The circumstances of MLK’s assassination were equally murky.

The numerous school shootings have been blamed on everything but prescription psychiatric drugs, which were almost universally used by the miscreants.

The 2017 mass murder of 61 and wounding 850 by “high stakes gambler” Steven Paddock in Las Vegas? I’d say the odds of any truth in that cover story are Slim and None. And Slim’s out of town.

What really happened on 9/11? It’s obvious that we have nothing like the whole story, starting with the fact that all three destroyed buildings collapsed in their own footprints, including Building 7, which wasn’t hit by a plane.

We don’t know who killed Charlie Kirk, and maybe we never will. Why weren’t his security scanning the roofs of nearby buildings? Or using a drone to do so? They haven’t found the bullet that’s supposed to have killed him. That’s odd. It couldn’t possibly have been a .30-06, as is widely alleged. Even if it wasn’t a hollow-point, the entrance wound looks quite small and neat. And initial word from the autopsy is that there’s no exit wound. It’s said he was wearing body armor that deflected the bullet. Under his T-shirt? Ridiculous.

There are many unanswered questions. I suspect most of them will remain unanswered, or the media will parrot fatuous answers that somebody fabricates, as they have with the numerous other recent instances of political or ideologically driven violence. The broad public is incapable of critical thinking. They believe what the Authorities tell them. And even if they’re suspicious, nobody wants to chance being labeled a “conspiracy theorist.”

In any event, there’s a good chance Charlie will serve as a catalyst, like John Brown did in 1859. I expect that there will be other events like this.

International Man: What struck you most about the reaction to Charlie Kirk’s reported death—both from the Right, who saw it as a devastating blow, and from parts of the Left, where some responses seemed dismissive or even celebratory?

What does that tell us about where the country is right now?

Doug Casey: It’s been obvious to me for the last 10 years—maybe much more, I’ll have to check past letters—that the US is heading towards a breakup. It’s uncertain whether it will be peaceful or violent. But one thing is for sure: the Red and the Blue people increasingly hate each other. And people with very different philosophical and moral beliefs can’t, and shouldn’t, inhabit the same political entity, especially when a powerful government is bankrupt, corrupt, and untethered.

One takeaway is that you can forget calls for “unity.” They’re nonsensical and impossible. The other takeaway is that “democracy”, now more than ever, is just a charade.

I’ve always felt that modern democracy was just mob rule dressed up in a coat and tie. But at this point, so-called democracy is about grabbing as much of the trillions of dollars of spoils that the US government dispenses every year as possible—and gaining control of the apparatus of the State to oppress the other guy. Forget about the “loyal opposition.” These people hate each other.

International Man: In the wake of Kirk’s assassination, Attorney General Pam Bondi said the Justice Department would “absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.”

Further, President Trump said he would designate Antifa as a terrorist organization.

What’s your take on these developments?

Doug Casey: Hate speech is unpleasant. I don’t like it any more than anybody else does. But it’s important that there be no regulation of what people say. Not just because the First Amendment guarantees free speech, but because if you do regulate speech, who decides what’s hateful? It’s not an objective standard. It’s an opinion. And in a highly politicized environment like today’s, that’s asking for trouble.

I’m all for people being allowed to say things that are hateful, simply because how else can you know who they are and what they believe? Trying to preclude hate speech is about as stupid as trying to enforce loving speech.

I like to know what’s going on in people’s minds, as opposed to trying to guess. Forewarned is forearmed. Suppressing so-called hate speech is like putting a lid on a pressure cooker. At some point, it will blow. The best solution to so-called hate speech is open discussion.

Pam Bondi, like most everybody in the Trump administration, has no philosophical core. She impresses me as a dim bulb who’ll do what she’s told.

Antifa is a destructive organization; its views are antithetical to the founding principles of the US. But on the other hand, the US founding principles have been disintegrating for many decades. The problem is that if Trump can designate Antifa as a terrorist organization, it gives him the right to round up the usual suspects arbitrarily. It’s a step towards martial law. Designating an organization—even if it’s full of sociopaths and criminals like Antifa—as a domestic terrorist organization opens the door to the Democrats, when they’re re-elected in 2028 (which I believe they will be), to put the shoe on the other foot. We’re on the way to a genuine police state in the US.

International Man: In the past, you’ve suggested the US could be headed toward a kind of civil conflict. Can you expand on what dynamics you see fueling that possibility today?

Doug Casey: It’s impossible to have 330 million people under the same political umbrella. Especially when the government controls 40% of the economy and has regulations for everything, it wouldn’t work even if the US were still homogeneous, as it was before the 1960s. But now it’s made up of many radically different ethnic, racial, linguistic, and religious groups who have nothing in common. Worse, strapped taxpayers are forced to carry 100 million non-producers.

Is there a solution to these problems? There are several possibilities. One is that the US amicably splits up so that birds of a feather can flock together and have their own political unit. That would mean that California, for instance, splits from the US, and its coastal regions and cities would split from the interior. That’s a theoretical, but highly unlikely, solution.

A second solution, the best one, is that 95% of the US government is dissolved, and it goes back to its original constitutional principles. A military to defend against foreign enemies. Local police to defend citizens from domestic violence. And a court system to resolve disputes without resorting to violence.

Since the government is directly or indirectly at fault for most of our problems, cutting it back 95% would be a good start. But that’s not going to happen either.

What’s most likely is something like a civil war. Either the country splits up violently, or one group violently captures the apparatus of the State and suppresses the losers. Or maybe everything somehow holds together under a police state of some description. I hate to think of that as both the “best” and most likely outcome…

International Man: Many see an economic and financial crisis on the horizon. How do you think the potential for political and cultural conflict factors into the country’s outlook?

Doug Casey: My guess is that all these simmering demographic, social, and political antagonisms will be catalyzed by a financial collapse. With all the markets at all-time highs, while the bankrupt US government takes increasing control of the economy, using the Fed to create more debt and more currency to patch up the sinking ship. A financial collapse is in the cards.

That will be accompanied by an economic collapse, with lots of bankruptcies from indebted companies, governmental entities, and individuals. We’re headed for lots of unemployment and a much lower standard of living.

Reprinted with permission from International Man.

The post Whether Charlie Kirk’s Death Could Be America’s Franz Ferdinand Moment appeared first on LewRockwell.

President Trump has just decided to support the little dictator/proxy who runs Ukraine on behalf of America’s “defense” industry and other such interests in the war Trump said he would end if elected.

Of course that was when he was campaigning to get elected. Of a piece – pattern recognition! – with read my lips, no new taxes – for those who recall that one.

Here’s one for the ages:

After getting to know and fully understand the Ukraine/Russia Military and Economic situation and, after seeing the Economic trouble it is causing Russia, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form. With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option. Why not?

Russia has been fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a War that should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win. This is not distinguishing Russia. In fact, it is very much making them look like “a paper tiger.” When the people living in Moscow, and all of the Great Cities, Towns, and Districts all throughout Russia, find out what is really going on with this War, the fact that it’s almost impossible for them to get Gasoline through the long lines that are being formed, and all of the other things that are taking place in their War Economy, where most of their money is being spent on fighting Ukraine, which has Great Spirit, and only getting better, Ukraine would be able to take back their Country in its original form and, who knows, maybe even go further than that! Putin and Russia are in BIG Economic trouble, and this is the time for Ukraine to act. In any event, I wish both Countries well. We will continue to supply weapons to NATO for NATO to do what they want with them. Good luck to all!

Feel queasy yet?

This news come on top of the news Trump itches to suppress “hate” speech, as expressed by his proxy, Attorney General Pam Bondi. She has not been fired for publicly announcing her intention – which means Trump’s intention – to sic the federal goons on those who speak “hatefully” – according to Bondi (and Trump).

Especially about our “greatest ally.” Speaking of which… if anyone dares to.

There’s also the bulldozing – and worse – of Gaza and the slaughter of tens of thousands of people who happen to be in the way of Greater Israel, a war crime Americans are now complicit in because Americans are paying for it and (most of them) insouciantly pretending isn’t happening. It doesn’t matter that they’re forced to subsidize this; what matters is that when the blowback comes it will hit them regardless.

Then there’s the Epstein Thing, which is all of a sudden no longer being talked about. It was all a “Democrat hoax,” says Trump – after campaigning that it was real and he’d release the information once elected.

Fooled ya – again!

Read the Whole Article

The post Orange Keeevvvv appeared first on LewRockwell.

Okay, the colonials may have started it, but the Brits already viewed Americans as unruly, ungrateful, and in need of a caning. Even a moderate soul such as Samuel Johnson of dictionary fame denounced them as a “race of convicts, who ought to be thankful for anything we allow them short of hanging.”

Wow, Brits are known for hypocrisy, understatement, even insincerity, but this was out of character. What really happened was as follows: 2.5 million Americans were doubling in numbers every 25 years. Two-thirds of colonials owned land and were literate. Back in England one-fifth owned land and were far less literate than the colonists. According to Rick Atkinson, a typical American paid no more than sixpence a year in Crown taxes, compared with the average Englishman’s 25 shillings. The Brits were angry, starting with George III. You all know the rest, or should. The Brits pretend to have gotten over it, but have they?

Brit journalists hide their historical ignorance—as well as their dandruff—by using Google and Wikipedia in dark rooms throughout their waking hours. The latest trend is comparing Roman emperors to American presidents, probably because the former have been discredited by Hollywood movies, a great source of knowledge for Brit hacks.

“The first emperor of Rome, Augustus, is a worthy mirror to our George Washington.”

Mary Beard, however, is not a journalist but a historian of dubious note, one who regularly appears on television, but one I cannot watch even for a minute. The problem is I find her so physically unattractive, I cannot look. I know, I know, it is not her fault but mine, but such are the joys of an inclination for pretty women. I simply cannot look at her. On her latest podcast (whatever that is), Mary Beard says Elagabalus, the third-century ruler of Rome, most resembles The Donald. Joking or not, it is an obvious publicity stunt that smacks of desperation. It simply makes no sense. Elagabalus was born into a family of Syrian origins, whereas Trump is as Aryan as they come. Elagabalus became emperor at age 14, perhaps married a male charioteer, and was obsessed with large male organs. Trump is obsessive, but not for those mentioned above. Comparing the two only shows desperation on the part of the historian. A drug-addicted, mentally deficient rapper is more likely to compare Puff Daddy to Julius Caesar than Trump to Elagabalus. Enough said.

Mind you, there are so many others one could pick while playing the Roman emperor/American president game. Caligula made his horse a consul, but in reality he only threatened to do so. Trump actually brought his horrible son-in-law into the White House and continues to seek his advice on Middle East affairs, but he would be well advised to seek the wisdom of a horse instead. I can’t think of which president Nero resembled most, but Nero never fiddled while Rome burned, instead fancying himself an actor and singer. Hence our beloved Ronald Reagan would fit the bill, but I can hear Bill Buckley and others turning over and making lots of noise while doing it.

I don’t expect any Brit historian to compare Ronald Reagan to Augustus, but they had a lot in common as far as accomplishments are concerned. Mark Antony was as tragic a hero as I can think of, primarily because of his obsession with female noses. Cleopatra had a long but beautiful nose, so the Romans couldn’t get enough. He left Actium for a last assignation with Cleo, or so I like to think. The closest to him as American presidents go would be—may the Roman gods forgive me for this—George W. Bush. He also lost the war down south, but instead called it mission accomplished and a victory. Neither Mark nor W. should have engaged the enemy, but both were certain of victory before reality set in. Mark Antony, as noble as they come, took the patrician way out. George W., as stupid as it is possible to be while also having been elected president, turned to painting flowers instead.

The first emperor of Rome, Augustus, is a worthy mirror to our George Washington. Augustus was the architect of the Pax Romana, while our George was the architect of a nation and an idea that clearly annoys perfidious Albion. Back in AD 198 Caracalla bestowed Roman citizenship upon every free man he encountered, very much like Biden letting in 12 million or so in these United States. The difference being that Caracalla loved baths and bathing, whereas Biden never knew when he was taking a bath or being given one.

My hero and favorite fighting general in the War of Independence was Benedict Arnold. He was badly treated throughout by his fellow Americans, so he switched. The Brits treated him almost as bad. I cannot for the life of me think of an equivalent to Benedict in modern times. Perhaps George Patton. Eisenhower was always on his case, and the egregiously pompous and reluctant-to-fight Brit Montgomery too. I suppose Benedict and George could be twinned. All I know is my father named a tanker after George Patton back in the early ’50s, and I got to shake his son’s hand in Vietnam. I never met Benedict Arnold, and old Dad never named a ship after him.

This article was originally published on Taki’s Magazine.

The post The Roman Emperor/American President Game appeared first on LewRockwell.

In his latest post to TRUTH SOCIAL President Donald Trump claims that with more dollars, euros and missiles, Ukraine could still regain all its lost territory. President Trump’s statement is a mixture of sentiment and self-delusion, not strategy. Few wars in modern times have been wrapped in so many illusions as this one.

The number of Ukrainian Soldiers killed in action (KIA) exceed 1.7. million.

The numbers of wounded in action (WIA) are unknown, but anecdotal evidence suggests most of the WIA are seriously disabled.

The ongoing mobilization of Ukrainian men in their late fifties and early sixties is not evidence for resilience but of exhaustion. Without constant flows of dollars and euros the Ukrainian State and Society would collapse in a few days.

Very soon, the globalist ruling class in Washington, London, Paris, and Berlin will raise the question, “Who lost Ukraine,” as though it was ever theirs to lose.

However, this time, Americans will ask how Washington insiders, Lobbyists, and the sprawling military-industrial-congressional complex persuaded President Trump to imitate President Biden; to prolong, even widen the war in Ukraine instead of ending it?

Contrary to popular belief in the West, Russia was never a wobbling power held together by propaganda. Measured in purchasing power, the war has helped Russia to become the world’s fourth-largest economy.

Russian factories are humming night and day, producing shells, missiles, and drones at rates the West cannot match.

Not only is the Russian economy thriving, sanctions meant to break its economy have instead pushed global trade eastward and cemented Moscow’s ties with Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.

Instead of a paper tiger, Russia looks more like an impregnable fortress.

Meanwhile, de-dollarization is advancing rapidly. For the first time in 30 years, foreign central bank gold reserves exceed US treasuries.

The dollar’s share of global reserves has already dropped from 72 percent in 2000 to about 58 percent in 2024 according to the International Monetary Fund. In economic terms, Americans are on the losing side in this conflict.

The fiscal situation in Britain, France and Germany is equally precarious, with spending levels and deficit trajectories that are unsustainable.

For the globalist leaders in Europe who opened their countries’ borders in 2015 to hostile invasion and de-industrialized their countries to follow Washington into the war against Russia the cost is even higher.

Their rendezvous with unrest and bankruptcy will come soon, long before Washington reaches the same destination.

Unfortunately, Trump’s words confirm the truth that the war in Ukraine really is Washington’s and NATO’s war against Russia.

The stark truth makes it much harder for Moscow to compromise with the West. More important, the truth justifies wider Russian military mobilization and deepening ties with Beijing, New Delhi, and Tehran.

Europe’s combination of acute military weakness and financial emergency makes the breakdown of Washington’s Atlantic Alliance inescapable.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban argues that Brussels should pursue a European Union–Russia security pact instead of aligning with Washington.

Orban is correct. If President Trump is content send money, but sit out the war for the duration, the Europeans must act.

The longer President Trump indulges the Zelenskiy Regime and its absurd demands for the restoration of Ukraine’s 1991 borders, the greater will be the damage to US and European Security.

Reprinted with permission from X.

The post War, Debt, and Delusion appeared first on LewRockwell.

Two days ago, while I was moving this website, President Donald Trump made some rather ridiculous comment (emphasis added):

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump – Sep 23, 2025, 18:55 utc

After getting to know and fully understand the Ukraine/Russia Military and Economic situation and, after seeing the Economic trouble it is causing Russia, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form. With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option. Why not? Russia has been fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a War that should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win. This is not distinguishing Russia. In fact, it is very much making them look like “a paper tiger.” When the people living in Moscow, and all of the Great Cities, Towns, and Districts all throughout Russia, find out what is really going on with this War, the fact that it’s almost impossible for them to get Gasoline through the long lines that are being formed, and all of the other things that are taking place in their War Economy, where most of their money is being spent on fighting Ukraine, which has Great Spirit, and only getting better, Ukraine would be able to take back their Country in its original form and, who knows, maybe even go further than that! Putin and Russia are in BIG Economic trouble, and this is the time for Ukraine to act. In any event, I wish both Countries well. We will continue to supply weapons to NATO for NATO to do what they want with them. Good luck to all!

DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Some people claimed that this uttering showed that Trump had changed his mind over Ukraine.

It was far from that. Trump was in fact mocking the delusional assessments General Keith Kellogg and General Dan Caine had given him:

Special Presidential Envoy Keith Kellogg on Monday said he and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff recently advised President Trump that Russia is losing its war on Ukraine — as Moscow has seen more than 1 million casualties while taking less than 1% of Ukrainian territory since November 2022.
…
“If Putin thinks Russia is winning, his definition of winning and my definition of winning are absolutely two different things,” Kellogg said. “If he was winning, he’d be in Kyiv. If he’s winning, he’d be west of the Dnipro River. If he was winning, he’d be on Odessa. If he was winning, he would have changed the government.

“Russia is, in fact, losing this war,” he added.
…
The two military experts gave their assessment in response to Trump’s then-prodding as to whether Putin’s grandstanding of supposed success in Ukraine was true, Kellogg said, giving a rare glimpse into private discussions at the White House.
…
“I responded quite forcefully, and I finally said, ‘Mr. President, don’t just listen to me. Your chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Dan Caine, is outside. He’s out in the hall, bring him in and ask him that question. He’s your senior, he’s your principal military adviser,’” Kellogg said.

“And he did, and Dan said the same thing. He went, ‘Nope, not winning.’”

When Trump repeated the implausible propaganda claims Kellogg had made it was pure sarcasm. Trump knows that “seeking a decisive Russian defeat is a virtually impossible goal that presents serious and unwarranted risks“.

He used the sarcasm to wash his hand over further action about Ukraine. It is also relieving him of pressure to continue talks with Russia.

It took two days for the New York Times to acknowledge this (archived):

But scratch the surface, and a deeper desire seemed buried in Mr. Trump’s reversal of position during the U.N. meetings in New York this week. Mr. Trump appears to want to wash his hands of the Ukraine conflict, after having no success bringing President Vladimir V. Putin to the negotiating table, and a dwindling chance of acting as mediator between the two warring parties.

Trump’s statement was not, as the NY Times claims, a “reversal of position”. At the essence he is saying that he will continue to sell weapons to Europe but that is all that he is going to do – at least openly. There will be no new U.S. aid for Ukraine and no U.S. forces riding to its rescue.

Behind the scene the U.S. will of course do its best to stay in control of the conflict. NATO, under full U.S. control, will continue to push the European dimwits towards a ever deeper involvement in the war. U.S. intelligence will continue to help Ukraine to target Russian troops and maybe even targets in Russia (machine translation):

US President Donald Trump has received information about a” planned offensive ” by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, which will require intelligence from the United States.

This is reported by the American business newspaper The Wall Street Journal.

At the same time, the publication notes that, despite the change in rhetoric regarding Russia, the American president still refuses to allow strikes with his country’s weapons deep into the territory of the Russian Federation.

Nothing is new in this policy. The U.S., under Trump, had always planned to drop the responsibility and burden of the war in Ukraine, which it had instigate, onto Europe. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had announced that plan on February 12 during a military summit in Bruxelles:

Hegseth also told Nato’s European members that they would need to provide the lion’s share of future aid for Kyiv, warning that Washington “will no longer tolerate an imbalanced relationship” with its allies.

“Safeguarding European security must be an imperative for European members of Nato,” Hegseth said. “Europe must provide the overwhelming share of future lethal and non-lethal aid to Ukraine.”

Trump’s “reversal of position” isn’t one. His announcement is a continuation of his policy. In today’s Washington Post a ‘senior White House official’ confirms as much (archived):

President Donald Trump’s furious rhetoric toward Russia is “a negotiating tactic” intended to pressure the Kremlin, a senior White House official said Wednesday, a day after the president stunned global policymakers and delighted Ukrainian leaders by embracing Kyiv’s ambitions for a decisive defeat of Russia.
…
Trump was not signaling a major shift in U.S. policy toward Kyiv during a day at the U.N. General Assembly in which he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the official said, ..

Russia seems to have understood Trump’s uttering better than Western journalists did. The former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev commented the events in New York in his usual manner:

And Trump? Once again he slipped into an alternative reality, reciting a fresh set of political incantations about “Russia’s weakness.”

After meeting with the clowns from Kiev and Paris, he posted a flamboyant message: final victory for Kiev, a return to old borders, Russia’s collapsing war economy, gas lines, and the image of a “paper tiger.”

In that reality everything is different: Kiev is winning, Russia is torn to pieces, and Bandera’s Ukraine is thriving on its own resources. In that same fantasy, Trump’s predecessors Obama and Biden still live happily ever after.

But Trump is not like them. No doubt—he’ll be back. He always comes back. In a few days he’ll probably propose that the green pianist sign a capitulation. Or maybe fly to Mars with his pardoned Musk. Or come up with something else “historic” to claim a Nobel Prize.

The key, after all, is to keep drastically changing your position on every major issue. That’s what makes for “successful” governance through social media.

And, as they say—thank you for your attention to this matter!”

Reprinted with permission from Moon of Alabama.

The post Why Trump’s Alleged Shift on Ukraine Isn’t One appeared first on LewRockwell.

Trump’s Truth on Russia and Ukraine spread like a California wildfire across social media in the last 24 hours. Supporters of Ukraine were elated… at least initially. I got a nice shout out today from my friend, Alexander Mercouris, who agreed with my assessment that Trump’s Ukraine/Russia Truth was actually a piece of sophisticated sarcasm. But Alexander did a better job than me in explaining the nature of this sarcasm. So, back at you Alexander. Brother Mercouris explained that Trump, rather than debate Kellogg and the neocons who wanted to push the Russia-is-losing narrative, essentially said to them, “You’re right,” and then took that claim to a logical conclusion. Rather than argue with Kellogg and the neocons he said:

Ok, you’re right. Since Ukraine is winning and Russia is losing, why the hell does the US have to do anything more? Sure, we’ll sell NATO all the weapons we want (assuming we can actually make them) and they can bankrupt themselves giving them to Ukraine while America makes some sorely needed cash. Anyway, since Russia’s economy is collapsing, the war will end, Ukraine will win and we don’t have to do another damn thing.

The ball is now in the hands of Ukraine, NATO and the neocons. Trump is not going to do anything new in terms of military or diplomatic action. He is in essence, hoisting them on their own petard. Kellogg is now on the record, having told Trump that Ukraine is winning and Russia is losing, and will have — as Ricky Ricardo used to say — some splaining to do when the Ukrainian front crumbles and Russia reaches the Dnieper River. And how will he explain why the Russian economy is doing better by December than the US economy? He promised Trump a collapse.

The war will grind on and the leading NATO countries in Europe will grow more panicked as the reality of Ukraine’s defeat becomes more apparent.

What we ought to be paying attention to is the dramatic buildup of US military assets off the coast of Venezuela. This mirrors the kind of activity we saw after the 13 June attack on Iran by Israel, as the United States deployed naval and air assets to the region in preparation for the US attack on 24 June. As of September 2025, the United States has deployed a substantial naval and military force off the coast of Venezuela in the southern Caribbean. The deployment includes:

Navy Ships:
• Guided-missile destroyers: USS Jason Dunham, USS Gravely, USS Sampson, USS Stockdale
• Missile cruiser: USS Lake Erie
• Littoral combat ship: USS Minneapolis-Saint Paul
• Amphibious ships: USS Iwo Jima, USS Fort Lauderdale, USS San Antonio (comprising the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group)
• Fast-attack submarine: USS Newport News

Military Units:
• Marine Expeditionary Unit: 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit, with approximately 4,500 personnel, including 2,200 Marines and sailors, deployed aboard the amphibious ships
• Air assets: F-35B fighter jets, MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, MQ-9 Reaper drones, and P-8 Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft
• Special Operations Forces: Reported secret deployments for targeted strikes and commando operations in support of anti-cartel missions

I cannot rule out that this show of military force is part of an intelligence operation — i.e., use the saber rattling as leverage over key members of the Venezuelan military to persuade them to launch a US-backed coup and eliminate President Maduro. But Maduro is not alone… He has the backing of Russia, China and Iran by virtue of his membership in BRICS.

Maduro and Venezuela have more than verbal assurances from Russia. Venezuela concluded a significant defense and strategic cooperation agreement with Russia in mid-September 2025, when the Venezuelan National Assembly preliminarily approved a Strategic Partnership and Cooperation Treaty with Russia. This agreement is designed to deepen existing bilateral ties in defense, energy, technology, and includes provisions for regular high-level political dialogue and oversight commissions for implementation.

Key features of the agreement:

• The treaty expands Venezuela’s military cooperation with Russia, building on the already substantial relationship, such as domestic manufacturing of AK-103 rifles and joint defense technology initiatives.
• Venezuelan cadets are training in Russia in advanced military specialties, including drone technology and electronic warfare.
• The agreement was advanced in direct response to the recent deployment of US warships, submarines, and fighter jets in the Caribbean, which Venezuela views as a threat to its sovereignty.
• The pact, which still requires a final parliamentary vote for formal ratification, is explicitly framed by Venezuelan officials as part of their rejection of “hegemonic” US influence and an effort to build a multipolar world order in partnership with Russia.
• Earlier this year, Presidents Maduro and Putin signed a 10-year strategic alliance, which lays the foundation for this further-deepened cooperation and also encompasses arms control, energy sector collaboration, and joint efforts to bypass sanctions.

Putin is sending Trump a not-so-subtle reminder that Russia still has some global reach.

This article was originally published on Sonar21.

The post Ignore Ukraine (Trump Is), Pay Attention to Venezuela appeared first on LewRockwell.

John Helmer and I agree that President Trump has lost control over foreign policy to his advisors. 

That Trump has lost control is clear from Trump’s reference to Russia as a “paper tiger” and his statement that he believes that Kiev is “in a position to fight and win all of Ukraine back and might be able “to go further,”  suggesting invasion of Russia, if the EU and NATO continue to support Ukraine.  Russia, Trump says, is in “BIG economic trouble” and that “this is the time for Ukraine to act.” 

This is the neoconservative line, and Trump’s advisers have used it to  lasso Trump.  The peaceful solution seems to be off the table.

Kremlin spokesman Peskov indicates that Russia continues to prefer delusion to reality by announcing that Moscow remains open to seeking a peaceful resolution to the hostilities.  While Trump mocks Russia, Peskov stresses that Putin “highly values” Trump’s efforts to mediate the Ukraine conflict and describes the Trump-Putin relationship as “warm.”  

If Trump’s advice to Ukraine that it is time to win all of Ukraine back from paper tiger Russia, and perhaps invade Russia as well,  is evidence of a warm relationship with Putin, what would be the words that describe a cold or hostile relationship?

President Trump echos my expressed opinion since early 2022 of the thoughtless, indeed, mindless–Trump calls it “aimless”– way Putin has mismanaged the conflict with Ukraine.  By refusing to see the obvious–that the conflict was a real war that Russia needed to quickly win before the West got deeply involved and widened the war–Putin created the impression in the West that Russia was either unwilling or unable to fight.  One consequence is that President Trump dismisses Russia as a military power:

“With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, [recovering] the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option. Why not? Russia has been fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a War that should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win.”

Trump’s comments reflect the opinion of his special envoy for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, who recently claimed the US could “kick Russia’s ass” and insisted Ukraine could win the war despite Russia’s continued gains in eastern Ukraine and its clear manpower advantage.

Some analysts suspect that Putin has been bamboozled by his pro-Western central bank director who convinced him that the Russian economy is not capable of fighting a real war.  Regardless, it is clear from Trump and Kellogg’s attitudes and the plots of the neoconservatives that Washington does not take Russia seriously as a military power. The strategic blunder Putin has made most likely leads to nuclear war. See this.

Trump again showed that the US military/security complex has already taken over US foreign policy.  There is no more  Trump talk of  normalizing relations with Russia.  Instead, there is Trump talk of shooting down Russian aircraft.

Estonia, little doubt bribed by the Zionist neoconservatives, falsely claims that Russian aircraft entered their air space.  Asked about this at the UN General Assembly meeting in New York City on September 23,  President Trump said that NATO countries should shoot down Russian aircraft that enter their airspace.

So, here is the “peace president” urging two-bit countries that cannot fight their way out of a wet paperbag to, in effect, declare war on Russia.  Of course, Putin being averse to war, might pretend it didn’t happen, as is his wont. There seems to be no end that Putin won’t go to in order to avoid the fact that he is at war with the Western world.  He has said that the West is at war with Russia a time or two, but he has never acted as if he believed it.

There is no evidence that Putin does.  Putin allowed Israel to trick Syrian air defenses repelling an Israeli attack to  shoot down a Russian aircraft without doing anything about it, so Estonia and the West can expect likewise. They can shoot down all the Russian aircraft they wish, and Putin will say it didn’t happen, just as he said the US/Ukrainian attack on Russia’s strategic bombing forces was merely an act of  terrorism, not an act of war.

In 2015 Turkey shot down a Russian aircraft without consequences.  Putin almost never holds any attack on Russia accountable.  He even allowed his incompetent central bank director to hand over $300 billion to the West without firing her.  Putin and his foreign minister, Lavrov, keep relying on Western good will which simply does not exist.  Countries that stand aside of Israel’s genocide of Palestine, as Russia also does, have no concept of good will.

Russia dispute’s Estonia’s claim, but facts don’t matter in the West.  What matters are agendas and their success.  The agenda is to do in Russia, and everything Putin does helps to do in Russia.

My concern is that at some point even Putin will fight, and that is when we get nuclear war.

The post Is the Kremlin Deluding Itself Into WW III? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

LifeSite

The post ‘China bans unauthorized online catechesis, preaching, and livestreaming of Masses appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Maureen McKerracher.

The post Something SERIOUS Is About to Hit America – Pope Leo XIV appeared first on LewRockwell.

Johnny Kramer wrote:

Update: a 2017 tweet from Tylenol has resurfaced, advising pregnant women not to take its products:

 The Gateway Pundit | by Cullen Linebarger

Watch: Democrats Protest Trump By Chugging Tylenol | ZeroHedge

I don’t think that Trump is diabolical enough to have done this specifically to provoke this reaction, but it’s hilarious to imagine that he is. I could see this joke sign becoming a real one in the near future.

The post Democrats Protest Trump By Chugging Tylenol appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

CNBC News

The post Former FBI Director James Comey expected to be indicted soon: MSNBC appeared first on LewRockwell.

Welcome back to Impact Theory with Tom Bilyeu. In today’s episode, Tom sits down with Mike Benz for a conversation that will fundamentally reshape the way you see the machinery behind global influence, media, and soft power. If you’ve always assumed that NGOs and international aid organizations are purely philanthropic, prepare to have your mind blown. Mike Benz peels back the curtain on how NGOs, government agencies, hedge funds, and massive corporate interests intersect and often operate as extensions of intelligence work, narrative control, and economic opportunism on a global scale.

From the evolution of media manipulation since the days of the printing press to the explosion of AI-powered censorship and narrative shaping, Mike explains the historical playbook and the modern tactics that shape elections, revolutions, and public sentiment. Tom and Mike dig deeply into headline-grabbing examples, like the Ukraine conflict, U.S. foreign policy, and even the true impact of Elon Musk’s takeover of X (formerly Twitter) on the global censorship apparatus.

This episode doesn’t shy away from tough questions—how do the interests of global elites and hedge funds dictate policy? Are uprisings and political polarization just collateral damage of soft power warfare? And can transparency and public oversight reign in institutions that have grown more secretive than the CIA?

Get ready for a riveting, eye-opening discussion that will challenge everything you thought you knew about media, power, and the forces shaping our world today.

00:00 – “Intro”

01:00 – “How the U.S. Buys Global Influence—One Newsroom at a Time”

15:54 – “Corporations Are Writing U.S. Foreign Policy”

26:55 – “Coups or Revolutions? Who’s Really Pulling the Strings”

39:14 – “Protests Are Being Engineered—Here’s How”

44:39 – “Teachers Union + Ukraine = WTF?”

58:25 – “Elon Musk Just Shattered the Censorship Machine”

01:05:32 – “Citizen Journalists Are Beating the Media—Badly”

01:24:03 – “Wall Street’s Quiet Takeover of U.S. Foreign Policy”

01:28:18 – “Social Media Is Powering a Global Uprising”

01:35:52 – “Fake Allies: The Hidden Politics You’re Not Supposed to See”

01:47:14 – “Ukraine: The Shocking Alliance of NGOs and Foreign Fighters”

01:58:41 – “The CIA Has a Shadow Playbook—And No Oversight”

The post The Leaked Playbook for Silencing America | Mike Benz Impact Theory w/ Tom Bilyeu appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

You Can See What Is Likely A Palm Pistol Barrel Clenched Between The Brown Shirt Man’s Middle Fingers Of His Right Hand – A Frame From Our Video

The post Close-up of assassin’s right hand appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks Christine R.

See this.

The post Just like Thomas Crooks, Kirk was cremated, and neither the autopsy nor the name of the doctor who performed it have been released appeared first on LewRockwell.

Bill Madden wrote:

The Constitution stipulates that real money (not fiat currency) be issued by Congress (not the private consortium of banks called the Federal Reserve).  Deficit spending by the government stimulates business activity and is therefore good for the economy but bad for the country – https://www.usdebtclock.org/ – so we have mostly deficit budgets.  The interest on our debt is about a trillion dollars a year and most of the debt was created from nothing.  Although the Fed creates the fiat currency from nothing to loan at interest into circulation, we have to earn, borrow, inherit or steal the fiat currency to pay the interest and/or to reduce the debt.  It is totally unfair but it happens because most of our elected officials are “influenced” to let it happen in spite of their oath to the Constitution. See this.

The post Stop Digital Currency Tyranny — Enact H.R. 1919 appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Saleh Abdullah.

https://miri.substack.com/p/charlie-kirk-turning-point-or-tv 

https://miri.substack.com/p/his-story-her-story-and-the-truth

The post Charlie Kirk: Turning Point or TV Plot? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Saleh Abdullah wrote:

Stew Peters and others have suggested that Charlie Kirk was killed by Israel with a planted exploding microphone sort of like what the Mossad did with the exploding pager operation against Hezbollah. I’m not sure I agree with this theory, but I’m not prepared to totally dismiss it either. Kirk’s security people were definitely doing all sorts of weird things as the event unfolded. So based on that alone, the theory is not totally outside the realm of possibilities. It is also definitely much more believable than the bullshit lone gunman story. I do agree with Stew that Israel is suspect number one in the assassination. How they went about assassinating him is a detail to the larger story. There’s been a serious effort to discredit people who have been blaming Israel for the assassination even though the evidence keeps mounting that they were the most likely culprit.

Here’s Charlie Kirk’s real assassin. 

https://x.com/realstewpeters/status/1971087324680421499

https://x.com/realstewpeters/status/1970918233273426057

https://x.com/RyanMattaMedia/status/1971057325416087971

The post Post from Stew Peters appeared first on LewRockwell.

Ginny Garner wrote:

Lew,

In his interview with Dialogue Works, Max Blumenthal explains how Charlie Kirk was leading a large grassroots political movement promoting a non-interventionist US foreign policy and as such was a grave threat to the neocons. Max also explains how the stage is being set for the US to fight a war in Iran because this is Netanyahu’s wish and Trump is afraid of the Israeli PM.

See here.

The post US on Path to War With Iran and Silenced Charlie Kirk was Leading US Conservative Antiwar Movement appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Can Trump Keep His Promise To Mideast Leaders? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

John Leake

The post Secretary Kennedy’s Key Remark at Autism Press Conference appeared first on LewRockwell.