"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation which would abrogate them." -- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

Bidgear ad




US Is Losing In Ukraine. Blame China, Says Blinken.

Biden Admin Piggybacks Sinophobia onto Rampant Russophobia

by John V. Walsh Posted on May 09, 2024

At the close of his recent trip to China, on April 26 while still in Beijing, Sec. of State, Anthony Blinken, made an extremely bellicose statement to the press.  Blinken’s words marked a new phase in the narrative to prepare the American and European public for more conflict with China.   As Caitlin Johnstone has reminded us, “Before they drop the bombs, they drop the narrative.”  What, then, is the narrative that Blinken dropped?

Blinken alleges that China’s support for Russia accounts for its success in Ukraine.

In his statement, Blinken tells us that the US has “serious concern” over “components” from China that are “powering” Russia’s war with Ukraine.  He goes on to say that China is the top supplier “of dual use items that Moscow is using to ramp up its industrial base, a defense industrial base…”  It is widely accepted that the US is losing its Ukraine proxy war.  Blinken now informs us that the US-installed Ukrainian regime is losing because China is aiding Russia.  Blaming China is nothing new in the argot of the West, but here it is put to a new use, as an excuse for yet another embarrassing defeat for the US.

Blinken lists “machine tools, microelectronics, nitrocellulose” as key components that China provides to Russia.  But “dual use items” is an ill-defined and malleable category.  Potentially, every item of trade can be subsumed under the term.  For example, if Russia imports Chinese machine tools to make cars, then it can readily be claimed that they are being used to build tanks.  Or if Russia imports nitrocellulose to make fingernail polish, it can be charged that the chemical is being used for gun powder or explosives.  So, when the US demands that China stop “indirect” support for Russia’s war effort, it is ultimately demanding that China cut off all trade with Russia.

Blinken offers no evidence that such “dual use” items are responsible for the drubbing that its Ukraine proxies are taking.  And China has no obligation to curtail its commerce with Russia.  As with India and other genuinely sovereign nations which continue to trade with Russia, China is not bound by the edicts of the United States.

What in fact is China’s stance on the Ukraine proxy war?  First of all, China says that it is providing no weapons or direct support to Russia’s war effort.  And the US does not try to contest this; it is a given.  In contrast, US and the EU are throwing billions in weapons at the war in Ukraine.

Similarly, the US insists that it will provide “whatever it takes” for “as long as it takes” for Ukraine to win the war. In sharp contrast China has called for negotiations to end the conflict and offered to serve as a mediator.  A negotiated solution would certainly end the conflict that has consumed hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers and a large but unknown number of Russians.  One might think that China’s call would be universally welcomed.   

“Blame China” emerging as a new propaganda line on the Ukraine proxy war

Blaming China for the US failure in Ukraine is not simply a quick talking point inserted into a Blinken speech.  It is being echoed by others in the Administration and beyond it in NATO.  And it is the reason given for a new round of anti-China sanctions. In short it has all the earmarks of a well-planned propaganda campaign.

Claire's Observations:  This kind of "blame game behaviour"is typical for a government leadership which is pathologically incapable of ever admitting having made a mistake, of any kind; and that.... is when things get dangerous!  Blaming China for NATO's inability to lead Ukraine to "victory" (whatever that is supposed to mean) against Russia, would be absolutely hysterical, were it not for the geopolitical (and potentially martial) ramifications here.

Posted on:

On Monday, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters that federal agencies such as the FBI and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) restarted discussions with Big Tech platforms. According to NextGov/FCW, this coordination will focus on “removing disinformation on their sites as the November presidential election nears.” Warner claimed these talks resumed in March, around the same time oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri — which centers on the feds’ censorship efforts — were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court.

When pressed on the validity of Warner’s remarks, an FBI representative confirmed to The Federalist that the agency has resumed communications with social media companies ahead of the 2024 election.

“The FBI remains committed to combatting foreign malign influence operations, including in connection with our elections. That effort includes sharing specific foreign threat information with state and local election officials and private sector companies when appropriate and rigorously consistent with the law,” the representative claimed. “In coordination with the Department of Justice, the FBI recently implemented procedures to facilitate sharing information about foreign malign influence with social media companies in a way that reinforces that private companies are free to decide on their own whether and how to take action on that information.”

Posted on:

Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times 

Nearly 1,425 people have been arrested on Jan. 6 charges, with 2024 arrests running at almost double the rate from 2023 and 2022, a U.S. Department of Justice report shows.

Capitol Police officers use pepper spray and tear gas to clear protesters from the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. (Brent Stirton/Getty Images)

Through close of business on May 3, the FBI has arrested 1,424 suspects in the 40 months since the breach and violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, the DOJ reported in its monthly update.

That includes 159 people who were arrested during the first four months of 2024, nearly double the 83 arrested during the same period in 2023 and the 85 arrested in the same period in 2022, DOJ records show.

The FBI has made 391 Jan. 6 arrests since May 2023 and 614 arrests since May 2022, according to DOJ data.

Jan. 6 is the largest, most sweeping investigation in FBI history—one that DOJ leaders have pledged will continue unabated. The DOJ has until Jan. 6, 2026, to charge individuals before the statute of limitations expires.

Some 1,334 people have been charged with entering and remaining in a restricted federal building or grounds, the most common Jan. 6 misdemeanor. Of those, 127 people were charged with entering and remaining while armed with a deadly or dangerous weapon.

Only two defendants were arrested over the past month for corruptly obstructing an official proceeding—the most commonly charged Jan. 6 felony that now affects 355 people—a controversial charge currently before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Thirty-six percent of defendants—510—have been charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers or employees. More than a quarter of those involved use of a deadly or dangerous weapon, the report said.

About 820 defendants have pleaded guilty to a variety of federal crimes. Sixty-nine percent were misdemeanor charges, and 31 percent were felonies.

Nearly 885 defendants have had their cases adjudicated, with 61 percent sentenced to prison time, 19 percent given home detention, and 3.5 percent given some combination of the two, the report said.

About 160 defendants have been found guilty at contested trials, the report said, including three tried in the District of Columbia Superior Court. Another three dozen defendants were found guilty based on an agreed-upon set of facts.

Of the 199 defendants who have gone to trial, 82 were found guilty of assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers and/or obstructing officers during civil disorder—both felony charges.

Every defendant who opted for a jury trial has been found guilty of at least some of the charges lodged against them. Only three defendants have been acquitted of all charges. Those cases involved bench trials.

The rate of arrests picked up during the last quarter of 2023 and has continued through four months of 2024.

Posted on:

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

Fascism became a swear word in the US and UK during the Second World War. It has been ever since, to the point that the content of the term has been drained away completely. It is not a system of political economy but an insult. 

If we go back a decade before the war, you find a completely different situation. Read any writings from polite society from 1932 to 1940 or so, and you find a consensus that freedom and democracy, along with Enlightenment-style liberalism of the 18th century, were completely doomed. They should be replaced by some version of what was called the planned society, of which fascism was one option

All of this became rather embarrassing after the war so it was largely forgotten. But the affection on the part of many sectors of the US ruling class had for fascism was still in place. It merely took on new names. 

As a result, the lesson of the war, that the US should stand for freedom above all else while wholly rejecting fascism as a system, was largely buried. And generations have been taught to regard fascism as nothing but a quirky and failed system of the past, leaving the word as an insult to fling at in any way deemed reactionary or old-fashioned, which makes no sense. There is valuable literature on the topic and it bears reading. One book that is particularly insightful is The Vampire Economy by Günter Reimann, a financier in Germany who chronicled the dramatic changes to industrial structures under the Nazis. In a few short years, from 1933 to 1939, a nation of enterprise and small shopkeepers was converted to a corporate-dominated machine that gutted the middle class and cartelized industry in preparation for war. 

“Most businessmen in a totalitarian economy feel safer if they have a protector in the State or Party bureaucracy,” Reimann writes.

“They pay for their protection as did the helpless peasants of feudal days. It is inherent in the present lineup of forces, however, that the official is often sufficiently independent to take the money but fails to provide the protection.” 

He wrote of “the decline and ruin of the genuinely independent businessman, who was the master of his enterprise, and exercised his property rights. This type of capitalist is disappearing but another type is prospering. He enriches himself through his Party ties; he himself is a Party member devoted to the Fuehrer, favored by the bureaucracy, entrenched because of family connections and political affiliations. In a number of cases, the wealth of these Party capitalists has been created through the Party’s exercise of naked power. It is to the advantage of these capitalists to strengthen the Party which has strengthened them. Incidentally, it sometimes happens that they become so strong that they constitute a danger to the system, upon which they are liquidated or purged.”

This was particularly true for independent publishers and distributors. Their gradual bankruptcy served to effectively nationalize all surviving media outlets who knew that it was in their interests to echo Nazi Party priorities. 

Reimann wrote:

“The logical outcome of a fascist system is that all newspapers, news services, and magazines become more or less direct organs of the fascist party and State. They are governmental institutions over which individual capitalists have no control and very little influence except as they are loyal supporters or members of the all-powerful party.”

In today’s polarized political environment, the left continues to worry about unbridled capitalism while the right is forever on the lookout for the enemy of full-blown socialism. Each side has reduced fascistic corporatism to a historical problem on the level of witch burning, fully conquered but useful as a historical reference to form a contemporary insult against the other side. 

As a result, and armed with partisan bête noires that bear no resemblance to any really existing threat, hardly anyone who is politically engaged and active is fully aware that there is nothing particularly new about what is called the Great Reset. It is a corporatist model – a combination of the worst of capitalism and socialism without limits – of privileging the elite at the expense of the many, which is why these historical works by Reimann and Flynn seem so familiar to us today. 

And yet, for some strange reason, the tactile reality of fascism in practice – not the insult but the historical system – is hardly known either in popular or academic culture. That makes it all the easier to reimplement such a system in our time. 



Posted on:
by Tyler Durden

The British government announced Wednesday it has expelled an official of the Russian embassy for being "an undeclared military intelligence officer."

The action comes amid an apparent broader pressure and essentially a war on Russian diplomatic facilities and personnel in the UK, with interior minister James Cleverly briefing parliament that multiple Russian-owned properties will be downgraded from having diplomatic status and protections.

He alleged that Russian sites in Sussex as well as in London will see their diplomatic immunity removed. Cleverly told parliament that "we believe have been used for intelligence purposes."

Via Reuters

New restrictions will also be placed on the amount of time Russian diplomats can spend in the country, given recent "malign" Russian activity in the UK, according to the interior minister's words.

One reported example was an arson attack on a Ukrainian-linked business, which the UK alleged had ties all the way back to the Kremlin.

All of this also comes as both countries are trading very serious and rapidly escalating threats in the wake of Foreign Secretary David Cameran saying while on a trip to Kiev earlier this week that the UK is fine with Ukraine using British-supplied weapons to attack Russian territory.

He had stated provocatively, "Ukraine has that rightJust as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it's defending itself."

Russia's foreign ministry in response promptly summoned UK Ambassador to Moscow Nigel Casey over the remarks. "Casey was warned that the response to Ukrainian strikes using British weapons on Russian territory could be any British military facilities and equipment on the territory of Ukraine and beyond," the ministry stated after the meeting.

Importantly, the Kremlin laid out that Cameron's words mean he "de facto recognized his country as a party to the conflict." This marked possibly the first time that the Russian government specifically threatened to attack British military installations and equipment within Ukraine and beyond.

Claire's Observations:  Why the hell the UK (with no reasonable military capabilities against Russia whatsoever) is playing "Picador" here, is anyone's guess, and particularly right now, with tensions on a razor's edge, between NATO and Russia, courtesy of NATO's abject failure in Ukraine's war against Russia, from which they cannot find the moral courage to withdraw.

The logical thing to do at this point, would be to sit Zelinsky down (or whoever the US/NATO have in the wings to replace him) and tell him he has to negotiate the best possible terms for an end to this meatgrinder of a war with Russia, but this continues not to happen.  

One has to wonder what he has (probably courtesy of Mossad or the IDF) on major heads of state in Europe and the US, for this monstrosity of a war to continue, but whatever it is, it must be huge.


Posted on:


by Tyler Durden

Yesterday we discussed the latest consumer credit data, which revealed that the amount of credit card debt across the US has hit a new record high of $1.337 trillion (even though it appears to have finally hit a brick wall, barely rising in April by the smallest amount since the covid crash), even as the savings rate has tumbled to an all time low.

To be sure, credit card debt is just a small portion (~6%) of the total household debt stack: as the next chart from the latest NY Fed consumer credit report shows, the bulk, or 70%, of US household debt is in the form of mortgages, followed by student loans, auto loans, credit card debt, home equity credit and various other forms. Altogether, the total is a massive $17.5 trillion in total household debt.

But staggering as the mountain of household debt may be, at least we know how huge the problem is; after all the data is public. What is far more dangerous - because we have no clue about its size - is what Bloomberg calls "Phantom Debt", and we have repeatedly called Buy Now, Pay Later debt. How much of that kind of debt is out there is largely a guess.

Let's back up: the topic of Buy Now, Pay Later, or installment debt, is hardly new: we have covered it extensively in the past year, as this selection of articles reveals:

But while it is easy to ensnare young, incomeless Americans into the net of installment debt where they will rot as the next generation of debt slaves for the rest of their lives, there is an even more sinister side to this extremely popular form of debt which allows consumers to split purchases into smaller installments: as Bloomberg reports in a lengthy expose on installment debt, the major companies that provide these so called “pay in four” products, such as Affirm Holdings, Klarna Bank and Block’s Afterpay, don’t report those loans to credit agencies. That's why Buy Now/Pay Later credit has earned a far more ominous nickname:

It's hard enough for central bankers and Wall Street traders to make sense of the post-pandemic economy with the data available to them. At Wells Fargo & Co., senior economist Tim Quinlan is particularly spooked by the “phantom debt” that he can't see.

Posted on:

blueapples on X
Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has largely spent the last few months shattering the hope that he presents a viable alternative to the current political establishment. From selecting big tech starlet Nicole Shanahan as his running mate to his utter sycophancy for the state of Israel, it has become clear the premise that an RFK presidency would be paradigm-shifting is nothing short of illusory. Yet, he has remained steadfast in the sole facet of his platform which does challenge the existing order. RFK's unfettered opposition to the medical technocracy behind the COVID-19 plandemic and the consequent large-scale human experiment that was the development and distribution of Pfizer and Moderna's mRNA vaccines stands as the only thing somewhat distinguishing him from his opponents in the 2024 election. While Biden and Trump have taken to the campaign trail boasting about how their support for those vaccines helped each of them beat the pandemic, RFK is singing a completely different tune by warning voters of the forthcoming WHO pandemic treaty. If passed, the treaty would put Americans under the yoke of medical tyranny in a manner much more oppressive than in 2020.

According to Fadéla Chaib, the WHO is set to complete the latest draft of its pandemic treaty by May 10th. That deadline marks the conclusion of its 9th session to complete its arduous mission to do so. If passed, the treaty would revise the existing International Health Regulations that the WHO's 194 member states have already adopted. According to the draft of the treaty most recently made available on April 22nd, the new IHR would give the WHO authority to direct and coordinate the pandemic response measures of nations across the globe signatory to it. If the WHO achieves its aims then the treaty would be adopted by the end of the month by the World Health Assembly, the WHO's governing body.

Changes to the existing IHR have belabored efforts to pass the pandemic treaty over the years. Over the last few years several proposed IHR changes have been dropped from the current draft of the treaty. Previous editions of the treaty included giving the WHO power to issue binding directives, disregard considerations for humans rights, act on the basis of a potential health emergency, impose digital vaccine passports, and conduct mass censorship to fight what they deem to be misinformation.

Claire's Observations:  And of course, what they will label as "misinformation" is any fact which goes against the grain of their current agenda!!  Doctors will be stripped of their professional classifications, and individuals with information about how the WHO's agenda might be doing more harm than good, will be demonitized; deplatformed; and potentially prosecuted, with impossible to pay fines, and doing jail time.

And if you think their Covid agenda was horrific, between lockdowns and the MRNA shots, now conclusively shown to create massive health problems for innumerable people, just wait until the next plandemic hits!!!!!  Folks, it's all about the Benjamins, and how much money can be squeezed from an unsuspecting public, before problems arise from that cannot possibly have other origins than specific "treatments" and  "vaccines" ordered by WHO.




Posted on:

Be skeptical of the U.S. stock market's recent rebound - there's more downside ahead, and plenty of evidence to back it up. The sound of alarm bells is becoming harder to ignore. With the economy slowing amid softening consumer activity, rising unemployment numbers, and spiking delinquency rates, big name stocks that have been propping up the market during latest rally are starting to lose momentum. Worse, they're already losing billions in market capitalization, and poised for an even bigger crash by mid-May, according to several renowned market strategists. JPMorgan says this is just the start of a much deeper sell-off that will put an end to this bull run. New data shows that the perfect setup for investor panic is here, and it's going to be ugly!

Posted on:

Phantom debt refers to debts that are either not owed at all or have already been paid off but are still pursued by debt collectors. Sometimes, these debts are entirely fabricated, while in other cases, they might stem from mistaken identity, expired debts, or debts that have already been settled. These debts can cause significant stress and financial hardship for individuals who may feel compelled to pay them out of fear of legal action or damage to their credit score. It's important for consumers to be vigilant and verify the legitimacy of any debt claims before making payments.

Posted on:
By: orraz
Posted on:
By: orraz
Posted on: