Giuseppe Arcimboldo Four elements – Air 1566
VDH
WATCH: Victor Davis Hanson Delivers Brilliant Breakdown on Why Democrats Despise Elon Musk |
"They hate him because they can't destroy him and every time they try they make a fool of themselves and he gets stronger."
🔥🔥🔥
This could be the single greatest explanation of why… pic.twitter.com/hDPHRZp0ay
— Overton (@overton_news) December 23, 2024
Woke
YES!
pic.twitter.com/FJhC3Mlj6p— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 22, 2024
Puppet
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 23, 2024
Loopholes
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 23, 2024
Rand Paul
JUST IN: Senator Rand Paul says he controls one committee – and will use it to ram through all of Trumps' Cabinet nominees he can through it ASAP.
"Kash Patel, Tulsi Gabbard, the list goes on and on… Pete Hegseth. The vast majority I will support. On day one, we will try to… pic.twitter.com/mIQlmnRIFJ
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) December 22, 2024
Pepe Nap
They can’t help themselves. It’s all they have left.
• Musk Derangement Syndrome (AmG)
Move over, Trump Derangement Syndrome! It is time to make room for the latest pathology: Musk Derangement Syndrome. The hysteria has been building for some time. It wasn’t so long ago that Elon Musk enjoyed enviable street cred among the brotherhood of snotty, self-congratulating elites. A green energy guru, he made the hearts of the Sierra Club Sultans go pit-a-pat with his talk of “sustainable transport” and solar roofs. Then Musk made several missteps. The first was buying Twitter and restoring open discourse to a platform that was started to encourage, well, open discourse but had become a headquarters of government surveillance and censorship during the first Trump administration.
Musk never recovered his progressive credentials after he came out as a supporter of free speech. But the atmosphere of left-wing disapproval that was swaddling Musk since his purchase of Twitter turned toxic and hysterical this past summer when, following the assassination attempt against Donald Trump, he announced that, gasp, he was supporting Trump’s reelection bid. Could you believe it? Supporting Trump’s reelection—especially actively, ostentatiously, effectively supporting Trump’s reelection bid—was like the sin against the Holy Ghost: unforgivable.
And then Musk compounded the perfidy by joining forces with Vivek Ramaswamy to form DoGE: the “department” of government efficiency, a time-limited initiative to help bring government spending and regulation under control. They have set an expiration date of July 6, 2026, by which date they hope to have been able to give America a 250th birthday gift of fiscal solvency and rational regulation. Many people have wondered what DoGe would be able to accomplish since it would just be making recommendations with no real power to enforce them. We have just been vouchsafed a glimpse of its possible potency.
For several years now, the approach of Christmas has brought not just visions of sugar plums and Santa sightings but also the annual Congressional budget snit known as CR, short for “Continuing Resolution.” The exercise now seems almost venerable. In fact, though, it is an admission of failure, begotten in legislative irresponsibility, bred in malodorous sluices of pork-laden, politically correct greed. Every year, Congress is supposed to deliver a budget before it breaks for Christmas. America’s last real budget was passed in 1996. The usual expedient is the stopgap measure of a “continuing resolution” in which Congress says it will just continue funding things at more or less the same level as it had been, kicking the can down the road and into the next fiscal year.
Contemplating the embarrassing sideshow that was this year’s CR squabble, a friend reminded me of the old quip. If “con” is the opposite of “pro,” what is the opposite of “Congress?” This year, as has become the usual practice, Congress waited until the last possible moment to plop the text of the Continuing Resolution on the desks of our Conscript Fathers. What had started as a twenty-page document had lizzoed into a 1547-page behemoth. This was no “continuing resolution” but a porker full of self-serving giveaways to Congress as well as numerous woke initiatives designed to stymie the incoming Trump administration.
Among many noxious items were a provision to scuttle any serious inquiry into the activities of Liz Cheney’s January 6 investigation and another provision to continue funding the State Department’s Global Engagement Center. This innocuous-sounding initiative (we’re all in favor of “global engagement,” right?) funds the Britain-based Global Disinformation Index, which encourages advertisers to flee media outlets of which the guardians of the Narrative disapprove. This includes the Washington Examiner, RealClearPolitics, Reason, the New York Post, Blaze Media, the Daily Wire, the Federalist, the American Conservative, Newsmax—and American Greatness. It is, as Vivek Ramaswamy observed, a “key node of the censorship industrial complex.”
This monstrosity was stopped, but how? Critics of Musk blame him. “He tweeted about our beloved monstrosity,” they skirled. “He killed the bill.” But this is wrong. Musk did indeed post, with Olympic assiduity, about the egregious piece of self-serving lard. But what scotched the original bill was the public outcry. Musk may have been the catalyst, the tocsin in the night. The fire brigade was manned by ordinary citizens. As one social media poster put it, “All Elon did was read a bill, post on a public platform that the reckless spending in it was unacceptable, ask others to contact their representatives if they agreed, and made clear that he will help primary Ds + Rs who support it.”
This is exactly right. But to listen to the Dems, you would think the world was coming to an end. On December 18, Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA), knickers twisted tight, asked angrily, “Can you imagine what the next two years are going to be like if every time that Congress works its will and then there’s a tweet? Or from an individual who has no official portfolio, who threatens members on the Republican side with a primary? And they succumb?” Yes, just imagine, Dick, if it is the people themselves, and not your little club of coddled thumb suckers, who shed light on the activities of Congress as it pretends to go about the people’s business?
How do we prevent for-profit AI? Even if we might succeed in the US, what good would that do in the rest of the world?
• Musk Makes Startling AI Prediction (RT)
Artificial intelligence could become smarter than any single human by the end of next year, according to tech billionaire Elon Musk. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO made the prediction shortly after his AI company, xAI, officially launched its first image generation model, Aurora, earlier this month. Aurora, an updated version of the first image generation model that xAI introduced in October, allows users to create photorealistic visuals. Compared to other AI models, Aurora has fewer restrictions and can accurately generate images at almost any prompt, including depictions of famous personalities and copyrighted characters.
‘It is increasingly likely that AI will superset the intelligence of any single human by the end of 2025 and maybe all humans by 2027/2028,” Musk wrote on Monday, in a post on his social media platform X. According to him, the probability that AI will exceed the intelligence of all humans combined by 2030 “is ~100%.” Earlier this year, Musk’s xAI launched Colossus, described as the world’s most powerful AI training system, setting a new benchmark in the rapidly advancing field of AI. Colossus boasts 100,000 liquid-cooled H100 graphics processing units (GPUs), the chips provided by Nvidia, which places xAI well ahead of its competitors, including those from OpenAI.
Meanwhile, high-profile figures and scientists have been raising concerns in recent years, over the potential dangers posed by the unregulated adoption of AI technology. Last month, renowned computer scientist and professor at the University of Montreal Yoshua Bengio warned that machines could soon have most of the cognitive abilities of humans and thus pose grave risks to humanity as it becomes harder to control AI. The computer scientist cited a common fear that the AI machines currently being trained “would lead to systems that turn against humans.”
Bengio also highlighted potential risks of social and political disparity stemming from AI, pointing out that a limited number of organizations and governments could afford to build powerful and costly AI machines. This would lead to a concentration of economic, political and military power, eventually threatening geopolitical stability worldwide, the scientist warned. In June, addressing the G7 summit in Italy, Pope Francis warned humanity against depending on choices made by machines. The Pontiff stressed that the algorithms “can only examine realities formalized in numerical terms,” while humans who have wisdom and can listen to Sacred Scripture “not only choose, but in their hearts are capable of deciding.”
“..the scale of X’s influence and Musk’s ability to reach a global audience has elevated this struggle to new heights. RT walked so X could run..”
• Elon Musk Is Winning The War Against The MSM. RT Was There First (Tarkhanov)
The tragic terror attack at the Christmas market in Magdeburg, Germany, which claimed several lives and left hundreds injured, was not just an attack on innocent civilians – it was also an attack on truth. In the aftermath of the atrocity, a predictable yet disturbing pattern emerged: the mainstream media, in lockstep with political authorities, immediately attempted to frame the narrative in a way that avoided uncomfortable truths. They downplayed the attacker’s background, obscured his motivations, and redirected public focus towards safer, more politically convenient storylines. But one figure cut through the fog of misinformation – Elon Musk. In recent years, the tech billionaire has emerged as one of the most prominent critics of legacy media and its increasingly transparent biases.
In the wake of the Magdeburg attack, Musk did what most global leaders and prominent media outlets refused to do: he publicly raised the questions everyone was asking and pointed out the contradictions in the official narrative. The mainstream media’s response to the attack followed a depressingly familiar script. Initial reports focused on generic descriptions of the attacker, avoiding critical details about his ideological background, motivations, and long history of suspicious behavior. When conflicting evidence emerged – suggesting the attacker was not the ‘ex-Muslim atheist’ he claimed to be but rather someone deeply entrenched in extremist ideology – the media still hesitated to shift its tone.
Musk, however, did not hesitate. Using his platform X (formerly Twitter), he called out the inconsistencies in the reporting, criticized the German government’s inaction, and directly challenged Chancellor Olaf Scholz. His posts, viewed and shared by millions, forced a public reckoning. Instead of allowing the narrative to settle into the comfortable grooves carved by mainstream outlets, Musk shattered the illusion and amplified the voices of those who had been warning about the attacker’s background for years. Musk’s engagement in this discourse is significant for several reasons. First, it demonstrates the power of decentralized platforms like X, where influential voices can bypass traditional media gatekeepers.
Second, it reveals the extent to which public trust in legacy media has eroded. Millions of people no longer turn to CNN, BBC, or Der Spiegel as their first source of information – they look to independent voices on social media, and Musk has become one of the most powerful of those voices. Mainstream media outlets, accustomed to being the sole arbiters of public narratives, now find themselves unable to suppress dissenting views. Musk’s immense following and his willingness to confront uncomfortable truths mean that attempts to obfuscate or spin events like the Magdeburg attack are no longer guaranteed to succeed.
While Musk and X are currently at the forefront of this information battle, it’s worth remembering that RT has been challenging mainstream narratives for years. Long before Musk took over X, RT was often one of the few major outlets willing to question Western governments and expose stories that mainstream media preferred to ignore. Despite being heavily criticized, de-platformed, and even banned in multiple countries, the network has persisted in providing alternative perspectives on global events. This isn’t to say RT is without its flaws – like any media organization, it cannot escape some of its own biases – but its contribution to breaking the monopoly of Western media narratives cannot be ignored.
While Musk and X have brought this fight into the mainstream, RT was already in the trenches, challenging the narrative before it was fashionable. In this sense, Musk is building on ground already broken by others. However, the scale of X’s influence and Musk’s ability to reach a global audience has elevated this struggle to new heights. RT walked so X could run, and while Musk is rightly celebrated for his courage and transparency, it’s worth acknowledging that he’s not the first to challenge the system – just the most impactful so far.
The Western elites understand one undeniable truth: power in the modern world is not merely about political or military might – it’s about controlling the flow of information. Historically, legacy media served as the perfect tool for this purpose. Carefully curated stories, selective reporting, and strategic omissions allowed those in power to guide public perception seamlessly. However, that era is fading. Social media platforms and figures like Musk have democratized access to information. In the aftermath of the Magdeburg attack, it wasn’t state broadcasters or newspaper editors who exposed the full story – it was ordinary people online, sharing evidence, raising questions, and amplifying voices that the mainstream ignored.
It’s no wonder, then, that the elites have turned their focus towards silencing alternative sources of information. Media outlets like Russia’s RT have been relentlessly targeted, de-platformed, and demonized. The justification is always the same: fighting misinformation. But one must ask – who decides what constitutes misinformation? In a world where even basic facts are twisted to serve political ends, it’s clear that this battle is not about truth but about control. Elon Musk’s actions in the aftermath of the Magdeburg attack were not just those of an outspoken billionaire – they were those of someone who understands the stakes in the battle for information.
By refusing to bow to the narrative enforced by the mainstream media, Musk has demonstrated that the power to control the public discourse is slipping from the hands of legacy institutions. This is not just a victory for Musk, nor is it merely a battle over one tragic event in Germany. It’s a symbolic moment in a larger war – a war over whether information will remain free and decentralized or be corralled and curated by a handful of powerful actors.
Despite mainstream journalists’ best efforts to steer the public away from questioning their narrative about the Magdeburg attack, one man with power and influence refused to stay silent. As long as platforms like X exist and influential figures like Musk are willing to speak out, there is hope that the truth will continue to break through the carefully constructed walls of mainstream narratives. The legacy media may still have power, but they no longer have a monopoly on the truth. And that, in itself, is a victory worth celebrating.
For every critical voice, they have 400 Economics PhD’s claiming they are The Science.
• Elon Musk: “The Fed Is Absurdly Overstaffed” (ZH)
The Ron Paul ‘Revolution’ could be on the horizon as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office next month. Elon Musk, one of Trump’s top advisors, wrote on X about creating efficiencies at the Federal Reserve. “The Fed is absurdly overstaffed,” Musk wrote on X early Monday morning, responding to Chamath Palihapitiya’s post about the Fed’s latest interest rate decision. A recent note from the Mises Institute pointed out that about 23,000 people work at the Federal Reserve Board in Washington and 12 regional reserve banks across the US. “But there’s more to it than that. The financial statements reveal that the Board of Governors expenses and currency costs were $2 billion. If this constitutes salaries, then total salaries and pension costs at the Fed become closer to $7 billion. Dividing this figure by 23,000 people equals around $304,000 per employee,” Mises said.
Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have been tasked with streamlining federal operations through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The department aims to create a leaner, more efficient government, including $2 trillion in spending cuts. The wish list of potential efficiencies continues to grow – with a ‘really bold plan for day one ‘ … Days before the presidential election, Ron Paul asked on X if he could join DOGE in Trump’s second term. Musk responded: “Would be great to have Ron Paul as part of the Department of Government Efficiency!”
https://twitter.com/alx/status/1852454701943423287
Last week, Ron Paul wrote on X, “We should wean ourselves off The Fed, like we weaned ourselves off the mainstream media.” Musk responded: “Yes!! Ron Paul ftw.” Let’s not forget about 400 PhD economists at the Fed failed to forecast the inflationary storm triggered by the rapid expansion of the money supply by trillions—only for them to dismiss it as “transitory.” Such a massive misreading underscores the urgent need for restructuring. Errors of this magnitude are unacceptable. With a workforce of 23,000, the Fed still manages to lose money—upwards of $200 billion. Perhaps Fed chair Jay Powell’s days are numbered.
What deals has Durov made with French justice?
• Musk Congratulates Durov On Telegram Milestone (RT)
SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk has offered some words of praise to Telegram co-founder and CEO Pavel Durov after the Russian-born entrepreneur’s company turned a profit for the first time in its three-year history of monetization. Durov announced the news in an X post on Monday. Describing 2024 as a “very successful year,” he explained that the privacy-focused messaging app made more than $1 billion in revenue this year, and that “we are closing the year with more than $500 million in cash reserves, not including crypto assets.” “Well done,” Musk responded under Durov’s post. Despite his company’s achievements, Durov has faced serious legal challenges this year. In August, he was detained after landing at a Paris airport and released on bail several days later. He faces 12 criminal charges, including complicity in distributing child pornography, drug dealing, and money laundering.
French prosecutors claim that Telegram’s supposedly lax moderation rules have enabled rampant criminality to flourish on the platform. Durov testified before a French court for the first time earlier this month. The Russian national, who is also a citizen of France, the UAE, and Saint Kitts and Nevis, refused to comment on the case to reporters. He has, however, denied any wrongdoing. Commenting in August on Durov’s detention, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov highlighted the absurdity of holding the entrepreneur accountable for crimes committed using his network. Prosecuting Durov for these crimes would be the same as French authorities arresting the heads of Renault or Citroen because “terrorists also use cars,” Peskov argued.
“In 2023, Tesla sold 1.8 million vehicles, while Toyota sold 11.2 million..”
“Year-to-date, Tesla’s stock is up 57%..”
• Tesla’s Market Cap Nears Half Of Global Auto Industry (ZH)
Tesla shares just reached a new all-time high following Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election, propelling the company to a massive $1.5 trillion valuation as of December 18, 2024. This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu, highlights the most valuable automakers by market cap worldwide as of Dec. 13, 2024, based on figures from CompaniesMarketCap.com.
Trailing far behind Tesla, the four other top automakers on the list are Toyota ($231 billion), BYD ($107 billion), Xiaomi ($98 billion), and Ferrari ($81 billion). Investors believe Elon Musk’s close relationship with Trump, along with Musk’s growing role in government, will serve as a powerful catalyst for Tesla. Additionally, some of the stock’s recent gains hinge on expectations that Trump’s planned corporate tax cuts will benefit U.S. manufacturers, including Tesla.
Tesla’s stock has also regained popularity due to investor expectations that its Robotaxi and Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology will drive a new phase of growth. Year-to-date, Tesla’s stock is up 57%. However, Tesla’s massive market cap is not reflected in its production numbers. In 2023, Tesla sold 1.8 million vehicles, while Toyota sold 11.2 million vehicles during the same period. Tesla’s success has further extended Elon Musk’s lead as the richest person on Earth. In December 2024, Musk’s net worth reached $462 billion, far ahead of Jeff Bezos in second place at $243 billion.
“..slated to serve as national security adviser..”
• Trump Adviser Says Ukraine Narrative Is Changing (RT)
The stances taken by EU and NATO nations on handling the Ukraine conflict have changed since Donald Trump won the US presidential elections in November, according to Representative Mike Waltz. “We’ve seen everybody’s narrative go from ‘As long as it tanks (sic), blank check, don’t dare say anything else, or you’re somehow pro-Russian’ to ‘How do we get this to a deal?’” the Florida lawmaker, who is slated to serve as national security adviser in the incoming administration, told political commentator Ben Shapiro on Sunday. The President-elect has made it clear the war must end, Waltz said.
He also emphasized that part of his role, along with Trump’s team, is to identify key players in peace negotiations, to bring them to the table, and to establish terms for a resolution that align with American interests. Waltz criticized the administration of outgoing President Joe Biden, saying it wanted more funding of its Ukraine policy, but declined to define the specific outcome that pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into the conflict should produce. He also said he has been receiving questions from his constituents about that. ”Is it in America’s national interest to expect every Russian off of every inch of Ukraine, including Crimea? How long is that going to take? How much money is that going to cost? How many lives will be lost? Is that even a realistic goal at this point?” he quoted the inquiries, calling them “valid” and “something we’re certainly talking about.”
Crimea voted to reunite with Russia in 2014, following a US-backed armed coup in Kiev, which was rejected by people living in the peninsula. The government of Vladimir Zelensky is demanding full control of the Russian region in return for what the Ukrainian leader calls “just peace” with Moscow. Both Shapiro and Waltz claimed that Russia was seriously weakened by the fight against its NATO-backed embattled neighbour, giving Trump leverage on both Kiev and Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin stated last week that his nation’s military is in a very good shape, supported by a reinvigorated defense industry and military technology that the West cannot match.
The Shapiro-Waltz interview was focused on Trump putting pressure on nations that the US perceives as adversaries, primarily China, after he is inaugurated in January. ”One of the lessons we should learn from Ukraine is you don’t try to arm your allies after they’ve been invaded. You, maybe, arm them before to prevent the invasion in the first place,” Waltz mused, pledging more arms to the self-administered Chinese island of Taiwan. The increased arming of Kiev by NATO nations was one of the triggers that pushed tensions with Russia into open hostilities in February 2022, according to Moscow.
“We’ve seen everybody’s narrative go from ‘As long as it [takes], blank check, don’t dare say anything else, or you’re somehow pro-Russian’ to ‘How do we get this to a deal?’” – Mike Waltz.
• Kiev Increasingly Sees Conflict Ending In 2025 – WaPo (RT)
Ukrainian officials are “starting to believe” that the conflict with Russia will be resolved next year, a senior member of Vladimir Zelensky’s government has reportedly told the Washington Post. The shift in attitude is a direct result of US President-elect Donald Trump’s public talk of a settlement, the official added. Trump promised on the campaign trail to end the conflict within a day of taking office, although he has since admitted that doing so may take longer. The US president-elect has revealed few details about how he plans to achieve this, but media leaks and comments from his closest advisers suggest that he will push to freeze the fighting along the current line of contact, using the leverage of US military aid to Ukraine to force Zelensky into talks with Putin.
“I wouldn’t believe we’re anywhere close to negotiations” were it not for Trump’s repeated comments on peace talks, the official continued, adding: “I just don’t think it’s possible to come to any agreement with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin.” Since 2022 Zelensky has maintained that no compromise is possible with Russia: first by insisting on restoring Ukraine’s 1991 borders by force, which would place Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions as well as Crimea under Kiev’s control; and by pushing a punitive ‘peace formula’ that would involve Russia agreeing to such a territorial change, paying reparations, and handing its officials over to face war crimes tribunals. Moscow has rejected outright all of Zelensky’s proposals.
However, the Ukrainian leader has recently abandoned his talk of “victory,” claiming instead that he wants a “just peace” coupled with security guarantees from the West in the form of NATO membership, with the status of the former Ukrainian regions undetermined. Moscow maintains that any settlement must begin with Ukraine ceasing military operations and acknowledging the “territorial reality” that it will never regain control of its former regions. In addition, the Kremlin insists that the goals of its military operation – which include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification – will be achieved. After meeting Zelensky in Paris earlier this month, Trump claimed that the Ukrainian leader “would like to make a deal and stop the madness.”
Zelensky immediately denied seeking a settlement, declaring that the conflict “cannot simply end with a piece of paper and a few signatures,” and that Putin “can only be stopped by strength.” Trump has since confirmed that he may cut military aid to Kiev once he takes office in January. “We’ve seen everybody’s narrative go from ‘As long as it [takes], blank check, don’t dare say anything else, or you’re somehow pro-Russian’ to ‘How do we get this to a deal?’” Trump’s nominee for national security adviser, Mike Waltz, said in an interview on Sunday. Expecting “every Russian off of every inch of Ukraine, including Crimea?” might not be a “realistic goal at this point,” he added.
This has NATO all over it.
• Moldovan President Eyeing Attack On Russian Peacekeepers – Moscow (RT)
Moldovan President Maia Sandu has openly discussed planning a military operation to seize control of the breakaway region of Transnistria, which hosts a Russian peacekeeping contingent, Moscow’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has claimed. According to the agency, Sandu became “emotionally unstable” at a recent meeting with government officials over Ukraine’s decision to cut the flow of Russian gas to Moldova, triggering fears of an energy crisis in the EU candidate state. Kiev has refused to reopen talks with Moscow on any future transit, prompting Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico to accuse Ukraine of graft. The news met with reported exasperation in Moldova, which is heavily reliant on Russian gas.
In a statement on Monday, the SVR claimed that Sandu’s government is preparing to escalate tensions in the region, potentially targeting the Cuciurgan power plant, which supplies around 75% of Moldova’s electricity. According to the agency, Sandu has discussed removing Russian peacekeepers and reasserting Chisinau’s control. EU officials were allegedly “clutching their heads” and “do not know how to calm down the emotionally unstable Sandu,” according to the agency. Sandu “categorically refused to discuss this issue with Ukraine and unequivocally pinned the blame on Russia,” threatening to “take it out on Transnistria” if Moscow fails to deliver gas to Moldova.
She reportedly ordered criminal cases against the breakaway region’s leaders for “separatism” and instructed officials to harass residents crossing the border. The SVR claimed the EU is deeply alarmed by Sandu’s alleged plans. “The meeting ended with Sandu discussing the need for a military operation to seize control over Transnistria and remove Russian peacekeepers,” leaving EU officials visibly shocked, the SVR alleged. Transnistria declared independence from Moldova in the early 1990s following the collapse of the Soviet Union. A brief war in 1992 ended with a ceasefire and the deployment of around 400 Russian peacekeepers.
Moldova does not recognize Transnistria’s independence and has periodically sought to reintegrate the territory. Sandu, who won Moldova’s presidency in 2024 after a contentious election, has previously faced criticism from Moscow, which accused her government of obstructing the voting rights of citizens of the country who live in Russia. Moldovan officials have not responded to the SVR’s latest claims, and no independent confirmation of the allegations has been made. Transnistrian authorities and international observers have yet to comment on the situation.
“Weidel accused the EU of destroying the German auto industry, the country’s economic pillar, and proposed winding back the bloc to a free-trade zone..”
• AfD Chancellor Candidate Tops German Poll – Bild (RT)
The co-leader of the right-wing AfD (Alternative for Germany) party, Alice Weidel, is ahead of her rivals in the campaign to become the next chancellor, according to the latest survey conducted by the INSA polling institute for Bild. The results of the poll, published by the tabloid newspaper on Sunday, showed that Weidel has the support of 24% of respondents, putting her ahead of the leader of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), Friedrich Merz, who received 20%. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who represents the Social Democratic Party (SPD), was reportedly backed by 15% of respondents. His coalition partner and Green Party leader, Robert Habeck, was favored by 14%.
The AfD named Weidel, 45, as its first chancellor candidate on December 7, setting out the bid for power ahead of snap elections scheduled for February 23. Weidel is due to be confirmed as the AfD’s nominee at a party conference next month. In an interview with Bloomberg last week, Weidel accused the EU of destroying the German auto industry, the country’s economic pillar, and proposed winding back the bloc to a free-trade zone. Earlier this month, the AfD stated in its draft election manifesto that Germany should leave the bloc and the euro in Brexit-like fashion, calling for a referendum on the issue.
AfD membership has swelled by 50% to about 50,600 over the past year, the party’s spokesperson told Reuters earlier his month. That number, however, only represents about 14% of the membership of Germany’s biggest parties, the CDU/CSU conservative bloc and the SPD. In recent years, right-wing, anti-immigration parties have gained traction across the EU, coming to power in Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, and Slovakia.
“People do not like to admit it, but they like being angry.”
• The Joy is Gone: A Liberal Hate-Fest for the Holidays (Turley)
“May Trump supporters and Trump voters and Trump himself never know peace.” Those words, from Disney’s new Snow White actress Rachel Zegler, came shortly after half of the country, roughly 77 million Americans, voted for Donald Trump. Only a few weeks ago, Kamala Harris and her supporters were rallying the country to choose “love over hate.” Now, the “joy” is gone. Tis the season of the liberal hate-fest. As Washington prepares for the inauguration, we are seeing a return to rage. During the first Trump administration, liberal servers and restaurant owners pledged not to serve Trump officials. Now, the Washingtonian is reporting on the planned resumption of the harassment of those serving in the Trump administration. Zac Hoffman, manager at the National Democratic Club and “D.C. restaurant veteran,” told the magazine that abusing conservatives was only natural and understandable:
“You expect the masses to just ignore RFK eating at Le Diplomate on a Sunday morning after a few mimosas and not to throw a drink in his face?” One bartender stated that Trump people may “theoretically [have] the power to take away your rights, but I have the power to make you wait 20 minutes to get your entrée.” Suzannah Van Rooy, a server and manager at Beuchert’s Saloon on Capitol Hill, declared that she would not serve some Trump officials. “It’s not, ‘Oh, we hate Republicans,’” she said. “It’s that this person has moral convictions that are strongly opposed to mine, and I don’t feel comfortable serving them.” Beuchert’s later fired Van Rooy. This campaign of hate is all too familiar to conservatives.
Many remember when White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her family were kicked out of the Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Virginia. As others were denied service or chased from restaurants, Democratic members like Rep. Maxine Waters, D-CA, supported such harassment. For those restaurants not willing to follow the Red Hen model, the response was equally unhinged. Mariya Rusciano runs a D.C. pizza restaurant. She posted congratulations to Trump on X after the election to encourage everyone to come together as a nation. The response from Democrats was furious, filled with pledges to boycott the restaurant and force it out of business. It is not just service and civility that are scarce in Washington.
Even while accusing Trump of putting his political and personal interests ahead of the nation, Biden is now reportedly moving to veto a bipartisan bill to relieve pressure on our overwhelmed court system. The Judges Act, supported by both Democrats and Republicans, would add 66 new judgeships to an over-worked court system. The White House supported the bill right up until Trump won the election. While some Democrats are still trying to get the White House to change its mind, liberal groups are applauding the expected veto “to prevent President Trump from having more vacancies.” If Biden carries out his threat, it will be not only gratuitous but illogical. The bill deliberately staggers the addition of judges over the next decade so that presidents of both parties will presumably be able to appoint them.
Moreover, the Senate is still closely divided, and “blue-slipping” (whereby senators can hold up some nominations) remains in effect. More importantly, the reason for this bipartisan effort is due to a dire need for our courts. Judges are drowning in dockets with rising caseloads. In 2004, the number of cases in district court pending for more than three years was 18,280. This year, there are 81,617. If justice delayed is justice denied, our court system is becoming a tar pit of injustice, with litigants left without verdicts or relief for years.
The word of the intended veto stripped away any pretense of the White House putting the public interest before politics. A veto would put rage before reason. In my recent book, I discussed how addictive rage is. People do not like to admit it, but they like being angry. Sometimes, people can choose madness as a release from reality. It offers a righteous license to slip from the bounds of civility and decency. It allows people to harass Republicans in restaurants or to scream profanities outside of their homes. It allows a president to say that he might block judgeships for a struggling court system, just because he does not want his successor to make any of the appointments. It is the reason 41 percent of adults under 30 believe that killing others, like healthcare executives, is justified, according to an Emerson College poll.
We cannot seem to shake this rage addiction even after an election or during a holiday committed to peace and understanding. One liberal site, Crooked Media, is actually selling holiday items featuring the violent extremist group Antifa — one of the most anti-free speech groups in history, which routinely attacks journalists, speakers, and conservative demonstrators. Created by former Obama staffers Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett, and Tommy Vietor, the Crooked Media site is selling a line of Antifa items for liberals, including Antifa onesies for infants and “Antifa Dad” shirts to seemingly celebrate political violence. It seems the joy, bipartisanship, and civility have all expired like last year’s eggnog. Even Disney’s new Snow White seems to have taken the cue from the Evil Queen and treated this election as “a blast of wind to fan my hate.” And we are not even at the inauguration yet.
“Western Europe faces a growing contradiction: its political insignificance clashes with its still-considerable material wealth and intellectual legacy.”
• Half of the West Is Doomed: Here’s Why (Timofey Bordachev)
Only a few years ago, most of Western Europe seemed like a fortress of stability in international politics. With robust economies, solid social systems, and the grand edifice of “European integration,” it gave an impression of permanence, impervious even to major geopolitical upheavals. Now, however, it has become an inexhaustible source of peculiar headlines and confusion. We see endless talk of sending “European peacekeepers” to Ukraine, drawn-out dramas over forming a government in France, or pre-election storms in a teacup in Germany. There are attempts to meddle in the Middle East, and above all, a deluge of irresponsible, often meaningless statements from Western European politicians. For outsiders, these developments provoke a mix of bemusement and concern. In Russia, the Western side of our shared continent’s apparent decline is met with suspicion but also a certain sadness.
For centuries, Western Europe has been both an existential threat and a source of inspiration for Russia. Peter the Great famously reformed the country to borrow the best from European thoughts and culture. In the 20th century, the Soviet Union, despite great sacrifices, secured victory over Nazi Germany during World War II. And for many Russians, Western Europe has long been an “Eden,” offering respite from what were often harsh realities back home. But a Western Europe that is economically unstable, politically chaotic, and intellectually stagnant is no longer the same as what once inspired reforms or envy. It’s no longer a place Russia can look to as a neighbor worth emulating or even fearing. For most of the world, Western Europe’s problems provoke only curiosity. Major powers like China and India are happy to trade with its various countries and benefit from its technology and investment.
But if Western Europe were to disappear from the global stage tomorrow, it wouldn’t disrupt their plans for the future. These nations are vast civilizations in their own right, historically shaped far more by internal dynamics than by European influence. Meanwhile, African and Arab nations still view Western Europe through the lens of colonialism. For them, its decline is of material interest but little emotional consequence. Türkiye sees European countries as prey, aging and weakened rivals. Even the United States, a supposed ally, approaches the continent’s crises with a businesslike detachment, focused solely on how to maximize its own interests at Europe’s expense. It’s tempting to blame Western Europe’s odd behavior on the degeneration of its elites. After decades under US patronage, its leaders have lost the ability to think critically or strategically.
The end of the Cold War allowed them to govern without serious competition, leading to complacency and mediocrity. Many of the brightest minds went into business, leaving politics to those less capable. As a result, Western European foreign policy departments now resemble provincial bureaucracies, out of touch with global realities. The expansion of the EU in the early 2000s, which brought in several small former Eastern European nations, only exacerbated this problem. Their provincial outlook often dominates discussions, reducing complex issues to simplistic, parochial concerns. Today, Western Europe’s politicians are adept at convincing the world – and perhaps even themselves – of their own incompetence. But the root of the problem runs deeper. Western Europe faces a growing contradiction: its political insignificance clashes with its still-considerable material wealth and intellectual legacy.
For centuries, its countries have accumulated vast resources and developed unparalleled intellectual traditions. Yet its strategic irrelevance renders these assets useless. Even France’s nuclear arsenal, once a symbol of power, now garners little respect on the world stage. Germany, the EU’s economic powerhouse, exemplifies this impotence. Despite its wealth, it has failed to translate economic strength into political influence, even over its own affairs. The destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline in 2022, allegedly at the hands of its American allies, symbolizes the bloc’s inability to defend its interests or hold its partners accountable. The United Kingdom, often touted as Western Europe’s most active foreign policy player, plays this role largely under American patronage. Brexit, for all its drama, did little to change this dynamic.
More than 100 years after the First World War dismantled Europe’s empires, the continent finds itself with resources it can no longer wield. The EU’s most recent foreign policy “victory” — the difficult absorption of impoverished Moldova — highlights its limitations. Meanwhile, Georgia, with its defiant government, remains beyond Brussels’ grasp. Even in the Balkans, the EU’s influence is limited to countries subdued by NATO and completely encircled by the US-led geopolitical order.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of modern Western Europe is its lack of reflection. Even the continent’s intellectual elite seems to live behind a wall of denial, detached from reality. This attitude extends to domestic politics, where the rise of non-mainstream parties is dismissed as voters “choosing the wrong way.” In foreign policy, its leaders continue to act as though their opinions still shape global politics, despite clear evidence to the contrary. The EU states march on, oblivious to their diminishing power and the shifting global environment. In theory, such persistence might seem admirable. But world politics is not a Glass Bead Game, as Hermann Hesse would have put it, and clinging to outdated behaviors will only hasten Western Europe’s decline. At some point, even its vast material and intellectual wealth will no longer be enough to sustain it.
“..their ‘true-believers’… in the Sunni identitarian diaspora haven’t yet clocked that they’ve been sold out – as was always the plan..”
• The “King-Makers” Pull The Rug From Syria, Yet Again… (Alastair Crooke)
James Jeffrey, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and Turkey, in a March 2021 interview with PBS Frontline, laid out very plainly the template for what has just happened in Syria this month: “Syria, given its size, its strategic location, its historical importance, is the pivot point for whether [there can be] an American-managed security system in the region … And so you’ve got this general alliance that is locked in with us. But … the stress point is greatest in Syria”. Jeffrey explained (in the 2021 interview) why the U.S. shifted its to support to Jolani and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS): “We got Mike Pompeo to issue a waiver to allow us to give aid to HTS – I received and sent messages to HTS” -The messages coming back from HTS were: “We [HTS] want to be your friend. We’re not terrorists. We’re just fighting Assad””.
The PBS Frontline interviewer asks: The U.S. was “supporting indirectly the armed opposition”? To which Jeffrey responds: “It was important to us that HTS not disintegrate … our policy was … was to leave HTS alone … And the fact that we haven’t targeted [HTS] ever, the fact that we have never raised our voice to the Turks about their cohabitation with them — in fact, I used this example the last time I was talking to very senior Turks – when they started bitching about this relationship we [the U.S.] have with the SDF [in eastern Syria]”. “I said to them, “Look, Turkey has always maintained that you want us in northeast Syria, which they do. But you don’t understand. We can’t be in northeast Syria without the platform, because we only have hundreds of troops there”; … I said: “It’s just like you in Idlib …”.
“We want you to be in Idlib, but you can’t be in Idlib without having a platform, and that platform is largely HTS. Now, unlike the SDF, HTS is a UN-designated official terrorist organisation. Have I ever, or has any American official ever, complained to you about what you’re doing there with HTS? No …”. David Miller, a British academic, has noted that in 2015, prominent Syrian Sunni Muslim scholar, Shaykh al-Yaqoubi (who is anti-Assad), was unconvinced by Jolani’s efforts to rebrand Al Qa’ida as Jabhat al-Nusra. Jolani, in his al-2013 Al-Jazeera interview twice confirmed his allegiance to al-Qa’ida, saying that he received orders from its leader, Dr Ayman [al-Zawahiri] … and those were to not target the West. He confirmed his own position as being that of hardline intolerance toward those who practiced a ‘heretical’ Islam.
Miller comments: “While ISIS put on suits; allowed Syria to be carved up by the U.S.; preach peace with the Zionist state; want free markets; and cut gas deals with their regional patrons – their ‘true-believers’… in the Sunni identitarian diaspora haven’t yet clocked that they’ve been sold out – as was always the plan”. “In private, the planners of this war in NATO states laugh about sending young Salafi cannon fodder from around the world into a meat grinder. The $2000 salaries are a mere speck of sand compared to the gas and construction wealth that is expected to be returned to Turkish, Qatari, Israeli and American coffers. They killed Palestine for this, and they’ll spend the next 30 years justifying it, based on whatever line the very expensive PR firms hired by the NATO and Gulf states shill to them…The Syrian regime change operation is the rug pull of the century”.
Of course, James Jeffrey’s account was nothing new. Between 1979 and 1992, the CIA spent billions of dollars funding, arming, and training Afghan Mujahideen militia (like Osama bin Laden) in an attempt to bleed the USSR dry by pulling it into a quagmire. It was from the ranks of the Mujahideen that al-Qa’eda emerged. “And yet, by the 2010s, even as the U.S. was ostensibly at war with al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan – it was secretly working with it – in Syria on a plan to overthrow Assad. The CIA spent around $1 billion per year training and arming a wide network of rebel groups to this end. As Jake Sullivan, told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a leaked 2012 email, “AQ [al-Qaeda] is on our side in Syria”, as Alan Macleod observes in Consortium News.
A whole list of alleged criminal activities they had ready to go after him, and keep him from becoming AG. But not one single charge.
“Not even a campaign finance violation. And the people investigating me hated me,” Gaetz wrote..”
• House Ethics Committee Releases Its Report Into Matt Gaetz (ET)
The House Ethics Committee unveiled its report into the past conduct of former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Dec. 23 after he filed a last-minute lawsuit in federal court to block its release. “The Committee determined there is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz violated House Rules and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of Congress,” panel investigators wrote in the report. Gaetz has denied wrongdoing. The committee voted on Dec. 10 on whether to release the report publicly. Several members voted against releasing the report but the majority were in favor of its release. The report alleges that Gaetz paid tens of thousands of dollars to women for drugs or sex in at least 20 instances but that investigators did not find sufficient evidence to conclude that Gaetz had violated the federal sex trafficking statute.
The report noted that Gaetz had declined a voluntary interview. The committee investigators wrote that they found substantial evidence that Gaetz regularly paid women for sexual activity between 2017 and 2020. The report alleges he engaged in sexual activity with a 17-year-old girl in 2017; possessed illegal drugs, including cocaine and MDMA, also known as ecstasy, between 2017 and 2019; accepted gifts, including transportation and lodging related to a 2018 Bahamas trip; and sought to impede and obstruct the committee’s investigation. The committee cited potential violations of federal and state laws, including regulations that prohibit obstruction of Congress and tampering with witnesses in a congressional proceeding, and Florida law that makes unauthorized possession of controlled substances a criminal offense.
The committee said the Department of Justice originally instructed it to defer its review until the department had completed its investigation. In February 2023 the committee resuming its investigation after the DOJ closed its investigation into Gaetz without bringing charges. Gaetz said in a Dec. 18 post on X that he was fully exonerated. “Not even a campaign finance violation. And the people investigating me hated me,” Gaetz wrote. “In my single days, I often sent funds to women I dated—even some I never dated but who asked. I dated several of these women for years. I NEVER had sexual contact with someone under 18. Any claim that I have would be destroyed in court—which is why no such claim was ever made in court. It’s embarrassing, though not criminal, that I probably partied, womanized, drank, and smoked more than I should have earlier in life. I live a different life now.”
After resigning from Congress last month following his nomination by President-elect Donald Trump for U.S. attorney general, Gaetz on Dec. 23 filed the lawsuit, which asks the judge to issue an emergency order to block the committee from releasing the report. Now that Gaetz has resigned from Congress, he argued in the lawsuit that the House Ethics Committee is reaching beyond its constitutional authority because it lacks jurisdiction over him as a private citizen. His attorneys maintain the report includes “untruthful and defamatory information” that could “significantly damage” Gaetz’s standing and reputation. Gaetz’s lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, names the Ethics Committee and its chair, Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.), as defendants.
“The Committee’s apparent intention to release its report after explicitly acknowledging it lacks jurisdiction over former members, its failure to follow constitutional notions of due process, and failure to adhere to its own procedural rules and precedent represents an unprecedented overreach that threatens fundamental constitutional rights and established procedural protections,” Gaetz’s attorneys wrote. The committee has said its singular mission is to “protect the integrity of the House.”
https://twitter.com/i/status/1871385251718533349
There are tons of people who want to abolish the death penalty. But a president cannot say ‘I don’t like this law, so I’ll circumvent it’. Only Congress can make/change laws. That makes this a scary precedent.
• Biden Commutes Sentences Of Dozens On Death Row (ZH)
President Joe Biden on Monday announced that he is commuting the sentences of 37 out of 40 prisoners currently sitting on the federal government’s death row – which will reclassify their sentences to life without the possibility of parole. The three men who were not spared for “terrorism and hate-motivated mass murder” are: “Robert D. Bowers, 52, who in 2018 gunned down 11 worshipers at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh; Dylann Roof, 30, who opened fire on Black parishioners in 2015 at a church in Charleston, SC, killing nine people; and Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 31. The decision comes weeks before Biden is set to leave office.
“I’ve dedicated my career to reducing violent crime and ensuring a fair and effective justice system,” Biden said in a statement – before suggesting that the US must abolish the death penalty at the federal level except in cases of terrorism and mass murder. “Make no mistake: I condemn these murderers, grieve for the victims of their despicable acts, and ache for all the families who have suffered unimaginable and irreparable loss,” Biden continued. “But guided by my conscience and my experience as a public defender, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Vice President, and now President, I am more convinced than ever that we must stop the use of the death penalty at the federal level.”
[..] As the Epoch Times notes further, President-elect Donald Trump made it clear during his campaign that he would resume the death penalty and expand its use to include child rapists and illegal immigrants who kill U.S. citizens and law enforcement officers. Biden’s commutations are final and cannot be overturned. “In good conscience, I cannot stand back and let a new administration resume executions that I halted,” the president said in his statement. In July 2020, President Trump’s Justice Department resumed federal executions after a 17-year pause. During the final six months of his first term, Trump oversaw the execution of 13 federal death row prisoners. After Biden took office, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memorandum in July 2021, imposing a moratorium on all federal executions.
“The Department of Justice must ensure that everyone in the federal criminal justice system is not only afforded the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States, but is also treated fairly and humanely,” Garland said. “That obligation has special force in capital cases.” In his statement, Biden said his decision was consistent with the moratorium his Justice Department has imposed on federal executions. Among the individuals whose sentences have been commuted to life imprisonment are Jorge Torrez, a former Marine convicted in 2014 for the killing of a fellow service member; Thomas Sanders convicted in 2014 for the killing of a 12-year-old girl; and Kaboni Savage, a drug dealer convicted in 2013 for his role in the deaths of 12 people.
In recent weeks, the president faced increasing pressure from civil rights groups to commute federal death sentences, a campaign promise he made in 2020, before Trump takes office. The announcement, made just before Christmas, is also significant for Pope Francis, who recently urged Biden to commute the sentences of death row inmates. “Today, I feel compelled to ask all of you to pray for the inmates on death row in the United States,” the Pope said in his weekly address in early December. “Let us pray that their sentences may be commuted or changed. Let us think of these brothers and sisters of ours and ask the Lord for the grace to save them from death.” Biden spoke with the Pope on Dec. 19 and scheduled to meet with him during his trip to Italy from Jan. 9 to 12, according to the White House.
Santa’s helper
If you need a smile.. 😉 pic.twitter.com/cmYdLw9Nc3
— Buitengebieden (@buitengebieden) December 23, 2024
Joke
The most satisfying joke ever pic.twitter.com/vAOFOjPDf6
— internet hall of fame (@InternetH0F) December 22, 2024
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
