A federal judge has issued a split ruling in a lawsuit over the “Alligator Alcatraz” immigration detention center located in the Florida Everglades – ruling that Detainees’ claims that they lacked access to immigration courts were moot after the Trump administration designated the Krome North Processing Center near Miami to hear their cases, but then transferred other claims to the Middle District of Florida, where the detention center is located.

“After numerous hearings, affidavits, status conferences, and supplemental filings, it has become readily apparent that Plaintiff’s Complaint suffers from two key flaws. For one, Plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment claim has been rendered moot,” wrote U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz on Monday. 

“Venue matters,” Ruiz continued in his decision to transfer the surviving claims. 

As the Epoch Times notes further, civil rights groups, led by the American Civil Liberties Union, had sought a preliminary injunction to ensure detainees could meet privately with lawyers and challenge their detention.

“Defendants currently hold approximately 700 immigrant detainees at the facility, and have barred detained immigrants from communicating confidentially with legal counsel,” their motion stated, asking the court to require private, unmonitored calls and stop officials from reading legal papers.

The suit also alleged that detainees were pressured to sign voluntary deportation orders without legal advice.

“One intellectually disabled detainee was told to sign a paper in exchange for a blanket, but was then deported subject to voluntary removal after he signed, without the ability to speak to his counsel,” the plaintiffs’ reply in support of their injunction request stated.

Government lawyers countered that the facility—still under construction on a remote airfield—had been updated to allow attorney meetings and that documents were only screened for contraband.

One attorney argued that the plaintiffs’ claims were really an effort to close the site, saying they were trying to “fragment, to prolong, [and] to block” deportation efforts.

Ruiz agreed that the First Amendment claims “are very much alive,” but ruled they should be litigated in the Middle District.

The Everglades site, formally called the Collier-Dade Training and Transition Detention Center but widely known as Alligator Alcatraz, has already drawn court battles.

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams ordered a 14-day halt on new construction after environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe argued the project violated federal review requirements.

This marks the second major federal lawsuit over the site, officially known as the Collier‑Dade Training and Transition Detention Center but widely called “Alligator Alcatraz.”

In early August, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams halted further construction for 14 days after environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe argued that the facility was built without required environmental reviews. Williams has yet to issue a ruling on venue.

The facility was built under emergency powers granted by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who authorized Kevin Guthrie, head of Florida’s Division of Emergency Management, to take over the Dade-Collier airfield and construct the center.

Ringed by more than 28,000 feet of barbed wire, the site sits more than 50 miles west of Miami within the Big Cypress National Preserve, home to some 30,000 alligators.

“We like the idea of reopening the original Alcatraz,” Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said earlier this year.

“I don’t know if that can happen or not, but we thought, ‘Hey, we’ve got our own natural Alcatraz in the middle of the Everglades, great runway, great, great perimeter. So let’s, let’s make it happen.’”

Environmental groups remain opposed.

“This project has been rushed through with zero analysis of the impacts of all the vehicles and the thousands of people that will be detained or work on the site,” Earthjustice attorney Alisa Coe said at a July 1 news conference.

“The Everglades deserves more, and that’s why we’re in court.”

T.J. Muscaro contributed to this report.

More details are emerging about President Trump’s latest show of force in Latin America aimed at narco-terrorist cartels fueling America’s drug crisis, which claims 100,000 lives a year. According to Reuters, three Aegis destroyers, surveillance aircraft, and an attack submarine are being deployed to international waters off Venezuela.  

Sources close to the media outlet say 4,000 sailors and Marines will support the large force projection mission that includes three U.S. Aegis guided-missile destroyers (USS Gravely, USS Jason Dunham, and USS Sampson), along with P-8 surveillance planes, other warships, and at least one attack submarine. 

The operation will run for several months and focus on enhancing hemispheric defense to dismantle narco-terrorist cartels’ command and control nodes that funnel drugs into the U.S. Also, this force projection is a signal to Beijing to limit Chinese activity in the region, particularly around critical infrastructure and trade chokepoints. The Trump administration has put Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel and Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua on notice, classifying them as foreign terrorist organizations. The broader understanding is that this is all a part of hemispheric defense. 

The deployment also signals to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s government that Washington is not playing around. Maduro told the nation on Monday that his country will “defend our seas, our skies and our lands.” He hinted at what he called “the outlandish, bizarre threat of a declining empire.”

On Tuesday, Mao Ning, a spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said combating drugs is a shared responsibility around the world: “But we hope that major countries should play the role responsibly, maintain regional peace and stability, and properly handle the issue together with relevant countries.” 

Related:

• U.S. SOUTHCOM Deploying 4,000 Troops To Latin American Waters As Counter-Narco-Terror Operations Loom

• Mexico’s President Draws Red Line: U.S. Kinetic Operations Against Drug Cartels Not Welcome On Her Soil

• U.S. MQ-9 Reaper Drone Flies Rare Drug-Cartel Hunting Mission In Mexico

• Schweizer: Chinese Chemists Working With Mexican Cartels Creating Fentanyl To Kill Americans

• China’s “Assassin’s Mace” Irregular Warfare Campaign May Render Trump’s Golden Dome Useless

. . . 

Submitted by American Truckers United, 

In a bold move amid mounting highway tragedies, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy has launched a scathing investigation into “rogue states” accused of flouting federal rules on Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDLs), directly linking lax enforcement to deadly crashes. The probe, announced on August 19, targets states like Washington, New Mexico, and California following a horrific Florida incident on August 12, where an illegal alien trucker – holding improperly issued CDLs – executed an illegal U-turn, killing three Americans. Duffy blasted “non-enforcement and radical immigration policies” for turning the trucking industry into a “lawless frontier,” allowing unqualified foreign drivers to operate massive 40-ton rigs.

This cannot happen again.

.@FMCSA is launching an investigation into both the driver and White Hawk Carrier.

Here’s what we know:

1. Washington State improperly issued the driver a full-term CDL. Asylum seekers or illegal aliens are NOT allowed to receive this!

2. New Mexico… pic.twitter.com/Qlf8T68IJz

— Secretary Sean Duffy (@SecDuffy) August 19, 2025

Preliminary findings reveal the driver, who entered the U.S. illegally in 2018, failed an English Language Proficiency (ELP) assessment post-crash, answering only 2 of 12 verbal questions correctly. Washington issued a full-term CDL to the asylum seeker in 2023, violating federal eligibility rules, while New Mexico skipped an ELP test during a 2025 speeding stop. California’s limited-term CDL is under scrutiny. Duffy, alongside President Trump, has reinstated strict ELP enforcement via a May order and initiated nationwide audits in June, vowing to “hold these states and bad actors accountable.”

This crisis didn’t emerge overnight. American Truckers United (ATU) has been sounding the alarm for over six years, advocating against the influx of non-domiciled CDL holders under the previous administration’s policies, which they say created public safety and national security risks. More recently, outlets like Zero Hedge have amplified these concerns over the past several months, highlighting migrant-driven crashes and corporate “leap-frogging” to evade accountability. ATU’s June letter to Duffy urged action to prevent further deaths, warning of hundreds of thousands of unvetted drivers unable to read road signs.

American Truckers United delivered a letter to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, requesting support for our petition to ban non-domicile CDLs issued to non-citizens and to restrict foreign CDLs. https://t.co/uQv0hwIvmC pic.twitter.com/z71Ba8XnJ6

— American Truckers 🚛🦅 (@atutruckers) June 19, 2025

This was followed by our dire warning to all Americans about the public safety and national security threat unfolding on highways nationwide… 

🚨Non-Citizen Truck Drivers Involved in Highway Crisis

This is an urgent wake-up call for every American. Our highways are no longer safe. Reckless immigration policies and weakened licensing standards have unleashed a deadly crisis on our roads. pic.twitter.com/NXrQTivkos

— American Truckers 🚛🦅 (@atutruckers) July 10, 2025

As Duffy signals “more updates soon,” states are responding. Wyoming is setting the pace, with its Highway Patrol endorsing legislation to expand ELP enforcement statewide, including penalties for repeat offenders. During an August 19 committee meeting, officials cited the Florida crash and reported 236 out-of-service violations since June 25. Trucking associations and independents voiced support, emphasizing rising insurance rates and safety hazards.

The Wyoming Highway Patrol on Tuesday said it supports legislation to pull non-English-speaking commercial truck drivers from the roads. During testimony, a trooper referenced a crash in Florida where an illegal truck driver killed three people last week.https://t.co/eQB2cmKAyv

— Cowboy State Daily (@daily_cowboy) August 19, 2025

With ATU’s long-standing push finally gaining traction, Duffy’s crackdown promises justice for victims and safer roads. Accountability – from sanctuary states to exploitative companies – is on the horizon, potentially reshaping the industry.

In a shocking incident that underscores the growing dangers of industrial automation, Chinese surgeons have pulled off what medical experts are calling a miracle surgery after a robotic arm nearly decapitated a factory worker in a horrific accident in May that has only now come to light through China’s state-controlled media apparatus.

The gruesome workplace incident left the unidentified man with what doctors described as an “internal decapitation” – his cervical vertebrae completely severed and critical arteries damaged, with only soft tissue keeping his head attached to his body. The worker immediately suffered paralysis and went into cardiac arrest at the scene, according to South China Morning Post, citing the Chinese medical publication Yixue Jie.

Medical teams at Shanghai Changzheng Hospital faced a gory challenge when the patient arrived in critical condition, with both of his vertebral arteries obstructed and his blood pressure having collapsed to life-threatening levels.

Advanced imaging revealed the full scope of the catastrophic injuries: one artery had completely ruptured and was blocked by bone fragments and blood clots, while the other was stretched to its breaking point and barely maintaining any blood flow to the brain.

“We have looked through much literature at home and abroad, but have never come across a case of such severe cervical vertebra separation, let alone one that survived after treatment,” said Chen Huajiang, director of the hospital’s cervical spine surgery department, as quoted by SCMP.

The medical team determined that emergency surgery represented the patient’s only shot at survival, but the procedure carried enormous risks that could have proven fatal in seconds. Any disruption of the existing blood clots could have triggered catastrophic hemorrhaging – with doctors estimating potential blood loss of up to 2,000 milliliters in a matter of seconds.

Adding to the complexity, extensive damage to the skin on the back of the patient’s neck meant that opening the surgical site risked introducing deadly bacteria into the cerebrospinal fluid, potentially causing a fatal brain infection. The patient’s precarious state also prevented doctors from conducting standard pre-operative imaging and basic medical assessments.

Despite these overwhelming challenges, a multidisciplinary surgical team took the extraordinary risk on June 18, performing a marathon three-hour operation to remove the life-threatening clot, realign the shattered cervical bones, and stabilize the spine using two auxiliary plates, marking the first reported use of this technique in such a severe case.

“Although it seems that we were merely moving bones, surrounding blood vessels and nerves were also being tugged as we operated. We had to avoid secondary injuries while striving for a high success rate,” Chen explained.

Despite warnings from some in China about the risks of defective combat robots, the government is aggressively advancing AI-driven battlefield systems. Recent tactical exercises featuring “robotic wolves” underscore Beijing’s rapid push toward unmanned warfare.

The China’s 76th Group Army’s recent drills focused on battlefield coordination between human personnel and autonomous technologies designed for reconnaissance, strategic point clearing, fire support and breaching defensive positions, according to official military statements. These exercises represent China’s latest and most aggressive effort to advance unmanned warfare capabilities as part of the growing global arms race in military robotics.

Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office has filed an official open records request to the Trump administration seeking information about a federal immigration enforcement operation that took place outside the venue where the governor was holding a press conference on Aug. 14.

The California governor filed a formal Freedom of Information Act request with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all documents, communications, and records from the Trump administration about the deployment of federal agents outside the Japanese American National Museum in Los Angeles.

Inside the museum on Aug. 14, Newsom and several other Democrats were announcing legislation dubbed the “Election Rigging Response Act”—a plan to allow voters to approve a new Democrat-drawn congressional district map that would bypass California’s independent redistricting commission in response to a redistricting effort by Republicans in Texas.

California’s Democratic Party plans to hold a referendum in November to ask voters to accept their redrawn map to favor at least five more Democratic seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The governor’s press office posted the information request on X Aug. 17.

“Did [President Donald] Trump or [Homeland Security Secretary] Kristi Noem send the masked agents to intimidate us?” his press office posted. “We’ll find out.”

The DHS disputed Newsom’s claims on Aug. 18. The U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) was conducting ongoing deportations in downtown Los Angeles targeting criminal illegal immigrants, Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said.

“DHS is a law enforcement agency—we enforce the law,” McLaughlin told The Epoch Times in an email. “Our brave men and women of CBP patrol ALL areas of Los Angeles every day with over 40 teams to arrest criminal illegal aliens.”

On the day of Newsom’s press conference, federal agents arrested two illegal immigrants in the vicinity of the Japanese American National Museum in the downtown area, according to DHS.

“DHS is focused on enforcing the law, not on [Newsom],” McLaughlin said. “These arrests include an alleged Tren de Argua gang member and narcotics trafficker.

“Under President Trump and Secretary Noem, if you break the law, you will face the consequences,” she added. “Criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the United States.”

In a letter to the Department of Homeland Security, Newsom’s office alleged U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents descended on the museum grounds in an “attempt to intimidate the people of California from defending a fair electoral process” and called the operation a “grotesque use of federal government resources for political grandstanding.”

Newsom alleged in a statement Aug. 17 that the president’s use of military and federal law enforcement was meant to “try to intimidate his political opponents.”

Newsom released a barrage of social media posts following last week’s event.

He said his redrawn districts would end Trump’s presidency in an all-caps social media post on Aug. 13, which read in part: “No deal=perfect, beautiful maps that will ‘end’ his presidency. Soon he will not be ‘47.’ Patriots will take back our congress… –GCN.”

Newsom’s office did not provide further comment, but instead referenced prior social media statements that indicated Newsom intends to help take back the Democratic Party’s control of Congress by electing more Democrats in California.

Four weeks after a DC police commander was suspended amid accusations that he manipulated crime statistics, the Department of Justice has launched a wide-ranging investigation into whether the department has been faking data to make crime rates lower, the Washington Post reports, citing two senior law enforcement officials.

The investigation is run out of DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office following the accusation lodged against Metro PD commander Michael Pulliam, who was put on leave in May after the department began investigating whether he altered crime data. Pullman has denied the allegations. 

Pulliam’s paid administrative leave came a week after he filed an equal employment opportunity complaint against an assistant chief over accusations that the department deliberately falsified crime data. The Police union, meanwhile, claims police supervisors in the department manipulate crime data to make it appear violent crime has fallen considerably compared to last year.

The DOJ investigation, however, will go much further – and will include other police and city officials who may have also fabricated or altered crime data. 

“D. C. gave Fake Crime numbers to create a false illusion of safety,” President Trump wrote on Truth Social Monday night. 

“This is a very bad and dangerous thing to do, and they are under serious investigation for so doing!” he continued, adding “Until 4 days ago, Washington, D.C., was the most unsafe ‘city’ in the United States, and perhaps the World. Now, in just a short period of time, it is perhaps the safest, and getting better every single hour!”

The DOJ has yet to articulate what specific crimes DC police officials have committed beyond ‘manipulating data.’ 

DC Mayor Muriel Bowser flipped out, of course, touting what she says is a drop in violent crime that happened before President Trump brought in hundreds of National Guard troops and federal law enforcement officers to join local PD – also taken over by the Trump admin – in fighting what Trump called a crime emergency. DC statistics showed violent crime down 27% year-over-year, and homicides down 11% – numbers that are now being called into question.

“We are not experiencing a spike in crime,” Bowser told MSNBC. “In fact, we’re watching our crime numbers go down.”

Sure you are!

Just the day after the historic Trump-Putin summit in Alaska to discuss finding peace in Ukraine, the famous economist and UN adviser Jeffrey Sachs made his first ever appearance before the Ron Paul Institute’s (RPI) annual conference in Washington DC. Sachs’ Saturday speech presented essentially a ‘Blueprint for Peace’ – which was precisely the title and theme for this year’s event, attended by several hundreds of independent-minded people.

Daniel McAdams, Executive Director of RPI, had previewed in a media statement that “Professor Sachs has become one of the most courageous voices challenging the Washington foreign policy establishment.” Former Congressman from Texas Ron Paul also underscored that “We are facing a perfect storm of reckless foreign policy, unsustainable debt, and attacks on civil liberties” and “Professor Sachs brings the kind of intellectual rigor and moral courage we need to chart a different course.”

While President Trump and his top officials have been commenting on the incredible “complexity” and significant hurdles to achieving peace in Ukraine, Sachs in his Saturday speech demolished this notion, arguing that on the contrary it’s not so complicated at all – that the reality is raging wars from Ukraine to Gaza could be ended in a single day if Washington wanted to. The war can be “ended tomorrow” – or also would have never started, if the US simply but firmly declared NATO will not expand to Ukraine, Sachs at one point emphasized.

“It’s not so complicated actually to end these conflicts. It’s a little surprising how long it takes and how hard it is to to accomplish this, but it’s not so hard in substance because the underlying reasons for the conflicts that the United States is in perpetually are not sound reasons from the point of view of America’s interests, from the point of view of our security, from the point of view of our well‑being or our economy,” Sachs began by explaining.

“All of the conflicts that we are in and those that we could get in are misguided, misdirected, provoked by us to a very large extent and um… solvable. That’s the basic point. It really is not so complicated.”

This is a point which should resonate with the majority of war-weary populations in both America and Europe, who have seen billions siphoned from taxpayers into heavy arms shipments for Ukraine and Israel. Washington could cut off the weapons which help keep these hotspots raging, and could do it tomorrow while pressing hard for peace if it wanted to – as we at ZeroHedge have also long emphasized.

But Sachs pointed out that the establishment, from the military-industrial complex to the media to members of Trump’s own administration, remains stacked in favor of forever wars and is largely dead set against Trump – which means the US leader has a lot working not in his favor if he truly does want to strike a peace deal with Putin.

Sachs called out the mainstream media for wanting to slap a ‘failure’ label on the summit from the beginning (or even before it began): “I was looking at all of the the banner headlines about the failure yesterday [Friday] in Alaska. The failure because we didn’t launch World War because the two presidents had a good meeting together, because they announced progress,” Sachs observed sarcastically.

“This is taken as failure in our media which of course is hawkish by the moment and manipulated by, controlled by, paid by, or simply aligned with the military‑industrial complex in the country. So, it’s extraordinarily hard to hear a word about peace in this country.”

Imagine you spent a half year trying to get Professor Jeffrey Sachs to speak at your conference. One of our greatest antiwar intellectuals. And finally in desperation you fire off a final email saying last invitation. And he responds. What an honor. pic.twitter.com/b27xeUxMHD

— Daniel McAdams (@DanielLMcAdams) August 17, 2025

Below is a breakdown of Sachs’ some 40-minute speech, with key themes, paraphrased takeaways, and direct quotes – compiled by ZeroHedge:

Sachs on Ron Paul & Independent Media

Dan, thank you. Thank you so much for being persistent [in inviting me here]. I’ll tell you the trick why it worked: he was persistent and extraordinarily polite. And it really worked because I said, “That’s a meeting I want to do everything I can to make.”

So, it is a little bit rushed today, but it’s an honor to be here – truly a special delight to be at a conference titled Blueprint for Peace. We don’t hear much about peace in this world anymore, strangely enough – unless it’s on Judge Napolitano’s show or from the Ron Paul Institute.

Eisenhower’s Warning: Can Trump Overcome?

I think the wisest words spoken since World War II were President Eisenhower’s farewell address on January 17, 1961. He said:

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

Eisenhower knew what he was talking about – as a Supreme Allied Commander, U.S. President, and president of Columbia University. He warned of a reality that already existed in 1961.

Can Trump overcome this? 

Whether he has the skill or not, I don’t know. But if he were a communicator and had the guts, what he should do is stand up and explain to the American people that this was about NATO enlargement, but we’re not going to do it… That would be the end. But he can’t quite… he says it privately, I’m sure, but not publicly. Why? Because we’re still trapped. We’re trapped as Eisenhower told us we’re trapped. And all these think tanks up and down the East Coast are bought the same way. It’s all phony. Everything you hear about the data. There was a report recently about Russia’s casualties being x times that of Ukraine by one of the Washington think tanks. So I looked at the sourcing and it was absurd.

Literally the Man Who Saved the World

That reality nearly ended the world during the Cuban Missile Crisis. President Kennedy, under immense pressure from military advisors, resisted the push to escalate. If he had listened to them, we wouldn’t be here today.

Even after resolving the crisis diplomatically with Khrushchev, we nearly saw nuclear war because of a Soviet submarine that misunderstood a US provocation – dropping live grenades as a joke – and almost launched a nuclear torpedo. Sachs detailed how the world nearly ended in nuclear annihilation:

We nearly had the world end anyway because of a disabled soviet submarine that was out of communication. And when it began and it was in crisis and when it began to surface, some jackass in the US military was dropping live hand grenades as a joke rather than death charges. They thought they were under attack. And it happened to be the one submarine in the squadron that had nuclear tipped torpedoes. And they were entered into the bay. And a man named Mr. [Vasili] Arkhipov, who was senior to the captain, countermanded the order and saved the world only to go back home, by the way, and be reprimanded and lived in obscurity. But literally the man who saved the world, saved the world within one second because US doctrine at the time was that any attack by a a nuclear atomic weapon would be met by the full force of the US nuclear armaments. And the estimation at the time was 700 million dead across the Soviet Union, China, Eastern Europe. But this is good reason to believe that all of humanity might have perished and we came within a second of that.

Kennedy Pursued Peace & Then Was Assassinated

A year later, Kennedy gave one of the greatest speeches in modern history on June 10, 1963 – his peace speech – praising the Soviet Union, speaking of shared humanity, and advocating for peace. It moved Khrushchev so deeply that five weeks later, the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed.

And then, four months later, in my opinion, the CIA killed Kennedy for that and other “crimes” — like trying to make peace. From Sachs:

But Kennedy made peace by praising the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War, talking about their valor, their culture, their scientific accomplishments, and the fact that both sides would perish in a conflict so both sides could be depended on to seek peace. And Khrushchev heard the speech immediately summoned Kennedy’s envoy Averell Harriman and said that’s the finest speech by a modern American president. I want to make peace with your boss. And five weeks later, the partial nuclear test-ban treaty was signed. And about four months after that, in my opinion, the CIA killed Kennedy for that and for other crimes of trying to make peace. Maybe that explains the military‑industrial complex as much as anything. Maybe our leaders are just afraid, they’re afraid to make peace.

Fear Among US Presidents

Maybe our leaders are just afraid – afraid to make peace, afraid to defy the military-industrial complex. Since Kennedy, perhaps no president has truly been independent. Nixon tried and may have paid the price. Others may be afraid, misinformed, or simply bought.

The Doomsday Clock: A Ticking Warning

The Doomsday Clock was introduced in 1947 to alert us to nuclear danger. At first, it was set to 7 minutes from midnight. After the Cold War ended in 1991, it was pushed back to 17 minutes.

But every U.S. president since – Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden – has moved it closer to midnight. Why? Because peace was possible in 1991, but the military-industrial complex decided it was time to dominate.

Amazing Story: Yeltsin Informing Sachs of End of USSR

I had a front-row seat. I worked with President Gorbachev and later with President Yeltsin to advocate for US financial assistance to stabilize Russia in the early ’90s. I was sure the U.S. would help. We didn’t.

Sachs recounts the following astounding story and series of events, as he was there in the room:

We can go to war anywhere we want. We can overthrow any government anywhere we want. I had a bit of a front row seat in those days because I fruitlessly was trying to get the United States to actually help the Soviet Union actively in 1990 and then to help Russia in 1991 and 1992 with financial assistance because of an urgent financial crisis that engulfed… a failed economic system. But when a system fails and a society is in distress I believe you help so that you don’t get into worse trouble so I had a front row seat. I was part of an effort as an adviser to President Gorbachev to try to enlist US support for financial stabilization in a very deep crisis.

I actually was in the Kremlin on December I think it’s December 13. I haven’t been able to absolutely confirm the specific date, but it was around December 13, 1991 when President Yeltsin walked across the room and sat in front of me. because I was a young kid but happened to be head of the delegation and he said, “Gentlemen – because it was all men – I want to tell you the Soviet Union is over.” That’s pretty interesting to hear that in the Kremlin. I kind of pinched myself and then it was my turn to speak and I said, “Mr. President, this is one of the greatest days in modern history and I am sure I am sure that my country will come to your assistance to give you help to help you stabilize because I know how extreme the financial crisis is.”

I’m a financial economist. I’ve helped stabilize a number of hyperinflations. You need some urgent help, even just a standstill on debt service payments because you don’t have foreign exchange reserves. This is a revolution. You need help to stabilize. But Mr. President, I’m sure that this will happen… So I thought I’m a pretty good economist, very convincing. Uh, and they’ll do the same. Nothing of the sort. Then I got blamed for the lack of stabilization in Russia by many people though it was exactly the opposite of what I had been saying because we refused to provide any help whatsoever. And honestly I could not quite figure it out. I knew that the people weren’t very clever but I still couldn’t figure out why. To summarize, the reason why is that the Cold War did not end in December 1991.

The Role of Netanyahu & US-Israel Policy

In 1996, another dangerous figure emerged: Benjamin Netanyahu. His vision was to dominate the Middle East with US support – no compromises, no peace, no division of land. Just take it all.

And so Netanyahu said, “We’re not going to make any compromises. It’s even a funny term if you know the history of Zionism that it’s a compromise: we come in, you should leave.” This is the basic summary, but not even we’ll divide the house. It was your house, we’ll divide the house. We’ll take 78%, you can have 22%. No. We’ll take 100% and there’s a lot of places you can move to. What are you complaining about? You ingrate. That’s the basis of the idea. And then the point is that a lot of people won’t like that. and there will be a militant reaction and then Netanyahu’s idea is you don’t fight the militants, you fight the governments that back them.

When Palestinians resisted, the plan was to go after the governments backing them. General Wesley Clark famously described the Pentagon’s post-9/11 plan: 7 wars in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran. We’ve fought in all of them…

Today, we witness mass killings in Gaza: 60,000 dead, including 18,000 children. Starving people are shot at while seeking food. Ministers boast of taking everything. And yet, not a single word of protest from our government. Why? The American public overwhelmingly opposes this, but our government doesn’t listen.

Illusion of Empire & the Monroe Doctrine

London may be worse than Washington. Britain still acts like it runs the world. MI6 is reckless. Starmer? Don’t get me started. They lost their empire 80 years ago, but they still act as if America is their junior partner in global mischief.

…The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 was a reciprocal statement: Europe, stay out of the Americas, and we’ll stay out of your internal affairs. That’s smart diplomacy, especially in a nuclear world.

Yet, we’ve violated that principle time and again – pushing NATO right up to Russia’s border, despite clear promises not to.

The Madness of ‘Extending Russia’ Doctrine & Sachs Personally Warning Biden/Sullivan

The Ukraine war could have been avoided – by simply stating that NATO would not expand to Ukraine. Even Jake Sullivan privately told me it wouldn’t happen. But when I asked him to say it publicly to avoid war, he refused.

The war can be ended tomorrow if the US declares NATO will not expand to Ukraine. That’s all. It’s not about territory. Russia didn’t demand land – just neutrality. Even in Crimea, Russia sought a lease renewal, not annexation – until the U.S.-backed coup. This war is entirely provoked and entirely avoidable.

We will, as the Rand Corporation wrote in 2019 in one of the most absurd, dangerous, ridiculous exemplars of American foreign policy, we will extend you. ‘Extending Russia’: a document of a think tank. How to annoy Russia in 27 different ways. Is this really what we pay them for? How to provoke the other nuclear superpower with 6,000 nuclear weapons and then wonder why the hand of the doomsday clock is 89 seconds to midnight? These people are crazy. Honestly, it’s very very dangerous. …Let me just say that all the major conflicts can be ended straightforwardly. The casus belli of the Ukraine war is NATO enlargement, and US coup operations all over Ukraine. Even the New York Times reported that one a couple of months ago.

More on the warning directly delivered to Jake Sullivan while proxy war in Ukraine unfolded:

And incidentally, I’ll share with you just one moment. In 2021, the war could have been avoided easily by President Biden saying to President Putin, “NATO will not expand to Ukraine.” And I will say so. And I called Jake Sullivan. He teaches at Harvard. It’s all consistent… after you fail in Washington. And I said, “Jake, avoid a war. Stop NATO enlargement. It’s ridiculous. It’s useless. Would you like it on the Rio Grand in Mexico – a Russian military base?” Sullivan responded, “Jeff, we have an open door policy for NATO.”

…Give me a break. Open door policy. I repeated the Monroe Doctrine to no effect and I said, “Jake, stop the NATO enlargement.” He said to me, “Jeff, NATO’s not going to enlarge to Ukraine.” I said, “Jake, we’re going to have a war over something that’s not going to happen. Why don’t you say so?” He said to me, “Don’t worry, there’s not going to be a war.” Honestly, these people are not clever. They’re not clever. What they’re doing makes no sense. They don’t know what they’re doing. We don’t know when Biden checked out. Maybe already then. But in any event, they’re not smart. They’re getting us into trouble. So, we could make peace in Ukraine. Yesterday [Friday] was a hint of it.

Meanwhile…

🇺🇸Just 4 hours ago – Fox News posts an interview with US Sec. of State Marco Rubio who repeats the exact same justification for Ukraine to defacto join NATO or a NATO-like alliance that has been used for DECADES and which led to this whole conflict in the first place…

…the… pic.twitter.com/XirMk79JD6

— Brian Berletic (@BrianJBerletic) August 19, 2025

On the Madness of Preparing for War with China

The most dangerous idea today? Preparing for war with China. It’s madness. China hasn’t invaded anyone in 2,000 years, with the exception of a one-month border clash with Vietnam in 1979 and defensive actions during the Korean War.

Even in Taiwan, conflict would only arise because the U.S. is unilaterally arming it – against diplomatic agreements. We’re turning Taiwan into Ukraine. And the consequences could be far worse.

A Blueprint for Peace: Structural Reforms Needed

1. End CIA covert operations. Intelligence is necessary – regime change is not.

2. Depoliticize the intelligence agencies.

3. Close overseas military bases. They waste resources and create enemies.

4. Aggressively seek diplomacy. We need diplomats, not bombers.

5. Educate the public. The American people must understand our real interests.

Sachs described, “First, it was already recognized by President Truman in 1963 publicly, soon after Kennedy’s assassination – and already known before that, that the biggest mistake we made in 1947 was to give the CIA two jobs: one, intelligence, which we need, and two, covert operations, which is absolutely deadly for our security and for world peace. We should end all CIA covert operations. Period.

A Final Plea

All of these conflicts – Ukraine, Gaza, potential war with China – can be resolved quickly, if we tell the truth, act with courage, and demand accountability. Our government must stop listening to the war profiteers and start listening to the people.

We need brave leaders, honest media, and informed citizens. That’s how peace begins.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

San Diego-based Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. agreed to voluntarily recall insulin pumps used to manage blood sugar, the company said in an Aug. 12 announcement by the Food and Drug Administration.

Insulin pumps are wearable devices that deliver insulin at predetermined doses at specific times. Such devices can feature alarm functions to alert users about various situations, such as issues with insulin delivery.

The recalled product, the t:slim X2 insulin pump, is being withdrawn to “address a potential speaker-related issue that can trigger an error resulting in a discontinuation of insulin delivery,” the announcement reads.

“The error, which appears as a Malfunction 16 alarm to the user, will stop insulin delivery and terminate communication between the insulin pump and the continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device,” it reads.

Continuous glucose monitoring devices constantly track a user’s glucose levels, sending the information to devices such as cell phones, allowing for real-time monitoring of glucose levels.

The malfunction could result in hyperglycemia—high blood sugar—due to the insulin delivery being discontinued and other factors, the company said.

According to the announcement, Tandem has already received 700 confirmed adverse event reports involving high blood sugar and situations that required users to seek medical intervention. Although no deaths have been reported, there have been 59 injuries, it said.

Tandem said it has already informed impacted U.S. customers about the issue through a notice sent between July 22 and July 24.

The notice listed several actions users can take to deal with the malfunction, including preparing a backup method of insulin delivery. It asked users to regularly check their blood sugar levels to ensure they do not have any unexpected high or low readings.

In the Aug. 12 announcement, Tandem said that it will be “releasing a software update designed to enhance early detection of speaker failure.”

“This update will also introduce persistent vibration alerts to help reduce potential safety risk,” it stated.

“Tandem will notify all pump users when the software update becomes available, and to request pump users complete the update of their insulin pump.”

Users can verify whether their insulin pump is included in the recall by entering the device’s serial number on the Tandem website.

Customers with queries can contact the company at 877-801-6901.

Tandem did not respond to a request for comment.

350,000 Insulin Pump Users

Tandem had issued a separate recall of its t:slim X2 insulin pump in February this year, according to FDA data.

That recall was tied to a software defect that could lead to insulin being under-delivered or over-delivered, thus resulting in “severe cases of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia,” the FDA said.

The recall status is still listed as “open,” according to the agency, indicating the company has not corrected or removed all faulty products.

According to a June 2022 study, there are an estimated 350,000 insulin pump users in the United States. However, they account for only a small portion of people with diabetes.

About 38 million American adults are estimated to have diabetes, and one out of five people are unaware that they have it, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a May 2024 post.

“In the United States, about 1 in 3 adults has prediabetes. More than 8 in 10 people with prediabetes don’t know they have it,” it said.

“With prediabetes, blood sugar levels are higher than normal, but not high enough for a type 2 diabetes diagnosis. Prediabetes raises your risk for type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and stroke,” the CDC stated.

“Prediabetes and type 2 diabetes can be prevented with lifestyle changes. Currently, no one knows how to prevent type 1 diabetes.”

According to the agency, diabetes is the eighth leading cause of death and the No. 1 cause of adult blindness, lower-limb amputations, and kidney failure.

When a news company is forced to completely rebrand to distance themselves politically from their parent company, you know they have hit rock bottom. 

The MSNBC news network announced this week that they will be rebranding and will become My Source New Opinion World (MS NOW).  They will also be removing the NBC Peacock from their logo.  The network, which features a stable of personalities including Rachel Maddow, Ari Melber and Nicole Wallace is notorious for their far-left hot takes and extreme anti-Trump bias in their reporting.  This image has led to plunging ratings in recent months.

Both MSNBC and CNN dealt with staggering losses in viewership over the past year while Fox News enjoyed viewership gains in the cable news ratings war.  The left-leaning networks suffered year-over-year declines in all major metrics for the second quarter of 2025 compared to the same period last year, according to the latest Nielsen data, which was reported by AdWeek. 

Comcast-owned MSNBC drew an average 1.008 million primetime viewers from April to June, a year-over-year decline of 15%, Nielsen figures show.  In the the advertiser-covered 25-to-54 demographic, primetime viewership dropped 20%, to 91,000 compared to last year.  

The news platform has become an embarrassment for parent companies NBC Universal and Comcast.  The name change was ordered by NBC Universal, which last November spun off cable networks USA, CNBC, MSNBC, E! Entertainment, Oxygen and the Golf Channel into its own company, called Versant. None of the other networks are changing their name.  

MSNBC got its moniker upon its formation in 1996 as a partnership between Microsoft and NBC. The name remained, even after the NBC partnership with Microsoft that produced it ended.  Versant CEO Mark Lazarus said in the initial days of the spinoff that “MSNBC” would stay, which makes this week’s announcement a surprise.  A branding change of this nature will likely crush the company’s ratings even further, but it would appear that MSNBC has been deemed an acceptable loss for NBC and Comcast.

It is also likely that pundits like Rachel Maddow (who has already taken a pay cut) will be out of a job in the near term.   

The social distancing away from the sickly network is due to its terrible ratings, but also the ongoing political shift in the US towards moderate and conservative ideals.  The Democrats burned every possible bridge and every ounce of political capital they had during Joe Biden’s presidency.  MSNBC was a integral part of the Biden Administration’s propaganda blitz.

The combination of covid fear mongering, their defense of the BLM riots, their defense of the transgender indoctrination of children, their incessant accusations of J6 “insurrection”, their dismissal of the Hunter Biden Laptop story, their open support for mass illegal immigration not to mention their delusional predictions for Kamala Harris during the 2024 election campaign has tainted MSNBC’s image beyond repair. 

Some critics point out that MSNBC has been losing viewers (and money) for many years; why are they being retooled now?  We once again have to wonder if the shutdown of federal subsidies from agencies like USAID has anything to do with the accelerated extinction of leftist media.  When big names like Stephen Colbert get cut and MSNBC goes into witness protection, it’s as if the cash flow keeping leftist platforms afloat suddenly dried up.

One positive result from MSNBC’s existence is that they unknowingly expedited the demise of the legacy media with their lunacy.  The public has increasingly turned to he alternative media and long form content for their information, which will ultimately lead to a better educated population.  Thanks, MSNBC!  We salute you!

Authored by Robert Rapier via OilPrice.com,

• Global nuclear generation reached 2,817 TWh in 2024, surpassing the previous record from 2021, with most growth coming from non-OECD countries.

• Asia Pacific, led by China’s 13% annual growth rate, now accounts for over 28% of global nuclear output, marking a major geopolitical and energy shift.

• While Eastern Europe, the UAE, and select other nations expand nuclear capacity, Western Europe and North America face stagnation, retirements, or policy-driven phaseouts.

Nuclear power has always been a paradox. It can produce massive amounts of low-carbon electricity, yet it must constantly battle the headwinds of politics and public perception. 

The latest Statistical Review of World Energy shows that while nuclear generation is growing globally—setting a new record high in 2024—the trend is anything but uniform. Some countries are charging ahead, while others are stepping back.

Global Output: Modest Growth, Unevenly Shared

In 2024, global nuclear generation reached 2,817 terawatt-hours, a modest uptick from 2023, but surpassing the previous all-time high set in 2021. 

Over the past decade, output has grown at a 2.6% annual rate—slow, but a clear recovery from the post-Fukushima slump. That growth is heavily skewed toward non-OECD countries, which are building new capacity at a faster pace (3.0% annual growth) than the flat-to-declining trend in OECD nations (2.5%).

Asia Pacific: The New Center of Gravity 

The most dramatic shift is happening in Asia Pacific, now responsible for over 28% of global nuclear output—over double its share from a decade ago:

• As with renewables, China is in a league of its own, with output soaring from 213 TWh in 2014 to more than 450 TWh in 2024—an annual growth rate near 13%.

• India and South Korea also posted steady gains, though on a smaller scale.

This marks a clear geopolitical shift. Nuclear power is no longer dominated by Western democracies, but by countries with state-driven, long-term infrastructure agendas.

North America: Stable, but Aging

The United States still leads the world in nuclear output at roughly 850 TWh annually (29.2% of the world’s total nuclear output), but beneath the stability is a slow attrition of older plants and a lack of new construction. 

But the U.S. had its biggest nuclear milestone in decades in 2023 and 2024 with the startup of Vogtle Unit 3, followed by Unit 4. Located in Georgia, Vogtle is the first newly built nuclear power plant in the United States in more than 30 years, and its completion marks the end of a long, costly construction saga plagued by delays and budget overruns. Together, the two new reactors added more than 2,200 megawatts of capacity—enough to power over a million homes—and provide a rare example of nuclear expansion in a country where most growth has come from extending the lives of existing plants. 

Canada’s output has slipped from 106 TWh in 2016 to 85 TWh in 2024, reflecting plant refurbishments and changing policies. Mexico, a small player, has seen big year-to-year swings, which may indicate operational challenges.

Europe: A Story of Contrasts

Western Europe is drifting away from nuclear:

• France, long the gold standard for nuclear reliability, has seen output fall from 442 TWh in 2016 to just 338 TWh last year, hampered by maintenance issues and political uncertainty.

• Germany is now at zero after completing its nuclear phase-out.

• Belgium, Switzerland, and Sweden are split between retirements and life extensions.

In Eastern Europe, the picture is brighter. The Czech Republic, Hungary, and Slovakia are increasing output, while Ukraine has managed to maintain over 50 TWh annually despite wartime disruptions.

Emerging Regions: Small Shares, Big Moves

In Latin America, Brazil and Argentina are holding steady around 15–25 TWh, with Brazil inching higher. Africa’s only nuclear producer, South Africa, remains flat at about 13 TWh. The Middle East has a new entrant in the UAE, which ramped from zero in 2019 to over 40 TWh in 2024 thanks to the Barakah plant—an impressive buildout in such a short time.

The Outliers

• Japan has restarted some reactors, but its output remains far below pre-Fukushima levels—84 TWh last year versus more than 300 TWh in 2010.

• Taiwan is phasing out nuclear, with production falling from 42 TWh in 2016 to just 12 TWh in 2024.

• Pakistan and Iran continue steady, if modest, growth.

Final Thoughts

The global nuclear landscape is diverging. Some countries are doubling down, driven by the twin imperatives of energy security and climate action, while others are walking away. The center of gravity is moving away from traditional Western producers toward nations prepared to back nuclear with long-term capital and policy support.

For investors, the next wave of growth is likely to come from Asia and the Middle East, not the historical powerhouses of Europe and North America. That shift carries environmental upside as well—especially in China, the world’s largest carbon emitter. Every gigawatt China moves from coal to nuclear represents a major win in the fight to reduce carbon emissions.