Authored by Drieu Godefridi via The Gatestone Institute,

Although Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky finally agreed to the “Golden Parachute” U.S. President Donald J. Trump offered him as a first step to have Russian President Vladimir Putin negotiate a ceasefire to the war he began three years ago, the meeting on Feb. 28 between Trump and Zelensky—as the world, to its shock, saw on television—collapsed.

Trump seems to have been anticipating a signing ceremony; Zelensky seems to have been anticipating receiving assurances of greater security. Trump’s ultimate message apparently was: a Trump final offer is a Trump final offer.

Trump was gracious enough to offer Zelensky the opportunity to return if he changed his mind—as he did on March 4. Trump also did not preclude the possibility that the U.S. would consider coming to Europe’s military assistance should it be needed at some future time.

For a long time, it was difficult to express doubts about Ukraine’s success without immediately being branded a “Putinist.” It was as if the horror of war forced everyone to take sides: only “Putinists” and “Slava Ukraini” remained.

Britain’s daily Telegraph, which is usually more discerning, labeled the U.S. demand for repayment of the hundreds of billions invested in war matériel for Ukraine as a “stranglehold.”

The Telegraph compared it to the reparations imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles after World War I—an analogy all the more shocking, they argued, because Ukraine is the victim, not the aggressor.

Trump has asked that Ukraine repay the enormous sums advanced by the United States—especially after he found out that the money given to Ukraine by European countries had been loans, not grants. Trump proposed a deal whereby the U.S. would help to develop Ukraine’s minerals, such as lithium and titanium, and help to develop Ukraine’s infrastructure, and suggested that such a business collaboration would serve as an adequate deterrence against renewed Russian aggression, making the security guarantees Zelensky was seeking unnecessary, at least during his tenure.

Reports suggest the U.S. would own 50 percent of these assets or their revenues, as a repayment to U.S. taxpayers for past aid. Zelensky said that he was open to investment but needed stronger security guarantees.

Critics of Trump called his request exploitative, akin to a colonial resource-grab, while supporters seemed to see it as a potential win-win if U.S. investment would help to rebuild Ukraine’s economy—a kind of new “Marshall Plan.” Details have not yet been confirmed.

The true analogy is with the assistance granted by the United States to the United Kingdom during World War II: the Lend-Lease Act of 1941. Under Lend-Lease, the U.S. provided Britain with goods valued at approximately $31.4 billion (in 1940s dollars) over the course of the war. This figure represents the total value of aid shipped to Britain, including everything from military equipment like ships, aircraft and tanks, to civilian necessities like food and oil. Adjusted for inflation to today’s dollars (as of February 2025), this amount equates to roughly $550 billion.

This amount was then rolled into the broader Anglo-American Loan Agreement of 1946, with a substantial rebate. Alongside settling Lend-Lease, the U.S. extended a new $3.75 billion loan at 2 percent interest to help Britain’s postwar recovery, bringing the total package to $4.4 billion (plus Canada’s separate $1.19 billion loan). The UK began repaying this combined sum in 1950, with payments stretching over decades. The final installment—covering both the Lend-Lease settlement and the postwar loan—was paid off on December 29, 2006, when Britain sent its last check of about $83 million to the U.S. Treasury.

In reality, a Ukraine-U.S. agreement on debt repayment is assuredly one way to keep America engaged in Ukraine for decades to come—and thus at least a non-military security guarantee. One does not allow a debtor owing $300 billion to be crushed. A long-term debt repayment agreement between Ukraine and the United States could serve as a powerful mechanism to ensure sustained American engagement in Ukraine’s security. Financial obligations of such magnitude—potentially in the hundreds of billions—create an inherent incentive for the creditor to protect the debtor from existential threats. No country, one hopes, allows a strategic partner with outstanding debts of that scale to be destabilized or overrun.

What, however, happens once the debt is repaid? Without a lasting strategic framework, financial leverage alone might not be enough to guarantee long-term security. The case of Hong Kong is a sobering precedent: the West was deeply invested in the city’s economy, but when communist China asserted control, international businesses largely packed up and left rather than confront Beijing.

For Ukraine, if economic leverage alone is not enough, what structures might be built to ensure that Ukraine’s security does not become another Vietnam, Hong Kong or Afghanistan, where outside powers ultimately choose to walk away? According to reports, such questions are to be addressed after a negotiated ceasefire.

In the meantime, the debt would be repaid by a U.S.-Ukraine “partnership” in mining Ukraine’s natural resources and rebuilding its economy. At the moment, Trump’s unconventional proposal is probably the best offer for Ukraine—and the only realistic one. It gives the U.S. “skin in the game,” enables Trump to have leverage when he approaches Russia, and prevents Putin, at least for a while, from retaking that part of the former Soviet Union.

The Error

Unlike his predecessors, Trump acknowledged that NATO had pledged not to expand beyond East Germany. For the past three years, merely stating this fact had led to being labeled a “Putinist,” an attempt at permanent discreditation. The facts, however, are clear: James Baker, Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush, made an unambiguous public commitment, confirmed by NATO’s secretary-general himself. To be clear: these declarations do not have the status of a treaty or international law, but they were commitments, at best a kind of unilateral undertaking.

On the other hand, so was the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, under which Russia, the United States and Ukraine agreed that Ukraine’s borders would be respected in exchange for giving up the nuclear weapons it had at the time. Both Russia and the U.S. failed to uphold their part of the agreement.

NATO, as may have postulated, does not really seem to be the problem. Russia already has hundreds of miles of peaceful borders with NATO countries, including the Baltic states, and did not kick up a fuss when Finland joined NATO last year. The only country where joining NATO ostensibly appears to be a problem is Ukraine. Perhaps this exception should be regarded as a flashing red light, warning that Putin still might have his eye on Ukraine for its minerals, agricultural land, and outlet on the Black Sea.

As long as Ukraine is not in NATO, Putin might regard it as fair game. As for the potential deal with Trump, it might well appear to Putin that some of Ukraine is better than none of Ukraine—especially after already having successfully captured all of Crimea and a good chunk of Georgia. It also might help to remember that, for better or worse, Putin will not be around forever.

What appears to terrify Putin the most is a democracy 250 miles from Moscow—where people inside Russia might see up close what it is like to live in a free society.

Towards a Yalta?

The main risk for Europe is that the Ukraine crisis formalizes its geopolitical downgrade. Europe lacks the resources to challenge the United States and can only confront Russia due to NATO’s support. In short, Europe does not count. So far, at least, Europe has not wanted to pay, and has not wanted to fight.

Trump has been a supporter of NATO but not as its guarantor. His worldview at the moment is that he rejects war, except as a last resort. To him, it seems, America’s true rival in the 21st century is not Europe, or Russia, and certainly not the amorphous, inconsistent entity known as the BRICs. It is China. To counter this threat, Trump needs a cooperative Europe that finances more of its own defense.

Russia may be an impoverished empire but it still thinks of itself as powerful one. It flexes its influence—based on oil and nuclear weapons—and power beyond its borders, but primarily when its economy is stable and flush with resources. When Russia is financially strained or “broke,” its imperial ambitions take a backseat.

It was the Biden administration’s energy policies that bolstered Russia’s economic position, and actually provided the funds that fueled its military actions, especially the invasion of Ukraine. Biden’s restrictions on domestic energy production in the U.S. and a shift away from energy independence drove up global oil and gas prices, filling the coffers of Russia, which relies on energy exports.

Russia does not want NATO a stone’s throw from Moscow, just as the United States did not want Soviet missiles in Cuba. The United States, nevertheless, does not go around invading other countries; Russia does. It is no secret, even to Trump, that Russia is the aggressor here, and probably determined to keep acting that way.

In the Caribbean, near the U.S., are islands that belong to France, the Netherlands and the UK—and no one loses sleep over them. Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, on the other hand, have been acting as predators. It is not just that they flex their muscles; they act as if they expect the West to give them a pass to overthrow it without any consequences. The U.S. is not out to conquer Asia, but Russia, China, Iran and North Korea seem hell-bent on carving out their empires one aggressive move at a time.

Today, three military powers dominate the world: China, Russia and the United States. Europe, if not on the list, has only itself to blame. Economically on par with the U.S. until the year 2000, the old continent has since succumbed to a morbid environmentalist fantasy—the “Zero-Carbon Society,” a totalitarian myth for which the European Union sacrificed everything: the economy, citizens’ well-being, freedom of speech, and perhaps eventually its culture and democratic form of government.

Consider this: the average European pays four times more for home heating than the average American. Why? Because in Europe, fracking for gas is banned, oil is despised, electricity is dependent on wind turbines and solar panels, and perfectly functional nuclear reactors are being decommissioned. Now Russia is trying to repair the Nord Stream II gas pipeline so that Europe can depend on Putin. Good luck with that.

Trump has the ambition, the means, and the momentum for a new Yalta. The Russians will be only too happy to return to the negotiating table. Cursing and shivering, the Europeans will be of enormous help.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

• Egypt plans to build a $7 billion petrochemical complex and launch new oil and gas auctions to boost domestic production.

• The country aims to enhance energy security and attract foreign investment, despite recent economic challenges and energy shortages.

• Egypt is balancing its fossil fuel development with renewable energy targets, though it has adjusted its green energy goals.

Oil-rich Egypt has big plans for the future of its fossil fuel development with several major new auctions and investments planned for the North African country. A new $7 billion petrochemical complex and other major oil and gas investments are expected to reinvigorate Egypt’s oil industry, although it may have to win back investor confidence following a disappointing financial year.

Egypt is a major African fossil fuel producer, the second-largest non-OPEC producer of liquid fuels after Angola. It was also the second-largest producer of natural gas in Africa in 2022, after Algeria. The expansion of Egypt’s gas production has been supported by the launch of operations at several major offshore fields over the past decade, including its Zohr gas field. However, Egypt’s gas production has been forecast to fall in the coming decades as Zohr matures, as well as due to several recent exploration failures.

In February, Egypt signed a framework agreement with U.K.-based Shard Capital and Saudi Arabia’s Al-Qahtani Group to construct a $7 billion petrochemical facility in New Alamein City in the northwest of the country. The project will be overseen by a consortium, including members from Shard Capital, Al-Qahtani Group, and the UAE’s Royal Strategic Partners. Once complete, it is expected to produce 3.1 million tonnes of eight different petrochemical products annually.

Karim Badawi, Egypt’s Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources, said that advanced technologies will be incorporated into the facility’s design to reduce the impact on the environment. Badawi said the development is key to improving the value of Egypt’s natural resources. The complex is expected to enhance Egypt’s export capacity significantly. It is also expected to help deepen ties between Egypt, Gulf countries and the U.K.

In March, Egypt’s Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources announced new investment opportunities, aimed at expanding exploration and production activities. The ministry plans to offer seven undeveloped fields in the Mediterranean and six exploration areas in the Gulf of Suez and the Western Desert. Companies can bid using the Egypt Upstream Gateway (EUG) over the next two months, until 4th May 2025.

The ministry recently closed the bidding round for 13 exploration areas and mature fields, after several offers were received, which are currently being assessed. The combined investments from the previous auction could bring in more than $700 million in investments.

In the new auction, the seven undeveloped fields are being offered in two clusters – the Aten, Merit, and Rahmat fields, as well as the Notus, Salamat, Satis, and Salmon fields. This approach is aimed at increasing investment returns, reducing production costs, and streamlining development and production processes.

The government aims to boost Egypt’s energy security through the expansion of the country’s oil and gas industry. 

The largely untapped natural gas reserves in the Mediterranean are expected to help make Egypt more energy-independent in the future, as the national energy demand continues to grow. Egypt’s President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi views the country as a production and re-export hub for international markets.

As host to the 2022 COP27 Climate Conference, Egypt also stated aims to expand its renewable energy sector. Before hosting COP27, Egypt pledged to increase renewable energy production to 42 percent of its energy mix by 2035, a target which it later moved forward to 2030. In June 2024, then-Electricity Minister Mohamed Shaker announced the ambitious target of an energy mix with 58 percent renewables by 2040. 

However, in October, the government revised its green energy target, reducing the figure to 40 percent of the energy mix. During the announcement, Petroleum Minister Karim Badawi said that natural gas will remain a vital part of the country’s energy mix for several years. At the opening session of the Mediterranean Energy Conference 2024, Badawi stated, “This is a message to all of us to work together to increase discoveries and attract more investments through the bids being offered for exploration, aiming to achieve new discoveries in the region, which holds more wealth, particularly natural gas.”

Egypt’s government is currently working to rebuild trust with foreign companies following the 2024 energy crisis. Following a sharp gas production decline, Egypt was forced to import billions of dollars’ worth of gas cargoes to meet its national demand last summer. The energy ministry had to resort to load-shedding to keep its grid online as its gas supplies depleted and demand rose. As Egypt was facing a currency crisis, countries, including Saudi Arabia and Libya, stepped in to help Egypt fund the gas imports it needed. 

Egypt’s pound experienced a devaluation of 60 percent between March and September 2024. In addition, Egypt reportedly accumulated around $6 billion worth of debt for gas and fuel supplies. President Sisi and Energy Minister Badawi now aim to attract new investments through the new oil and gas auctions, as well as reassure companies that already have operations in Egypt.

Delta Air Lines lowered its sales and earnings expectations for the first quarter, citing a “recent decline in consumer and corporate confidence due to increased macro uncertainty, leading to softness in domestic demand.”

The Atlanta-based airline issued a profit warning in an 8-K filing shortly after Monday’s market close. This comes ahead of its Tuesday morning presentation at the J.P. Morgan Industrials Conference and massively differs from its outlook at the beginning of the year… 

Delta slashed its first-quarter revenue growth forecast to 3%–4%, well below the initial guidance of 7%–9%. Additionally, it lowered its adjusted earnings forecast to 30–50 cents per share, down from the previous range of 70 cents to $1 per share.

“The outlook has been impacted by the recent reduction in consumer and corporate confidence caused by increased macro uncertainty, driving softness in Domestic demand,” Delta wrote in the filing, adding, “Premium, international, and loyalty revenue growth trends are consistent with expectations and reflect the resilience of Delta’s diversified revenue base.” 

A slide in Delta’s presentation for the JPM conference tomorrow noted that, despite consumer and corporate confidence shifts, the airline is expected to have a “solidly profitable March quarter, reflecting Delta’s durability.”

After hours, Delta CEO Ed Bastian joined CNBC’s “Closing Bell,” informing viewers that a recession is not in the cards but noting that consumer confidence has softened. 

Delta’s downward revised forecast sent shares plunging as much as 13% in after-hours trading, adding to a year-to-date loss of 17%.

The airline industry closely tracks GDP, with a near 1:1 correlation. Take a look at Delta’s shares compared to the U.S. Economic Surprise Index…

Earlier, we shared a note with readers stating that President Trump was eager to push the U.S. economy into a recession—one he can rightly blame on the Biden-Harris regime’s failed ‘Bidenomics.’ Remember what Trump said in an interview on Sunday: “There could be a little disruption.“

Delta’s first-quarter weakness suggests continued softening of the U.S. economy and should make traders and investors consider what type of economic landing lies ahead.

Authored by Jackson Richman via The Epoch Times,

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard announced on March 10 that she had revoked dozens of security clearances in accordance with President Donald Trump’s order.

Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, New York Attorney General Letitia James, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, and attorneys Mark Zaid, Andrew Weissman, and Norm Eisen were among those who lost clearances.

Gabbard also revoked the clearances of the 51 former U.S. intelligence officials who signed a letter alleging that the Hunter Biden laptop story had the “earmarks” of Russian disinformation. Former FBI employees testified to Congress in 2023 that the laptop was not disinformation.

In February, Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social that former President Joe Biden’s intelligence information would be “cut off immediately” and that his daily Intelligence briefings would stop.

The laptop was an issue in the 2020 presidential election, as critics said it contained information that could be negative about the former president’s son. He was later convicted of criminal tax and gun charges but was pardoned by his father shortly before the latter left the White House.

The October 2020 letter stated that “the arrival on the U.S. political scene of emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter, much of it related to his time serving on the Board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

“We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement–just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.”

Trump took action on Jan. 20, the first day of his second term, to revoke the security clearances of 50 former government officials, including his former national security adviser, John Bolton.

“Federal policymakers must be able to rely on analysis conducted by the Intelligence Community and be confident that it is accurate, crafted with professionalism, and free from politically motivated engineering to affect political outcomes in the United States,” stated the presidential action.

“The signatories [of the letter] willfully weaponized the gravitas of the Intelligence Community to manipulate the political process and undermine our democratic institutions.”

*   *   * 

Top sellers from last week at ZH Store:

ZH Multitool

Anza Swat Micarta Blued knife

ReadyWise Heirloom Seed Vault

IQ Colostrum

ZH Coffee + Tumbler deal (buy 2 bags, get free tumbler)

InfoWars reporter Jamie White has died in what host Alex Jones says was a ‘brutal murder‘ which occurred around midnight outside of his Austin apartment.

At 11:57 p.m., Austin PD responded to a call in the 2300 block of Douglas Street – finding a white male victim with “obvious signs of trauma,” according to APD Public Information Officer Leah Ratliff. White was transported to a local hospital where he died shortly after arrival.

According to Ratliff, “This is pretty early on in the investigation, and the homicide unit will be releasing more information as they’re able.”

According to Jones, staff at InfoWars grew concerned after White did not show up to work on Monday.

“We sent some people over this morning when he didn’t answer the phone because he’s always here early, loves to work, loves to fight tyranny, loves to promote freedom,” adding “He passed away at the hospital very soon after they got him there.”

“Jamie was our best writer,” Jones said.

JUST IN: Alex Jones reveals his top reporter Jamie White was m*rdered outside of his home in Austin, Texas last night.

Jones says his staff became worried when White didn’t show up to the office this morning.

“There are a lot of really cool people that have worked at Infowars… pic.twitter.com/dPSmHvpBrK

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) March 10, 2025

Jamie White
1988 – 2025
American Patriot

Remembering Murdered Infowars Journalist, Jamie White.

Rest In Peace pic.twitter.com/jDbZroAptI

— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) March 11, 2025

Our deepest condolences to the InfoWars family.

Authored by Steven Kovac via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

This week, a federal investigation determined that the Maine Department of Education (MDOE) violated the rights of female athletes under its charge.

Official notice of the MDOE’s failure to comply with Title IX was sent to state officials in a Feb. 25 letter from Anthony Archeval, acting director of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights. Archeval estimated that about $700,000 received by the MDOE in 2024 from federal sources could be in jeopardy because of its noncompliance.

The notice was addressed to Maine Gov. Janet Mills and state Attorney General Aaron Frey.

Neither Mills nor Frey responded to a request for comment.

The determination of violation was made four days after a widely publicized exchange about men in women’s sports between Mills and President Donald Trump at a Feb. 21 White House meeting with the nation’s governors.

After Trump called Mills out for her defiance and threatened to cut off federal funds, the Maine governor affirmed her opposition to Title IX policy and said she would see him in court.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any educational program or activity that receives federal financial assistance, in part, stating: “No person shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, be treated differently from another person or otherwise be discriminated against in any interscholastic, intercollegiate, club or intramural athletics offered by a recipient (of federal funds).”

In 2024, the Biden administration implemented a rule that, for the purposes of Title IX, the definition of discrimination on the basis of sex includes sexual orientation, gender identity, sex stereotypes, and sex characteristics.

In his letter, Archeval cited a recent decision by the United States District Court Eastern District of Kentucky (Tennessee v. Cardona), which said in part, “When Title IX is viewed in its entirety, it is abundantly clear that discrimination on the basis of sex means discrimination on the basis of being a male or female.”

On Jan. 9, the federal court vacated the Biden-era rule.

Evidence of Noncompliance

Archeval wrote that the Office for Civil Rights investigation found that on Feb. 17, 2025, Greely High School violated Title IX “through the participation of a male athlete in a women’s high school track meet.”

The letter also cited that Maine Coast Waldorf, a public high school, violated Title IX by allowing a male athlete to participate in a women’s high school ski event on Feb. 18 and 19.

States’ Rights Versus Federal Supremacy

Institutional policies and certain state laws in Maine that conflict with Trump’s executive order and the Title IX rules put forth by the Trump administration were highlighted in Archeval’s letter.

Archeval noted that the Maine Principals’ Association (MPA) is the governing body for youth sports in the state and that all public high schools, as well as a number of private schools, are MPA members.

In 2024, the MPA approved a policy allowing athletes who identify as transgender to compete on teams either according to their birth-assigned gender or their gender identity.

Archeval also cited the Maine Human Rights Act, which states, “The opportunity for an individual at an educational institution to participate in all educational, counseling and vocational guidance programs, all apprenticeship and on-the-job training programs and all extracurricular activities without discrimination because of sex, sexual orientation or gender identity, a physical or mental disability, ancestry, national origin, race, color or religion is recognized and declared to be a civil right.”

Mike Burnham, executive director of the MPA, has stated that the MPA is committed to following state law on gender identity.

The Office for Civil Rights letter cited comments made by Burnham, who said Trump’s executive order is “in conflict” with the Maine Human Rights Act. Trump signed the Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government order on Jan. 20, which states that there are only two sexes and women-only spaces are to be protected for women only.

Jeff Porter, superintendent of Maine School Administrative District 51, the home of Greely High School, published a letter stating that the MDOE told the state’s school districts that Trump’s order applies only to federal agencies and does not mitigate the authority of Maine law or locally adopted school board policies.

Porter said the MDOE memo stressed that schools are expected to abide by the Maine Human Rights Act, and in the case of athletics, the MPA has adopted the position to follow state law.

The issue of federal funding of school districts rests with the state and not local districts, Porter said.

“After a federal court vacated the 2024 rules last month, the new federal guidance reinforces compliance with the 2020 rules, which we are re-adopting,” he said.

Archeval told Mills and Frey that if compliance from the MDOE is not forthcoming, he may send a referral to the Department of Justice, in addition to the potential loss of federal funding.

The Trump White House wants Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to begin planning elections or else consider stepping down as a condition for the resumption of US military aid and intelligence sharing, a fresh NBC report reveals. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also said Monday that Ukraine must cede territory.

Ukraine “would have to make concessions over land that Russia had taken since 2014 as part of any agreement to end the war,” The NY Times reports. “The most important thing that we have to leave here with is a strong sense that Ukraine is prepared to do difficult things, like the Russians are going to have to do difficult things, to end this conflict or at least pause it in some way, shape or form,” Rubio told reporters as he flew from the US to Jeddah – as quoted in multiple outlets.

American and Ukrainian officials are meeting in Saudi Arabia. The question of elections in Ukraine, which have been canceled indefinitely under martial law, has moved to the forefront also as pressure is still on for Kiev to sign the minerals deal.

“As President Trump demonstrated by reading President Zelenskyy’s message at the joint session, the Ukrainians have made positive movement. With meetings in Saudi this coming week, we look forward to hearing more positive movement that will hopefully ultimately end this brutal war and bloodshed,” White House National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes said this weekend when asked about Trump’s requirements.

Rubio in Riyadh has further explained, “The important point in this meeting is to establish clearly their intentions, their desire, as they’ve said publicly now numerous times, to reach a point where peace is possible,” Rubio said of Tuesday’s delegation meeting with the Ukrainians. “And then we’ll have to determine how far they are from the Russian position, which we don’t know yet either. And then once you understand where both sides truly are, it gives you a sense of how big the divide is and how hard it’s going to be.”

There’s widespread acknowledgement in Washington that Ukrainian forces will never be able to pry the four annexed territories in the east back from Russia.

The question of Crimea will be something Moscow will also never budge on – and Kiev is likely more willing at this point to give up any future claims on it, which has been the historic home of Russian naval power on the Black Sea.

As for elections, Zelensky’s term in office expired in May 2024, and Ukrainian parliament has recently reaffirmed the Constitutionality of Zelensky’s mandate as leader of the country during wartime. However, Trump last month called him a ‘dictator’ who canceled elections, and even long before that called him the “world’s greatest salesman” as he received hundreds of billions from the US and Western allies.

Below are the key lines from the Sunday NBC report:

Trump wants the deal, which would give the United States a stake in Ukraine’s mineral resources, signed. But he also wants to see a change in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s attitude toward peace talks, the officials said, including a willingness to make concessions such as giving up territory to Russia. Trump also wants Zelenskyy to make some movement toward elections in Ukraine and possibly toward stepping down as his country’s leader, the officials said.

As for some reports which suggest the next round of US-Russia talks are about to get underway, the Kremlin is denying that anything has been set:

Russian and U.S. officials do not plan to meet in Saudi Arabia this week for a new round of diplomatic talks, the Kremlin said Monday.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied a CNN report claiming that Trump administration officials planned to meet separately with Russian and Ukrainian officials in Saudi Arabia this week. The report, citing an unnamed source, did not specify who would have attended the discussions.

Increased speculation came after President Trump said Sunday that “big meetings” in Saudi Arabia would include Russia – after one “successful” meeting led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio already took place.

On the battlefield, Russia and Ukraine continue trading drone attacks on key energy infrastructure. But in the ‘war of attrition’ the Ukrainian side is losing, by almost all accounts.

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

Former Clinton strategist James Carville has reinvented himself at age 80 as a sage Democrat podcaster. His predictions—remember, a victorious Kamala Harris?—are usually wrong. He enjoys engaging in public duels with celebrities to gain online clicks and media appearances.

Yet sometimes he appears judicious in his effort to return his party to the Clinton glory days of 1992-2000, before the takeover of the party by the lunatic left. That said, he too has become part of the new left nihilism he supposedly despises.

Most recently, Dr. Carville diagnosed Donald Trump as suffering from tertiary syphilis. Carville’s “proof” was his identification of a bruise on Trump’s much-used shaking hand, along with his supposed brain dementia. As confirmation, Carville described Trump as a “fat f—ing slob” with a “beached whale body.” 

So, a once top Democratic strategist has gone from his 1992 iconic campaign reminder, “It’s the economy, stupid,” to smearing Trump as a fat slob with syphilis. 

Carville’s descent sums up his entire party.

Meanwhile, the congressional Democratic opposition finds itself loudly and proudly standing with only 20-30 percent of the American people on matters from biological males competing in female sports to an open border. For years, Democrats claimed the lack of “comprehensive immigration reform” prevented them from securing the border and stopping a 10-12 million influx of illegal aliens. And then they went quiet when Trump, without any new legislation, simply enforced existing immigration statutes and nearly eliminated all illegal entries.

Defeated candidate Kamala Harris is still trying to reassure donors that she did not know how she blew millions of dollars in last-minute 2024 campaign gifts by paying off the likes of Oprah, Al Sharpton, and Cardi B for interviews and endorsements while flying young staffers around the country on rented private jets.

The Democratic Congress under Chuck Schumer and Hakim Jeffries demonstrates their opposition to Trump by cutting videos in which party luminaries promise to stop the “sh-t.” Fellow Democratic congresswomen rivaled them with a worse ad in which they dressed in macho kickboxing attire and clumsily gyrated as if they were punching out their conservative opponents.

At Trump’s first congressional address, most Democrats did not stand when a young survivor of a brain tumor was honored by receiving an honorary Secret Service membership. Instead, many of them displayed hand-held, bingo-like-placards attacking Elon Musk as a thief. Democratic Women’s Caucus members wore pink uniforms, while septuagenarian Rep. Al Green shook his cane, screaming like a lunatic at Trump at the dais. He had to be forcibly escorted out of the joint session of Congress, which otherwise was already frequently interrupted by Democratic heckling and jeering.

What is going on?

Like a drug user who knows his addiction is killing him but cannot quit, the Democratic Party privately understands that the majority of the American people do not buy into their transgender, open border/illegal alien, reckless spending, fanatical green advocacies, and diversity/equity/inclusion racial essentialism.

Yet, they continue their destructive fixations in fear of their own hardcore base. And who are these radicals that run the party?

Some are the students who hit the streets and disrupt campuses to protest for the terrorists of Hamas, or the edgier and even crazier who approve of violent acts, such as youth between 18-29 who poll in favor of Luigi Mangione’s recent assassination of a United Health executive.

And then there are the various racial caucuses who no longer make much attempt to hide their overt racial obsessions and separatism. There is also a growing overt anti-Semitism among many of the DEI crowd who seem to think their own minority status shields them from repercussions. The various public sector and teacher unions are babied. Both can rally money and protests, but otherwise cannot improve dismal schools or incompetent bureaucracies.

So, the current Democratic Party is completely unaware of the irony that to stop Trump, they must become far more unpopular than Trump. We are witnessing the most radical counter-revolution in the last 100 years, as the Trump administration attempts to slash government spending and the federal bureaucracies. It insists on reciprocal tariffs with friendly, neutral, and hostile nations alike. It will vastly expand energy production, end once and for all illegal immigration, fire the DEI industry and its overt racism, reboot public health policies, redirect the Pentagon, and, in general, reexamine almost every entrenched left-wing government institution and policy of the last 50 years.

Normally no party would even attempt such needed but radical changes in a country that in the last three elections split nearly 50/50. To conduct such a rare counterrevolution, a president by nature would have to become controversial and make enemies as he battled opposition in Congress, the courts, the media, and the street. And Trump does all that. Yet in less than 60 days, he has done more to reverse the radical left-wing agenda than even Ronald Reagan did in eight years. And so far, he is continuing on course.

How and why? Part of his audacity is found in the unique personage of Trump, who enjoys controversy. He is a private sector builder who hates delay and obfuscation. He sees his political modus operandi as no different than building a Manhattan high-rise, whose success is predicated on cutting deals, bulldozing obdurate opponents, and delivering a superior product that eventually the public appreciates despite the controversies surrounding its construction and implementation.

But part of Trump’s success is also the gift of the new Democrat Party. It is so foul-mouthed, so embarrassingly infantile and exhibitionist, and so out of touch with the wishes of the American people that at least for now it makes Trump’s counter-revolution seem normal and long overdue—especially after the four-year catastrophe of the nihilist Biden administration.

Rather than agree on anything with Trump, the Democrats will automatically oppose everything he does, even if that means pushing issues that 70 percent of the people don’t want, or play-acting like 1960s spoiled college protestors, or shielding violent illegal aliens, or mouthing now-tired Trump-is-Hitler-Mussolini-Stalin boilerplate.

In a sane world, the Democrat opposition would do two things.

One, for each of Trump’s initiatives that it opposes, it would publish a comprehensive counter agenda, hoping to side with the majority of the people. And when it rarely more or less agreed with Trump, or felt he was on the right side of public opinion, sane Democrats would then offer bipartisan support in hopes of helping the nation, as well as stealing Trump’s thunder by taking credit for popular reforms.

Instead, it is doing neither. Like a spoiled teenager who sticks out his tongue when his allowance is cut, the Democratic Party and its appendages in the media are now screaming profanities, now crying and whining in despair, and now coming up with all sorts of bizarre conspiracies that Musk is a felonious thief, that Trump is a syphilitic, and that the only way to get their way is to destroy all prior protocols of congressional civility.

Again, the irony is that by doing all that and more, they are gifting to Trump a despised alternative to almost everything he is doing. The more their polls fall, the more Democrats believe that they did not act quite juvenilely, obnoxiously, and foully enough.

In sum, if Trump succeeds with his historic counter-revolution, his new anti-New Deal, it will be due in no small part to those who hate him and thereby reveal themselves to be innately hateful.

And Democrats almost daily apparently want the American people to witness their venom—and thereby to be revolted by them.

It seems some far-left NGOs still have funds to deploy despite Secretary of State Marco Rubio neutering USAID. 

A video shared by X user DOGE Designer shows what appears to be an anti-Musk protester admitting in front of a Tesla showroom during a protest: “I get paid to be out here.” 

BREAKING: DOGE protester outside the Tesla store admits he was paid to protest.

“I get paid to be out here.” pic.twitter.com/FbRiygAQHt

— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) March 10, 2025

In recent weeks, attacks on Tesla dealerships and Superchargers have been reported nationwide. The culprits behind the chaos are unhinged liberals angry about Elon Musk’s DOGE slashing government waste and corruption (now with a “scalpel“). 

• “Vandalism Is Not Free Speech!” Elon Musk Speaks Out After Rise In Tesla Protests, Defacements

• Vandalism And Attacks On Tesla Accelerate As Musk Says ActBlue, Soros To Blame

This is crazy https://t.co/lCzN69NyAY

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 10, 2025

Musk revealed on Saturday that Democrats have unleashed protests against his company through a network of shady NGOs: 

An investigation has found 5 ActBlue-funded groups responsible for Tesla “protests”: Troublemakers, Disruption Project, Rise & Resist, Indivisible Project and Democratic Socialists of America. ActBlue funders include George Soros, Reid Hoffman, Herbert Sandler, Patricia Bauman, and Leah Hunt-Hendrix. ActBlue is currently under investigation for allowing foreign and illegal donations in criminal violation of campaign finance regulations. This week, 7 ActBlue senior officials resigned, including the associate general counsel.

An investigation has found 5 ActBlue-funded groups responsible for Tesla “protests”: Troublemakers, Disruption Project, Rise & Resist, Indivisible Project and Democratic Socialists of America.

ActBlue funders include George Soros, Reid Hoffman, Herbert Sandler, Patricia Bauman,…

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 8, 2025

This time around, protests have yet to gain traction since USAID—the slush fund for NGOs—came under intense scrutiny during President Trump’s first few weeks in office.

Now…

Rubio Slashes 83% Of USAID Programs, Hails DOGE For Supporting “Historic Reform” https://t.co/JAHgMAOTDH

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 10, 2025

So, how will Democrats fund a professional protester army now, as they have in the past—such as with BLM and other groups meant to push color revolutions? Come on, Alex Soros, think. What would master-grifter dad do??

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy apologized to President Donald Trump for a heated Oval Office meeting this past week in a letter that Trump cited during his March 4 speech before Congress, White House special envoy Steve Witkoff said.

“Zelensky sent a letter to the president. He apologized for that whole incident that happened in the Oval Office,” Witkoff said on March 10 in an interview on Fox News. 

“I think that it was an important step and there’s been a lot of discussion between our teams and the Ukrainians and the Europeans who are relevant to this discussion as well.”

The letter, mentioned by Trump during his congressional address, also signaled Ukraine’s willingness to negotiate an end to the war with Russia. 

Trump quoted Zelenskyy as saying Ukraine was “ready to come to the negotiating table” and eager to “work under President Trump’s strong leadership” to reach a lasting peace.

Trump also said Zelenskyy wrote in the letter that Ukraine is ready to sign a minerals deal with the United States.

Zelenskyy’s outreach follows his contentious Feb. 28 meeting with Trump and Vice President JD Vance, which the Ukrainian president later called “regrettable.” The meeting, initially meant to finalize an economic agreement granting the United States access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, devolved into a heated exchange over the path to ending the war.

During the meeting, Trump pressed for an immediate cease-fire and direct negotiations with Russia, while Zelenskyy pushed back, questioning the viability of any agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Zelenskyy argued that Putin could not be trusted to uphold a peace deal and insisted that any future agreement with Moscow include explicit security guarantees from the United States. Trump, however, rejected the idea, maintaining that U.S. economic involvement in Ukraine’s mineral sector would provide a strong enough deterrent against future Russian aggression.

After the meeting, Trump accused Zelenskyy of using U.S. military aid to prolong the fight against Russia rather than engaging in negotiations with Moscow. Shortly afterward, Trump halted U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, intensifying pressure on Kyiv to agree to a cease-fire while also pushing European allies to step up their support.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Ukrainian officials are set to meet in Saudi Arabia this week to discuss potential peace talks with Russia. Zelenskyy, who arrived in Jeddah on Monday, is expected to meet with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ahead of the summit.

While the United States has restricted intelligence-sharing with Ukraine for offensive operations, Witkoff noted that defensive intelligence remains available. Officials are expected to discuss the future of U.S. military aid and intelligence-sharing during the talks in Saudi Arabia.

“We never shut off intelligence for … anything defensive that the Ukrainians need,” Witkoff told Fox News.

Trump, who said he has received “strong signals” from Russia about peace negotiations, framed the moment as an opportunity to end the war. “Wouldn’t that be beautiful?” he said to applause during his address to Congress.

In a bid to encourage Russia to get serious about peace talks, Trump threatened sanctions and tariffs on Moscow.

“Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely ‘pounding’ Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large-scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED. To Russia and Ukraine, get to the table right now, before it is too late. Thank you!!!” he wrote in a March 7 post on Truth Social.

Trump did not say how much in tariffs or what other types of sanctions he would impose on Russia.

In his latest public statement on March 10, Zelenskyy reiterated his readiness to engage in peace talks, saying on X that Ukraine “has been seeking peace since the very first second of the war,” while blaming Russia for ongoing hostilities.