62.1 F
Chicago
Tuesday, September 29, 2026
Home Blog Page 2410

Trump Agrees To Debate Kamala Harris On Fox News With “Full Arena Audience”

Trump Agrees To Debate Kamala Harris On Fox News With “Full Arena Audience”

Let’s get ready to rumble.

US Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump announced late Friday that he will debate Democratic US Vice President Kamala Harris in early September, with Fox News set to host the debate event in Pennsylvania. 

“I have agreed with FoxNews to debate Kamala Harris on Wednesday, Sept. 4. The Debate was previously scheduled against Sleepy Joe Biden on ABC, but has been terminated in that Biden will no longer be a participant, and I am in litigation against ABC Network and George Slopadopoulos, thereby creating a conflict of interest,” Trump wrote on social media platform Truth Social. 

Trump noted, “The FoxNews Debate will be held in the Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, at a site in an area to be determined. The Moderators of the Debate will be Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, and the Rules will be similar to the Rules of my Debate with Sleepy Joe, who has been treated horribly by his Party – BUT WITH A FULL ARENA AUDIENCE!….”

Trump continued, “….As everyone knows, the Democrats have Unconstitutionally taken a Candidate, who was acknowledged to be defeated, and unceremoniously replaced him with a new Candidate. This has never been done before, and is a Threat to Democracy, but I am totally prepared to accept the results of this “coup,” and replace Joe on the Debate stage with Crazy Kamala Harris.” 

“I spent Hundreds of Millions of Dollars, Time, and Effort fighting Joe, and when I won the Debate, they threw a new Candidate into the ring. Not fair, but it is what it is! Nevertheless, different Candidate or not, their bad Policies are the same, and this will be strongly revealed at the September 4th Debate,” the former president said. 

He ended, “I look forward to meeting and debating Kamala Harris on Sept. 4. This date is convenient and appropriate in that it is just prior to the September 6th start of Early Voting in the 2024 Presidential Election. I look forward to seeing everyone on Sept. 4, in the Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania!”

AP News quoted VP Harris a little more than a week ago. She said she was “ready” to debate Trump and accused him of backpedaling from a previous debate agreement with ABC for Sept. 10. 

The problem with VP Harris, as David Sacks and Elon Musk describe on X, is that when she gets off script – well – it’s disastrous.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 12:15

Josh Shapiro Downplays IDF Volunteerism As ‘Service Project’ As Wikipedia Scrubs Evidence

Josh Shapiro Downplays IDF Volunteerism As ‘Service Project’ As Wikipedia Scrubs Evidence

Authored by Matt Margolis via PJ Media (emphasis ours),

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

It seems inevitable that Gov. Josh Shapiro (D-Pa.) is going to be chosen as Kamala Harris’s running mate. 

Assuming this is correct, the goal of selecting Shapiro is to put Pennsylvania back in play for the Democratic ticket—if not completely out of play for Donald Trump. But, Shapiro’s Jewish heritage and pro-Israel positions are likely to cause a real problem with the far left. Shapiro is one of the only candidates that is outwardly auditioning to be Kamala’s running mate, and sadly, he’s already trying to memory-hole his support of Israel.

First is the way he’s distancing himself from his past position that peace “will never come” to the Middle East and that a two-state solution wasn’t likely to succeed.

In the opinion article, titled “Peace not possible,” Shapiro, then a 20-year-old student at the University of Rochester, argued that a negotiated accord between Israeli and Palestinian leaders would not end conflict in the region, writing: “Using history as precedent, peace between Arabs and Israelis is virtually impossible and will never come.”

He described the Arab world as fractious, and wrote that the then-Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was in danger of being assassinated “by his fellow belligerent Arabs.”

“Palestinians will not coexist peacefully,” Shapiro wrote. “They do not have the capabilities to establish their own homeland and make it successful even with the aid of Israel and the United States. They are too battle-minded to be able to establish a peaceful homeland of their own.”

Shapiro now insists he supports a two-state solution.

“I was 20,” he said. “I have said for years, years before October 7, that I favor a two-state solution — Israelis and Palestinians living peacefully side-by-side, being able to determine their own futures and their own destiny.”

For sure, views can evolve, but Shapiro is also now sadly downplaying something he shouldn’t. In the same aforementioned op-ed, he identified himself as a former volunteer for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

Today, however, his campaign is downplaying that.

“While he was in high school, Josh Shapiro was required to do a service project, which he and several classmates completed through a program that took them to a kibbutz in Israel where he worked on a farm and at a fishery,” Manuel Bonder, a spokesman for Shapiro, told The Times of Israel. “The program also included volunteering on service projects on an Israeli army base. At no time was he engaged in any military activities.”

Simultaneously, Shapiro’s volunteering for the IDF has been scrubbed from his Wikipedia page.

Imagine being so desperate to be chosen as Kamala Harris’s running mate that you would look at volunteering for the IDF as something not to be proud of because you’re trying to appease the antisemitic and anti-Zionist wing of the Democratic Party. This is the Democratic Party of today.

 

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 11:40

“Greater Than 50-50 Chance”: SpaceX May Save Stranded Boeing Starliner Crew At ISS

“Greater Than 50-50 Chance”: SpaceX May Save Stranded Boeing Starliner Crew At ISS

Boeing’s crewed Starliner spacecraft mission to the International Space Station was initially expected to last just a few days, but it has stretched into weeks and now two months. 

The two astronauts, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, have been stranded on the ISS following Starliner’s helium leaks and failing thrusters in early June.

NASA and Boeing have been working to resolve Starliner’s issues, but progress has been limited.

The big story here is that, after two months, Boeing has yet to publicly ask Elon Musk’s SpaceX for help. Optically, this would be a major blow to Boeing’s image, especially considering the series of mid-air mishaps involving its 737Max commercial jets. Additionally, it’s an election year for the Biden administration, which has been on a crusade against Trump and his supporters, but also is very anti-Musk. Any rescue mission by SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft is undesirable news flow for Democrats.

However, a new report from Ars Technica, citing various sources, indicates SpaceX could be publicly called up to save the day.  

Here’s more from Ars Technica:

For a long time, it seemed almost certain that the astronauts would return to Earth inside Starliner. However, there has been a lot of recent activity at NASA, Boeing, and SpaceX that suggests that Wilmore and Williams could come home aboard a Crew Dragon spacecraft rather than Starliner.

The report continued:

One informed source said it was greater than a 50-50 chance that the crew would come back on Dragon. Another source said it was significantly more likely than not they would. To be clear, NASA has not made a final decision. This probably will not happen until at least next week. It is likely that Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator, will make the call.

On Thursday evening, NASA spokesperson Josh Finch told Ars, “NASA is evaluating all options for the return of agency astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams from the International Space Station as safely as possible. No decisions have been made and the agency will continue to provide updates on its planning.” 

X users are wondering why the stranded Starliner story is not huge news. 

Imagine that… Trump’s wealthiest supporter could save the day on the ISS.

Where is Bezos’ rocket?

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 11:05

Worldcoin Spreads Across Europe With Austria Digital ID Launch

Worldcoin Spreads Across Europe With Austria Digital ID Launch

Authored by Savannah Fortis via CoinTelegraph.com,

The Worldcoin Foundation has announced that its World ID-issuing orb has been introduced in Austria, which adds another location in Europe with access to its digital identity verification technology. 

As of July 31, residents of Vienna over the age of 18 can verify their World ID at several locations throughout the city, joining a network of over 6.3 million users worldwide.

Worldcoin in Europe

Tools for Humanity, the Germany-based company operating Worldcoin, is complying with the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). 

The project has also consulted with the Austrian data protection authority to address privacy and data security concerns. The company emphasized that World ID verification does not collect additional personal data beyond the iris scan required for the process.

Friederike Lumbroso-Baumgartner, the general manager at Tools for Humanity for Germany, Austria and Switzerland, stated that the project aims to rapidly expand its reach:

“Our goal is to enable as many people as possible to obtain the World ID quickly.”

Worldcoin said that Austrians interested in the initiatives can become Worldcoin ambassadors to help spread “awareness and understanding of the project.”.

The launch in Austria follows a similar launch that recently took place in Germany, which comes after an investigation into Worldcoin by the Bavarian State Office for Data Protection Supervision, or BayLDA, over concerns of biometric data collection.

Reports revealed that the BayLDA probed Worldcoin’s activities back in November 2022.

The company has faced skepticism from other governmental agencies across the globe, including in Spain, where it has halted operations for the time being.

Mixed reception

Along with Spain, it has been asked to stop services in Hong Kong, where the region’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data concluded that Worldcoin’s operations violated its Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance.

At the same time, the company has been actively working toward compliance with local privacy laws, in an attempt to gain more trust from users and regulators worldwide. In May, Worldcoin upped its security by open-sourcing its biometric data system and confirmed that users can now securely delete old iris codes.

After dropping operations in Kenya in 2023 due to a probe opened by local authorities, Kenya dropped its investigation in June, saying “no further police action” will be taken.

However, Worldcoin has faced new allegations related to price manipulation and a scam involving its native Worldcoin (WLD) token. The company has since denied insider trading and manipulation accusations.

The project celebrated its first anniversary on July 23, 2024.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 10:30

About Face! SecDef Austin Kills Plea Deal That Would Spare 9/11 Plotters From Death Penalty

About Face! SecDef Austin Kills Plea Deal That Would Spare 9/11 Plotters From Death Penalty

​In a stunning turnaround, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin has killed the deal that would have spared three major 9/11 defendants from the death penalty in exchange for their admissions of guilt. The Friday move came just two days after the Pentagon ignited a firestorm of controversy by announcing the plea bargain agreement — a deal that angered 9/11 victims yearning for maximum accountability, and for the revelation of new facts about the attacks.  

“I have decided that, in light of the significance of the decision to enter into pre-trial agreements with the accused…responsibility for such a decision should rest with me as the superior convening authority under the Military Commissions Act of 2009,” wrote Austin in a memorandum addressed to Susan Escallier, a retired Army brigadier general and military lawyer who has been overseeing the Guantanamo prosecutions. That puts potential death penalties back in the mix.  

Nearly 23 years after the attacks that killed 2,977 people and radically changed the course of history, the US government has yet to conduct a trial against 9/11 defendants who’ve been held at the US Navy base at Guantanamo, Cuba. Recent years have been consumed by pre-trial clashes over the admissibility of statements made by detainees who were subjected to the US torture regime.  

“Responsibility for such a decision should rest with me,” declared Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin (Alex Brandon/AP via US News & World Report)

The US government has efficiently prosecuted many non-9/11 terror cases in civilian federal courts — including the one that centered on the first attack on the World Trade Center, which came in a 1993 truck bomb explosion meant to topple the towers. The Bush-Cheney regime’s decision to prosecute 9/11 defendants as “enemy combatants” via military tribunals overseen by Pentagon officers with uniformed juries sent the pursuit of justice into a quagmire. 

That would have caused enough problems, but the complexity of the 9/11 prosecutions has been compounded enormously by the Bush-Cheney regime’s decision to torture the accused. The plea bargain agreement announced Wednesday offered an opportunity to end a seemingly endless cycle of pretrial motions and discovery aimed at sorting out and potentially excluding incriminating statements made while being tortured — by opting against death penalties for what likely would have been sentences measured in thousands of years.

Of course, many Americans including family members of those killed on 9/11 understandably want to see the three defendants covered by the nixed deal — alleged mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi — put to death. However, it should be noted that death penalties at the end of a full trial are far from assured, as defense attorneys will argue the government’s torture of their clients should be factored into the sentencing decision. Mohammad alone was waterboarded 183 times.    

While there’s something to be said for putting a relatively expeditious end to literal decades of slow-grinding “justice,” many 9/11 family members and survivors hope that full trials of the defendants will help them pursue a different avenue of justice — by illuminating links between the 9/11 plot and Saudi government officials. 

The same day the plea deal was announced, 9/11 plaintiffs were in a federal courtroom in New York, where Judge George Daniels was hearing arguments over Saudi Arabia’s motion to dismiss a long-running civil suit that seeks to hold the kingdom liable for logistical and financial aid the hijackers appear to have received from a web of Saudi officials operating out of the Saudi embassy in Washington and the consulate in Los Angeles.  

As they’ve pursued that case at its own glacial pace, plaintiffs lawyers have had to contend not only with the Saudi government, but with the US government, which has thwarted their attempts to obtain files from the FBI’s investigations of the attacks. On Wednesday, 9/11 Justice, a grassroots group pursuing Saudi-9/11 transparency, expressed alarm over the plea arrangement. In a statement, the group’s president, Brett Eagleson, whose father was killed in the attacks, said:  

“Our primary concern remains access to these individuals for information. These plea deals should not perpetuate a system of closed-door agreements, where crucial information is hidden without giving the families of the victims the chance to learn the full truth…We urge the administration to ensure that these deals do not close the door on obtaining critical information that can shed light on Saudi Arabia’s role in the 9/11 attacks.” 

Meanwhile, jury selection in the military trial in Guantanamo isn’t expected to start until at least 2026 (!), with the trial then expected to span upwards of a year and a half.

As the saying goes, justice delayed is justice denied…especially for 9/11 survivors and families.  

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 09:55

Hungary & Slovakia Consider Cutting Electricity Supply To Ukraine If Kiev Keeps Blocking Russian Oil Supplies

Hungary & Slovakia Consider Cutting Electricity Supply To Ukraine If Kiev Keeps Blocking Russian Oil Supplies

Via ReMix News,

Roughly 40 percent of Ukraine’s electricity imports pass through the Ukrainian-Hungarian border, which means Hungary is not entirely powerless in the face of a Ukrainian blockade on oil supplies. In fact, Hungary may be forced to cut electricity to its neighbor if push comes to shove.

Olivér Hortay, head of Századvég’s climate and energy policy department, noted that Ukraine’s biggest energy problem is the electricity system. Since the start of the war, the country has lost three-quarters of its own electricity generation capacity, leading to Ukrainians having to deal with prolonged blackouts and cuts to production due to a lack of electricity.

To deal with Ukraine’s faltering electricity network, the country has been importing energy from neighboring countries.

“The proportion of electricity coming through Hungary in terms of Ukrainian imports exceeded 40-42 percent during several periods,” said Hortay, while speaking to Hungarian television channel M1.

As a result, Ukraine may suffer “serious consequences” due to its oil blockade.

He notes that the MAVIR station in Szabolcsbáka is one of the main hubs of the European and Ukrainian electricity systems. This is the only Hungarian and EU substation with 750 kV system components. Roughly 40 percent of Ukraine’s electricity imports pass through here.

Hungary and Slovakia have both sounded the alarm to Brussels about Ukraine’s action of cutting oil supplies from Russia, which flow through the Friendship pipeline. However, the EU, which is well known for its opposition to the governments in Hungary and Slovakia, has responded cooly to the complaints, saying that Ukraine does not endanger the energy supplies of the two countries.

Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó has rejected the EU’s argument and called Croatia, which is supposed to increase supplies in response to the Ukrainian blockade, an unreliable transit country.

Both Hungary and Slovakia rely on Russia for up to 80 percent of their oil supply, underlining the threat to both economies. Olivér Hortay explained that Russia’s Lukoil provides a third of the oil demand of the Hungarian Száhahalombatta refinery and 45 percent of the demand of the Bratislava refinery in Slovakia.

Gergely Gulyás, the minister in charge of the Prime Minister’s Office, called it unfair and contrary to EU agreements that Ukraine is blackmailing Hungary and Slovakia because of its pro-peace stance.

Hortay points to an existing association agreement, based on which Hungary and Slovakia initiated proceedings at the European Commission , where “literally it is stated that the parties cannot limit each other’s imports, exports and transit.”

Based on this agreement, he says it is self-evident that Ukraine’s action is illegal and that the European Commission should immediately convene a consultation forum.

The EU contends that the two nations can replace Russian oil on the Adriatic pipeline coming through Croatia

“If the loss of this does not cause a security of supply risk, it is not clear what would,” said Hortay.

He also noted that the theoretical maximum capacity of the Adriatic pipeline is 11 million tons per year, and the combined demand of the two countries is 12 million tons, and oil should also reach the Czech Republic.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 09:20

“Millions” Wasted On Electric School Busses As Maryland Pivots Back To Diesel

“Millions” Wasted On Electric School Busses As Maryland Pivots Back To Diesel

A school district in Maryland is finding out just how costly virtue signaling can wind up being. 

Maryland’s largest school district in Montgomery County found out via an Inspector General’s report that implementing electric busses “led to millions of dollars in wasteful spending”, according to WTOP.

The wasteful spending was caused in part by late deliveries and maintenance issues, according to the IG report. 

The report said that at a ribbon-cutting ceremony in October 2022, Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) announced that its 326 new electric buses would save 6,500 gallons of fuel daily and cut costs by 50%.

And then reality set in. Since entering into a $168 million contract for the buses, MCPS has faced significant delays, WTOP reports.

The county’s Office of the Inspector General reported that the buses were consistently delivered late. Dozens of buses scheduled for fiscal year 2022 arrived only after Christmas, instead of at the start of the school year as required.

“MCPS’s failure to hold the contractor accountable to the terms of the contract and their decision not to include provisions to offset incurred expenses has led to millions of dollars in wasteful spending,” the IG report said. 

A similar issue occurred in fiscal year 2024. Of the 120 buses slated for delivery, only 37 arrived by the end of September, 69 between October and December, and 14 more between January and April.

The report also highlighted mechanical and charging failures, which rendered many buses inoperable for extended periods. From February 2022 to March 2024, buses failed to complete routes 280 times, with repairs taking an average of 13 days, and more than half exceeding five working days, according to WTOP. 

Consequently, in October 2023, the school board approved the purchase of 90 diesel buses for over $14.7 million to address the shortfall.

Who says government isn’t an efficient allocator of your tax dollars?

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 08:45

Europe’s Recipe For Disaster: The Von Der Leyen Program

Europe’s Recipe For Disaster: The Von Der Leyen Program

Authored by Drieu Godefridi via The Gatestone Institute,

In a speech to the European Parliament on July 18, 2024, the President of the European Commission, Germany’s Ursula von der Leyen, an outspoken environmentalist, set out her program for its next five years.

Here are some of the salient aspects of her proposal, strictly in line with her previous term of office.

  1. The objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions — 90% reduction by 2040, 100% by 2050 – is maintained. By definition, this reduction structures and determines the whole of the Commission’s program, because all human activity — industrial, commercial and private — emits greenhouse gases. In fact, in a program document published by the Commission in February 2024, already under the aegis of von der Leyen, are plans to invest 1.5 trillion euros per year in decarbonizing the European Union, and to this end take authoritarian measures in all areas of human activity. The amount is equivalent to 10% of Europe’s GDP — every year. Apparently this policy is the uncompromising model found in every party in Germany, but apart from a war effort, there is no objective of any kind that has ever required the diversion of 10% of a continent’s GDP by political decree.

  1. European funds, which are distributed to EU member states in various ways, will henceforth be “conditional on respect for the rule of law”. By the rule of law, the EU means a very specific and at the same time vague notion, enabling it to disqualify regimes and personalities with which it disagrees, principally but not exclusively, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in Hungary.

    In other words, any deviation from the EU’s ideological line, in any area, will be subject to financial sanctions – as is already happening with Hungary. This new direction for the EU will lead to the ideology of Western Europe being imposed on Eastern Europe: “open borders”, environmentalism, the fight against “hate” — but only “hate” from the right of the political spectrum. For example, far-left MEP Rima Hassan frequently issues direct threats against colleagues who don’t share her hatred of Israel, without any consequences. The countries of Eastern Europe are the main beneficiaries of EU funds. It remains to be seen whether Eastern Europe will be taken in.

  2. “We will start by focusing on the implementation and enforcement of the digital laws adopted during the last mandate. Tech giants must assume responsibility for their enormous systemic power in our society and economy. We have begun the active enforcement of the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act. We will ramp up and intensify our enforcement in the coming mandate”, explains von der Leyen. In particular, the aim is apparently to penalize social media networks that refuse to censor their users or, more precisely, that refuse to penalize their users in the way the EU wants. The first to be targeted is X, formerly known as Twitter, as Commissioner Thierry Breton has made no secret: either X submits to the EU’s ideology and censorship, or X will have a part of its global revenue confiscated.

  3. As has been stated for the last 80 years, a plan has been announced to construct a genuine “Europe of defence”. Again and again, the suggestion is set forth to build a European army, essentially supported by states such as Germany and Belgium, which devote a royal 1% of GDP to their military defenses and which would already be incapable of defending their own borders without American assistance.

  4. Von der Leyen also announced the tripling of the FRONTEX border guards to 30,000 staffers. The problem is that, under EU law and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), these border guards, whatever their numbers, are essentially providing a free ferry service between Africa and Europe. Indeed, in accordance with the ECHR’s case law, any illegal immigrants intercepted in the Mediterranean, even within sight of the African coast, must be brought to the European Union to exercise their “rights.” A tenfold increase in the number of border guards would do nothing to change the law in force; as long as the law is not reformed, unlimited and unvetted migration in Europe will continue. As von der Leyen points out: “We will always respect human rights and will ensure that those who have a right to stay can do so, and can receive essential support to integrate into communities.”

  5. Finally, a whole series of new regulations with global ambitions are announced, confirming the EU’s claim to legislate not just for Europe, but for the world. For instance, a “European Oceans Pact” — note the “s” in Oceans – is declared: evidently the EU claims to regulate all the world’s oceans, whereas it only dips its toes in one.

Calculated in terms of purchasing power parity – meaning disregarding the strength of the dollar — the average GDP per capita in the EU as of 2022 is 72% of the average GDP per American. Given that economic growth is higher every year in the United States than in the EU, this gap will only widen. This backwardness is confirmed by the innovation vitality of the American economy. In just one example, compare artificial intelligence, essentially an American innovation, to the lack of creativity in the European economy. NVIDIA’s success is unthinkable in Europe.

Three factors might help to explain Europe’s economic backwardness compared to the United States:

  1. the cost of energy, which is five to ten times higher in Europe than in the US;

  2. the greater difficulty in Europe of concentrating private capital to invest in R&D;

  3. and finally, the pull of the “mad legislator“, which is even worse in Europe than in the US. For example, Apple recently settled an EU investigation regarding its restriction on third-party developers accessing its payment technology, which could have led to a fine of 10% of its annual revenue for non-compliance. Apple’s total net sales in 2023 were $383.3 billion, so a 10% fine would amount to $38.3 billion. Given Apple’s operating income in Europe is $36.1 billion, non-compliance with EU regulations could result in fines exceeding its regional earnings.

How is it, when all these facts are known, that von der Leyen was reappointed to her post, while the Greens lost the European Parliament elections, and the right-wing parties of all persuasions won them by a wide margin? Perhaps this seeming paradox can be explained by the fact that the center-right, the largest party bloc in the European Parliament, is ideologically subservient to the left, on two levels: 1) by adhering to most of the dogmas of the left, starting with environmentalism, and 2) by refusing on principle any coalition with real right-wing parties such as Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy or, in France, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN).

This ensures that, while losing elections, the left can stay in power. The new von der Leyen majority consists of four parliamentary groups: the center-right, the socialists, the left-wing liberals and the far-left environmentalists. Of these groups, the center-right is by far the largest. It would therefore be logical for them to dominate von der Leyen’s program. But that is not what takes place. It is the demands of the smallest group — environmentalists — that dominate: continuation of the Green Deal, total decarbonization by 2050.

European power is a mirror image of its two driving forces — France and Germany — where the center-right parties behave in the same way: ideological submission to the left and a ban on the right governing. In Germany, the right-wing political party Alternative for Germany (AfD), finds itself in a position to govern several regions with the center-right. But everywhere in Germany, the center-right prefers to ally with the left, the environmentalists, sometimes even the communists, than to govern with the AfD. In France, Le Pen’s RN clearly won the European elections, then the first round of legislative elections. The center-right immediately announced that it preferred a victory for the far left and the communists to a victory for Le Pen.

The post-war European citizen has never voted so far to the right. He is harvesting a program that has never been so extremely left-wing. The von der Leyen program owes more to the Greens (53 MEPs) than to the center-right (188 MEPs).

By refusing on principle ever to govern with real right-wing parties, the center-right guarantees that the left remains forever in power. When voting no longer serves any purpose, democracy dies.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 08:10

Orban’s Insight Into The Global Systemic Transition & Hungarian Grand Strategy Is Worth Reading

Orban’s Insight Into The Global Systemic Transition & Hungarian Grand Strategy Is Worth Reading

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban elaborated on the global systemic transition and his country’s grand strategy within it during a lengthy speech at the Balvanyos Free Summer University and Student Camp over the weekend. The over 11,000-word English transcript was published on Monday, which the present piece will summarize for the reader’s convenience. It began with him reaffirming that it’s his Christian duty to promote peace and mocking the EU for its Orwellian “war is peace” mantra.

He then said that the Ukrainian Conflict was a “red pill” for him and proceeded to elaborate on the ten ways in which it opened his eyes to reality.

First, there have been enormous casualties on both sides, but each will continue fighting unless external stakeholders diplomatically intervene since they’re convinced that they’ll win.

Second, the US went from containing China to waging a proxy war on Russia, which pushed those two together and prompted questions about why the US would do this.  

Third, Ukraine’s resilience in spite of its objective economic and demographic weaknesses can be explained by its sense of mission that fills it with a higher purpose, which is to become the West’s eastern military frontier.

Fourth, Russia has also proven itself to be impressively resilient, and it’s nowhere near collapsing like Western leaders hubristically predicted.

Fifth, the EU has undergone fundamental changes since the latest phase of the Ukrainian Conflict began two and half years ago.

It now follows the US Democrats’ lead instead of retaining its strategic autonomy, and the traditional Franco-German axis is now challenged like never before by Poland, which has allied with the UK, Ukraine, the Baltic States, and Scandinavia to create a new center of power in Europe. This is actually an old Polish plan (Pilsudski’s “Intermarium” from the interwar period) adapted to contemporary conditions brought about by the Ukrainian Conflict and fully assisted by the US.

Sixth, the West’s standards are no longer universal and it’s experiencing “spiritual solitude” after the entire non-West refused to follow its lead in isolating Russia.

Seventh, the biggest problem in the world is the weakness and disintegration of the West caused by its lack of leadership and seemingly irrational policies, which is accelerating China’s rise as its global systemic challenger.

Eighth, Western Europe’s worldview is now post-national while Central Europe still believes in the sanctity of the nation-state.

This dichotomy explains the West’s seemingly irrational policies since each half of Europe is operating according to a completely different philosophy. The US is also experiencing a similar division between those like Trump who want it to remain a nation-state and his opponents who want it to become a post-national state. According to Orban, this division owes its origins to the sexual revolution and student rebellions from over half a century ago, which sought to free people from any form of collective identity.

Ninth, the West’s post-national trends are convulsing democracy and leading to friction between the elite/elitism and the people/populism.

And finally, the tenth red pill is that Western soft power/values aren’t universal but are actually counterproductive since Russia’s strongest international attraction nowadays is its resistance to LGBTQ. Orban then said that these trends are leading to the rise of the non-West, which he believes first began with China’s admission to the WTO in 2001 and might be irreversible.

Trump’s priority is to rebuild and strengthen North America, to which end he’ll squeeze the US’ European and Asian allies while negotiating better deals with China. His end game is to make the US self-sufficient in energy and raw materials so that it can stand a better chance at retaining its declining position in global affairs. The EU has two options: it can either become an “open-air museum” (passive international actor) absorbed by the US or pursue strategic autonomy in order improve its standing in the world.

What’s needed is more connectivity, a European military alliance with its own defense industry (albeit without federalization), energy self-sufficiency, reconciliation with Russia, and admitting that Ukraine won’t join the EU or NATO. It’ll return to its prior role as a buffer zone and will be lucky if it gets security guarantees in a US-Russian agreement. Poland’s power play will fail because it lacks the resources to replace Germany so Orban expects that his “Polish brothers and sisters” will return to Central Europe.  

He also considers all of these changes to be an opportunity. Developments in the US favor Hungary, but it must be careful about any deals it might offer due to the Polish precedent. Warsaw bet everything on Washington and received support for its strategic goals, but now it’s “subject to the imposition of a policy of democracy export, LGBTQ, migration and internal social transformation.” Orban ominously notes that this combination risks of the loss of Polish national identity if these trends continue unabated.

Hungary will remain in the EU, but the bloc’s East-West divisions between those that correspondingly respect the nation-state and those that are moving beyond it will widen. The EU must also accept that it’s the loser in the Ukrainian Conflict, the US will abandon this proxy war, and the EU can’t realistically pick up the tab. All the while, Hungary will rely on China for modernizing its economy and boosting its exports, which will lead to mutually beneficial outcomes.

A Hungarian grand strategy is required in order to maximally take advantage of the opportunities brought about by the ten previously described red pills and their abovementioned consequences. What’s already been decided upon since his government began work on this after the 2022 elections isn’t yet digestible and widely comprehensible by the public, and he said that it’ll take around six months for everything to become clearer for them, but he still shared the gist of what this grand strategy entails.

The first part is what he describes as connectivity, which he explained as being plugged in to both the Eastern and Western halves of the global economy. The second is sovereignty, with a focus on the economic dimension by promoting national companies on the world market, reducing debt, becoming a regional creditor, and boosting domestic production. The final part is bolstering his society’s resilience by halting demographic decline, preserving villages, and maintaining Hungary’s distinct culture.

Orban ended by explaining that all Hungarians across the world must help advance this grand strategy. The global systemic transition is expected to last another 20-25 years so the next generation will be tasked with completing its implementation. Their liberal opponents will try to offset this, but such efforts can be counteracted by recruiting young nationalists to the cause. The impression that one gets after reading through his speech in full is that Orban is this generation’s most visionary European leader.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 08/03/2024 – 07:00

Trump’s China Tariffs: Extraordinarily Good For America

Trump’s China Tariffs: Extraordinarily Good For America

Authored by Gordon Chang via The Gatestone Institute,

“I can’t believe how many people are negative on tariffs that are actually smart people,” President Donald Trump told Bloomberg in a June 25 interview.

“Economically, they’re phenomenal.”

Since then, a lot of smart people have rushed to the American media to say that, on the contrary, high tariffs are horrible.

Trump is right. Although these levies would increase costs to American consumers, the costs would not be nearly as great as experts say. Moreover, there are other considerations, both economic and national security, favoring raising tariffs now.

“As president, Trump shattered the long-standing Republican orthodoxy of favoring free trade,” Bloomberg noted in commentary accompanying the interview, released on July 16th: “He says he’ll go further if reelected.” Trump talked about increasing tariffs on, among others, China.

Trump happens to be right about China. In February, speaking to Maria Bartiromo on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures, he suggested he might impose tariffs greater than 60% on Chinese imports.

Critics from the American elite howl. “This is going to add price inflation across the board, all in the name of ‘tough guy’ election-year politics,” said Yael Ossowski of the Consumer Choice Center, in comments carried by Bloomberg.

“The long historical record demonstrates these are borne not by other countries, as Mr. Trump keeps insisting, but by American consumers and industries,” writes Steven R. Weisman of the Washington, D.C.-based Peterson Institute for International Economics, about tariffs.

The long historical record might show that, but not the immediate one. In 2018, Trump imposed additional tariffs on China and analysts warned that prices in America would rise. Smart people in America, however, forgot that China had an incentive to effectively pay the tariffs: The Chinese government and exporters absorbed 75% to 81% of the cost of the additional levies. They did so primarily through the government increasing export and other subsidies and factories accepting lower profit margins.

“The Trump tariffs were barely noticed by U.S. businesses or consumers,” long-time trade expert Alan Tonelson told Gatestone. “They certainly did not raise inflation, and they certainly did not cut growth.”

Trump’s additional tariffs topped out at 25%. Now, he is proposing even higher levies. The hit to the American consumer will undoubtedly be greater this time. “The higher tariffs are raised from current levels, the more likely disruptions will occur,” says Tonelson, also the founder of public policy blog RealityChek.

At the same time, however, the Chinese have even greater reason to shield consumers from increased costs. The problem for Xi Jinping is that China’s growth model is exhausted, and after rejecting stimulating domestic consumption, he is entirely dependent on increasing exports.

Chinese factories, from all indications, are struggling and need to keep customers. For instance, China’s Producer Price Index, which measures factory-gate prices, declined for the 21st consecutive month in June. The Wall Street Journal reports low prices have pushed many factories in China “to the brink.” With prices declining in China, American consumers will not feel the pinch of new tariffs.

Furthermore, there is one more reason why U.S. consumers will not suffer. High American tariffs will encourage factories to move out of China. When they do, any pressure on consumer prices will disappear.

This is a contest that the United States cannot lose.

In short, trade-surplus countries, such as China, cannot prevail over trade-deficit ones, such as America.

Last year, America’s merchandise trade deficit with China was $279.4 billion.

That is why, ultimately, China will have to pay the cost of tariffs that Trump — or any other American leader — may impose. Clearly, China’s regime knows this. People’s Daily, the Communist Party’s self-described mouthpiece and therefore the most authoritative publication in China, this month is arguing that America should not raise tariffs.

Yet even if American consumers were to pay more because of the tariffs, let us remember why they were imposed in the first place. Trump in 2018 invoked Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and raised tariffs as a remedy for Chinese theft of U.S. intellectual property. China steals each year somewhere in the neighborhood of a half trillion dollars of American intellectual property. Critics of tariffs, whether they make valid points or not about increased costs, have an obligation to say how they would eliminate or reduce this criminal practice through other means.

On a broader point, Americans, after more than four decades of misguided policy, have to realize that they cannot fix their lopsided trade relations with China without bearing pain. Unless they agree to become subservient to the militant Chinese state, they will have to accept the costs of remaining sovereign.

Trump’s 60% tariffs would “drastically slow” the Chinese economy, as Fortune reported this month. The hit to China would be far greater than any collateral effects in America. Experience with the 2018 tariffs is a guide. “Overall, the damage to China’s gross domestic product from the trade war was three times as high as the hit to the U.S., according to some Chinese economists,” the Wall Street Journal reported in May.

Why should Americans want to decimate the Chinese factory sector? The Communist Party of China sees the U.S. as an enemy and seeks the destruction of the American republic. The struggle, in short, is existential. China’s regime cannot wage the fight against America without American money.

So why should Americans supply the cash to their enemy?

Tyler Durden
Fri, 08/02/2024 – 23:45