| To: Les H who wrote (45002) | 2/17/2025 6:58:04 AM | | From: Les H | | | | Analysis | Rubio Came to Israel to Save Netanyahu. But What Does Trump Get Out of It?
Benjamin Netanyahu fears Trump's wrath, but he is also panicking for his political survival. That's why after every intervention the Trump team makes to save the hostages in Gaza, it needs to make a second one to rescue Netanyahu
Haaretz
Netanyahu is stuck with coalition partners who don't care about the hostages and are happy to sacrifice their lives in order to achieve other goals. This is why after every intervention it makes to save the hostages, the Trump team must make a second one to save Netanyahu.
It all started with Trump's insistence that Netanyahu enter a cease-fire and hostage release agreement with Hamas right before his return to the White House last month. Netanyahu had no desire or intention of making that deal, which he knew would anger the far-right elements of his coalition. Eventually, though, he realized that he fears Trump's wrath more than the disappointment of his political allies at home.
And yet, while the vast majority of Israelis celebrated the release of the hostages from hell, Netanyahu was panicking over his own political survival.
That was all fixed by Trump when they met at the White House earlier this month and the president unveiled his plan to kick two million Palestinians out of Gaza and turn the coastal enclave into a gambling resort. Netanyahu immediately briefed the press that for any of his coalition partners to bring down the government right after Trump had presented this plan would be an irresponsible move.
Whether the Trump plan will ever happen is beside the point for Netanyahu. He has utilized its promise in order to calm down the dissenters within his own government.
But then last Saturday, Trump, like many others, saw the gruesome images of the three starved and tortured hostages being released from Gaza, and realized that the hostage release deal's timeline had to be changed. The pace of hostages coming out in dribs and drabs was never the right way to do it. Yet Netanyahu had insisted on that from the start of the negotiations, when President Joe Biden was still in the White House, in order to save himself the option of renewing the war in Gaza in between the scheduled stages.
In an act that appeared to be completely off-the-cuff, Trump announced that he was done with the "three hostages at a time" method, and instead wanted to see them come out of Gaza all at once. He set this up as an ultimatum, accompanied by a threat: If all of the hostages were not released by Saturday at noon, the gates of hell would open. |
| | World Outlook | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: Les H who wrote (45004) | 2/17/2025 2:48:02 PM | | From: Les H | | | | Are 150-year-old Americans receiving Social Security checks, as Elon Musk said?
Politifact
These DOGE (or dodgy) programmers have only been on the job less than one month. They're highly unlikely to know the nuances of the subject areas or of the software systems where they're meddling. Their announcements are highly tainted by political bias and an eagerness to show that they're actually accomplishing something. They could've easily asked some of the managers or developers at the Social Security Administrations the context for what they were seeing. |
| | World Outlook | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| To: Les H who wrote (45005) | 2/17/2025 3:24:24 PM | | From: Les H | | | | The latest news on the meeting of European leaders that Emmanuel Macron will convene in Paris this morning published in The Financial Times online edition presents many questions that are not now unanswerable, but which should be identified at once if we are to make sense of the announcements made at the end of this gathering.
First, it would now appear that the leaders present will be more numerous than originally stated. Besides Germany, Poland, Italy and the United Kingdom, who were named initially, it seems that the heads of government from Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark will be there. Moreover, and very importantly, we can expect NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte to have a seat, which is quite extraordinary given that Team Trump stated explicitly that any peace-keeping force provided under the terms of an eventual peace settlement will not be a NATO mission.
Extraordinary as it may be, it fits in with the concept that the Europeans seem to share, that the ‘peace keepers’ are there to protect Ukraine from some expected attempt by the Russians to renew their aggressive war and seize more territory at some date in the future. That is to say, they willfully ignore the possibility, shall we say the likelihood that violations of any cease-fire and agreed borders will come from the revanchist Ukrainian side. That is precisely what happened during the positioning of OSCE monitors at the Donbas-Ukraine line of confrontation to enforce the Minsk-2 agreements.
The OSCE monitors were rapporteurs, nothing more. But their reports in the weeks prior to the Russian invasion in February 2022 clearly showed that the Ukrainian side was greatly increasing the frequency of its artillery barrages directed at the civilian population on the ‘rebel’ Donbas side in what could be construed as a ‘softening up operation’ ahead of the massive armed attack on the Donbas that the Kremlin feared was coming, and against which it had prepared its own 150,000 soldiers stationed at Ukraine’s borders.
If the peace-keeping force that the Europeans will propose today, specifying at their meeting in Paris the numbers of soldiers and equipment available for the mission, is intended to look only one way, at Russian violators of the peace terms, then indeed war will break out again. Under this protective cover, the Ukrainians may start lobbing missiles and artillery shells over their heads against the Russian settlements on the other side of the border. In short, that would be a self-fulfilling prophecy of Russian ‘aggression’ to come and is precisely the opposite of what Team Trump’s stated objective is – namely a definitive end to hostilities and normalization of relations with Russia.
As I have written in the past week, the mention by Team Trump of a ‘non-European’ contingent in the future peace-keeping force is precisely to ensure that the force is not a NATO mission. The reason is clear: Vladimir Putin surely told Trump that the Russians will not accept a NATO presence in Ukraine whatever it may be called. Full stop.
The sad reality is that the European leaders assembling today in Paris are diehard enthusiasts for precisely the situation that Team Trump rejects: they do not want a durable peace with Russia and a revision of the European security architecture that brings Russia in from the cold. The sense of their insistence that Ukraine be a party to the negotiations from the start is that Ukraine would be allowed to present yet again its claims to recovery of all its lost territory and to receive war reparations from Russia. In short, they want to receive at the peace table what Ukraine and the US-led West have lost on the battlefield. This runs directly against the thinking of Team Trump and we may expect a harsh clash between the sides in the coming week or so.
Proof of my formulation of the problem is to be found in the latest statements of Antonio Costa, head of the European Council, who will also be participating in the Paris meeting at the invitation of Emmanuel Macron. He is cited in today’s FT thus:
The negotiations on the new security architecture need to take into account that Russia is a global threat, not only a threat to Ukraine
Gilbert Doctorow |
| | World Outlook | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: Les H who wrote (45006) | 2/17/2025 4:19:06 PM | | From: Les H | | | | Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, is the first of President Vladimir Putin’s strategic allies to leave him to make whatever exit from the Ukraine war he can negotiate with President Donald Trump.
Modi did this by saying as little as he could about Russia last week in Washington while preparing his own military, energy supply, sea lane and land route agreements with the US; altogether, according to Indian sources in Moscow, they enlarge India’s role in the escalating US war against China across the globe, and diminish Russia’s role significantly.
“I have been in constant contact with both Russia and Ukraine. I have also visited both countries,” Modi said beside Trump at the White House on February 13. “And many people are mistaken and they feel that India is neutral. I would like to clarify: India is not neutral. We have taken a side, and we have taken the side of peace…Ultimately, you have to come to the negotiating table, and India has constantly made efforts that there are talks that take place where both parties are present. It is only then that we will find a solution. The efforts being made by President Trump — I support them, I welcome them, and I would like that President Trump is successful as soon as possible so that the world is on the path to peace once again.”
This isn’t a statement of India’s support for Russia, according to Russian sources. It is not even India’s acknowledgement of the wars which the US and its allies are waging against Russia simultaneously on its western and eastern, northern and southern fronts. It’s India’s declaration that it aims to be on the US side in the multi-front war India is waging against China from the Pacific to the Indian Ocean. It is also a proclamation by Modi against the Arab, Iranian and Muslim resistance to the US and Israel on the Arabian Sea, the Red Sea, and the Persian Gulf.
“The prime minister and I,” said Trump, “reaffirmed that strong cooperation among the United States, India, Australia, and Japan [the Quad], and it’s crucial really to maintaining peace and prosperity, tranquillity even, in the Indo-Pacific.”
“We will work together to enhance peace, stability, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific,” Modi replied, “The Quad will play a special role in this. During the Quad summit scheduled to be held in India this year, we will expand cooperation in new areas with our partner countries.”
A veteran Indian source in Moscow explains: “Indians are very pleased with the anti-China stand of the US. The last two years of relations with Russians have been bruising for Indians and a lot of top oil and gas managers are exasperated with the Russians. They would do anything to stop doing business with the Russians – this is not because of the sanctions, it is the Russians themselves! [From Modi’s visit to Washington] there is the general take that we cannot be throwing our lot with Russians because they are so unreliable now and are junior to the Chinese. Putin might have brokered the Ladakh moment, but all in all Indians prefer to deal with the US now. For now we know that the Americans call the shots.”
Russia has been relegated. In Delhi now, Quad is major league; the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and BRICS are minor league.
“One thing that I deeply appreciate, and I learn from President Trump, is that he keeps the national interest supreme,” Modi said in his Oval Office remarks. “Like him, I also keep the national interest of India at the top of everything else.”
The Indian media have interpreted this as more than compensating for the American put-downs Modi registered. “The President did not turn up to greet [Modi] when he arrived at the White House; Trump snubbed him by doubling down on reciprocal tariffs…Elon Musk insulted him by bringing his children to a business meeting… In the age of trivialisation through social media tattle and trolling, all of this is of little consequence… The broad consensus among more seasoned analysts and experts is that PM Modi disarmed a rampant US President…and advanced bilateral ties…The visit was actually a tour de force measured in terms of impact and outcomes.”
John Heimer |
| | World Outlook | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: Don Green | 2/17/2025 6:40:38 PM | | | | | | ‘This is a coup’: Trump and Musk’s purge is cutting more than costs, say experts
Robert Reich theguardian.com
In slashing staff and disabling entire agencies the administration is lacerating the structures of US democracy
Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s radical drive to slash billions of dollars in annual federal spending with huge job and regulatory cuts is spurring charges that they have made illegal moves while undercutting congressional and judicial powers, say legal experts, Democrats and state attorneys general.
Trump’s fusillade of executive orders expanding his powers in some extreme ways in his cost-cutting fervor, coupled with unprecedented drives by the Musk-led so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) to slash many agency workforces and regulations, have created chaos across the US government and raised fears of a threat to US democracy.
Trump and Musk have also attacked judges who have made rulings opposing several of their moves after they ended up in court, threatening at least one with impeachment and accusing him of improper interference.
“In the US, we appeal rulings we disagree with – we don’t ignore court orders or threaten judges with impeachment just because we don’t like the decision. This is a coup, plain and simple,” Arizona’s attorney general, Kris Mayes, said.
Trump and Musk, the world’s richest man and Trump’s largest single donor, now face multiple rebukes from judges and legal experts to the regulatory and staff cuts they have engineered at the treasury department, the US Agency for International Development and several other agencies.
Incongruously, as Trump has touted Musk’s cost-cutting work as vital to curbing spending abuses, one of Trump’s first moves in office last month was to fire 17 veteran agency watchdogs, known as inspectors general, whose jobs have long been to ferret out waste, fraud and abuse in federal departments.
Those firings were done without giving Congress the legally required 30 days’ notice and specific justifications for each one, prompting mostly Democratic outrage at Trump’s move, which he defended as due to “changing priorities”, and falsely claimed was “standard”.
In response to the firings, eight of those inspectors general filed a lawsuit against Trump and their department heads on Wednesday arguing their terminations violated federal laws designed to protect them from interference with their jobs and seeking reinstatement.
The IGs who sued included ones from the Departments of Defense, Education and Health and Human Services.
Democratic critics and legal experts see Trump’s IG firings and Musk’s Doge operation as blatant examples of executive power plays at the expense of Congress and transparency.
“I think their claims that they’re going after waste, fraud and abuse is a complete smokescreen for their real intentions,” said Democratic senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
Likening Trump’s firing of the IGs to “firing cops before you rob the bank”, Whitehouse stressed: “It’s pretty clear that what’s going on here is a very deliberate effort to create as much wreckage in the government as they can manage with a view to helping out the big Trump donors and special interests who find government obnoxious in various ways.”
On another legal track opposing Trump and Musk’s actions, many of the nation’s 23 Democratic state attorneys general have escalated legal battles against Doge’s actions and sweeping cost cutting at treasury, USAid and other agencies.
For instance, 19 Democratic AGs sued Trump and the treasury secretary in February to halt Doge from accessing sensitive documents with details about tens of millions of Americans who get social security checks, tax refunds and other payments, arguing that Doge was violating the Administrative Procedures Act. The lawsuit prompted a New York judge on 7 February to issue a temporary order halting Doge from accessing the treasury payments system.
In response, Musk and Trump lashed out by charging judicial interference. Musk on his social media platform Twitter/X where he has more than 200 million followers charged that the judge was “corrupt” and that he “needs to be impeached NOW”.
Trump, with Musk nearby in the Oval Office on Tuesday, echoed his Doge chief saying: “It seems hard to believe that a judge could say, ‘We don’t want you to do that,’ so maybe we have to look at the judges because I think that’s a very serious violation.”
Legal experts, AGs and top congressional Democrats say that Trump’s and Musk’s charges of improper judicial interference and some of their actions pose dangers to the rule of law and the US constitution.
“The president is openly violating the US constitution by taking power from Congress and handing it to an unelected billionaire – while Elon Musk goes after judges who uphold the law and rule against them,” said Mayes.
Ex-federal prosecutors echo some of Mayes’s arguments.
“The suggestions by Trump, Musk and Vance that courts are impermissibly interfering with Trump’s mandate to lead is absurd,” said the former federal prosecutor Barbara McQuade, who now teaches law at the University of Michigan.
“Under our constitutional separation of powers system, each co-equal branch serves as a check on the others. The role of the courts is to strike down abuses of executive power when it violates the law. Comments disparaging the courts seems like a dangerous effort to undermine public confidence in the judiciary. If people do not respect the courts, they will be less inclined to obey their orders.”
Likewise, some former judges worry that certain judges could face violence sparked by the threats Musk and Trump have publicly made.
“While federal judges expect people to disagree with their opinions, I have long feared that personal attacks like those from Trump and Musk against at least one New York judge would expose them to harm and even death,” said the former federal judge and Dickinson College president, John Jones.
“Worse, judges are essentially defenseless when it comes to fighting the false narratives that are being promulgated because their code of conduct prevents them from engaging with the irresponsible people who make these statements.”
Legal experts too are increasingly alarmed about how Musk and Trump are exceeding their power at the expense of Congress, including some of the retaliatory firings by Trump against critics or perceived political foes.
A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration
Enter your email address
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion
In one egregious case the IG for USAid, Paul Martin, on Tuesday was abruptly fired almost immediately after he issued a highly critical report warning of serious economic repercussions from the sweeping job cuts that Doge was making as it gutted agency staff.
Musk has blasted USAid, which doled out over $40bn in congressionally authorized aid in 2023 and consummated $86bn in private sector deals, as a “criminal organization” and an “arm of the criminal left globalists”. The agency’s mission is to provide humanitarian aid and fund development assistance and tech projects in developing countries.
“The firing of IG Paul Martin, a highly respected and experienced inspector general, on the day after his office released a critical report, risks sending a chilling message that is antithetical to IGs’ ability to conduct impactful independent oversight on behalf of the American taxpayer,” said the ex-defense department IG Robert Storch.
Storch, one of the 17 IGs Trump fired abruptly last month who has joined the lawsuit against the Trump administration, stressed more broadly that “IGs play an essential role in leading offices comprised of oversight professionals across the federal government to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse and corruption.”
A former IG, who requested anonymity to speak freely, warned bluntly: “Trump and Musk are gaslighting the American people. No one should believe Musk and his troops have actually discovered billions of dollars of waste, fraud, abuse and ‘corruption’. If they had, we would know the specifics. They can’t provide them and they won’t. At most, they have seen things that may need to be explained, but they haven’t bothered to seek the explanation from anyone with relevant knowledge.”
Despite rising concerns about the powers assumed by Musk, Trump unveiled a new executive order in the Oval Office on Tuesday expanding Musk’s authority and mandate.
Trump’s new order requires federal agencies to “coordinate and consult” with Doge to slash jobs and curb hiring, according to a White House summary.
All agencies were instructed to “undertake plans for large-scale reductions in force” and limit new hires to only “essential positions”, according to the summary.
During the Oval Office meeting on Tuesday Musk spoke in grandiose terms about his mission with a few dubious and broad claims about frauds that it had uncovered, while declaring without evidence that it was what “the people want”.
Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, which have received billions of dollars in federal contracts in recent years, is wielding his new federal authority as a “special government employee” without giving up his private-sector jobs. Musk’s post is a temporary one that bypasses some of the disclosure requirements for full-time federal employees.
As Musk’s powers have expanded and Doge has done work in more than a dozen agencies, 14 state AGs filed a lawsuit in federal court in DC on Thursday broadly challenging Musk and Doge’s authority to obtain access to sensitive government data and wield “virtually unchecked power”.
The lawsuit argues that Trump violated the constitution’s appointments clause by establishing a federal agency without Congress’s approval.
At bottom, some legal experts and watchdogs say the threats posed by Musk’s cost-cutting drive that Trump has blessed, are linked to the record sums that Musk gave Trump’s campaign.
“After Musk reportedly spent close to $300m to help Trump get elected, Trump has been giving Musk what appears to be unprecedented access to the inner levers of government, including private and confidential information about individuals,” said Larry Noble, a former general counsel at the Federal Election Commission who now teaches law at American University.
“Musk and his followers can use that access to help Trump kill or neutralize congressionally created agencies and rules that serve and protect the public interest, while ensuring the government protects and serves the ability of the wealthy to grow their fortunes.”
Other legal watchdogs fear more dangerous fallout to the rule of law from Trump’s greenlighting Musk’s Doge operation and agenda.
“President Trump has not only afforded Elon Musk and Doge extraordinary power over federal agency operations with little public oversight and accountability, but he has also done so at the expense of Congress and its constitutionally mandated power,” said Donald Sherman, the chief counsel at the liberal-leaning watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
“Trump enabled Musk’s capture of the federal government after illegally firing more than a dozen inspectors general despite Congress strengthening the laws protecting IGs less than three years ago … ”
Sherman noted that “what’s even more troubling is that congressional Republicans have been more than willing to cede their constitutional powers in service of President Trump and Elon Musk’s political agenda.” |
| | World Outlook | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: Les H who wrote (45009) | 2/18/2025 9:01:05 AM | | From: Les H | | | | The mad king of Kyiv: Why Zelensky can’t afford to end the war
by John Mac Ghlionn, opinion contributor - 02/15/25 3:00 PM ET
The Hill
Zelensky is Ukarine's Netanyahu.
A new government might open corruption case on Zelensky and others to reclaim badly needed funds for reconstruction. |
| | World Outlook | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| |
