The latest announcement by President Trump via Truth Social [SEE HERE] should not come as a surprise to anyone here.

As the economic impact of MAGAnomics starts to sink-in to the global psyche, once again it is predictable that China and the EU will use their central banking system in a defensive posture against President Trump’s economic, trade and tariff policies.  As a direct result, the value of the dollar increases, and as we noted before, “Exports from the USA ultimately cost more because the dollar is stronger against EU and Asia currencies. However, a stronger dollar is an offset to BRICS leverage and allows Trump to play economic chess.”

That’s the background for this:

[Source]

President Trump knows how to leverage U.S. market access as part of the economic security program for the entire country.  President Trump is the only person who can do this.   If a nation wants to align with an alternative trade currency, President Trump will tariff their products at 100%, and/or shut them out of the USA market completely.

MAGAnomics Simplified: Everyone who is a pragmatic critical thinker knows that China will (a) subsidize their targeted industries; then (b) devalue their currency to lower the impact of exports to the USA. Beijing controls the banks, and they did this before. As a result, the dollar value increases and imports cost less.

The Chinese imports then enter the USA at a lower price consistent with their cost estimate as a tariff offset. China takes in a lower price but retains access. That’s just how it works. The importers pay the tariff with a lowered price and a higher valued dollar. Essentially statis for the time being.

Then…..

(more…)

In the world of geopolitics created by the U.S. Dept of State and CIA, the pretending is thick.

A recent report has Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy now offering to give up territory to Russian President Vladimir Putin in exchange for NATO membership for the remaining portion. The story is sold by western media as if Zelenskyy has options, he doesn’t. However, Putin has a very strong weapon that President Trump has to navigate with a team of people around U.S. policy that are tenuous at best. Let’s discuss without the pretending.

Start with a Politico Article HERE, that frames the entry of President Donald Trump as the wildcard that has everyone, according to the DC narrative, rushing to get the best position in the final weeks before Trump’s arrival.

The DC narrative is that Russia is trying to maximize their land gains, while Zelenskyy and the NATO allies attempt to position for the least losses possible before they are forced to start peace talks.

It’s a little stunning that Washington DC is saying in advance of inauguration day that bloodshed stops, a ceasefire is imminent, and peace negotiations are a foregone conclusion, without President-elect Donald Trump even lifting his chin.

Apparently, and keep in mind this is the narrative of Washington DC, all President Trump needs to do is take his hand off the bible on January 20th and mysteriously global conflict comes to a screeching halt.

All things accepted and considered; the word “remarkable” is not adequate for that DC perspective.  If that administrative state perspective doesn’t just encapsulate the scale of Donald Trump, I don’t know what could.

If global conflict stops or diminishes simply by changing a U.S. president, then who exactly is responsible for global conflict and escalation? I digress…

Next, we enter the perspective of Volodymyr Zelenskyy as newly espoused.

The New York Post [Article Here], where Zelenskyy tells Sky News, “If we want to stop the hot stage of the war, we should take under [the] NATO umbrella the territory of Ukraine that we have under our control. That’s what we need to do fast, and then Ukraine can get back the other part of its territory diplomatically.”  Again, in this context, “fast” is the timetable in Zelenskyy’s mind, before President Trump shows up.

The proverbial “west,” which includes the White House, the CIA, NATO, the EU and the U.S. State Department are all trying to figure out their best exit from bloodshed and war, via a crisis they created a decade ago when they carried out the Maidan color Revolution in Ukraine, ultimately installing Volodymyr Zelenskyy.  The intellectually honest observers of events, that’s the non-pretending group, readily admit this is exactly what happened.

(more…)

On October 27th, as the outcome of the Georgia election surfaced in stunning clarity, we warned that the U.S. would fight strongly against the result {GO DEEP}.  Yesterday, unquestionably with the support of Samantha Power – who had vested significant time in the nation, a series of riots against the government surfaced.

The pragmatic and non-pretending people of Georgia saw what the U.S and EU did to Ukraine, and they want nothing to do with it.  Georgians overwhelmingly voted to retain their sovereignty and right to self-determination.  The Biden administration and the EU are furious about it, and immediately the U.S. State Department promised to organize every effort in their interventionist arsenal to challenge the election outcome.

[Background Link]

Having spent tens of millions financing an attempted color revolution, and with Samantha Power having traveled to Georgia three times (twice while I watched her), the CIA and State Department were not happy with the result.  As expected, Brussels hit back hard against the rebellious Georgians.

BRUSSELS – […] In a session in Strasbourg, MEPs voted by a margin of 444-72 in favor of a motion to declare the parliamentary election results in the South Caucasus country invalid, arguing they “do not serve as a reliable representation of the will of the Georgian people.” It calls for the election to be re-run within a year under international supervision.

In a statement following passage of the motion, the Parliament said Georgia’s voting process had been “neither free nor fair,” after international election observers expressed concern over pressure on citizens and allegations of vote buying and ballot stuffing.

(more…)

In the background of other interesting matters, it’s worthwhile taking a glance into the TikTok battle every once in a while.  While I retain a slight ambivalence to the issue of TikTok and social media control mechanisms, it is also true that TikTok is currently the only larger used platform that is not directly under the wing of the U.S. Intelligence Community.

As we noted in the recent Romanian election outcome, the winner of round #1, a nationalist-minded Romania First candidate named Călin Georgescu, strongly directed his campaign message to the Romanian people, via TikTok. Georgescu campaigned on an anti-EU, anti-NATO and anti-war with Russia platform; simultaneously supporting domestic farmers, domestic energy production and advocating for a Romania that is free from foreign influence.

Suddenly, the Romanian officials who lost the election are asking the EU to investigate TikTok for allowing the organic message of Georgescu to flourish and generate support.

(Via Politico) […] TikTok is under mounting pressure to explain how it handled political content in Romania after a first round presidential vote on Sunday propelled the ultranationalist, pro-Russian firebrand Călin Georgescu to a shock victory, in part thanks to his sudden surge on TikTok. A top EU lawmaker demanded on Tuesday that TikTok’s chief executive appear before the European Parliament to answer questions, and Romanian NGOs have urged the Commission to look into whether TikTok and other platforms complied with Europe’s social media laws.

The European Commission oversees TikTok’s compliance with the bloc’s new DSA rulebook, which sets the rules for how large online platforms moderate content, including in political campaigns.

(more…)

With around 50 days remaining to stir up as much trouble as possible, and with around 50 days of strategic activity left in order to Trump-proof the UE coalition of the NATO alliance, the U.K and France are in “classified” discussions about sending their troops into Ukraine before President Trump takes office.

It should be remembered that President Barack Obama did not want to intervene in Libya, circa 2011.  That was a decision made by The U.S. State Department and CIA, pushed by Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power and Director Leon Panetta, and ultimately, militarily, executed by NATO Commander Admiral James Stavridis.  And yes, Libya was not a threat to NATO…. but it happened anyway.

The U.K recently signed a mutual defense agreement with Moldova, promising to come to their aid if conflict with Russia escalated into the country.  Now we see reports of the U.K traveling to France to create a two-party coalition within the larger NATO assembly, intended to send military troops into Ukraine.

Is an attack against allied troops analogous with an attack against a NATO member?  Before you answer that question, remind yourself of the justification for the reference Libya intervention, the infamous “Responsibility To Protect” or R2P.  Now, using that framework, revisit the question.  I digress.

Le Monde – […] As the conflict in Ukraine enters a new phase of escalation, discussions over sending Western troops and private defense companies to Ukraine have been revived, Le Monde has learned from corroborating sources. These are sensitive discussions, most of which are classified – relaunched in light of a potential American withdrawal of support for Kyiv once Donald Trump takes office on January 20, 2025.

The debate about sending troops to Ukraine, which French President Emmanuel Macron initiated at a meeting between Kyiv’s allies in Paris in February, was strongly opposed by some European countries, led by Germany. However, it was relaunched in recent weeks thanks to the visit to France of the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, for the November 11th commemorations. “Discussions are underway between the UK and France on defense cooperation, particularly with a view to creating a hard core of allies in Europe, focused on Ukraine and wider European security,” confided a British military source to Le Monde. (read more)

Almost all modern “western” wars are bankers’ wars.  To understand the activity, it is worth paying attention to who is the benefactor and who is the beneficiary in the Corporate/Government relationship.

(more…)

Interesting that none of the Europeans saw this outcome looming, which is likely why Samantha Power and her USAID/CIA election operation was not present for round #1.   Unfortunately, it should be expected that team USA will quickly react and dispatch assistants to help recover in round #2.

Make Romania Great Again candidate Călin Georgescu came out of nowhere and has won the first round in the presidential election.

Georgescu campaigned on an anti-EU, anti-NATO and anti-war with Russia platform; simultaneously supporting domestic farmers, domestic energy production and advocating for a Romania that is free from foreign influence.

Oh, and instead of traditional media, his campaign message was strongly directed to the Romanian people, via TikTok. Imagine that.

As noted by Politico, “Ultranationalist Călin Georgescu comes from nowhere to lead center-left PM Marcel Ciolacu and liberal Elena Lasconi in first round.

[…] According to the partial results, Georgescu leads with 22.2 percent followed by center-left Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu on 20.2 percent. Reformist candidate Elena Lasconi is on 18 percent, while another hard-right candidate, George Simion, trails with 14.1 percent support, with 96 percent of precincts reporting.

(more…)

Germany is the largest economy in the E.U. However, due to a confluence of horrible events, most of them self-created as an outcome of ridiculous energy production decisions, the German industrial economy has been contracting since 2022.

Into this downward spiral of negative economic events within Germany, now comes the problem of President Trump eager to eliminate the Marshal Plan of one-way tariffs and start dealing with the trade inequities.  The German industrial manufacturing companies who make up the majority of the economic output are concerned, very concerned.

Within the discussion suddenly something appears that all Western financial pundits have yet to accept. Leo Barincou, a senior economist at Oxford Economics in Paris says:

[…] limited tariffs on selected products, such as cars, chemicals and agricultural products, may not be too much of a problem, Barincou says. A rising dollar, and hence a falling value of the euro, would offset some of the harm caused by the tariffs. “At a macro level, the impact would be limited,” he says. (read more)

Yep, here we go again.

(more…)

Suspicious Cat smells some possible streamlining and downsizing afoot.

Not only has President Trump announced the nomination of Howard Lutnick as Commerce Secretary, but he has also announced that Lutnick will carry the role and “responsibility for the Office of the United States Trade Representative” (USTR).

[LINK]

Perhaps in the second term President Trump and Howard Lutnick are going to fold the USTR into the Dept of Commerce?  Interesting.

Hopefully, Howard Lutnick, like Wilbur Ross, will keep the U.S. Chamber of Commerce blocked from influence over the upcoming trade discussions and potential trade agreements.  We note that former USTR Lighthizer was part of the transition discussion, and it seems odd his name has not surfaced…. yet.

Regardless, Howard Lutnick is an excellent choice for all the reasons previously outlined.

(more…)

It’s not Joe Biden per se’, he is simply a useful pawn.  This action is coming from the people deep inside the IC and State Dept who are committed to fomenting a serious conflict with Russia and Vladimir Putin as the White House is about to change hands.  We previously said to watch out for this lame duck session.

In response to previous discussion about this, Russian President Vladimir Putin said he had ‘clear eyes’ on what long-range missile deployment inside Ukraine really meant. Ukraine does not have the targeting systems or satellites to use long-range missiles for strikes into Russia.

If long-range missiles were used by Ukraine, they originate from the U.S-NATO and they are deployed with the targeting of U.S-NATO.  Vladimir Putin clearly stated that if such weapons were used, Russia will not pretend or ignore that this is direct provocative engagement by NATO against Russia.  Knowing this, the people around Joe Biden have just deployed exactly what Putin warned about.

WASHINGTON – President Joe Biden has authorized Ukraine to use a powerful American long-range weapon for limited strikes inside Russia in response to North Korea’s deployment of thousands of troops to aid Moscow’s war effort, according to two senior U.S. officials.

(more…)

Responding to reporters’ questions, today President of the European Union commission Ursula von der Leyen congratulated Donald Trump then immediately began the framework to explain EU background discussions in economic terms. “We still get a lot of [liquified natural gas] from Russia, and why not replace it by American LNG, which is cheaper for us and brings down our energy prices,” said Ursula von der Leyen.

The EU realizes the seismic shift that is upon them as a result of the U.S. election.  Everything from the Ukraine-Russia war; the economics of energy which President Trump will use in negotiations for peace; to the factual lowered prices within the EU created by Joe Biden energy policy to punish Americans; to funding for NATO in combination with the potential for the end of the Marshal Plan one-way tariffs are looming.  President von der Leyen is in a very precarious position.

.

Ursula was speaking from ¹Budapest, Hungary.

While many are interpreting her remarks about purchasing LNG to be snuggling up to President Trump, factually it is a much bigger problem than western media will openly discuss.

(more…)