Western media are reporting that CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Moscow, Russia, to warn his Russian counterpart Sergey Naryshkin, head of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), about striking back against Baltic states. {CITATION} However, that’s only half of the story.

Director Ratcliffe wasn’t simply telling Naryshkin not to hit back; he was telling Naryshkin that European NATO provocations against the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad (between Poland and Lithuania) were not ‘fully’ sanctioned by the United States. {CITATION Aug 18}

EU NATO members have been conducting provocative military operations and psychological warfare via NATO exercises all around Kaliningrad. They have been getting more aggressive with each series of maneuvers.  The Trump administration (DoW) recently removed the head of U.S-NATO operations over this background strategy. What the western media will not tell us is that Lt. Gen. Charles Costanza, commander of the Army’s V Corps, was removed from command over this planned operation {citation Aug 7}.

Apparently, European NATO is increasingly trying to provoke expanded conflict with Russia, while President Trump and CIA Director John Ratcliffe attempt to tamp down the problems being created.  This is all connected to the expanded drone activity recently reported in media (Germany – Leipzig airport and Romania citations}, which looks increasingly like covert Ukraine intelligence operations.  There are some reports that western intelligence linked Russia to the Leipzig airport drone, so perhaps Director Ratcliffe also carried that intelligence message.

The bottom line is there’s a lot of sketchy ‘fog of war’ stuff happening, and U.S. intelligence has a responsibility to the Trump administration to try and contain any significant issues involving escalation.  Hence, Ratcliffe’s message saying we are not trying to provoke you, so don’t put us in a situation where we end up defending NATO because you retaliate against all of this activity happening outside Ukraine’s borders.

(more…)

This is a must watch interview.  Most Americans have no idea that Canadian media is controlled by the Canadian government; it’s what they call “cultural protection” where the rules and regulations of permissible speech are controlled by govt regulators and media are subsidized by govt.  The overall objective is to control information and censor viewpoints that might be averse to the interests of the Canadian govt. That’s why most Canadians have no concept of granular details on policy matters; they just don’t get the information.

In this interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), U.S Trade Representative Jamieson Greer is discussing the trade conflict and breakdown with Canada’s version of Baghdad Bob, Rosemary Barton.  I’m a little surprised the CBC would even entertain the discussion. However, as noted in the past few days there is increasing skepticism amid Canadians about who and what actually blew up the trade talks. Canadians are starting to show signs of suspicion; enter Ms. Barton on behalf of the Canadian government to try and control things.

USTR Jamieson Greer answers the questions in a most unfortunate manner; meaning, he told the truth.  Greer outlined exactly why he suspects the trade talks broke down, and it has nothing to do with economics or trade, it’s all politics on the Canadian side.  As Greer noted, there was no change to the trade agreement between President Trump and Prime Minister Carney’s lengthy phone call on Tuesday, and the Canadian decision to walk away on Friday.  Greer was being very diplomatic, but Barton started getting the vapors. WATCH:

Greer noted the Carney administration had requested “Fortress North America” a synergetic alignment of U.S-Canada trade principles.  Canada wanted a united North American continent against the world on trade.  Therefore, this talk of Canada being upset about joint collaboration and agreement on trade agreements with third countries, a point brought up by Carney in the walk-away just doesn’t make sense.

If you want a united trade policy for North America, then each nation in North America must hold the same baseline on terms and conditions with other nations.  That was the discussion. Those were the agreed principles; until all of a sudden Canada accused the U.S. of dictating terms.

(more…)

There are many people in Canada demanding to see the rough draft proposals of the U.S-Canada trade agreement so they can judge for themselves the issues that Carney claimed were irreconcilable.  For those people this interview today by Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc will only embolden those requests.

Trade Emissary LeBlanc outlined the major fracture points that drove Prime Minister Mark to reject the deal. I’ll put the full interview below which everyone should watch because what LeBlanc outlined is rather funny.  Carney was obviously looking for a reason to walk away, because the fracture points were ridiculously small.

Essentially, it boils down to four issues. !1) Removal of tariffs on Canadian assembled Semi-Trucks. (2) U.S. streaming services writing code for “search engines” in the French language. (3) Canada demanding 5% of gross revenues from U.S. tech platforms, and the last one is silly because it already exists: (4) the U.S. having a right to reject a trade deal made by Canada with a non-market economy, ie. CHINA.

Taking the issues one by one we start with ♦U.S. tariffs on Canadian Semi Trucks.  Canada wanted tariffs on Big Rigs removed. The U.S. said no.

The reason is simple.  Big Rigs assembled/built in Canada are falling apart in the USA. Why? Because they are full of cheap Chinese component goods and parts that wear out quickly.  The U.S. wants two things on this issue. Either: (1) Make them in the USA, or (2) stop using cheap Chinese component parts.  The parts that Canada are using are not even available in the USA because we tariff and reject them, so why should we accept them when Canada installs them?  Either quit using Chinese parts (hence, the trade alignment against Chinese imports), or accept a tariff equal to the rate we would apply if the product was coming directly from China.

(more…)

Two significant media reports on the topic of immigration today.

The first is an AP report showing the State Dept is planning to revoke 200,000 visas that were given after illegal entrants claimed asylum status.  The second is DHS requiring $100,000 payment for each H1B visa sought by companies to bring in foreign workers.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is preparing to revoke the business and tourism visas of up to 200,000 foreigners who have applied for or are currently seeking asylum status in the United States. If it happens, the move would be the largest single mass revocation of visas in U.S. history and would likely face legal challenges.

Unless challenged or revised, the State Department is expected to announce in the coming weeks the revocation of so-called B1 and B2 visas issued between 2016 and 2026 whose holders have sought asylum or are now seeking asylum, according to State Department documents obtained by The Associated Press and two U.S. officials. The action will be taken in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security.

“We are coordinating with DHS to identify and revoke the nonimmigrant visas of foreigners who have come to the United States claiming to be short-term visitors, but then file for asylum to stay here permanently,” said State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott. (more)

(more…)

At the core of the issue is the administration executive order that requires states to send their voter rolls to the U.S. Postal Service for mail service for mail-in ballots.  The USPS would then cross-check with DHS and Social Security records to ensure each of the names and addresses were eligible to vote before mailing them a ballot.

Obviously, the blue states -Democrat States- are refusing to comply with the USPS rule, the reason is simple.  A significant number of the blue state registered voters are not eligible voters (illegal aliens etc.)  If the states allowed cross-checking of their voter rolls the American people would see just how many illegal voters are registered; this would significantly reshape the U.S. election.  The scale of the issue is up for debate.

That said, the anxiety forms the baseline of opposition where blue states are suing in every court possible to stop the postal service requirement. The Trump executive order also directs the Postal Service to block delivery of mail-in ballots entirely from states that refuse to share voter lists with the federal government.

Today the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 [RULING HERE] that lifted one of the lower court injunctions that was filed as a lawsuit in Massachusetts. The court ruled that Boston-based Judge Indira Talwani (Obama appointee) engaged in “a string of speculations to find this suit justiciable.”

[SOURCE]

The three DEI justices (Brown-Jackson, Kagan, Sotomayor) all dissented from the majority opinion, because of course they did.

WASHINGTON – […] More than 20 blue states sued to block Trump’s order, saying it threatens to upend their planning for the midterms in November and intrudes on their authority to administer elections.

(more…)

Secretary Bessent notes in his prepared remarks that President Trump has called the nations who are engaged with Iran to request them to cease and desist.  That means Trump likely called Chairman Xi (China), President Putin (Russia), President Erdogan (Turkey) and President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan.

The video and transcript of Secretary Bessent’s remarks are below. Media questions begin at 7:50 of video. WATCH:

[TRANSCRIPT] – Good afternoon.

Today, at President Trump’s direction, the United States Treasury has begun Operation Economic Outcast – an unprecedented campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran and its enablers.

In the Second World War, D-Day marked the historic beginning of a campaign with our allies to target and drive the enemy from its positions, including those in third countries.

Today, in that same spirit, we are launching an economic onslaught against Iran’s financial connections around the globe. Our objective is to sever every economic lifeline that sustains this tyrannical regime until Tehran stands alone.

(more…)

I am fielding a lot of questions about President Trump’s direct announcement today to place a 50% tariff on autos from Canada contrast against the USMCA (CUSMA) and other trade matters.

First, for President Trump this is not political; it’s pure economics.  Donald Trump has been talking about this issue for 40+ years. Trump has held the same position about American manufacturing and exploitation of U.S. industrial jobs long before he officially became a politician.  President Trump is not looking at the politics of the matter, nor does the midterm election play a part of the consideration.

This is the economics of the thing, politics be damned, and the Canadian politicians have no concept of how structurally important this is to Donald Trump personally.  For Canada it’s political, for Trump it’s business – deliberate, direct and consequential business.  There are trillions at stake.

VIA TRUTH SOCIAL – “Canada has been ripping off the United States of America for years. Their ridiculously high tariffs on our Farmers and farm products has made life impossible for these great American Patriots, and has long created a 60 Billion Dollar Deficit between our two Countries. Not sustainable, and NOT ANYMORE! On January First, 2027, Tariffs on all Cars, Trucks, both large and small, Automotive Parts, and Steel, will be increased to 50%. Build in the U.S. and there are ZERO TARIFFS. Canada will be treated like a State no longer! On Trade, and in other ways, also, they are among the worst Nations in the World to deal with. They feel entitled, and yet, WE DON’T NEED CANADA, THEY NEED US! They do 95% of their business with the U.S., with us, the exact opposite! Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

~ President DONALD J. TRUMP

The second aspect to the inbound questions center around the USMCA (CUSMA) and anticipated legal challenges to the 50% tariffs in violation of the USMCA trade agreement.  Those questions are coming from people who don’t understand the first point above, in combination with what we have outlined for years, President Trump does not want the multilateral USMCA to remain.  Trump has been very direct about this.

As to the legality of the matter. If you accept the USMCA is not valued as a reciprocal trade tool by the U.S. administration, then you set yourself up to understand there are two options available.

(more…)

An interesting soundbite from Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) President Mike Froman who distills down the main point of contention.  Essentially, the U.S. position is to demand a common trade approach toward China and the U.S. delegation gave Canada an ultimatum within the deal proposed, us or them.

If Mike Froman is correct, Mark Carney chose China. [X LINK] Video Below:

Mike Froman, former US Trade Rep on CNN yesterday afternoon “I think the new issue is that the Trump administration is pressing Canada, as well as other countries, to adopt a common approach vis a vis China, whether it’s a common external tariff or export controls, or ensuring… pic.twitter.com/RoTIXMZs3k

— cbcwatcher (@cbcwatcher) August 23, 2026

(more…)

This video from the Promethean Action PAC wraps in a few background details that most readers and followers of the U.S-Canada trade relationship will likely find interesting.

Susan Kokinda argues the dispute is larger than USMCA negotiations, portraying Canada as an “outlaw” that enables transshipment “smuggling,” fails to enforce forced-labor bans, and facilitates “snow-washing” through weak corporate transparency and money laundering documented in British Columbia’s Cullen Commission.

She contrasts U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s pro-development case for oil and gas as civilizational progress with Canadian Minister Mélanie Joly’s Chatham House speech promoting “geo-industrialization” and a Mark Carney-aligned “middle powers” strategy against U.S. and China “hegemons.” Kokinda highlights a House of Commons petition led by Green Party leader Elizabeth May to declare U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra persona non grata, and notes Joly’s outreach to U.S. lawmakers and cities during the trade fight.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

Earlier today following a meeting in Washington, D.C., between Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc and United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, both representatives delivered remarks to reporters.  There are no details provided, however, within his remarks, Greer says he is confident that a deal has been reached as they work to finalize the details.

USTR Greer notes the significant trade barriers between the U.S. and Canada appear to have been resolved. However, the devil is going to be in the details.  Greer noted they are putting together the documentation that will allow him to brief President Trump and congress on the proposals.  “While we certainly have eliminated some of the irritants we have had over the past several years, we are also taking a strong foot forward,” Greer remarked. WATCH:  

.

Given the antagonistic nature of Canada and their dependency on retaining an assembly economy with access to the U.S. market, it will be interesting to see what non-tariff barrier positions the Canadian government is willing to put forth.

There is a lot of optimism in media surrounding the tariff pause and the remarks that have followed; but I would caution interested parties to be aware of the scale of the divide between the two sides.

President Trump’s remarks from today about the Canada-U.S. trade position are below.

(more…)