President Zelensky of Ukraine gets into shouting match with President Trump and VP Vance, all but ending US support of Ukraine.

 

Zelensky, Trump and Putin. Fox News/Getty. 

President Zelensky of Ukraine got into a shouting match with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, all but ending US support of Ukraine. Fox News. At the end of a nearly 40 minute press conference between the three men, Zelensky criticized Trump and Vance to their faces, while Trump and Vance responded in kind. Zelensky was here to sign a mineral deal but the deal fell apart during the conference. The exchange started with Vance saying that Biden's chest pounding foreign policy wasn't working, and that diplomacy was necessary. Zelensky rejected diplomacy and said that Putin wouldn't honor a cease fire. Both Vance and Trump said that Zelensky was being disrespectful and then both sides criticized each other. Zelensky was accused of not being grateful to US assistance. The exchange led to the mineral deal not being signed and Zelensky being forced to return to Ukraine. 

I recommend watching the full conversation between Trump and Zelensky before forming strong opinions

(This is true for any situation)

pic.twitter.com/7ROt5QT41F

— Shaun Maguire (@shaunmmaguire) February 28, 2025

My Comment:

This is one of the biggest diplomatic self-immolations I have ever seen anyone make. The crazy part of it is that there was about 40 minutes of a pretty normal and boring press conference and then Zelensky kind of went nuts. It's one of the craziest things I have ever seen. I have been extremely critical of Zelensky for years now, but even I am shocked by this, I thought he was smarter? 

I am not sure what set Zelensky off, as it seemed to start after Trump said that Zelensky hated Putin, which makes a deal hard to make. Vance then said that diplomacy was needed and then Zelensky went on his tirade. It makes zero sense. 

Does Zelensky have a point that Russia wouldn't honor a cease fire? Possibly. Putin has little reason to make a deal and as long as their main goals in the war aren't accomplished, denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine, I guess it's possible they could go back on any deal. I do think that Trump was right and they wouldn't do that against him, but maybe five or ten years down the line?  

Either way, even if the point was valid, and that's debatable, the time to make it is not in a press conference in front of a major diplomatic victory for your country. The mineral deal wasn't that good for Ukraine but it was absolutely necessary for continuing support for Ukraine. Getting done would have been a coup for Ukraine as they wouldn't have found themselves in the situation they are in now.  

What Zelensky should have done is just kept his mouth shut. By trying to argue with Trump and Vance in front of the media he basically doomed his country and probably himself as well. Had he just shut up and signed the deal things would be going a lot better for him. He was very close to repairing an already fragile relationship that had been damaged recently, but instead he chose this? 

This was an absolute disaster for Zelensky. He just gave Trump permission to cut off Ukraine and he also gave various warhawks an off ramp as well. Senator Lindsey Graham, a well known neocon warmonger, went so far as suggesting that Ukraine should get rid of Zelensky. When Zelensky has lost Graham you know things went badly for him. Graham is a pretty slimy dude and probably only did this because he knows which way the winds are going, but it's still hugely significant that he's done with Zelensky. 

Today, President Trump gave a masterclass on how to stand up for America. pic.twitter.com/hekqo9j9TM

— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) February 28, 2025

The tirade had immediate repercussions. In addition to getting kicked out of the country, which is a huge deal in itself, Secretary of State Marco Rubio ended aid for Ukraine's energy system. Russia has been targeting Ukraine's power generation for months now (they should have done it WAY earlier) so that's a huge blow. 

There are rumors going around that military aid is going to be cut as well, though I haven't seen actual proof of that. If that ends up being the case than Zelensky is done. Ukraine can't fight the war without US support. Europe is unable to make up the difference if the US were to pull out. They have already emptied their stocks trying to help Ukraine in the first place, plus they don't have the higher end stuff that we have been sending Ukraine, not that we have much left either. If no peace deal is made and the war continues, Zelensky will run out of weapons very fast.  

Zelensky might not have just ended US support, he may have essentially ended his career, and possibly ended his life as well. Zelensky had to essentially balance four competing groups, Russia, the United States, Europe and the Banderite hardliners in his own government. Any one of those groups may start to wonder if it would be better for their interests if Zelensky is gone. Given that Zelensky won't resign or hold new elections, it's possible new leadership will be installed by one of those factions through more kinetic means... 

Regardless, this press conference will likely go down in history as on of the biggest diplomatic failures. Historians will probably wonder if the Ukraine war would have gone differently if Zelensky could have just kept his mouth shut. 

The FBI appears to be hiding files in the Jeffrey Epstein case...

 

File photo of Jeffrey Epstein. Fox News/DOJ photo. 

The FBI has been accused by Attorney General Pam Bondi of hiding files in the Jeffrey Epstein case. Fox News. Bondi had requested all files held by the FBI in the investigation into the Epstein trafficking network, but only received 200 files. Those files were released today, though there was little in the way of new information. Bondi said that there were thousands of pages of documents still at the FBI office in New York and that she expected them to be on her desk by tomorrow. New FBI director Kash Patel, who was confirmed eight days ago, has said that the FBI would enter a new era of transparency. 

My Comment:

Right wing folks on X are not happy about the events today. Folks wanted everything released and they wanted it released yesterday. The files that were released today were mostly old news and I haven't really heard of anything new in these files. It didn't help that Congressional republicans literally "rick rolled" folks that were looking for the files. It was not a good look and more than a few people are furious about it. 

But I also think that expectations are way too high. We actually know pretty well who was involved in the Epstein trafficking/blackmail network. Folks like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Bill Richardson, Bill Gates, Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz are well known to have to had close ties to Epstein and some of them have been directly accused of abuse. I really don't know what else folks expect to be released.

My guess is that folks are hoping that there will be new names that haven't shown up before or that there will be some major revelation that will send half the Democrats (and a few corrupt Republicans) right to prison. That isn't going to happen. There might be a few more documents in the FBI office in New York, but I would be pretty shocked if they have anything much that we don't actually already know or suspect.

The real story is that the FBI is appearing to stonewall the Attorney General. That's pretty unforgivable and the folks in charge of that decision need to be fired and fired yesterday. It's totally unacceptable to ignore a lawful order like this and they can use whatever argument they want, they don't have a leg to stand on. 

Of course even if the FBI does release these documents to Pam Bondi, that doesn't mean that the documents will be released immediately. I am guessing that the documents would have to be reviewed and some redactions, mostly relating to the identity of the victims, would have to be made. That would take at least some time.  

The real question I have is if the fact that the Epstein network will have whoever was funding and controlling it. Epstein has been a called an intelligence operative and I believe that is accurate. The real problem is that nobody released who was actually running him. Was it one of our three letter agencies? Or was it Israel, as many suspect? Such a revelation would indeed be shocking and could more than explain the reluctance to release the files. Just imagine if it was the FBI that was running the Epstein network... 

Either way though, I am not expecting too much more from the Epstein case. It's possible that some of the folks involved could be charged, and I think that's what everyone really wants. But I am not holding my breath. I am guessing that even the new files held by the FBI will end up disappointing people. 

I do think this case has become a bit of a liability for the Trump administration. Today's little stunt wasn't exactly popular. Folks wanted everything and everything now but instead we got 200 old pages of stuff we already knew. And they hyped up the release way too much to the point where folks were going to be disappointed regardless. So far much of the criticism has been leveled at Attorney General Pam Bondi and I think some of it is fair. She does seem to spend a lot of time on Fox News and folks have noticed that she hasn't released the files relating to Sean "Diddy" Combs, the JFK assassination and the MLK assassinations. At least some of the criticism of her would have been tamped down if she had released those files as well. 

Illegal alien charged with supporting ISIS in New York.

 

Mansuri Manuchekhri. New York Post/DOJ photo. 

An illegal alien has been charged with supporting ISIS in New York. New York Post. Mansuri Manuchekhri was charged with sending $70,000 to supporters of ISIS-K in Syria and Turkey. The man also sent pictures of himself at gun ranges to the ISIS supporters. Manuchekhri was from Tajikistan and entered the United States in 2016 on a tourist visa. He married a stripper in 2017 in a sham marriage to stay in the country, but the effort failed as he failed to provide documents. He was ratted out by his ex-wife who told police that he was a threat. One of the men Manuchekhri was accused of sending money to was arrested by Turkey for the 2024 attack on a Catholic Church in Istanbul. It is unclear if he was planning his own attack while his lawyers have said his actions were efforts to help people. 

My Comment:

This is another example of how broken our immigration system is. This man never should have been in the country in the first place, but when he overstayed his visa, he was not removed. He was able to get a job as a trucker and amassed quite a bit of wealth. He sent $70,000 overseas and it sure looks like at least some of it was used on a terror attack. 

To be fair, the terror attack was mostly a failure. They were only able to shoot and kill one person, a disabled man, before their weapons jammed. But things could have been a lot worse and I do wonder if the attack would have happened if it wasn't for folks like Manuchekhri funding it. Either way, he never should have had the opportunity to even earn the money in the first place. 

I do wonder how he was able to get a trucking job and what company he worked for. I know the trucking industry is lacking drivers, but I doubt things are so bad that we have to hire actual terrorist illegal aliens. And I would be very interested in which company hired this man, they absolutely should be held to account for doing so.

Of course, the sham marriage is another example of why our immigration system is broken. It shouldn't be possible to stay in a country if you get married to a stripper and have no actual desire to start a family with her. Manuchekhri only met with his "wife" twice, once to get married and once to pay her off. I'd say that she should be charged in this scam as well but it seems like she is the one that turned him in, which kind of makes up for it. 

The defense is arguing that Manuchekhri was just sending money to widows and orphans but I doubt that. He was also supposedly said that he supported terrorists and I think that's probably true. And he sure seemed to like guns. That's not evidence of much, but his texts made it seem like he was actually training for a terrorist attack. I don't think his defense is going to be successful unless there is more information we are missing. 

Regardless, it does make me wonder how many more folks like Manuchekhri are in this country. Some of them are getting deported but this guy was here for a long time and had an established life in our country. I only hope that more folks like him are deported before they can cause more problems like this guy caused. 

I'd also point out that this kind of thing is probably where ISIS gets much of their funding. ISIS doesn't really hold much territory anymore and what they do hold is in Afghanistan, which isn't much of a tax base. That means they must be getting funding somehow and remittances from western countries might be a major source. All the more reason to deport these illegal aliens that could be funding terrorists. 

Top Hamas leader says he regrets endorsing October 7th attacks.

 

Hamas stands in Gaza. New York Post/AP.

A top Hamas leader says he regrets endorsing October 7th. New York Post. Mousa Abu Marzouk, the head of the groups foreign relations office in Qatar, said that had he knew the consequences of the attack, he would have never supported it. In response to the attack, that killed civilians and lead to the kidnapping of hundreds, Israel has largely destroyed Gaza, with thousands dead and around 70% of buildings destroyed or damaged. As many as 48,000 Gazans were destroyed in the conflict. Marzouk said that upper Hamas brass was mislead about the goals of the terror attack, not knowing that the targets were civilians. Marzouk also said it was clear that Hamas had lost the war. Hazem Qassem, a Hamas spokesman, condemned the comments and said that the words were taken out of context. 

My Comment:

Marzouk stating the obvious. The October 7th attack was one of the biggest mistakes that Hamas had ever made and is a good example of a group winning a major battle but losing the war because of it. The attack was an amazing victory but the backlash and consequences it caused far outweighed any accomplishments it made. 

I don't buy for a second that the upper brass of Hamas didn't know the specifics of what was going to happen in October 7th. That seems like a very obvious lie and an attempt to try and "sanewash" their decision making. Had only a few civilians been captured or killed, you could write it off as the troops being out of control. But they specifically targeted civilian areas, like the rave in the desert, even when it made little military sense to do so. And I can't imagine that a decision of that much political importance was left to commanders on the ground. 

It also is very obvious that the cost Hamas paid was not anywhere near worth what they paid. Not only is Gaza mostly destroyed and a lot of their people are dead, they also see their allies greatly diminished by the war. Syria is no longer there and Iran lost most of their proxies in the battles with Israel. Hezbollah is pretty much gone now and so are the pro-Iran militias in Syria. 

The only real victory they had is that they somehow got supporters in the west. This never made any sense to me, there are reasons to criticize Israel, but nothing in recent history makes me have any sympathy for the Palestinian cause whatsoever. They lost every war they have fought against Israel and their behavior in both warfare and peace has been deplorable. 

But for whatever reason a lot of folks in the west make excuses for Hamas and Gaza. Some of it is the deluded "colonialism" narrative that makes zero sense, Israel was won through conquest, not colonization. Most of it is folks just hating the Jews, but even then, I don't understand how that lends any sympathy to Hamas. 

Regardless, it's also clear that Marzouk's statements aren't universal among Hamas. Hamas says that he was taken out of context, and considering that the statements were made to the New York Times, that's certainly possible. But if there are any truth to the statements at all, then it's possible that this is a sign of a power struggle within Hamas itself. 

I do think that Hamas did lose the war in Gaza. Israel didn't accomplish all of its goals, there are still Hamas fighters still alive of course, but Hamas was defeated on the battlefield and Gaza has mostly been destroyed. That's not even a moral victory for Hamas, they pretty much completely failed at their goals and paid an extremely high cost. 

Another mass stabbing in Europe. One killed and several injured in a terror attack in France.

 

Emmanuel Macron. Politico/AFP/Getty

Another mass stabbing as rocked Europe with one killed and several injured in an attack described as an "Islamic terrorist act". Politico. The attack occurred in Mulhouse in the Alsace region and a 37 year old Algerian man who was already on a terror watchlist and was wanted for deportation. The man attacked police first and when a passerby civilian tried to intervene the man stabbed the civilian, fatally wounding him. The attacker shouted "Allah Akbar". The man was supposed to have been deported but Algeria would not take him back. The President of France, Emmanuel Macron, condemned the attack and said there was no doubt that it was Islamic terrorism. 

My Comment:

It seems like every couple of days there is a mass stabbing committed by some lone wolf terrorist. The last couple of attacks were in Germany but this one is in France. France has their own Islam problem and they have the added difficulty of being a former colonial power in Muslim majority nations. 

What is infuriating about this is the fact that this man was not only a terror watchlist, he was supposed to be deported. The fact that he was so bad that even France wanted him gone should show you how dangerous he was. 

But the problem was that even Macron couldn't get rid of this man. Somehow Algeria was able to say "he's your problem France, deal with it". That is insane to me. How can a country refuse the deportation of their citizens? I guess it shows how limited France's hard power is, or how poorly they choose to use it. You would think they could spend a little political capital to force Algeria to take back folks like this which are obviously going to cause problems. 

The specific circumstances of this attack are a good reason why both the police and the public are armed. Unliked the armed soldiers that protect sensitive areas of France, most French police are not armed. And forget about the good Samaritan who tried to help and got stabbed to death for the trouble. If even one of those folks would have been properly armed then the attacker would be dead and the good Samaritan would still be alive. 

Still, at least there's one guy in France that is willing to stand up to a terrorist. Funnily enough, other sources say he was a 69 year old man from Portugal. Regardless of where he is from, it's possible that he saved someone's life. Supposedly one of the police officers had a cut to his carotid artery, so if the attack had continued, the terrorist could have finished him off. 

Regardless, it does seem like this problem is getting worse. It took awhile but a new wave of European terrorism appears to be happening. And with little stomach for the kinds of mass deportation that actually dealing with the problem I don't see it getting any better... 

A DOGE rebate has been proposed, but will the $5000 checks ever be cut?

 

Donald Trump speaking on Air Force One. Yahoo Finance/AFP.

A DOGE rebate has been proposed that would give taxpayers a $5000 check, but will the DOGE dividend ever happen? Yahoo Finance. Both President Trump and Elon Musk have expressed support of the idea that would use 20% of the original goal of a $2 trillion reduction to send to taxpayers. But it is unclear how DOGE would get that much funding cut when the goal has now been cut to a $1 trillion reduction. And DOGE would have a long way to go to reach that level of cuts as it has only cut $55 billion in funding. The payment would also require action from congress as well, and it may be tough to pass due to deficit hawks in the Republican Party. Trump also said that tariffs, which have mostly not been put into place, could help pay for the checks. 

My Comment:

This isn't a bad idea but I also just don't see it happening. Though the article is pessimistic about the chances of cutting enough government waste to actually pay for the $5000 checks, it's not actually the biggest hurdle and that's congress. 

I do think that giving people back some of their money that has been wasted on things like transgender plays in Columbia and other such nonsense is justified. The tax payers in this country are getting fleeced and it would be good for them to get at least some of their money back. 

There are worries that this could cause inflation, and to a degree there is some justification for that. When folks spend more money it does cause inflation, but I don't think we would see the post-pandemic stagflation we saw after the pandemic after Biden took office. The inflation wasn't just caused by folks spending money due to stimulus checks, but also because we borrowed and printed money to pay for it. This would be money that we already have printed so inflation, while still a concern, would not be as severe. Tariffs would help to reduce the amount of inflation as they would strengthen the dollar and export our inflation to other countries. That might be the answer to worries about inflation. 

Regardless, like I said, the real problem is congress and I can't see this passing. The Democrats in congress are extremely unlikely to vote for this as it would be popular for voters and given how rough their electoral chances are after 2024, I doubt they would want to give Trump a free win. 

But the real problem is the Republicans. They don't actually need any Democrats to vote for this package as they control the House and Senate. But the deficit hawk of the party wants to pay down the national debt and balance the budget instead and they would want to use this money for that. To be fair, the proposal already earmarks 20% of the savings to paying down debt, but for deficit hawks, that's not nearly enough. 

I do think they have a point. The national debt is out of control, to the point where 13% of the entire budget is going to paying down interest. Getting rid of this debt would be a very good thing and though the best time to have dealt with the problem was 20 years ago, the 2nd best time is now. Still, even if all $1 trillion in possible savings would be spent on reducing the debt, it would still be a drop in the bucket given how massive our debt problem actually is. Total national debt is around $35 trillion so while getting it down to $34 trillion would be an improvement it doesn't actually solve the problem. 

Still, it's possible that a deal for smaller checks could be made.  If the size of the checks was reduced considerably, perhaps $1000 to $500 and the rest going to paying down debt, the deficit hawks could be brought on board? That would at least get folks some money while the lions share of the money goes to their priority of reducing the debt. Keep in mind the original figure was for a $2 trillion savings and that doesn't appear to be in the cards. $5000 was probably never really in the cards. 

Of course it's way too soon to make any real predictions, we don't know how much money DOGE is going to be able to cut. There is still a long way to go before we cut enough where the checks would even be worth cutting. The higher estimate of DOGE savings is $55 billion, and if we cut a check with that folks would be getting around $150, assuming the 20% ratio (but please, don't trust my math!). Until that number is a lot higher, this is just an academic discussion. 

The Trump and Zelensky relationship appears to have soured dramatically.

 

Ukraine's President Zelensky and President Trump during a pre-election meeting. Fox News/Reuters

Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine have traded barbs on social media as their relationship appears to have soured. Fox News. Trump harshly criticized Zelensky on his Truth Social account, going so far as to call Zelensky a dictator for not holding elections. Trump also criticized Zelensky for being a "moderately successful comedian" who was only good at getting money from Joe Biden. Zelensky had said that Trump was living in a "disinformation space" after Trump said that Ukraine bears responsibility for the start of the war. The spat comes after high level talks between Russia and the United States, which did not involve Ukraine or Europe. Zelensky has remained President despite his term ending a year ago and has refused to hold elections. 

My Comment:

It appears the relationship between Trump and Zelensky has collapsed entirely. The two men had an apparent good relationship dating back to Trump's first term, but that appears to be over. This spat between the two men is probably the end of their supposed friendship.

I had great hopes for Zelensky when he was elected. He ran as a peace candidate, one that would end the civil war between the Ukrainian ethnic of Western Ukraine and the Russians of Donbass. I had hoped that Zelensky would have agreed to a federal solution where the Russian of Ukraine would have protections and some level of independence. 

Instead Zelensky betrayed his voters and escalated the war instead of ending it. He did nothing to end the anti-Russian laws the country had put into place and he never seemed serious on making a deal with Russia. 

And he has not been a very good wartime leader. The one thing he was good at was as a symbol to folks susceptible to propaganda. But he has made so many errors, from not ending the war when Russia offered a decent peace deal in the early part of the war, to the failed summer offensive in 2023 and the insane Kursk incursion when it was clear the war was lost. None of it was smart and none of it was in the best interest of his people. 

But it was his cancelation of elections that gave lie to the entire western justification of the war. We were supposed to be "defending democracy", whatever that is supposed to mean, but canceling an election is about the most undemocratic thing anyone can do. And no, the war isn't an excuse. The United States held elections during World War II, the lead up to our entry of World War I and, most critically, during our own Civil War. If we could do it then, Ukraine absolutely could do it now. And they should. 

Zelensky is in kind of an impossible situation here. He's rapidly running out of allies, only Europe really supports him now, and that includes factions in his own country. If he does do what Trump wants, at the very least, he will be voted out of office. At worst, he might be assassinated by the Banderite faction, the actual Nazis that have a disturbing amount of influence in Ukraine. But if he further angers Trump he risks Trump throwing up his hands and saying "let Europe deal with it, we don't care anymore". 

It does sound like Trump taking the ball and going home seems to be the most likely situation. If Ukraine won't hold elections, it's the perfect off-ramp for the United States. If Zelensky is replaced than Trump can have an actual partner in ending the war. Either way, Trump wants better relations with Russia and wants the end of US involvement in what he sees (and I agree is) a pointless war that has killed far too many good people on both sides. 

Like I have been saying for awhile now, I still think the most likely end to the war is complete Russian victory. That seems pretty likely now, with Zelensky losing influence and a major deal between Russia and Ukraine difficult to imagine. A deal might be possible but it would require Zelensky to see the writing on the wall and Ukraine to survive long enough to actually hold elections. 

USA and Russia meet in Saudi Arabia and make progress in normalizing ties.

 

The American and Russian delegations meeting in Saudi Arabia. Fox News/AP.

The United States and Russia met in Saudi Arabia and have made progress in normalizing ties and possibly ending the war in Ukraine. Fox News. Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Russian Foreign Minster Sergey Lavrov and agreed to a framework to end the war. Reports say that both sides agree that Ukraine has to hold elections if any peace deal is to be made. Ukrainian President Zelensky is likely to lose any such election and will almost certainly be replaced by someone more willing to negotiate and possibly someone more sympathetic to Russia. However, the meeting was also about trying to normalize relations between Russia and America, which have degraded massively under the Biden administration. It is notable that both Ukraine and the rest of Europe were shut out of the talks in Saudi Arabia. 

My Comment:

As important as the Ukraine war is, the real goal of his meeting was normalizing relations. From what I understand that was successful as well. Supposedly, it was agreed that they would fully staff their embassies again, which is a major win. Even if the Ukraine talks don't pan out, at the very least we are a lot less close to World War III than we were under Joe Biden. 

They also agreed to a major meeting between Putin and Donald Trump. That will be a diplomatic coup as well. The two men used to have a good working relationship though obviously they haven't met in person for awhile. Unlike Biden, who openly hated Putin, Trump is at least willing to work with Russia and may be able to further normalize ties to the point where sanctions are dropped. 

Of course the big news is of course Ukraine. It seems very clear that there are going to have to be elections for a peace deal to happen. Keep in mind, Zelensky's term ended last year and he canceled elections. He's not a legitimate President right now and that has to change if Ukraine is going to be at the table for any negotiations. 

This is, of course, bad news for Zelensky. He's not going to win any election, which is why he didn't hold them in the first place. He made noise about it not being possible while in a war, though that was never an argument that held any water. He has little choice but to hold elections either, if he refuses then President Trump has the perfect excuse to cut him off entirely. 

I have zero sympathy for Zelensky, by the way. I took it rather personally that the man was elected for one reason and one reason alone, to end the war, and he betrayed that promise as bad as I have ever seen anyone betray anything. Zelensky pretty much destroyed his entire country because Biden ordered him to and I won't forgive that. I hope that any deal made ends with Zelensky in a small cell somewhere for the rest of his life... 

There is a long way to go to any peace deal in Ukraine. Russia was always going to be hard to convince as they know that any deal they make with Trump could be overturned by whoever replaces Trump in 2028. Putin can't risk Ukraine being able to rejoin the war in four years if a Democrat or neocon Republican wins in 2028. 

But it does seem like things are moving on that front. I am guessing that a peace deal is possible, at least. I still think the most likely deal is that an agreement isn't made and Ukraine collapses and Russia wins militarily. Given the low morale, lack of weapons and manpower, and the absolutely idiotic military actions Ukraine has taken, it's very possible that Ukraine collapses on its own before any deal can be made. 

I am not surprised that both Ukraine and Europe were shut out of these talks. For one, it wasn't primary about them, like I said the main reason was to normalize ties to a degree. But I don't think Ukraine or Europe is serious about ending the war and normalizing ties with Russia. If they aren't willing to play ball, why invite them to the table? 

Leader of the "Zizian" transgender vegan cult arrested in Maryland. The cult was linked to several murders.

 

The mugshots of Jack "Ziz" LaSota and Michelle Zajko. Fox News.

The leader of the "Zizian" cult, a group of mostly transgender radical vegans, has been arrested in Maryland. Fox News. Jack "Ziz" LaSota and Michelle Zaiko were arrested by police in Maryland after a manhunt. The cult, which is a group of so called "rationalists" that are greatly concerned about AI, is linked to several homicides, including the murder of Border Patrol agent David Maland. The two were charged with firearms charges and trespassing while  Zaiko was also charged with resisting arrest. Zaiko was accused of purchasing the firearms that two cult members, Felix "Ophelia" Bauckholt and Teresa "Milo" Consuelo Youngblut, used in the shootout with the border patrol. Bauckholt was killed in the shootout. Zaiko is also a person of interest in two other murder cases, one a double homicide in Pennsylvania and another homicide in California. 

My Comment:

I've been following this case since the shootout with the border patrol and I was very surprised at the connection to the rationalists. I've been reading some of the folks from the rationalist movement for awhile now, most notably Scott Alexander and some of the spinoff sites from his blog, including the former blog and now the spinoff site, TheMotte. They are, at least, interesting and have had some influence in America today. 

The rationalists were supposed to be about using good reasoning to discover the best way to do things. Generally speaking they are center-left (though the spinoff sites like TheMotte are more right wing) and somewhat opposed to the far left "woke" people, but they are also focused on some strange things. Certainly the focus on veganism always baffled me as it seemed like an obvious flaw to lump in animals as the same moral worth as humans. And they are also extremely concerned about AI, to the point where some folks literally drove themselves insane worrying about it. 

The Zizians appear to have spun off from them and are dramatically more radical. They are extremely vegan and justify violence because of it. They are also mostly (completely?) made up of transgender people, which means reporting on it is extremely difficult due to trying to figure out who is a biological male or female. 

The murder of the border patrol agent David Maland was the biggest story for them, but it's hardly the only crime they have committed. They were involved in a major disturbance at a AI conference but it's the other homicides that are really disturbing. The Pennsylvania homicides were supposedly about the parents of one of the cult members, Michelle Zaiko, not accepting their transgender status. 

But it's the California homicide that really gets to me. Curtis Lind was an 80 year old landlord that was renting property to the Zizians and when the group devolved from tenants to squatters he threatened to evict them. In response, two Zizians attacked him with knives and swords. Despite having a sword literally sticking out of him, Lind was able to retrieve a firearm and shot his attackers, killing Emma Borhania. Two other Zizians were charged in the crime for the attack and the death of Borhania. Lind survived the attack but was hospitalized for months, and lost one of his eyes. 

Those two, Suri Dao and Alexander Jeffrey Leatham, were set to stand trial and Lind was going to testify against him. But at 82 years old Lind was stabbed to death after fleeing his home and living in fear that the cult would kill him. It appears they have succeed and Zaiko may have been the one responsible. 

Curtis Lind's Gofundme page before his death. Open Vallejo. 

This is probably the most heinous crime that the cult was involved with. Lind survived a horrible attack and saved his own life through extreme determination and bravery. And he was brave enough to testify against the folks that almost killed him. But he was murdered at 82 years of age because the cult wanted to silence him. It's horrible and one of the worst crimes I have heard of in awhile. 

The real question with the Zizians is what caused their violence. Ziz himself doesn't seem that charismatic but that isn't surprising to me. It's hard to tell how influential people are without meeting them in person. But was the violence due to their rationalist beliefs? Their veganism? Their transgenderism? Or the fact that they were all incredibly unattractive? 

Either way it's a fascinating story and it's one I would like to read more about. I know Kiwi Farms (NSFW link and a fairly notorious website) has a thread which I haven't had a chance to read yet and the rationalists themselves have put out some information. I hope that this is the end of this story but who know? This group has already been linked to six deaths (four murders and two cult members killed during their crimes) and if there are still more of them out there, we could see more... 

Syrian man who stabbed six people in Austria, killing one, pledged support for ISIS.

 

Mourners at the site of the attack. Fox News/AP.

A Syria man who stabbed six people in Austria, killing a 14 year old boy, has pledged support for ISIS. Fox News. The attacker was radicalized online over a very short period. He carried out his attack in a town Villach, a village of 60,000 people located near the border with Italy and Slovenia. The attack comes after a deadly car ramming attack in Germany that ended with two people dying in the hospital. US Vice President JD Vance had visited Europe between the two attacks and was very critical of the immigration policies that allows asylum seekers from the Middle East into Europe. The attacker in this case is not believed to have any wider connection to ISIS and is believed to be a "lone wolf" attacker. 

Thursday -Afghan asylum seeker commits terror attack in Munich, kills 2-y-o girl & her mom

Friday -JD Vance comes to Munich & warns about open border migration policies. EU political elite gets angry

Today -Syrian asylum seeker commits terror attack in Austria, kills 14-y-o boy pic.twitter.com/XNBW8CILy6

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 15, 2025

My Comment:

This attack happened yesterday but I wasn't blogging this Saturday. Given the fact that the man was confirmed to have pledged allegiance to ISIS I thought it was worth covering. Not to mention the obvious political consequences of this attack. 

Regardless, that photo embedded in the tweet that I posted, well, it's something else. The man had just killed a teenage boy and stabbed five other people and he was sitting there with a grin on his face and his finger in the air. How that police officer stopped from firing on him is beyond me. Either way, it's the kind of image that sticks with you and it just shows how much hate these folks have. 

I do think that this attack was entirely preventable. As I have said for many years, there was no reason why Europe had to take these folks in the first place. By international law, Syrians could have absolutely stayed in the first safe country they arrived at, Turkey. That they did not was inexcusable. 

It's also inexcusable that these folks are still there. They had fled from the Syrian government, but the Syrian government is no longer there. Indeed, they are now ruled by the same kind of Islamic extremism these folks seem to like. Why aren't they being sent back? The war is over and they can just go home. 

Regardless of the preventability of this attack, I do wonder if this is another example of Islamic terrorism making a big comeback. Though ISIS as an organization isn't in the same position it once was, it certainly is still an influence. The lone wolf attacker is going to be a thing for a long time, but what I am worried about is core ISIS, or another Islamic terror group launching a major attack. 

There's an argument for both cases. Part of me thinks that ISIS won't be able to carry out the large scale attacks anymore because they don't have the funding. When the major European attacks were launched they had a tax base and safe haven in Syria, Iraq and Libya. They do not have that today and only control small areas of the Syrian desert. They just don't have the money. 

On the other hand, it costs almost nothing to ram your car into a crowd or stab a bunch of people with a knife. The large scale gun and explosive attacks of the last decade might not be possible anymore but these kinds of lower scale, lower impact attacks, are certainly both easy to fund and carry out. And all ISIS really has to do is keep up the propaganda and there will be lone wolf attackers that will be inspired by it... 

30 people injured in car ramming attack in Munich Germany

 

A officer and police dog inspect the car used in the attack. AP. 

30 people were injured in a car ramming attack in Munich Germany. AP. The suspect was a 24 year old asylum seeker from Afghanistan. He targeted a march by a service workers union, ver.di, and rammed his Mini Cooper into the crowd. Police opened fire on the car and was able to capture the attacker. It is suspected that the crowd was targeted randomly and not because of their political activity. The incident comes 10 days before the election where immigration has been a critical issue. Both the more mainstream conservatives and the AFD are demanding political consequences for the attack. 

My Comment:

Yet another car ramming attack, this one injuring 30 people. Thankfully the attacker picked a pretty terrible car for his attack. There are a few cars worse than a Mini Cooper for a car ramming attack, but not many. The car's small size probably explains why it doesn't sound like anyone will die from this attack. Once again, I am thankful for stupid terrorists. 

We don't yet know exactly why this attacker did this, but it's hardly important. I am guessing it was radical Islam but in the past car ramming attack it was actually committed by a former Muslim who hated current Muslims and attacked Germans because of their policy of allowing Muslims in the country. Hopefully this attack has more understandable motives, but it's very possible it won't. 

Regardless, it hardly matters what the motive of this crime was, the fact is that it was entirely preventable. I said that with the last car ramming attack in Germany and I will repeat it again here. The attacker was an asylum seeker and there was no reason for him to have been in Germany in the first place. There were a lot of safe places a lot nearer to Afghanistan instead of Germany he could have stayed at. Instead he traveled across an entire continent to enter Germany and committed a serious crime. This attack was absolutely preventable. 

I do have to appreciate the irony of the attacker targeting a bunch of leftists that were marching for their parties that would welcome even more folks like the attacker into the country. Do you think any of them will change their minds after seeing the consequences of their polices first hand? Probably not, but you never know, maybe some of them will.

This attack will probably help the conservative parties in Germany. This attack will probably help AFD, the German "far right" party, since it matches their rhetoric. I haven't followed the German election too closely but it does sound like the conservatives are going to win and AFD is going to be part of the ruling coalition. 

Finally, I do wonder if this was related to ISIS or if this was just a "lone wolf" attacker doing it for his own reasons. I did say that the motive doesn't matter and I guess that is true, but if this was part of a larger plot we could see further attacks. I doubt it was because you would think that if that if this was an ISIS (or other terror group) plot, they would have thought to rent a truck instead of a Mini Cooper.

As for the 

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin agree to peace talks over Ukraine.

 

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Politico/AFP/Getty

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin have agreed to peace talks that could end the war in Ukraine. Politico. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth started the announcement by saying that Ukraine would not be able to take back both Crimea and the territory Russia took during the war. Hegseth also said that there was no path for Ukraine to join NATO, which was a major cause of the war. Trump talked to both Putin and Ukrainian President Zelensky, who confirmed that the country wanted peace. The announcement leaves Europe out in the cold and some of those countries have vowed to continue to support Ukraine. 

My Comment:

Very interesting. We finally know Trump's policy on Russia and Ukraine and it seems like we are done with the Ukraine war. We also seem like we will finally have a sane policy when it comes to Russia and we will also finally move away from a third world war. 

Do I think that the war will end in negotiated settlement? I doubt it. Trump is moving to be into a position to where he can cut off Ukraine. Right now all the pressure is on Zelensky. I don't think he will be allowed to accept the terms Trump is proposing, no path to NATO and Russia keeps the lands they have kept. He has a lot of hardliners in his country that would prefer to see every Ukrainian dead before they would even consider allowing Putin to even keep Crimea, let alone the rest of the territory they have taken. 

And it's not like there aren't easy ways to get rid of Zelensky if he refuses to go along with this on the United States' end either. Zelensky should have stood for election months ago and has not. I am guessing that will be a major demand of Putin and one that I don't see Zelensky going for as he will not survive an election. But it's also an entirely valid demand, we can't be "defending democracy" in Ukraine if democracy isn't even allowed to happen. 

Ukraine's truly heroic levels of corruption might be another out. Though much of the aid sent to Ukraine probably ended up in America, I am guessing that Zelensky and his cronies enriched themselves as well. Supposedly we are auditing the aid given to Ukraine and when the corruption is found, and it will be, it would be a perfect way to get America out of the war and start dealing with Russia directly. 

I do think that there is a small possibility to end the war with negotiations though. I find it extremely unlikely, like I said, Zelensky is probably dead to his hardliners if he seriously considers Trump's plan. But it's possible that Zelensky could reign in the hardliners and actually negotiate in good faith. 

Such a deal would be hard to get. Putin is in a good situation here and he knows he will win the war regardless of what Trump does. I can't see any deal where Ukraine remains a military force as though I think he can trust Trump to not restart the war, can he trust the next American president? Both the Democrats and the few remaining neocons in the Republican Party would probably start the war again if the war ends with a peace deal. 

But a peace deal is still possible. Though Russia is in a good position, it's hard to argue that the war hasn't been tough for them. It's possible that Putin would value the end of the war over totally destroying Ukraine as they could get sanctions relief, better relations with the United States, and an end raids and destruction against their territory. I think this is unlikely but there is a slim chance that the war could end with a deal

However, I mostly Trump saying to Europe that Ukraine is their problem now. Europe has terrible relations with Trump and Trump doesn't want to run a war he had no interest in the first place. If negotiations don't work he has a third out that Europe ruined everything and they can take the blame for when Ukraine falls. Essentially Trump will get a separate peace from Europe and they are just going to have to deal with it. 

If Europe does try to continue the war after a deal is made between Trump and Putin, it will be an exercise in folly. They have very little in terms of weapons left and won't really be able to provide for Ukraine in any meaningful way. Even if they go totally insane and deploy troops to Ukraine, they won't be able to win the war. They simply don't have the weapons left to make much of a difference. 

Either way, I am very happy. I have always hated the war in Ukraine and I have always thought it was the worst thing America has done in my lifetime at least, maybe period. Biden started a war with Russia, a nuclear power, that has left Ukraine destroyed to the point where they won't really able to continue as a people. I never thought Russia should have been an enemy after the cold war ended but the Democrats always made it a demand. This kind of deal making to reverse that course is why I have supported Donald Trump in the last three elections. 

Marc Fogel, an American citizen, released by Russia; is it the start of normalization of relations?

 

Marc Fogel after his release. BBC.

Marc Fogel, an American citizen convicted of drug crimes, has been released by Russia in a diplomatic breakthrough. BBC. Fogel had been arrested for brining a small amount of Marijuana into the country and received a 14 year sentence. The marijuana had been prescribed to him by a doctor. Fogel was not described as being wrongfully imprisoned until 2024 despite pressure from his family. WNBA star Britney Griner, who was arrested for an extremely similar crime, was traded for notorious arms dealer Victor Bout, but Fogle was not included in that deal, or a prisoner exchange by Biden for three other Americans last year. Fogel was released while Steve Witkoff, President Trump's envoy for the Middle East, was in the country. Witkoff is the highest ranking American to visit Russia since the war between Russia and Ukraine broke out. It is unclear if America offered anything in return for Fogel's release. 

My Comment:

I've got mixed feeling on this one. I have very little sympathy for folks that don't follow the laws of the countries they are visiting. Both Britney Griner and Marc Fogel faced extremely harsh sentences for bringing drugs into Russia, but both of them should have known a lot better. 

That being said, they were punished very harshly. If they had been arrested in America for possession of the small amounts of weed they had on them, I doubt either of them would have been imprisoned. Indeed, had they been Russians themselves they could have still been imprisoned but it sure looks like it would have been a shorter sentence. 9 years for Griner and 14 for Fogel is pretty ridiculous. 

Still, this is an easy win for the Trump administration and one for Russia too. Trump promised to get Fogel out and it's another feather in his cap. We don't know if he paid any kind of price for it, but presumably no arms dealers were released in exchange. That makes Trump look pretty good and it makes Joe Biden look horrible. All Biden had to do to get Fogel released is talk to Russia and he just wouldn't do that. And he could have easily included him with the other groups of prisoners that were exchanged. 

What is of real interest is the fact that I don't think Russia would do this if tensions were going to get higher. Releasing a prisoner, apparently at no cost, is a gesture of good faith and one that shows that Russia probably wants to get along with Trump more than Biden. Russia absolutely hated Biden and for good reason. Biden's the reason why the Ukraine war started in the first place and it's also why it has gone on for so long even though it's pretty clear the matter is settled. 

It also shows that there has been some high level diplomacy between Russia and the United States. The elephant in the room since Trump won the election has been what on earth would he do on Ukraine? There is pretty much nothing he can do to end the war, Biden escalated to the point that there isn't much that Trump could do, other than raising fuel prices which will actually help, not hurt Russia. 

I think this is a sign that Trump is willing to cut a deal with Russia. I don't think he can actually end the war but he might be able to trade Ukraine to Russia for victories in other areas, like the Gaza mess. The writing is on the wall for Ukraine and I am guessing that the plan is for DOGE to audit the Ukraine aid and when the billions of dollars of graft and waste is found, Ukraine will be cut off. Ukraine will probably lose the war before the end of the year anyways, so it's not like there is a huge cost here. 

If so, that's a very good thing. I voted for Trump in 2016 because I wanted better relations with Russia, not the insane war that Hillary Clinton was planning and Biden finally put into place during his term. I have never understood why Russia was treated as the #1 adversary when it was so obvious that China absolutely is and my hope is that we will be able to at least cool things down a bit... 

DOJ dismisses charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams

 

New York Mayor Eric Adams. Fox News.

The Department of Justice has dismissed charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams. Fox News. Adams was charged with several crimes based on foreign influence, including bribery, campaign donations from foreign government officials, wire fraud and conspiracy. The case was not dismissed due to the evidence in the case and was dismissed without prejudice. The reason the case was dismissed was for the appearance of prejudice by the Biden Administration due to they Mayor's criticism of illegal immigration. Adams was charged with the crimes shortly after the statements criticizing Biden's immigration policies. There was also concern that the charges would influence the 2025 New York mayoral race which Adams is running in and the Trump administration's effort to enforce immigration. 

My Comment:

I'm of two minds of this. I am convinced that Eric Adams is probably guilty of the crimes he is charged with. There is a real chance that he did accept bribes from the government of Turkey. He probably should face a trial based on the evidence. 

But I also feel like this is a pretty obvious "Bill Cosby" situation. Cosby was guilty as sin of sexual assault but the prosecutors in his case dropped an agreement they had with Cosby and a judge ruled that was a violation of his rights. In that case it was the right thing to let him go, despite his obvious guilt, because the prosecutors behavior was egregious. 

It seems like the same thing happened here. Selective prosecution is not something that should be tolerated. The timing of the case certainly made it seem like Joe Biden and his administration was only charging Adams because he spoke out about illegal immigration. I have very little doubt that these charges would not have been filed if Adams hadn't made the comments about illegal immigration that he did. 

They also have a point that this prosecution also appears to be an attempt to derail Adams and his election effort in 2025. Though Adams is himself a Democrat, the party is still angry with him for perceived support of Donald Trump. Adams is also a fairly centrist Democrat by the standards of the party and isn't really "woke" either. Convicting him of bribery charges would be a way to ensure that he wasn't going to win the 2025 election. 

I do think that the Trump administration did the right thing here but I do have to say that I do think that it's unfortunate that the case got destroyed by the Biden Administration. If Adams really is guilty, it's not great that he won't face any punishment for them. But as I said during the Bill Cosby case, it's better to let a guilty man go free in this kind of situation than to violate their rights. 

Trump approval remains high as the President gets high marks after three weeks in office.

 

Trump's approval rating. CBS News/YouGov.

Donald Trump's approval rating remains high after his third week in office. CBS News. Trump's approval rating is at 53% approve and 47% disapprove, which is much better than Joe Biden when he left office. Trump gets high marks for his immigration plans, though a majority say that large camps aren't needed before deportation. Trump is also described as effective, focused, energetic and tough by the majority of voters. Trump gets mixed marks on the Israel-Gaza conflict. 54% agree with what he is doing with Israel but people are much more skeptical of the idea of the United States taking over Gaza, with only 13% approval, though 40% say they are not sure. Trump's one area of concern is that 66% say he should be doing more do reduce prices, as Trump road a wave of discontent over inflation to the White House. 

My Comment:

Trump has pretty good approval numbers right now and it shows that folks aren't abandoning him. Keep in mind that CBS/YouGov has been biased against Trump for his entire political career. I am guessing the actual approval rating is even higher. 

It's also not surprising that Trump is getting good ratings on immigration. The 2024 election was partially about immigration and folks are so happy that Trump is actually trying to do something about the huge number of illegal immigrants in America. Though the numbers of deportations aren't super high, it's just a huge difference that we have a president that made stopping illegal immigration a priority. I think the lower numbers for holding immigrants in large camps is mostly because folks don't want to wait that long for folks to get deported. 

Some of this is due to the massive unpopularity of Joe Biden. Biden was none of the things that Trump was described as, he was senile and totally ineffective while Trump is at least trying to do things. And he has had some major accomplishments. Trump is at least attempting to keep his campaign promises. 

As for the Gaza-Israel war, Trump is seen as doing well. Much of this is because he was able to effectively end the war before he even took office, which was a huge accomplishment. Folks are a lot more skeptical of his effort to take over Gaza. Nobody seems to know how that would work though I agree that it's probably just an effort to make folks in the Middle East take responsibility for rebuilding Gaza. 

Trump's main problem is the economy. Folks want lower prices and so far things haven't really changed that much. Some of this is due to it being much harder to do things on the economy than anything else. You can't really flip a switch and fix the economy. And Biden did a lot of things that would damage the economy that haven't really stopped affecting it. The price of eggs is a good example, Biden had millions of chickens killed for bird flu concerns, and it's not like that's a problem that can be fixed in three weeks. I think that tariffs will eventually help the economy but it's going to be something that will take awhile to take effect. The real question is if it will happen before the 2026 midterms or after and it could be what defines his 2nd term. 

As for me I am mostly happy with what Trump has done. He's accomplished more then I have thought. And I'm surprises that Trump's victories on the culture war front, like the bans on trans surgery on children, weren't covered. But it hasn't all been good, his order tonight to end the production of the penny has to be the worst thing he has ever done by far. Everything in the country just got more expensive, as you know everyone is going to round up, and not down. Still, other than that madness, I'm extremely happy with everything else he has done. 

The House wants to ban Chinese AI program DeepSeek from government devices...

 

File photo of the DeepSeek. AP.

The House wants to ban Chinese AI program DeepSeek from government computers and may move to ban it entirely from the United States. AP. DeepSeek took the tech world by storm by being as effective as American AI programs but with much cheaper costs. However, major security concerns exist. The program can send login information to a company that has been banned from operating on US soil. The ban would be similar to the one currently in use for TikTok, which is banned from government devices. Another bill has been introduced that would ban all AI that comes from China. 

My Comment:

It's not surprising that DeepSeek would have the ability to steal login information. The whole thing seems like a major scam by China in order to use AI against the rest of the world. Banning this technology from government devices is a major no-brainer. DeepSeek appears to be slightly better than other chat based AI but the security threat obviously isn't worth it. 

Some will say that this is just the United States not wanting to compete with DeepSeek, which appears to offer a superior product. I am sure that is part of it as tech stocks took a massive hit after DeepSeek was released. But just because that is true does not mean that DeepSeek should be used on government devices. 

I also have questions about how China was even able to develop this program. I think they are obviously smart enough (and willing to steal) to pull it off, but they do not have the production ability to get the chips needed to run them. You need high end, professional GPU's to run these kinds of programs and supposedly China does not have access to those chips. They may have made their own but it's more likely that they were able to obtain them from Taiwan somehow. 

I don't really know why AI programs like this would be allowed on government devices in the first place. AI chat programs are just toys and don't seem to do all that much useful other than function as a better search engine than Google. Supposedly chat based AI is supposed to change the world but I also don't know why the government would need to use it. 

Besides, there are plenty of US based choices they could use even if the AI was necessary. ChatGPT and Claude are supposedly only slightly worse than DeepSeek and I have found that Grok, Elon Musk's AI program based on the X platform, works fine. That comes with a X subscription and you can also use it to generate stupid pictures like this:

Regardless, I am not sure if a full ban of DeepSeek is necessary. I think if the ability to scan someone's login info is removed than it should be fine for domestic use. I still wouldn't be comfortable having it on government devices, but that's true no matter the program, I don't think Facebook, Instagram or X should be on government devices either, unless it's for official accounts. Either way, if DeepSeek cleans their act up then it would be fine to allow them for domestic use. If they don't then a full ban might be necessary. 

   

Politico and other news outlets received millions of dollars from government subscriptions.

 

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt before the announcement. New York Post/Getty.

Politico and other news outlets received millions of dollars from government subscriptions. New York Post. Politico, a news outlet owned by German Alex Springer, received 8.4 million for subscriptions and contracts. Those have now been canceled by DOGE. Politico is best known for their regular news outlet but they also have many trade and policy newsletters about health care, energy and other topics. 

Politico was not the only news outlet receiving these kinds of contracts and subscriptions. The Wrap. Two major wire services, AP and Reuters, received $620,000 and $3.1 million respectively. The New York Times had also received more than $375,000. 

My Comment:

This is a very good thing for a couple of reasons. The most obvious is that this was a colossal waste of money. From what I understand these subscriptions were for trade magazines and newsletters. Some of those might have had some use for a few federal workers but the cost they were paying was absurd. Some of these Politico subscriptions were worth six figures! That's an absurd waste of taxpayer money. I am sure that the information contained in these news letters are publicly available. 

And that's just the explanation that the media is using for why these subscriptions were being used. It's very possible that they weren't actually being used by anyone. If all these things are is trade letters, what do you think the chances are that the government employees that had these subscriptions never even read them? In that case it's an even bigger waste of money, especially for what the government was paying for them. 

The other major benefit is that this sure looks like graft. It at least has the appearance of doing so. Some of this money was from USAID and other government agencies that could have used these subscriptions as a way to ensure that Politico itself gave good coverage to their efforts. Given how critical Politico is of both the Trump administration and right wing politics in general this could mean that their coverage of those things are not actually organic. They could be paid off. 

Are we certain that is what is happening? I believe it. I have very little doubt that the government and news outlets were coordinating with each other to both prevent Donald Trump from returning to office, among other things. Can we prove that in court? Probably not. But if it is the case I would like to see these folks face justice because I doubt that is legal. This would essentially be a bribe. 

Regardless, the most important thing is that these money is no longer going to Politico and other news outlets. This is going to hurt their bottom line but that's a small price to pay if it means less money is being wasted by the taxpayers. I doubt there was any real legitimate reason why these subscriptions and contracts existed and that's all money that could be spent elsewhere.   

President Trump issues a threat against Iran: If they attempt to take him out he has left orders for the USA to retaliate with military force.

 

Donald Trump speaks to reporters as he signs executive orders. AP. 

President Trump issued a major threat against Iran saying that he has left orders to have Iran "obliterated" if they successfully assassinate him. AP. Trump was signing an executive order to pressure Iran to give up any nuclear weapons program when he made the comments. Though he said that he wished for peace in the Middle East he acknowledged the threat. During the campaign Trump faced two assassination attempts, neither of which was apparently connected to Iran. However, the Justice Department said they had disrupted an Iranian plot against Donald Trump. If a plot against Trump would succeed, JD Vance would become President and it is unclear if he would follow Trump's orders or not. Iran has made threats against Trump ever since he ordered the bombing of Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani.

My Comment:

I have discussed this issue before. Back then I said that had Iran murdered candidate Trump then I didn't see a way for Joe Biden to avoid a war with Iran. Obviously, now that Trump is back in office, any attempt on his life, successful or not, would be an act of war and would obviously be a valid casus belli for a major war against Iran. 

If such an attempt on the President's life were to succeed, I am sure that JD Vance would follow Trump's orders. At that point it would have little to do with Trump himself, though even his critics would support a conflict. Not retaliating with force would show extreme weakness and is pretty much unimaginable. Like I said, a foreign government killing a President would be an act of war and would justify a military retaliation. 

The real question is what that retaliation would be? Would it be a targeted attack against the people that ordered the attack? Would it be a full scale war, or even an invasion? Or could it be the ultimate retaliation, nuclear warfare? I think the first two options are the most likely, a full invasion or a nuclear war would be very unlikely. The attack would most likely be proportionate. 

Of course I have seen very little evidence that Iran is capable of actually getting to Donald Trump. Even if you ignore the amount of luck that the man has, it honestly borders on divine protection if you believe in that kind of thing, Trump has the best security in the world right now. I struggle to think of a way they could get to him now that security has been tightened up dramatically. 

And Iran? They are absolutely on the back foot right now. They gambled big on the Israel-Gaza war and they lost big. Their only success was the Yemen theater, in every other theater they lost. Gaza gave up, Hezbollah was mostly destroyed and their proxy armies in Syria no longer have any protection from the Turkish backed new government. In short, I don't know if they can actually do all that much. 

But the fear is that they have been so humiliated they will want to try and take Trump out regardless. That would be an act of insanity, especially after this warning, but would they care? I would think that they wouldn't want to take the risk, but that assumes rational actors. Is the leadership of Iran rational? Keep in mind that Trump just ordered "maximum pressure" on Iran, it's possible that it will be effective enough to drive them to an insane action... 

The only problem I can see with Trump's order here is the possibility that Iran gets blamed for any attempt on Trump's life even if they aren't responsible. I would hope that if the unthinkable does happen we would at least wait for proof that Iran was the one that did it. Trump, unfortunately, has many enemies and Iran probably isn't even in the top five, though they would be in the top ten. But the last thing we need is an unnecessary war if Iran isn't actually responsible.