Illegal immigrant gang from Venezuela takes over apartment complexes in Aurora Colorado.

 

Venezuelan gang members taking over an apartment building. Fox News/Edward Romero.

An illegal immigrant gang from Venezuela has taken over apartment complexes in Aurora Colorado. Fox News. They Mayor of the city, Mike Coffman, said that the gang had taken over two apartment complexes, pushing out the owners and collecting rent and "protection" money from the residents. The Tren de Arugua gang had also issued threats to the police, but a gang leader known as "Cookie Monster" was arrested. Coffman blamed the federal government for allowing the people into the country and shipping them to Aurora.

Disturbing new footage from Aurora, Colorado reveals that an illegal immigrant gang has completely seized control of an entire apartment complex.

This gang, originating from Venezuela through the Biden-Harris open border policy, is deeply involved in human smuggling, brutal… pic.twitter.com/ho4G5KqcAZ

— Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) August 28, 2024

“Those Venezualans are taking over”

Parts of Aurora, CO are now under the control of the migrant gang Tren de Aragua.

They took over apartment buildings, rob stores, shut down streets for protests, and commit violent crime.

Kamala is the border czar pic.twitter.com/lJu8NGuLzP

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) August 29, 2024

 

My Comment:

Well, that's a pretty good argument for the 2nd Amendment. One guy with a rifle could have done something to stop these gang members from taking over these apartments. Of course, knowing the current sad state of criminal justice in blue states you would probably get arrested, but at least you would still be alive. 

This is an extraordinarily dangerous development. The one thing the government should not tolerate is criminal gangs extorting people and that appears to be what is happening here. The victims are probably illegal immigrants or other foreigners but even then there is no excuse for allowing this to happen. The entire reason to have a government and a police force is to stop this kind of thing happening. If they can't do so then we have descended into warlord-ism...

The gang is a major problem. Tren de Aragua started in a Venezuelan prison but has spread through North and South America as the people of Venezuela have fled the socialist government. The gang went with them and are now moving to places where they have moved to to further exploit those people. They are the biggest criminal organization in Venezuela and are a major threat. 

I do think that the Biden/Harris administration is responsible for this. None of the folks coming from Venezuela are being vetted in any way and now a lot of criminals have come into America. Venezuela, as an American adversary, does not give us any information of who is a criminal and who isn't. We have no way to tell who is a criminal and who isn't, not that I would want any of these people coming in regardless. 

If the border was closed and the "remain in Mexico" policy was still in place, none of these people would be in the country. And the Tren de Aragua gang would not be exploiting them. To be fair, the gangs in South and Central America might be, but that would not be our problem at all. It would be there problem. 

I think it's only a matter of time before US citizens are affected by this problem. Indeed, if the third video (the Libs of TikTok link, which I usually wouldn't use but she's the only one that had the video) is true then they already are. Those folks were just normal, African American, citizens of the city and they almost got hit by a car. If the Tren de Aragua gang get more powerful they are the kinds of folks they could be targeting next. 

Will anything be done about this? It sounds like at least the gang leader, the "Cookie Monster" fellow, is under arrest, but both the local, state and federal law enforcement agencies need to tamp down on this as soon as possible. If they don't I think it's only a matter of time before people pick up arms nad start their own gangs to protect themselves and that could lead to out and out warfare between Tren de Aragua and American civilians... 

All of this is entirely predictable. Bringing people in from the third world brings third world problems. Venezuela is a failed state with a large criminal underclass that has a major reason to get out of the country. Allowing them to come here has brought the same problems and the only solution is to get them to stop coming and sending them back home. 

I do think that this is going to be a major campaign issue. This is the kind of thing that nobody wants to see in America and it plays into Trump's major campaign issue of border security. Harris has tried to convince people that she will be tough on the border, but the results of the Biden-Harris policy is clear. People are not going to want to vote for Democrats as long as they understand that this could be a result. 

The UN fears Ukraine could damage or destroy the Kursk nuclear power plant in Russia...

 

The Kursk nuclear power plant in Russia. Politico/Getty.

The UN fears that Ukraine could damage or destroy the Kursk nuclear power plant in Russia. Politico. The head of the IAEA, Rafael Grossi led a mission to the plant and inspected damage caused by a reported Ukrainian attack. He was shown evidence of drone strikes. The Kursk plant is vulnerable to drone and artillery strikes due to not having a protective dome like many nuclear power plants. However, he said that neither side can allow a nuclear "accident" to happen. 

My Comment:

Once again the media is behind the story. The point of the Kursk offensive, possibly the entire point, was the hold the power plant hostage. Doing so would be about the only thing that Ukraine could do to gain leverage against Russia as they are losing the war by conventional means. The attack on the plant was a proof of concept. 

So far though the attack failed and Ukraine really hasn't been able to get close enough to the plant to attack it. America has forbidden Ukraine from using the kinds of long range weapons that could actually hit this power plant. They tried drone strikes but they were not effective enough to actually do much damage.

Of course a successful attack on the Kursk plant would be a massive disaster and one that could utterly change the course of the war. It would probably be Chernobyl style disaster that would leave hundreds or thousands of people dead and would increase cancer rates across the region for decades. It would be horrific. 

And the worst part? It would allow the Russians to return the favor and destroy Ukrainian nuclear power plants, including Chernobyl. Though Russia has mostly destroyed Ukraine's power generation capabilities, they have mostly left the nuclear power plants alone for this very reason. Destroying nuclear power plants would lead for tit-for-tat retaliations that would damage the entire region and kill thousands of people in horrific ways. 

I don't know that Ukraine cares about that though. They know that they are losing the war and their only hope is to somehow bring NATO into the war. Tit-for-tat strikes on nuclear power plants could do that. It  could also finally make NATO wise up and pull out of the war, but  I think Ukraine wants to risk it. 

Indeed, they have done this song and dance before. They tried to attack the  Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant many times. It mostly failed because that plant was shut down and isn't as vulnerable to attacks compared to the one in Kursk. But they have absolutely done this before and if given the chance they will do it again. 

The good news is that their plan appears to have failed and the international community is coming down on Ukraine for trying this. The IAEA is obviously upset about this and it might be part of the reason why Germany cut off aid. And they aren't going to get long range weapons from America if this is what they are going to do with it. 

But there is still a chance of another major attack on the Kursk power plant. Though they are barred from using US long range weapons, it's possible that Britain will allow Ukraine to use theirs. Plus, Ukraine does have some long range drones that could potentially hit the plant. And supposedly Ukraine has developed their own ballistic missiles, the Palianytsia. This new missile could be used to strike the Kursk plant... 

Tulsi Gabbard endorses Donald Trump for president.

 

Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard. Fox News/AP.

Former 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard has endorsed Donald Trump for president. Fox News. Gabbard, a former Congresswoman from Hawaii and a veteran who served in Iraq, ran as a presidential candidate in 2020. She endorsed Trump after an event commemorating the victims of the 2021 Afghanistan ISIS attack that killed 13 US troops. Gabbard praised Trump for being an anti-war candidate that cares about the troops and said that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris brought the world closer to World War III. Gabbard is a second notable former Democrat that has endorsed Trump since the DNC convention after RFK Jr. 

My Comment:

Anyone who has been paying attention should not be surprised about this. Gabbard wasn't really recruited by the Republicans, she was pushed into their arms. The powers that be never forgave her for the shellacking she gave Kamala Harris at the Democratic debates in the 2020 election cycle. If it hadn't been for the fact that Joe Biden wanted a DEI candidate for his VP role, Kamala Harris would no longer have a career in politics. It was that much of a domination and is a reason why Harris doesn't seem to want to debate Donald Trump. 

Harris ended her Presidential campaign after that and after that the claws came out for Tulsi Gabbard. She was called a pro-Russia stooge and was made persona non-grata in the Democratic Party. It basically ended her political career, but it was because she hurt one of the "powers that be" golden children. Gabbard rebranded herself after that from being the one Democrat that Republicans like to being basically a Republican. She often appeared on Fox News and was BFF's with Tucker Carlson. So it's no surprise that she's endorsing Donald Trump, it would have been more surprising if she didn't at this point, and there was zero chance that she was ever voting for Harris. 

I personally have mixed feelings about Gabbard. I think she's a decent person but I do have substantial disagreements with her on policy. Though she has moved to the right, I still don't trust her on gun rights. I agree with her on other things, most notably opposition to the Ukraine war, but she's better than most Democrats mostly in comparison. 

Will the endorsement change much? There might be a few people that will change their minds about voting for Trump, but those folks will be a rounding error. What Gabbard will accomplish is similar to what RFK Jr. will accomplish and that's making the Trump campaign look more reasonable and centrist than the Harris campaign. It's an example of Trump trying to widen the base and take a few votes away from Harris from people that feel pushed out by the Democrats and their actions. 

Still, I doubt this will move the needle much. Like I said, Gabbard is a known factor and it would have been surprising if she didn't endorse Trump. It's not like the RFK Jr. endorsement that came out of nowhere and actually did move the needle. 

I think the real asset for Trump is the fact that Gabbard would be a great person for debate prep. Gabbard is smart and knows how to get under the skin of Kamala Harris. And she's be a good person to practice debating against, though it's not like Trump doesn't have experience in debating. He's ended the careers of Jeb Bush, Hillary Clinton and now Joe Biden during debates and I think he's got a good shot of doing so against Harris, especially if Gabbard helps him. 

The timing of this was pretty good as well. Gabbard is a good person to attack the Harris campaign over the Afghanistan withdrawal. She served in Iraq and, much like JD Vance, she cares about her fellow veterans. And it's a very good thing to remind people of one of the darkest days of the Biden-Harris administration and the failure that was the withdrawal from Afghanistan. 

Will their be more Democrat defectors? It's possible. There has to be some Democrats out there that are upset with the way the party is acting and may decide that Trump is the lesser of two evils. Given how deeply into a purity spiral the Democrats are and how they are self immolating over the Israel-Gaza war, it's possible that Trump could peel off a few more big names before November, though I am also not holding my breath. On the other hand, the Democrats have burned their bridges with a lot of people in their own party and this is part of the consequences. 

Finally, I have to point out that that I am pleased that the Republican party is now an anti-war party. There are a few neocons left but it's clear that most of the big players are now against the war in Ukraine. I am sure a major reason why Gabbard endorsed Trump is because they both agree with each other about the war in Ukraine and how it needs to end. They are putting their differences aside to accomplish more together and that is a positive thing. 

Ukraine raises concerns about build up of troops at border with Belarus. Will Belarus join the war or is it another feint?

 

Ukrainian troops near the border with Belarus. Reuters.

Ukraine has raised concerns about a build up of troops at the border with Belarus. Reuters. Ukraine says that Belarus has concentrated troops including tanks, air defenses, engineering units along with special forces and possible former Wagner Group mercenaries. Ukraine also said they would not take hostile actions against Belarus. However, Belarus pointed out that Ukraine had 120,000 troops on the border with Belarus, 1/3rd of Ukraine's forces.

My Comment:

I'm fairly skeptical that this will amount to much. Belarus has made waves about joining the war before and it has mostly led to absolutely nothing. Russia did us Belarus to threaten Kiev during the early stage of the war but then pulled back when it was clear the force wasn't big enough to actually take the capital. There is no indication that Russia itself is doing so again at this time. 

Belarus does serve a function for Russia though. Ukraine has 120,000 troops on the border with Belarus and those troops have to be there just in case Belarus or Russia decide to invade from that direction. Belarus has to saber rattle for that to continue to be the case. Indeed, if Ukraine were to pull those troops out Belarus probably would invade. 

The problem with the idea that  Belarus is going to attack is the fact that they are pretty outnumbered if the numbers from Ukraine are right. Belarus has a small army, 60,000 regular troops, maybe less if you don't consider border units to be regular troops. And keep in mind they wouldn't be able to deploy all of them due to the fact that they have to keep a large force at their borders with NATO due to fear of an attack from them. Belarus doesn't have a bad army by former Soviet Republic standards, but they are absolutely not up to the standards of Russia or Ukraine. 

Without major backing from Russia I don't see how an attack from Belarus would succeed. Even if they used every single of their regular forces they would still be outnumbered by a 2-1 margin and to be brutally honest, without Russian help, Ukraine would have the superior force in terms of firepower and weapons. I don't know what the quality of the forces on the border are, I am guessing they are reserve units and mauled units rebuilding themselves, but I can't imagine even with that that a force smaller than 60,000 could overcome 120,000.

I actually think that Ukraine attacking Belarus is a lot more likely. Doing so would be a terrible idea as it would turn what is a quiet front into a major conflict and could lead to a general collapse. But you could make the same argument about the Kursk offensive. Ukraine is desperate and if they think attacking Belarus would help things they could do so. Though I don't see what advantage attacking Belarus would give Ukraine in the first place other than preventing Russia from invading in that direction. But again, I haven't seen much in the way to prove that. I guess it's possible that Ukraine could be convinced that Belarus is going to invade but that also seems very unlikely.

My guess is that these troop movements are just yet another feint. The chances of either side invading each other is pretty low but an attack from Belarus is just plausible enough that Ukraine has to react to it. I don't think an attack from Belarus is at all likely until we see actual Russian forces being deployed. And I also don't think Ukraine will do anything either. 

Russia is succeeding in eastern Ukraine despite Kursk incursion.

 

A border post in Russia. New York Times

Russia is succeeding in Eastern Ukraine despite the Kursk incursion into Russia itself. New York Times. Ukraine launched the offensive into Russian territory two weeks ago. Though they had initial success, the offensive has bogged down as Russia has send reinforcements into the area. They have also lost more pieces of valuable military equipment than the Russians. The hope that the offensive would relieve pressure in the Donetsk Front has not materialized. Russia is closing in on the critical transportation hub of Pokrovsk. The Russians have artillery control over the city of 40,000 people and have reached the final defensive line of the city. Northeast of Pokrovsk, Russia has mostly captured the city of Nui York, also known as New York, and have taken Toresk. Those towns are the gateway to Kostiantynivka, another critical hub. 

My Comment:

I haven't said much about the Kursk incursion largely because I couldn't believe how stupid the Ukrainians were to try it. Yes, they did have some success against the Russians in the region, largely because they attacked border conscripts and achieved surprise. But the attack has bogged down and the Ukrainians risk losing their best troops for little gain. 

And now we are seeing the cost. The troops that are in Russia right now would have been much better used as a reserve against the attacks in the Donetsk region, which is in very serious trouble. The situation is worse than the New York Times admits as it's clear that Russia is going to create another major cauldron. Capturing Pokrovsk will cut off one of the major highways in the region and further cut off Kostiantynivka. It could also cut off Ukraine's army in the region and could cause a front line to collapse. 

So why is Russia continuing the offensive? Why didn't they pull troops away from the Donetsk Front to reinforce Kursk? Well, the problem is that Russia does not need to do so. Indeed, the Kursk incursion allows Russia to use their large conscript forces. They had been forbidden to deploy to Ukraine but now that they are defending Russia proper, they can and are being used. And they have given these conscripts a major motivation to actually fight since they are defending Russia itself. 

And it's not like things are going all that well in Kursk either. Russia was caught off guard, mostly because they didn't believe the intelligence they were getting (again, this was a really stupid plan). But the advance mostly stopped once reinforcement arrived and now the Ukrainians risk being caught in another cauldron. And it's not like they actually control all of the territory in Russia that they are claiming. Much of it is still contested and they are not going to be able to hold it long term.  

The real problem is the large number of weapons and troops being lost in the Kursk Front. The New York Times article talked about all the vehicles and weapons being lost, including irreplaceable anti-air batteries, but these were some of the best troops Ukraine had left and they are taking heavy casualties. Russia did at first when the initial conscripts were overrun, but they are now focusing on heavy airstrikes and drone attacks on these troops. 

It's also important to note that the Ukrainians have failed to accomplish their war target in this attack, the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant. They wanted to take the power plant to take it hostage so they could threaten Russia with nuclear disaster. That plan has failed as it seems like the Ukrainians are not going to get anywhere near the power plant. 

A lot of people are making the comparison to the Battle of the Bulge in World War II. Indeed, there are a lot of parallels. Just like the Nazis, the Ukrainians have already lost the war, but they still had enough power left to launch a desperate offensive. They really didn't have all that much to lose but the attack appears to have failed and will likely lead to a similar result as the Nazi offensive in World War II. 

Regardless, the individual battles don't mean much in the end. Ukraine is pretty much completely screwed, which is why they launched the desperate attack in the first place. Ukraine has lost almost all of their power generation and it would be trivial for Russia to end what's remaining. And given that winter is only a few months away, I doubt Ukraine can survive long term. If anything the Kursk losses will probably accelerate things...