Blog

What’s Behind Washington’s Signaling Support For NATO Troops In Ukraine?

It might be a negotiating tactic to pressure Russia into concessions on its maximalist goals in the conflict as a quid pro quo for not reprioritizing Russia’s containment over China’s by extending Article 5 to NATO states’ troops in Ukraine and thus reducing the odds that they’ll actually deploy there.

France and the UK recently committed to deploying troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire as part of their latest proposed security guarantees to that country, the principle of which was praised for the first time ever by Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the US’ Special Envoys for talks with Russia. The Paris Declaration that France and the UK signed also pledged their support for “Participation in a proposed US-led ceasefire monitoring and verification mechanism”. All of this certainly raises concern in Russia.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth declared last February during his speech at NATO HQ that his country won’t consider member states’ troops in Ukraine to be covered by Article 5 and won’t deploy any of its own there either as part of any security guarantee. In light of the Paris Declaration, however, some in Russia might wonder whether the US is soon planning to reverse both policies to protect its NATO allies’ troops in Ukraine upon their deployment and deploy its own there too for monitoring a ceasefire.

Putin himself warned as recently as last September that Russia would deem Western troops in Ukraine “legitimate targets for destruction.” It’s therefore easy to see how their deployment en masse, unlike the minor unofficial French and UK troop presence in Odessa that Russian spies confirmed later that same month, could spiral out of control into World War III if Russia targets their forces. That might not happen, though, if the US’ support for the latest security guarantees is just a negotiating tactic (at least for now).

To explain, Trump 2.0 could have continued pumping Ukraine with weapons for free and never initiated talks with Russia if it wasn’t sincere about ending the conflict, all while gradually ramping up escalations against Russia as part of a “boiling the frog” approach for normalizing the path to World War III.

Keep reading

‘We Cannot Be Afraid To Do Something Because the Left Might Do It in the Future’

Asked by a college student if Republicans ought to be more cautious about “abusing that power” when they control the federal government, Vice President J.D. Vance left no doubt that he’s unworried.

“The left is already going to do it, regardless of whether we do it,” he added.

You’ll have a hard time finding a more concise formulation of the will-to-power sentiment that has seized so much of the conservative movement in recent years. And this was no gaffe—Vance has said similar things on several occasions, and he posted a video of this comment to his official X account.

The full context of the moment is worth appreciating. At a Turning Point USA event in October 2025 at the University of Mississippi, Vance took a question from a student who expressed concern about an unfriendly administration potentially targeting conservatives who might protest against it. “How can we prevent someone from abusing that power?” the student asked.

Vance’s chilling response waves away those worries. Rather than asking conservatives to reflect on the proper limits of political power or the potential consequences of overreaching, the vice president is effectively granting permission for greater intrusions against Americans’ rights and liberties.

Keep reading

DHS Invokes Immigration Enforcement To Justify Gathering Americans’ DNA

Government agencies inevitably turn enforcement responsibilities into opportunities to extend the security state. Every initiative to document, monitor, track, or otherwise spy on Americans starts with a mandate to ensure that people are obeying some rule or law. So it is with immigration policies, which fuel government efforts to gather biometric information not just on those who want to enter the country, but on citizens born and raised here. Fortunately, the scheme is getting pushback.

Massive Data Sweep Hiding in a Proposed Rule Change

On November 3 of last year, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposed a rule change allowing its agents to gather and store more biometric data on anybody associated with applications for “benefits” including family visas, Permanent Resident (green) Cards, and work permits. The DHS summary of the rule states, in part:

DHS proposes to require submission of biometrics by any individual, regardless of age, filing or associated with an immigration benefit request, other request, or collection of information, unless exempted; expand biometrics collection authority upon alien arrest; define “biometrics;” codify reuse requirements; codify and expand DNA testing, use and storage; establish an “extraordinary circumstances” standard to excuse a failure to appear at a biometric services appointment…

According to the proposal, the purpose of gathering biometric data, including fingerprints, photographs, signatures, voice prints, ocular images, and DNA (which is heavily emphasized by DHS) is “identity management” to verify that people are who they say they are.

Immigrants aren’t especially popular in certain U.S. circles at the moment, or perhaps it’s more accurate to say that leniency towards those who want to enter the country is unpopular. But the rule change also ropes in lots of Americans. The proposal specifies that “by ‘associated,’ DHS means a person with substantial involvement or participation in the immigration benefit request, other request, or collection of information, such as a named derivative, beneficiary, petitioner’s signatory, sponsor, or co-applicant.”

As attorneys Alessandra Carbajal, Lee Gibbs Depret-Bixio, and Ryan Mosser  note in an analysis, the new rule would affect not just immigrants but “U.S. citizens, nationals, and lawful permanent residents, regardless of age.” They add that “signatories for employers that serve as sponsors/petitioners may potentially be subject to biometrics requirements. This would mark a departure from current practice, where only foreign nationals seeking benefits typically provide biometrics.”

“This data collection would not be limited to just immigrants, it would also impact millions of American citizens,” agrees Institute for Justice (I.J.) attorney Tahmineh Dehbozorgi. “DHS is claiming this DNA collection is meant to serve one narrow purpose, but realistically, it is creating a vast genetic dragnet that endangers the Fourth Amendment rights of everyone, all without Congress’ approval.”

Keep reading

The Great Grok Bikini Scandal is just Digital ID via the Backdoor.

wo days ago, the British government announced a U-turn on their proposed digital identity, and that the much-anticipated “BritCard” would no longer be mandatory to work in the UK.

This was welcomed as a victory by both fake anti-establishment types whose job is to Pied Piper genuine opposition, and some real resistance who should know better.

The reality is that reports of the death of digital identity have been greatly exaggerated. All they said was that it would no longer be mandatory.

Having a bank account, a cellphone, or an internet connection is not mandatory, but try functioning in this world without them.

As we said on X, anybody who understands governments or human nature knew any digital ID was likely never going to be gun-to-your-head, risking-prison-time mandatory.

All it has to be is a little bit faster and/or a little bit cheaper.

Saving you half an hour when submitting your tax return, faster progress through customs, lower “processing fees” for passport or driver’s license applications.

An hour of extra time and 50 pounds saved per year will do more coercion than barbed wire and billy clubs ever could.

Running alongside this is the manufactured drama around Grok’s generation of images of bikini-clad public figures, something which it suited the press and punditry class to work up into “sexual assault” and “pornography” whilst imploring us all to “think of the children!”

Inside a week, X has changed its policy, and Sir Keir Starmer’s government has promised a swift resolution of the issue using legislation that was (conveniently) passed last year but has yet to be enforced (more on that in the next few days).

This issue became a “problem”, had an hysterical “reaction” and was supplied a ready-made “solution” all inside two weeks. A swifter procession of the Hegelian dialectic would be hard to find.

So, we have the reported demise of mandatory digital identity occurring alongside the rise of the “threat” of AI “deepfakes”.

Nobody in the mainstream press has actually linked these stories together, but the connection is as obvious as the next step is inevitable.

This next step is the UK introducing its own version of the Australian “social media ban” for under-16s. In effect, age-gating all online interaction on major platforms and ending online anonymity.

Keep reading

We Were Told There Is No Scientific Evidence for UFOs. Our Research Says Otherwise

Two months ago, the documentary The Age of Disclosure premiered in theaters and on Amazon Prime Video.

In the film, 34 government officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and senior members of Congress from both parties, reveal what they are able to disclose publicly about unidentified flying objects (UFOs).

Rarely have so many highly credible testimonies been assembled in a single production, which quickly became the most-purchased film on the streaming platform.

We learn not only about UFO sightings, but also about serious allegations of secret government programs studying UFOs, crash-retrieval efforts involving non-human vehicles, and threats directed at whistleblowers.

The implications are enormous: our planet may be visited — or even inhabited — by another intelligent species, far more advanced than ourselves.

The Age of Disclosure has been met with both fascination and skepticism. The skeptics’ central response has been, “Where is the data? Where is the evidence?”

Unsurprisingly, many news outlets have opted for lighter undertones in their coverage, choosing their language carefully to distance themselves from the exotic nature of the claims made in the film.

The topic has long been ridiculed and stigmatized within scientific circles, where engaging with it was considered a near-certain path to career ruin. Media houses and editors often fear publishing pieces that might appear to support such claims, and any articles that do emerge tend to downplay their significance.

But is there truly a serious lack of evidence for UFOs, as skeptics have insisted since the 1950s?

For the past several years, my colleagues and I have analyzed “transients,” intriguing astronomical phenomena which change in brightness – or disappear entirely – over short periods of time.

Our research has zeroed in on hundreds of thousands of bright, star-like short flashes of light, recorded in photographic surveys of the night sky. Importantly, these astronomical observations are from the years before the Soviet Union launched the first man-made satellite, Sputnik, in 1957.

In two papers published recently in respected, peer-reviewed scientific journals, we make a compelling case that at least some of these bright flashes are reflections of the Sun off of objects of unknown, but non-natural, origin.

We also find a statistically significant correlation among these bright flashes, historical eyewitness UFO reports, and above ground nuclear tests that were being conducted at that time. Unsurprisingly, our work has garnered significant attention from our scientific colleagues.

Keep reading

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Somali Welfare and Money Laundering

Newly discovered evidence indicates a relationship between the Governor of Minnesota, the source of Massive Money Laundering and the possible destination of this massive amount of “stolen” money.

In a January 9, 2026 announcement by the US Department of Treasury:

“WASHINGTON— In Minnesota, Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent announced several initiatives to combat rampant government benefits fraud in Minnesota, which has wasted billions of taxpayer dollars. These initiatives are designed to strengthen and safeguard the financial system and protect Minnesota taxpayers.

“President Trump has instructed the administration to bring accountability for the hardworking people of Minnesota,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent. “Under Democratic Governor Tim Walz, welfare fraud has spiraled out of control. Billions of dollars intended for feeding hungry children, housing disabled seniors, and providing services for children in need were diverted to benefit Somali fraud rings.”

According to Fox News on January 10, 2026

“The scandal has already claimed Walz’s political career, forcing him to abandon his bid for re-election. But if he reckoned that quitting would somehow shield him from legal culpability, he is mistaken. There is mounting evidence that Walz was willfully complicit, deliberately refusing to expose or pursue the monumental thefts and, instead, launching aggressive measures to scuttle any legal scrutiny and criminal consequence.

The governor’s own state workers at the Department of Human Services issued a blistering statement blaming him as 100% responsible. Witnesses say he retaliated against whistleblowers and schemed to discredit the well-documented fraud reports.”

Keep reading

MORE BETRAYAL: House Votes to KEEP Funding Globalist NGO Responsible for Global Censorship and Domestic Propaganda — 81 Republicans Side With Democrats to Kill Defund Push

In yet another stunning display of Uniparty betrayal, the House of Representatives has voted to continue funneling taxpayer dollars to the shadowy National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – a globalist NGO notorious for meddling in foreign elections, fueling censorship worldwide, and even pushing domestic propaganda right here at home.

By a lopsided 127–291 vote, lawmakers rejected an amendment offered by Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) to prohibit $315 million in funding for the NED as part of the FY2026 spending package.

Following the vote, a disgusted Rep. Eli Crane took to X to vent his frustrations with the rot inside the halls of Congress.

“The swamp is real. But we did pass the Shower Act this week. I could use one after spending so much time in this awful place,” Crane wrote.

He followed up with a stinging rebuke of the 81 Republicans who turned their backs on the base:

“Tonight, the Uniparty rejected my amendment to defund NED. 81 ‘Republicans’ voted with Democrats to fund this rogue organization that fuels global censorship and domestic propaganda. We will keep fighting.”

Keep reading

Judge’s Conduct in “We Build the Wall” Case Draws Scrutiny After Timothy Shea Conviction – Tim’s Family Speaks Out

The federal prosecution of Timothy Shea in the “We Build the Wall” case continues to raise serious questions about judicial conduct, jury integrity, defense representation, and sentencing fairness following Shea’s 2023 conviction in the Southern District of New York.

Shea was indicted in August 2020 alongside Stephen Bannon, Brian Kolfage, and Andrew Badolato in connection with the nonprofit organization that raised private funds to construct sections of a border wall. Shea was listed fourth on the indictment and prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. The case was presided over by U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres.

In January 2021, then-President Donald Trump pardoned Bannon, effectively removing him from federal prosecution. Shea, a Colorado resident who lives in Castle Rock with his wife of 20 years and their three children, ultimately became the only defendant from the original indictment to face trial and incarceration.

Mistrial and Concerns Over Judicial Impartiality

Shea’s first trial in 2022 ended in a mistrial after a week of testimony and more than a week of jury deliberations. Immediately after the jury was dismissed, Judge Torres stated from the bench that she was available the following week to retry the case.

Defense attorneys viewed the remark as improper, noting that the decision to retry a case rests solely with prosecutors, not the court. The comment, they argued, suggested a predisposition toward continuing the prosecution rather than maintaining judicial neutrality.

Several months later, Shea was retried and convicted. What followed intensified concerns about the integrity of the proceedings.

Keep reading

Ukraine Braves Grueling Winter in the Cold and Dark, as Relentless Russian Strikes Take Power Generation and Energy Grid to the Brink

‘Hello, Darkness, my old friend.’

We have reported multiple times on the relentless combined air campaign by Russian forces that is targeting Ukraine’s power plants and energy grid, and leaving swaths of the population in the cold and dark during a grueling winter.

But now, we’ve come to the point where Kiev’s CHPP-5 (combined heat and power plant) and CHPP-6 can’t even be fully restored after a massive ballistic missile strike before the next one hits.

Lights have been out in much of Kiev and many other large cities, and there isn’t much room for improvement.

Simplicius on Substack:

“One of the most noteworthy aspects of the last strike on Kiev was the notable absence of any major air defense action. Video footage of only one ‘Patriot’ missile launching and self-destructing in the sky soon after emerged, but beyond this, Ukrainian defenses over Kiev appeared dismal compared to previous strikes, signifying a likely exhaustion of resources.”

Keep reading

US sees negative net migration for first time in 50 years during 2025

The United States experienced negative net migration in 2025 for the first time in more than five decades as the Trump administration continues a sweeping crackdown on immigration.

In a report released Tuesday by the Brookings Institution, the shift was driven by a combination of stepped-up immigration enforcement, removals of illegal immigrants, voluntary departures, but most significantly a sharp decline in new entries into the country over the past year.

“We estimate net flows of -295,000 to -10,000 for the year,” the study said. “Though a high degree of policy uncertainty remains, continued negative net migration for 2026 is also likely.”

The Trump administration has moved aggressively to reduce both illegal and legal immigration since returning to office. It has suspended or scaled back a range of humanitarian programs, including refugee admissions, with limited exceptions.

Brookings estimated that between 310,000 and 315,000 removals occurred in the United States in 2025. That figure is substantially lower than the number the Trump administration has publicly claimed, and only slightly higher than the roughly 285,000 removals recorded in 2024.

The report noted that the nature of removals has shifted compared with prior years. In fiscal year 2024, only 18 percent of Immigration and Customs Enforcement removals were initiated by ICE rather than U.S. Customs and Border Protection, meaning most deportations involved recent border crossers. Comparable statistics have not yet been released for 2025.

“At 310,000 to 315,000, the 2025 removals are not much higher than the 2024 removals of around 285,000,” the report said. “The nature of these removals has changed, however.”

Brookings added that while ICE has drawn most of the national attention, border statistics and other evidence indicate that most removals in 2025 involved individuals already living in the country’s interior.

Keep reading