Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

“One of the most essential branches of English liberty is the freedom of one’s house. A man’s house is his castle.”
—James Otis, Revolutionary War activist, on the Writs of Assistance, 1761

What the Founders rebelled against—armed government agents invading homes without cause—we are now being told to accept in the so-called name of law and order.

Imagine it: it’s the middle of the night. Your neighborhood is asleep. Suddenly, your front door is splintered by battering rams. Shadowy figures flood your home, screaming orders, pointing guns, threatening violence. You and your children are dragged out into the night—barefoot, in your underwear, in the rain.

Your home is torn apart. Your valuables seized. Your sense of safety, demolished.

But this isn’t a robbery by lawless criminals.

This is what terror policing looks like in Trump’s America: raids by night, flashbangs at dawn, mistaken identities, and shattered lives.

On April 24, 2025, in Oklahoma City, 20 heavily armed federal agents from ICE, the FBI, and DHS kicked in the door of a home where a woman and her three daughters—all American citizens—were sleeping. They were forced out of bed at gunpoint and made to wait in the rain while agents ransacked the house, confiscating their belongings.

It was the wrong house. The wrong family.

There were no apologies. No compensation. No accountability.

This is the new face of American policing, and it’s about to get so much worse thanks to the President Trump’s latest executive order, which aims to eliminate federal oversight and empower local law enforcement to act with impunity.

Titled “Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens,” the executive order announced on April 28, 2025, removes restraints on police power, offers enhanced federal protections for officers accused of misconduct, expands access to military-grade equipment, and nullifies key oversight provisions from prior reform efforts.

Trump’s supporters have long praised his efforts to deregulate business and government under the slogan of “no handcuffs.” But when that logic is applied to law enforcement, the result isn’t freedom—it’s unchecked power.

What it really means is no restraints on police power—while the rest of us are left with fewer rights, less recourse, and a Constitution increasingly ignored behind the barrel of a gun.

This isn’t just a political shift. It’s a constitutional unraveling.

These aren’t abstract freedoms—they’re the bedrock of the Bill of Rights: the Fourth Amendment’s shield against warrantless searches, the Fifth Amendment’s promise of due process, and the First Amendment’s guarantee that we may speak, protest, and petition without fear of state retaliation.

Yet the build-up of the police state didn’t begin with Trump. What he has done is seize upon decades of bipartisan failure—and strip away the last remaining restraints.

For years, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, policing in America has grown more militarized, aggressive, and unaccountable. At times, there were modest attempts to rein in the worst excesses—like curbing the flow of military surplus equipment to local police—but these efforts were short-lived, inconsistent, and easily undone.

Trump’s executive order doesn’t just abandon those reforms. It bulldozes the guardrails. It hands law enforcement a blank check: more weapons, more power, and fewer consequences.

The result is not safety. It’s state-sanctioned violence.

It’s a future in which no home is safe, no knock is required, and no officer is ever held accountable.

That future is already here.

Just a few days before Trump signed the order, that reality played out in Oklahoma City when ICE, FBI, and DHS agents stormed the wrong home and terrorized a mother and her daughters.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident.

In the 30 years since the first federal Crime Bill helped militarize local police forces, the use of SWAT teams has exploded. What was once a rare tactic for hostage situations is now used tens of thousands of times a year, often for nonviolent offenses or mere suspicion. These raids leave behind broken doors, traumatized children, and, too often, dead bodies. And yet, when families seek justice, they’re met with a legal wall called qualified immunity.

Under this doctrine, courts excuse even blatant misconduct by law enforcement unless an almost identical case has already been ruled unconstitutional. It’s legal sleight of hand—a get-out-of-jail-free card for government agents who trample on the Constitution.

We’ve entered an era in which federal agents can destroy your home, traumatize your family, and violate the Fourth Amendment with impunity. And the courts have said: that’s just how it works.

More than 80,000 SWAT raids now occur annually in the United States, most of them for nonviolent offenses like drug possession or administrative code violations.

Many are botched. Few are ever investigated.

In Martin v. United States, now before the Supreme Court, a heavily armed FBI SWAT team mistakenly stormed a Georgia home—armed with rifles, clad in tactical gear, and deploying a flashbang grenade—causing the family inside, with a 7-year-old son, to fear they were being burglarized.

The agents were supposed to raid a gang suspect’s house. Instead, they relied on faulty GPS and ended up at the wrong address, a block away from the intended target.

Only after detaining the family—forcing one family member onto the bedroom floor at gunpoint, and then pointing a gun in the mother’s face—did the officers realize their mistake.

The Rutherford Institute, alongside the National Police Accountability Project, filed an amicus brief urging the Court to deny qualified immunity for the agents. But if history is any guide, justice may prove elusive.

Just last year, the Court refused to hold a SWAT team leader accountable for raiding the wrong house, wrecking the wrong home, and terrorizing an innocent family.

In Jimerson v. Lewis, the SWAT team ignored clear differences between the actual target house and the Jimerson residence—missing house numbers, architectural mismatches, a wheelchair ramp where none should have been—and still received qualified immunity.

These rulings aren’t exceptions—they reflect a growing doctrine of unaccountability enshrined by the courts and now supercharged by the Trump administration.

Trump wants to give police even more immunity.

Brace yourselves for a new era of lawless policing.

President Trump’s call for a new crime bill that would further insulate police from liability, accountability and charges of official misconduct could usher in a new era of police brutality, lawlessness and the reckless deployment of lethal force on unarmed civilians.

This is how the rights of ordinary Americans get trampled under the boots of unchecked power.

Even when SWAT commanders disregard warrants, ignore addresses, and terrorize innocent families, the courts shield them from consequences.

These SWAT raids have become a thinly veiled, court-sanctioned excuse to let heavily armed police crash through doors in the dead of night. Too often, they’re marked by incompetence, devastation, and death—leaving a trail of broken homes and broken lives, while law enforcement escapes accountability.

There was a time in America when a person’s home was a sanctuary, protected by the Fourth Amendment from unlawful searches and seizures.

That promise is dead.

We have returned to the era of the King’s Writ—blanket search powers once used by British soldiers to invade colonial homes without cause. As James Otis warned in 1761, such writs “annihilate the privilege” of privacy and due process, allowing agents of the state to enter homes “when they please.”

Trump’s new executive order revives this tyranny in modern form: armored vehicles, night raids, no-knock warrants, federal immunity. It empowers police to act without restraint, and it rewards those who brutalize with impunity.

Even more alarming, the order sets the stage for future legislation that could effectively codify qualified immunity into federal law, making it nearly impossible for victims of police violence to sue.

This is how constitutional protections are dismantled—not in one dramatic blow, but in a thousand raids, a thousand broken doors, a thousand courts that look the other way.

Let’s not pretend we’re safe. Who will protect us from the police when the police have become the law unto themselves?

The war on the American people is no longer metaphorical.

Government agents can now kick in your door without warning, shoot your dog, point a gun at your children, and suffer no legal consequences—so long as they claim it was a “reasonable” mistake. They are judge, jury, and executioner.

With Trump’s new order, the architecture of a police state is no longer theoretical. It is being built in real time. It is being normalized.

It’s not just the poor, the marginalized, or the criminalized who should be afraid. It’s every homeowner, every parent, every citizen who still believes in the Bill of Rights.

Nowhere is this threat more visible than in the unholy alliance between ICE and militarized police forces.

This is where the danger deepens: when ICE and SWAT join forces, no one is safe.

This is more than just a problem of policing—it’s the convergence of two of the most dangerous arms of the modern security state: the merging of federal immigration enforcement with militarized domestic operations, creating a volatile blend of ICE lawlessness and militarized SWAT-style brute force.

Together, they’ve created a government apparatus that acts first and justifies itself later, if at all.

What used to be separate spheres—immigration enforcement and local policing—have now, under the pretense of national security, merged into a seamless operation of nighttime raids, heavy weaponry, blacked-out uniforms, and unmarked vehicles.

Armed federal agents, often operating in plainclothes and without clearly presented warrants, storm homes in the dead of night.

The distinction between a SWAT raid and an ICE operation has disappeared.

ICE agents—often masked, plainclothes, and operating without judicial oversight—are executing aggressive home invasions indistinguishable from SWAT team raids. These officers operate in secret, detaining individuals without clear warrants, sometimes without charges, and often without informing families of where their loved ones have been taken.

This alliance of ICE and SWAT has turned the American home into a battlefield, especially for those deemed politically inconvenient or “suspect” by the state.

These raids aren’t limited to those suspected of crimes.

Legal residents, asylum seekers, and even U.S. citizens have found themselves disappeared under vague claims of national security or immigration violations.

It is policing by fear and disappearance. And it runs counter to everything the Bill of Rights was designed to prevent: punishment without trial, surveillance without suspicion, and power without accountability.

When ICE agents armed with military-grade equipment conduct predawn raids alongside SWAT teams, with little to no accountability, the result is not public safety. It is state terror. And it’s exactly the kind of unchecked power the Constitution was written to prevent.

The Constitution is supposed to be a shield—especially the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. But in this new reality, the government has nullified that shield.

All of America is fast becoming a Constitution-free zone.

What started as an exception—the so-called Constitution-free zone at the border—is fast becoming the norm across America, where due process is optional, and law enforcement acts more like a domestic army than a public servant.

The government no longer needs to prove its authority in court before violating your rights. It only needs to assert it on your doorstep—with flashbangs and rifles at the ready.

The only castle left may be the one you’re willing to defend.

The Founders knew the dangers of unchecked power. That’s why they gave us the Fourth Amendment. But rights are only as strong as the public’s willingness to defend them.

If we allow the government to turn our homes into war zones—if we continue to reward police for lawless raids, ignore the courts for rubber-stamping abuse, and cheer political leaders who promise “no more handcuffs”—we will lose the last refuge of freedom: the right to be left alone.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the Constitution cannot protect you if the government no longer follows it—and if the courts no longer enforce it.

The knock may never come again. Just the crash of a door. The sound of boots. And the silence that follows.

Reprinted with permission from the Rutherford Institute.

Excluding Moscow’s representatives from commemorations of the defeat of the Nazis shows a problem with elementary logic and basic decency

Eighty years ago, Germany suffered its worst self-induced military – as well as moral, political, cultural, you name it – catastrophe ever.

First, Nazi Germany led the global fascist challenge that we call World War II. Then, Germany was not merely defeated but crushed by the combined efforts of, in order of importance, the Soviet Union, the US, and UK, to name only those powers that really mattered decisively for the outcome of the war in Europe. This Allied victory in Europe is celebrated in May. In the West, the commemorations peak on the 8th and in Russia, one day later.

In Asia, things were different. World War II started earlier – in July 1937, not September 1939, and ended later – in August, not May, 1945. Regarding the war in Europe, the West has always, with varying intensity, sought to diminish the preponderant role of the Soviet Union – and within the latter, of Russia.

Concerning the war in Asia, the West’s main target of this weaponized forgetfulness has been China, rightly labeled “the forgotten ally” by historian Rana Mitter. China, like the Soviet Union and now Russia, has always dared challenge Western hegemony and especially US ‘primacy’. And, as with Russia and the former Soviet Union, it is this geopolitical independence that has led the West to deny the Chinese people’s real and massive World War II contribution and sacrifices, which were enormous (the death toll alone, to quote only one figure, is estimated at 12-20 million).

But for now, back to the European part of the war. There, in historical reality, it was the Soviet Union that did the most – by far – to destroy Nazi Germany. And that is a simple, even quantifiable historical fact. Merely a decade ago, it was occasionally admitted even in Western mainstream media, such as America’s Washington Post and Britain’s Independent.

A few figures suffice to sketch just how predominant the Soviet share in the victory over Nazism was: Over the course of the war, in all its theaters, 17 to 18 million Germans served in the Nazi forces (including the Wehrmacht and the smaller but especially important and vicious Waffen-SS).

At least 4 million German soldiers were killed in the fight against the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1945 alone. Estimates indicate that at least as many were injured, probably more; around 3 million became POWs.

The upshot of this is simple: A massive chunk, some historians estimate up to 80%, of the total German fighting manpower of World War II – not only those who invaded the Soviet Union – was eliminated on what the Germans called the Eastern Front. Without going into easily available details, the picture is similar when we focus not on men but materiel.

Ask, for instance, Google’s Gemini AI in Deep Research mode, and it will sum it up thus: “It is evident that the Eastern Front absorbed the vast majority of Germany’s total tank losses throughout the war.” It turns out that the failure of Germany’s touted Leopard tank in the Ukraine conflict has a long tradition reaching back to Nazi Germany’s Panthers and Tigers: Russia, neutering German cats since 1941.

Put simply, as with Sweden’s Gustav XII and France’s Napoleon, it was Russia and the Soviet Union that broke Hitler’s back. And at enormous cost and sacrifice: Current, solid figures put Soviet losses (military and civilian combined) at 26-27 million. (Compare, for instance, with the US: Military casualties, according to Encyclopedia Britannica, just over 292,000; civilian losses were negligible, even if every individual death is, of course, tragic.)

And now it is Germany – of all places – that has marred the run-up to this year’s May anniversary with an embarrassingly ugly scandal. Its essence is a German government attempt to crudely instrumentalize the commemorations to make them serve the propaganda war that has been part of the West’s proxy war in Ukraine, while accusing Russia of doing just that. In Germany, more and more often, every accusation is a confession, as they say about Israeli propaganda.

While similar initiatives have occurred for years, this year, the German Foreign Office – still mismanaged by Annalena ‘360-Degrees-of-Russophobia’ Baerbock – has escalated the pettiness by circulating a so-called Handreichung – officially, a sort of advice; unofficially, nasty arm-twisting – to insist that neither Russian nor Belarusian representatives should be invited to commemoration events and that, if they dare show up anyhow, they should be kicked out.

The barbaric call to, in essence, kick out well-behaved diplomats as if they were brawlers at a pub, is encoded as a reference to ‘house rules’ to be enforced. But this is a shamelessly primitive euphemism, about as Teutonically klutzy as when the German authorities used to disappear their opponents into ‘protective custody’.

The German mainstream media have mostly, once again, supported this harebrained and bigoted attempt to stick it to the Russians, as is fashionable again in the new-old Zeitenwende Germany of massive re-armament and ‘war fitness’ (Kriegstuechtigkeit – a term Nazi-infowarrior-in-chief Joseph Goebbels also used). As always, Ukrainian representatives have done their best to misuse their always willingly available German media platforms to confirm Germans in their errors.

The German parliament has followed the Foreign Office and demonstratively excluded Russian and Belarusian diplomats from its commemorations. At least some of the heads of commemoration sites and museums are obeying the Foreign Office’s advice, or perhaps pursuing the same policy out of their own provincial dogmatism. Christian Wagner, who is responsible for sites in Thuringia, has explicitly barred Russian and Belarusian diplomats. Likewise, the head of commemoration sites in Brandenburg, Axel Drecoll, has boasted of disinviting the Russian ambassador and of being ready to evict him – in cooperation with the ‘security forces’ – if he tries to attend.

The good news is that there is resistance as well. Around the town of Seelow – a region with special importance because of the immense 1945 Battle of the Seelow Heights – local politicians, including from Sarah Wagenknecht’s leftwing BSW, the centrist SPD, and also the mainstream-conservative CDU party, dared show themselves “astonished” by the Foreign Office’s “absurd” ideas.

When Russian Ambassador Sergey Nechayev did attend a commemoration event, no one asked him to leave and – surprise, surprise – nothing terrible or scandalous happened. That’s because Russians, unlike quite a few Germans, it seems, still know how to behave with decency.

To the credit of many other Germans, in Seelow, the ambassador was welcomed by a crowd showing their support and respect. Nechayev also took part in commemorations in Torgau, where Soviet and US troops famously met toward the end of the war, and later, at the site of the former camp of Sachsenhausen, which was liberated by the Red Army in April 1945. There, as well, the hysterical fantasies of Germany’s Foreign Office proved simply irrelevant.

In the Berliner Zeitung, songwriter and author Hans-Eckardt Wenzel sharply criticized the policy of weaponizing the memory of World War II against Russia. In particular, he took Axel Drecoll to task, challenging him, in effect, to stop his attempts at rewriting history.

The German Foreign Office, meanwhile, has shown cold feet. It has begun to equivocate in a comically dishonest and self-revealing manner. When challenged about his ministry’s gratuitous initiative against Russian and Belarusian representatives, its spokesman, Sebastian Fischer, outdid his usual stonewalling: The Foreign Office’s circular, he said, is not a prohibition because the individual memorial sites and museums retain the right to decide whether to follow it or not.

Yes, sure, and we know from Hollywood that the Pirate Code is not really legally binding but more like, you know, sort of a recommendation. Russia has long pointed out that Western elites have become so habitually underhanded, so addicted to sophistry and casuistry that they are no longer ‘agreement-capable’. Thank you for selflessly illustrating, Mr. Fischer from the Foreign Office, that this collapse of a minimum of good faith holds true not only in their behavior abroad but at home as well.

In reality, it is obvious that – despite Fischer’s transparent weaseling – the Foreign Office issued its directive to exert political and public-opinion pressure and do its worst to compel other institutions. To now discover that no one really meant to give orders is a cheap cop-out. But let’s be fair, for Germany, it’s at least a new one: From ‘I was just following orders’ to ‘We never really meant to give any.’ And they say Germans have learned nothing from their nasty past!

In the same press conference, Fischer also failed to answer a crucial question: His ministry has argued that Russian and Belarusian representatives should be kept away and even kicked out if they dare show up in order to prevent any nefarious political instrumentalization.

Yet, when reminded that similar concerns have been voiced for years now and asked to provide concrete examples of anything of the kind actually happening, Fischer drew an embarrassing blank. He mumbled something vague about some St. George’s ribbons – and that was it, all he could come up with. This from a strangely high-ranking spokesman for a country that has never really had an issue with quite a few of its new Ukrainian friends displaying stuff that is by any reasonable reckoning much worse, namely Nazi-style – and often just straightforward-Nazi – symbols. Talk about instrumentalizing the memory of World War II!

It was left to a member of the German parliament from the Alternative for Germany party (AfD) to speak some plain truth: Steffen Kotre pointed out that it is, actually, Germany’s “ideological policy” that “is instrumentalizing history.” For those out to “clobber the Russians ideologically,” the real history of World War II does not even matter. Exactly!

It is not a pretty picture: The German authorities have revealed, once more, just how small-minded, historically illiterate, and fanatically Russophobic they are. The same politicians who have never failed to support Israel’s routine instrumentalization of the German crime of the Holocaust to cover for Israel’s own brutal crimes of apartheid and genocide against the Palestinians, have shown that they see Russia as a legitimate target of what can only be called memory warfare by dirty tricks.

Of all countries, it is Russia, the one that – objectively, quantifiably – did the most to rid the world of the Nazism that Germans made, served, and fought for, which some Germans now feel they have to censure and offend demonstratively. Germany’s elites have serious problem not merely with memory but with elementary logic and basic decency.

Congressional Republicans are putting together legislation that would defund America’s biggest abortion business.

According to a new Fox News report, House Republicans are discussing a measure that would defund Big Abortion, including both the Planned Parenthood abortion chain as well as other companies that kill babies for profit.

The defunding is part of a package of legislation the House is considering to cut at least $1.5 trillion in spending and it follows on the heels of House Speaker Mike Johnson saying he wants to use reconciliation to defund Planned Parenthood.

“We are working on a lot of different options, but that’s been discussed,” Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., told Fox News Digital when asked directly about Planned Parenthood. “Yeah, it’s been discussed.”

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

Reconciliation is a budgetary process that allows both the House and Senate to pass a major piece of financial legislation with just a majority vote – normal in the House but helpful in the Senate because it’s not subject to the filibuster Senate Democrats would typically use to block pro-life legislation.

Planned Parenthood received $699.3 million in taxpayer funding fiscal year and carried out 392,712 abortions in its 2022-2023 fiscal year, according to its most recent annual report.

The Speaker of the House says he’s fully on board with taking away taxpayer dollars from America’s biggest abortion chain, but the House would need the votes to do it. With a very narrow Republican majority and no pro-life Democrats that’s easier said than done.

Still, Johnson said he would like to defund the abortion giant and is working to build the votes to do it. Likely, the only way that can be accomplished is via a reconciliation bill — which both the House and Senate can pass on a majority vote margin.

“I would like to. That’s for sure,” Johnson said in an interview on Fox News’s “The Story with Martha MacCallum,” when asked whether he plans to axe the two organizations.

“Yeah,” Johnson said, when MacCallum clarified whether he wants to cut spending to the organizations, adding, however, that, “We got to build consensus to have the votes to do that.”

“Now, some of this will be done by executive order out of the White House. He has a broad authority to do a lot of that,” Johnson said, referring to President-elect Trump. “But where Congress is involved, that’s where it takes the hard work of legislating and getting everybody on the same page.”

Despite the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey on June 24, 2022, Planned Parenthood aborted five percent more unborn children during the 2022-2023 fiscal year than the previous year and brought in more than $2.9 billion in assets.

In the recently released 2022-2023 fiscal year annual report titled, “Above & Beyond,” Planned Parenthood states it performed 392,715 abortions. That means Planned Parenthood killed 1,075 babies in abortions every single day even though the abortion giant claims its main focus is merely “women’s health care.” In other words, Planned Parenthood kills 44 babies every hour.

Despite the fact that the High Court ruled there is no right to an abortion on a federal level, Planned Parenthood continues to make profit from abortions its top priority.

“Above & Beyond” also shows that 34 percent of Planned Parenthood’s revenue, $699.3 million, comes from “government health services reimbursements and grants,” or taxpayer dollars.

Taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood surged $65.9 million after Joe Biden took office in 2021, even as inflation and a slow economic recovery from the artificial COVID shutdowns eroded Americans’ real income.

The post House Republicans Putting Together Legislation to Defund Planned Parenthood appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein were spies who used underage sex to blackmail politicians

https://www.the-sun.com/news/116819/ghislaine-maxwell-and-jeffrey-epstein-were-spies-who-used-underage-sex-to-blackmail-politicians-ex-handler-claims/  

A Russian Commentator Provides a More Accurate Picture of Trump than Does the Western Media

“The first 100 days of Donald Trump’s second presidency have sparked a wave of commentary portraying him as a revolutionary. Indeed, the speed, pressure, and determination with which he has acted are striking. But this view is superficial. Trump is not dismantling the foundations of the American state or society. On the contrary, he seeks to restore the pre-globalist republic that the liberal elite long ago diverted onto a utopian internationalist path. In this sense, Trump is not a revolutionary, but a counterrevolutionary – an ideological revisionist determined to reverse the excesses of the liberal era.

“At home, Trump benefits from Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. Legal challenges to his policies – particularly on downsizing government and deporting illegal immigrants – have so far made little progress. Accustomed to media attacks, Trump continues to hit back hard. The recent story alleging that top officials debated strikes on Yemen over Signal has not gained political traction. If anything, it reinforces Trump’s image as a president who acts decisively and without fear of scandal.

“Trump’s economic course is clear: re-industrialization, tariff protectionism, and investment in cutting-edge technologies. He is reversing decades of globalist integration, pressing allies to pool financial and technological resources with the US to rebuild its industrial base. Tactically, Trump applies pressure early, then offers retreats and compromises to lure competitors into negotiations favorable to America. This approach has been effective, particularly with Washington’s allies. Even with China, Trump is betting that Beijing’s reliance on the US market, and America’s influence over EU and Japanese trade policy, will yield strategic concessions.”

Dmitry Trenin’s assessment can be read here:  https://www.rt.com/news/616578-trumps-foreign-policy-calculated/ 

PCR comment:  Trenin, like so many Russians hopeful of being part of the West, overlooks the possibility that the purpose of the Ukrainian peace negotiations is to sequence the West’s wars against Russia and China.  I look forward to reading Dmitry Trenin’s assessment of West Mitchell’s recent article in Foreign Affairs.  https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2025/04/26/a-peace-deal-or-a-deception/ 

The US president has renamed two WWII and WWI-related holidays to “start celebrating our victories”

The US played the most significant role in achieving victories in the two world wars, President Donald Trump claimed on Friday. Trump made the claim while announcing he has designated May 8 as Victory Day for WWII and November 11 Victory Day for WWI.

Nazi Germany officially capitulated to the Allied forces on May 8, 1945, shortly after Soviet troops captured Berlin. The surrender took effect after midnight in Moscow. Traditionally, May 8 is observed as Victory in Europe Day, with Russia celebrating on May 9.

”Many of our allies and friends are celebrating May 8th as Victory Day, but we did more than any other Country, by far, in producing a victorious result on World War II,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Thursday.

“Nobody was close” to the US “in terms of strength, bravery, or military brilliance,” Trump claimed. “We won both Wars,” he wrote, adding that “We are going to start celebrating our victories again!”

Trump’s praise for the US military effort in Europe comes as he pressures fellow NATO member states to ratchet up their defense budgets. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has warned that the EU must take responsibility for its own defense as the US is gradually stepping back from its security commitments on the continent.

The US president has previously claimed that Russia “helped” the US win WWII, drawing a rebuke from Moscow. Earlier this week, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that while Russia is grateful to the US for its support during the Second World War via the Lend-Lease program, the Soviet Union would have beaten Nazi Germany anyway.

The US does not officially observe any public holidays dedicated specifically to World War II. However, remembrance ceremonies have been held nationwide in May, August, and September for many years. On November 11, the US celebrates Veterans Day, commemorating the 1918 armistice , which suspended active hostilities and effectively ended the World War I.

Chay Bowes was detained in Bucharest and subsequently deported after he arrived to cover the presidential election

The recent detention and deportation of RT correspondent Chay Bowes from Romania highlights growing “Russophobia” in the West, particularly in Western media, according to Tara Reade, an RT contributor and a former US Senate aide.

The incident “says volumes” about Romania’s upcoming presidential election, Reade claimed, and questioned why the country would prevent international observers from attending.

Bowes, an Irish journalist and EU citizen, was detained on Thursday after arriving in Bucharest to cover the election re-run, but was later deported to Istanbul. According to Bowes, Romanian authorities labeled him ‘a security threat’ – a notion Reade said she finds alarming.

“I’m shocked that they have detained him… what does Romania have to hide? It makes you wonder, what is going on,” Reade said, speaking to RT on air following the news of Bowes’ detention. She tied the move to what she described as “Russophobia” and efforts by Western governments to suppress Russian-affiliated voices.

“Russophobia has now spread so much to Western media, and has fueled this fear of any kind of journalist that might even work for [Russia]… It’s seeped through to every fabric of international conversations… it’s ridiculous, the Russophobia,” she said, calling the trend “really concerning, because we are living in a multipolar world and there’s no room for Russophobia anymore.”

Romania’s presidential election re-run was ordered after last year’s results were annulled over alleged violations. NATO critic Calin Georgescu won the first round, but the Constitutional Court invalidated the result, citing campaign irregularities and accusations of Russian interference – claims Moscow has denied.

READ MORE: ‘No free press’ in NATO states – Going Underground host on RT journalist ban

It later emerged that the controversial campaign in question had been funded not by Moscow, but by Romania’s pro-EU National Liberal Party, which was reportedly targeting a rival but inadvertently boosted Georgescu instead.

The re-run is set for May 4 and May 18.

The prayer I read at the end of the podcast, from Father Z:

Prayer for the Election of the Roman Pontiff

O God the Father Almighty, who at the beginning of creation calmed the primordial waters by the hovering of the Holy Spirit, deign swiftly to send the same Spirit upon Your Church for the purpose of electing the Successor of the Holy Apostle Peter, so that, the new Roman Pontiff duly elected, tranquility may be fostered and expanded.

O God, Lord Jesus, whose Body is the Church founded by You on the Apostle Peter, grant, we beg You, that you defend with angelic protection and strengthen with many graces the Cardinals whose task it is to elect his Successor, so that in these days before and during the Conclave, their words and deeds, for the true good of You Church, will result in peace and the salvation of souls.

O God the Holy Spirit, Paraclete, Divine Breath of the Trinity, deign to waft through all the locales and dwellings of the Cardinals-elect, on our knees we beg You, to repel diabolical schemes, to crush external forces, to bring clarity and serenity to Your Church.

O God, Most Holy Trinity, in Your infinite mercy and according to Your ineffable providence for the Church, inspire, guide and gently urge, if necessary even with supernatural signs, the Cardinals in the Conclave to grant us a good and wise Pope, a kindly but strong Shepherd, a faithful and reverent Vicar of Christ, a praying and prudent Successor of Peter, a Roman Pontiff who loves and preserves the customs of our forebears, a steadfast, pious, virile and holy man, namely, one better than we deserve. Amen.

Holy Mother of God, intercede for us.
Saint Peter, intercede for us.
Saint Paul, intercede for us.
All Holy Popes, intercede for us.

This past week, two lower-cost food and beverage retailers posted earnings, which conveyed the underlying message that consumers are struggling. McDonalds and Starbucks reported significant domestic sales declines for the first quarter. McDonalds saw its US same-store sales fall by 3.6%, driven by a decrease in its "guest count." This was the worst decline in same-store sales since 2020. Starbucks saw its revenues decline by 4% in its US stores.

Executives at McDonalds and Starbucks spoke to similar themes. They see their clientele dealing with uncertainty from tariff-related economic concerns. Moreover, persistent inflation is resulting in more frugal behaviors, such as eating and making coffee at home. They both note that low-income customers are particularly affected.

• "Consumers today are grappling with uncertainty"- Chris Kempczinski - CEO McDonalds

• "Starbucks faces challenges in reviving its business... with inflation and economic uncertainty driving up costs and dampening U.S. demand."- Brian Niccol - CEO Starbucks

Two key takeaways from McDonalds, Starbucks, and other lower-end retailers this quarter: First, it appears they are not able to pass on higher prices to their customers. Second, poor consumer sentiment is weighing on personal consumption.

We end with a comment from Chipotle's CEO following a 0.4% decline in same-store sales, the first decline since 2020:

In February, we began to see that the elevated level of uncertainty felt by consumers are starting to impact their spending habits. We could see this in our visitation study, where saving money because of concerns around the economy was the overwhelming reason consumers were reducing the frequency of restaurant visits.

What To Watch Today

Earnings

Economy

Market Trading Update

Yesterday, we discussed oil prices and their impact on inflation and the economy. While economic growth remains a concern in 2025, the market has been inflating over the past two weeks. The S&P is currently in an 8-day winning streak, decently long without a down day. However, yesterday, the market rallied above the 50-DMA following better-than-expected earnings reports from MSFT and META. That rally is likely limited given the short-term overbought condition of the market and the reality that the 200-DMA is just ahead, with the 100-DMA just above it.

The good news is that the previous resistance level developed when the pre-tariff announcement lows were broken has now been returned to support. Therefore, any short-term correction will find support at the 50-DMA and then at those previous bottoms. However, breaking that support will also violate the recent market uptrend and suggest a retest of lows is possible. While the markets are behaving more bullishly in the near term, we should not dismiss the possibility of another correction phase over the next few months.

This is why we increased a short S&P 500 hedge position this week and are carrying higher cash levels. Once the bullish trend is reconfirmed, we will reduce hedges and increase equity exposure accordingly. While we may not buy the bottom of the market and may suffer some short-term underperformance, the preservation of capital and reduced volatility will give us a long-run advantage over benchmarking an index.

Trade accoridngly.

Continuing Jobless Claims Continue To Drift Higher

Continuing jobless claims rose to 1.916 million, up from 1.841 million last week. This marks the highest level since November 2021. Accordingly, it signals that an increasing number of job seekers face difficulties finding new employment. Initial jobless claims increased to 241,000, surpassing estimates of 223,000 and the prior week’s 222,000. Like ADP, the data point to a weaker-than-expected BLS employment report today.

Continuing jobless claims, unlike initial claims, which track new unemployment filings and are considered a leading indicator, reflect the number of people still unemployed and receiving benefits. Thus, they serve as a coincident measure of economic conditions. In the current environment, layoffs are low, but new hires are weak. Simply, the underlying labor market is not as robust as the headline data suggests. An increase in layoffs will be problematic as potential job openings decline.

As the graph below shows, continuing jobless claims are historically low but have slowly risen to their highest level since late 2021.

China Sells Gold

It is being reported, and as shown below, courtesy of ZeroHedge, that China sold "millions of ounces" of gold Thursday morning. Gold fell by three percent on the news. There are many rumors that China is trying to replace its dollars with gold. While there may be some truth to that, they are still heavily dependent on the dollar. Accordingly, they are unlikely to make any radical adjustments to their dollar or gold holdings, as it will work against their broader economic interests. In other words, be cautious when buying gold on the thesis that China is rapidly abandoning the dollar.

Tweet of the Day

“Want to achieve better long-term success in managing your portfolio? Here are our 15-trading rules for managing market risks.”

Please subscribe to the daily commentary to receive these updates every morning before the opening bell.

If you found this blog useful, please send it to someone else, share it on social media, or contact us to set up a meeting.

The post McDonalds And Starbucks Confirm Eroding Sentiment appeared first on RIA.

YAOUNDÉ, Cameroon – Cameroon is continuing to be attacked by the Islamist organization Boko Haram, and the situation is getting worse, according to a bishop.

Bishop Barthélemy Yaouda Hourgo of the Yagoua Diocese in Cameroon’s Far North region, Barthélemy Yaouda Hourgo spoke to Crux about the deteriorating security situation in the area during the 50th Ordinary Plenary Assembly of the Cameroon Bishops’ Conference.

“The current situation of insecurity is worsening,” he said. “I say this because just recently, soldiers were killed only 5 kilometers from my village.”

On March 25, Boko Haram fighters, disguised as herdsmen, launched a deadly assault on a military base in Wulgo, near the Nigerian border. The base, operated by Cameroonian soldiers from the Multinational Joint Task Force, was overrun by the assailants, resulting in the loss of at least 20 soldiers.

According to sources cited by the French news channel Africa 24, the insurgents seized Soviet-made Shilka guns — lightly armored, radar-guided anti-aircraft weapons further escalating the threat.

Yaouda Hourgo expressed concern over the worsening security situation, emphasizing that the terrorist organization is increasingly acquiring sophisticated weaponry.

“Boko Haram now has access to drones,” the bishop told Crux.

“Unfortunately, we are losing soldiers, and the toll on civilians is even more devastating. Civilians who have their cattle in the bush are killed. It’s become part of our daily lives,” he said.

Added to the attacks are the kidnapping of people for ransom.

“Once kidnappers believe you have a little money, they will either come for you, your kids or your wife. They take all these people and they can only be released upon the payment of a ransom,” Yaouda Hourgo explained.

Boko Haram, an extremist group that emerged in Nigeria in 2009, when it launched a violent campaign with the goal of establishing a caliphate across the Sahel.

Initially operating within Nigeria, the group soon expanded its attacks to neighbouring countries — Cameroon, Chad, and Niger — causing widespread devastation. According to the United Nations, Boko Haram has killed at least 40,000 people and displaced more than 2.3 million, leaving countless families in turmoil.

Its activities have severely disrupted livelihoods across the Lake Chad Basin, an area that sustains nearly 40 million people through fishing, farming, and herding. Communities that once relied on these industries now face economic instability, food insecurity, and a continuous threat of violence.

The group’s name, Boko Haram, translates to “Western education is prohibited,” and its radical ideology has led to the closure of many schools across Cameroon and the broader Sahel region.

However, while Boko Haram’s attacks have directly contributed to the decline of education in Cameroon’s Far North, the crisis has been exacerbated by a government that has failed to invest adequately in the region’s children. A lack of resources, infrastructure, and support has left many young people without access to quality education, further deepening the challenges faced by the area.

“I feel deep sadness that the Far North region is always left behind,” Yaouda Hourgo said.

“When I see the disparity in resources — how our children don’t receive the same opportunities as those in Yaoundé, Douala, or Bafoussam — it’s disheartening. If given the same means, they could thrive because there are incredibly intelligent people here,” he said.

“We are not ignorant; in fact, I assure you that the Far North is home to exceptionally bright students. Very, very intelligent young minds. Yet, we face overwhelming challenges. Schools often lack basic necessities — benches, classrooms, even roofs. Imagine a child studying in unbearable conditions. Just last week, I was in Kousséri for a pastoral visit. I met students in a room with a scorching 46-degree [114ºF] temperature. Picture a child trying to learn in a school with no roof. How can they possibly be expected to compete academically with students in better-equipped regions?” Yaouda Hourgo added.

He said both insecurity and poverty have affected the Church in more ways than one and expressed worry that with the dearth of western funding, only faith could keep the Church going in that part of the country.

“The Church is also facing difficult times,” he said.

“For years, Europe has been our primary source of support, but now, it has little to offer. First, there are fewer Christians. Churches are empty, offerings have dwindled, and requests for Mass have declined. Financial aid has virtually disappeared,” he told Crux.

He said that at the level of the Episcopal Conference, there are discussions on how the Church can survive without external support.

“We are searching for ways to sustain ourselves, but independence requires support,” said Yaouda Hourgo.

“If you want to establish a bakery, you need funds to get it started. If you want to engage in farming—something we in the North could certainly do—you still face challenges. In one night, hundreds of sheep could be stolen, jeopardizing the effort,” he admitted.

“Despite these hardships, the Church does not belong to an individual — it belongs to God. That is why it has endured for 2,000 years,” he said.

“Priests and bishops do not receive salaries, yet they continue to live. The financial survival of the clergy depends on the generosity of Christians. It is thanks to you, and to others, that we are able to carry on,” Yaouda Hourgo said.

(CNS Photo)

The post Cameroon faces rising threat from Boko Haram, says bishop first appeared on Catholic Herald.

The post Cameroon faces rising threat from Boko Haram, says bishop appeared first on Catholic Herald.

Of all the correspondence compiled by St. Paul documenting salvation through the Event of Jesus Christ—who alone set about redeeming us all because in Adam’s fall we sinned all—the Epistle to the Romans is clearly the lengthiest of them all. It is also the most impressive, easily eclipsing everything else he wrote. “An alpine peak towering over hills and villages,” is how one admiring exegete put…

Source

President Donald Trump previously said his administration is in contact with Beijing over the tariff dispute, which China has denied

China is “assessing” US overtures to begin tariff negotiations, the Commerce Ministry said on Friday. According to the ministry, senior US officials recently reached out to Beijing through third parties with proposals to start talks.

Tensions between the world’s two largest economies have risen since US President Donald Trump imposed 145% tariffs on Chinese imports last month as part of a wider effort targeting over 90 trade partners. Most of the new tariffs were paused for 90 days – excluding China – while a baseline 10% remains in place. Beijing responded with 125% tariffs on US goods and export restrictions.

The ministry said China has taken note of recent US messages and is evaluating the possibility of negotiations, adding that while Washington has expressed interest in talks, trust would be undermined if unilateral tariffs remain.

“The US has recently sent messages to China through relevant parties, hoping to start talks with China. China is currently assessing this,” the ministry stated.

Trump previously suggested that the tariffs could “come down substantially” and spoke about the potential for a “fair deal with China.” He also claimed that his administration was “actively” engaging with Beijing and that he had spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping by phone.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed on Fox News last week that Beijing was “reaching out” to Washington. China has denied this and accused the US of misleading the public.

In its statement on Friday, the Commerce Ministry reiterated that the US must show “sincerity” by canceling the tariffs if it wants meaningful dialogue. It added that China remains open to talks, but will not be pressured: “If we fight, we will fight to the end; if we talk, the door is open.”

It stressed that Beijing will only agree to negotiations in good faith. “Saying one thing and doing another, or even trying to coerce and blackmail under the guise of talks, will not work with China,” the statement read.

READ MORE: Trump ‘blundered’ on China tariffs – Medvedev

Analysts expect negotiations will begin soon, citing recent market volatility and the IMF’s downward revision of global growth forecasts due to trade uncertainty. Some observers, however, predict that formal talks will not be announced until after the US and China agree on the terms of a tariff deal privately.