SCOTUS ruled 6-3 to end a precedent that the president set in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States from 1935.
Therefore, Trump had the authority to fire FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter.
Humphrey’s held that “The Federal Trade Commission Act fixes the terms of the Commissioners and provides that any Commissioner may be removed by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
“Humphrey’s framework has not withstood the test of time,” wrote the majority. “From the start, Humphrey’s was tethered to a highly circumscribed view of the FTC’s role. Humphrey’s by its terms applied only to agencies that occupy ‘no place in the executive department,’ are ‘independent of executive authority,’ and exercise ‘no part of the executive power.’”
I’m glad that SCOTUS pointed out that independent agencies are not independent:
Slaughter relies on reliance. She argues that Congress has relied upon Humphrey’s to create agencies that are “insulated from presidential control.” Brief for Respondent 15. But that is precisely the problem. Despite what Humphrey’s may say, independent agencies are not “independent” in the sense that they are free of the President and thus responsive “only to the people of the United States.” 295 U. S., at 625. Placing the power to administer laws in officers who enjoy “freedom from Presidential oversight (and protection)” does not deliver us to a promised land of technocratic governance—it often results only in an “increased subservience to congressional direction.” FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U. S. 502, 523 (plurality opinion). Pp. 21–25.
The FTC falls under the authority of the executive branch. It is only “independent” because a cabinet secretary does not oversee the agency.
So where does the FTC fall? The majority explained (emphasis mine):
With these principles in mind, the FTC’s for-cause removal provision violates the separation of powers. In its present form, the FTC enforces and administers some 80 statutes covering almost every facet of the Nation’s economy, and the tasks it undertakes are “the very essence of ‘execution’ of the law.” Bowsher v. Synar, 478 U. S. 714, 733. The FTC has the power to promulgate substantive rules carrying the force of law, investigate businesses and enforce statutes through inhouse adjudications, and file civil suits on behalf of the United States in federal court. The FTC unquestionably exercises executive power and must therefore be controlled by the Chief Executive. Pp. 25–27.
“All the Court does today is recognize what has been clear for a century—that those who fall within the President’s ‘general administrative control’ must be removable by the President at will,” the majority wrote.
To “discharg[e] the duties of his trust,” the President must have the assistance of officers he can trust. 30 Writings of George Washington, at 334. Although it is up to the Senate to decide whether to confirm those with whom the President would prefer to work, neither Congress nor the courts may saddle him with those with whom he cannot work. Subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him. Then, and only then, can they remain accountable to the President, and the President to the people.
Those unelected bureaucrats who consider themselves part of the #resistance to Trump? That’s the Deep State (or at least a part of it).
Now President Trump has a Supreme Court-approved tool to clear out the deadwood holding back reforms. Every agency head resisting Trump’s policies should be sacked and replaced with someone loyal to the Constitution rather than the Democrat Party. (I couldn’t tell you how many that still applies to, but there are a lot of ostensibly “independent” agencies that exercise executive branch powers.) All of them should have Trump-appointed heads, and all should undergo DOGE audits to determine how money was spent under previous regime, and charging those who have abused taxpayer money.
The headline “Fujimori Wins in Peru” might leave some readers wondering which decade they’ve woken into, but the Fujimori in this case is daughter Keiko rather than father Alberto.
Conservative candidate Keiko Fujimori, age 51, appears to have won election for the Presidency of Peru. She leads her left-wing opponent by around 50,000 votes, out of more than 18 million cast…
Reuters reports,
Keiko Fujimori’s expected victory returns divisive dynasty to Peru
I had mentioned before that Fujimori’s 2026 victory margin is larger than either of her election defeats in 2016 or 2021. But, somehow, it’s her victory that’s divisive. Her narrow defeats are merely democracy at work.
As Reuters frames it,
Fujimori will become Peru’s first elected female president. Her win follows three previous failed bids — in 2011, 2016 and 2021 — each decided by narrow margins and shaped in part by a persistent “anti-Fujimori” vote that has defined the country’s elections for years.
Get this,
Fujimori takes over from Jose Balcazar, who assumed office earlier this year after Congress removed his predecessor over a scandal involving undisclosed meetings with a Chinese businessman.
So “divisive” is seen as being worse than outright corruption.
Keiko’s father Alberto Fujimori was “divisive” because he revived Peru’s economy and destroyed the Maoist Shining Path guerillas while being a non-leftist. Faced with political deadlock against corrupt parties on both the left and right, he launched an autogolpe, or self-coup, in which he assumed dictatorial power with the backing of the military. But the autogolpe was widely popular with the majority of Peruvians, and Papi Fujimori used that power to crush Shining Path and institute free market reforms in the economy, then returned the country to democracy, winning reelection in 1995 with 2/3rds of the vote.
In the end, he too fell into Peru’s long history of authoritarian strongman habits, with the usual abuse of power, corruption, and human rights abuses. He won a third term in a scandal-plagued election in 2000, but ended up fleeing the country before he could be arrested. And despite that, he was still arguably the most successful (and important) President in Peru’s troubled history.
The problem is, just about every Peruvian president has either been impeached for corruption, been ousted in a coup, ruled for a time as a dictator, or ate a bullet, as you can see perusing the Wikipedia list of Peruvian presidents. And you can’t trust that list, since Dina Boluarte is listed as an “independent” rather than on the left, but she was actually a Marxist, as was immediate predecessor Pedro Castillo, whose own autogolpe failed.
Faced with such a long history of corruption and dysfunction, much of it carried out by lefties or Marxists (in South America, the difference can be thin to non-existent), the Alberto Fujimori era now looks like something of a golden age for Peru. No wonder they’re willing to elect Keiko Fujimori, much like Filipinos were willing to elect Bongbong Marcos there…
Babylon Bee: “We Asked AI To Simulate If The U.S. Had A Second Civil War.”
Here are the results:
“In the city, we’re used to being able to burn down a target and no one does anything. I guess it’s different in the suburbs, though.”
“One of the big issues is how we hate guns. But the right loves them. I guess none of us considered how big a disadvantage that would put us in a civil war.”
“Many of the losing combatants fled to the far north. Starvation was rampant among them from lack of access to DoorDash.”
More Medicare scammers captured, Trump wins multiple border security cases at the Supreme Court, the Supremes also drive a stake through a vampire, Ukraine hits a whole lot of bridges in occupied Crimea, dirty commies win Dem primaries in New York, and Tom Scott looks at some furry workers.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel announced that another suspect on the T White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud’s new Most Wanted Fraudsters list has been apprehended.
Patel posted on X Saturday that Herbert Leon Kimble, 60, was arrested in the Philippines thanks to the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ) task force led by Vice President JD Vance and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
“In just over two weeks, this is the second Most Wanted Fraudster arrested on the FBI’s list led by Vice President Vance and the White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud,” wrote the director. “Herbert Leon Kimbel was apprehended in the Philippines and is now back in the United States, on the run since 2024 after he allegedly orchestrated a $1.2 billion healthcare fraud conspiracy that targeted the Medicare system – particularly elderly victims – from 2014-2019.”
Kimble of Chicago, Illinois, is accused of targeting Medicare in a “large-scale healthcare fraud conspiracy” via “the improper marketing and distribution of durable medical equipment (DME), particularly orthopedic braces.”
According to the FBI, from 2014 to 2019, he operated a scheme in which victims — often elderly — would be unnecessarily prescribed orthopedic braces for pain relief by telemedicine providers via call centers in the Philippines.
DME suppliers affiliated with Kimble would then bill Medicare for reimbursement, resulting in over $1.2 billion in Medicare charges.
On April 4, 2019, in the District of South Carolina U.S. District Court, he pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States, to make a false claim to a department of the United States, to commit mail fraud, to commit wire fraud, to commit healthcare fraud and to offer kickbacks and bribes in connection with the scheme.
He subsequently failed to appear for his sentencing hearing on August 27, 2024, resulting in the issuance of a federal arrest warrant that same day, charging him with failure to appear.
The FBI offered a reward of up to $150,000 for information leading to his arrest and conviction.
Kimble is the second individual on the most wanted list that has been apprehended.
Last week, Said Abdullahi Ereg, 47, was also arrested after he surrendered to authorities in connection with an alleged $4 million scheme involving the Federal Child Nutrition Program during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ereg ran a grocery and deli in Minneapolis sponsored by Feeding Our Future. He was initially issued a federal arrest warrant in January 2024 and was indicted in June 2024 by a federal grand jury for conspiracy involving wire fraud and money laundering.
The FBI’s Most Wanted Fraudsters list can be found here.
The Supreme Court this morning, in a pair of 6–3 opinions written by Justice Samuel Alito, gave the Trump administration’s border policies two more big wins. Both pared back humanitarian bases for admitting people into the country. Mullin v. Doe allowed the administration to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations granted by the Biden administration — specifically for Haitians and Syrians, but the decision’s logic, which bars judicial review of revocations, would seem to compel the same outcome for Venezuelans. Mullin v. Al Otro Lado allowed immigration officials to prevent people from reaching the border to present asylum claims, because the law allows those claims to be presented by an alien who “arrives in the United States.”
Along with Tuesday’s decision in Blanche v. Lau, which strengthened the government’s power to exclude criminal aliens prior to their convictions, this was a clean sweep for immigration hard-liners. That may take some of the sting out of the Court’s pending decision in Trump v. Barbara, which could come as soon as Monday and is expected to be a loss for Donald Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship.
In the backdrop of Mullin v. Doe are the divergent attitudes of the Biden and Trump administrations toward TPS, but the actual ground of battle, as our editorials have emphasized, is the language of the TPS statute and whether courts should take the written law seriously.
The TPS statute, enacted in 1990, allows the president to designate particular countries as unsafe because of war, natural disasters, epidemics, or other temporary crises and therefore give their nationals temporary protection to stay within this country. Before the statute’s enactment, presidents would sometimes grant such protection as a discretionary matter but with no statutory authorization and, in effect, no rules. In that sense, TPS is like the 1977 tariff statute at issue in Learning Resources: It was designed to provide rules of the road for the executive to follow in responding to emergencies. Prior to 1990, the judiciary had treated these executive decisions as exercises of discretion that courts could not review.
Of course, nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. For some countries, TPS has been continually in force now for decades, making a mockery of the “temporary” designation. Somalia has had a TPS designation for 35 years, and Nicaragua, Honduras, and El Salvador have been so designated for more than 25 years. Haiti received a TPS designation because of an earthquake 16 years ago.
The statute is written to reflect broad executive discretion. The secretary of homeland security “may” grant TPS to nationals of a particular country based on a series of statutory criteria but is under no obligation to do so. Several of the criteria explicitly reference conditions “temporarily” existing in the foreign country. By contrast, the statute requires TPS to be terminated if the secretary finds that the home country “no longer continues to meet the conditions for designation.” The law thus contemplates ongoing review — the secretary is mandated to conduct a new review at least once every 18 months — and DHS violates the law if it extends TPS when the conditions justifying it no longer exist.
That may be particularly important when a foreign tyranny is suddenly toppled and replaced by a new government, as has happened recently in both Syria and Venezuela. Syria’s designation was applied in 2012 because of the civil war that sought to topple the Assad regime, which ended with Assad’s departure in late 2024. Once TPS is revoked, the affected foreign nationals are given 60 days before they must either leave the United States or secure some other legal basis to stay. The 60-day provision was designed by Congress to accommodate the reliance interests of foreigners here temporarily, who have been given work permits but who knew from the outset that shelter on American shores was explicitly temporary.
The Biden administration tried to lock in its successor on these inherently fluid, temporary foreign policy assessments by granting TPS extensions, in some cases just days before Joe Biden left office. For example, Alejandro Mayorkas, the impeached-but-not-tried secretary of homeland security, extended TPS for Venezuela on January 17, 2025. By contrast, the Trump administration has terminated every TPS it has reviewed, 13 of them so far. Trump has been quite open about this as a deliberate policy.
Can courts review TPS designations? Congress didn’t think so. We know that because Congress said so in terms that could hardly be more explicit: “There is no judicial review of any determination of the [secretary of homeland security] with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state.” The TPS litigation that has been ongoing since the outset of the second Trump term has dragged on this long because multiple lower court judges (including the Ninth Circuit) decided to judicially review what Congress said explicitly they may not judicially review. As Alito noted, judicial orders stopped Trump from ending TPS for Haiti, Syria, Venezuela, Burma, and Ethiopia and also prevented Trump from ending TPS for Haiti during his first term, in 2018.
Alito began with whether the law written by Congress means what it says, and his opinion is almost comical in attempting to take seriously the ridiculous contention that it doesn’t. “This text is clear, and its plain meaning is very broad,” he noted, and he explained why the word “determination” means decisions that the secretary is empowered and in some cases required to make.
“Supreme Court Drives a Stake Through Hawaii’s ‘Vampire Rule.'”
IAt stake was a Hawaiian statute, Act 52, that inverted the usual presumption that governs public access to generally accessible private property, but only where firearms are concerned. Prior to the passage of Act 52, Hawaiians who were able to obtain carry permits (which, before Bruen, was effectively impossible) were allowed to enter any generally accessible private space while carrying a firearm — unless the property owner explicitly signaled otherwise. After Act 52, Hawaiians with carry permits were allowed to enter any generally accessible private space while carrying a firearm only if the property had signaled that it was acceptable. (Gothic lore holds that vampires must be explicitly invited to enter one’s home before they may cross the threshold. Hence: “vampire rule.”)
As the Court correctly noted, this change — which was made directly after Bruen, and which shifted only the rules governing firearms, and no others besides — was explicitly designed to impede “the ability of law-abiding citizens to exercise the right Bruen recognized as they go about their daily lives.” That being so, it fell.
Writing for the majority, Justice Alito recorded that:
At common law, opening up private property to the general public implies a “license to all persons to enter,” meaning that “no person is a trespasser by merely entering therein” unless the property owner has given “due notice” that such a person is banned.
“Hawaii’s shift from the common-law rule,” Alito concluded, “unquestionably imposes a new and significant burden on the exercise of the right recognized in Bruen.”n a 6–3 vote, the Supreme Court has struck down Hawaii’s “vampire rule” as a violation of the Second and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. This was the right result, and, once again, it is a disgrace that the decision was not unanimous.
During briefs and at oral argument, Hawaii offered up three main defenses of its law. The first defense was that it has historically had much stricter firearms laws than much of the rest of the United States. Alito dealt with that one quickly:
As the plurality explained in McDonald, the Second Amendment has the same meaning in all parts of the United States. 561 U. S., at 784–785. It cannot give way to “the spirit of Aloha” in Hawaii, contra, State v. Wilson, 154 Haw. 8, 27, 543 P. 3d 440, 459 (2024), any more than it can yield to the spirit of the Big Apple (Bruen) or the Windy City (McDonald).
Aloha, “spirit of Aloha.”
No, Hawaii, you can’t argue that “Historically, Hawaii has ignored the constitution” as an excuse to ignore it further…
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the sentencing eight “North Texas Antifa Cell” operatives to a total of 450 years in prison on Tuesday for their various roles in the July 4, 2025 attack on the Prairieland U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Detention Center in Alvarado.
“Testimony and other evidence at trial established that the defendants were members of a North Texas Antifa Cell, part of a larger militant enterprise made up of networks of individuals and small groups primarily ascribing to an ideology that explicitly calls for the overthrow of the United States Government, law enforcement authorities, and the system of law,” a June 23 DOJ press release said.
On July 4 of last year, the Antifa members dressed in dark clothing with head and face coverings, forming a “black bloc” in order to conceal their identities and make them indistinguishable from each other. Evidence revealed they had 11 firearms, body armor, and 11 “military-grade first aid kits with tourniquets and other items to treat gunshot wounds to the scene of the attack.”
They began shooting fireworks and vandalizing vehicles and a guard shack at the property. Alvarado police officers responded to a 9-1-1 call about the attack. Ringleader Benjamin Song was heard on a bodycam recording yelling, “Get to the rifles!” — after which the group opened fire on the officer, hitting him in the neck.
Many of the Antifa members were arrested near the scene, but Song escaped and was not arrested until July 15.
The DOJ said this is the “first sentencing of defendants affiliated with Antifa following President Donald J. Trump’s executive order designating the group as a Domestic Terrorist Organization in September 2025.”
In March, nine of the Antifa members were convicted for “their roles in rioting, using weapons and explosives, providing material support to terrorists, obstruction, and the attempted murder of an Alvarado police officer.”
Of the nine, eight were sentenced on Tuesday, including Song, who received the harshest sentence of 100 years in prison for the attempted murder of the officer. Evidence from the trial showed that Song acquired and distributed firearms to the co-defendants and “recruited members at gun ranges and combat sessions he conducted, as well as from various ideologically aligned groups.”
Maricela Rueda was sentenced to 70 years; Cameron Arnold, Savanna Batten, Zachary Evetts, Bradford Morris, and Elizabeth Soto to 50 years each; and Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada to 30 years.
Ines Soto was granted a continuance and will be sentenced on July 1, along with seven co-defendants who all pleaded guilty to one count of providing material support to terrorists: Seth Sikes, Nathan Baumann, Joy Gibson, Susan Kent, Rebecca Morgan, Lynette Sharp, and John Thomas.
Seven others who pleaded guilty to providing support to the terrorists will be sentenced on July 1.
Fauci, as NIAID director, directed millions in U.S. taxpayer funds (via Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance and other entities) for gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses in Wuhan.
Fauci had close relationships with intelligence-community leaders and provided hand-picked NIAID-funded scientists as advisors, which was used to promote a natural-origin narrative and downplay the lab-leak theory. Fauci played a direct role, even meeting with the CIA to assist in a coverup.
Fauci LIED to Congress in 2024 when asked about his involvement in these schemes (there is a long trail of evidence proving this).
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence released declassified documents to support her claims, which can be found here.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said that signal repeaters on the territory of Belarus that had been helping Russian drones strike Ukraine ceased operating on 22 June….
“Based on the available information reported to me by the Commander-in-Chief [of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Oleksandr Syrskyi] and intelligence services, the relevant signal repeaters stopped operating on the territory of Belarus on 22 June. I don’t know yet whether they have been dismantled, to be honest. But we are working on this, and I am keeping a very close eye on the situation and receiving daily reports. It is a fact that the signal repeaters are not operating today.”
On 19 June, Zelenskyy issued an ultimatum to self-proclaimed Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko, giving him a week to dismantle the signal repeaters used to adjust Russian drone strikes on Ukrainian cities, or Ukraine would do it itself.
Old and busted: Russia puts heavy air defense around Putin’s vacation palace. The new hotness: Russia torn down the palace. Puzzling.
Things went from bad to worse for Democrats on Thursday afternoon after a judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction on the “assault firearms” and high-capacity magazine ban that was set to go into effect in the Commonwealth on July 1. The judge from Lancaster County, located in the Northern Neck of Virginia, ruled that the Virginia State Police (VSP) cannot enforce the bans through December 31, 2026 or until a final order is issued.
The lawsuit was brought against the superintendent of the VSP by the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) and Gun Owners of America (GOA), who took well-deserved victory laps on social media.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s endorsement proved influential in three key congressional primary races on Tuesday, as his favored progressive candidates prevailed over opponents more closely aligned with the Democratic establishment.
New York State Assemblywoman Claire Valdez and Harlem community organizer Darializa Avila Chevalier, both of whom were also backed by the Democratic Socialists of America, won races in New York’s seventh and 13th congressional districts, respectively. Meanwhile, former city comptroller Brad Lander, a progressive former DSA member, pulled off an impressive upset over incumbent Representative Dan Goldman in NY-10. Lander is a Jewish progressive who left the DSA in 2023 after it held a pro-Palestinian rally just one day after Hamas’s terror attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023.
Lander and Goldman, who is also a Jewish Democrat, both made their stances on the Israel-Hamas war a key part of their respective campaigns. Lander, who sits to the left of Goldman politically, had criticized his opponent for failing to take a tougher stance on Israel.
Avila Chevalier prevailed over incumbent Representative Adriano Espaillat despite her status as the most controversial of the three Mamdani-backed progressives. While Espaillat is the chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus “who has over the years built a political machine of his own in upper Manhattan and parts of the Bronx,” according to Politico, Avila Chevalier is a first-time candidate who was well known in Harlem for her pro-Palestinian activism but whose unearthed social media posts made her a political liability for the DSA. Those posts included messages blasting Democratic politicians, including one 2021 post in which she wrote “f*** Kamala Harris,” and others against an array of topics from the police to Israel and private property.
Mamdani, for his part, said he wasn’t aware of her past comments when he endorsed her, but he did not pull his endorsement nonetheless.
The mayor also endorsed Valdez in her bid to assume the seat left open by retiring Representative Nydia Velázquez. The outgoing Democratic congresswoman had endorsed Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso as her replacement. Mamdani and the DSA’s decision to endorse a different candidate led to a falling out with Velázquez, who had been an early supporter of Mamdani’s mayoral run.
In late May Chinese leaders travelled to the Zhoushan National Oil Reserve and discovered the nation’s strategic oil reserves weren’t there. For over a year, the disruption of oil supplies from Venezuela and Iran had left Chinese oil reserves reduced. Despite that, government documents indicated that China still had 1.2 billion tons of oil reserves. That’s equivalent to 8,756,117,022 barrels.
China’s strategic oil reserve, to the surprise of the government officials who went to verify the reserves in May, was instead composed of water, sludge, various debris and overflow from nearby sewer lines.
Because the Americans dominated global energy supplies, the Chinese oil reserve served as a major cushion to any disruptions to Chinese oil imports from the Persian Gulf, especially Iran whose main customer was China. Under America’s global energy stranglehold, Chinese crude oil stockpiles have reached the verge of collapse at the slightest exposure.
The current Chinese vulnerability stems from the American disruption of Venezuelan oil exports to China and more recently a similar situation with Iranian oil exports to China.
China’s strategic oil reserve was insurance against disruptions in Venezuelan and Iranian imports. With its oil reserves revealed as a sham, China finds itself in a desperate situation. What happened to Chinese oil? It was soon discovered that corrupt government officials and oil reserve personnel had sold the oil and pocketed the proceeds. The local buyers were often operators of small, locally owned refineries that turned the oil into commercial products that were sold throughout China. Most of these oil criminals then fled, often leaving China for sanctuary states that would welcome any affluent Chinese and their new wealth. The only winners were a few conniving Chinese and the Americans, who continued to dominate the global energy system.
Important tip: If you’re a Bexar County judge and you’re given an official YouTube channel to livestream your court proceedings, don’t use it for your book club.
“Woman who emptied Knicks trashcan on street — then stole it — is fired from JPMorgan Chase, was DEI exec.” Shocked face engaged. (Hat tip: Dwight.)
The Lock-Picking Lawyer: “I didn’t think it was possible, but somehow Master Lock has now tarnished its name even more with a brand new line of padlocks.” Evidently the Elite line isn’t.
Republican U.S. Rep. Pat Fallon of Texas has introduced legislation that would prohibit federal funding for higher education institutions that partner with the Chinese Communist Party.
H.R. 9123 would “establish intelligence community funding restrictions on institutions of higher education that have a relationship with certain entities in the People’s Republic of China.”
The legislation amends the National Security Act of 1947 to prohibit intelligence community support for any higher education institution that participates in a series of relationships with entities tied to China.
This would seem a common sense policy implemented that should have been implemented long before now. Communist China is always looking to steal technology from the West through its “Thousand Talents” espionage program, and Chinese nationals have been stealing technology from American universities (including Texas A&M) for a while now.
Examples of these entities include:
Confucius institutes
Institutions that participate “in the Chinese defense industrial base”
Institutions that are “affiliated with the Chinese State Administration for Science, Technology and Industry for the National Defense”
Institutions that receive “funding from any organization subordinate to the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party”
Institutions that provide “support to any security, defense, police, or intelligence organization of the Government of the People’s Republic of China or the Chinese Communist Party”
The legislation also places restrictions on partnerships that undermine America’s relationship with Taiwan and on Chinese propaganda efforts against U.S. citizens.
This is a good first step, but we should go further and ban Chinese nationals from holding any position at any U.S. research university, laboratory or institute that takes federal money.
To paraphrase Bob Dylan, you have to serve somebody, and it shouldn’t be communist China. As I’ve said before, anything that discourages colleges and universities from working with a genocidal communist dictatorship is a good thing.
It turns out if you repeatedly flout Uncle Sam’s immigration laws, sooner or later Uncle Sam is going to notice.
Congressional Republicans have launched an investigation into Travis County District Attorney José Garza’s handling of immigration-related cases, accusing his office of adopting policies that shield illegal aliens from immigration enforcement and undermine public safety.
In a letter obtained by Texas Scorecard, U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R–Ohio), Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee Chairman Tom McClintock (R–California), and Constitution and Limited Government Subcommittee Chairman Chip Roy (R–Texas) demanded records from Garza’s office related to its interactions with federal immigration authorities and treatment of noncitizen defendants.
“The Committee on the Judiciary is conducting oversight of state and local jurisdictions that endanger American communities through their refusal to cooperate with federal immigration officials and their prioritization of illegal and criminal aliens over American citizens,” the lawmakers wrote.
The letter points to campaign promises made by Garza regarding immigrant communities and his office’s consideration of immigration consequences in criminal prosecutions.
According to the lawmakers, Garza previously pledged to “protect immigrant communities” and create policies that consider the immigration consequences of criminal charges and convictions. The committee also highlighted Garza’s support for diversion programs that could allow noncitizen defendants to avoid criminal convictions carrying immigration consequences.
“Under your office’s pro-crime, pro-illegal immigration policies, illegal alien criminals are allowed to freely operate, terrorize local communities, and reoffend without consequences,” the lawmakers wrote.
The committee is seeking a broad range of records dating back to January 2021, including communications with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, policies related to the prosecution of non-U.S. citizens, training materials concerning immigration consequences, and communications with local law enforcement agencies regarding immigration enforcement.
Lawmakers also requested records involving cases in which prosecutors considered immigration consequences, including instances in which defendants were allowed to replead charges or had convictions reduced or vacated.
Roy said the inquiry builds on concerns he has previously raised about Garza’s office.
“Under District Attorney José Garza, Austin has been failed by pro-criminal policies that weaken accountability and prioritize lawbreakers over public safety,” Roy told Texas Scorecard. “This dereliction of duty has raised serious questions about whether repeat offenders, including criminal aliens, are being adequately prosecuted and whether the safety of law-abiding Austin residents is being put first.”
Of course American Citizens aren’t being put first. Garza and Soros prioritize putting criminal back out on the streets in the name of socials justice, not to mention the needs of keeping illegal aliens around as welfare state clients and to vote for Democrats.
Congressional hearings are one thing, but Roy et al need to refer Garza to the Department of Justice for prosecution (and all other Soros-backed DAs) for ignoring the law in favor of putting hardened criminal and illegal alien felons back on the street.
One billion dollars is a sum that gets your attention, especially when it’s alleged Medicare fraud.
A Las Vegas nurse practitioner…
Not an administrator, not a doctor, a nurse practitioner. Although the average nurse practitioner earns about $130,000 a year in Texas, that’s still not the sort of profile you usually see in billion dollar fraud cases.
..who operated wound care clinics in Pearland and Manvel has been indicted on federal charges alleging she masterminded one of the largest Medicare fraud schemes ever prosecuted in the Houston area, billing the government for nearly $1 billion in treatments prosecutors say were medically unnecessary, falsified, or administered to patients who were already dying.
Pearland and Manvel are to the south of Houston, exurbs that are turning into suburbs. 60 years ago, Manvel had a hundred people, and now it has an estimated 17,261 population, doubling what it had in 2020.
Marizel Yukee was indicted June 18 in the Southern District of Texas on charges including conspiracy to commit health care fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy to pay and receive illegal kickbacks, and money laundering, according to the federal indictment. A warrant for her arrest was issued the same day.
Prosecutors allege that between October 2023 and April 2026, Yukee and unnamed co-conspirators submitted more than $906 million in fraudulent claims to Medicare and TRICARE, the federal health insurance program covering military members and their families, through four wound care companies she owned: Wound Medic, My BestHealth First, AllCare Mobile Wound Treatment, and Oracle Wound Treatment. From those claims, the government paid out approximately $297 million, according to the indictment.
The scheme centered on skin-substitute allografts, which are bioengineered from donated placental tissue and used to treat chronic wounds. According to prosecutors, Yukee’s clinics applied those grafts to wounds that were already healed, infected and ineligible for treatment, or to patients who had no qualifying wounds at all. In some cases, hospice patients received grafts and died within days, according to the indictment.
Prosecutors allege Yukee paid health care providers to refer patients to her clinics, and separately received nearly $16 million in kickbacks from allograft distributors whose products she used. In one documented example from the indictment, she paid $1,600 for a graft product and then directed her billing company to invoice Medicare for $3,900, more than double the actual cost. She averaged more than $1 million in billed claims per patient, according to prosecutors.
The indictment accuses Yukee of falsifying patient records to make the treatments appear medically appropriate and of instructing colleagues via email to inflate prices when seeking reimbursement.
Prosecutors allege the proceeds funded an extravagant personal lifestyle.
Of course she did.
The indictment identifies a Ferrari valued at more than $500,000, an $865,000 Bulgari diamond necklace, a $1 million home in Hawaii, and a $4.6 million beach resort under construction in the Philippines. Investigators have also seized a Porsche, a Mercedes, an Escalade, two Teslas, and roughly $467,000 in cash.
She should have tried building her stolen money resort in a country without an extradition treaty with the U.S. Then again, it probably won’t shock you to learn that Yukee is herself a Philippines national.
The government is seeking forfeiture of several properties, including real estate in Hawaii and Las Vegas and a commercial property in Pearland.
I have to think that the sheer scale of her operation probably doomed her. Employees in her Houston-area clinics had to have known skin drafts for dying patients weren’t medically necessary. All it takes is one or two of them squealing for the feds to lower the boom.
I notice she started her (alleged) shenanigans under the Biden Administration. How many more untold billions in fraud did that headless machine enable?
Over the last few days, American news networks have failed to make any mention of a massive report about the rampancy of migrant rape gangs in the UK. Now, as Prime Minister Keir Starmer resigned under colossal political pressure surrounding the migrant crisis, Monday’s CNN News Central had only continued to avoid mention of the terrifying report and the other consequences of mass migration in the U.K.
During the morning’s CNN News Central, there was hourly coverage of Starmer’s resignation from the role of Prime Minister. Only once did they go into the reasons behind his resignation, with CNN correspondent Clare Sebastian saying this about the troubles facing the U.K.’s political leadership:
Why, you might ask, can the UK not hold on to prime ministers? Well, there’s a number of different reasons. But ten years ago this week, the UK voted to leave the European Union and the turmoil that has followed, the economic turmoil, the political turmoil, certainly has contributed to some of this. There’s other economic reasons as well. The big surge in inflation that we saw after the pandemic and the war in Ukraine has really hurt people here, and they are looking for radical change.
Sebastian was very vague about the conditions surrounding Starmer’s resignation, shifting the blame onto U.K.’s exit from the E.U., the Ukraine war, and COVID, things which occurred years ago. She avoided mention of the actual current disaster facing Starmer’s administration: the UK migration crisis.
For the past few years, concerns among the British public have risen regarding immigration, eventually reaching a breaking point after two massive scandals in the past two weeks.
Firstly, major riots in Belfast after a beheading attempt by a Sudanese migrant. Secondly, the release of a massive report uncovering huge child trafficking networks in the U.K., perpetrated primarily by Muslim immigrants and entirely ignored by the British government. Those who only listen to the media, however, have probably never heard about these crises.
According to Sebastian, Starmer simply just didn’t bring the radical leftist change he promised:
Now, Keir Starmer swept to power in a landslide nearly two years ago, promising that radical change. But most people here, well, certainly most people around the country that we’ve spoken to, and an increasing number of members of parliament in his party, feel that he hasn’t managed to deliver that.
This cover-up of immigration crises like these was part of a larger campaign by the media. They downplay the brutal effects mass immigration has on European societies. They demonize those who try to fight back against the flood of violent criminals into their societies.
And Starmer’s coverup of the Muslim rape gang scandal stretch back to long before he took up residence at Number 10 Downing Street, as the rape gang inquiry report makes clear. “While Sir Keir Starmer was the Director of Public Prosecutions, it has been reported that 13,000 suspected rape gang members and paedophiles were let off with warning letters.”
Ah yes, pedophiles. The other constituency that Starmer’s Labour Party seems riddled with. “Starmer’s Labour is now infested with sexual predators and child rapists. The communist types, the Jeremy Corbynites, you know, like, you know, they’re insane, but they’re not Blairites. And the Blairits seem to have a lot of nonces [i.e. pedophiles] in there.”
Jeremy Corbyn is an old-style communist whose policies would have been disasterous for the UK (and he played his own role in covering up the Muslim rape gangs), but somehow the elderly commie seems less personally odious and repulsive than Starmer. It’s not so much that Starmer is insincere as that he’s completely incapable of understanding what sincerity consists of. He’s a frightened little rabbit who fancies himself a lion, with none of the cunning or cuddleness of an actual rabbit.
And speaking of Corbyn, remember that Starmer’s “Labour Together” operation was a coordinated effort to censor those who dared to disagree with Keir Starmer, from Corbyn to Donald Trump to Elon Musk’s Twitter. Starmer had a significant role in helping spin up the global left-wing, social justice censorship machine to hide inconvenient facts that might negatively impact Starmer’s Labour Party. The fact that Starmer is the most unpopular PM in the history of polling tells you how well his censorship efforts worked out for him.
Certainly there have been worse Prime Ministers. The tenures of Neville Chamberlain and Lord North probably wrought more harm to the UK than Starmer’s short time at the top. But none seemed as personally repugnant as Starmer, and his slithering off stage is long overdue.
Thermoclines of truth, where valid information can’t make it to the top of organizations because telling unpleasant truths is discouraged, has been an ongoing concern of the blog. Simon Whistler and his crew have taken a look at the Russian military, and it appears that it’s thermoclines of truth (and endemic corruption) all the way down.
He starts out with a discussion of the current state of the war:
“Once upon a time, the Russian military was supposed to be the second most powerful on Earth. Today, the Russian military isn’t even the most powerful military in Ukraine.”
“From the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, the nation’s armed forces have been subjected to a strange humiliation ritual, partly because of the cunning and innovation of their Ukrainian rivals, but partly because of the sheer bumbling idiocy of their own commanding officers.”
“Russia’s consistent ability to find its way into new and catastrophic blunders also definitely doesn’t hurt. As painful as the last several years have been for the Russian military, the situation has deteriorated even further in 2026. Russia is losing troops at an unprecedented rate, expending more lives, more munitions, and more state wealth. Even as they capture less and less territory each month, his battlefield commanders are making increasingly poor decisions, and they’re openly lying to their higher-ups when their attacks inevitably fall apart.”
“In the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin and his inner circle are being fed a constant stream of false victories when on the front lines, Russia’s spring and summer offensive has fallen flat on its face.”
“But however incompetent the Russian military might seem, the reality is even worse. Because underneath Ukrainian victories and underneath obvious blunders by Moscow, the Russian military has built a hidden corrupt machine where every battlefield catastrophe puts rubles into Russian pockets.”
“As the time of writing, Russian forward progress on the battlefield has basically halted in an overall sense. But Russia is still pushing forward in some areas just as it is being pushed back in others.”
“The graft and exploitation we’re going to describe today isn’t an accident. It exists because of the war in Ukraine. It feeds off the war in Ukraine. And the people who benefit most from the exploitation are the same people with the greatest incentives to ensure that the war continues even after any honest outside appraisal would suggest that Russian gains aren’t even close to being worth the cost.”
“Just a few short months ago, Russia was moving assets into position for what was intended to be a major push centered on the city of Sloviansk in the partially occupied Donetsk oblast. Taking Sloviansk wasn’t going to be easy for the Russians.”
“But even before there was time for the spring offensive to get underway, Ukraine revealed what’s turned out to be a decisive advantage. a new arsenal of mid-range drones, including an American-made model called the Hornet, plus the tactical advances to use those drones effectively. Dubbed the Martian 2 by Russian soldiers, the Hornet is piloted partially by artificial intelligence, and it’s completely impervious to Russian jamming because it navigates by using that AI to read the terrain visually instead of relying on GPS or remote control. The onboard AI can identify targets and even handle the final kill process all by itself. Flying at a range of over a 100 km, they’re practically silent until just before impact.”
“They’re extremely cheap, and they’ve been used by Ukraine less to target Russian troops at the front, and more to target the staging operations that would have created the foundation of a successful offensive. Russian forces have been unable to protect their ammunition stockpiles, their fuel trucks, or their encampments and training grounds away from the front lines.” More on how Ukraine is hammering Russian logistics here.
“Nor is the Hornet the only drone in Ukraine’s arsenal. Recently, Ukraine’s 412th Nemesis Brigade unveiled the Morrigan, another mid-range strike drone that’s optimized to operate significantly behind enemy lines. Those drones have allowed Ukraine to completely diffuse the spring offensive before it ever really got going.”
“Even more important, Ukraine has achieved those results without putting its soldiers at greater risk. Ukraine’s forces are chronically undermanned and perpetually exhausted. And Kiev does not have the ability to go head-to-head with the full strength of a Russian offensive in any one area, but instead it’s completely destroyed the infrastructure Russia needed to create an offensive that wouldn’t collapse under its own weight.”
“As a result, Russian forces near the front are badly isolated, cut off from easy reinforcement and resupply, while the bulk of the killing takes place away from the front lines where Russian troops naturally have their guard down. Ukraine has even expanded its strikes to target the highway network leading across occupied territory and into Crimea where the impact of Ukraine’s bombardment has gotten so bad that the entire region is on the brink of economic collapse. Fuel trucks, trains, and even ferries are unable to reach Crimea. The existing fuel storage infrastructure there has been destroyed and the problem’s only getting worse with fuel shortages now starting to spread across the Donbas.”
“According to the latest frontline reports, mobile drone defense teams are now at risk of running out of fuel. A crisis that would clear the way for even deeper Ukrainian strikes.”
“Better yet for Ukraine, targeting efficiency is improving constantly, to the point that it now takes only a few minutes for Ukrainian forces to spot a new moving target, get a drone on site, and destroy it.”
“Over the last several years, Russia and Ukraine have been engaged in a cycle of mutual innovation, with one side working out new solutions to battlefield problems and gaining a temporary advantage until the other side counters with innovations of their own. This time, however, Russia hasn’t been able to innovate a solution to the new problems that Ukraine has posed.”
“Russian troops are overextended and they have no choice but to hold their positions on the front when really their manpower is needed to defend the territory that Russia has already captured.”
“In the air, Russia still hasn’t found a way to meaningfully engage its air force in the conflict. Besides the use of strategic bombers and MiG-31 fighters to launch long-range cruise missiles, Russia can’t risk using some of its most valuable reconnaissance and command aircraft after Ukraine proved able to use American-made Patriot missiles to bring them down. And the supposedly world-class Su-57 fighter jet is still almost completely absent from contested airspace.”
“Russia’s aerial problem is expected to get even worse by early 2027, when Ukraine will take possession of its first Swedish-made Gripen fighter jets along with a long-range missile, the Meteor, that will have the range to strike Russian strategic bombers as they conduct those missile launches over the water.”
Snipping discussion of the poor state of Russia’s Black Sea fleet and the most recent St. Petersburg strike that we’ve covered in various LinkSwarms.
“Russian air defenses on the home front appear to be on the verge of complete collapse. Ukrainian long-range drones now regularly impact targets that were once unthinkable. From the Baltic Sea oil terminals at Primorsk and Luga to sensitive or highly specialized defense industrial centers located deep in the Russian heartland. Even Moscow has been targeted successfully.
“According to the chief designer at Ukraine’s leading missile innovator Firepoint, a new line of ballistic missiles will soon be operational and capable of hitting Moscow directly.”
“Russia hasn’t been able to meaningfully address the [air defense] problem.”
“As for its attempts to prevent Ukrainian long-range strikes, Russia seems to be unable to hit the command and control centers or the drone stockpiles that enable the campaign. So instead, Russia tries to deter Ukraine by launching long-range strikes of its own, often targeting population centers, energy infrastructure, or dual use facilities instead of going after the Ukrainian military.”
“Just as important [as Ukraine’s strikes], if not even more so, is the incredible consistency with which Russia manages to shoot itself in the foot. Moscow’s original sin, so to speak, is one that the rest of the world has gotten very familiar with. A supreme overconfidence that’s been helping Russia defeat itself from the very beginning. Despite the alternative storylines pushed out by Russian bot farms and repeated, no doubt, in this very comment section [aside: “Hello there, robots”], the idea that Kiev would fall in three days was very much a Russian invention.”
“But much more important than Russia’s original mistake was the fact that Moscow still hasn’t learned its lesson. Military planners and strategists all up and down the Russian military, from the unit level on the battlefield to Vladimir Putin himself, still base their decisions and expectations on an aggrandized version of the Russian military that simply does not exist.”
“Over time that problem is fused with another one. The fact that Russian leaders, again from the unit level all the way to the top, simply refuse to give each other honest assessments of what’s happening. At a certain point, those leaders realized that they could get away with reporting advances, victories, and other good news that didn’t actually exist.”
“The problem often starts small on the front lines. A Russian army captain sends a small unit to plant a flag and takes a few selfies in a contested area before that unit is annihilated in drone strikes. And then the captain sends those selfies to his major, claiming that today his forces took the territory in the picture. That same day, the major gets several similar reports from other captains. So he reports to his colonel that the front line has moved up by a few hundred meters when in reality most of the forces under his command have not moved at all.”
“That’s a throwaway example, of course, but you get the idea. And that news then travels up the chain until it reaches somebody like chief of the general staff of the Russian armed forces, Valery Gerasimov. We put the spotlight on Gerasimov in particular, because this is how you get statements like the one he made this past April, when he claims that Russia had captured a total of 80 settlements and over 1700 square kilometers since the start of the year. According to independent war monitors, Gerasimov tripled the amount of territory that Russia had actually taken. And of course, he failed to measure the territory that Russia had lost.”
“Don’t just take it from us, though. Even Russia’s milblogger class was calling bullshit in the aftermath.”
“But those institutional miscommunications, combined with the Russian military’s inflated perception of itself, combine to form a third problem, a demand for forward progress at all costs.”
“At this point in the war, commanders and higher-ups have gotten very used to the idea that their troops are consistently moving forward, consistently taking territory, and consistently getting Russia closer to victory. But now that lie has become too big to fail. And if individual Russian commanders were to report results that don’t align with that lie in places Russia wasn’t expecting, then they are at risk of being demoted, relieved of duty, or even worse.”
“As a result, each level of Russian leadership places immense pressure on the next level below them, all the way down to the frontline soldiers. Because their commanders need to deliver forward progress. And because their commanders won’t get into any real trouble if they sacrifice more lives in exchange, those frontline troops are at immense risk of being ordered forward into incredibly risky assaults.”
“Of course, it’s not unusual that a soldier on the front line of a major war would face some risk. But there’s a difference between being asked to advance as part of a coordinated push on a well-defined, well-scouted target and being told to sneak into a zone where there’s been no prior scouting and where Ukrainian surveillance and kamikaze drone coverage is expected to be overwhelming. Those are the kinds of situations that Russian soldiers are being ordered into. Not because there’s any expectation that they would succeed, but because their attempt gives their commanders enough plausible deniability to report success.”
Sometimes it works. “But the costs of munitions, funds, supplies, and especially human life are so much greater than the value of what Russia’s actually capturing.”
“Nor does Russia particularly care which soldiers get sent to the meat grinder. More and more sources from within the Russian military report the troops are sent into assault units regardless of their other qualifications, including skilled recruits who could make meaningful contributions to enhance Russia’s overall situation. Soldiers with experience in electrical work, logistics management, and even the medical field, have been reassigned against their will to assault brigades, often without explanation. At times, those reassignments come after they were recruited into the military on the promise that they’d be working with their advanced skill set.”
“Sometimes the reassignments appear to be random, but at other times they’re used as punishment. Soldiers who disobey orders, try to desert, or otherwise anger their commanders are highly likely to be reassigned to units where they’ll be used as cannon-fodder.”
“But let’s circle back to Ukraine’s mid-range drone campaign, because that makes this problem even worse. At the best of times, Russian troops were being sent forward into these high-risk assaults with at least a few things going for them: A little bit of training and prep time, a decently well supplied sustainment infrastructure to keep them alive, a possibility of MedEvac if they’re wounded, and a possibility that reinforcements would soon join them if they survive.”
“Today, though, that entire support infrastructure has been torn to shreds. Yet, the expectation of forward progress still remains. So, these soldiers are still ordered forward, but they’re overexposed, under-supplied, and isolated compared to what was already a bad situation. When they’re wounded, they aren’t evacuated. They die slow, horrific, predictable deaths. To the point that instead of the usual ratio of killed to wounded in modern war, one killed for every three wounded, Ukrainian assessment suggests that Russia’s balance looks more like two soldiers killed for every one wounded.”
“Even worse, the soldiers who are wounded will often be sent back to combat. Every so often, video footage emerges from the front lines depicting soldiers on crutches or in wheelchairs bearing visible shrapnel wounds or dealing with limbs that won’t work like they’re supposed to, forced back into assault units where their death is all but certain.”
“And all of that would be bad enough if Russia wasn’t so insistent on hobbling its soldiers even further. Take the example of frontline drone equipment. According to Russian milblogger sources, the Kremlin recently ordered most combat units to start giving up drones of various models, sending them back to be reassigned to Russia’s dedicated drone forces. That’s despite the fact that the Russian drone forces are not properly dispersed along the front line, and they’re not part of any efficient decision-making infrastructure that would allow them to support Russian troops in real time. So where a Russian platoon might once have been able to use small FPV drones to scout their surroundings or strike Ukrainian targets, they now have nothing. They’re operationally blind and beholden to another branch of the military for support.”
“On paper, Russia has started to fix the issue. Officials in Moscow say that Russia is now producing record numbers of FPV drones. According to the milbloggers, however, these replacement drones are unreliable, ineffective, and of a dangerously low construction quality. Similarly, Russian troops are still reeling from the decision to cut off access to Telegram a couple of months ago, demanding that Telegram be replaced with the state-run Max app, despite the fact that it is insecure, incomplete, and extremely buggy. Maybe Vladimir Putin vibe coded it. The same could be said for the loss of Starlink, a western controlled connectivity service that Russia chose to remain dependent on instead of dedicating the appropriate resources to build its own alternative.”
“If we were to end this episode right now, the situation we’ve described would already be bad enough. A Russian military that’s completely failed to address Ukrainian combat innovations and one that’s consistently made decisions that puts its troops at extreme unnecessary risk. But all too often, when a country or a fighting force seems to suffer from issues so comprehensive and so obviously stupid, that they seem to resist understanding, it’s important to ask another question. Who’s getting paid?”
“If Russia’s obvious incentives are to increase the combat potency of its troops, make legitimate gains on the battlefield, and eventually win the war, then who benefits inside Russia from making sure that that doesn’t happen? To answer that question, we’re going to invite you to think about the war a bit differently for just a minute.”
“Take away the people, the guns, the tanks, the drones, and the territory, and think about Russia’s invasion as a flow of money. That money is being sent from within Russia and funneled into Ukraine. Sent in the form of military equipment, fuel supplies, and direct payments made to Russian soldiers. Then some of that money flows back into Russia as those soldiers paychecks travel to bank accounts or are sent to their families.”
“That flow of funds is partially regulated, but it’s happening in and around an active combat zone, which means monitoring is difficult, and financial transfers have to happen with limited internal oversight or anti-corruption protections. Not to mention that the Russian state isn’t exactly the best at internal oversight.”
“Transactions happen on the aggregate scale of tens of billions of rubles, meaning that even relatively large amounts of missing cash can easily be dismissed as just a rounding error.”
“If you were a person interested in taking money that you could reasonably obtain somewhere within the Russian economy, then the war is the perfect place to do it. You’ve just got to figure out where you can get in the way of the regular flow of funds, whether those funds are headed into the conflict zone or traveling out.”
“Take another look at the problems the Russian military is dealing with and the specter of internal corruption is everywhere.”
“We’ll start with a few examples at the top from people who exert immense power within the Russian armed forces. Take Roman Demurchiev, a major general who serves as deputy commander of Russia’s 20th Combined Arms Army. Over the span of several years, he engaged in regular shakedowns of his subordinates worth the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of US dollars, some of which he passed up to his superiors who expected additional payouts. As he once texted to one of his subordinates, quote, “War is war, but don’t forget about the cash. Get yours. Delete this message later.'”
“Or take the former deputy defense minister Ruslan Tsalikov, who was brought up on bribery, money laundering, and conspiracy charges that alleged he created a gang to steal from the Russian state budget. He was brought down during a wave of prosecutions that surrounded former defense minister Sergey Shoygu.”
“But even though Russia does occasionally prosecute corrupt officials, the Kremlin’s track record dovetails in a very troubling way with the problem we’ve already mentioned. Commanders only tend to come under real scrutiny when they’ve already failed in some way that requires their removal, usually due to battlefield setbacks. From Vladimir Putin’s perspective, the nice thing about everybody in the Russian leadership being so corrupt, is that when it’s time to remove them, it usually doesn’t take very long to dig into their finances and bring legitimate, damning charges against them.”
“But if these commanders understand that they’ll only be scrutinized after they’ve been found to have committed battlefield screw-ups, then they’re heavily incentivized to ensure that their screw-ups don’t become common knowledge. So they push their subordinates harder and they push their subordinates harder still until frontline soldiers are fighting and dying to create an illusion of frontline progress so their commanders can save their skins.”
“Or take another problem we’ve already mentioned, the cheapy and ineffective FPP drones that are being flooded toward the Russian front lines. That decision was the work of Yuri Vaganov, the commander of the Russian unmanned systems forces who was appointed in late 2025. But here’s the thing about Vaganov. He has got zero military experience, zero military education, despite now holding the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Instead, he owns a very large drone company, the same drone company that’s now guzzling down rubles from state contracts and mass-producing the FPV drones that Russian soldiers are expected to use. Interesting, isn’t it? In essence, this single aspiring oligarch has worked out a way to position himself within both the Russian military itself and the Russian defense industrial complex so that he could give himself a monopoly over drone procurement in the biggest drone war that the world has ever seen.”
“For Russian soldiers, his appointment is a life-threatening catastrophe. But for Vaganov himself, the incentives will be to cut corners, inflate costs, and otherwise pillage as much of Russia’s drone budget as possible.”
“But let’s talk about the other way that money flows through the Russian side of this war, into soldiers pockets, and then ideally back to their bank accounts or to their families. That’s where lower level commanders get their opportunity, because they wield the power to decide who lives and who dies. Take an article published this April by The Economist, where a dozen Russian contract soldiers describe a system where low-level infantrymen will bribe their commanders for a position away from the front and then spend a high share of their remaining wages financing their commander’s lifestyle while carrying out unpaid labor on the side.”
“As one soldier in that article described, troops often start giving up a portion of their paychecks to buy decent drones or body armor or other assets that might, you know, keep them alive. But then also, quote, ‘You’ll pay forever so they don’t send you to the meat grinder.’ Other Russian commanders have purportedly forced troops to pay exorbitant sums to stay alive and sometimes just to avoid being shot on the spot.”
“According to recent reports by exiled Russian journalists, low-level commanders operate more like gang leaders than actual military personnel, in increasingly sophisticated structures that are informed by the high proportion of ex-convicts that now swell the Russian ranks. Often when new troops arrive, commanders confiscate their bank cards and ping codes and threaten violence against those who don’t comply. And when those soldiers are killed, they’re formally reported by their commanders as missing. A change that ensures that money will continue flowing to their accounts.”
“Think of frontline soldiers as a pure revenue stream, and even some of Russia’s most asinine decisions start to make sense. When a soldier is wounded in combat, that soldier still receives a paycheck. And if they can be kept on the front lines, then the process of extortion can continue.”
“When a higher skill Russian recruit shows up in one of those units, commanders know that they’re likely to have more money, partly because they’re going to be paid on a better contract, and partly because they probably have some form of savings squirreled away from their civilian life. Trap those soldiers in an assault unit, and there’s no limit to what they might be willing to pay in order to avoid the meat grinder. But if they seem as if they’ll cause trouble, then the meat grinder is right there for their commanders to use.”
“Those incentives also help explain increasing reports of physical torture of Russian soldiers by their own commanders on or near the front lines, including soldiers who’ve already been wounded. Our own Warfronts team has encountered footage of Russian troops who’ve had multiple limbs amputated due to combat wounds who were then cling-wrapped onto trees and extorted further. Videos like that can be sent to a soldier’s family who will then ends up paying even more to spare the life of a person who’s locked into conscription or contract by the Russian state.” The Western tradition of military service demands leaders who will do just about anything for the men serving under them, while Russian officers torture their subordinates for money.
“Quoting researcher Alexandra Arapova [Russian families] are saying that literally we paid everything to have our father, brother, husband not to be killed. In many cases, superiors, they use torture to take money from the soldiers.”
“As for the scale of the brutality, we can’t know for sure, but judging by the available information, this kind of treatment is everywhere. One Russian exile outlet, Radio Echo, obtained accounts from soldiers like these, and over a 6-month period in 2025, Radio Echo indicated that they had received almost 12,000 complaints of corruption and violence by Russian commanders against their own men.”
“It’s here that we find the real root of Russia’s ongoing military incompetence. Where Ukraine has spent the last four years learning, adapting, and innovating on the battlefield, Russian generals, defense industrial elites, and low-level battlefield commanders have been building a deeply corrupt machine at every level of the Russian armed forces. That machine exists to extract wealth for the direct and personal benefit of people lucky enough to wield power at the expense of frontline soldiers who aren’t so fortunate.”
“In a system like that, where officials aren’t just personally corrupt, but can safely assume that corruption is all around them, reform just isn’t a goal, even if it saves lives. Reform, there is a danger, even an enemy. Because if Russia were to ever fix the incompetence that runs through its armed forces, then it would destroy the machine that Russian incompetence is built to serve.”
“Right now, that status quo demands constant reports of forward progress, by any means necessary. And the Kremlin is willing to pay every ruble in Russia in order to make that happen.”
“But Vladimir Putin’s military is overrun with people who don’t particularly care about conquering Ukraine as long as they know they’ll be set for life in the post-war Russia that comes next. Russian incompetence is getting worse because it’s becoming streamlined and because the Russian leadership has proved that corruption will go unchecked as long as forward progress continues.”
“The incompetence is the point because the longer this situation lasts, the longer this vast corrupt machine can go on making a profit.”
Thermoclines of truth and endemic corruption are the horrifying reality for Russian soldiers, and also a big reason why Ukraine has a real chance to win.
We previous touched on Putin’s thermocline of truth here.
Judges hate it when people lie to them, and when they do it over and over again, they start to get pissed. And the office of Soros-backed Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner seems to be lying to them an awful lot.
Most of the mainstream media isn’t spending much effort to cover the slow-rolling collapse of Soros-prosecutor District Attorney Larry Krasner.
At least I HOPE it will be a collapse, as judges turn on Krasner not so much for his soft-on-crime policies, about which they can do little directly, but for his office’s illegal tactics used to help convicted murderers get out of jail.
I wrote about decision #1 yesterday, in which the Democrat-dominated Pennsylvania Supreme Court blasted Krasner’s office for lying to the courts about deficiencies in trials for convicted murderers, conceding—falsely—that prior D.A.’s had committed errors (or worse) in pursuing convictions of murderers.
By doing so, they gave what amounted to get-out-of-jail tickets to murderers. With convictions vacated, Krasner’s office did not give up the right to retry the cases, but it’s pretty hard to expect that an office that committed what amounted to perjury to help convicts overturn their convictions would then pursue the subsequent cases with vigor. At best, they purposely helped the defense and endangered cases that were won; at worst, they decided to just let guilty people go free.
The Supreme Court was not amused, and essentially defanged Krasner’s office, allowing the Attorney General of Pennsylvania to intervene in cases as required.
In a forceful and scolding opinion, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that District Attorney Larry Krasner’s office misled the courts, “violated its duty of candor,” and submitted false statements when asking a judge to vacate a 2004 murder conviction.
In the opinion released Tuesday, Justice Kevin Dougherty wrote that prosecutors’ pattern of misleading judges in seeking to overturn murder convictions is so troubling and recurrent that, going forward, before Krasner’s office seeks such relief, judges must notify the state attorney general’s office and allow it to review the case.
The decision amounted to one of the most scathing rebukes yet of Krasner’s efforts to revisit decades-old convictions, and arrives amid intensifying scrutiny of the office’s Conviction Integrity Unit and appeals division, whose handling of post-conviction cases has drawn criticism from judges in both state and federal court.
Just last week, Krasner’s office reversed course in a separate murder case, writing in a federal court filing that one of its prosecutors had made “material misstatements” and submitted “legally erroneous” statements when seeking to overturn a man’s murder conviction. The office sought to withdraw its recommendation to grant the defendant a new trial.
This decision is, as far as I can tell, one of the most scathing rebukes of a District Attorney in memory. It’s pretty shocking, actually. The Justices spared no mercy to Krasner and company, and with good reason.
Snip.
Now comes round two: a federal court just sanctioned one of Krasner’s former attorneys who was in charge of this program, barring her for three years from cases before the court.
Nancy Winkelman was suspended for three years by a panel of federal judges who found that she was complicit in efforts to mislead a federal judge while seeking to overturn the death sentence of a man convicted of killing an East Mount Airy couple in the 1980s and allow him to serve life in prison instead.
The ruling, made public this week, adds to the mounting judicial scrutiny of post-conviction work in Krasner’s office. On Tuesday, the state Supreme Court imposed remarkable new restrictions on prosecutors’ efforts to reverse potentially problematic convictions.
In a forceful and scolding opinion, the high court said Krasner’s office misled judges, submitted false statements, and “violated its duty of candor” in asking a judge to vacate a 2004 murder conviction.
The court wrote that prosecutors’ actions in the case were part of a troubling pattern of conduct in seeking to overturn murder convictions and ordered that, going forward, the state attorney general’s office must be asked to review and weigh in on all such cases.
The panel of federal judges, in ordering Winkelman’s suspension, echoed some of those concerns.
Nor did the viciousness of the murders in question prevent Krasner’s office from lying to get said murderers sprung.
The three-judge panel, in a ruling issued in March and unsealed this week, said Winkelman and a subordinate, former assistant district attorney Paul George, misled a federal judge by misrepresenting parts of the case while attempting to reverse the death sentence of Robert Wharton.
Wharton was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1984 strangulation and drowning deaths of Bradley and Ferne Hart inside their East Mount Airy home.
The jury found that Wharton, angry over a disputed debt, spent months terrorizing the family before he forced his way inside the home at knifepoint and killed the couple. Afterward, he turned off the heat, leaving the couple’s seven-month-old baby, Lisa, to freeze to death — but she survived.
Decades later, prosecutors in Krasner’s office, in seeking to vacate his death sentence, suggested in court that the victims’ family backed their effort. But it was later discovered that they had consulted only one relative and never contacted Lisa Hart-Newman, the couple’s surviving daughter, who strongly opposed the move.
George later acknowledged that was a mistake, and U.S. District Judge Mitchell Goldberg ordered Krasner to write apology letters to the Harts’ relatives.
Goldberg, who denied the request to reduce Wharton’s sentence, later said George’s and Winkelman’s review of the case was “patently deficient,” and that they violated federal rules of procedure in a manner that was “egregious” and “exceptional.”
The two prosecutors then faced federal disciplinary proceedings to examine whether they’d been intentionally deceptive.
Last year, the three-judge panel found that George had lied to Goldberg about key facts, “flouted the interests of the public and the victims’ families,” and acted as the “quarterback” of efforts by the district attorney’s office to undo or undermine all death penalty cases.
Is it possible to have them tried for perjury? I am not a lawyer, so I am unclear whether lying in documents to the court count the same as perjury under oath.
Apparently, among the “needed reforms” Krasner refers to, letting convicted murderers escape punishment by lying to courts is on the top of the list.
Two courts so far have made clear that Krasner’s office is not only pursuing bad policies, which could be “justified” by the fact that Krasner was elected, but also willing to break the law to do so in the name of “reform.”
Given that Krasner got some 75% of the vote the last time he was elected, it seems that ordinary Philadelphians are either ignorant of his love of criminals and mindlessly pull the D lever, or are aware of them and side with the criminals as well…
