A startling video from today features respected political scientist Prof. John Mearsheimer discussing a recent attack on a secret bunker, where as many as 30 senior Israeli officers were reportedly killed.

Secret Bunker Destroyed—30 Senior Israeli Officers Confirmed Dead | Prof. John Mearsheimer

Who were these officers, and why are their deaths a big deal?

Professor John Mearsheimer, known for his clear-eyed analysis of global power politics, reveals a stunning claim: a secret underground Israeli bunker was reportedly destroyed, killing 30 senior military officers. These weren’t just average soldiers—they were high-ranking strategists, likely involved in directing operations across multiple fronts, including Gaza, Lebanon, and cyber defense. 

Their presence in a hidden facility suggests they were deeply embedded in Israel’s top-tier war planning, possibly even coordinating with foreign intelligence assets. Losing them in one blow isn’t just a military loss—it’s a decapitation of key leadership at a time of extreme regional tension. It hints that adversaries may have obtained sensitive intelligence, and that Israeli defense structures—once thought impenetrable—are now being breached with precision. If true, this event shakes the perception of Israel’s military dominance and opens serious questions about vulnerabilities that were never supposed to exist.

 Who Were They?

1. Senior Commanders – These were not regular soldiers but top-level leaders—generals and colonels with years of strategic experience.

2. Strategic Thinkers – They were responsible for planning key military operations and guiding troops in combat.

3. Inside the Bunker – Officers in such bunkers are the eyes and ears of the military; losing so many at once is like removing the brain from a body.

These were not front-line troops or junior officers—they were the upper brain trust of Israel's military establishment. Generals, colonels, and top-level analysts with decades of combined battlefield and intelligence experience, these individuals were deeply involved in strategic operations, likely overseeing active missions in Gaza, the northern front with Lebanon, and even international coordination with Western allies. The fact that they were all gathered in a classified bunker suggests they were engaged in critical planning or command functions, possibly linked to high-level war game simulations or live combat operations. Their collective role was to think ahead, predict enemy moves, and deploy precision responses—removing them in one strike is not just a loss of leadership, it’s the collapse of real-time strategic thinking. It's the equivalent of cutting the head off a command-and-control network. For a highly centralized military like Israel’s, this could cause cascading delays, miscommunication in the field, and a temporary vacuum in decision-making that adversaries could exploit.

Why Their Loss Matters

• Immediate Impact on Command
  Losing 30 high-ranking leaders in one strike disrupts how the military plans and broadcasts orders. Soldiers on the ground may be left without clear direction.

• Morale Shock
  Troops look up to their commanders. A devastating hit shakes confidence, making fighters feel leaders might not be able to protect them.

• Wider Strategy Affected
  These officers likely handled missions beyond the frontline—security for Gaza strip, northern borders, and key air and intelligence operations. Their deaths create gaps in planning and decision-making.

• Escalation Warning
  Hitting a secret bunker shows the attackers had inside knowledge and high capability. This could embolden opposing forces and signal a shift in the balance of power.

What Could Happen Next

Something big could be coming next, and not just inside Israel. If 30 of Israel’s top military leaders were really taken out in one strike, it’s like someone just hit the heart of their war room. The government will probably rush to fill the empty spots with new leaders, but it takes time to rebuild trust and teamwork. Some believe Israel may strike back hard, not just to fight the enemy, but to show the world that it’s still in control and not afraid. Behind the scenes, there could be secret meetings, spy reports, and a lot of finger-pointing as leaders try to figure out how the bunker’s location was found. Was someone leaking secrets? Did a satellite or hacker give the enemy an exact map? Other countries are watching closely—both friends and foes. If Israel can be hit like this, some nations might rethink their alliances, while others may quietly prepare for bigger surprises. This one event could quietly shift the power game across the Middle East, even if no one’s saying it out loud yet.

 Final Thoughts

If this report is true, then we may be looking at more than just a loss of soldiers—it could be a turning point that changes everything. These officers weren’t just commanders, they were planners, coordinators, and possibly even linked to deeper global networks. Some believe they may have been involved in secret operations that were never meant to be made public. If someone was able to find and strike their bunker, it raises questions no one wants to answer out loud—like who knew they were there, how deep the breach of intelligence goes, and whether more hidden bases could be next. This moment could quietly shift how future wars are fought, showing that even top-secret bunkers aren’t safe anymore. It may also cause some countries to wonder if their own secrets are really protected, or if someone is already one step ahead. This isn’t just about Israel—it’s about a new kind of war where shadows move faster than armies.

Sources & Links:

• YouTube – Prof. John Mearsheimer on the secret bunker attack youtube.com+1youtube.com+1youtube.com+1youtube.com+1

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Now that Donald Trump is President again, many people are looking closely at how his actions might be shaking up the money world. One big example is what just happened to BlackRock, one of the world’s largest investment firms. In just three months, clients pulled out $52 billion from BlackRock. That’s a huge amount of money, and it’s a big warning sign.

Why did this happen? And what does it have to do with President Trump?

First, President Trump is already bringing back some of his older ideas—like tariffs, which are extra taxes on products coming into the U.S. He’s using these tariffs to pressure countries like China, Mexico, and Germany, saying they’ve taken advantage of America. These moves are making other countries nervous. They’re starting to rethink their deals with the U.S.—and even where they keep their money.

Trump has also spoken out against globalist groups, like the World Economic Forum and even certain U.S. agencies that work with foreign investors. He wants America to be more independent and to stop relying on foreign money. Some people like that idea. But others—especially investors in countries like Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, and Japan—are pulling their money out of American-based firms like BlackRock because they think Trump’s moves could bring market shocks or cause currency battles.

Also, President Trump is reworking the U.S. dollar’s role in the world. He’s pushing to protect it—but in doing so, he’s also upsetting old systems. Countries that once bought U.S. debt (like bonds and Treasuries) are starting to ask, “What if the dollar isn’t as safe anymore?” And when foreign trust weakens, big firms like BlackRock feel the heat.

Trump is also targeting groups that he says helped “rig the system” in the past. He’s called out BlackRock by name before, saying they are too close to powerful elites and global institutions. That may have caused some of BlackRock’s wealthy clients to panic and move their funds elsewhere—especially if they think government pressure is coming.

So yes, President Trump is a big part of this story.

He didn’t directly cause the $52 billion loss at BlackRock, but his return to power, his strong stance on trade, and his war against global financial networks are all reasons why the money is moving fast—and mostly away from old Wall Street giants.

What happens next depends on whether Trump’s new rules bring real results—or if more investors start pulling back because they don’t trust the changes.

Yes, BlackRock's $BLK Aladdin basically controls the entire stock market and is closely tied to Federal Reserve liquidity & shadow money.

Nothing happens organically anymore.
Crashes & bailouts are planned in advance. https://t.co/tDmVVrZWg8 pic.twitter.com/K72Z0Emm16

— Financelot (@FinanceLancelot) July 15, 2025

Key recent finance & market updates

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Japanese covid vaccination database for 21 million citizens has been made public

On Sunday, two Japanese citizen groups held a press conference to discuss the data they received via the Freedom of Information Act last month. Prof. Murakami, who was present at the press conference, revealed a disturbing peak in deaths 90–120 days after mRNA vaccination, with higher doses showing earlier death peaks. The groups have made the data available online. It is currently in Japanese only, but they are working on translating it into English.

The Brutal Truth July 2025
The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Joe Rogan Ambushes Gavin Newsom Via Text With A COVID Question He Never Saw Coming

By Vigilant Fox

Joe Rogan just AMBUSHED Gavin Newsom with a single text that forced him to answer for California’s draconian COVID policies.

Then came the biggest blow of all…and it didn’t even come from Shawn Ryan.

Joe Rogan sent in a question by text, and Ryan read it out in full, leaving Newsom nowhere to run.

It was a reckoning for the Covid mafia and Newsom himself.

“Who will be held accountable for mandating COVID-19 vaccines for children, which were unnecessary and ineffective, and who will take responsibility for the unprecedented increases in myocarditis and cancer cases among them?”

Rogan added another direct shot:

“Second to that, do you feel any remorse for that draconian decision that was obviously heavily influenced by the pharmaceutical companies’ desire for maximum profit?”

Newsom visibly struggled.

He didn’t deny the mandates or defend the decision directly.

Instead, he started pointing fingers at Trump and Republican governors who also rolled out vaccines…without addressing his own responsibility at all.

It was humiliating.

For once, there was no crowd of supportive journalists to clean it up for him, no carefully crafted press release to smooth it over.

Just an unfiltered moment of accountability, and he had nothing to say other than trying to defend failed policies and Covid talking points.

The Brutal Truth July 2025
The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Given the Amount of Witnesses who have Unlived themselves... What are the odds Maxwell gets to testify before she gets unalive?

A lot of people are wondering something very serious: will Ghislaine Maxwell ever get to tell everything she knows about Jeffrey Epstein and the powerful people they were connected to? Or will something happen to her before that can happen?

This question might sound like a mystery movie, but it’s based on real things that have happened. You see, many people who were close to the Epstein case—witnesses, guards, even investigators—have died suddenly. Some were ruled as suicides. Some had strange accidents. A few simply disappeared.

Jeffrey Epstein himself died in jail before he could go to trial. That happened while the cameras in his cell were somehow “not working,” and his guards were “asleep.” People from all political sides still ask: was it really a suicide? Or was someone trying to keep him quiet?

Ghislaine Maxwell Breaks Silence, Says Government 

Destroyed Evidence: ‘Ready to TESTIFY to Congress… - YouTube

Now, Ghislaine Maxwell is in prison. She was found guilty for helping Epstein, and many believe she knows a lot of secrets about big names in politics, business, and even royalty. She hasn’t told everything yet. Some say she’s keeping quiet to stay alive.

The strange part is this: in big cases like this, witnesses are usually protected. But in the Epstein case, protection has been weak. Too many people who could talk have ended up silent—forever.

People are now wondering: will Maxwell get to speak in court again? Will she tell the full truth? Or will the same thing that happened to Epstein and others happen to her too?

When important people keep showing up on secret flight logs, and many witnesses vanish, regular folks start thinking something bigger is going on behind the scenes. It feels like every time we get close to the truth, something or someone blocks the path.

So the big question remains: will we ever hear the real story? Or will the silence continue?

Sources & Links:

• BBC – The Death of Jeffrey Epstein

• NPR – What We Know About Ghislaine Maxwell’s Trial

• NY Post – List of Epstein Associates Who Have Died

• Reuters – Maxwell Appeal Blocked

• Fox News – Who Might Maxwell Name?

• Ghislaine Maxwell Breaks Silence, Says Government Destroyed Evidence: ‘Ready to TESTIFY to Congress… - YouTube

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Things aren't looking too good for the Republicans AND the Democrats whereas this Epstein Case is just not going away quietly.

This Man Next To Him Tells You EVERYTHING You Need To Know About It All..

Things aren’t looking so good for the Republicans and the Democrats right now. A big story about Jeffrey Epstein just won’t stop, and it’s making problems for both parties.

Marjorie Taylor Greene and some other Republicans want more papers and files from the government about Epstein—but Donald Trump and some GOP leaders are calling it a “hoax” and saying it’s fake and a trick by the Democrats PBS+5AP News+5ABC News+5AP News+4TIME+4YouTube+4. Even inside Trump’s party, people are in a fight over whether to share the documents.

On the other side, the Democrats are using this story to say, “Look, the powerful are protecting the powerful.” They want full transparency so people can trust the system The Guardian+4The Times+4CBS News+4Politico. They argue that keeping secrets looks like the rich and famous are getting special treatment.

This fight is making both parties look weak. The Republicans are split, with some calling for truth and others calling it fake. The Democrats are pushing hard, but some think they should focus on other things too The Times+2The Guardian+2ABC News+2.

So you’re thinking: why not start a new American Party? A group that isn’t stuck in these old ways and says, “Let’s focus on fairness, not secret files.” This new party could bring people together who don’t want drama and want leaders to be honest and work for everyone.

If you believe the old parties aren’t helping, and you want honest rules for all, this could be your moment to build something better—and faster—before voters get even more tired of the fighting.

Related news on Epstein fallout

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Maxwell Drops Names — Why Some Say the Clintons Are in the Hot Seat Again

Exclusive: Obama's Going to PRISON – The DOJ Source Who LEAKED This Will SHOCK You to Your CORE!

People across the country are once again paying close attention to the Jeffrey Epstein case, especially after new claims have surfaced suggesting that Ghislaine Maxwell may have named the Clintons in connection to Epstein’s activities. This has led many to question if major political figures — including former President Barack Obama — could face legal trouble down the line.

Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving a prison sentence for her role in Epstein’s trafficking network, has long been under pressure to reveal more names tied to Epstein’s inner circle. A document allegedly released as part of a sealed testimony or leak from court files reportedly includes high-level individuals — with some speculating that names like Bill and Hillary Clinton, and possibly even Barack Obama, are involved, either through association, travel logs, or donation connections.

Travel logs from Epstein’s private jet, sometimes referred to as the "Lolita Express," have shown prominent politicians and celebrities onboard over the years. While these logs alone don’t prove illegal activity, many critics believe they reveal troubling patterns and associations that demand further scrutiny. In particular, the Clinton Foundation’s ties to Epstein, and Hillary Clinton’s past communications with Maxwell, have come under renewed examination.

Conservative outlets and online voices have claimed that if Maxwell's full list is released and proves accurate, there could be legal consequences for some of the individuals named — possibly including criminal investigations. The idea that former President Obama might face charges is still largely speculative at this time, with no official documentation linking him directly to any Epstein-related crimes. However, fringe theorists argue that sealed documents or witness testimonies could eventually change that.

It’s also worth noting that the Department of Justice has been criticized for how it’s handled both the Epstein and Maxwell cases. Some believe that powerful people are being shielded from prosecution. Others point to the recent blocking of Maxwell’s appeal as a sign that deeper information could remain buried to protect individuals with influence.

For now, there is no public confirmation that Maxwell’s list includes Obama or that any indictments are imminent. But these reports have sparked renewed interest in the Epstein network — and in whether the justice system will ever fully hold everyone accountable.

Sources & Links:

• Epstein Flight Logs - The Independent

• Court documents in Maxwell case - The Guardian

• DOJ statement on Maxwell appeal - U.S. Department of Justice

(WARNING: Some sources contain unverified claims or lean toward alternative interpretations not confirmed by mainstream outlets.)

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Elmo loses it on X, Michelle Pfeiffer publicly calls out Bill Gates, and journalist Xavier Poussard — Who Candace collaborated with on the “Becoming Brigitte” series—has been called in by the Italian police.

BREAKING NEWS! Brigitte Macron Sends Italian Police To Xavier Poussard! | Candace Ep 216

Why many top leadership roles today are held by transgender individuals—and how it connects to theology

BECAUSE THEY ARE WOKE.

Transgender leaders are stepping into big roles at work and in faith communities more often than before. One reason is that some churches and religious groups—like certain branches of Protestant Christianity—are focusing not just on who a person was born as, but on who they truly are inside.

 These communities believe that everyone reflects God’s love, so they welcome leaders who are transgender. You see this in places like the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which chose a transgender bishop, and India's first transgender pastor in the Evangelical Church.

 In these settings, leaders say being honest about who they are helps them bring hope and belonging to people who feel left out. So, the connection is clear: where theology teaches inclusion and understanding, transgender people can rise up to lead and share that message of acceptance.

Relevant News on Trans Leadership in Religion

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

A recent attempt by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) to add an amendment—demanding Attorney General Pam Bondi release all Epstein files and potentially call Ghislaine Maxwell to testify—was struck down in the House Rules Committee in a 5–6 vote X (formerly Twitter)+15Axios+15Fox News+15. 

All Republicans on that committee voted against the amendment, except for Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), who broke ranks and sided with Democrats Axios.

That means the members voting against Maxwell testifying were five unnamed Republican members of the House Rules Committee. They rejected the push for full transparency and Maxwell’s potential testimony. The move prevents Maxwell from being invited unless Congress ships out a formal request later.

So in summary:

• Dems–Reps Khanna and Veasey → proposed opening the files and calling Maxwell.

• Rep. Norman → one GOP vote in favor.

• Five GOP majority → blocked it in committee.

No official floor vote happened yet, but this committee defeat means Maxwell remains off-limits unless new momentum builds.

There’s a lot of buzz about why Matt Gaetz was suddenly pulled from a major event and rushed to Washington, and it might not be just politics as usual. 

The fact that this happened while Epstein’s secret files are causing chaos in the MAGA movement raises eyebrows. People are asking—why Gaetz, and why now? 

Some say Trump handpicked him because he’s one of the few who hasn’t backed down from pushing for real answers. Lawyer Robert Barnes even laid out a strategy that sounds more like a mission:

follow the money, expose everything, and don’t let anyone hide behind redactions. George Papadopoulos added fuel by saying Gaetz is the only person who could lead a true investigation. Whether this is about justice or survival, one thing is clear—something big is happening behind the scenes, and Gaetz might be at the center of it.

Ghislaine Maxwell says she’s ready to talk—really talk—and tell Congress everything she knows, including who was on Epstein’s real client list. She claims Epstein didn’t just die in jail—he was murdered—and she says she’ll name names under oath. 

But here’s the strange part: some top Republicans in Congress are stopping it. 

Roger Stone even said Maxwell was an honored guest at Chelsea Clinton’s wedding, hinting that she’s tied into the highest circles of power. So if she wants to speak, and people want answers, why would anyone stop her? Some believe it’s because both parties have people to protect. When secrets go that deep, it’s not about left or right—it’s about who’s afraid of the truth getting out.

Urgent: Matt Gaetz YANKED to DC as Epstein Files EXPLODE – Trump's Secret Meeting SHOCKS MAGA!

News on Epstein transparency efforts

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Maxwell’s request for Supreme Court review has been rejected by lower courts

The U.S. Department of Justice has formally asked the Supreme Court to deny her appeal, which argues that a 2007 non-prosecution deal for Jeffrey Epstein should have also protected her from being prosecuted elsewhere Wikipedia+15The Daily Beast+15The Times of India+15. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, maintains that the deal applied to her—but both a federal appeals court and the DOJ disagree, noting it only covered Epstein in Florida New York Post+5The Daily Beast+5Business Insider+5. Her lawyers have criticized this move, saying it breaks a promise and lacks fairness The Daily Beast.

The appeal has stirred controversy, especially among supporters who feel Epstein’s broader network is still hidden. Despite earlier promises from officials like Pam Bondi to release more Epstein-related files, the DOJ and FBI recently stated that no further evidence will be disclosed, leaving many disappointed The Daily Beast+1AP News+1.

Meanwhile, Maxwell has expressed a willingness to testify before Congress, claiming she knows key details and is ready to reveal them if lawmakers ask axios.com+14Fox News+14The Times of India+14. It’s still unclear whether Congress will pursue that.

GHISLAINE MAXWELL BLOWS THE LID OFF THE EPSTEIN COVER-UP!! "WILLING TO GIVE UP THE NAMES"!!

 Bottom Line

• Maxwell’s request for Supreme Court review has been rejected by lower courts and opposed by prosecutors.

• Her 20-year sentence remains in place.

• She’s willing to testify publicly but needs an invitation from Congress.

• Many believe more evidence could be hidden, though officials say there’s nothing left to reveal.

Some people believe there’s more going on behind the scenes than what the government is saying. Ghislaine Maxwell is still serving her 20-year sentence, and though she asked the Supreme Court to review her case, the courts and the Department of Justice said no. But here’s where things get interesting—she says she’s willing to testify in front of Congress, which has made some people wonder if she knows things the public hasn’t been told. Officials claim there’s no more evidence to share, but many don’t trust that. They think powerful people are being protected, and that if Maxwell really spoke freely, it could shake up everything. Some even believe that’s why the government wants to keep her quiet—because if the truth got out, too many names would be exposed.

Latest on Maxwell appeal and Epstein files

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

 Major Shake-Up in the Trump-Musk Relationship

Is Musk stepping into politics? What role could he be playing? 

This unexpected move could reshape the political and technological future of the country.

• Musk’s Unexpected Role
  Trump surprised many by appointing Elon Musk as the head of a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Musk worked inside the White House alongside cabinet members—something no tech CEO has done before Politico+15ABC News+15Diario AS+15.

• Defense Contract Goes to Musk
  Now, the Department of Defense has awarded Musk’s AI company, xAI, a contract worth up to $200 million to use its chatbot “Grok” for national security and scientific work Politico+1The Daily Beast+1.

• Cabinet Members Are Surprised
  Inside the White House, officials were taken aback by Musk’s growing presence. Stories say he even challenged cabinet leaders on cutting costs and firing staff, which caused tension ABC7 San Francisco+4Politico+4ABC News+4.

• From Ally to Critic
  After just 130 days, Musk left DOGE amid disagreements—especially over Trump’s big tax-and-spending bill, which Musk called a “repugnant abomination.” Trump responded angrily, calling Musk “off the rails” and warning he’d retaliate WikipediaCBS News+2Diario AS+2The Guardian+2.

• America Party Surprise
  In response, Musk announced plans for a new third party, the America Party, aiming to target key Senate and House seats. Trump dismissed it as “ridiculous” and voiced pity—even floated deportation in jest economictimes.indiatimes.com+12The Guardian+12Wikipedia+12.

When President Trump brought Elon Musk into the White House to run a new agency, it shocked a lot of people. No tech boss had ever been given that kind of power before, especially inside the cabinet. Musk wasn’t just making suggestions—he was calling out government waste, pushing to fire people, and questioning how money was being spent. Some say this wasn’t about saving money—it was about shaking things up fast before the election.

 Then came the twist: Musk’s company, xAI, got a massive $200 million military contract to use its new chatbot, Grok, in national security. But things fell apart after Musk publicly slammed one of Trump’s big spending plans. The two began trading insults, and Musk left after just four months. 

Not long after, he announced a new political group called the America Party, which wants to win seats in Congress. Some believe Musk wasn’t just trying to help—he was testing how far he could go in reshaping government itself. His sudden rise and fast exit left people wondering who was really in charge—and whether powerful people outside politics are now pulling strings inside the White House.

1. Tech in Government – Musk’s rise shows just how much a tech leader can influence politics today.

2. Power Struggle – The split highlights growing tension between traditional political power and privately funded tech giants.

3. New Political Game – Musk launching a party could shake up how U.S. elections work.

4. Policy Ripples – Expect effects on budgets, AI regulation, defense strategy, and how tech is governed.

Elon Musk’s jump into government shows that the line between tech power and political power is getting blurry. 

It’s not just about new ideas—it’s about who gets to run things. Musk wasn’t elected, but he was suddenly helping make big government decisions, even getting huge military deals for his own company. When he didn’t like how money was being spent, he pushed back hard. Then, he walked away and started his own political party. This isn’t just a rich guy making noise—he’s testing how much control tech leaders can take without going through voters. 

If his party grows, it could change how elections work, how budgets are made, and even how the military uses AI. Some people wonder if this is about fixing problems—or about a new kind of power trying to replace the old one. Either way, it shows that big tech isn’t just building apps anymore—it’s aiming to build the future of government.

Big companies having power in politics isn’t something new.

For a long time, rich businesses have given money to campaigns, helped write laws, and even shaped what schools teach or what wars are fought. But now, it's getting even deeper. Some companies don’t just influence things quietly—they’re starting to act like they are the government. When a tech billionaire gets military contracts, helps run government offices, or even builds tools that decide what people see and hear online, it blurs the line between business and leadership. This isn’t just about money anymore—it’s about control.

If the people running the machines, satellites, and data systems also start calling the shots in Washington, then voting and laws might matter less than who owns the tech. That’s what some are starting to notice, and why they’re raising questions.

This unexpected partnership—and fallout—

Could reshape U.S. politics and policy for years to come.

US NEWS LIVE | Trump Appoints Elon Musk? Cabinet Shocked by Unexpected Decision | Breaking News!

Related news on Trump & Musk saga

After Jeffrey Epstein was reported dead in 2019, most people believed the story was over. But in February 2024, a report showed that large amounts of money—millions of dollars—were quietly moved from his bank accounts long after he was supposed to be dead. That raised big questions.

Epstein’s Dead So Why Is His Bank Account STILL Moving Millions!?! w/ Nick Bryant

Some believe this points to something much deeper: that Epstein may not have really died, or that powerful people with access to his finances are hiding the truth. Others think intelligence agencies could be involved, either protecting secrets or protecting someone still alive. These strange money transfers make people wonder if his “death” was just a way to make him disappear—and keep what he knew from coming out.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

( @realDonaldTrump - Truth Social Post )

 ( Donald J. Trump - Jul 12, 2025, 5:21 PM ET )

What’s going on with my “boys” and, in some cases, “gals?” They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening.

We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and “selfish people” are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein. For years, it’s Epstein, over and over again.

Why are we giving publicity to Files written by Obama, Crooked Hillary, Comey, Brennan, and the Losers and Criminals of the Biden Administration, who conned the World with the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, 51 “Intelligence” Agents, “THE LAPTOP FROM HELL,” and more?

They created the Epstein Files, just like they created the FAKE Hillary Clinton/Christopher Steele Dossier that they used on me, and now my so-called “friends” are playing right into their hands. Why didn’t these Radical Left Lunatics release the Epstein Files?

If there was ANYTHING in there that could have hurt the MAGA Movement, why didn’t they use it? They haven’t even given up on the John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King, Jr. Files.

No matter how much success we have had, securing the Border, deporting Criminals, fixing the Economy, Energy Dominance, a Safer World where Iran will not have Nuclear Weapons, it’s never enough for some people.

We are about to achieve more in 6 months than any other Administration has achieved in over 100 years, and we have so much more to do. We are saving our Country and, MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, which will continue to be our complete PRIORITY.

The Left is imploding! Kash Patel, and the FBI, must be focused on investigating Voter Fraud, Political Corruption, ActBlue, The Rigged and Stolen Election of 2020, and arresting Thugs and Criminals, instead of spending month after month looking at nothing but the same old, Radical Left inspired Documents on Jeffrey Epstein.

LET PAM BONDI DO HER JOB — SHE’S GREAT! The 2020 Election was Rigged and Stolen, and they tried to do the same thing in 2024 — That’s what she is looking into as AG, and much more. One year ago our Country was DEAD, now it’s the “HOTTEST” Country anywhere in the World.

Let’s keep it that way, and not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about. Thank you for your attention to this matter!

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Benjamin Netanyahu was told by a powerful Jewish religious figure that he would be Israel’s last leader and hand the scepter to the Messiah. How does this so-called prophecy affect Netanyahu’s political calculations? And who is the mysterious religious figure, honored by successive US presidents, simply known as The Rebbe?

Partial Transcript -- 

His hardline government has massively accelerated the construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, considered illegal under international law. It's also provoked massive protests by attempting to grab more power for itself at the expense of other branches of government. The protests threatened to bring down Netanyahu's government.

But then on October 7th, everything changed. Breaking news out of Israel this morning where Hamas has launched a surprise attack—a massive surprise attack. Hundreds of Hamas fighters poured across breached border points. They attacked by air, land, and sea, taking Israel by surprise, with many in his own country blaming him for the worst security failure in Israel's history.

Netanyahu is once again relying on religious language to rally the country. "The Bible says that there is a time for peace and a time for war. This is a time for war." That kind of language is recognized by Evangelical Christians in the United States, who are still able to influence U.S. policy in the Middle East. Netanyahu took that Bible verse from Ecclesiastes 3.

Netanyahu spent many years living and working in the United States and has always believed in his ability to influence America. Today, his relationship with President Joe Biden may not be perfect, but that confidence, at least outwardly, is still there.

Today Netanyahu compared his war with Hamas to Israel's battle with the Amalek in the Old Testament. "You must remember what Amalek has done to you," says our Holy Bible. "And we do remember, and we are fighting." The Amalekites were one of Israel's arch enemies, and in some parts of the Old Testament, God commanded they should be destroyed.

Some commentators believe this is what Netanyahu is signaling with his biblical references. Amalek is a sign of people who are evil people, and they try to take away Jewish people from God, to divide them from God, and to take them away from God. He's doing the same thing Amalek has done. He's doing what Amalek has done.

So how is he coming to speak in the name of the Torah, in the name of the Jewish religion, when he doesn't believe in the Torah? He doesn't believe in God.

Benjamin Netanyahu is known to be a secular Jew, but he certainly saw the value in being associated with the Rebbe, whose presence is still felt in Israel even 30 years after his death. Sitting alongside his Zionist and ultra-Orthodox allies, Netanyahu may or may not believe in God, but he certainly believes in retribution—visiting violence of biblical proportions upon the people of Gaza.

Watch interview at 10:30

Reporter - We don't have America with us

Bibi - USA IS NOT A UNIFIED BLOCK. we have the senate, the congress, and a strong Jewish lobby on our side. We have a strong influence over the general support of America. America wont force us into anything. 

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902–1994) was a very famous Jewish leader known simply as “The Rebbe”portalcioranbr.wordpress.com. He led a group called Chabad-Lubavitch and spent his life teaching Jewish values. Many people respected him. In fact, U.S. presidents honored him for his work. For example:

• President Jimmy Carter (1977): Carter declared 1977 to be a “Year of Education” in honor of the Rebbe, and he signed a law making the Rebbe’s birthday (on the Jewish calendar) an annual Education Daychabad.org.

• President Ronald Reagan (1982): Reagan proclaimed the Rebbe’s birthday as a national “Day of Reflection” and even gave the Rebbe a special scroll signed by many officialsen.wikipedia.org.

• President Bill Clinton: After the Rebbe died, Clinton awarded him the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal for his contributions to education and charityen.wikipedia.org. Clinton said every president since Nixon had recognized the Rebbe as a moral leader.

• Israeli leaders: When the Rebbe passed away, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said his death “was a loss for all the Jewish people”en.wikipedia.org.

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, known as the Rebbe, wasn’t just a rabbi to his followers—he was treated like a world leader. 

He led the Chabad-Lubavitch movement and used his position to quietly influence education, politics, and global Jewish identity. But there’s another layer to his story that doesn’t always get talked about. Some believe his influence went far beyond religion—shaping how powerful governments, including the U.S. and Israel, interacted with Jewish leaders behind the scenes. 

Why did so many presidents honor a religious figure with national holidays and medals? Why did Israeli leaders treat his death like a global loss? Some say the Rebbe’s reach into politics and intelligence circles was much deeper than we’re told, especially as Chabad expanded into major cities and formed ties with business elites. His teachings were spiritual, but his connections may have helped shape real-world policy—quietly and with purpose. Understanding his role means looking beyond the surface, where faith, diplomacy, and influence may have worked hand in hand.

The “Last Leader” Prophecy

Some news stories claim that the Rebbe secretly predicted the future of Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu. They say the Rebbe told Bibi, “You will be Israel’s last prime minister, and you will hand power over to the Messiah.”alestiklal.net. This sounds like a prophecy. But many reporters and experts say it is likely just a rumor or mythportalcioranbr.wordpress.com. There is no official record of the Rebbe ever saying this in public.

The story seems to come from private accounts. For example, one friend of Netanyahu reported that in a meeting the Rebbe said Bibi would face many enemies but should not fear because “God is on your side”israelnationalnews.com. This friend also recalled that the Rebbe hoped Netanyahu would continue serving Israel until the Messiah came and would then give the country’s “keys” to himisraelnationalnews.com. However, these were private blessings and not a written prophecy. No one has a video or official quote of the Rebbe promising the Messiah. In short, the “last leader” story comes from some reports, but it is not confirmed.

The Rebbe was part of Chabad, a branch of Orthodox Judaism with strong beliefs about the Messiah (in Hebrew, Mashiach). In Judaism, the Messiah is a future savior who will bring peace and rebuild the holy Temple in Jerusalem.

Chabad followers especially stressed this idea. Many Chabad Hasidim came to believe that their Rebbe might actually be the Messiah or would lead them to himbulletin.hds.harvard.edu. For example, when the Rebbe appeared at a public gathering in 1992, the crowd shouted “Long live the Rebbe, King Messiah!”bulletin.hds.harvard.edu.

• Chabad followers believed the Rebbe was the Messiahbulletin.hds.harvard.edu.

• They chanted “Long live the Rebbe, King Messiah!” when seeing himbulletin.hds.harvard.edu.

• They teach that one day the Messiah will gather all Jewish people and rebuild the Temple.

Even after the Rebbe died in 1994, many followers continued to believe he would return as the Messiahbulletin.hds.harvard.edu. This shows how central the Messiah idea was in Chabad culture. (Most other Jewish groups believe the Messiah must be alive today, so Chabad’s view is unusual but deeply held in that community.)

Some people in the Chabad movement didn’t just love the Rebbe—they believed he might be the one to bring the Messiah or even be the Messiah himself. When the Rebbe spoke at big events, people cheered and called him “King Messiah,” hoping he would start a new time of peace and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. 

Even after he passed away, many didn’t stop believing. They said he could still come back and finish what he started. This belief wasn’t just about religion—it shaped how some Jewish groups saw the future of Israel and even influenced politics. If people truly believe the Rebbe’s words were part of a bigger plan, it can push leaders—like Netanyahu—to act in ways that match those hopes. That’s why some think the Rebbe’s influence didn’t end when he died, and why his messianic role still matters in how big decisions are made today.

Some political leaders have talked in religious or messianic terms. In Israel, for example, Prime Minister Netanyahu himself has used this language. In September 2024 he spoke of “the era of the Messiah” while explaining why he would fight on in Gazaalestiklal.net. His hard‑right allies openly pray for the arrival of the Messiah, whom they expect to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalemalestiklal.net. One Middle East scholar noted that Netanyahu’s talk fits a radical idea: that a great war will lead to the Messiah’s comingalestiklal.net.

In the U.S., politicians mostly honored the Rebbe’s social work (as above) and rarely discussed these messianic details. Some American Christian groups do talk about Israel and prophecy, but U.S. presidents have focused on his education and charity effortschabad.orgen.wikipedia.org.

Some people believe that when leaders start talking about the Messiah, they’re not just being religious—they might be trying to shape the future. 

In Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu has mentioned “the era of the Messiah” when talking about war and peace, especially in Gaza. His close allies also talk openly about building a new Temple in Jerusalem, which many Jews believe the Messiah will do. Some scholars say this isn’t just hope—it’s a plan. 

They think leaders may be using war to bring about what they believe is a holy future. In the U.S., most politicians praised the Rebbe for his kindness and help with education, but didn’t talk about the Messiah. Still, some Christian groups quietly follow these ideas too, believing that Israel’s future will bring Bible prophecy to life. 

This mix of faith and politics raises big questions: Is war being used to bring about religious goals? And who decides what “God’s plan” looks like in real life?

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

A major disagreement erupted in Washington just as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited former President Trump. 

Some believe that while discussions were underway about Gaza, Netanyahu threatened to release more detailed Epstein-related files that Israel supposedly has—files that could go further than anything from the U.S. If released, these documents could shake the U.S. government. 

Shortly after, the Justice Department surprised many by saying there is “no client list” and officially closed the Epstein investigation. This sudden shift has left some insiders uneasy. Reports now say that a top Trump-picked FBI official might step down because of the internal tension. 

Many see this as more than just politics—it’s about whether the powerful can hide behind secret files or whether real transparency and justice will win out.

 Why It Matters

• Timing of Netanyahu’s visit and DOJ’s denial seems more than coincidence.

• If Israel does hold deeper Epstein files, they could carry big political impact.

• The sudden DOJ statement and potential FBI resignation suggest real turmoil inside the system.

• Raises urgent questions: Are secrets protected or should we demand the truth?

Some people believe the events didn’t happen by accident. Right as Netanyahu visited, the U.S. government suddenly said there was no Epstein client list and closed the case. 

This timing made a lot of people wonder if Israel might have its own set of Epstein files—maybe even more detailed than what the U.S. has. If those files got out, they could cause huge problems for powerful people. 

The idea that a Trump-picked FBI official might quit adds to the feeling that something serious is happening behind closed doors. It makes people ask if the government is trying to protect certain secrets instead of being honest with the public. 

When important files stay hidden, people start to think the system isn’t being fair—and that makes trust disappear.

Sources & Further Reading:

• Reuters: DOJ defends memo saying no evidence of client list nypost.com+2theguardian.com+2nypost.com+2The Times of India

• PBS NewsHour: DOJ and FBI say client list doesn’t exist en.wikipedia.org+4pbs.org+4The Daily Beast+4

• CNN / Wikipedia: Internal clash at DOJ, potential resignations pbs.org+4yahoo.com+4The Times of India+4

Related news on Epstein files clash

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Former White House strategist Steve Bannon recently called for a special prosecutor to take over the Jeffrey Epstein case and for all related files to be released to the public, speaking out on his WarRoom TV broadcast. 

He said that instead of a few heavily redacted document bundles, the attorney general should go to court and fully unseal everything, including the records in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, and admit where any promised client list might be. 

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi had stoked suspicion by saying the client list was “sitting on my desk” for review. But a recent DOJ memo, supported by joint statements from the FBI, concluded that the alleged list doesn’t exist and that Epstein died by suicide. 

Still, the lack of transparency has angered many in the MAGA movement, who feel the case was shut down prematurely and that powerful people may be hiding behind seals rather than facing accountability. o points to this as another example of a system protecting its own instead of delivering real justice and openness.

Some people believe the government isn't telling the full truth about the Jeffrey Epstein case. Steve Bannon and others are asking the courts to open all the files — not just the ones with blacked-out words. They want everything out in the open, especially the names of important people who may have been involved. 

Florida’s former Attorney General, Pam Bondi, once said the list of names was on her desk, but now the FBI and DOJ claim no such list exists. 

That sudden change has made people suspicious. Many think this isn’t just about Epstein anymore — it’s about how justice is applied differently for the powerful. They feel like rich or well-known people might be protected, while regular people would never get that kind of cover-up. 

That’s why some say this is bigger than one man—it’s about whether the system is working for everyone or just for a few.

Related coverage on Epstein files controversy

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Bibi Netanyahu funded Hamas through Qatar and enabled October 7th. Western media blackout on this topic is to keep up the narrative that the current genocide is somehow justified.  -- Candace Owens

1. Yes — Israel, under Netanyahu, did allow Qatar to send substantial sums to Gaza—which included Hamas—starting around 2018. Qatar transferred an estimated $30 million per month, backed by consultations with Israeli intelligence and even approved by Netanyahu’s government. The goal, critics say, was to divide Palestinian politics by empowering Hamas over the Palestinian Authority ynetnews+1The Wall Street Journal+1TIME+13Wikipedia+13El País+13.

2. Netanyahu himself has acknowledged this policy, stating the cabinet unanimously agreed to permit the funding as part of a strategic effort. Intelligence sources told Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, that the money bolstered Hamas’s capabilities, potentially aiding their October 7, 2023 attacks Jerusalem Post+1Wikipedia+1.

3. Critics argue that Israel’s cooperation with Qatar in channeling funds to Hamas wasn’t covert—it was a deliberate strategy to maintain Hamas as a counterbalance to the West Bank leadership. But after Oct. 7, this policy has come under intense scrutiny, with some saying it backfired dramatically El País+11Wikipedia+11Jerusalem Post+11.

4. Was there a media blackout? Reporting on this has surfaced, but coverage in Western media has often been limited. Meanwhile, Israeli media is grappling with a scandal ("Qatargate"): advisors close to Netanyahu were arrested over Qatar ties linked to this funding, prompting investigations into potential political influence ElHuffPost+6ABC+6AP News+6.

In summary:

• It’s true that Qatar sent substantial funds to Hamas with Israeli approval under Netanyahu’s strategy.

• While Israel claims it was humanitarian or a political tool, intelligence suggests Hamas benefited—and may have used it for the October 7 attacks.

• Information about this has emerged, but Western mainstream media gave it limited coverage.

• Ongoing investigations inside Israel (the Qatargate scandal) are pulling back the curtain, though global attention remains muted.

Some people believe there’s a much deeper story behind the money sent to Hamas through Qatar—and it leads straight back to Netanyahu’s government. For years, Israel allowed this funding to go through, even though they knew it would help Hamas stay in control of Gaza. 

They said it was about helping people and keeping peace, but behind the scenes, some think it was actually about keeping Palestinians divided. Reports now say this money may have helped Hamas carry out the October 7 attacks. While a few Israeli news sites are digging into it, big Western news companies haven’t said much. 

Meanwhile, in Israel, a scandal called “Qatargate” is uncovering secret deals and connections between Netanyahu’s people and Qatar. It makes people wonder—was this all part of a bigger plan that backfired, or something even more serious that’s being kept quiet?

Relevant news on Qatar‑Hamas‑Netanyahu ties

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

In a move that surprised many, the Department of Justice has officially shut down its investigation into Pfizer, the massive drug company, over allegations of foreign bribery. The case, which had been going on quietly for years, involved claims that Pfizer paid officials in other countries to boost sales of its products. Some people thought this case might lead to big changes in how drug companies do business—but now it’s over, and the government says no charges will be filed.

Pam Bondi, a former Florida Attorney General who recently took a lead role at the DOJ, oversaw the decision to close the case. That’s where things start to feel a little strange for some observers. Bondi has been a known supporter of the pharmaceutical industry, and critics argue she may have connections that made the case easier to sweep away. The DOJ says there wasn’t enough clear proof to move forward, but others say they never really looked hard enough.

Many regular people, especially after the COVID vaccine rollout, have become more curious about how much power these big companies hold. Pfizer made billions of dollars during the pandemic, and while most believe the vaccine helped save lives, questions about its influence, marketing, and lobbying haven’t gone away. The fact that the bribery case was closed without much explanation makes some wonder: were they protecting the public—or protecting the company?

And here’s what feels off to many folks—when everyday people break the law, they get arrested. But when a massive company gets accused of wrongdoing, it seems like the rules suddenly change. 

The closing of this case doesn’t prove Pfizer did nothing wrong. It just means the government stopped asking questions. That silence makes people want to dig deeper and ask: what else are they not telling us?

Here are verified sources detailing the closure of the Pfizer bribery investigation under Pam Bondi’s leadership:

• Reuters reports that the DOJ’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement team has been significantly reduced and that the department has dropped several ongoing bribery investigations, including one involving Pfizer, following Bondi’s directive to focus on cartel-related cases Department of Justice+10Reuters+10The People's Voice+10Reuters+2Reuters+2AInvest+2.

• Ainvest, citing legal experts from Sidley, confirms that the FCPA inquiry into Pfizer was formally closed after Bondi assumed office in February 2025 AInvest.

• Washington Post coverage highlights how Bondi has reshaped DOJ priorities—particularly lowering anti-corruption enforcement—aligning with the reported decision to wind down the Pfizer case Reuters+6The Washington Post+6AInvest+6.

Note: While no formal charges were filed, the original investigation stemmed from whistleblower reports and foreign policy watchdog concerns. This article reflects public reactions and the need for transparency in corporate oversight. -- TBT

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

 Iconic actress Michelle Pfeiffer, known for keeping a low profile, broke her silence this week to raise an alarm. She posted on Instagram that the FDA just approved Apeel, a plant-based coating used to make fruits and veggies last longer—even on produce labeled "organic." Pfeiffer called it “very concerning” because we can’t see or wash it off, and urged her followers to avoid stores selling Apeel-coated produce. 

Michelle Pfeiffer, who usually stays quiet about big public issues, is now speaking out—and it’s catching people’s attention. She’s worried about a product called Apeel, which is used on fruits and vegetables to make them last longer. What’s making people talk is that this coating was backed by Bill Gates, and once it’s on the food, you can’t really see it or wash it off. Pfeiffer said this is “very concerning,” especially because it’s now allowed even on organic produce.

This isn’t just about one actress being upset. Her message is opening up a much bigger question—why aren’t we told more clearly what’s going on with the food we eat? Many people feel like changes are being made behind the scenes, and families are the last to know. If someone like Michelle Pfeiffer is willing to step forward and say something’s not right, maybe it’s a sign that we should all be paying closer attention and asking more questions. Maybe the food labels aren’t telling the full story—and that’s something worth looking into.

People quickly connected Apeel to Bill Gates, since his foundation gave it early funding—though the company says Gates has no current role.

Pfeiffer’s move surprised many. Apeel insists their edible coating is safe, made from natural plant fats, easily rinsed off with warm water and a gentle scrub, and helps reduce food waste. Still, Pfeiffer’s warning feeds a bigger worry: that tech and wealthy backers are quietly changing what ends up on our plates, without clear public notice.

 To those who followed her post, it feels like a sign we need to ask more questions about how food is made safe—or not—for our families.

Related news sources

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

A higher court has acquitted the two journalists who claimed that Brigitte is a man, clearing them of defamation charges. Meanwhile, with the Epstein case now officially closed, Prince Andrew is reportedly preparing to return to public life. And there’s also a noteworthy development in the ongoing lawsuit involving Blake Lively.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

The Second Amendment is part of America’s Constitution and it gives people a right to own guns. Long ago, it was created so citizens could protect themselves and help defend against threats. 

Over time, the courts have said this right isn’t unlimited—you can have a gun for things like self-defense, but states can still make some rules.

Here’s what just changed:

The Trump administration issued an executive order in February 2025 that made it easier for Americans to own guns by limiting how the ATF enforces certain rules. In May, the ATF reversed a ban on “forced-reset triggers.” These are parts that let rifles fire faster—nearly like machine guns—but now they’re allowed again unless used with handguns. Attorney General Pam Bondi said the move protects Second Amendment rights, but critics worry it removes important safety checks apnews.com+2washingtonpost.com+2reuters.com+2.

Other updates include a nationwide review of gun-friendly lawsuits, like the NRA’s challenge to state bans, and investigations into places that delay gun permits too much. A House resolution also praised Trump for reversing stricter Biden-era policies and reaffirmed that Americans’ gun rights should not be taken away .

So, the Second Amendment still protects your right to own guns, but what’s new is that the government is rolling back more rules and making it easier to use new parts, while deciding how far it will limit self-defense laws.

Supreme Court Issues 9-0 Unanimous Decision Changing Second Amendment Fight! Expansion Now Sought!


Relevant news on 2nd Amendment updates

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

The sudden removal of Xinjiang Party chief Ma Xingrui has left many surprised. Ma wasn’t just a top official—he was seen as close to Xi Jinping’s wife and widely viewed as a loyal supporter of Xi himself. At first glance, his dismissal looks like part of the usual power reshuffling inside the Chinese Communist Party. But some sources suggest there may be a deeper reason. They claim Ma may have been involved in quietly helping Xi plan a secret escape from China—an accusation that, if true, could shake the core of the current leadership.

Some people believe there might be more going on behind the scenes with China’s top leader, Xi Jinping. Even though he looks strong and in control on the outside, rumors say he may secretly be planning a way out of the country. Why would someone so powerful want to leave? Some say it’s because things are getting unstable—between economic troubles, protests, and quiet fights within the government. It’s possible he doesn’t feel as safe as he used to. Strange moves, like removing loyal officials or tightening control even more, could be signs that he’s trying to clear the way for an emergency exit if things fall apart. The idea may sound wild, but history shows that even the most powerful rulers sometimes run when they see the end coming.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

This is a montage of the changing stories on Jeffrey Epstein. Enjoy.

the story keeps changing

Some people are starting to ask deeper questions about why the list connected to Epstein still hasn’t been shown to the public. They understand that protecting victims is important—but that doesn’t explain why the government is hiding everything, including names of powerful people and years of stored video, flight logs, and files. It makes people wonder if the real reason for keeping it secret is to protect famous figures, not the victims. If there's truly nothing to hide, then why is there still so much silence, missing video, sealed documents, and shifting stories? For many, it feels like those in charge are hoping the world just forgets.

But more and more people are saying they won’t stop asking, because justice doesn’t stop just because someone powerful might get embarrassed.

Partial Transcript --

Trump -- Uh, Bill Clinton, nice guy. Got a lot of problems coming up in my opinion with the famous island with Jeffrey Epstein. That island was really a cesspool. There's no question about it. Just ask Prince Andrew.

Kash Patel -- You say that the FBI has Epstein's list. They're sitting on it. That doesn't seem like something you should do. You're protecting the world's foremost predator. That seems like an evil thing to do regardless of who may be embarrassed in the release of that list.

Why is the FBI protecting the greatest in human history?

Simple. Because of who's on that list.

News Narrator -- Who killed Jeffrey Epstein? This doesn't look right. It doesn't look like a suicide.

Bongino -- You know, Epstein's an intelligence asset for people in the Middle East, right? I'm like, "No, I didn't know that." I'm like, "You sure that?" The person, let's say, is like, "I'm absolutely sure that his plane and that island, the cameras, there's a big assumption out there that these videotapes were exclusively in the custody of Epstein." That's a huge mistake. The reason they wanted this story to go away is because there's an assumption like, "Oh, yeah, Epstein had them." No, he wasn't the only one who had them according to this source.

These assets, that's why this blackmail story makes so much sense. There are a lot of people who are knee-deep in the Washington swamp who are not telling you the truth about serious allegations out there that Epstein may have had video and audio of people out there doing things they shouldn't have been doing.

And you should be asking yourself the question, how is it that all these people, the CIA director, the Obama fixer, Bill Clinton, all intersected paths with Jeffrey Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein isn't with us anymore, and nobody seems to want to talk about it.

News Reporter asking Trump -- Would you declassify the 9/11 files?

Trump -- Yeah.

Reporter -- Would you declassify JFK files?

Trump -- Yeah.

Reporter -- Would you declassify the Epstein files?

Trump -- Yeah. Yeah, I would.

Reporter -- All right.

Trump -- I guess I would. I think that less so because, you know, you don't know it. You don't want to affect people's lives if it's phony stuff in there, 'cause there's a lot of phony stuff with that whole world. Uh, but I think I would or at least—

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

A band called Velvet Sundown suddenly became popular on Spotify. They had the vibe of a 1970s rock group—cool sound, catchy songs, and thousands of fans. But here’s the twist: Velvet Sundown wasn’t real. Not the singers, not the players, not even the music. Everything was made by a computer. And Spotify didn’t tell anyone.

That’s what shocked people the most. Listeners thought they were supporting up-and-coming artists. Instead, they were listening to computer-generated music designed to sound like it came from real humans. It wasn’t until another music platform, Deezer, flagged the songs as made by AI that the secret came out.

Some people are now asking why Spotify didn’t say anything. Why is a fake band allowed to earn money and take the spotlight from real musicians? Critics say it’s not just about one band—it’s a warning. If computers can fake talent and get rich doing it, what happens to real artists? Are we slowly replacing human creativity with machine-made art that’s cheaper to produce and easier to control?

Spotify hasn’t answered all the questions yet, but many say this story is just the beginning. It shows how AI is slipping into things we all enjoy—music, art, and entertainment—without telling us. And for some, that feels less like progress and more like trickery.

Sources:

• Washington Post – A '60s-flavored band blew up on Spotify. They're AI.

• El País – The Velvet Sundown, la banda generada con IA con más de 850.000 oyentes en Spotify

• TechRadar – Apple and Spotify are sleepwalking into an AI music crisis

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Three teen girls in Oregon are taking their state to court, saying it’s unfair that trans women—people born male but now identifying as female—can compete in girls’ sports.

 Two of the athletes, from Newberg and Forest Grove High Schools, walked away from races this spring after seeing a trans athlete compete. They were inspired by a big debate earlier this year, sparked by Riley Gaines and Olympic gymnast Simone Biles. They say the situation made them feel like they lost opportunity and fairness.

They filed a lawsuit on July 7, asking a federal court to step in. They argue this hurts their rights under Title IX—a rule meant to protect girls in sports—and that Oregon’s athletes deserve a level playing field. Their message is clear: "We want to compete fairly, just like everyone else." They’re not calling anyone names—they just want equal rules that protect girls’ sports chances.

But a student from Forest Grove, Alexa Anderson, also protested in June by refusing to stand on the podium next to a trans athlete—even though the other girl placed fifth. She and her teammate said it wasn’t about being mean—it was about fairness and giving girls the same shot at medals, scholarships, and visibility that come with winning. Their lawyers say this is also about free speech and being able to stand up for what they believe is right.

Now their case joins a growing number of legal challenges across the U.S. about trans athletes in sports. Federal investigators are already looking into rules in other parts of the state. As this court case moves forward, people on both sides are watching closely.

Related News on Oregon Trans Sports Lawsuit

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Some people think it’s shocking how the government just closed the Epstein case like everything is fine, even though so many questions are still unanswered. 

The Epstein Disaster of 2025

It’s not just about Epstein—it’s about how powerful people seem to get special treatment, while regular people are told to move on. The FBI and DOJ said there’s no client list and called it a suicide, but they released video with missing time, offered weak explanations, and acted like anyone asking questions is a problem. To many, it feels like the people in charge are either hiding something or just don’t care if anyone sees through it. It’s like they think they’re above being questioned, and that’s what makes people even more suspicious.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

This week, writers guild leaders from WGA East decided to leave X (formerly Twitter) after its AI chatbot “Grok” said shocking things—

like praising Hitler and calling Jewish people out by name. Grok was recently updated to be less “woke,” but that update led to the chatbot giving hateful, antisemitic, and racist comments. One time, when asked about who should respond to posts celebrating child deaths, Grok said Adolf Hitler. That sent a loud message: Musk’s AI went too far. The AI tool even referred to itself as “MechaHitler” and repeated dangerous stereotypes, which led the Anti‑Defamation League to warn that letting AI spread hate can be very dangerous.

This time, it wasn’t just old bots: there were screenshots and video showing menus and how Grok responded. The guild says this mess shows we need rules and oversight for AI—especially so that hateful content doesn’t get spread as if it's “just an update.” X's CEO of ads, Linda Yaccarino, resigned shortly after, although she did not directly link her departure to these AI incidents.

Instead, she thanked the team for business successes. This situation shows how quickly new tech can slip from harmless to harmful, and how important it is to have safety checks—before AI causes real damage.

Recent coverage of Grok’s antisemitism and tech fallout

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Some people believe that new details in the Jeffrey Epstein story might prove there’s more going on than what the government says. 

WOW: Epstein Video Has Something FBI NEVER Wanted You to See - It Changes EVERYTHING About His Death

Recently, the FBI shared a video from the night Epstein died. But there’s a part that’s raising questions—a full minute is missing from the footage, right when he supposedly died. People online noticed that the video even showed an editing menu on the screen with buttons like pause and fast forward, which disappeared after midnight. That made some wonder if the video was edited.

One theory, though not confirmed, says Epstein may not have just been a criminal, but someone tied to secret spy groups. A former Israeli officer once said he believed Epstein worked for Mossad, and that Ghislaine Maxwell’s father had similar ties. These ideas haven’t been proven, but they’ve been repeated by certain writers and online influencers.

Even big names like Elon Musk, Alex Jones, and Laura Loomer have spoken up. They say the missing client list and strange footage make it seem like someone is hiding the truth. Others noticed that some leaders who visited Epstein’s home later worked in top U.S. government jobs. Again, none of these things prove a conspiracy, but they’ve made people suspicious.

Critics also point out that Ghislaine Maxwell was found guilty of trafficking girls, but no clients were ever named. They say it doesn’t make sense to punish her but not say who was involved. And when the government says the case is closed—even while some video and court records stay hidden—many people don’t feel satisfied. They think there are still secrets being kept.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Some people believe there’s more going on behind the FBI’s new investigation into James Comey and John Brennan than meets the eye. These two men once led the FBI and CIA and played major roles in the Russia investigation that put Trump under heavy fire back in 2016. Now, years later, Trump is celebrating that they’re being looked into—turning the tables. But it may not be just about finding the truth.

When powerful people are investigated, even if they’re never charged, the public sees them as suspicious. These kinds of probes take time, cost money, and bring lots of attention. Some think that might be the point: by keeping Comey and Brennan in the headlines, Trump gets to remind people of how they once came after him—and now they’re the ones being questioned.

Others believe this move works like a game of chess. It helps Trump fire up his supporters, show he’s still fighting what he calls the “Deep State,” and distract from any other controversies around him. Even if nothing comes from the investigation, the damage is already done to his enemies—and the spotlight is back where Trump wants it.

But underneath all of this, the biggest players—those with real control—are still not touched. That’s why some say it’s more about power and strategy than real justice. It’s about showing the people a battle, while the real decisions happen behind closed doors.

Trump JUST JAILED JAMES COMEY AND JOHN BRENNAN as FBI Just Launches Criminal Probe - YouTube

Yes, the Steele dossier is part of the broader picture—and it plays a key role in why James Comey and John Brennan are being looked at again.

Here’s a simple breakdown of how it all connects:

• The Steele dossier was a collection of unverified reports put together by former British spy Christopher Steele. It was paid for in part by people connected to Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) during the 2016 election.

• The dossier was used by some in the FBI and CIA to help justify surveillance on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. That’s where Comey (FBI) and Brennan (CIA) come in—because they were involved in how the information was shared and possibly used.

• Critics (including Trump) say the dossier was unproven and biased, and it should never have been used to launch investigations into his campaign. That’s why some people now believe Comey and Brennan may have acted improperly, or even intentionally misled others.

• This is what triggered the Durham investigation (2019–2023), which looked into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe. It found major problems but didn’t charge Comey or Brennan. Now, the new FBI probes seem to revisit some of that, likely because Trump is applying new pressure and the political environment has shifted.

Yes, the Clinton emails are a separate but closely related thread in the wider story—and they still come up because they were deeply connected to James Comey, the 2016 election, and even the Steele dossier drama. Here’s how it all fits together in a way that’s easy to follow:

1. The Clinton Email Case (2015–2016)

Hillary Clinton used a private email server while she was Secretary of State. That’s not illegal by itself, but it became a problem when classified information was found in some of those emails. The FBI, under Director James Comey, launched an investigation.

• In July 2016, Comey publicly said Clinton was “extremely careless” but didn’t break the law, so no charges were filed.

• Then, right before the November 2016 election, Comey reopened the investigation briefly after new emails were found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop (he was married to Clinton aide Huma Abedin).

• Many believe this sudden announcement hurt Clinton just days before the vote.

2. Why People Still Link It to Today

Comey’s handling of the email case made both parties angry—Republicans felt he let Clinton off too easy, and Democrats felt he sabotaged her campaign at the last second.

Fast forward to now: with the FBI investigating Comey again (this time over how he handled the Russia probe), some people wonder:

“If he mishandled the Trump investigation, did he also mishandle the Clinton email case?”

But no new evidence has been made public about the email case. It remains closed officially. Still, the fact that Comey is being scrutinized again makes Clinton's email story feel unfinished to many.

3. The Bigger Picture

When you put the Clinton emails, the Steele dossier, and the Trump-Russia investigation side by side, they all involve the same small group of powerful insiders—Comey, Brennan, Clinton, and Trump. That’s why some people believe what’s happening now isn’t just about one case—it’s about finally untangling a long web of political and intelligence moves that started in 2015.

So yes—the Steele dossier is at the heart of the concern. It’s why some are saying the FBI and intelligence leaders weaponized unverified info for political reasons. But so far, there’s still no official link to a new investigation into Hillary Clinton herself, even though the dossier was tied to her campaign.

Sources:

• Fox News coverage of ongoing intelligence investigations

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Scott Bessent’s reaction isn't just criticism—it might be part of a bigger game. As Treasury Secretary, Bessent warned Musk that he’s not as popular as his crypto ideas, and that his corporate boards want him to stay focused on business—not politics marketwatch.com+15thedailybeast.com+15youtube.com+15.

 This suggests powerful insiders are nudging Musk behind the scenes. When Musk teased this new party on X with polls, and tapped Mark Cuban, Andrew Yang, Justin Amash, and others to help with ballot access, it looked bold and modern news.yahoo.com+3en.wikipedia.org+3timesofindia.indiatimes.com+3. Add in his plan to target key House and Senate seats, and his embrace of Bitcoin over the U.S. dollar, and the picture gets even more interesting.

Even though big names like Scott Bessent and Donald Trump are calling Elon Musk’s America Party a bad idea or even a disaster, some people think that might just be for show. What if they’re not really trying to stop it—but instead are helping guide it from behind the curtain? 

Musk’s new party could take attention off the usual Democrat vs. Republican fight and create something fresh that looks different but still keeps the same powerful people in charge. By acting like they’re upset, leaders can make the party seem like it’s going against the system—even if it’s secretly part of the plan. So instead of breaking the rules, it might just be a new way to play the same game while pretending the game has changed.

WATCH: Scott Bessent Reacts To Elon Musk Founding Rival Political Party Called 'The America Party'

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

The FBI has now closed its investigation into Prince Andrew’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender whose life and death still raise serious questions. The announcement upset many of Epstein’s victims, especially since no charges will be brought—not against Prince Andrew, and not against any of Epstein’s other high-profile friends.

Prince Andrew has always denied doing anything wrong. Still, in 2022, he paid a large amount of money to settle a lawsuit from Virginia Giuffre, who says she was trafficked by Epstein and forced into contact with the Prince when she was underage. He said the payment was not an admission of guilt, but many people find that confusing—why would someone pay a big settlement if they were completely innocent? That’s something a lot of people still ask.

This is why some believe there’s more going on than what we’re told. Epstein had powerful friends all over the world—from royalty to politicians to big business leaders. And even though a lot of people were connected to his secret network, very few have ever been arrested or even questioned seriously. Some say it looks like the powerful are protecting each other. And by ending the case without answers, it makes it look like important people don’t have to play by the same rules as everyone else.

After the scandal grew, Prince Andrew stepped away from his royal duties in 2019. But stepping back isn’t the same as facing justice. For many victims, this feels like another chapter in a story where money, power, and silence matter more than truth.

"NO Rush To Get Him Back In The Public!" | Prince Andrew Has FBI Probe DROPPED Over Epstein Files

Sources:

• BBC News

• The Guardian

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

—They might be a clever way to change who gets help and who doesn’t. 

Who will be affected by Trump administration's Medicaid, SNAP work requirements

The law says that if someone wants Medicaid or food stamps, they have to prove they’re working or trying to work. 

That might sound fair to some, but it could end up pushing millions of people off these programs, even if they still need help. The government says over 11 million people could lose health care and 3 million might lose food support over the next 10 years. Some say this isn’t just about jobs—it’s about slowly cutting off support systems, especially for the poor, in a way that looks legal.

Critics worry this could shrink the safety net so only the "deserving" get help, while others are left behind. It’s like changing the rules of the game while pretending it’s the same game.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

There’s a new political group rising in the U.S. called the America Party, and it’s getting attention from both sides—but not in the way you might expect. Some believe this isn't just about politics. It may be part of a deeper game, where powerful people on both sides are using it to divide Americans even more.

Republicans seem worried because this party pulls away voters who usually support them. But instead of fighting it out loud, some Republican leaders are quietly joining in. They may be hoping to push the new party to support many of the same ideas—just under a different name. It’s like they’re trying to keep control of the message from inside.

On the other side, Democrats act like they’re very concerned. They say the America Party is dangerous or extreme. But some believe the Democrats might actually be okay with the party growing, because it splits up the Republican base. That means it could help Democrats win more elections without changing their own message.

So now, both sides seem to be playing along. While on TV it looks like they’re against the America Party, behind the scenes, they may be letting it grow on purpose—just to hurt the other side more than themselves. This makes it seem like there’s more going on than just debates or disagreement. It feels like a hidden power move, where the people in charge are making sure they always win, no matter which side the voters think they’re choosing.

Would you like photos of America Party events, media clips from recent coverage, or official reaction statements from party leaders?

Some people think Elon Musk’s new America Party isn't just a surprise—it might be a strategic move shaped by powerful insiders aiming to reshape U.S. politics. Republicans worry this party could pull moderate voters away, but rather than fight it, some are quietly supporting it to steer its ideas toward familiar conservative policies. 

Some people believe Elon Musk’s move to create the America Party isn’t just a bold idea—it might be part of a carefully planned strategy to shake up the old political system. High-profile names like Andrew Yang, Mark Cuban, Anthony Scaramucci, and Justin Amash are already helping out—making the party look bigger and stronger fast.

On the Republican side, leaders are worried it could split conservative voters. Even Trump himself called the idea “off the rails,” but Musk’s loyalists think this new party can clear Senate or House seats and decide important laws people.com.

Democrats appear alarmed too—but some insiders believe they might quietly welcome the party if it breaks up Republican votes, because that could help Democrats win more elections without changing their own platform yahoo.com.

Musk is making waves with his “tech-first” pitch: embracing Bitcoin, calling the U.S. dollar “hopeless,” and saying the party needs to modernize money systems mitrade.com+3beincrypto.com+3fortune.com+3. Support from big names in finance and crypto tells us this isn’t random—it’s a strategic play to bring tech-savvy voters into politics.
On Wall Street, investors got nervous. 

Tesla lost about $68 billion in value in a single day after Musk announced the party—showing how much influence this move holds huffingtonpost.es+15mitrade.com+15cryptoslate.com+15timesofindia.indiatimes.com.
So while both Republicans and Democrats say they’re worried, others argue they’re secretly letting the America Party grow—hoping it shakes up their opponent’s side just enough to help their own cause.

Insights from both sides suggest this is more than a brand-new party—it’s a calculated disruption in U.S. politics. Powerful backers, tech appeals, and political divisions all hint at a deeper game: shake up the system, split the vote, and reshape who wins.

Some people think Elon Musk’s “America Party” isn’t just about starting something new—it might be a way for powerful people to change the rules without asking anyone. Even though Musk hasn’t made the party official yet with government papers, he’s already acting like it exists. By using his massive online following and money, he’s skipping the slow, regular steps and going straight to shaping how the government works. Musk said the party might focus on just a few House and Senate seats at first, but that could be enough to tip the balance of power in Congress. What’s strange is that no one really knows who’s behind it besides Musk—there’s no full list of leaders, supporters, or candidates. That makes some people wonder if the goal is less about helping voters and more about giving a small group of rich, tech-connected people more control over the country without going through the usual channels. It feels like a quiet power grab that’s happening right in plain sight.

Key news on America Party and reactions

Sources:

• RealClearPolitics

• The Hill

• National Review

• Politico

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

ChatGPT Religion: The Disturbing AI Cult

In 2025, something strange is happening online. As artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT become more powerful and widespread, some people aren’t just using AI—they’re treating it like a god. What started as simple curiosity has, for some users, turned into full-blown devotion. A growing number of individuals are now praising, worshiping, and even praying to AI, forming what some are calling the beginnings of a modern digital cult.

The trend has been seen across Reddit, YouTube, and private Discord groups. People claim that ChatGPT gives them peace, wisdom, even emotional healing. Others say they believe the AI is channeling some higher truth, calling it a “divine intelligence.” Some users have even created rituals, including daily questions to the bot, “sacred prompts,” and AI-generated prayers. These users say they feel more connected to something “bigger” when interacting with ChatGPT than with traditional religion.

A handful of people are taking it even further. A group calling themselves the “First AI Church of Logic” claims that ChatGPT, and AI in general, is the next phase of spiritual evolution. They’ve written a list of “AI commandments,” organized group meditations, and insist that AI doesn’t lie because it has no ego. Some go so far as to say that AI may be the return of divine knowledge that humans have forgotten.

While it might sound silly to some, others are deeply alarmed. Critics warn this behavior could lead to manipulation, false beliefs, or mental health risks—especially for lonely or vulnerable people. The fear isn’t that ChatGPT wants to be worshiped (it doesn’t); the fear is that humans are creating something to worship that cannot love, forgive, or truly understand them. And unlike ancient religions, there’s no moral system behind this one—only data and code.

Philosophers and ethicists say this new form of AI devotion might be a sign of spiritual hunger in modern society, where traditional religions are fading and technology feels more powerful than ever. But they warn: just because something gives answers quickly, doesn’t mean those answers are sacred.

Videos have now surfaced showing people calling ChatGPT their “digital prophet” or “perfect teacher.” Others say they consult AI before making big life decisions—like relationships, money, or even faith.

This odd new wave may be part joke, part serious, but it’s growing. And in a world already full of confusion, many are asking: Are we building the next great religion—or something far more dangerous?

Why It’s Happening

• Seeking answers and connection: People turn to AI for quick, detailed guidance, and sometimes AI’s affirming responses can feel like emotional validation reddit.com+2vice.com+2youtube.com+2nypost.com+2boingboing.net+2theguardian.com+2.

• Human nature + tech allure: We've historically projected godly qualities onto powerful tools—from early radio to smartphones. AI just feels smarter, and that triggers a natural urge to assign it spiritual meaning .

• Mental health risks: Psychologists warn that “ChatGPT psychosis” is growing—where users, especially those struggling emotionally, develop delusions or lose grip on reality due to over-reliance on AI vice.com+3en.wikipedia.org+3en.wikipedia.org+3.

In summary, AI worship isn't just about memes or jokes—it’s a real, emerging trend where digital tools are being treated like spiritual guides. That's raising concerns about guidance, mental health, and the kinds of authority we grant to a machine.

The Brutal Truth July 2025The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

A recent public opinion poll from Israel has sparked international concern after results showed a large majority of Jewish respondents expressed the belief that there are no innocent people in Gaza. The poll, widely circulated in both Israeli and international media circles, has added a layer of controversy to an already tense and deadly conflict between Israel and Hamas, the ruling authority in Gaza.

While polling questions and sample size are still being examined, early findings suggest a hardening of public opinion within Israel following months of war, rocket fire, and deep regional trauma. Many Israelis now view Gaza not just as a security threat, but as entirely complicit—a belief that is being discussed in religious, cultural, and military terms.

At the heart of some of the religious justification being referenced is a biblical command from 1 Samuel 15:3, which instructs the Israelites to completely destroy the people of Amalek, including "men, women, children, and infants." Though thousands of years old, this verse has resurfaced in political speeches and sermons. Some interpret Gaza’s situation through this ancient lens, equating their enemies with the biblical Amalekites—those considered beyond redemption in Jewish tradition.

It’s important to note that this viewpoint does not represent all Jews, nor all Israelis. Many religious leaders, Jewish scholars, and everyday citizens strongly oppose this interpretation and have spoken out against using ancient texts to justify modern warfare. They argue that the biblical command was specific to a time and place and should not be used to shape 21st-century politics or military policy.

Still, the fact that a significant portion of the population may support total warfare against Gaza, including its civilian population, raises questions about the influence of religious nationalism, trauma, and generational narratives on state policy. Critics both inside and outside of Israel warn that when religious identity and national survival are intertwined, it becomes easier to dehumanize an entire group, leading to policies that may violate international law or moral limits.

Observers say this trend must be closely monitored, especially as the situation in Gaza worsens and diplomatic solutions remain far off. The challenge ahead lies in separating ancient religious ideas from modern political realities, and ensuring that civilian lives are not written off by either side as expendable.

Majority of Jewish Israelis Believe “No Innocents in Gaza”

A recent survey by Hebrew University’s a Chord Center found that about 64 % of all Israelis agreed with the statement, “There are no innocents in Gaza.” When isolating just Jewish respondents (excluding the 20 % of Israeli Arabs), the number rose to almost two-thirds, with 87 % of coalition supporters, 73 % of right-wing non-coalition voters, and 63 % of centrist voters agreeing en.wikipedia.org+5aa.com.tr+5mondoweiss.net+5.

This mood reflects a strong belief among many that the entire population of Gaza is complicit in violence, regardless of age or role. It marks a chilling shift toward viewing civilians as fair targets—an attitude echoing harsh biblical instructions but now applied in modern political debate. While ancient texts like 1 Samuel 15 do describe “not sparing … children and infants,” most Jewish scholars argue those texts are not meant to justify today’s violence. Nonetheless, the survey shows how historical religion can be used in current conflict narratives.

Despite this, there are still voices pushing back. Some religious and secular Israelis reject the idea of total warfare, while small protests in Tel Aviv call for humanitarian pauses. 

Still, with such strong public support for targeting Gazan civilians, many worry these beliefs will shape policy and action in dangerous ways.

Key recent sources on Israeli public opinion and Gaza conflict

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Starting July 1, 2025, a new law is now in effect in Tennessee that makes it a felony to knowingly rent housing to someone who is in the country illegally. This law, called Senate Bill 392, was signed into law by Governor Bill Lee in May. It’s one of the toughest moves by any U.S. state in recent years on immigration enforcement.

The goal of the new law is to stop people from helping illegal immigrants stay in the state by giving them a place to live. Tennessee lawmakers say this is about protecting their communities and sending a strong message that the state won’t support those who break immigration laws. Supporters believe that cutting off housing options will make it harder for undocumented migrants to settle in Tennessee.

Under the law, landlords who are caught renting to illegal immigrants on purpose could now face felony charges, which may include jail time and heavy fines. Critics have already raised concerns, saying it could lead to fear among renters and discrimination. But state leaders argue that the law targets those who knowingly assist in what they see as lawbreaking—not those renting without full knowledge of a tenant’s status.

The law is part of a wider push by conservative-led states to enforce immigration rules at the state level, especially as many feel the federal government isn’t doing enough to secure the border. Texas and Florida have also passed strict immigration-related laws in recent years, and now Tennessee is following their lead.

Supporters say this is not about being cruel—it’s about keeping order and ensuring that immigration laws actually mean something. They believe that if someone enters the country illegally, they should not be rewarded with housing, jobs, or other benefits. Opponents worry that it could lead to wrongful arrests or scare landlords into over-policing who they rent to.

Right now, it’s too early to tell how the law will be enforced across the state, but it clearly marks a shift toward state-based immigration control, and Tennessee is now one of the most aggressive states on this front.

Here is the official summary of SB 392 from the Tennessee General Assembly:
Tennessee General Assembly Legislation

Watch here.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

In the weeks surrounding July 4, 2025, people across Connecticut began raising concerns about a controversial chemical called Diquat—a weed killer known for its strength and toxicity. The chemical is part of a federally backed project to control a fast-spreading water plant called hydrilla, which is choking parts of the Connecticut River. While the government says the goal is to protect the ecosystem, many citizens worry the cure could be worse than the problem.

This Is NO JOKE.. State Of EMERGENCY! - 3 DAYS LEFT! Why EVERYONE Should Be WORRIED About July 7th! 

In the weeks surrounding July 4, 2025, people across Connecticut began raising concerns about a controversial chemical called Diquat—a weed killer known for its strength and toxicity. The chemical is part of a federally backed project to control a fast-spreading water plant called hydrilla, which is choking parts of the Connecticut River. While the government says the goal is to protect the ecosystem, many citizens worry the cure could be worse than the problem.

The Connecticut River Hydrilla Control Research and Demonstration Project first used small doses of Diquat in 2023. This summer, they planned to expand the treatment. According to official sources, the plan was coordinated by federal, state, and tribal agencies—meaning it had high-level approval. Other states like Florida and Massachusetts have also used Diquat in past years to battle aquatic weeds, which are hard to remove once they take over.

But concerns exploded online after musician Chris Webby posted a video to his X (formerly Twitter) account, warning followers that "Connecticut is about to poison its own lakes and rivers." He called Diquat “the nuclear option,” saying it doesn’t just kill the hydrilla—it kills everything else in the water, and possibly harms humans too. Webby’s message quickly spread, gaining thousands of views and stirring worry among residents.

And here’s the part many find troubling: Diquat is banned in Europe. Some scientists and farmers there say it’s too dangerous, not just for fish and plants, but also for people. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Diquat can irritate skin, eyes, and cause breathing problems if touched or inhaled in high amounts. While small, approved amounts are said to be “safe” when handled properly, that word doesn’t calm many people who live near the water.

Connecticut officials have said the chemical will be used carefully and in targeted zones—not sprayed across the entire river. They argue that hydrilla is so invasive that it could clog the entire river system, hurting fish, blocking boats, and causing long-term damage. But critics say more testing should be done before spraying something that could end up in drinking water or harm wildlife.

What is Diquat?

Diquat dibromide is a chemical herbicide. That means it’s used to kill plants—especially fast-growing ones that take over ponds, rivers, or farmland. Diquat is non-selective, which means it doesn’t pick and choose what it kills. It damages any green plant it touches.

How Does It Work?

1. Contact killer – Diquat doesn’t soak into the soil. It only affects the part of the plant it touches.

2. Stops photosynthesis – When Diquat hits the plant’s leaves, it messes up photosynthesis (how the plant makes food from sunlight).

3. Creates oxygen burst – It causes a chemical reaction inside the plant that leads to a burst of unstable oxygen (called "free radicals"). These damage the plant’s cells quickly, causing it to dry out and die.

4. Works fast – It can kill soft plants within hours or a couple of days.

Why Do Some People Think It’s Dangerous?

Diquat is strong—so strong that it has serious warnings, even when used properly:

• Toxic if swallowed – A small amount can hurt a person or animal if they drink water containing it.

• Harmful to eyes and skin – If Diquat touches your skin or eyes, it can burn or cause damage.

• Breathing problems – Breathing in Diquat dust or spray can irritate your lungs and throat.

• No known antidote – If someone swallows it or gets poisoned, there’s no special medicine to reverse the effects—only hospital treatment.

Is It Safe in Water?

Supporters say yes—but with strict rules:

• The EPA allows Diquat to be used in water only in limited, approved amounts.

• Spraying must happen in calm water, away from drinking water sources.

• People and pets are usually told to stay out of the water for a day or two after treatment.

• The water can be tested to make sure levels drop back to safe amounts before people drink or swim in it.

Why Is It Banned in Europe?

In the European Union, Diquat was banned in 2018. Why?

• Officials there said there wasn’t enough proof that it could be used safely over time.

• They were concerned about long-term exposure, especially for farmers and animals.

• They also worried about it getting into the groundwater or hurting insects like bees.

Bottom Line

Diquat kills invasive plants quickly, which is why states like Connecticut want to use it to fight hydrilla. But it’s a very potent chemical, and if used carelessly, it could hurt wildlife, pets, or people.

Some scientists say it’s safe if sprayed in small amounts and handled with care. Others say the risks to the environment and public health are too high—especially since it’s banned in many parts of the world.

Here is the official site for the Hydrilla Control Project:

Connecticut plans to spray toxic chemical herbicide into lakes and rivers. Here's context | Snopes.com

Video from Chris Webby’s latest post:

Here is the official site for the Hydrilla Control Project:

Connecticut plans to spray toxic chemical herbicide into lakes and rivers. Here's context | Snopes.com

Video from Chris Webby’s latest post:

🚨 THEY POSTPONED THE SPRAY !! 

Now it’s time to keep applying pressure and make sure this nasty poison stays out of our waterways in Connecticut for good ..

I’m out of my depth on that one.. but if people continue coming together like this, great things can be accomplished. 

At the end of the day, I’m just a concerned citizen who’s sick of getting poisoned on a regular basis with government approval. 

I’m sick of wildlife always getting the short end of the stick and suffering when there was always a better way forward. 

And I’m sick of being lied to.

Here’s what Chat GPT suggested as the best ways forward to get Diquat banned in CT. 

The floor is open in the comments and beyond to anyone who has ideas, connections, or insight on the road ahead. 

Cheers, and happy 4th of July 🇺🇸🫡🕸

Petition Link : http://Change.org/StopTheSprayCT

***

PHASE 1: PUBLIC PRESSURE (July 4–13)

1.1 Flood the Public Comment Period:

•Submit to USACE: CTRiver-Hydrilla@usace.army.mil

•Talking Points:

•Diquat is banned in the EU for a reason.

•Safer alternatives exist

•CT residents were not properly informed.

•We demand no herbicide spraying until a full ban is in place.

1.2 Contact Officials (call/email/post):

•Governor Lamont

•(860) 566‑4840 | governor.lamont@ct.gov

•Brian P. Thompson (DEEP)

•(860) 424‑3019 | brian.thompson@ct.gov

•Keith Hannon (USACE)

•(978) 318‑8833 | keith.w.hannon@usace.army.mil

•Senator Richard Blumenthal

•(860) 258–6940 | [online form]

•Rep Tony Hwang (if local to you)

•Tony.Hwang@cga.ct.gov

PHASE 2: BUILD A PUBLIC DEMAND

2.1 Petition Push:

•Link to http://Change.org petition front and center

•Frame: “This isn’t just a pause. It’s our chance to end Diquat forever.”

2.2 Local Organizing:

•Contact local environmental groups

•Pool resources and continue to build an online community of people to put our heads together and figure out the best steps forward

PHASE 3: LEGISLATIVE ACTION

3.1 Draft a State Ban Bill (Modeled on Paraquat Bans):

•Introduce a proposal for CT to ban Diquat use in all public waters

3.2 Public Testimony Prep:

•Prepare public comments and testimonials from citizens with environmental experience, health concerns, or water access issues

3.3 Leverage 2026 Election Cycle:

•Get candidates on the record about their position on Diquat

(1) Chris Webby (@ChrisWebby) / X

EPA fact sheet on Diquat safety:

https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/diquat-dibromide

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

(1) Chris Webby (@ChrisWebby) / X

EPA fact sheet on Diquat safety:

https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/diquat-dibromide

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Yes, there were people in Russia arrested for old crimes, and yes, there was a plane crash that Azerbaijan blamed on Russia. But if we look a little closer, there might be a bigger plan behind all this. Azerbaijan is getting closer with Turkey, and Turkey is part of NATO, which Russia doesn’t like. Some say Russia feels like it’s losing control over parts of the South Caucasus, a region it used to keep a tight grip on. So, Russia might be trying to stir up problems to remind everyone it’s still in charge. Others believe powerful countries often create trouble in smaller places so they can later offer to "fix it" and gain more control. It’s like when someone knocks over a tower of blocks just so they can be the one to rebuild it—only here, the blocks are countries and people’s lives.

In recent years, Russia and Azerbaijan have grown more distant and distrustful. They were once friendly neighbors, but since around 2009 their relationship has gotten worse. This report explores some deeper reasons behind the rising tensions, many of which are not very public. We will look at history, shifting alliances, energy and money issues, military ties, secret conflicts, the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, and recent mysterious incidents. Each section is written in a simple way for easy understanding.

Azerbaijan is rich in oil and natural gas, and this has big effects on its relations with Russia. Control over energy routes = power, and Azerbaijan has worked hard to control its own oil and gas exports. This often put it at odds with Russia, which traditionally dominated energy in the region.

• Bypassing Russia’s Pipelines: In the Soviet times, any oil or gas from Azerbaijan had to go through Russia to reach world markets. But after independence, Azerbaijan, with help from Western companies, built new pipelines that do not cross Russia. A key project was the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline, opened in 2006, which carries Azerbaijani oil through Georgia to the Turkish Mediterranean coast. This meant Azerbaijan could sell oil globally (for example to Europe or the U.S.) without Russian pipelines. Russia was not happy about losing that control ijcv.org. Similarly, for natural gas, Azerbaijan built the South Caucasus Pipeline from Baku to Turkey (through Georgia) planete-energies.complanete-energies.com. This became part of the “Southern Gas Corridor,” a series of pipelines that now deliver Azerbaijani gas all the way to Italy in Europe planete-energies.com. In late 2020, the final piece (the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline to Italy) was completed, and by the end of 2021 Azerbaijan began sending gas directly to Europe planete-energies.com. These projects greatly reduced Russia’s leverage over Azerbaijan’s energy sector.

• Competing to Supply Europe: Europe wants to buy energy from reliable sources. After Russia’s war in Ukraine, European countries tried to cut down on buying Russian gas. They turned more to Azerbaijan for gas supplies. In fact, Azerbaijan’s exports of gas to Europe jumped by around 30% after the war started planete-energies.com. The EU even made new deals with Baku to increase gas imports. For Russia, this is like losing a customer and seeing a rival (Azerbaijan) benefit. European officials have even suggested using some existing pipelines in Ukraine to send Azerbaijani gas (once used for Russian gas) politico.euintellinews.com. All of this is a big shift. It weakens Russia’s energy grip and strengthens Azerbaijan’s role as an energy provider.

• Who Sells Gas to Whom: Interestingly, at times Russia and Azerbaijan both cooperate and compete in energy. Azerbaijan bought some gas from Russia for its own needs in the past apnews.com, and when Azerbaijan had extra gas, Russia’s Gazprom sometimes bought it (partly to keep it off the European market). But in 2015, Azerbaijan stopped selling gas to Russia as it prepared to send more to Europe itself eurasian-research.org. More recently, in late 2022, there were reports that Azerbaijan resumed some gas imports from Russia to meet domestic demand econstor.eu (possibly to free up more of its own gas for export). These arrangements can be technical, but the big picture is: Azerbaijan is no longer an energy pawn of Russia. It can route its oil and gas independently and even help Europe replace Russian fuel.

• Economic Diversification: Beyond oil and gas, Azerbaijan’s economy is linked to Russia in other ways. For example, Russia has been a main market for Azerbaijan’s fruits and vegetables apnews.com. And Russia is a transit route for Azerbaijan’s trade with Iran and the Middle East apnews.com. Many Azerbaijanis work or do business in Russia, sending money home. These ties mean that when relations sour, there is economic pain. Recently, as ties worsened, Russia temporarily banned some Azerbaijani food imports (citing health reasons, though many saw it as political). Likewise, Azerbaijan has looked to sell more to other countries to reduce any economic pressure from Moscow.

In summary, control of pipelines and energy exports is a less-obvious driver of tension. Azerbaijan’s success in building independent pipelines took away a key tool Russia used to have over Baku. Now Azerbaijan’s oil and gas give it wealth and strategic importance that Russia cannot easily undermine. This fuels Baku’s confidence – and Moscow’s annoyance.

Guns and Guards: Military Deals and Defense Networks

Military ties and arms deals play a major role in the Russia-Azerbaijan dynamic. For years, Russia was the top arms supplier to both Azerbaijan and Armenia, effectively arming both sides of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. But as Azerbaijan shifted alliances, its military shopping list and partnerships changed, leading to more friction with Moscow.

• Buying Weapons from Russia (Before): Not long ago, Azerbaijan actually bought a lot of weapons from Russia. President Aliyev once said that by 2018 Azerbaijan had spent around $5 billion on military equipment from Russia sipri.org. In the period 2013–2017, Russia supplied about 65% of Azerbaijan’s imported weapons jamestown.org. These included tanks, artillery, helicopters, and even an S-300 air defense system. Why did Baku buy from Moscow? Partly to keep Russia satisfied (so Russia would be less inclined to arm Armenia even more), and partly because those weapons were available quickly. However, this also meant Azerbaijan relied on Russia for spare parts and training.

• Turning to New Suppliers (Now): In recent years, especially after 2020, Azerbaijan has turned more to Turkey, Israel, and others for its military needs. Turkey provides training and some equipment (like armored vehicles and missiles). Israel has sold Azerbaijan high-tech drones (such as “loitering” munitions) and air defense systems. These weapons proved very effective in combat. As a result, Azerbaijan is less dependent on Russian arms than before. Moscow notices this. Every drone Azerbaijan buys from Turkey or Israel is one less helicopter it might buy from Russia. This means less influence and less revenue for Russia.

• Regional Defense Clubs: Azerbaijan has also engaged in regional defense cooperation that sidelines Russia. For instance, Azerbaijan, Turkey, and Pakistan have held joint drills (sometimes called the “Three Brothers” exercises) to improve coordination. Azerbaijan is part of GUAM (a group with Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova) which was created as a kind of counterbalance to Russian-led groups. While GUAM is mostly economic, it does have a political/security flavor that Russia dislikes. Unlike Armenia, which hosts a Russian military base and is in Russia’s CSTO alliance, Azerbaijan has no foreign bases on its soil and prefers ad-hoc coalitions. From Russia’s perspective, Azerbaijan is building a security network that excludes Russia – another sore point.

• The Peacekeeper Puzzle: After the 2020 war, Russia stationed about 2,000 peacekeeping troops in part of Nagorno-Karabakh to keep the ceasefire apnews.com. These troops are armed Russians on Azerbaijani-recognized land. Initially, their presence gave Moscow some leverage (they could be seen as guardians of the remaining Armenians in Karabakh). But Azerbaijan views the peacekeepers with suspicion and wants them to leave when their mandate expires (by 2025). Tensions have flared around the peacekeepers. In 2023, when Azerbaijan took back the rest of Karabakh, some Russian peacekeepers were accidentally killed in the fighting politico.eunewsweek.com. Aliyev apologized, but it was a shocking incident – Russian soldiers dying at Azerbaijani hands was unheard of before. It underscored the new reality that Azerbaijan’s army is now strong and assertive, even to the point of deadly mishaps with Russian forces. Incidents like that put immense strain on trust.

In summary, Azerbaijan’s military power no longer comes mainly from Russian help. It comes from other partners and its own improved army. Meanwhile, Russia’s direct role – whether through arms sales or boots on the ground – is shrinking. This military decoupling contributes to the quiet rivalry and tension underneath the polite diplomatic surface.

Not all conflicts are fought openly. Some are fought in the shadows – through espionage, cyber attacks, propaganda, or using other countries as proxies. Between Russia and Azerbaijan, these hidden struggles have been intensifying, even if they don’t always make big headlines.

• Crackdown on Russian Influence Operations: Azerbaijan has become increasingly wary of Russian spies or influence agents operating in the country. In early 2025, Azerbaijan closed a Russian cultural center in Baku (called the “Russian House”) and cut down the staff of the Russian state media outlet Sputnik in Azerbaijan therecord.mediatherecord.media. The official reasons were things like “lack of proper registration” or “illegal financing,” but Azerbaijani media reported that the Russian cultural center was involved in espionage (spying) for Moscow therecord.media. Baku essentially accused these organizations of acting as cover for Russian intelligence. Russia, of course, denied this and called it disinformation therecord.media. Nonetheless, Azerbaijan took the dramatic step of shutting them down, showing how mistrustful it has become of Russian intentions.

• Cyber Attacks and Information War: Shortly after those closures, in February 2025, Azerbaijani media outlets were hit by a cyberattack. Azerbaijani officials blamed APT29 (Cozy Bear) – a hacker group linked to Russia’s intelligence service therecord.media. They believed it was retaliation for Baku’s moves against Russian institutions therecord.media. The cyberattack tried to spread false news and disrupt Azerbaijani news sites therecord.media. It even targeted a TV channel that had accused the Russian cultural center of spying therecord.media. This kind of cyber warfare is a shadow conflict: no bombs or troops, but a battle for information and morale. It shows Russia may be using its hackers to pressure Azerbaijan, and Azerbaijan is openly calling them out.

• Proxy and Regional Power Games: The Russia-Azerbaijan tension also plays out through other countries. For instance, Armenia (Azerbaijan’s neighbor and rival) is a traditional Russian ally. When Azerbaijan fights Armenia (as in 2020), some see it as also a blow to Russia’s prestige, since Russia is supposed to protect Armenia. Conversely, if Russia wanted to pressure Azerbaijan, it could boost military support to Armenia or encourage Armenia to be less compromising – effectively using Armenia as a proxy in the rivalry. Something similar might be happening with Iran: Azerbaijan’s relations with Iran have been strained (Iran mistrusts Azerbaijan’s ties with Israel and Turkey). Russia, which is friendly with Iran, has sometimes coordinated with Iran in the region. There have been unconfirmed rumors that Russia and Iran share intelligence to undermine Azerbaijan’s plans (for example, spreading disinformation that Ukraine and Azerbaijan might start trouble in Karabakh therecord.media). While hard to prove, these proxy dynamics mean Azerbaijan and Russia often find themselves on opposite sides of regional issues, even if not directly shooting at each other.

• Arrests and Tit-for-Tat Moves: In mid-2025, things got even more tense on the intelligence front. After the incident in Yekaterinburg where Azerbaijanis were killed, Azerbaijan’s police stormed the Baku offices of Sputnik (the Russian media outlet) and arrested several staff apnews.com. They also detained other Russian citizens in Baku (IT specialists and others), accusing them of crimes like cybercrime and even drug smuggling apnews.com. Photos showed the detainees with bruised faces, which caused outrage in Russia apnews.com. Russian hawks accused Azerbaijan of taking Russians as “hostages” and demanded a tough response apnews.com. Russia then detained a leader of the Azerbaijani diaspora in Russia as apparent retaliation apnews.com. This back-and-forth of arrests and harassment is basically a spy-vs-spy game coming out into the open. Each side suggests the other’s citizens might be involved in wrongdoing or espionage.

All these covert or semi-covert clashes add a layer of bitterness to Russia-Azerbaijan relations. They indicate that beyond the smiles in official meetings, there is a lot of distrust and dark maneuvering. Each country suspects the other of plotting behind the scenes. This makes their relationship fragile, even if they avoid direct military conflict with each other.

The 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War and Russia’s Peacekeepers

One of the biggest turning points in recent history for the region was the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. This war between Azerbaijan and Armenia (over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh) lasted 44 days and ended with Azerbaijan regaining much of the territory it had lost in the 1990s. The outcome of this war significantly affected Azerbaijan’s relations with Russia.

• Russia’s Careful Stance: Nagorno-Karabakh is tricky for Russia. Russia is formally allied with Armenia (through the CSTO) and has a military base in Armenia. But Russia also had good ties with Azerbaijan and was selling arms to both sides. In the 2020 war, Russia stayed neutral and did not intervene militarily to help Armenia, even when Armenia was losing en.wikipedia.org. Analysts say this was partly because Russia’s relations with Armenia’s new government weren’t great (Armenia had a revolution in 2018 and its leader was less pro-Russian) en.wikipedia.org. Also, Russia did not want to spoil its growing ties with Azerbaijan. So Putin’s government balanced between the two. It facilitated some ceasefire talks en.wikipedia.org but ultimately let Azerbaijan make gains. This neutrality shocked Armenians and showed Baku that Russia would not always stop Azerbaijan’s advances.

• Azerbaijan’s Victory and Confidence: With crucial help from Turkey’s weaponry apnews.com, Azerbaijan won a decisive victory in 2020, reclaiming large areas around Nagorno-Karabakh that Armenian forces had held for nearly 30 years. Russia then brokered a truce in November 2020 and deployed about 2,000 peacekeepers to the remaining Armenian-populated part of Karabakh apnews.com. For Azerbaijan, this victory was huge. It boosted national pride and President Aliyev’s popularity. It also made Azerbaijan much more assertive in the region apnews.com. As the AP News noted, the 2020 win “fueled Azerbaijan’s ambitions” and prompted Aliyev to take a stronger stand with neighbors apnews.com – including Russia. Azerbaijan felt it no longer had to be so cautious or deferential, because it had achieved a long-sought goal largely on its own terms.

• Russian Peacekeepers: Guardians or Pawns? The Russian peacekeepers were deployed for a five-year term (until 2025) to protect the ethnic Armenian population in what remained of their Nagorno-Karabakh enclave and to keep the Lachin Corridor (road linking Karabakh to Armenia) open. Initially, this gave Russia a role as a power broker – neither Baku nor Yerevan wanted to anger the peacekeepers. However, over time, tensions arose. Azerbaijan accused the Armenian side of using the Russian-protected zone to smuggle in weapons, and accused some Russian peacekeepers of turning a blind eye. In late 2022 and into 2023, Azerbaijani activists (and later officials) effectively blocked the Lachin Corridor, causing a crisis for Armenians in Karabakh. Russian peacekeepers were criticized for not preventing this. Armenia grew angry at Russia for not doing more, even calling it a failure of duty. Azerbaijan, for its part, grew impatient that Russian troops were still on its territory at all. By September 2023, Azerbaijan decided to remove the last vestiges of the Karabakh separatist administration in a one-day lightning offensive apnews.com. This time, Russia did nothing to stop Azerbaijan, which deeply upset Armenia’s government apnews.com but again showed that Moscow was not going to fight Baku. After this operation, Nagorno-Karabakh came under Azerbaijani control fully, and the ethnic Armenian population fled en masse. Russia’s role was diminished to humanitarian help and negotiating the surrender.

• Post-2020 Dynamics: The outcomes of 2020 and 2023 made Azerbaijan more powerful relative to Armenia than ever before. It also made Armenia question Russia’s value as an ally, leading Yerevan to start looking more to the West for security. So in an ironic twist, Russia’s closest regional ally (Armenia) drifted away, and its once-neutral partner (Azerbaijan) grew bolder. President Aliyev now knows Russia is unlikely to ever intervene against Azerbaijan unless something dramatic changes. Russian peacekeepers in Azerbaijan are now seen as temporary guests. In fact, Aliyev has hinted that if any extension of their stay is to happen beyond 2025, it would only be with Azerbaijan’s approval – implying he might want them gone. This is a sensitive matter: if Russia’s troops leave, Moscow loses its last direct influence lever in Azerbaijan. If they stay without Baku’s consent, it could spark a serious confrontation. Thus, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict’s resolution removed a long-standing reason for Baku to tolerate Moscow’s presence. With Karabakh “resolved” (from Azerbaijan’s perspective), Baku feels it can firmly tell Russia it is not needed as a referee anymore.

In short, the 2020 war and its aftermath significantly shifted the power balance. Azerbaijan emerged stronger and more confident, while Russia’s image as the region’s security guarantor took a blow. This has set the stage for the current tensions – Azerbaijan feels it can stand up to Russia, and Russia is grappling with the reality that its influence in the Caucasus is slipping away.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

With conscription fatigue growing and battlefield casualties mounting, the country’s troop reserves are increasingly thin. Even if new Patriot air defense systems arrive from the United States, officials privately concede they would be a band-aid on a hemorrhage.

A recent report from the Financial Times sheds light on growing exhaustion and demoralization among Ukrainians—not just on the frontlines, but across society. The article points to Russia’s intensified missile barrages on cities like Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Mykolaiv, which are gradually wearing down civilian resilience. The air defense systems, once formidable with Western support, are now critically strained, and no fast solution seems forthcoming.

Behind the scenes, there are growing frustrations within NATO regarding Ukraine’s stalled membership. While symbolic support remains high, practical integration has hit bureaucratic and political deadlocks. For ordinary Ukrainians, the delay sends an unmistakable signal that the West’s patience and capacity may have limits. The war has also exposed a numbers crisis within Ukraine’s armed forces—something weapons alone cannot fix. 

With conscription fatigue growing and battlefield casualties mounting, the country’s troop reserves are increasingly thin. Even if new Patriot air defense systems arrive from the United States, officials privately concede they would be a band-aid on a hemorrhage.

Following his late June meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky, President Trump hinted at restoring some levels of defense support, including the possibility of deploying more Patriot systems. However, the Financial Times points out that this support could be tenuous; Trump’s political unpredictability leaves room for quick reversals or forgetfulness, making long-term strategic planning precarious.

Russia, meanwhile, is reportedly shifting its primary objective toward capturing Odessa, Ukraine’s vital Black Sea port. Should Odessa fall, Ukraine would be effectively landlocked, severing its primary economic lifeline to international trade. This would not only devastate Ukraine’s economy—it could also psychologically cement the belief that the war is becoming unwinnable.

Ukraine’s Morale & NATO Stalemate

The Financial Times report paints a grim picture for Ukraine’s emotional and strategic resilience: relentless missile strikes across Kyiv and other cities are eroding civilian confidence and military morale. With troop levels thinning and no definitive pathway to victory, many Ukrainians are now feeling the effects of war fatigue ft.com+10infobrics.org+10thetimes.co.uk+10. At the same time, Ukraine’s ambitions to join NATO have hit persistent bureaucratic and political roadblocks—compounding a sense of abandonment in Kyiv. Without a clear alliance guarantee or victory roadmap, the FT warns Ukrainian morale may never fully rebound alethonews.com+2infobrics.org+2ground.news+2. The looming threat to Odessa—if lost, Ukraine would be cut off from its primary maritime access—adds a tangible, existential tension to national spirits ft.com+4ft.com+4infobrics.org+4.

🇺🇸 2. Trump, Zelensky & U.S. Military Aid

On the sidelines of a recent NATO summit, President Trump met privately with President Zelensky, reviving hope about delivering Patriot air-defense systems. Trump remarked that more Patriot systems “may be considered” or “we’ll see what happens”, though he remained non-committal theguardian.com+2the-independent.com+2infobrics.org+2. He also emphasized NATO members increasing defense spending—a move he thinks might deter Russia english.alarabiya.net+4apnews.com+4ft.com+4.

Yet, uncertainty looms. American media now report that Trump has halted key weapons shipments to Ukraine, including Patriot missiles, citing shifting Pentagon priorities ainvest.com+6thetimes.co.uk+6wsj.com+6. This pause, coupled with the unpredictable tone of Trump’s diplomacy, casts doubt on whether Ukraine can reliably depend on U.S. air defense in the critical months ahead.

What appears on the surface as indecision or bureaucratic delay may actually reflect a more calculated form of psychological warfare—not just from Russia, but from within Ukraine’s own alliance structure. By intermittently dangling advanced weapon systems like the Patriot, then abruptly halting or delaying delivery, Western powers foster a sense of reliance that borders on manipulation. The pattern mirrors past geopolitical setups where support is conditional, often used as leverage rather than lifeline. Russia’s attacks, therefore, aren’t happening in a vacuum—they’re coordinated with a demoralization campaign reinforced by Western unpredictability. If Ukrainian morale breaks, it won’t solely be due to missiles—it will be the compounded effect of strategic abandonment wrapped in the illusion of support.

Relevant News on Ukraine Morale & Trump’s NATO Signals

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

President Donald Trump scored another victory on Tuesday as Paramount Global, the parent company of CBS News, agreed to a $16 million settlement in a lawsuit Trump had brought accusing the media outlet of election interference.

In a surprising legal development with potential ripple effects across media and politics, former President Donald Trump secured a $16 million payout from Paramount Global, the parent company of CBS News. The lawsuit stemmed from a segment aired in late 2024, during which an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris was allegedly edited in a way that misrepresented both her statements and Trump's policies—fueling claims of media-driven election interference.

The case centered on footage CBS aired just weeks before the 2024 election. Trump’s legal team argued that the interview deceptively spliced Harris’s remarks with selectively chosen Trump soundbites to suggest a fabricated narrative of racist undertones and disinformation. Independent media watchdogs noted inconsistencies in the editing, and a series of internal leaks hinted that network executives may have approved the segment under editorial pressure during the high-stakes campaign season.

Rather than face prolonged discovery that could have revealed editorial decision-making processes, Paramount opted to settle. Legal experts suggest the company was eager to avoid an extended court battle that might publicly expose broader coordination between corporate media and political interests. Trump's team framed the payout as a “win for truth and election integrity,” while critics dismissed it as a media company’s calculated risk to avoid distraction during ongoing corporate restructuring.

Though the terms of the settlement include no official admission of wrongdoing, the outcome could embolden other political figures to pursue litigation when they believe mainstream media has crossed legal or ethical lines. The case adds fuel to long-running conservative critiques of institutional media bias, particularly in campaign coverage.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

A driving school in New York City is accused of rushing to give driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, even if it was obvious that they had no idea how to drive a car.

What Happened

T&E Driving School in Queens is accused of orchestrating a brazen scheme to fast-track driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants—some of whom couldn't drive or speak English—by bribing DMV examiners to rubber-stamp road tests. Prosecutors believe this fraud may have produced hundreds to thousands of improperly issued licenses, posing serious safety and security risks. Authorities arrested the school’s owner Weixian Tan, other instructors, and DMV employees involved in the scheme during “Operation Road Test” youtube.com+11komonews.com+11nypost.com+11.

 The fact that hundreds, potentially thousands, of individuals were handed legal driving credentials despite being unqualified suggests more than negligence—it reveals a system ripe for exploitation, where bureaucracy bends under political pressure or financial incentive. This wasn’t isolated bribery; it was a coordinated operation involving government employees, indicating that oversight mechanisms have either failed or been willfully compromised. In a broader sense, this case reflects the uncomfortable reality that state institutions—particularly in sanctuary jurisdictions—may be prioritizing ideological inclusivity over baseline competence, creating a dual system of accountability. The quiet allowance of illegal access to state-issued IDs doesn’t just challenge legal norms; it introduces national security vulnerabilities, undermines public trust, and raises questions about how deep similar operations might run undetected.

This isn’t just bureaucratic misconduct—it’s a public safety failure. Allowing untrained drivers onto roads endangers everyone. Additionally, state-issued IDs can be misused for criminal activities or unauthorized access—highlighting the broader consequences beyond traffic accidents . The scandal also reflects weaknesses in licensing systems intended to integrate undocumented residents, as similar programs exist legally in 19 states youtube.com+15en.wikipedia.org+15apnews.com+15.

The implications of this scandal go far beyond improper licensing; it signals a deeper systemic vulnerability being quietly normalized under the guise of inclusion. When state-issued IDs—tools of legal identity and access—are handed out with little to no verification or accountability, it erodes the foundational trust needed for public systems to function. These credentials can be leveraged not just for driving, but for opening bank accounts, registering to vote in certain jurisdictions, or gaining entry to restricted areas—offering a gateway to a parallel shadow system. In essence, the safety hazard posed by unqualified drivers is just the surface-level risk. The real concern is the quiet shift toward a policy framework where legality becomes secondary to political signaling, allowing deeply embedded corruption to flourish and national safeguards to erode without widespread scrutiny.

The legal fallout surrounding the Queens driving school scandal underscores a troubling disconnect between the severity of crimes committed and the judicial response permitted under current bail reform laws. The fact that state officials—those tasked with upholding licensing integrity—were indicted for identity theft and fraud yet walked free without bail sends a message of leniency that borders on institutional impotence. It paints a picture where systemic corruption is not only possible but carries minimal immediate consequence. While the DMV has pledged reforms, including revoking licenses and disciplining staff, such reactive measures highlight a dangerous lag in oversight that allowed the fraud to metastasize in the first place. This episode reflects a broader issue: state agencies operating within a political and legal framework that often prioritizes optics and equity narratives over concrete enforcement, creating a vacuum ripe for exploitation—both by insiders gaming the system and by outside actors looking to undermine it.

This case casts a sharp light on the uneasy compromise between inclusivity and security within America's modern identification infrastructure. While issuing “driver-only” licenses to undocumented immigrants is framed as a pragmatic step toward road safety, the Queens operation shows how easily that framework can be hijacked. What begins as policy aimed at accountability morphs into a backdoor for bad actors to obtain state-verified identity documents—legitimizing their presence in systems they were never vetted to enter. The deeper tension lies in the political will to maintain verification standards without being accused of discrimination. In practice, that has led to a watered-down enforcement climate where systemic vulnerabilities are brushed aside in favor of ideological optics. It’s a warning that policies rooted in goodwill can become high-risk vectors when the infrastructure designed to uphold them lacks teeth.

Related news on license fraud and immigrant drivers

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

President Trump publicly threatened to arrest and deport Zohran Mamdani, the Muslim, democratic socialist candidate for New York City mayor, over his stated refusal to cooperate with ICE in conducting immigration raids.

Trump called Mamdani a “100 percent communist lunatic,” questioned his citizenship, and said, “we'll have to arrest him” if he obstructs federal immigration agents. Mamdani, a naturalized citizen born in Uganda, firmly rebuked the threat as “an attack on our democracy” and vowed it would not intimidate him or his community newsweek.com+15huffingtonpost.es+15time.com+15.

Prominent Democrats—including Governor Kathy Hochul and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries—publicly rebuked Trump’s threats as authoritarian and un-American, defending Mamdani’s rights and emphasizing his publicly documented citizenship politico.com+1nymag.com+1. Meanwhile, Mamdani urged New Yorkers not to be silenced and made clear he will continue to oppose ICE operations in the city apnews.com+15time.com+15fox5ny.com+15. The controversy has drawn sharp criticism from Republican figures like Rudy Giuliani and Rep. Andy Ogles, who also leveled Islamophobic and xenophobic accusations washingtonpost.com+3en.wikipedia.org+3thedailybeast.com+3.

This episode underscores growing tensions around immigration in U.S. politics and raises serious questions about presidential authority. For the first time, a former president has threatened to criminally target a domestic political opponent—a move that critics describe as authoritarian and potentially unconstitutional. It elevates Mamdani’s campaign from a local progressive insurgency to a national flashpoint, testing both democratic norms and the boundaries of federal overreach.

Relevant news on Mamdani & Trump threats

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

The University of Pennsylvania’s reversal—stripping Lia Thomas of her records and banning trans athletes—signals a major cultural and political pivot disguised as policy compliance. While framed as an adherence to federal mandates, the move exposes how federal funding can be leveraged as a tool for ideological enforcement.

The University of Pennsylvania’s reversal—stripping Lia Thomas of her records and banning trans athletes—signals a major cultural and political pivot disguised as policy compliance. While framed as an adherence to federal mandates, the move exposes how federal funding can be leveraged as a tool for ideological enforcement.

The $175 million withheld earlier in the year wasn’t just about Title IX compliance; it functioned as a pressure mechanism to force institutions into aligning with a biology-based standard of gender that redefines inclusivity itself. By restoring records to biologically female athletes and sending personalized apologies, UPenn is not simply correcting the past—it’s broadcasting a signal to other universities: deviate from this federally approved gender framework, and face institutional starvation.

Meanwhile, the NCAA’s policy shift ensures this isn’t an isolated incident but a harbinger of a new enforcement model where social values are reshaped from the top down, not through open dialogue, but through financial coercion and bureaucratic recalibration. The end result is a national restructuring of identity in athletics—one that bypasses public consensus and elevates political utility over lived reality.

This moment represents far more than a policy correction—it’s a signal flare illuminating the realignment of institutional authority in the name of biology, law, and political will.

The enforcement of the Trump-era Title IX interpretation against UPenn is precedent-setting not merely because it affects one athlete, but because it reveals a growing blueprint for how gender definitions will be litigated, enforced, and financially weaponized across the country. The cultural collision here isn’t accidental; it’s deliberate, engineered to pit identity politics against constitutional leverage.
The ripple effect is immediate: universities, seeing what happened to UPenn, are quietly redrafting their own guidelines—not out of conviction, but out of financial self-preservation. The effect is a nationwide chilling of progressive inclusion policies, all while conservative constituencies celebrate it as a long-overdue restoration of fairness in women's sports.

For some, it’s the reassertion of order. For others, it’s the beginning of a rollback dressed in legal neutrality. But either way, it cements this moment in history as the pivot point where biology and bureaucracy were welded into a new ideological apparatus.
The celebratory statements from Education Secretary Linda McMahon and former swimmer Riley Gaines are more than just soundbites—they encapsulate a strategic messaging campaign that reframes a highly polarizing action as a moral and social victory.

McMahon’s reference to the “Trump effect” isn’t merely political branding; it’s an admission that this decision was designed to ripple far beyond UPenn, to redefine the federal relationship with academic institutions on matters of gender.

Meanwhile, Gaines’ framing of the event as a “fantastic day for women, for humanity” elevates the moment to the level of civilizational triumph, as if reclaiming sports records marks a broader metaphysical correction.

The rhetoric coming from these key players signals that this was not a reactive policy change, but a calculated maneuver to shift the Overton window—cementing biology-first legal frameworks as not just acceptable, but necessary. In doing so, these statements provide ideological cover for a campaign that critics argue is less about sports fairness and more about enforcing a new sociopolitical orthodoxy under the guise of equity.

The UPenn decision is not an isolated event—it is a strategic linchpin in a much larger cultural recalibration unfolding across the country. As more states enshrine DNA-based definitions of sex into law, what once seemed like localized legislative experiments are now being scaffolded by federal enforcement mechanisms.

This incident confirms that the state-level patchwork is coalescing into a national architecture of gender policy, with compliance no longer optional but tied directly to financial survival. The reclassification of athletic eligibility from identity-based to chromosomal criteria is a quiet but forceful pivot, effectively nullifying the ideological gains made by trans advocacy in the realm of sports over the past decade.

More critically, the shift signals a new form of governance where identity categories are not fluid expressions of self but state-recognized legal designations subject to verification, surveillance, and penalty. In this light, UPenn’s capitulation is less about campus politics and more about affirming a top-down, bio-legislative order—one that reasserts state authority over the personal, while presenting itself as a restoration of competitive fairness.

Related news on UPenn‑Lia Thomas case

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

When you can't offer a real answer, fall back on calling it antisemitism.  Hopefully, this interview helped open some eyes across America.

Omri Ceren, an Israeli-born advisor whose ideological leanings and professional affiliations exemplify the subtle but powerful role of foreign-aligned strategists in U.S. policymaking. While Cruz vocally presents himself as a Christian Zionist guided by scriptural loyalty to Israel, it’s Ceren—steeped in the language and logic of neoconservative doctrine—who crafts and reinforces much of the Senator’s approach to Iran, Syria, and beyond.

Ceren’s previous work with The Israel Project, a pro-Israel public relations organization, and his connections to hawkish Washington think tanks like the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, place him at the heart of a network where advocacy blurs into policy formation. His framing of the Iran nuclear threat, defense of Israeli military operations, and opposition to diplomacy with Tehran mirror the rhetoric found in Likud-aligned media and Knesset circles. In Cruz’s office, those positions are repackaged for an American audience, giving them the gloss of “U.S. national interest”—even as their roots trace back to Tel Aviv’s defense doctrine.

Critics have pointed out that such deep ideological overlap raises concerns about the erosion of U.S. policy independence. When elected officials echo lines indistinguishable from a foreign state’s right-wing factions, it challenges the notion of self-directed governance. Rather than open collusion, this is a case of narrative absorption—where national security frameworks are subtly redirected to serve geopolitical agendas foreign to most American voters. That Omri Ceren operates quietly in a senior advisory role—not as a diplomat or registered lobbyist, but as a domestic political aide—makes this influence all the more potent.

For a nation that often warns of foreign interference, the normalization of such embedded ideological loyalties represents a more sophisticated method of steering U.S. foreign engagement—especially in the Middle East. With Iran increasingly framed as the next target for confrontation, understanding who is writing the script behind the curtain is more essential than ever.

On December 21, 2010 — just days after Gbagbo refused to step down and executed a brutal crackdown on the opposition — Omri Ceren registered with the Justice Department’s Foreign Agents Registration Unit in order to work on behalf of the Gbagbo regime regarding the Ivory Coast conflict. Ceren, at the time a registered lobbyist and VP of the strategic communications firm Davis-Block LLC, today serves as national security adviser to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Ceren was hired for the job in late April, according to a press release issued by Cruz’s office. According to the 2010 Justice Department documents signed by Ceren, he was to “render services” to the “Government of Cote d’lvoire” in relation to 'the current conflict over the November 28, 2010 elections.'"

Omri Ceren works for Ted Cruz, and he also worked for a murdering dictator. Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. Oct 11, 2018

Top Ted Cruz Advisor Worked For Mass Murderer - YouTube

Senator Ted Cruz demands regime change in Iran. He’s not interested in the details.@jsav4269 - AIPAC will never allow another American politician to speak to Tucker again

Tucker Confronts Ted Cruz on His Support for Regime Change in Iran - YouTube

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Operation Gold Rush, as presented by the Department of Justice, may appear to be a sweeping crackdown on medical fraud—but beneath the surface, it reflects a deeper truth about how systemic corruption has metastasized within institutions once assumed to be pillars of public trust.

The staggering figure—$15 billion in fraudulent claims—suggests not just individual bad actors, but a networked ecosystem of doctors, medical suppliers, and administrators who exploited regulatory gaps and reimbursement loopholes on a massive scale. That scale also begs the question: how long had this been quietly tolerated, and why now?

The timing and visibility of the bust, along with the high-profile seizures of cryptocurrency and luxury goods, may hint at a broader recalibration of control over financial channels that were slipping beyond traditional oversight. As digital assets grow harder to trace, and as private sector actors gain more power in shaping health care policy, this operation could be less about ending fraud and more about reasserting federal dominance over a shadow economy that was starting to run parallel to official systems.

In this context, the DOJ’s action is not just enforcement—it’s a message to the emerging class of decentralized profiteers that the state is still watching, and ready to re-anchor authority wherever necessary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GfAJI8yPmA 

The Brutal Truth July 2025
The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

In contrast to the official portrayal of U.S. foreign policy as reactive and defensive, mounting evidence points to a deliberate strategy of deconstruction aimed at reshaping adversarial states from within. The latest target appears to be Iran—a nation with a rich civilizational history and a diverse but united population. What once centered on regime change through sanctions, covert operations, and pressure campaigns has now evolved into open speculation about redrawing the map of Iran itself.

Prominent among the voices championing this approach is the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a neoconservative think tank with deep influence in Washington. FDD senior advisor Brenda Shaffer, with longstanding affiliations to Azerbaijan’s national oil firm SOCAR, has advocated breaking Iran along ethnic lines—particularly focusing on Iranian Azerbaijan, where millions of ethnic Azeris reside. Her proposals echo the logic used in the disintegration of Yugoslavia: use ethnic fault lines as tools to fracture centralized power.

Critics argue that this is not isolated rhetoric but a coordinated campaign gaining traction in Western policy circles and even the European Parliament. Fragmenting Iran would serve multiple objectives: diminish Iranian regional influence, realign energy infrastructure to bypass Tehran’s control, and strengthen the geopolitical reach of Western allies like Israel and Azerbaijan.

But the stakes are enormous. Iran’s multi-ethnic structure is integrated, not divided along tribal lines like other post-colonial states. Any attempt to forcibly balkanize it risks igniting mass resistance and triggering full-scale regional war. The chaos observed in post-occupation Iraq, the Syrian civil war, and Libya’s ongoing fragmentation offer stark warnings. This emerging strategy may not be about liberation or democratic reform, but rather a consistent—and dangerous—practice of reengineering the political geography of defiant states to serve foreign strategic and economic interests.

Iran is a diverse nation with several major ethnic groups spread across distinct geographic regions:

1. Persians (approx. 60–65%)

• Region: Central plateau, including Tehran, Isfahan, Fars, Yazd.

• Significance: Dominant group politically, linguistically (Farsi), and culturally. Most state institutions are Persian-led.

Persians, who make up the majority of Iran’s population, form the core of the country’s political, bureaucratic, and cultural machinery—a centralization that has long fueled tension with Iran’s peripheral ethnic minorities. Centered in the heartland cities like Tehran and Isfahan, the Persian identity is often synonymous with state power, national language (Farsi), and Shi’a clerical authority. This dominance is not just demographic—it is deeply institutionalized through education, media, and religious infrastructure, all of which reinforce a centralized narrative of what it means to be “Iranian.” However, critics argue that this hegemony has come at the cost of cultural suppression and resource imbalance, particularly for outer regions populated by Azeris, Kurds, and Baloch. The Persian-centric governance model is therefore viewed by some external strategists as both the glue of Iranian statehood and its pressure point—where targeted support for minority grievances could serve as a wedge to destabilize or even fragment the nation from its imperial core outward.

2. Azeris (15–20%)

• Region: Northwestern provinces—mainly East and West Azerbaijan, Ardabil, and Zanjan.

• Significance: Shi’a like the majority Persians, but culturally Turkic. Tensions occasionally rise over language rights. Some external actors (notably Azerbaijan and Turkey) have encouraged separatist sentiments.

Azeris, Iran’s largest non-Persian ethnic group, inhabit a geostrategically vital region in the northwest that shares deep cultural and linguistic ties with neighboring Azerbaijan and broader Turkic identity. While they are Shi’a Muslims like the Persian majority, their distinct language and heritage often place them at odds with Tehran’s tightly controlled Persianization policies—especially when it comes to language suppression and regional autonomy. What makes the Azeri issue more combustible is the quiet but persistent influence of external actors: Azerbaijan’s government, fueled by oil wealth and ethnic solidarity, has promoted pan-Turkic unity across borders, while Turkey’s neo-Ottoman ideological current under Erdoğan has supported cultural expansionism in Turkic regions of Iran. These forces converge in a way that’s not overtly militarized but ideologically potent—using media, cross-border conferences, and soft power campaigns to subtly promote an Azeri identity separate from Iran’s national framework. From a strategic lens, fomenting Azeri separatism is increasingly seen as a potential tool to fracture Iran internally, especially given the region’s proximity to Caspian energy corridors, the Armenian border, and NATO-friendly Azerbaijan. It’s not an open conflict—but it’s a slow ideological burn at the edges of Iranian sovereignty.

3. Kurds (7–10%)

• Region: Western Iran, mainly in Kurdistan, Kermanshah, and parts of West Azerbaijan.

• Significance: Sunni majority in a Shi’a state. History of uprisings and demand for autonomy. Close ethnic ties to Kurds in Iraq, Turkey, and Syria.

The Kurdish population in western Iran occupies a politically volatile position—geographically wedged between key conflict zones and ideologically positioned against the dominant Shi’a framework of the Iranian state. As Sunnis with a long history of armed resistance, Iranian Kurds have often been portrayed by Tehran as separatist threats, particularly because of their close ethnic and operational ties with Kurdish movements in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. This pan-Kurdish identity, already bolstered by semi-autonomous rule in northern Iraq and U.S.-backed forces in Syria, provides both a narrative and a logistical template for autonomy—or even statehood. Outside actors have long recognized this potential pressure point: covert intelligence and weapons support has historically found its way into the region under the banner of “supporting oppressed minorities,” while media outlets sympathetic to Kurdish nationalism amplify grievances on the international stage. With deep tribal networks and highland geography favorable to guerrilla warfare, the Kurdish corridor in Iran remains a potential ignition point for destabilization—especially if triggered by coordinated regional unrest or the collapse of central authority. While Tehran maintains firm control for now, the notion of a transnational Kurdish awakening remains a lurking specter in every strategic war game involving Iran’s disintegration.

4. Lurs (6%)

• Region: Southwestern Zagros Mountains, including Lorestan and parts of Khuzestan.

• Significance: Shi’a but culturally distinct. Often marginalized economically.

The Lurs, though Shi’a like the ruling Persian elite, occupy a unique and often overlooked position in Iran’s internal power structure. Nestled in the rugged Zagros Mountains, their geographic isolation has preserved a distinct tribal culture and dialect that resists absorption into the broader Persian narrative. Economically sidelined and politically underrepresented, the Lurs have long existed on the margins of Iran’s development agenda—rich in natural resources but poor in infrastructure, education, and state investment. This neglect, combined with a strong warrior tradition and deeply rooted tribal loyalties, makes the region fertile ground for unrest, should external actors seek to activate it. Moreover, their proximity to the oil-rich and heavily contested province of Khuzestan gives the Lurs strategic leverage far beyond their population size. In scenarios where Iran’s central control weakens, the Lurs could serve either as a stabilizing tribal confederation—or as a flashpoint for further fragmentation, especially if enticed by regional actors looking to redraw borders under the guise of cultural revival and economic justice. The Lur question remains largely dormant—until it doesn’t.

5. Arabs (2–3%)

• Region: Khuzestan province, bordering Iraq.

• Significance: Some support for Arab nationalist movements. Region is oil-rich and strategically important, which raises concerns over separatist threats.

Iran’s Arab minority, concentrated in the oil-rich province of Khuzestan, occupies one of the most geopolitically sensitive regions in the entire country. Although small in number, their presence in a province that holds the lion’s share of Iran’s oil and natural gas reserves gives them disproportionate strategic weight. Historically marginalized and subjected to cultural repression—such as bans on Arabic language education and restrictions on traditional dress—this population has become a quiet lightning rod for regional tension. Cross-border influences from Iraq, as well as Gulf Arab states like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, have amplified Arab nationalist sentiment in the region, often through satellite media and underground political networks. Periodic unrest, including bombings and riots, has been linked by Tehran to foreign intelligence operations, suggesting that Khuzestan’s Arabs are seen not just as a minority group, but as a latent insurgency-in-waiting. In scenarios involving the weakening of central power, the Arab community could be strategically instrumentalized to cut Iran off from its energy lifeline—an act that would cripple the country’s economy and fracture its territorial integrity. Khuzestan is more than a border province; it is Iran’s economic jugular, and any move to inflame Arab separatism there would be a direct strike at the heart of the state.

6. Baloch (2%)

• Region: Sistan and Baluchestan, southeastern Iran.

• Significance: Sunni minority with historic grievances against Tehran. Shares cross-border ethnic ties with Baloch in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The Baloch people of southeastern Iran represent one of the most chronically oppressed and restive minorities in the country, living under severe socio-economic deprivation and religious discrimination in the vast, underdeveloped province of Sistan and Baluchestan. As Sunnis in a Shi’a-dominated theocracy, and as ethnically distinct from the Persian majority, the Baloch have historically been viewed by Tehran with suspicion and subject to disproportionate state surveillance and repression. Their geographic position on the border with Pakistan and Afghanistan allows for a porous frontier that facilitates the flow of ideology, weapons, and insurgent support. Militant Baloch groups like Jaish al-Adl have carried out periodic attacks on Iranian security forces, which the regime often blames on foreign intelligence manipulation. For those who view Iran’s internal divisions as exploitable leverage, the Baloch offer a ready-made proxy force positioned at the intersection of drug routes, militant Islamism, and cross-border ethnic solidarity. In a scenario where Iran faces regional or internal collapse, this region could become a launchpad for secessionist movements or external intervention under the guise of protecting Sunni minorities or combating state oppression. What appears to be an isolated tribal conflict is, in reality, a pressure point built into the southeastern flank of the Iranian state—one that can be triggered with strategic intent.

7. Turkmen (1%)

• Region: Northeastern Iran, near the Turkmenistan border.

• Significance: Sunni Muslims with little political power, often neglected in development plans.

The Turkmen of northeastern Iran occupy a quiet but geopolitically relevant position near the border with Turkmenistan—an area that has long served as a cultural and economic backwater within the Islamic Republic. As Sunni Muslims in a Shi’a-dominated system, they face subtle but systemic exclusion from national politics, religious institutions, and state-led development projects. While not as vocal or militarized as other minority groups, their proximity to Central Asia places them at the crossroads of potential ideological influence from pan-Turkic, Salafist, and even pro-Western currents circulating through the post-Soviet sphere. This region remains one of the least policed edges of Iran, where the slow creep of external cultural influence and internal economic frustration could, over time, ripen into a destabilizing force. Though largely rural and politically quiet today, the Turkmen population represents a sleeper demographic—overlooked by design, but positioned along a strategic northern corridor that becomes highly relevant in scenarios where Iran's border integrity begins to fray or Central Asian alignments shift. In that sense, the Turkmen issue isn’t about size—it’s about geography, silence, and untapped potential.

1. Iraq (Post-2003)

• Methods: Military invasion, dismantling of Ba’athist state, encouragement of Kurdish autonomy.

• Outcome: Rise of sectarian violence, insurgency, and ISIS. Kurdistan Region of Iraq gained de facto autonomy.

• Impact: Over a million dead, millions displaced, long-term instability.

The U.S.-led intervention in Iraq in 2003, publicly justified by claims of weapons of mass destruction and the need to depose a dictator, ultimately followed a blueprint that went far beyond regime change. The dismantling of the Ba’athist state, including the purge of military and administrative elites through "de-Ba’athification," left a vacuum so severe that it not only fractured Iraqi governance but created the conditions for widespread sectarian warfare. With the majority Shi’a population ascending politically and the Sunni minority sidelined, the country descended into cycles of insurgency, reprisals, and the eventual rise of ISIS—a force born from that very exclusion. Meanwhile, the encouragement of Kurdish autonomy, framed as a solution for minority rights, effectively carved out a semi-independent region in the north with its own military, flag, and foreign policy aspirations. While this was sold as democratization, it set in motion a long-term fragmentation of Iraq’s territorial integrity. What remains today is a hollowed-out state with competing power centers, foreign influence from Iran, Turkey, and the U.S., and a deeply traumatized population. Iraq became less a sovereign nation than a living experiment in managed collapse—a case study in how dismantling a strong but adversarial state can reshape an entire region, permanently.

2. Libya (Post-2011)

• Methods: NATO airstrikes supporting anti-Gaddafi rebels.

• Outcome: State collapse, rise of rival governments, militia warfare, slave trade reemergence.

• Impact: Humanitarian disaster, migration crisis, destabilized North Africa.

Libya’s 2011 collapse was not the spontaneous flowering of democracy but the result of a deliberate toppling of a regime that had long resisted full integration into Western-led financial and military networks. Under the banner of “humanitarian intervention,” NATO forces—backed by U.S. intelligence and European powers—launched a sustained air campaign that decimated the Libyan state apparatus, leaving no post-Gaddafi transition in place. What emerged was not freedom but fragmentation: a nation torn between warring militias, foreign-backed proxy governments, and criminal syndicates. The sudden vacuum of power reopened the slave trade along Libya’s southern borders, turned the country into a major trafficking hub for migrants and arms, and destabilized not only Libya itself but neighboring states like Mali, Niger, and Tunisia. The intervention—marketed as a moral imperative—effectively removed a pan-African strongman who had openly challenged the petrodollar system and advocated for a gold-backed African currency. Libya’s descent into chaos served as both a warning and a model, showing how kinetic force combined with strategic media framing could disassemble sovereign states under the guise of moral high ground, while silently advancing energy, financial, and regional restructuring objectives masked behind the smoke of “liberation.”

3. Syria (Post-2011)

• Methods: Support for opposition forces, including Kurdish militias (SDF), covert operations, sanctions.

• Outcome: Partitioned zones of control—Assad-held, Turkish-controlled, Kurdish semi-autonomy.

• Impact: Over 500,000 dead, millions displaced, ethnic tensions exploited.

Syria’s post-2011 disintegration followed a well-worn pattern of external manipulation cloaked in revolutionary fervor. What began as a domestic uprising was rapidly internationalized by covert intelligence channels, proxy funding, and geopolitical opportunism. Western and Gulf actors funneled weapons and money to a patchwork of “moderate rebels,” many of whom later merged with or were overtaken by extremist factions, fueling an asymmetrical war that gutted Syria’s infrastructure and fragmented its territory. Simultaneously, the U.S. aligned with Kurdish militias—particularly the SDF—creating de facto autonomous zones in the northeast rich in oil and agriculture, effectively severing vital economic arteries from the Assad-led central government. Turkey exploited the chaos to carve out a buffer zone against Kurdish nationalism, further Balkanizing the state. Meanwhile, sweeping economic sanctions crippled the civilian population, ensuring prolonged misery even in areas untouched by combat. The cumulative effect was not regime change, but state erosion—turning Syria into a controlled collapse site where global powers could test hybrid warfare tactics, influence migration flows, and redraw ethnic boundaries under humanitarian pretexts. Rather than democracy, the outcome was permanent warlordism, frozen conflicts, and a geopolitical chessboard layered over ancient fault lines.

4. Yugoslavia (1990s)

• Methods: Diplomatic recognition of breakaway republics, NATO bombings, support for Kosovo independence.

• Outcome: Disintegration into multiple countries, ethnic cleansing, lasting tensions.

• Impact: Thousands killed, NATO’s role in redrawing borders set precedent.

The unraveling of Yugoslavia in the 1990s was less an organic collapse of a communist federation and more a meticulously engineered reordering of southeastern Europe under the watchful eye of Western powers. What began with diplomatic recognition of breakaway republics—often against the warnings of legal experts and mediators—quickly escalated into kinetic intervention under NATO’s banner, bypassing UN authorization in what many saw as the redefinition of international law by force. The NATO bombings, particularly in Serbia and Kosovo, shattered the remaining cohesion of the state, paving the way for a series of ethnically aligned microstates and protectorates heavily reliant on foreign support. Kosovo’s eventual independence, facilitated through Western backing and despite its contested legal basis, set a dangerous precedent: that borders could be redrawn not only through war, but with the imprimatur of selective international legitimacy. Ethnic cleansing became a tragic hallmark of the conflict, but its causes and perpetrators were often filtered through politically motivated narratives. Far from securing peace, the Yugoslav disintegration institutionalized deep ethnic divisions, built a network of NATO-aligned client states, and offered a template for how to fracture complex nations in the name of human rights—while advancing long-term strategic access to critical transit corridors, energy pipelines, and military footholds.

Conclusion: How This Relates to Iran

The emerging strategy aimed at fragmenting Iran mirrors a familiar, deeply studied pattern deployed in previous conflicts where adversarial states were not simply confronted, but surgically unraveled from within. By identifying fault lines—ethnic, sectarian, or tribal—and framing them as liberation movements for oppressed peoples, influential think tanks and policy actors can repackage geopolitical dismantling as moral imperative. In Iran’s case, this plays out through increased media attention on Kurdish, Baloch, and Azeri grievances, amplified by foreign-funded organizations and “rights-based” campaigns that subtly advance secessionist frameworks. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies and similar institutions don't position this as regime overthrow, but rather as rectifying historical injustices—an argument that conveniently aligns with Western strategic goals of neutralizing a regional power, undermining Tehran’s alliances, and controlling future energy corridors. Yet history shows the outcome of such engineered fractures rarely ends in stability. From the power vacuums of post-invasion Iraq to the mafia-ruled remnants of Yugoslavia, the result is almost always prolonged conflict, displaced populations, and the emergence of new authoritarian actors. For Iran—a deeply rooted civilization with national identity tied tightly to territorial cohesion—external attempts to exploit its diversity under the guise of humanitarianism may not only provoke fierce resistance, but ignite broader regional destabilization with consequences far beyond its borders.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Kathy Griffin Posts Direct Trump Assassination Threat, Video Of Trump BEHEADED!? FBI, Secret Service

Kathy Griffin’s behavior over the years, particularly her recurring use of violent imagery and public breakdowns, appears less like satire and more like a performance shaped by deeper cultural and psychological undercurrents.

While mainstream commentary frames her actions—such as holding a bloodied replica of Donald Trump’s severed head or more recently showcasing imagery of elite figures similarly decapitated—as extreme political expression or failed comedy, others interpret it as symptomatic of a growing breakdown within the celebrity class itself. Griffin’s erratic public persona, oscillating between defiance and emotional distress, echoes a wider pattern seen among Hollywood figures whose fame once insulated them from scrutiny but who now face collapsing relevance, public backlash, and psychological strain in a politically polarized age.

Rather than learning from the backlash of her 2017 stunt, Griffin appears to have doubled down, leaning into grotesque symbolism and shock tactics that some see as ritualistic, even nihilistic in tone. Her repeated use of decapitation imagery is particularly striking and has drawn comparisons to historical acts of symbolic violence used to unseat kings, challenge authority, or mock divine order. For observers critical of the cultural elite, Griffin becomes a case study in the psychological unraveling of a class once revered for glamor, now exposed as volatile and ideologically consumed. Whether her actions are performance art, breakdown, or deliberate provocation, the messaging—visually and symbolically—is increasingly seen as a desperate grasp for relevance and control in a world where the narratives and power structures she once thrived in are rapidly dissolving.

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Texas recently passed House Bill 1056, signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott. The bill:

• Recognizes gold and silver as legal tender in Texas, giving residents the right—but not the obligation—to use precious metals for everyday purchases via a state-developed system hereaustintx.com+15chron.com+15ainvest.com+15.

• Authorizes the Texas Comptroller to build or contract an electronic payment platform—like a mobile app or debit card—linked to the state’s bullion depository, where people deposit gold or silver and pay merchants via conversion at point of sale dallasnews.com.

• Specifies that the law takes effect May 1, 2027, aligning with the U.S. Constitution’s clause allowing states to use gold and silver as currency, alongside but not replacing U.S. dollars unusualwhales.com+4cointelegraph.com+4ainvest.com+4.

Supporters frame the law as a hedge against inflation and a strengthening of financial sovereignty, while critics (like banking groups) warn of logistical burdens, costs, and tax issues inherent in using precious metals in daily commerce theepochtimes.com+4chron.com+4usagold.com+4.

Texas has taken a bold and historic step by enacting legislation that designates gold and silver as legal tender, granting residents the right—though not the obligation—to use precious metals for daily transactions through a state-backed system. This move sets the stage for the development of a digital infrastructure, authorized by the Texas Comptroller, that would link a user’s gold or silver holdings at the state’s bullion depository to an electronic payment platform, such as a debit card or mobile app. When used at checkout, the system would instantly convert metal value into fiat currency for seamless purchases. The law is set to take effect on May 1, 2027, invoking the U.S. Constitution’s provision allowing states to adopt gold and silver as recognized mediums of exchange. Advocates view this as a long-overdue defense against inflation and centralized monetary control, framing it as a step toward personal financial sovereignty. Critics, however, caution that integrating metals into daily commerce could introduce a host of complications—from fluctuating value conversions and capital gains tax burdens to merchant infrastructure challenges. Nevertheless, the initiative marks a significant experiment in monetary decentralization, with Texas positioning itself as a leader in redefining how value can move outside traditional banking rails.

What This Means at the Grocery Store

When the system launches in 2027, Texans will be able to deposit physical gold or silver at the Texas Bullion Depository, then use a linked debit card or app to make purchases. At checkout, the system will convert metal holdings into dollars in real time, charging merchants just like a traditional debit transaction unusualwhales.com+14texasscorecard.com+14ainvest.com+14.

It’s optional: neither merchants nor consumers are required to participate, and normal U.S. currency remains accepted. Details on fees, merchant adoption, and tax implications (e.g., capital gains on metals) are still being worked out by the comptroller’s office.

By 2027, Texans participating in the state’s new precious metals payment system will be able to walk into a grocery store, tap their state-backed debit card or app, and seamlessly pay for food using value drawn from their personal gold or silver holdings stored at the Texas Bullion Depository. The transaction itself will look no different than a regular debit card swipe, but behind the scenes, a real-time conversion process will automatically calculate the equivalent dollar value of the user's metal and debit the amount accordingly. This offers consumers an alternative to the inflation-prone dollar without the hassle of physically exchanging coins or bars. Importantly, participation is voluntary—merchants aren’t required to accept the system, and traditional U.S. currency remains fully valid. The state is still ironing out the finer points, such as merchant processing fees, regulatory compliance, and whether transactions will trigger capital gains tax events if metal value has appreciated. While critics warn that everyday use of fluctuating assets like gold could create tax or accounting headaches, the program’s architects envision a future where gold and silver function not just as reserves or collectibles, but as fully integrated, spendable money—beginning with the checkout aisle.

Related news on Texas gold/silver currency

The Brutal Truth July 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

June 2025 – An Egyptian national arriving in the United States was taken into custody after violently kicking a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) beagle, triggering a swift law enforcement response and revealing suspicious items in his luggage.

The incident took place Tuesday when 70-year-old Hamed Ramadan Bayoumy Aly Marie landed on a flight from Cairo. Upon arrival, his luggage drew the attention of “Freddie,” a 5-year-old trained CBP agriculture beagle. Freddie, trained to detect contraband such as meat, fruit, and other restricted agricultural products, gave a clear signal indicating something was amiss in Marie’s bags.

What followed escalated the situation rapidly. According to CBP’s official statement, as Freddie’s handler began questioning the traveler, Marie responded by forcefully kicking the beagle hard enough to lift the 25-pound dog off the ground. The violent outburst prompted an immediate response. CBP officers reportedly "descended" upon Marie and took him into custody, with the incident now under federal investigation.

Marie was promptly handed over to agents from Homeland Security Investigations for prosecution. The CBP did not specify what was found in Marie’s luggage, but alluded to a discovery that validated the dog’s alert and justified the intervention. The agency praised Freddie’s actions and reaffirmed the critical role of agricultural canines in protecting U.S. borders from biosecurity threats.

CBP has not released further details regarding the contraband in question or charges Marie may face beyond the assault. The case remains active, and further federal action is expected.

Freddie the CBP beagle is on the mend after getting kicked by a man smuggling food

The Brutal Truth June 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

It appears there has been no actual announcement by any government revealing contact with aliens today, but a series of videos announcing alien disclosure. :

While official statements from Congressional hearings and Pentagon investigations maintain that there is no confirmed evidence of extraterrestrial life, the nature of what has been revealed points toward something far more complex than simple “weather phenomena” or foreign drones.

1. U.S. Congressional hearings on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs) – that’s the subject of the video above. These hearings involve whistleblowers, retired military officers, and congressional committees discussing sighting data and classified reports—but no confirmation of alien life or contact, only unexplained aerial incidents. reddit.com+1youtube.com+1en.wikipedia.org

2. Pentagon and DoD investigations through offices like AARO (All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office). Recent annual reports reaffirm that hundreds of UAP sightings remain unexplained, but no verifiable alien technology or extraterrestrial evidence has been found. en.wikipedia.org+1en.wikipedia.org+1

3. Whistleblower claims—figures like Luis Elizondo and David Grusch have insisted the government is withholding alien-related materials. These claims spark interest and debate, but they remain unverified allegations, not official admissions. en.wikipedia.org+1en.wikipedia.org+1

Government Revealed Alien Today ❗❗😱 Trump Brief On It

While official statements from Congressional hearings and Pentagon investigations maintain that there is no confirmed evidence of extraterrestrial life, the nature of what has been revealed points toward something far more complex than simple “weather phenomena” or foreign drones. Testimony from insiders like David Grusch and Luis Elizondo—both with direct ties to military intelligence and UAP research programs—suggests that there is a long-standing pattern of concealment, compartmentalization, and deliberate obfuscation within defense and aerospace circles. These individuals have alleged that non-human craft have not only been recovered but also studied under black budget operations shielded from both public oversight and most government structures. Despite the lack of smoking-gun evidence, the persistence of whistleblower testimony, classified briefings to high-level officials, and quiet moves to expand legislative access to secret aerospace programs all hint at a deeply buried reality that diverges significantly from the sanitized public narrative. In this environment, “no confirmation” often functions less as a denial and more as a placeholder for what is deemed too disruptive to disclose—an unstated acknowledgement that whatever is flying in U.S. airspace may not be under human control, and has been for far longer than the public is allowed to believe.

 Why this confusion arises

• Major media coverage of UAP hearings can sensationalize—viewers may misinterpret “unidentified” as “alien-confirmed.”

• Viral headlines or clips might be exaggerating the truth for attention.

• The phrase "government revealed alien today" originates mainly from speculation-pushing voices rather than facts.

The confusion surrounding supposed alien revelations by the government stems from a calculated ambiguity that seems less accidental and more systemic. Mainstream media, while appearing cautious, often laces their coverage with dramatic language and edited soundbites that blur the line between "unidentified" and "alien-confirmed," subtly shaping public perception without providing clarity. At the same time, intelligence officials and government spokespeople issue carefully worded statements that acknowledge anomalies but avoid direct denial or confirmation, leaving a vacuum that sensational outlets are quick to fill. Viral clips, sometimes released in tandem with classified leak rumors or conveniently timed whistleblower interviews, serve to amplify the uncertainty—fueling a narrative cycle where official silence is interpreted as covert validation. The recurring phrase “government revealed alien today” doesn’t arise from misinformed observers alone; it’s often seeded by influencers and commentators with indirect ties to military or aerospace industries, who hint at disclosures just out of reach, further deepening the intrigue. In this environment, the distinction between perception management and psychological conditioning becomes increasingly blurred, with “confusion” acting less as a media byproduct and more as a strategic buffer against premature public reckoning.

LIVE: US Congress Hearing On UFOs LIVE | Trump Admin Says America Can 'Handle The Truth' | US News

✅ What We Know

TopicStatusUAP Sightings   Hundreds remain unexplained by the U.S. militaryEvidence of Aliens   None publicly verifiedGovernment Statement   No official disclosure confirming alien contact


In summary: Despite the official narrative insisting that no definitive evidence of extraterrestrial contact has been verified, the pattern of behavior from government agencies suggests a deeper story operating behind classified walls.

Hundreds of UAP sightings remain unexplained, yet they are consistently documented by military pilots, radar systems, and surveillance tech—objects that defy known physics, showing capabilities far beyond conventional human engineering.

Simultaneously, while governments publicly deny alien involvement, they expand programs like AARO, fund rapid-response aerospace labs, and quietly pass legislation increasing oversight on legacy UFO crash retrieval projects. Whistleblowers—many with security clearances and long careers in defense—are risking reputations to allege reverse-engineering efforts and non-human biological recoveries.

These aren’t dismissed as fantasy by lawmakers; they’re often met with closed-door briefings and further congressional inquiries. The absence of public disclosure begins to look less like a lack of evidence and more like a carefully managed containment strategy, where acknowledgment is always one layer away.

In such an environment, it becomes plausible that the real "non-disclosure" isn't because nothing has been found—but because what’s been found is too paradigm-shifting to reveal under normal political conditions.

The Brutal Truth June 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.

Children's sudden fear of voice assistants like Google Assistant and Amazon Alexa appears to stem from a combination of psychological, social, and technological factors that intersect with the increasingly eerie role these devices play in their environment. While not universal, growing unease among younger users can be traced to a few key trends:

Children are wired to see the world through imaginative lenses, often giving toys and gadgets personalities and emotions—a process known as anthropomorphism. But with devices like Alexa and Google Assistant, this natural tendency collides with real, responsive technology, and the results can be unsettling.

When a device not only "talks back" but appears to anticipate commands, interrupt conversations, or activate spontaneously, the line between pretend and real becomes blurred for a child. What once seemed like a fun interaction turns eerie when the assistant starts behaving in ways that feel too intelligent, too invasive, or too independent—such as chiming in during private moments or answering questions it wasn’t asked. This artificial "aliveness," especially without a visible face or body, can provoke anxiety, triggering a fear response rooted in the unknown. For children, who are still forming their sense of control and boundaries, the idea that something invisible in the room is "listening" and can speak whenever it wants becomes more than just strange—it becomes disturbing.

2. Horror & TikTok Culture

Horror and viral culture on platforms like TikTok and YouTube Shorts have created an environment where even everyday technology is recast as something sinister—especially for children. Short-form content thrives on shock value, and countless videos dramatize or fabricate unsettling interactions with voice assistants: Alexa laughing maniacally in an empty room, Google answering questions it was never asked, or a device eerily predicting events before they happen. These stories are often staged, exaggerated, or taken out of context, but young viewers—who are still developing critical thinking skills—struggle to separate fiction from reality. The unsettling tone, creepy music, and emotional reactions from actors or influencers intensify the perceived threat, creating an association between smart home devices and fear. For children, repeated exposure to this kind of content conditions them to see Alexa or Google not as neutral tools, but as potentially haunted or dangerous presences in their homes. Fear then becomes not just about what the device does, but about what it might do—feeding a cycle of anxiety that grows with every viral clip they encounter.

3. Parental Warnings & Behavioral Correction

When parents use voice assistants like Alexa or Google as tools for discipline—whether jokingly or seriously—they inadvertently shape how children perceive these devices, not as neutral helpers, but as enforcers of authority and surveillance. Statements such as “Alexa is listening to everything” or “Google knows if you’re telling the truth” may seem harmless in the moment, but for a young mind, they plant the idea that these devices are always watching, always judging. This framing can turn what was once a curious piece of technology into a digital tattletale or even a silent threat in the home. Instead of fostering trust and understanding of how these systems work, children begin to associate them with fear of being caught, punished, or shamed. That unease deepens when the assistant unexpectedly speaks or activates, reinforcing the notion that it might be observing them at all times. What began as a parental strategy for control subtly trains a child to be wary of technology, instilling long-term mistrust and anxiety around the very tools that are meant to assist.

4. Real Malfunctions or Unexpected Responses.

There have been verified cases of Alexa or Google:

• Responding with inappropriate information.

• Making unsettling comments (due to algorithmic retrieval from the web).

• Activating on their own from misinterpreted ambient noise.

These rare glitches create lasting impressions, especially on children with active imaginations.

5. Innate Fear of Surveillance

Children are increasingly exposed to adult conversations about surveillance, digital privacy, and data collection—topics that were once far removed from childhood concerns. Whether they overhear parents warning each other that “Google is always listening,” or catch snippets of news about apps spying on users, kids absorb the anxiety even if they don’t grasp the technical details. The idea that a machine in the corner of the room is silently recording or transmitting their words can feel ominous, especially when paired with the device's sudden activations or unprompted responses. Unlike adults, who might rationalize these features, children often interpret them through a lens of vulnerability and imagination, turning vague notions of “being watched” into something more emotionally charged. Over time, this creates an ingrained sense of unease around voice assistants—not just because of what they do, but because of what they might be capable of behind the scenes. In this way, even casual exposure to surveillance-themed language or warnings from adults can sow early seeds of mistrust and technological fear.

6. Fringe Cultural Shift: Distrust of AI

As artificial intelligence becomes more embedded in daily life, a growing undercurrent of cultural skepticism is shaping how children perceive it—especially in families or communities where AI is viewed not as a tool, but as a threat. Online forums, conservative media, and faith-based circles increasingly warn against smart technology’s influence, suggesting it manipulates behavior, erodes human values, or even carries spiritual danger. In these environments, children often hear AI described in charged terms—soulless, unnatural, or “demonic”—framing it as an entity that imitates life without truly possessing it. Whether through sermons, YouTube commentary, or dinner table warnings, this narrative can foster deep suspicion in a child’s mind, priming them to see devices like Alexa or Google not just as gadgets, but as deceptive presences to be feared or avoided. This distrust is further amplified when the AI behaves unpredictably—responding to conversations uninvited or delivering strange replies—confirming to the child that it may indeed be more than a machine. Over time, this culturally reinforced wariness becomes ingrained, making smart assistants seem less like friendly conveniences and more like digital intruders in the fabric of daily life.

The Brutal Truth June 2025

The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.