Russia’s multibillion-dollar revenue stream may soon grind to a halt, thanks to Ukraine. Its ripple effects could hit Europe
Prarthana Prakash – December 24, 2024
While Russia has lost its gas market share in Europe to the likes of Qatar and Norway since it invaded Ukraine, some countries like Slovakia and Austria still rely heavily on the supplies. (Olga Rolenko—Getty Images)
Russia’s wartime economy has been sustained, in part, by oil and gas revenues as Europe has relied on it for several decades. Key to that arrangement is Ukraine, the country Russia is at war with, as the countries have a deal in place to allow Russian gas to transit via Ukraine and reach Europe.
The deal is nearing expiry when the year ends, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has resisted renewing the contract on the same terms even if the Kremlin wants it to. This could create a worry for Russia amid the plunging value of the ruble and a protracted war.
Russia’s gas revenues from supply sent via Ukraine to Europe will be worth $5 billion this year, according to Reuters estimates. In 2023, Russia shipped about 15 billion cubic meters of gas—only a fraction of the supply to Europe pre-pandemic.
Meanwhile, Ukraine makes just $800 million from facilitating the transit of gas to Europe, the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) said last week.
“Despite reams of evidence that Russia uses gas exports to inflict harm on Europe, buyers in Moscow-friendly countries are now pressuring Ukraine to continue the transit from 2025,” CEPA experts wrote.
The dependence on Russian oil and gas supplies has built up over time. In 2022, much of that reliance needed to be rethought following the invasion, forcing gas prices to shoot up. However, governments slowly began decoupling from Russia’s gas supplies, which had a direct impact on Gazprom’s revenues as a state-owned energy supplier.
While Russia has lost its gas market share in Europe to the likes of Qatar and Norway since it invaded Ukraine, some countries like Slovakia and Austria still rely heavily on the supplies. Moreover, because of sanctions, Russia has already taken a big hit on energy-related revenues, which still account for a fifth of its GDP.
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov admitted to the impending fallout on the gas transit contract as being “very difficult, requiring greater attention,” on Monday.
A sharp energy-price spike because of the gas transit contract is unlikely. Still, given that transit fees are much higher in other European countries, it could add to uncertainties, ruling them out as viable options for countries such as Hungary.
Russia’s economy has shown some cracks owing to inflation and overexposure by military-adjacent industries. But in sum, it has remained resilient despite the war being dragged on for three years.
For instance, Russia has built trade relationships with allies elsewhere in the world, such as China and India. “The Russian economy has adapted, and key industries have found ways to get the goods and components they need from alternative suppliers or via more circuitous trade routes,” Sergey Vakulenko, a senior fellow at Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, wrote earlier this year.
Russia calls gas sales to Europe ‘complicated’ as deal with Ukraine nears end
Reuters – December 23, 2024
Illustration shows natural gas pipeline, Russian Rouble banknote and flag
MOSCOW (Reuters) -Russia said on Monday the situation with European countries that buy its gas through a transit deal via Ukraine was very complicated and needs more attention, a day after talks between President Vladimir Putin and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico.
Ukraine has said it will not be renewing a five-year deal to pipe Russian gas to Europe, which is due to expire at the end of the year, as it does not want to aid Moscow’s military effort.
The flow accounts for around half of Russia’s total pipeline gas exports to Europe, with Slovakia, Italy, Austria and Czech Republic set to be most affected if it ends.
Kremlin-controlled Gazprom also exports gas to Europe via the TurkStream pipeline on the bed of the Black Sea.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said he could not give more details about Sunday’s talks between Putin and Fico, which also touched on bilateral relations and the Ukraine conflict.
Fico said that Putin had confirmed Russia’s willingness to continue to supply gas to Slovakia, although this was “practically impossible” once the Ukraine transit deal expires.
It was not clear what potential solution the two leaders might have discussed.
Slovakia has said the loss of supplies from the east would not hit its consumption and it has diversified supply contracts. However, it would drive up its costs and the country sought to preserve the Ukraine route to keep its own transit capacity.
Slovakia’s main gas buyer SPP has contracts for the purchase of gas from a non-Russian source with BP, ExxonMobil, Shell, Eni and RWE.
The benchmark front-month contract at the Dutch TTF gas hub rose by 1.52 euros to 45.33 euros per megawatt hour (euros/MWh) by 1443 GMT, LSEG data showed.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Monday criticised what he said was Fico’s lack of desire to end his country’s dependency on Russian natural resources as a “big security issue” for Europe and Slovakia.
Hungary has also been keen to keep the Ukrainian route, although it will continue to receive Russian gas from the south, via the TurkStream pipeline.
Zelenskiy said last week it might be possible to renew the transit deal, but only if Russia was not paid for the gas until after the war is over, a condition Moscow is unlikely to accept.
“You heard the statement from the Ukrainian side, and you know about the positions of those European countries that continue to buy Russian gas and that consider this necessary for the normal operation of their economies,” Peskov told reporters.
“Therefore, there is now a very complicated situation here that requires increased attention,” Peskov added.
Putin said last week it was clear there would be no new deal with Kyiv to send Russian gas through Ukraine to Europe.
(Reporting by Gleb Stolyarov, additional reporting by Jason Hovet; writing by Mark Trevelyan and Vladimir Soldatkin; Editing by Andrew Osborn and Alexander Smith)
Russia’s economy is set to lose another source of income that Ukraine controls
Huileng Tan – December 24, 2024
Scroll back up to restore default view.
Russia’s natural-gas transit deal with Ukraine is set to expire soon, which would cut billions in revenue.
The deal’s possible end affects European countries relying on Russian gas via Ukraine.
Russia has shifted much of its energy exports to India and China amid Western sanctions.
Russia is set to lose yet another source of income for its war chest in days — and it’s Ukraine calling the shots.
An agreement to let piped Russian natural gas transit via Ukraine to Europe is set to expire at the end of the year, depriving Moscow of billions of dollars in income for its wartime economy.
European countries receiving gas from the pipeline have voiced concerns about the end of the supply, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly said that the five-year agreement will not be renewed.
Russia has meanwhile said it’s ready to extend the agreement — though President Vladimir Putin said last week that it was “clear” there wouldn’t be a new contract.
Still, the situation could change.
Zelenskyy said last week that Ukraine could consider continuing the arrangement if Russia doesn’t receive payments for the fuel until the war ends.
On Monday, the Kremlin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, said the gas transit was complicated.
“The situation here is very difficult, requiring greater attention,” Peskov said, according to the TASS state news agency.
Russia is probably making $5 billion in gas sales via Ukraine this year
The end of the five-year transit deal would be a blow for Russia, which could make about $5 billion from gas sales via Ukraine this year alone, according to Reuters‘ calculations based on Moscow’s gas price forecast.
It would also impact several European countries that still depend on Russia for gas, including Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Austria. There are alternative energy sources and pipelines available, but they could be pricier.
Ukraine could lose hundreds of millions of dollars a year in transit fees — a Kyiv consulting firm told Bloomberg in September that this amounted to about $800 million.
But Ukraine’s $800 million revenue from transit would just be a “paltry 0.5% of the country’s annual GDP,” analysts at the Center for European Policy Analysis, a think tank, wrote in a report last week.
They argued that it was “simply preposterous” to think that continuing the transit deal would offer Ukraine a security guarantee as Russia would want to preserve its gas flows to Europe.
This is because “Russia always put itself first,” the analysts added.
Russia diverts energy flows away from Europe
The end of the Ukraine transit route for Russia’s gas would put more pressure on Putin’s wartime economy, which has plummeted because of sweeping Western sanctions targeting its massive oil and gas trade.
Energy accounts for about one-fifth of Russia’s $2 trillion GDP. The country’s energy revenue fell 24% last year on the back of sanctions and continues to be under pressure this year as Europe weans itself off Russian gas.
Russia once accounted for as much as 40% of Europe’s gas market, but the EU has cut its reliance on the fuel since the Ukraine war.
In response, Russia has diversified its energy customer base, diverting most of its previously Europe-bound oil to India and China.
On Friday, the Russian energy giant Gazprom said in a Telegram post that it delivered a record amount of gas to China via an eastern Siberian pipeline. It didn’t specify the volume of gas it delivered but said it was above its contractual obligations with the state-owned China National Petroleum Corporation.
Elon Musk wants to ‘delete’ many Americans’ financial lifeline
Sharon McGowan, opinion contributor – December 24, 2024
Nearly every exit poll conducted on Election Day found that, more than any other issues, voters’ concerns about the economy helped to return Donald Trump to the White House and put Republicans back in charge of both houses of Congress. Americans who felt the sting of inflation and who had trouble making ends meet, as companies steadily increased prices for essential goods like groceries and clothing, voted in the hopes that a new administration and new Congress would bring relief for their families.
So it is especially surprising that one of the first federal agencies to come under scrutiny from the incoming administration is one that has returned billions of dollars to many of the same consumers who were counting on leaders in Washington to look out for their wallets.
On Nov. 27, Elon Musk — who, along with Vivek Ramaswamy, has been tasked by President-Elect Trump with running a new Department of Government Efficiency — posted on his platform X that he wants to “Delete CFPB,” referring to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The agency, Musk said, was part of a problem of “too many duplicative regulatory agencies” in Washington. But there are no other agencies in the federal government returning money to Americans’ bank accounts in the way the CFPB does.
Since its founding, the agency has returned more than $19 billion in cash to people who have been scammed by financial institutions, including predatory payday lenders and even some of the largest banks in the country. It has done so under Republican and Democratic presidents, including major actions against Wells Fargo and Equifax during President Trump’s first term in office, which, combined, returned $425 million to consumers. (Those actions both began under the Obama administration, but Trump’s CFPB directors oversaw the execution of those fines.)
The money recovered is made available to those who have been impacted by the institutions’ wrongdoing through the CFPB’s victims’ relief fund. To date, more than 200 million Americans have been eligible for payments from the fund. The agency has also cancelled many consumers’ debts altogether and reduced loan principles for many others.
In fact, just days after Musk posted his message on X, the CFPB announced that it was mailing refund checks to more than 4 million people who were scammed by so-called credit repair companies, including Lexington Law and CreditRepair.com, which illegally collected fees from consumers seeking relief for the effects of economic woes weighing down them and their families. The companies will pay $2.7 billion in consumer redress and civil penalties; $1.8 billion of that will go directly to those who lost money as a result of the scam.
It’s no wonder the agency enjoys broad, bipartisan support, with more than eight in 10 Americans supporting the CFPB’s various enforcement actions. In red and blue states, Americans seem to support returning money to those who have been cheated.
The agency’s impact is felt in other ways, too. In Oklahoma, CFPB collected evidence that helped retired Lt. Col. Susan Parisi in her fight against loan company GreenSky — which scammed her into a high-interest loan she never agreed to. The CFPB found that GreenSky was using “deceptive” and “fraudulent” tactics and ordered the company to return $9 million to consumers. My organization is representing Lt. Col. Parisi in her class action on behalf of others who were scammed by GreenSky.
So why is an agency that has been so effective, and returned so much money to so many people, being targeted for “deletion?” Because, in the course of holding wrongdoers accountable, it has crossed paths with some of the most powerful people in the country.
Musk’s post on X, for example, seems to have been prompted by complaints from Marc Andreessen, a venture capitalist whose companies have been sanctioned (and, in the case of LendUp Loans, shuttered) because of CFPB investigations and actions. Andreessen accused the agency of “terrorizing financial institutions,” and was clearly infuriated when the CFPB found that LendUp had misled customers about high-interest loans and overcharged U.S. service personnel.
President-elect Trump and Republicans in Congress should not let Andreessen’s views overshadow the overwhelming opinion among Americans that the agency is doing important work that makes a real difference to those who turn to financial institutions and lenders for help during tough financial times. By one count, even under the first Trump administration’s CFPB directors — who tended to enforce far fewer fines against companies than Biden and Obama appointees — the agency brought more than $1 billion in redress back to consumers’ wallets. That’s direct relief, and money in wallets, for millions of Americans. “Deleting” the agency would almost certainly ensure that no such future relief ever reaches consumers again.
Fortunately, neither Musk nor the incoming administration can completely eliminate the CFPB, whose funding comes from the Federal Reserve in a model, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, that is meant to protect it from political meddling. Republicans and Democrats alike should ensure that firewall remains in place, and the CFPB remains on the job, if they’re serious about providing real, meaningful economic relief to Americans.
Sharon McGowan is the chief executive officer of legal advocacy organization Public Justice.
President Musk? The DOGE leader’s government-shutdown push shows how he’ll wield power in Washington
Bryan Metzger – December 23, 2024
Lawmakers in both parties say Elon Musk played a major role in tanking a government funding bill.
Now the government is on the brink of shutting down.
It’s an early sign of how he’ll wield influence as the co-lead of DOGE.
After a government funding bill went down in flames on Wednesday, lawmakers in both parties were in agreement about one thing: Elon Musk played a huge role in bringing Washington to the brink.
“Yesterday was DOGE in action and it was the most refreshing thing I’ve seen since I’ve been here for 4 years,” Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia wrote on X.
“The leader of the GOP is Elon Musk,” Democratic Rep. Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania wrote. “He’s now calling the shots.”
President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance put the final nail in the coffin of the bill, but their joint statement trashing the continuing resolution — and issuing a new demand for Congress to raise the debt ceiling — came after several hours of silence on the matter.
That void was filled by Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency co-lead, Vivek Ramaswamy, who savaged the bill as an example of the wasteful spending that Trump has empowered them to target for elimination during his second term. Newly galvanized by DOGE and lacking any guidance from Trump, several Republican lawmakers publicly cited arguments put forward by the two leaders to justify their opposition to the bill.
“This omnibus is the very thing the incoming Department of Government Efficiency is trying to put an end to,” Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri wrote on X. “A vote for this monstrosity is a vote against DOGE.”
As Republican support for the bill dried up, passage through the GOP-controlled House became an impossibility, and the bill was scrapped.
Federal funding is set to run out at midnight on Friday. If lawmakers are unable to agree upon and pass a new bill by then, the government will shut down for the first time in six years, prompting flight delays, closures of national parks, and paycheck delays for federal workers.
In a statement to Business Insider, Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for the Trump-Vance transition, disputed the notion that Musk is the leader of the GOP.
“As soon as President Trump released his official stance on the CR, Republicans on Capitol Hill echoed his point of view,” Leavitt said. “President Trump is the leader of the Republican Party. Full stop.”
Musk did not respond to a request for comment.
‘This bill should not pass’
Over the past several weeks, Democrats and Republicans had been hammering out a compromise bill to fund the government through March 14. After significant delays, the bill’s text was released on Tuesday night.
Aside from extending government funding at current levels for another three months, the bill also included language allowing the District of Columbia to take control of a stadium that the Washington Commanders have long sought to use, a modest pay increase for lawmakers, billions of dollars in disaster relief for states affected by recent hurricanes, and other provisions that Trump and Vance later characterized as “giveaways” to Democrats.
Over the course of several hours, what began as a simple statement of opposition turned into something much larger, including Musk endorsing shutting down the government until January 20 and saying that any Republican who voted for the bill would deserve to be voted out of office.
Along the way, Musk made and amplified false claims about the contents of the bill, including that it included a 40% pay raise for lawmakers (it was 3.8% maximum) and $3 billion for the Commanders’ stadium.
By the time Trump and Vance weighed in on Wednesday afternoon, the bill already appeared dead, and the two men had a different demand: Lawmakers shouldn’t simply shut down the government but pass a spending bill without “giveaways,” while raising the debt ceiling.
Musk, the ‘shadow president’
It remains unclear what legislation will emerge. Democrats have insisted on moving forward with the deal they struck with Republicans, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries rejected in Thursday-morning a Bluesky post the idea of raising the debt ceiling.
The government spending bill’s collapse was an early demonstration of Musk’s newfound clout with Republicans on Capitol Hill, previewing how the mercurial billionaire might handle the role of DOGE co-lead under Trump.
Over the past two years, a pattern has emerged in government funding and other fiscal fights. Both parties work on compromise legislation, hard-line Republicans rail against it, and both the House and the Senate easily pass it with mostly Democratic votes.
On Wednesday, that pattern was broken, with a shutdown appearing imminent.
For hard-line Republicans who’ve typically opposed government funding bills, it marked a moment of elation and a sign that with the advent of DOGE, the balance of power is set to shift in their direction under Trump.
Some Democrats, meanwhile, have seized the moment as an opportunity to embarrass Trump, painting him as subordinate to Musk.
Mark Pocan “Who’s a good boy? You’re a good boy. Go grab the deal to keep the government open. Fetch. Bring it to me. Good boy.”
In a steady drumbeat of social media posts and TV interviews, Democrats have begun referring to Musk as the “president-elect,” the “shadow president,” the “copresident,” and even the “decider in chief” as they’ve attacked Republicans for opposing the bill.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, released a fact sheet about “what Elon will cost your state” that said “President-Elect Musk’s” opposition to the government funding bill had also derailed disaster-relief funds.
“It is dangerous for House Republicans to have folded to the demands of the richest man on the planet, who nobody elected, after leaders in both parties came to an agreement to fund the government and provide this disaster aid,” DeLauro said in a statement. “There was no need for a government shutdown.”
Musk, for his part, rejected the notion that he was the real leader of the GOP.
“All I can do is bring things to the attention of the people,” he wrote on X, “so they may voice their support if they so choose.”
Elon Musk’s Drug Use Becoming a Problem for Government Security Clearance
Victor Tangermann – December 17, 2024
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk may not receive top security clearances — even though roughly 400 staffers at his rocket company already have those permissions.
As the Wall Street Journal reports, SpaceX lawyers advised executives not to attempt to secure higher security clearances for the mercurial CEO, since that would force him to disclose information about his frequent contacts with foreign nationals, including Russian president Vladimir Putin, as well as his much-rumored drug use.
Musk currently holds a “top secret” security clearance, giving him access to “some national security secrets,” but not the full clearance required by staff who work on classified programs, sources told the WSJ.
Worse yet, by seeking an even higher security clearance, Musk may risk losing his current “top secret” clearance, the lawyers worry.
But now that he’s been put in charge of a so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) by president-elect Donald Trump, these concerns may soon be a moot point. Now that Musk has secured himself prominent placement among the incoming administration’s ranks, the richest man in the world may soon have a much easier time accessing highly classified information.
Without permissions for “sensitive compartmented information,” which several hundred SpaceX employees have, Musk is reportedly unable to access certain information about his company’s spy satellite program, called Starshield. According to the WSJ, he isn’t even allowed to enter most facilities where related work is being done.
Earlier this year, the WSJ reported that Musk had a long history of using psychoactive drugs, including LSD and psychedelic mushrooms. His lawyer, however, later disputed the report, arguing that he had “never failed” a drug test at SpaceX.
Whether Musk will have to fill out a full questionnaire and disclose his drug use, as well as his extensive communications with foreign nationals, remains to be seen. With the ear of the president of the United States, Musk could soon have unfettered access to highly classified information without having to jump through additional hoops.
Besides, now that they’re in charge of DOGE, both he and pharma exec Vivek Ramaswamy will likely have to sift through some highly classified data anyway — as they’ve already promised to slash the Pentagon’s spending in the coming years.
Kash Patel, Trump’s FBI pick, would turn the agency into the Federal Bureau of Retribution
Doyle McManus – December 16, 2024
Kash Patel, shown campaigning for Donald Trump this year, has vowed to purge the FBI of anyone who doesn’t fully support Trump and to prosecute those he accuses of conspiring to undermine the president-elect. (Ross D. Franklin / Associated Press)More
He has called for the prosecution of a long list of people he accuses of conspiring to undermine Trump, including President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and outgoing FBI Director Christopher A. Wray.
“These people need to go to prison,” Patel said last year. If he delivers on that threat, he would turn the once-independent FBI into the Federal Bureau of Retribution.
Patel has vowed to purge the federal law enforcement agency of anyone who doesn’t fully support Trump, and says he will transfer all 7,000 employees in the bureau’s Washington headquarters to other cities — apparently including agents who now focus on international terrorism and foreign espionage.
“Go chase down murderers and rapists,” Patel said. “You’re cops. Go be cops.”
The president-elect has called on prosecutors to investigate the Biden family, Harris, Clinton, former President Obama, the members of the congressional committee that investigated his attempt to overturn the 2020 election, even the police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol against rioters on Jan. 6, 2021 — “The cops should be charged and the protesters should be freed” — among many others.
And he has long harbored a special animus toward the FBI, which he blames for investigating allegations that his 2016 campaign colluded with Russia and for the 2022 search of his home and social club in Florida that turned up more than 100 classified documents he claimed not to have.
Since his election last month, Trump has said — not entirely reassuringly — that he does not intend to order up investigations from the Oval Office.
But he added: “If they think that somebody was dishonest or crooked or a corrupt politician, I think he probably has an obligation to do it.”
Patel may not find that a difficult call. He has already published an enemies list of 60 people he considers “corrupt actors of the highest order.”
The record from Trump’s first term suggests that these threats should be taken seriously.
During his four years in the White House, Trump frequently demanded that the FBI and the Justice Department investigate his adversaries. His aides often pushed back, but eventually bowed to his pressure and opened investigations of Clinton, former Secretary of State John F. Kerry, former national security advisor John Bolton, former FBI Director James B. Comey and other former FBI officials. None was charged with a crime.
Those episodes reflect a sobering fact: It’s easier for the FBI to open an investigation than you may think.
“There’s basically no limit, at least when it comes to opening a preliminary investigation,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a former federal prosecutor.
For a full-scale investigation, which could include search warrants and electronic surveillance (if a judge approves), the standards are tougher.
“They have to have an articulable factual basis to believe a federal crime has been committed,” said Michael R. Bromwich, a former Justice Department inspector general. “There’s a lot that can fit within that, but it’s not limitless.”
“If Patel goes to his deputies and says, ‘Let’s open an investigation into Liz Cheney,’ they’re going to ask: ‘What’s the factual predicate?’” he said, referring to the Republican former congresswoman from Wyoming, a vigorous Trump critic. “There will be resistance in the FBI … unless he finds compliant officers who are willing to make something up.”
Prosecution is harder. A criminal indictment requires clear evidence that the person under investigation committed a specific federal crime.
But merely being investigated can have devastating consequences.
“There’s a lot of damage that can be done by an investigation even if there’s no indictment,” Bromwich said. “Investigations are very expensive; a target needs to hire a lawyer. They affect a target’s ability to gain a livelihood. And they are extremely stressful.”
“Lives get ruined,” said Faiza Patel of the Brennan Center for Justice (who is not related to Kash Patel). “People get fired from their jobs.”
An investigation also opens a target’s private life to scrutiny, potentially putting embarrassing information in the hands of the FBI director.
Under J. Edgar Hoover, who ran the FBI for almost half a century until 1972, the bureau assiduously collected private information about politicians and other prominent figures.
The most infamous example was the FBI’s attempt to blackmail civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. by threatening to expose his extramarital affairs.
So if a president wants retribution, opening investigations is a good way to start.
The irony, of course, is that Trump and other Republicans have spent years condemning what they claim has been a “weaponization” of the Justice Department and FBI under Democratic presidents.
Now that they’re about to regain the White House, they appear to have decided that weaponization is now their friend.
But senators in both parties should resist that dangerous trend.
They should look carefully at Patel’s skimpy qualifications beyond his loyalty to Trump. In 2020, when Trump proposed giving Patel the No. 2 job in the bureau, his attorney general, William Barr, threatened to quit. “The very idea of moving Patel into a role like this showed a shocking detachment from reality,” Barr wrote later.
They should ask Patel if he realizes that transferring all the FBI’s staff out of Washington would disrupt the bureau’s efforts to stop espionage by Russia and China.
And they should ask whether he really intends to turn the bureau into a weapon of partisan retribution against every target of Trump’s boundless ire.
GOP senators might want to ask why so many of the names on Patel’s enemies list are Republicans who disagreed with him during Trump’s first term, including Barr, Bolton and former Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
Then they should think twice about giving Patel power to investigate anyone he chooses. One day they may find themselves in his sights as well.
Donald Trump Probably Isn’t a Russian Agent. But He Wouldn’t Be Behaving Much Differently If He Were.
Fred Kaplan – December 11, 2024
Donald Trump probably isn’t a Russian agent, but he wouldn’t be behaving much differently right now if he were.
Among the main goals of the Kremlin’s foreign policy are to sow chaos and distrust within Western democracies and to disrupt the alliances that join those countries together, especially the links between the United States and Europe. The idea is that a weaker West makes for a stronger Russia—a connection all the more important as the measures of Russia’s strength on its own (economic, political, and military) are diminishing.
Many have noted Trump’s open antipathy toward alliances and his aversion to any foreign commitments that don’t yield immediate transactional gains.
His actions since he won the election—especially his nominees for high-level positions—reveal his affinity for chaos, his keen desire to sow distrust within the American political system. His aim here is not to strengthen Russia (and other authoritarian countries), though that may be among its consequences. The aim—as he and some of his more ideological cronies have proclaimed for a long time now—is to destroy the “deep state,” to concentrate power in the White House, and to weaken or punish (perhaps even incarcerate) those who try to obstruct his ambitions.
Trump is not stupid. He must know that many of his nominees to be Cabinet secretaries, agency directors, and ambassadors have no apparent qualifications to run vast bureaucracies, parse complex problems, or engage in delicate diplomacy. That’s not the point. He wants them to empty out the bureaucracies or run them into the ground. He wants them to twist the agencies into empty shells or blunt instruments of his vendettas. He wants to insult the diplomatic corps and to show foreign leaders how slight he regards their status.
Some of his nominees are meant to carry out his most perniciously personal and political campaigns. He named Pete Hegseth, a man who has never run an organization of any impressive size, to helm the Defense Department—with its $840 billion budget, 3 million employees, and wide-ranging global responsibilities—because Hegseth’s commentaries on Fox News (where he anchored a weekend show) indicate he’d happily carry out Trump’s intention to fire senior officers who don’t express utter loyalty to Trump.
He named Kash Patel to head the FBI because Patel is not just willing but sweating-ready to go after Trump’s personal and political enemies, including within the FBI itself. Patel has drawn up an enemies list already. (Trump tried to make Matt Gaetz attorney general for the same reason, but Gaetz proved too blatant a henchman for even Trump’s loyalists in the Senate to swallow—as, by the way, some of his other nominees may prove to be too.)
He named Tulsi Gabbard to be director of national intelligence because he wants to blow up the intelligence agencies, many of which he sees as teeming with enemies to himself and the country (which he views as a mere extension of himself, as in l’état, c’est moi).
He named Dr. Mehmet Oz, a heart surgeon turned TV doctor with financial interests galore to run Medicare and Medicaid, because he wants to gut Medicare and Medicaid.* He named Kristi Noem, the governor of South Dakota, to run the Department of Homeland Security—a hodgepodge of 22 once independent departments and agencies with a combined budget of $108 billion (more than 16 times that of South Dakota’s state budget)—because he wants to gut homeland security.
The list could go on.
Trump has said—and may genuinely believe—that he can run the country, the economy, the military, social services, and all the rest, just fine all by himself. (Axios once assembled a list of topics that Trump has said he knows “more about than anybody.” It included money, infrastructure, the economy, trade, ISIS, energy, taxes—just about every topic involving government.)
Many of Trump’s voters think it’s great that he plans to blow up the system. That’s a big reason why many of them voted for him. No doubt, much of the system could use reforms or outright overhaul. But the people Trump wants to put in charge have no idea how to improve the system, nor are they expected to. Many citizens may come to feel buyer’s remorse when they realize just how closely their own lives and interests are intertwined with the functioning of government—something that is often taken for granted, until it doesn’t function. By that time, it may be too late.
And while the direct connection may not be clear, people might also come to take note of new dangers to national security. Foreign governments may no longer share highly sensitive information with an intelligence director who parrots Kremlin propaganda; allies who no longer regard the U.S. as a reliable protector may go their own way or make deals with adversaries; and adversaries may take America’s passivity as a green light to go bold. The Western-led “rules-based order,” which is already in grim shape, will turn to tatters.
So I’m sure those forgotten men and women are thrilled to know Trump has stocked his upcoming administration with enough billionaires and multimillionaires to, as The Guardian put it recently, “form a soccer team.”
I’m sure these down-to-earth billionaires care deeply about the forgotten men and women who put Trump in office. Surely they are in no way “elite,” aside from perhaps owning an island, or maybe occasionally hunting poor people for sport on said island.
Trump is surrounding himself with non-elite billionaires who care
The Guardian puts the net worth of Trump’s gang thus far at more than $300 billion. If you believe in math, it’s a staggering sum, about 2,000 times the wealth of those in the Biden administration.
Elon Musk, holding his son, and Vivek Ramaswamy, in blue tie, visit Capitol Hill to meet with members of Congress on Dec. 5, 2024.
So, you know … regular folks, the kind who undoubtedly can relate to the day-to-day needs of Americans. The sort who regularly go to grocery stores, which they refer to as “commoner slop-distribution centers.” The kind who would never want to harvest the blood of young people in a narcissistic quest for eternal life.
Musk, Ramaswamy may come after VA health care, but it’s fine
There’s no way billionaire businessmen like Musk and Ramaswamy would do anything that helps the rich at the expense of hardworking Americans. They wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal that they will be “taking aim at the $500 billion plus in annual federal expenditures that are unauthorized by Congress.”
Huzzah! Take that, elites! Now please stand back while regular-guy-billionaire Donald Trump installs a phalanx of other billionaires who will, in a totally non-elite way, lower their own taxes while taking away government services that many forgotten men and women rely on for little things like continuing to live.
Economists ‒ probably elites ‒ say the cost of tariffs will get passed along to American consumers. They say that because it’s exactly what will happen. But Trump, the everyman, has long denied that reality, convincing the forgotten men and women of the middle class he’s an economic wizard and this will all work out great for them.
Fruit could be impacted by Trump’s proposed tariffs, particularly avocados, melons and citrus fruits.
Put your future in the hands of Trump’s caring billionaires
You see? Trump cares about American families to not guarantee anything.
So don’t worry, forgotten men and women. Be confident that Trump and Musk and Ramaswamy and McMahon and Lutnick and all the other totally trustworthy and altruistic non-elite billionaires know what’s good for you.
trump, musk and the billionaires can’t wait to begin dismantling American Democracy and our Constitution: Elon Musk warns Republicans against standing in Trump’s way — or his
Thomas Beaumont, Juliet Linderman, Martha Mendoza – December 9, 2024
President-elect Donald Trump walks with Elon Musk before the launch of the sixth test flight of the SpaceX Starship rocket Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2024 in Boca Chica, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Pool via AP)Elon Musk, carrying his son X Æ A-Xii, leaves after a meeting with members of congress to discuss President-elect Donald Trump’s planned Department of Government Efficiency on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 5, 2024. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A week after President-elect Donald Trump’s victory, Elon Musk said his political action committee would “play a significant role in primaries.”
The following week, the billionaire responded to a report that he might fund challengers to GOP House members who don’t support Trump’s nominees. “How else? There is no other way,” Musk wrote on X, which he rebranded after purchasing Twitter and moving to boost conservative voices, including his own.
And during his recent visit to Capitol Hill, Musk and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy delivered a warning to Republicans who don’t go along with their plans to slash spending as part of Trump’s proposed Department of Government Efficiency.
“Elon and Vivek talked about having a naughty list and a nice list for members of Congress and senators and how we vote and how we’re spending the American people’s money,” said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga.
Trump’s second term comes with the specter of the world’s richest man serving as his political enforcer. Within Trump’s team, there is a feeling that Musk not only supports Trump’s agenda and Cabinet appointments, but is intent on seeing them through to the point of pressuring Republicans who may be less devout.
One Trump adviser, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal political dynamics, noted Musk had come to enjoy his role on the campaign and that he clearly had the resources to stay involved.
The adviser and others noted that Musk’s role is still taking shape. And Musk, once a supporter of President Barack Obama before moving to the right in recent years, is famously mercurial.
“I think he was really important for this election. Purchasing Twitter, truly making it a free speech platform, I think, was integral to this election, to the win that Donald Trump had,” said departing Republican National Committee co-chair Lara Trump, the president-elect’s daughter-in-law. “But I don’t know that ultimately he wants to be in politics. I think he considers himself to be someone on the outside.”
During the presidential campaign, Musk contributed roughly $200 million to America PAC, a super PAC aimed at reaching Trump voters online and in person in the seven most competitive states, which Trump swept. He also invested $20 million in a group called RBG PAC, which ran ads arguing Trump would not sign a national abortion ban even as the former president nominated three of the justices who overturned a federally guaranteed right to the procedure.
Musk’s donation to RBG PAC — a name that invokes the initials of former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a champion of abortion rights — wasn’t revealed until post-election campaign filings were made public Thursday.
Musk has said he hopes to keep America PAC funded and operating. Beyond that, he has used his X megaphone to suggest he is at least open to challenging less exuberant Trump supporters in Congress.
Another key Trump campaign ally has been more aggressive online. Conservative activist Charlie Kirk, whose group Turning Point Action also worked to turn out voters for Trump, named Republican senators he wants to target.
“This is not a joke, everybody. The funding is already being put together. Donors are calling like crazy. Primaries are going to be launched,” Kirk said on his podcast, singling out Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa, Jim Risch of Idaho, Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Thom Tillis of North Carolina as potential targets. All four Republican senators’ seats are up in 2026.
For now, Musk has been enjoying the glow of his latest conquest, joining Trump for high-level meetings and galas at the soon-to-be president’s Mar-a-Lago resort home in Palm Beach, Florida. The incoming administration is seeded with Musk allies, including venture capitalist and former PayPal executive David Sacks serving as the “White House A.I. & Crypto Czar” and Jared Isaacman, a tech billionaire who bought a series of spaceflights from Musk’s SpaceX, named to lead NASA.
Musk could help reinforce Trump’s agenda immediately, some GOP strategists said, by using America PAC to pressure key Republicans. Likewise, Musk could begin targeting moderate Democrats in pivotal states and districts this spring, urging them to break with their party on key issues, Republican strategist Chris Pack said.
“Instead of using his influence to twist GOP arms when you have majorities in both houses, he could start going after Democrats who vote against Trump’s agenda in states where the election was a referendum for Trump,” said Pack, former communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “Otherwise, if you pressure Republicans with a primary, you can end up with a Republican who can’t win, and then a Democrat in that seat.”
___
Linderman reported from Baltimore and Mendoza from Santa Cruz, California. Associated Press congressional correspondent Lisa Mascaro in Washington contributed to this report.
Scroll back up to restore default view.
