Posted originally on Sep 17, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Political warfare is the new tool of the establishment. Jair Bolsonaro was permanently silenced, indicted for inciting a coup that never occurred, and sentenced to 27 years imprisonment. Călin Georgescu of Romania has become the establishment’s latest victim as he stands trial for inciting yet another coup that never occurred.
Brussels determined that the vote of the Romanian people must be ignored. The European Court of Human Rights upheld the annulment of the results of the first presidential election. Unelected judges determined that Romania’s election results were null because they did not like the ruling. The government then acted perplexed when people took to the streets to protest.
The second election on May 18, 2025, was permitted to take place WITHOUT Calin Georgescu. Millions of Romanians supported his presidential bid, but he was not pre-approved by the establishment. Anyone “anti-war” is now “pro-Russian” and a threat to the ultimate goal of creating World War III to usher in the dawn of a new world order. The main reason that Georgescu has been silenced is his unwillingness to participate in neocon war games.
“What is happening now in Romania gains no reaction abroad, no reaction from the United States. They don’t understand what is going on here, because if they use Romania as a door for a war, what to be next? We don’t need war; this is my point,” Georgescu said, TASS reported. He said it loud and clear — THIS IS NOT OUR WAR! Georgescu is against collaborating with NATO to wage World War III, as are the Romanian people, who DO NOT WANT WAR! Tens of thousands took to the streets to beg their now UNELECTED officials to hear their voices.
Similar to Bolsonaro, who was barred from re-election, Georgescu retained support from his core base. The establishment needs to silence him to eliminate any dissent. Prosecutor General Alex Florența determined Georgescu was “the beneficiary of Russia’s hybrid war actions,” including disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks. The establishment blames Russian meddling for election results that align with the people over the neocon globalists.
Georgescu knew his life was at risk. In May 2025, he agreed to step away from politics to focus on his family. Yet, the establishment believes he must stand trial for allegedly planning to overturn the results of the election. No coup occurred. No election was overturned. The establishment is showing its hand—it’s scared and sees the rapid public shift toward nationalism and anti-war sentiment. If the people protest the results of an election, their candidate of choice will be blamed for attempting a coup. Similar to conspiracy, no crime needs to actually occur. We will see an increase in political warfare as the people increasingly lose trust in government.
Posted originally on Sep 17, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
The Baltic Defense Line established by Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania has become the largest fortification effort in Europe since World War II. The multi-layered defensive installation includes anti-tank obstacles, surveillance systems, trenches, and bunkers. The “East Shield” is intended to protect these nations, and therefore Europe, from Russian invasion, which they believe is inevitable.
Estonia announced that it has begun construction of a 40-kilometer trench along its border with Russia. Other Baltic States, such as Lithuania and Latvia, have constructed “dragon’s teeth” or anti-tank barriers that act as large pyramid-shaped concrete obstacles for armored vehicles.
🇱🇹 Lithuania is shifting from individual counter-mobility measures to a unified 3-echelon defence line – giving greater depth, stronger control & full NATO/EU integration at our frontier. pic.twitter.com/qgd4VXYKCZ
The three Baltic states will each install a minimum of 600 bunkers along the border. The 600-mile-wide project is expected to take up to ten years to complete. “[Vladimir] Putin is not going to let us wait those 10 years,” said Gabrielius Landsbergis, who served as Lithuania’s foreign minister until November. “The most dangerous time for the Baltics will be immediately after a ceasefire in Ukraine,” he told The Telegraph.
The new neocon tale states that a ceasefire with Ukraine would cause a world war. To the neocons, a ceasefire would give Russia more time to regroup, rearm, and attack NATO nations. Danish Intelligence reported that Moscow could “fight a local war in a country bordering Russia,” and in as little as two years, the nation will “be ready for a regional war against several countries in the Baltic Sea region.” By 2030, Danish intelligence believes Russia will engage in “a large-scale war” in Europe.
Now the Baltic states are spending a minimum of £60 million each to implement this Baltic Defense Line. “We must be able to hold the line, make sure Russia does not get inside, but we must also be able to take the fight to the enemy,” declared Raimond Kaljulaid, the head of Estonia’s delegation to NATO.
Russia has no motive to invade the Baltics unless NATO provokes it to do so. Moscow’s strategic concerns lie elsewhere. But NATO must keep expanding the conflict, because without Russia as the eternal enemy, the alliance has no purpose. The wall is being built not because of military necessity, but because the neocons want perpetual confrontation. The Baltic Defense Line is political theatre for the masses to believe that Europe is protecting itself against Russian threats, when in reality, the neocons in Europe have been planning to wage war against Russia at the nearest opportunity.
Posted originally on Sep 17, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
QUESTION: Marty, here in Thailand, aside from freezing 3 million people’s accounts and bending to the OECD to hunt taxes for the Europeans, now we have the central bank is talking about imposing a tax on trading gold because of the right in the baht. Is Thailand committing economic suicide?
FJ
ANSWER: It appears that the Baht will peak against the dollar, perhaps here in September. Arguing to tax gold because of the rise in the currency is on par with the markets. We still show a Panic Cycle in 2026 for Thailand. The combination of these decisions and the tensions with Cambodia does not project peace and harmony for Thailand into 2026.
Posted originally on Sep 17, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene voiced a harsh truth: America is a divided nation. These differences appear irreconcilable, and Greene is proposing “a peaceful national divorce.” Which state will file the papers first?
The computer system warned long ago that the United States would not remain as one country indefinitely. The cycle of political disintegration is in motion. The question is not if, but when. History repeats because human nature never changes. People assume the United States will last forever because it has existed for nearly 250 years. But no empire, no republic, no government in history has ever escaped the cycle of political disintegration. Rome divided, the British Empire collapsed, the Soviet Union disintegrated. The United States will be no different.
Divisive politics have created a crack in the union that cannot be united. Each side believes the other wants to dictate how they must live, and therefore, each side believes that the other is a danger to democracy. The unified culture that was once the United States has vanished as extreme beliefs on both sides cannot coexist. Civil unrest has turned into a looming civil war.
Each state has its unique culture and customs. One cannot compare Washington to Texas, or Florida to Colorado. California believes it is already its own country. The law varies drastically from state to state, and those policies are now coming to a head. The Supreme Court no longer reigns as it starts to interpret rulings independently.
The Founding Fathers never created a “democracy.” They created a Republic, where the states were sovereign and the federal government was a creation of the states. That balance has been destroyed. Washington has usurped the role of the states in nearly every matter – taxation, regulation, trade, healthcare, and even education. This erosion of states’ rights is precisely what lies the groundwork for separatism.
Decentralization has begun. Our Economic Confidence Model has targeted 2032 as the final political collapse of confidence in government. This is not limited to the United States; the European Union is destined to fail, as are other governments throughout the world that are propped up on perpetual debt and coercive politics. The total loss of confidence in government will be a global event that will not begin in America. But once it spreads like a contagion to America, we will see states demand succession as they fight against federal power. Greene believes this can be done in a peaceful manner, yet history says otherwise.
I’ve discussed this matter in depth in the report “How Empires & Nations Divide,” which is perhaps one of the most fascinating pieces I have penned.
Posted originally on Sep 16, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Most people have no idea, but the entire speed limit is a scam simply to raise money. On January 2, 1974, effective January 6, 1974, during the whole OPEC oil crisis, to conserve gasoline during the 1973 oil embargo and resulting energy crisis, Congress came up with the nonsense of reducing the speed limit to reduce fuel consumption. They repealed the federal law in 1995, returning speed limit authority to the individual states. They did not change in most cases because they would collect fewer fines.
If you drive for 5 hours at 55 mph, consuming 30 mpg, and then at 75 mph, you get there in 3.6 hours at 24mpg, you used 11.46 gallons compared to 9.17 for the same distance, but you saved about 1.5 hours.
Nevertheless, nobody cares about safety. The idea that you are travelling at 65 instead of 55 has nothing to do with safety. It is all about money.
Posted originally on Sep 16, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
President Donald Trump believes that companies should cease reporting on a quarterly basis and switch to semiannual reports instead. Trump said that the concept is “subject to SEC approval” and would “save money, and allow managers to focus on properly running their companies.”
JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon and Warren Buffett also once voiced support for semiannual reporting. “In our experience, quarterly earnings guidance often leads to an unhealthy focus on short-term profits at the expense of long-term strategy, growth and sustainability,” the pair wrote in an op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal in 2018.
The SEC currently has a 3-1 Republican voting majority, but why does this seem to be a bipartisan issue? The issue is global, in fact, as Norway’s sovereign wealth fund recently proposed switching to semiannual reporting, and the UK and Europe do not currently require quarterly reports. Providing the consumer and investor with less, infrequent information alludes to bad news. Companies would willingly share praise of quarterly earnings with the public if they were bullish on their future, but in the current stagflationary trend, companies are cautious. Those at the top are losing confidence in their company’s ability to meet or exceed expectations.
Dimon and Buffett argued that the public’s attention should be on the long-term results. That aligns with Buffett’s buy and hold strategy but does not work for most portfolios that require investment strategy changes based on incoming data. In Trump’s personal predicament, the price adjustments due to tariffs are a reason to halt quarterly reporting.
Still, lowering transparency raises market risk, and the markets do not respond well to volatility. Columbia Law Schoolpublished an article that looked at the 2017 regulatory adjustment on the Tel-Aviv Exchange (TASE) when small-cap firms switched from mandatory quarterly reports to semi-annual updates. “The stocks of firms that chose that option dropped an average of 2 percent in price in a window of (-5,+5) days,” the analysis found. “Conversely, the stock of firms that chose to continue quarterly reporting rose an average of 2.5 percent over an immediate window of (-5,+5) days.”
The study also noted that while compliance costs dropped by 19.8% by eliminating two annual reports, the firms that chose to maintain four annual reports did not see a significant change in audit fees. There was a clear trade-off between cost reduction and maintaining investor confidence, the study noted.
The US markets cannot be compared to the TASE, and that 2% reduction in investment would likely rise for US firms, as consumer confidence is absolutely paramount. The proposition of semi-annual reports stems from the belief that companies will be unable to provide optimistic earnings reports. Reducing reporting fees is not the concern, and the repercussions are vast as massive portfolio shifts would ensue as investors and money managers need to reduce risks and would be less likely to take short-term risks if the data is unavailable to them. Reducing transparency would shake up confidence in the markets overall, and as mentioned, capital does not like volatility.
Posted originally on Sep 16, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
After months of legal turmoil, the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the United States can secure its borders and has the right to end the temporary legal protections granted to migrants under the Biden Administration.
Joe Biden provided 430,000 migrants from Haiti, Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua with temporary protected status (TPS). Biden later expanded this status to those from Sudan, Ukraine, and El Salvador. People from Myanmar (Burma), Cameroon, Haiti, Ethiopia, Lebanon, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria, and Yemen were also often granted TPS status. “We are glad the Biden Administration has committed to protecting the citizens of four troubled countries, including 190,000 Salvadorans who have worked and contributed to this country for decades. […] Citizens of Honduras and Nicaragua, among other countries, deserve TPS extensions also, and they are still waiting. Like other immigrants, they will face great danger when the next president takes office. The current administration needs to protect them, too,” the TPS Alliance stated ahead of Trump’s presidency.
Basically, anyone from a less than desirable nation was suddenly permitted to live and work in America without going through the proper immigration process. Open border policies at their finest. Over one million migrants enjoyed the protections granted to them under TPS, until now.
The Trump Administration has been attempting to reverse this policy since March, arguing that the protection was only meant to be temporary and the Department of Homeland Security should have the authority to expel those who overstayed. The purchased courtrooms ruled that each case needed individual due process, which could never feasibly happen.
Now, the court has ruled that the Department of Homeland Security can revoke TPS status for over 430,000 migrants, or less than half who are in the nation. This status was originally meant to last for two years, but once someone enters the United States, the legal system makes it very difficult for them to leave involuntarily. The entire intent of open border policies was to flood the nation with as many migrants as possible to alter elections, prop up the dollar, and replace the declining working class. There was no plan or budget and the American people will be paying for open border policies for generations to come. Mass deportation is the only way to prevent the United States from becoming Europe. Import the third world and you become the third world.
The best and worst of humanity have revealed themselves in the week following the death of Charlie Kirk. Over 800 Americans have been forced to resign from their jobs after spewing hate online. Suddenly, harassing conservatives and inciting violence has consequences.
Democrats are continuing to use Kirk’s untimely passing as a method to promote gun safety. In his own words, Kirk explained that the right to bear arms has a deeper meaning than merely personal safety. The Second Amendment exists for the citizens to protect themselves against tyrannical governments. No actual dictatorship would permit the people to bear arms. No real communist or socialist regime would permit the people to bear arms. Lethal protection against government was precisely the intend of the Founding Fathers.
“Having an armed citizenry comes with a price, and that is part of liberty,” Kirk explained, comparing gun ownership to the risk of driving as everything comes at a price. “You get rid of driving, you’d have 50,000 less auto fatalities. But we have decided that the benefit of driving — speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services — is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road. So we need to be very clear that you’re not going to get gun deaths to zero. It will not happen,” he continued.
“Does it take shooting a conservative to start to realize the gun scourge? I hope they realize it,” Rep. George Latimer (D-NY) commented. “Pass some gun laws!” Rep. Jahana Hayes screamed during the moment of silence for Charlie Kirk. “I believe that anyone who has committed their entire career to obstructing gun safety legislation in this House has no right to blame anyone else for the consequences of their actions,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) chimed in.
Criminals do not abide by the law. The majority of these shooters obtain firearms illegally. It is also curious that we do not hear of conservatives shooting down liberals for discussing their views. Conservatives are not setting buildings on fire or vandalizing property in the aftermath of Kirk’s death, and yet, the media continues to portray the right as dangerous. Every aforementioned representative parades around Washington D.C. with armed security. They want YOU to be disarmed and unsafe while they enjoy the protection offered under 2A.
Kirk argued that places with armed security—banks, sporting events, airports—do not have shootings. Why? Law-abiding citizens are exercising their right to bear arms and ensure law and order. Disarming the public only enables the government to have blanket control over the population. It’s what they did in China, Cuba, the Soviet Union—the list could go on. The historical evidence is glaringly clear that gun ownership is the best protection against tyranny.
Here is the full transcript of Charlie Kirk’s dialogue:
AUDIENCE QUESTION: How's it going, Charlie? I'm Austin. I just had a question related to Second Amendment rights. We saw the shooting that happened recently and a lot of people are upset. But, I'm seeing people argue for the other side that they want to take our Second Amendment rights away. How do we convince them that it's important to have the right to defend ourselves and all that good stuff?
CHARLIE KIRK: Yeah, it's a great question. Thank you. So, I'm a big Second Amendment fan but I think most politicians are cowards when it comes to defending why we have a Second Amendment. This is why I would not be a good politician, or maybe I would, I don't know, because I actually speak my mind.
The Second Amendment is not about hunting. I love hunting. The Second Amendment is not even about personal defense. That is important. The Second Amendment is there, God forbid, so that you can defend yourself against a tyrannical government. And if that talk scares you — "wow, that's radical, Charlie, I don't know about that" — well then, you have not really read any of the literature of our Founding Fathers. Number two, you've not read any 20th-century history. You're just living in Narnia. By the way, if you're actually living in Narnia, you would be wiser than wherever you're living, because C.S. Lewis was really smart. So I don't know what alternative universe you're living in. You just don't want to face reality that governments tend to get tyrannical and that if people need an ability to protect themselves and their communities and their families.
Now, we must also be real. We must be honest with the population. Having an armed citizenry comes with a price, and that is part of liberty. Driving comes with a price. 50,000, 50,000, 50,000 people die on the road every year. That's a price. You get rid of driving, you'd have 50,000 less auto fatalities. But we have decided that the benefit of driving — speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services — is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road. So we need to be very clear that you're not going to get gun deaths to zero. It will not happen. You could significantly reduce them through having more fathers in the home, by having more armed guards in front of schools. We should have a honest and clear reductionist view of gun violence, but we should not have a utopian one.
You will never live in a society when you have an armed citizenry and you won't have a single gun death. That is nonsense. It's drivel. But I am, I, I — I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. Nobody talks like this. They live in a complete alternate universe.
So then, how do you reduce? Very simple. People say, oh, Charlie, how do you stop school shootings? I don't know. How did we stop shootings at baseball games? Because we have armed guards outside of baseball games. That's why. How did we stop all the shootings at airports? We have armed guards outside of airports. How do we stop all the shootings at banks? We have armed guards outside of banks. How did we stop all the shootings at gun shows? Notice there's not a lot of mass shootings at gun shows, there's all these guns. Because everyone's armed. If our money and our sporting events and our airplanes have armed guards, why don't our children?
Posted originally on Sep 16, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Keith Kellogg’s stupid statement that Russia’s war in Ukraine would end very quickly if Beijing withdrew its support for Moscow. He made the comments at a security conference in Kiev. He called Russia the “junior partner” to China and said it is losing the war in Ukraine. Such a statement is just insane. Like Iraq, nobody ever asked, if Ukraine defeats Russia, what would happen in Russia? This would be like saying What if Mexico invaded the USA and won?
After Germany lost World War I, there was a revolution that overthrew the monarchy, and the Weimar Republic was born, which then ended in hyperinflation. Even the Russian Revolution of 1917 was enabled by Russia’s disastrous performance in WWI, including massive casualties and economic collapse, which sparked widespread strikes and mutinies. The Tsar abdicated in March 1917, ending 300 years of Romanov rule; the Bolsheviks then seized power in November, leading to civil war and the Soviet Union.
Austria collapsed in 1918 after losing World War I. The empire’s multi-ethnic collapse after defeat led to ethnic revolts and declarations of independence in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and elsewhere. The monarchy ended in November 1918, fragmenting into nation-states amid famine and military desertions.
The collapse of the Ottoman Empire also took place after World War I. The Turkish War of Independence and the abolition of the sultanate (1919–1923) unfolded. Allied occupation post-armistice fueled nationalist resistance led by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. The sultanate was abolished in 1922, and the caliphate in 1924, birthing the Republic of Turkey after revolutionary reforms.
Xinhai Revolution (1911) followed the defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War of 1895. Humiliating territorial losses to Japan exposed the dynasty’s weakness, sparking anti-Manchu sentiment and Sun Yat-sen’s republican movement. The last emperor abdicated in 1912, ending over 2,000 years of imperial rule and ushering in the Republic of China.
Franco-Prussian War of 1870 saw the Paris Commune and fall of the empire (1870–1871). Napoleon III’s defeat led to the Third Republic’s proclamation. Radical workers then revolted in the Paris Commune, which was brutally suppressed, but the monarchy was permanently ousted.
These modern historical events illustrate a pattern without having to catalogue all the countless such events throughout human history. Wars drain resources, erode legitimacy, and amplify grievances (e.g., food shortages, casualties), creating fertile ground for revolutionaries. Not all post-war unrest leads to full regime change—e.g., Bulgaria’s monarchy survived WWI initially, only falling later in 1944. Nonetheless, these are clear instances of direct causation between revolution and the loss of a previous war.
In a post on his Telegram channel, Medvedev made the realistic statement that granting NATO members permission to down Russian drones operating in Ukrainian airspace would mean “war between the Alliance and Russia.” His comments followed growing calls in Europe and NATO to intervene in the war, demanding stronger Western action against Russia for its drone incursions while supporting Ukraine to use Western long-range missiles to attack even Moscow. On Sept. 12, Bundestag Defense Committee Chair Thomas Röwekamp urged NATO to begin intercepting Russian drones over Ukraine.
I have repeatedly stated that the psychological war tactic is that you MUST claim that an adversary has attacked you to get people to sign up. The support hasn’t been this low since 2022. This is why false flags are so important. They are used to claim you have been attacked, and then the common people will sign up to die on the battlefield for a noble cause.
That works on all sides. A new poll made by the independent Russian institute Levada shows that the Russians are growing tired of the war in Ukraine. The poll showed that 66%, or roughly two out of three, of the participants want the Kremlin to engage in peace negotiations with Ukraine. That is the highest number since 2022, when the war began. If NATO attacks Russia using a false flag, this will support the Rally Around the Flag for Russia. Let’s face it. Russians are treated with disdain as were the Jews before World War II. That is not a scenario that implies world peace lies ahead.
Senior military leaders from NATO member states have publicly assessed that the alliance would prevail in a conventional war against Russia relatively quickly due to overwhelming advantages in personnel (over 3.4 million active troops vs. Russia’s 1.3 million), aircraft (22,000+ vs. 4,000), ships (1,100+ vs. 400), defense spending (3.5 times Russia’s), and GDP (20 times larger).
In a February 2024 speech, UK Chief of the Defence Staff Admiral Sir Tony Radakin stated that “NATO would defeat Russia quickly,” citing Russia’s struggles in Ukraine as evidence of its military weaknesses and NATO’s growing strength with the addition of Finland and Sweden. Similarly, analyses from outlets like Al Jazeera and The Week conclude that NATO’s integrated command, superior training, and equipment would lead to a “quick” conventional victory. However, they warn that this could escalate to nuclear risks if Russia faces total defeat. As I have said, if I have a gun and you break into my house and threaten to kill me, I think I may shoot back.
Sensational claims, such as NATO submarines “destroying Russia in 30 seconds,” appear in YouTube videos and informal discussions but stem from hyperbolic speculation about nuclear scenarios, not official statements. Recent X posts echo debates on NATO’s superiority but often tie it to broader geopolitical tensions without referencing its past defeats. Overall, while NATO officials project confidence in deterrence, they prioritize avoiding direct war over public victory projections.
This push for war with Russia leaves out TWO critical factors
(1) China will support Russia because it knows it will be next, as they plainly told Kallas.
(2) This will turn nuclear, and Europe, with all its conventional power, can be turned to dust in minutes, not days.
“Europe is ready to take a step forward. We are ready to take control of the changes that are inevitable. Because we can’t let history push us around. This means that it is necessary to act now. Acting on a large scale is an indispensable condition for speed, scale and strength by 2030 … By 2030 Europe should have a strong European defense structure,” Ursula said.
This drone shot down in Poland from EVERY source I have states that this is a FALSE FLAG and there is no evidence that this every invaded Polish airspace. They desperately need to create a False Flag, get gullible people to sign their own death wish, so these failed EU leaders can keep their pensions. Ursula told the EU Parliament with great theatrics:
“Battle lines for a new world order based on power are being drawn right now,” von der Leyen told the European Parliament in her annual State of the EU address.
“So, yes, Europe must fight. For its place in a world in which many major powers are either ambivalent or openly hostile to Europe,” she said.
Putin is the smartest and responsible world leader at the table today. Remove him, and we will get an emotional leader like Medvedev. Speculating on a post-Putin Russia is inherently uncertain, as the regime’s opacity and Putin’s tight control over security services make a smooth transition debatable. An overthrow—whether via coup, elite infighting, or sudden death—would likely trigger a power struggle among siloviki (security elites), oligarchs, and technocrats, potentially leading to instability or even fragmentation. I would emphasize that no apparent clear heir exists, and the outcome depends on the circumstances: a managed handover (unlikely in an overthrow) versus chaotic removal.
I would list the potential replacements, prioritize loyalty to the current system, hawkish stances on Ukraine/NATO, and control over key institutions like the FSB, military, or economy, which will all come into play. Dmitry Medvedev is indeed a contender due to his proximity to Putin, but he’s not the top pick—his role is often seen as that of a “bad cop” provocateur rather than a unifying leader. Perhaps, but we are looking at an outright statement from the EU that Russia must be defeated and obliterated. We are not talking about just pushing Russia out of Ukraine.
Kaja Kallas, a ruthless Neocon, openly calls for the total destruction and breakup of Russia. This is the total destruction of the country. That is not something that should be taken lightly. That is the justification for nuclear war. Kallas is a greater threat to the EU than Putin.
MY LIST OF CONTENDERS:
Mikhail Mishustin, Prime Minister Nikolai Patrushev, Deputy Chair, Security Council (former FSB head) Sergei Sobyanin, Moscow Mayor Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chair, Security Council Andrei Belousov, Defense Minister Alexei Dyumin, Tula Governor (ex-bodyguard) Sergei Kiriyenko, First Deputy Chief of Staff
Medvedev’s name surfaces due to his history (tandem with Putin in 2008-2012) and recent high-profile positioning him as a “nuclear-ready” hardliner who could rally nationalists. X discussions often call him the “natural successor” for stability. However, he’s rarely ranked #1 in expert assessments—his provocative style (e.g., 2025 threats sparking U.S. sub deployments) makes him a Kremlin mouthpiece, not a consolidator. Others see him as a fallback, not a frontrunner, due to reputational damage from past “liberal” image and scandals. In an overthrow, elites might prefer Mishustin or Patrushev for their institutional grip.
Keep in mind that Khruschev was overthrown in a coup, and he was usurped by Bresnev because of his reckless handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Post-Stalin USSR saw infighting; a similar “vicious struggle” would be likely if Russia were defeated in Ukraine, with FSB vs. military clashes. No democratic shift should be expected. Any successor would most likely double down on authoritarianism and anti-West policies, and any hope of world peace will be completely obliterated.
Then, for a coup, any replacement inherits a quagmire; hardliners like Patrushev or Medvedev might escalate, while technocrats like Mishustin seek de-escalation for economic relief.
In summary, Mishustin or Patrushev edge out as most probable for their balance of competence and control, but Medvedev remains a wildcard—loyal enough for continuity, radical enough for drama. Russia after Putin looks more like Putinism 2.0 than reform. This is all upset if NATO pushes its agenda to destroy Russia and break it up, strip mining its assets. This goal, as articulated in part by Kallas, warrants a fight to the death with nukes, and in this case, I would put my money on Medvedev, who has the high-profile that would become more valuable when confronted with the destruction of Russia, not with just pushing it out of Ukraine.
Posted originally on Sep 15, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: I believe you have said that the United States practices the law of tyrants, conspiracy, which only proves a thought crime, not that you committed a crime. Is this why you say we are doomed, because nobody will do real legal reform?
Wes
ANSWER: Our legal system adopted the tyranny of the king and replaced him with the Department of JUST US. Its combination of the Pinkerton rule, broad federal statutes like RICO, and the strategic, frequent use by prosecutors makes American conspiracy law one of the most potent and expansive in the world. The United States has the most anti-human rights legal system on the planet. For example, under Canon Law used in France, they cannot compel any family member to testify against you. In the United States, they can imprison your children until they testify against you. The only privilege is granted to a spouse or a priest. Then they will use a divorce to get around the spouse rule. Under the Canon law of the Catholic Church, the sanctity of the family unit comes first. Under English Common Law, precedent takes precedent. We had a revolution against the king’s tyranny, replacing him with local tyranny.
They love to call Russia and China authoritarian and communist. But look at the stats. You have a 340% greater chance of going to jail in the United States compared to China. The United States has the highest percentage of its population in prison of any country in the world, so much for liberty. Suppose you lie to a government official; that is perjury, punishable by up to 5 years. If a government official lies to you, that is legal.
Without the rule of law, civilization crumbles. Courts rule in favor of the government. Rarely will you find a judge who will truly defend the Constitution, and good luck in prosecuting a judge or a prosecutor.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 