Posted originally on Sep 19, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
Chicago is stepping in to lend cash to its underfunded pensions so they have enough money to avoid asset sales to cover retirement checks as they wait for property taxes to come in after a computer issue delayed collections https://t.co/NjYZMGlDs7
Chicago’s money trees are shedding their autumn layers with a new multi-million dollar government payout package for underfunded public pensions. City officials approved a short-term bailout of the Firemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund to the tune of $28 million to avoid forced asset sales. That is merely the tip of the iceberg, as Chicago’s pension debt has risen 15% over the past five years to an utterly unsustainable $36 billion.
Property taxes currently fund 80% of the city’s pension fund, but are not enough to sufficiently meet payouts. The average pension fund ideally has a funding level of around 70%, and funding beneath 40% is considered nearly insolvent. In Chicago, the top four public pension funds (fire, police, municipal, and laborers), along with the teachers’ pension fund, have a backing ratio between 24% to 43%, with the combined debt now exceeding $53 billion—all of Chicago’s public pension funds have gone bust. Reform measures have been bypassed for years to the point of no return.
Chicago’s pension system carries a debt larger than that of 44 states. Seven Chicago-area pension funds are among the top 10 worst-funded plans in the country. The city already allocates up to 20% of its annual budget toward pensions. Taxpayers are expected to meet all shortfalls, but again, the current level of taxation is not enough to cover the gap.
Lawmakers claim there was a mere system error. Property tax bills were expected to be sent out in June, but will not reach taxpayers until October. The $28 million is intended to act as a temporary band-aid, but the city is almost guaranteed to ask for additional loans and bailouts because the frozen funds are NOT the problem. These funds are a Ponzi scheme, robbing Peter to pay Paul, but the jig is up.
Lawmakers recently passed a bill to provide additional pay to Chicago’s retired firefighters and police officers. Politicians are permitted to pass bills to secure votes without actually having a plan in place. The city’s pension bill will rise to $2.76 billion by 2026. There is no money for other public services. Chicago has lost its ability to remain competitive as capital is fleeing increased levies.
Chicago’s overall property tax levy more than doubled in a decade, expanding from $860 million in 2014 to $1.77 billion in 2024. Pension costs directly have risen sixfold over that ten-year span from $478 million in 2014 to $2.75 billion in 2024. The city has redirected every penny collected from property taxes since 2014 into these failing funds, but the pension obligation has surpassed 160% of the annual property tax revenue.
The blame falls on the people rather than the failed politicians. Mayor Brandon Johnson proposed increasing property taxes by $300 million for the current fiscal year, which would mark the largest spike in property taxes in the city’s history. The measure was shot down by the City Council who instead plans to generate $165.5 million with additional taxes and fees in other domains.
In 2021, Mayor Lori Lightfoot demanded a $93.9 million increase in property taxes. Johnson actually campaigned against that measure, and Lightfoot was pressured to drop the tax hike to $42.7 million in 2023. Johnson was elected over Lightfoot for pretending to care about constituents and promising to lower tax burdens.
Their approach has failed. 41% of property taxes were injected into these broken pension funds in 2014 and increased to 80% in 2024. Property taxes more than doubled in that timeframe, but it is nowhere near enough to solve this crisis. Politicians will continue to rob the people with excessive levies to maintain the Ponzi scheme for as long as possible. It is only a matter of time before the city is unable to pay retirees.
The Illinois Constitution does not permit cities to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy. The state has historically blocked any cuts to payouts regardless of liquidity. The city may one day be forced to beg for a federal bailout, which would force all Americans to pay for decades of reckless mismanagement by financially illiterate politicians.
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 |
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.
Posted originally on CTH on September 12, 2025 | Sundance
As President Trump is known to say, “don’t make it complicated.” Just look at things as they are, as they present themselves to be, and ask the most obvious questions.
“Domestic Tranquility?” Consider Antifa.
Portland — Antifa try to use a dumpster as a battering ram against the gate protecting an ICE facility but are repelled by federal agents who shoot pepper balls at the masked insurrectionists. Video by @FrontlinesTPUSA: pic.twitter.com/A8Gud9zzx3
How can a group within America openly threaten police, use violence against police, throw Molotov cocktails, bricks and explosive fireworks at police. Use batons, shields, bats and physical violence against police and federal law enforcement; destroy vehicles, set cars on fire, destroy property, trash and block the streets and create chaos…. Completely without being stopped?
It doesn’t matter where it is happening, that’s irrelevant. Think plainly and simply.
How does any individual or group get to do this without being arrested?
It doesn’t make sense, unless….
Portland — Antifa's riot gear and explosive devices are no match for the dozens of federal officers and agents who have fully mobilized to protect the ICE building after a week of daily arson attacks. Video by @FrontlinesTPUSA: pic.twitter.com/ZnYThnNZau
…. Unless…. The group conducting the violence cannot be arrested.
Day after day; night after night, in most major metropolitan areas around the nation, the group known as “Antifa” operate with impunity. They are organized; they are funded; they communicate locally, regionally and nationally. They mobilize in designated and coordinated areas of operation, and they are exceptionally violent and dangerous.
So how is it they can operate?
They build encampments outside federal facilities and openly fight with federal officials and law enforcement. Yet, nothing is done. Why not?
If the FBI did not support Antifa, quite simply Antifa would not exist. They are right there, highly visible, doing illegal things on camera, repeatedly, all over the country, and the FBI doesn’t lift a finger to stop them. Why?
The only thing that makes sense is that the FBI wants this activity to take place.
If they did not want it to take place, they would stop it and arrest the lawbreakers who are attacking federal buildings and officers. Why hasn’t the FBI designated antifa as a domestic terrorist organization? The visuals of trashed streets, barricades, smoke bombs, riots, semi-frequent baton clashes in the streets, etc. etc. must serve some purpose for the FBI or they would stop it.
This is not misdemeanor behavior.
Arrest the participants and put them into federal prisons.
This is not complicated.
The FBI supports Antifa. If they did not support them, the FBI would stop them.
Posted originally on Sep 11, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |
The Patriot Act was drafted and pushed through with lightning speed, something that could not have been written overnight. This was the beginning of warrantless surveillance, indefinite detention, and a wholesale reversal of constitutional rights. I have said many times: governments do not waste a good crisis. They wait for the right moment to impose measures that would never pass during normal times. Americans may be unaware of the freedoms that have been stripped away from them after October 26, 2001, when the Patriot Act was signed into law.
The Patriot Act, officially titled “the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001,” provided the government with unlimited surveillance powers. Terrorism became the premise to bypass the checks and balances of the legal system. Need a warrant? One could be obtained in any district or area where terrorism was suspected. Of course, warrantless searches were permitted under the guise of terrorism and deemed “sneak and peek” searches, where the government could enter a business or personal residence immediately and without warning to conduct an investigation.
Neither party has repealed the Patriot Act, and politicians on both sides of the aisle will NEVER relinquish these powers. The Patriot Act destroyed the Fourth Amendment and legally permitted the NSA to spy on all Americans. October 26, 2001, marked the day that the United States of America officially became a surveillance state. We The People were branded as potential terrorists, and “the land of the free” was permanently placed under the watchful eye of government. “The War on Terror” has no clear end or defined enemy. The real target was always domestic — the American people themselves. By creating an atmosphere of fear, Washington justified trillions in spending, the invasion of foreign countries, and the slow strangulation of the very liberties the terrorists supposedly hated.
Surveillance spread to the financial sector, naturally, as the government can control the masses by controlling their spending. The government is legally permitted to seize funds from foreign and domestic bank accounts if terrorism is suspected. As we saw under the Biden Administration, banks openly share transaction data with the government, and the government can mandate that banks halt any activity under the premise of money laundering or terrorism. The government requires banks to file Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR) to FinCEN to track any “suspicious” financial activity. The scope is deliberately vague. As mentioned, under the Biden Administration, purchases of Bibles or donations to conservative parties were cause for “suspicion.”
Law enforcement agencies have no barriers to sharing information. In Florida, for example, all law enforcement agencies can see every citizen’s personal data, including medical history and any pharmaceuticals they have been prescribed. They can see where a person lives, has lived, and where they commonly visit. Law enforcement agencies can monitor phone calls, text messages, emails, and internet searches. GPS and cell tower tracking can pinpoint an individual’s current location and any previous movement. As the law as progressed, law enforcement agencies have been provided access to social media activity.
AI technology has enabled the government to utilize facial recognition to identify individuals in crowds or track their day-to-day whereabouts. It is not an exaggeration to say that there are cameras everywhere. Some nations openly promote the use of public surveillance cameras, but most Americans are unaware that they are constantly under the government’s watchful eye.
The Patriot Act was far more than merely increased security at the airport. The true nature of the act was to provide the government with unrestrained power to spy on the people. The government can obtain any banking record without judicial oversight and freeze funds without notice. “Terrorism” or “money laundering” can be used to attack citizens for any reason or without reason. Suspicion is the only criterion, and under the Patriot Act, everyone is considered a terrorist and a threat to the established order.
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 