EU Effort to Use Russian Funds to Support Ukraine Collapses – EU Takes Out Loan to Support Zelenskyy


Posted originally on CTH on December 19, 2025 | Sundance

The grand plans of the EU Leadership failed to generate their desired result.  Initially, Ursula von der Leyen, Friedrich Merz, Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer intended to permanently confiscate the Russian sovereign wealth fund and use it to fund their interests in Ukraine.  However, the EU coalition didn’t agree.

After 16 hours of failed internal negotiations the EU ended up creating a $90 Billion euro-backed financial loan to Zelenskyy which he will not have to pay back until Russian reparations are paid to Ukraine.

The European elites essentially used EU taxpayers to create an EU loan to Zelenskyy.

EUROPE – BRUSSELS — European governments failed to reach a deal on sending Russian frozen state assets to Ukraine after a 16-hour summit in Brussels, in a major setback for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Countries were forced instead to agree on an emergency backup plan based on EU joint debt that was pushed for weeks by Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever and was deemed a long shot until hours before the deal was done. In a further blow to EU unity, three countries ― Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic ― won’t take part.

“The bottom line, after today, is that our support for Ukraine is guaranteed,” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said as the summit wrapped up at 3 a.m.

The agreement provides a crucial lifeline to Ukraine’s war-battered economy as it grapples with the risk of a looming cash crunch as early as next spring with its conflict with Russia grinding on into a fourth year.

Though the accord allows everyone to claim victory, this wasn’t the solution that Germany and the Commission had been pushing for in the lead-up to this summit. (read more)

Rhode Island Arrest Affidavit Gives Details on How Brown Shooting Suspect Was Identified – Full Affidavit pdf


Posted originally on CTH on December 19, 2025 | Sundance 

Public Press Release – HERE / Affidavit Available – HERE

Rhode Island – […] “On December 18, 2025, a Rhode Island state court, based on an affidavit from a Providence Police Detective, issued a state arrest warrant for Neves Valente charging him with two counts of murder and 23 felony counts of assault and felony firearms offenses.

Earlier this evening, law enforcement tracked Neves Valente to a Salem, New Hampshire storage unit. After obtaining a federal search warrant for the unit, authorities entered and found Neves Valente deceased from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Neves Valente (age 48) was born in Torres Novas, Santarem, Portugal and was a Legal Permanent Resident of the United States. Neves Valente arrived in the United States in August 2000 as an F-1 student at Brown University and subsequently obtained U.S. lawful permanent residency in April 2017. While at Brown University, he was enrolled in a doctoral program but subsequently withdrew from the university.”  – Affidavit Here

[SOURCE]

[Full Affidavit Link]

There is no motive being outlined by law enforcement or FBI investigators.  However, the level of planning outlined within the affidavit itself would indicate specific targeting.

♦ Valente first arrived in the USA on a student visa August 23, 2000.  Valente would have been 23 years old.

♦ Valente was only at Brown University for two semesters (Sept 1, 2000, to May 21, 2001).

♦ Sixteen years later Valente was granted a diversity visa. May 10, 2017.

♦ On Sept 14, 2017, Valente became a legal permanent resident (green card holder).  Valente would have been 40 years old.

♦ On December 13, 2025, Valente returns to Brown University approximately 24 years after he dropped out and begins shooting people.

I’m sure much more will come out.

EU Desperate to Find a Way to Use Frozen Russian Assets to Fund Ukraine


Posted originally on CTH on December 18, 2025 | Sundance 

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is huddled with European Leaders at the European Council meeting in Brussels.  The key effort by the assembly is how to use frozen Russian assets to give money to Ukraine.

The EU itself does not want to lend Ukraine money directly because people within each nation of the EU assembly do not support giving Ukraine more money.  The issue reflects a political disconnect where the EU leaders want to give money that the EU citizens do not support giving.

As a result, the only viable option is for the EU to find a mechanism where seized Russian assets can be disbursed or used as collateral for payments to Ukraine.  However, some member states like Hungary, Italy and Belgium are refusing to cooperate with the seizure of the Russian sovereign wealth fund.  The problem for Zelenskyy and his friends is simply that without money wars cannot continue.

As noted by Decentralized Media: “What is unfolding in Europe reads less like miscalculation and more like controlled demolition operation. The freezing—and now effective seizure—of Russian-linked assets at Euroclear is not simply a sanction gone too far. It is a deliberate trigger in a broader effort to collapse the European Union’s existing financial architecture and, with it, the London-centered banking cartel that has dominated global capital flows for decades.

That process accelerates the moment Donald Trump removes the United States as the EU’s financial backstop.

Trump’s decision to defund and condition U.S. support for Ukraine did not merely pressure Kyiv. More importantly, his insistence on pursuing a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia threatened to end the war on terms that would devastate European interests. It forced Europe to confront a war it could not afford and a system it could no longer sustain. Without Washington underwriting the conflict, Brussels faced a stark choice: accept a negotiated peace and a financial reckoning or prolong the war long enough to extract what value it could from the system before collapse.

Europe chose the latter.

The Russian assets frozen in 2022 were never meant to be spent. They were never supposed to survive a peace deal. They were leverage—political theater designed to signal resolve while assuming eventual American rescue. But when Trump pulled the plug, those frozen funds became the only available war chest. The moment Europe reached for them; the collapse became inevitable. (read more)

President Trump has told the EU the frozen Russian assets should be used as part of the negotiation for a ceasefire.  If the EU announces permanent confiscation of the assets the leverage is lost.

The EU could borrow the needed money against the security of the EU budget and then lend the money to Ukraine.  However, such a move requires unanimity among the 27 EU countries, Hungary and Italy already said they would veto it.

If the EU is not going to accept peace, the only option they have left is to collateralize the Russian assets and loan the money to Ukraine.

Providence-area Radio Host Asks Brown University About Their Intentional Disabling of CCTV Systems


Posted originally on CTH on December 18, 2025 | Sundance

During a press conference on Wednesday, a Providence-area radio host, Chas Calenda, directly confronted Brown University officials and law enforcement with information he has received about the school intentionally disabling surveillance systems due to DEI concerns.

The response from university officials and the Providence Mayor indicate Mr. Chas Calenda’s informed accusation and question is directly on target.  WATCH:

In addition to information we previously shared {GO DEEP} reflecting requests from various “civil rights” and “humanitarian” groups who demanded Brown University disable their surveillance system, additional information about the issue comes via the Rhode Island ACLU making the same demand in October of this year [SEE HERE].

Brown University was under pressure from far-left groups as an outcome of concern the CCTV and school security system would be used by federal authorities to (a) identify radical leftists expressing antisemitic sentiments, and (b) identify the immigration status of persons on campus.  It is not just isolated to Brown University.

Multiple municipal governments, private and municipal agencies have received the same demand in an ongoing effort to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations.  The mass shooting on Brown University is leading to a larger public awareness of an issue that has been spreading rapidly in the last several months.

The claim by Chas Calenda is that his local sources within law enforcement are confirming the university cowed to the concerns of the civil rights groups, including the removal of cameras.  This is why there is no recorded CCTV footage, and the university is talking gibberish in their efforts to avoid admitting what has taken place.

Brown University and Providence police have $8 billion liability reasons to be less than honest with the alarmed public. The political ramifications of the story are also complicating the issue for Brown University, as well as local and national figures.

Here is the full press conference.  The key question comes at the very end of the video 49:20.

Russian President Vladimir Putin Responds to Zelenskyy and EU During Remarks to Defense Ministry


Posted originally on CTH on December 17, 2025 | Sundance 

During a speech to the Russian Defense Ministry, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin responded to the generally-public-outline of the Zelenskyy-EU plan to end combat operations against Russia.

Remarkably, President Putin began his statement by thanking North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un for sending supportive troops to assist the Russian army in the Donbas region.  Putin held a moment of silence for the fallen soldiers from the DPRK.

The entire speech transcript IS HERE.  Below I am pulling out the excerpt that specifically pertains to the current line of conflict in Ukraine and the position of Russia as it pertains to a cessation of hostilities.

VLADIMIR PUTIN – […] “Today, we can see that the geopolitical situation remains tense throughout the world, and even critical in some regions. NATO countries are actively building up and modernizing their offensive forces, and creating and deploying new types of weapons, including in outer space.

Meanwhile, people in Europe are being indoctrinated with fears of an inevitable confrontation with Russia, with claims that preparations must be made for a major war. Various figures who have held or continue to hold positions of responsibility appear to have simply forgotten what that responsibility entails.

They are whipping up hysteria, guided by momentary, personal or group political interests rather than the interests of their people. I have said many times that this is a lie and an irrational narrative about an imaginary Russian threat to European countries. But they are doing this deliberately.

The truth is that Russia has always, until the last possible moment tried, even in the most complicated circumstances, to find diplomatic solutions to differences and conflicts. Responsibility for the failure to use these chances lies squarely with those who believe that they can use the language of force with us.

We continue to call for developing mutually beneficial and equal cooperation with the United States and European countries, and for creating a joint security system in the Eurasian region. We welcome nascent progress in our dialogue with the new US administration, which cannot be said of the current leaders of the majority of European countries.

At the same time, we realize that our Armed Forces remain the key guarantor of Russia’s sovereignty and independence in any international situation. As I have stated, we must work consistently to strengthen them.

What I would like to emphasize here are the objectives to be set in the area of military development, taking into account the dynamics of the situation along the line of contact, among other factors.

First. The goals of the special military operation will undoubtedly be achieved. We would prefer to accomplish this and address the root causes of the conflict through diplomatic means. However, if the opposing side and its foreign patrons refuse to engage in substantive dialogue, Russia will achieve the liberation of its historical lands by military means. The task of creating and expanding a security buffer zone will also be carried out consistently.

Second. Work on modernizing the Armed Forces must continue at a rapid pace and to a high standard, primarily within the framework of the new State Armament Programme for 2027˗2036, which is currently under development.

As I have repeatedly emphasized, the experience gained during the special military operation, emerging trends in combat tactics, and rapidly developing military technologies must be fully taken into account.

Key areas of the state programme include air and missile defense systems, command and control systems, electronic warfare capabilities, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) operating in all environments.

Of course, improving our strategic nuclear forces remains a priority. As before, they will play a decisive role in deterring aggression and maintaining the global balance of power.” (READ MORE)

Brown University Received a Letter from 34 Human Rights Groups in August Requesting They Disable Their CCTV System


Posted originally on CTH on December 17, 2025 | Sundance

The question is: Did Brown University acquiesce under pressure from far-left human rights groups to disable their CCTV systems, in advance of the mass shooting on campus?

[SOURCE – AUGUST 19, 2025]

As originally reported in August 2025 {SOURCE}, a group of far-left human rights advocates sent a letter to 150 U.S. colleges and universities asking them to disable the CCTV systems to protect “free expression and academic freedom across the country,” because “the Trump administration has launched an aggressive campaign against US academic institutions.”

The motive for the request to disable CCTV systems as stated: “Right now these tools are facilitating the identification and punishment of student protesters, undermining activists’ right to anonymity––a right the Supreme Court has affirmed as vital to free expression and political participation.” {SOURCE}

The letter from ‘Fight For The Future‘ (August, 2025) came after an earlier campaign by the same group seeking to stop the use of facial recognition cameras on college campuses. {SOURCE}

The Brown University President and school officials have been giving ridiculous answers to questions about the 800 cameras on the campus and the fact that no current footage exists of the shooter walking around inside the campus or inside the buildings therein.

The question is really a simple one.  Did Brown University follow the requests of the hardline leftist groups who asked the school to disable the functioning of their surveillance network in order to protect the identity of the students on campus?

Obviously, this potential explanation would answer a lot of seemingly irreconcilable questions about the lack of surveillance footage available to local law enforcement, state police and FBI investigators.  The only current footage of the shooter is from privately owned doorbell cameras and CCTV systems from businesses near the campus.  No footage of the shooter on campus has been identified.

Against the factual evidence of Brown University receiving requests to disable their surveillance cameras, someone needs to ask the right question.

Everyone can see the potential ramifications here, along with the severity of the legal risk Brown University would be facing.  Perhaps that dynamic is what’s behind the twisted wording and explanations coming from university and local officials.

A targeted political assassination of a young, female conservative vice-chair of the Brown University Republican group takes place.  The ideological shooter benefits from the lack of school security and surveillance.  That lack of security was intentionally created by ideological school administrators and officials bowing to pressure from ideologically aligned leftist organizations.

If accurate, this is quite a scenario on many levels; including a considerable legal risk, intentional and willful negligence, and massive lawsuit exposure in the aftermath of two deaths and 9 injured students.  Brown University has an $8 billion endowment.

As everyone understands, a University like Brown creates a local economy unto itself. College towns like Providence, Rhode Island are college towns for a reason.  The college is a considerable foundation for the economic wealth of the community.  As an outcome, the local officials would be in full protection mode over their economic foundation.  In this case, there are billions at stake.

Perhaps this dynamic explains all the conflicts and seemingly bizarre statements by local and university officials.  WATCH:

.

JD Vance Gives Strong Defense of Susie Wiles


Posted originally on CTH on December 16, 2025 | Sundance

Vice President JD Vance was questioned about White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles calling Vance a conspiracy theorist.

Vance embraces the conspiracy label, defines how accurate it is, then delivers a strong set of remarks in defense of Susie Wiles.  WATCH: 

The overall remarks themselves are not terribly toxic to the White House, but the question of why a chief of staff would sit down for eleven interviews over 11 months with Vanity Fair remains rather curious.

What exactly did Susie Wiles expect was going to happen with all those recorded interviews?

Bannon 2.0 – Another Trump Chief of Staff Creates Another Hot Mess


Posted originally on CTH on December 16, 2025 | Sundance 

Last time it was Steve Bannon who held multiple interviews with Michael Wolff for his book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.  This time it is White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles who sat down for a series of recorded ‘on the record’ interviews with Vanity Fair author Chris Whipple. [Article w/ Paywall]

The interviews with Susie Wiles have been taking place all year, with recordings of her statements made to ensure she could not retract the divisive content now deployed by Vanity Fair at a critical moment in the Trump administration.

The intent of the Vanity Fair outline is to paint the most negative light possible, and it appears Susie Wiles gave Chris Whipple all the ammunition to do so.

TIMING: This anti-Trump narrative, supported by the toxic statements by Wiles, is dropped at a key moment when European leadership is purposefully pushing a narrative against President Trump. This series of articles and documented interviews hits at a moment of merging interests against the administration.  The coordination is noted.

SUBSTANCE: The New York Times outlines some of the statements by Susie Wiles that are going to grab attention.

[…] “Over the course of 11 interviews, Ms. Wiles offered pungent assessments of the president and his team: Mr. Trump “has an alcoholic’s personality.” Vice President JD Vance has “been a conspiracy theorist for a decade” and his conversion from Trump critic to ally was based not on principle but was “sort of political” because he was running for Senate. Elon Musk is “an avowed ketamine” user and “an odd, odd duck,” whose actions were not always “rational” and left her “aghast.” Russell T. Vought, the budget director, is “a right-wing absolute zealot.” And Attorney General Pam Bondi “completely whiffed” in handling the Epstein files.”

[…] She said she urged Mr. Trump not to pardon the most violent rioters from Jan. 6, 2021, which he did anyway. She unsuccessfully tried to get him to delay his major tariffs because of a “huge disagreement” among his advisers. And she said the administration needed to “look harder” at deportations to prevent mistakes.

[…] She attributes her ability to work for Mr. Trump to growing up with an alcoholic father, the sportscaster Pat Summerall. “High-functioning alcoholics or alcoholics in general, their personalities are exaggerated when they drink,” she said. “And so I’m a little bit of an expert in big personalities.” While Mr. Trump does not drink, she said he has “an alcoholic’s personality” and operates with “a view that there’s nothing he can’t do. Nothing, zero, nothing.”

[…] Ms. Wiles confided in Mr. Whipple in March that she had told Mr. Trump that his presidency was not supposed to be a retribution tour. “We have a loose agreement that the score settling will end before the first 90 days are over,” she said then. When that did not happen by August, she told Mr. Whipple that “I don’t think he’s on a retribution tour” but said that he was aiming at people who did “bad things” in coming after him. “In some cases, it may look like retribution,” she said. “And there may be an element of that from time to time. Who would blame him? Not me.”

[…] In the interviews published by Vanity Fair, Ms. Wiles faulted Ms. Bondi, one of her closest friends in the administration, for her early handling of the Epstein files, an issue that has been a cause célèbre for Mr. Trump’s right-wing base.

“I think she completely whiffed on appreciating that that was the very targeted group that cared about this,” Ms. Wiles said. “First, she gave them binders full of nothingness. And then she said that the witness list, or the client list, was on her desk. There is no client list, and it sure as hell wasn’t on her desk.” Mr. Vance, by contrast, understood the sensitivity because he himself was “a conspiracy theorist,” she said.

Ms. Wiles said she has read the Epstein documents and acknowledged that Mr. Trump’s name is in them. “We know he’s in the file,” she said. “And he’s not in the file doing anything awful.”

[…] Ms. Wiles described frustration with Mr. Musk, the billionaire who early in the year was empowered to eviscerate federal agencies and fire employees en masse with almost no process. “He’s an odd, odd duck, as I think geniuses are. You know, it’s not helpful, but he is his own person.” When he shared a post saying that Stalin, Mao and Hitler didn’t murder millions, their public sector workers did, Ms. Wiles said, “I think that’s when he’s microdosing.” Asked what she meant, she said, “he’s an avowed ketamine” user.

[…] In the interview with The Times on Monday, Ms. Wiles took issue with the quote attributed to her about his drug use. “That’s ridiculous,” she said. “I wouldn’t have said it and I wouldn’t know.” But Mr. Whipple played a tape for The Times in which she could be heard saying it.

[…] She acknowledged sharp internal divisions over Mr. Trump’s announcement of major tariffs last spring. “There was a huge disagreement over whether” tariffs were “a good idea,” she said. “We told Donald Trump, ‘Hey, let’s not talk about tariffs today. Let’s wait until we have the team in complete unity and then we’ll do it.’” But he announced them anyway and “it’s been more painful than I expected.”

[…] As for the potential successors, Mr. Vance and Mr. Rubio, she distinguished how each of them came around to supporting Mr. Trump after initially opposing him. “Marco was not the sort of person that would violate his principles,” she said. “He just won’t. And so he had to get there.” As for Mr. Vance, “his conversion came when he was running for the Senate. And I think his conversion was a little bit more, sort of political.”

Mr. Rubio told Mr. Whipple what he has said publicly, that “if JD Vance runs for president, he’s going to be our nominee and I’ll be one of the first people to support him.” (read more)

Immediately after publication of the Vanity Fair story, Mrs. Wiles took to Twitter to explain her position:

[SOURCE]

Mrs. Wiles never explains why, for all that is reasonable and holy, she would even sit down with Vanity Fair for eleven interviews over the course of the year.

If you find yourself looking at this narrative engineering and saying, “WTF, why would she be so stupid?”  You are not alone.

Perhaps it’s the old axiom that sooner or later the senior staff always convince themselves that they are the star of the show.  Or perhaps Mrs. Wiles just never heard the Snake Poem:

On her way to work one morning
Down the path ‘longside the lake
A tender-hearted woman saw a poor half-frozen snake
His pretty colored skin had been all frosted with the dew
“Oh well,” she cried, “I’ll take you in and I’ll take care of you”
“Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake

She wrapped him up all cozy in a comforter of silk
And laid him by thе fireside with some honеy and some milk
She hurried home from work that night, and soon as she arrived
She found that pretty snake she’d taken in had been revived
“Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake

She clutched him to her bosom, “You’re so beautiful,” she cried
“But if I hadn’t brought you in, by now you might have died”
She stroked his pretty skin again and kissed and held him tight
Instead of saying thanks, that snake gave her a vicious bite
“Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake

“I saved you,” cried the woman
“And you’ve bitten me, but why?
And you know your bite is poisonous and now I’m gonna die”
“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
“You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in”

Oscar Brown Jr

Brown University Shooter Still at Large – Open Discussion Thread


Posted originally on CTH on December 16, 2025 | Sundance

Everything about the Brown University shooting doesn’t make sense through the ordinary prism.

However, if political ramifications in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s targeted assassination are overlaid against the Brown University murders, then a certain context might reconcile some of the issues. {GO DEEP}  Was Ella Cook targeted in a similarly motivated fashion to the murder of Charlie Kirk?

There are a reported 800 cameras on the Brown University campus, including facial recognition capable cameras, yet school and local police officials claim they do not have any footage of the suspect entering or exiting the building or walking on the campus itself.

Given the nature of the extreme left Brown U ideology, were the cameras turned off or non-recording as part of an ICE resistance effort?

Journalist Mark Halprin received information that College Republican Vice President Ella Cook was the primary target of the shooter.  This is relayed as information to Ms. Cook’s family as stated by FBI investigators. Other victims who were with her in the room were shot as an outcome of their association with the primary target.  WATCH:

There are a lot of odd contradictions and missing information within the statements by the Providence Mayor, school officials and local law enforcement. The suspect has still not been identified, and the local police are trying to avoid specific questions.

Obviously, if Ella Cook, a conservative Christian student and vice-president of the campus Republican group was the specific target, then Brown University would have a motive to try and avoid admitting that Ella Cook a young, female, Christian conservative student was a victim of a targeted political assassination on campus.

Fox News host Jesse Waters has actually put together a strong monologue drawing attention to some of the issues; however, Waters only alludes to the issues raised within the background, he does not draw attention to the specifics. WATCH:

Fox News: FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino May Depart Office in Next Few Weeks


Posted originally on CTH on December 16, 2025 | Sundance

It seems like every other month there is another report of Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino departing the FBI.  However, this time the internal sources are double-dog-sure of the likelihood.

Multiple media outlets now report an anticipated exit by Dan Bongino over the next few weeks.  It would not come as a surprise if he did leave.  The institutional corruption within the FBI is a very difficult situation to manage, especially if FBI leadership are not willing to admit the institutional corruption exists.

We do not want to see him fail, and the FBI has delivered some good results.  Depending on which report you read, Andrew Bailey, who until recently was Missouri’s attorney general, is favored to take over the role of FBI director “probably around the first of the year.”

(VIA FOX NEWS) – Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino will make a decision about his future at the bureau within the next few weeks, two sources familiar with his considerations tell Fox News.

The sources deny recent reports that Bongino’s office at the FBI is empty, but they say that his departure is a possibility in the near future.

A source familiar with the situation told Fox News Digital that Bongino has not made any decisions about his future.

Bongino’s tenure at the FBI has come under fire in recent weeks, alongside FBI director Kash Patel. Earlier this month, a blistering report from an alliance of active-duty and retired FBI personnel portrayed the bureau as directionless under its new leadership.

Bongino and Patel pushed back on the report, however, defending sweeping reforms they say have delivered major gains in accountability and public safety. (read more)

Jimmy Paul, Bongino’s chief of staff for the past nine months, has reportedly already left Washington for a new post as special agent in charge of the Baltimore field office.