There's a way to stop the outbreak.

It's in your hands.

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Turner Classic Movies celebrates actor Barbara Stanwyck Wednesdays in March 2025.

The Oscars In Memoriam segment continues to stir upset among viewers as the 2025 ceremony snubbed stars like Michelle Trachtenberg, Shannen Doherty, Tony Todd, Olivia Hussey, and more in its most recent televised presentation. But as viewers began to convey their annoyance over the snub, it must be noted that the Oscars revealed a link that would take viewers to […]

If you want to understand why last Friday’s Oval Office press conference between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky went off the rails, ignore most of what you are seeing in the corporate media. Anyone watching a video of the entire event, instead of the deceptively edited clips featured on most “news” sites, will see that neither the President nor the Vice President “ambushed” Zelensky. The first 39 minutes of the meeting were unremarkable, with President Trump attempting to be cordial despite the Ukrainian president’s cartoonish costume and insolent attitude. The legacy media have also lied about the UK’s position on Ukraine. The argument erupted after a “reporter” suggested that Trump was “too closely aligned” with Vladimir Putin to negotiate a cease fire between Russia and Ukraine. The President answered, “If I didn’t align myself with both of them, you’d never have a deal.” The Vice President added that the last administration’s belligerent rhetoric had accomplished nothing positive and contended that a better path to peace was diplomacy. This set off Zelensky, who launched into a patronizing lecture which he concluded with this disrespectful question: “What kind of diplomacy, JD, you are speaking about? What do you mean?” Vance replied as follows: I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country. [Zelensky attempts to interrupt] Mr. President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media. Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the President for trying to bring an end to this conflict. The pugnacious Ukrainian president responded to that admonition by peppering Vance with a new round of asinine questions that eventually angered President Trump enough to interrupt. Incredibly, Zelensky then began to argue with him. This upset Ukraine’s ambassador to the U.S. Oksana Markarova so profoundly that she was on the verge of tears. This went on for a few more minutes until Trump threw his hands up: “All right, I think we’ve seen enough. What do you think? This is going to be great television. I will say that.” Not long thereafter, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Zelensky that he should leave the White House. The corporate media are, of course, lying about all this. The New York Times told its readers, “The president’s verbal assault on Mr. Zelensky was a stunning display of anger and resentment toward the leader of a country that has been invaded by a larger power intent on eliminating it as an independent state.” Politico parroted this nonsense, “Ukraine’s supporters in Washington and abroad reacted with horror to President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s verbal takedown of Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday, calling it a dismaying display of American bullying.” The Atlantic echoed the narrative: Leave aside, if only for a moment, the utter boorishness with which President Donald Trump and Vice President J. D. Vance treated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House today. Also leave aside the spectacle of American leaders publicly pummeling a friend as if he were an enemy. All of the ghastliness inflicted on Zelensky today should not obscure the geopolitical reality of what just happened: The president of the United States ambushed a loyal ally. Curiously, none of these accounts include any mention of Zelensky’s meeting with a group of Democrats that occurred about an hour before his arrival at the White House. This is how Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) described this confab in a Friday morning X post: “Just finished a meeting with President Zelensky here in Washington. He confirmed that the Ukrainian people will not support a fake peace agreement where Putin gets everything he wants and there are no security arrangements for Ukraine.” In other words, this “loyal ally” never really intended to sign the mineral resources deal he was invited to the White House to close. Nonetheless, the corporate media have insisted on misrepresenting what happened Friday in the Oval office. CNN portrayed the event in the same lurid tones used by the publications noted above: “Never before has an American president verbally attacked his visitor like Trump did Zelensky, leading to an almost real-time breakdown in relations between Washington and Kyiv. Trump at one point threatened to give up on Ukraine entirely.” The legacy media have also lied about the UK’s position on Ukraine. Britain’s U.S. ambassador, Peter Mandelson, joined ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday to deliver this message to Zelensky: I think the first thing that President Zelensky can do is to make clear his commitment to the initiative that President Trump is taking. And, yes, I do think it would be a good idea if he signed the economic and commercial deal put forward by the United States … It will mean that U.S. commercial interest, U.S. individual citizens will be on the ground there and that will be an even greater, added incentive for the U.S. to protect the Ukraine in future, make sure that war does not ensue again. It Is Time to Re-think Zelensky Mandelson went on to tell the host, former Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos, “George, it is the only show in town.” Meanwhile, Zelensky has been hobnobbing with the bourgeoisie in London, where UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has allegedly “laid out a framework for a plan to end Russia’s war in Ukraine — one where Europe will lead the charge for securing peace — while still relying heavily on U.S. backing.” Zelensky also told the BBC that he’s still ready to sign the U.S. minerals deal. It is now abundantly clear that the feckless President of Ukraine is not the only comedian performing on the world stage. All of which brings us back to Friday’s Oval Office press conference and the dust-up that was obviously caused  by Volodymyr Zelensky. This is perhaps a good time to review this guy’s history. As Victor Davis Hanson reminds us, “Zelensky has postponed elections, outlawed opposition media and parties, suspended habeas corpus and walked out of negotiations when he had an even hand in Spring 2022.” This man clearly believes peace will end his brief destructive political career — and he is right. The media have consistently portrayed this character as a Churchillian statesman. It’s a lie. Time to give this clown the hook. READ MORE from David Catron: Federal Bureaucrats Launch Resistance Website The Corporate Media Rediscovers Inflation The post The Mendacious Media Coverage of Zelensky’s Stunt appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

In 2006, the brilliant geopolitical scholar Mark Steyn wrote a depressively prescient book about the imminent fate of the Western world, America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It. Steyn posited that Europe would collapse from three main causes: Islamic domination, an unsustainable welfare state, and anti-spiritual solipsism. He added that the United States would be the last nation standing as a majority united Christianist country with the will to power. And that America’s very rejection of the leftist hive mentality would draw the ire of its diminishing allies across the pond. Soon, American men won’t have to listen to the shrieking of uglified green-haired women. Neither will European men. Their women will all be in hijabs. “There may be many things wrong with the United States,” wrote Steyn. “But only a blind fool who hasn’t been paying attention for the last 20 years would hold up Europe as the alternative.” It took almost 20 years for his assessment to be proven right. First came the electoral landslide of Donald Trump and J. D. Vance. Followed by European leaders’ handwringing last month over Vance’s denouncement of their free speech censorship. But their outrage after Trump and Vance’s public dismissal of Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy by U.S. President Trump and Vice President Vance was all the evidence required. There’s no need to review what the whole world witnessed last Friday in the Oval Office, only the subsequent European reaction. Many of the leaders pledged to increase America-less financial support for Ukraine, ironically a condition the Trump Administration had been pushing for. While most of them declined to directly criticize Trump, several were less diplomatic. “The scenes from the White House are shocking,” X-posted Johann Wadephul, Deputy of the party of incoming German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “How can you stab the president of an invaded country in the back like this? Free Europe will not betray Ukraine!” “What we saw from the White House today is serious and disheartening,” said Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr. “That Trump accuses Zelenskyy of gambling with World War III is deeply unreasonable and a statement I distance myself from.” Norway went even farther last weekend, or, as some American observers declared, over the line. Norwegian petrol giant Haltbakk Bunkers threatened it would stop providing fuel to all American forces in Norway. “No fuel to Americans!” declared a company spokesman, sounding like the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld. That the American forces are in Norway protecting it from a Russian military invasion was a cold logic lost on the refusers. Although not on the wiser Oslo government officials. On Sunday, Defense Minister Tore Sandvik affirmed that Norway will continue supplying U.S. Navy ships with fuel, taking a side shot at Haltbakk Bunkers. “We have seen reports raising concerns about support for U.S. Navy vessels in Norway,” said Sandvik. “This is not in line with the Norwegian government’s policy.” It might have been, were someone other than Donald Trump occupying the White House. The only reason Europe was able to indulge its welfare fantasies is because previous U.S. presidents continued to defend it. And this was long after one of them, Ronald Reagan, helped to free half the continent by vanquishing the enslaver. Since then, many of the western European countries have embraced the Marxist policies he crushed, including speech repression and political tyranny. Vice President Vance last month also condemned the cancellation of the Romanian election last December because the conservative candidate was about to win. The candidate, Calin Georgescu, was subsequently detained by police and is facing criminal charges, a treatment similar to that of the current American President. Because Europe is dying, as Mark Steyn noted, of self-inflicted wounds. His three causes are already taking their toll. Take the first one, Muslim dominance. While the continent’s white birth rate has stalled, Muslim reproduction is expected to increase from 26 million in 2016 to 36 million in 2050. This doesn’t factor in the millions now pouring undeterred into Great Britain, France, Germany, and other countries. Or the fact that the new immigrants are hostile to the Western traditions they’re replacing. Yet when people in the UK voted to stop the inflow, the Conservative government continued it.  The current Labour government has only increased the number of immigrants. Worse, the police now harass citizens for protesting not only the Islamists but such leftist sacred cows as abortion, or even for praying for the unborn. Vance slammed that too. America was on an equally suicidal course under Joe Biden. Biden and Kamala Harris insisted they needed a Congressional bill to reduce the illegal crossings. Trump promised to close the southern border without one. Last week, single-day border apprehensions hit a 15-year low. Furthermore, as Steyn predicted, America is rejecting the leftist ideologies that have doomed Europe, such as feminism. A new analysis by the Institute of Family Studies found that only 12 percent of liberal women age 18-40 said they were satisfied with life. In contrast, 37 percent of conservative women said they were. Soon, American men won’t have to listen to the shrieking of uglified green-haired women. Neither will European men. Their women will all be in hijabs. READ MORE from Lou Aguilar: The End of Bond and Britain A Single Word Induced My Hollywood Flashback The post America Alone, and We Can Handle It appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

After the White House shouting contest on Friday, U.S. support for Ukraine may be at an end. No one can be happy about that except Vladimir Putin. A little background before we get to the shouting. Before he became vice president, J.D. Vance led Senate opposition to any further aid to Ukraine. That may have led to Trump choosing him as his running mate. We have a national security interest in Ukraine, but not a vital one that would compel us to risk American lives there. Last week both French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer visited with President Trump. Each offered to station troops in Ukraine as part of a peace deal. (Putin said he wouldn’t accept any foreign troops there.) These were backdoor offers to make Ukraine a de facto NATO member. Any attack on French or UK forces in Ukraine would be enough for them to invoke Article 5 of the NATO Treaty which requires all NATO members to defend each other. Last week Trump’s ambassador voted at the UN with Russia and China on a Ukraine resolution on the third anniversary of the Russian war against Ukraine. The resolution condemned Russian aggression. Why would Trump not support Ukraine’s resolution? Only because it didn’t fit with his rhetoric. Over the past two weeks, Trump had accused Zelensky of being a dictator for failing to hold elections since Russia started the war and hinted that Ukraine caused the war. (The Ukrainian constitution provides for suspension of elections in time of war when martial law is declared as it has been.) Vance said that he — and, apparently, Trump — believe that Putin would negotiate in good faith for a truce. That is absurd. Putin’s KGB past, his personal record and his entire genetic makeup prevent him from negotiating in good faith. Trump had adopted Putin’s talking points. That was the setup for the Friday meeting. When Ukrainian President Zelensky entered the White House on Friday, there was the expectation that he and Trump would sign an agreement enabling the U.S. to mine and export Ukraine’s wealth of rare earth metals which are critical to many technologies from cell phones to satellites. That was the reason things went awry. Zelensky had said, for weeks, that he wanted U.S. security guarantees as part of the deal on minerals. It was another back-door attempt at de facto NATO membership. When he was presented with a deal to sign, it contained no U.S. security guarantees. Taking questions from reporters, Vance said he had to respond to questions about negotiations with Russia without Ukraine. (Zelensky had previously said that Ukraine would not be bound by any agreement made in its absence.) Vance cut in to say, “I have to respond. What makes America a good country is America’s engaging in diplomacy. That’s what President Trump is doing.” Zelensky replied, laying out Putin’s war of aggression that goes back to 2014, saying nobody stopped Putin in that period which included Trump’s first term. According to the Wall Street Journal, that’s when things fell apart. Vance, visibly angry, said, “It’s disrespectful to come to the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the media.” Vance added, “Have you said thank you once?” At that point, Zelensky accused Vance of shouting and everything fell apart. Trump interjected, saying, “You’re in no position to dictate to us what we’re going to feel.” Trump later accused Zelensky of “gambling with World War III.” No agreement for U.S. mining of Ukraine’s rare earth metals was signed because of Zelensky’s demand for U.S. security guarantees. After the meeting, which lasted about 50 minutes, Trump said, “I think we’ve seen enough,” signaling the meeting’s end. Zelensky was then essentially thrown out of the White House. A calmer, less impatient Trump could have saved the meeting and calmed both Vance and Zelensky. But he didn’t. All of this gave Putin more hope than he should have. In Russia, double-digit inflation is the norm. Interest rates exceed twenty percent and Russia is having enormous problems replacing the tanks and armored vehicles that have been lost to weapon systems such as the U.S.-made Javelin missile. Oleg Vyugin, a former deputy head of Russia’s central bank, said that Putin may have to choose between cutting military spending or rampant inflation. The Friday meeting may have made that choice for him. It’s questionable whether Putin can sustain his war much longer but in the aftermath of the Friday shouting contest Putin must have greater hope. Trump said about a week ago that the peace deal would have to be made quickly or not at all. It appears the “not at all” idea will be the result. Will Trump end all U.S. support for Ukraine? At this point we don’t know. Like him or not, Zelensky is Ukraine’s elected president. Whether Trump or Vance like Zelensky or not and whether Trump really trusts Putin, we risk Putin’s conquest of Ukraine which would endanger the NATO nations. As this column has often said, putting U.S. troops into Ukraine would be an enormous mistake. We have a national security interest in Ukraine, but not a vital one that would compel us to risk American lives there. Our only interest is in thwarting Putin’s conquest of Ukraine. By demanding U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine, Zelensky overplayed his hand. Trump is an impatient man. He said that the Russian war in Ukraine would be solved between his election and inauguration. He also said that he could bring an end to the war in 24 hours. None of that happened. Now the president has to decide whether we will continue to support Ukraine. For Trump, it may be a bitter choice but only one outcome is reasonable: to continue support for Ukraine, with or without Zelensky in power. READ MORE from Jed Babbin: Hamas Does Evil, But They Control Israel’s Options Another Plan for the Future of Gaza The post Is US Support for Ukraine Over? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.