EU and Canada Sign Security Pact as Carney Pivots From US

 

The European Union and Canada have signed a security partnership that moves them closer to cooperation on military purchases, as Prime Minister Mark Carney aims to reduce his country’s dependence on the US for defense.

Carney and EU leaders described the move as a first step toward participation in the 27-member bloc’s €150 billion ($173 billion) joint-purchase loan pool dubbed Security Action for Europe (SAFE), part of its proposed €800 billion ReArm Europe initiative. Access to SAFE still has to be negotiated and requires purchase-by-purchase agreements led by European partners.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-23/eu-and-canada-sign-security-pact-as-carney-pivots-from-us

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/commentary-oil-isnt-the-economic-weapon-it-used-to-be-230718895.html

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-nato-summit-push-historic-5-spending-goal-amid-global-conflicts

Eyes On Beijing's Annual Reshuffle Of Military Chiefs Amid Signs Of Xi's Waning Power

 by Alex Wu via The Epoch Times,

As infighting within the top echelons of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intensifies, many China watchers are wondering if Chinese leader Xi Jinping is still in power and really in control, especially of the military.

According to long-standing CCP practice, a group of generals are promoted before Army Day on Aug. 1 every year. Since many generals were reported to have been taken down or investigated in an alleged military purge over the last year, whether Xi will promote any generals or announce new appointments before Aug. 1 has attracted attention as an indication of whether he’s still in control of the military.

Xu Qiliang, former vice chairman of the CCP’s Central Military Commission, the highest military leadership body of the communist regime, suddenly passed away on June 2, making him the latest casualty following a string of top CCP military officials who have encountered misfortunes, including sudden death, arrest, or simply disappearing.

Meanwhile, He Weidong, one of two vice chairmen of the Central Military Commission, whose status in the military is second only to the other vice chairman, Zhang Youxia, disappeared from the public eye on March 11 after the closing ceremony of the third session of the National People’s Congress. He is regarded as one of Xi’s most trusted men. There have been rumors coming out of Beijing that He was under investigation.

With this, some observers have speculated that Zhang is now in charge of the CCP’s military and that he stripped Xi’s power last year.

Since two other members of the Central Military Commission—Li Shangfu and Miao Hua—were successively brought down in the two years prior, if He’s absence is officially confirmed, the number of members of the Central Military Commission will drop from seven to four.

Who will fill these top military positions and who will replace the generals who have been pushed out is a focus for this year’s Army Day.

Generals in Prison Enough to Form a Military Company

In the past 13 years since Xi became CCP leader, he has launched waves of “anti-corruption” campaigns to purge his political enemies, many of whom were in the military, to consolidate his power.

“So much resentment has been accumulating for 13 years,” Su Tzu-yun, researcher and director of Division of Defense Strategy and Resources at Taiwan’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told the Chinese language Epoch Times on June 16. “The CCP’s internal struggle in the name of anti-corruption is more dangerous than a battlefield.”

But within one year from 2023 to 2024, the Chinese regime began to see purges, with 12 top PLA (People’s Liberation Army) officials removed in the name of “anti-corruption;” including Li Shangfu and Wei Fenghe who were both former ministers of defense, three rocket force commanders, and one air force commander, and others.

In 2024, overseas Chinese media re-posted a now-deleted X post by China observer “Li Jun” listing the names and ranks of 101 top CCP military leaders who were put in jail. Li said there were enough individuals to form a military company, with 97 being at “general-level” alongside four more “colonel-level” cadres.

Su noted that all the senior military officials purged over the last year were previously promoted to their position by Xi.

“At present, it seems that only Zhang Youxia has the power to carry out the purge, and Xi Jinping may have become a rubber stamp, otherwise, not all of them would be people from Xi’s faction,” he said.

U.S.-based China affairs observer Tang Jingyuan shares the same assessment. He told the Epoch Times on June 16 that “not only this wave of the large-scale purge is almost entirely aimed at Xi Jinping’s cronies ... those replacements are all people from Zhang Youxia’s faction,” while some positions after the purge remain vacant.

“This means there might have been a huge replacement and transfer of power in the CCP’s military,” Tang said. “Once control over the military is transferred, it means that the party leader’s power base has collapsed. So now, Xi Jinping may still be the top leader in name, but in fact, he has lost control of the highest power of the CCP.”

Shen Ming-shih, director of the Division of National Security Research at Taiwan’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told The Epoch Times on June 16 that such speculation is difficult to confirm as there is no public information about the power struggles within the CCP, and no way to get official clarification or proof of any internal strife either.

Soldiers of the People's Liberation Army are seen before a giant screen as Chinese leader Xi Jinping speaks at the military parade marking the 70th founding anniversary of the regime in Beijing on Oct. 1, 2019. Jason Lee/Reuters

“It’s expressed entirely through vague information or vague language, and even deliberately uses such vague language to indicate who is in power or who has stepped down. It’s harder for the outside world to read these signs.”

Possible Personnel Changes by Army Day

U.S.-based China affairs commentator Chen Pokong told The Epoch Times that this year’s Army Day will be a major point to observe who will be promoted in the military and which faction they belong to.

“If they really want to add new members to the Central Military Commission on the Aug. 1 Army Day, they must be confirmed by the Fourth Plenary Session of the CCP’s Central Committee, which is definitely a big fight between the Xi faction and the anti-Xi faction.”

If new members are added, it will also show which faction has the upper hand in the CCP’s infighting, Chen said.

Shen said it remains unclear which exact dates the Fourth Plenary Session of the Central Committee will be held amid the rumors of a power struggle.

“If it is held before the end of June, the CCP’s general secretary or the Central Military Commission will have made the personnel arrangement to promote a group of generals before the Aug. 1 Army Day,” he said.

Insiders close to the regime’s top circle have leaked two possible dates for the top CCP political meeting. Well-known independent current affairs commentator Cai Shenqun cited a source within the regime saying that the Fourth Plenary Session will be held Aug. 27 to Aug. 30.

Meanwhile, Australia-based current affairs commentator Jiang Wangzheng has said that according to his source in China, the top meeting will be held on Oct. 13 to Oct. 16.

Chen said that the CCP’s personnel arrangements are opaque and that it has been very difficult for the various factions to reach an agreement.

“The internal struggles of the CCP’s top leaders may be far more fierce than the outside world imagines, and the CCP and its military are in a precarious state,” he said.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/all-eyes-beijings-annual-reshuffle-military-chiefs-amid-signs-xis-waning-power

Chicago Tribune gives NYC stark warning on electing a socialist mayor

 The Chicago Tribune issued a grim warning to New Yorkers about electing a socialist mayoral candidate like Zohran Mamdani in a bombshell op-ed Monday, the day before the Empire State’s primary elections.

The paper’s editorial board paints a bleak image of Mamdani, the 33-year-old Democratic socialist Queens assemblyman who leapfrogged longtime frontrunner, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, in a stunning new poll released earlier in the day.

“A familiar dilemma: a moderate, business-friendly Democrat versus a democratic socialist. New Yorkers, take it from Chicago — we’ve seen this movie before, and the ending isn’t pretty,” the board of one of the last remaining big-city daily newspapers cautioned.

5

The paper’s editorial board paints a bleak image of Mamdani, the 33-year-old Democratic socialist Queens assemblyman.Paul Martinka

The Tribune likened Mamdani’s buzz-worthy campaign, which has garnered a historic amount of grassroots support, to that of embattled progressive Windy City Mayor Brandon Johnson, whose took office in 2023.

“Johnson’s approval rating cratered in his second year — a reflection of how quickly progressive promises collapsed under the weight of governance and Chicago’s financial reality,” the paper wrote. “What sounded good in theory has translated into dysfunction, driven by fiscal missteps and political inexperience.

5

The Tribune likened Mamdani’s buzz-worthy campaign, which has garnered a historic amount of grassroots support.NurPhoto via Getty Images

“Johnson is one of the most progressive mayors in the U.S., but Mamdani, inarguably, is yet more radical,” it continued.

The outlet pointed out that many of Mamdani’s ideas — such as rent freezes, city-operated supermarkets and free transit — are “shared (at least in principle) by Mayor Brandon Johnson, and many of them are popular in blue cities.”

5

“Johnson is one of the most progressive mayors in the U.S., but Mamdani, inarguably, is yet more radical,” it continued.LP Media

But was quick to argue that “experience has taught us here that far-left candidates do not make for effective or popular municipal executives in today’s stressful economy.”

The ed-board drew parallels between Mamdani’s freebie-filled platform, which he plans to fund with tax hikes to bring in roughly $10 billion annually, to that of Johnson’s similarly overzealous tax proposal.

“Johnson tried to float a $300 million tax hike — and failed. He tried to pass a ‘mansion tax’ that would’ve hiked the real estate transfer tax — and failed,” the Tribune highlighted.

5

The ed-board drew parallels between Mamdani’s freebie-filled platform to that of Johnson’s similarly overzealous tax proposal.Chicago Tribune

The Tribune was the latest to pile on to the recent wave of news outlets denouncing the Queens pol’s ambitious run.

The paper echoed sentiments shared by myriad New York publications, including The Post, Daily News and New York Times — who have discouraged voters from ranking the socialist candidate, whose too-good-to-be-true platform is just that, they say.

A through line in the anti-endorsements of the two-term Assemblyman is his lack of experience and the unrealistic nature of his policies.

5

The Tribune was the latest to pile on to the recent wave of news outlets denouncing the Queens pol’s ambitious run.LP Media

“If New Yorkers are frustrated with Mayor Eric Adams, they should be careful not to trade him for someone who might preside over a city that is less competitive and less financially secure.

“Trust us — we’re living that reality.”

The Tribune’s ominous warning comes just one day before Tuesday’s primary election.

Polls across the five boroughs will be open from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/23/us-news/chicago-tribune-gives-nyc-stark-warning-on-electing-socialist-mayor-like-zohran-mamdani/

FICO announces first-ever credit scoring models to incorporate buy now, pay later data

FICO said on Monday that it is going to incorporate buy now, pay later (BNPL) data into credit scores as the payment method surges in popularity.


The FICO Score 10 BNPL and FICO Score 10 T BNPL will be the first credit scores from a leading credit scoring provider to incorporate this data. FICO said the scores represent a "significant advancement in credit scoring, accounting for the growing importance" of such loans in the U.S. credit ecosystem.

"Buy Now, Pay Later loans are playing an increasingly important role in consumers’ financial lives," Julie May, vice president of B2B Scores at FICO, said. By expanding its FICO Score 10 Suite with these new models, May said the company is "enabling lenders to more accurately evaluate credit readiness, especially for consumers whose first credit experience is through BNPL products."


FICO said it utilized input from the largest lenders in the U.S. and that there was a broad consensus that integrating BNPL data into credit scoring "is a critical advancement that allows lenders to make more informed, accurate decisions while responsibly expanding credit access."

FICO said these scores will provide lenders with greater visibility into consumers’ repayment behaviors and will enable a more comprehensive view of their credit readiness.

Lending services such as Afterpay, Klarna, Affirm and PayPal have risen to prominence as cash-strapped consumers looked to stretch their wallets as they contend with persisting inflation, high interest rates and student loan payments, which resumed in October 2023 after a pause due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The services allow consumers to make purchases and pay for them in installments, often with no interest or fees. However, interest is tacked on to certain plans, and consumers can get hit with a late fee if they don't have adequate funds in their account to cover the payments.

Traditionally, they have been utilized for big-ticket items. However, these buy now, pay later financing options have become so popular in the current economic environment, that a growing number of consumers are even leveraging them to pay for necessities like food.


Data from an April LendingTree report shows that 25% of such users have used the service to buy groceries, up from 14% a year ago.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/buy-now-pay-later-loans-now-impact-americans-credit-scores

Americans Shouldn’t Have to Subsidize Their Own Mistreatment

By J.B. Shurk

There is plenty of evidence that taxpayer dollars are funding the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles and elsewhere.  Here’s how that happens: domestic agitators set up “non-profits” and other kinds of “non-governmental organizations” with deceptively innocuous names.  They apply for monetary grants from state and federal agencies.  Government agencies use their discretion to award outside groups.  These groups then pay rioters to cause mayhem on the streets.  Voila!  Government-funded pop-up revolutions are ready to go!

This isn’t anything new.  Politicians have been diverting taxpayer funds to their favorite “public policy” groups for so long that a large professional class now exists whose entire business model consists of establishing new “foundations,” bilking government agencies of fresh taxpayer dollars, filling their own bank accounts, and occasionally doing the bidding of the government bureaucrats responsible for doling out the “free” money.  

Have you ever wondered why so many government-adjacent “influencers” who show up on cable news are the “president,” “founder,” or “CEO” of organizations with serious-sounding names whose activities sound peculiarly vague?  Most of those empty suits with fancy titles are the heads of recently made-up entities that specialize in leeching off the taxpayer.  Whenever their prefabricated organizations miss out on easy government money, they simply create new ones and play the game again.  

These government-funded third parties produce nothing of value.  Their names suggest that they pursue charitable missions, but they help only themselves.  They are parasites that suck taxpayer wealth from working families, and if their own “work” impacts a local community at all, it is usually in the form of organized “protests” that block traffic, shut down businesses, and prevent Americans from getting to actual jobs.  They are government-subsidized agents of chaos.

Consider how insane this arrangement is.  In Los Angeles alone, dozens of law enforcement officers have been injured during the last two weeks of riots.  Shops have been vandalized and looted.  Citizens are effectively blackmailed to support anti-ICE terrorists or suffer serious consequences.  As the famous “Libs of TikTok” social media account has repeatedly pointed out, “Democrats are funding the riots and destruction of our cities.”  While speaking in Los Angeles, VP Vance noted that California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass “actively encouraged illegal migration” and then put American citizens in harm’s way by fanning the flames of the anti-ICE riots.

Let’s break this down.  Taxpayers fork over money to pay the government salaries of Newsom and Bass.  They pay for a police force and provide that force with the vehicles and equipment necessary to defend the civilian population.  They pay for public infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, and pay for trash removal and sanitation crews to keep their cities clean.  

However, they also pay the agitators — who receive taxpayer grants — to destroy city parks, vandalize businesses, graffiti streets, and attack residents.  They pay for Newsom, Bass, and other Democrat blowhards to make speeches that defend the actions of rioters and condemn the actions of law enforcement officers.  They pay for damaged police vehicles and equipment and cover overtime expenses.  They pay for the hospital bills of injured officers.  They pay to repair broken windows, busted concrete, and burnt-out buildings.  They pay in the form of higher insurance premiums.  They pay in lost time and money while government-subsidized domestic terrorists block traffic and threaten drivers.  They pay by diverting police resources away from other assignments that might prevent or solve crimes.  Most seriously of all, taxpayers pay big time if they or their loved ones are hurt or killed during these government-financed, Democrat-sponsored riots. 

How does it make sense to pay for government officials who cost taxpayers even more money?  It seems more reasonable to cut the whole government off and start paying for private services.  Better to be the mayor, policeman, and governor of your own home than to pay for Democrats to send thieves, arsonists, and violent barbarians into your community.  

At the very least, Democrat politicians who give aid and comfort to criminals should be held legally liable for the costs of those criminals’ destructive actions.  When Democrat politicians and Democrat-funded groups give aid and comfort to foreign soldiers and terrorists, they should be charged and tried for treason against citizens of the United States.  Why should American taxpayers be expected to fund a foreign invasion?  Why should Democrat politicians responsible for opening the nation’s gates to foreign invaders not be branded traitors?  This is not Mexico, Venezuela, Yemen, Somalia, or China.  Government officials who act as foreign agents and against the interests of American citizens are domestic saboteurs and enemies of the United States.

Who profits from this government-subsidized treachery?  

As regular commenter Lydia points out, Democrat politicians profit greatly.  Because U.S. congressional and Electoral College representation depends upon census calculations that include non-citizen residents and illegal immigrants, Democrat politicians profit by encouraging the flow of millions of foreign nationals into their jurisdictions.  The more illegal aliens that California has, the more members of Congress California sends to D.C. and the greater California’s influence is on presidential elections.  

California officials who flagrantly break U.S. immigration laws are rewarded with more power and taxpayer money.  In any other line of work, such ongoing criminal conspiracies would be prosecuted as straight-up Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) cases.  Instead, Democrat politicians get new districts, and Democrat-aligned NGOs get new grants to bankroll new crimes.  

Businesses that are willing to break federal and state laws also profit from government-sponsored riots in support of illegal immigration.  As commenter Mark Anderson notes, businesses save a lot of money when they can ignore minimum wage laws, workers’ compensation requirements, social security obligations, Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations, and mandated medical expenses.  When companies publicly support anti-ICE riots, they are cynically supporting their supply of cheap labor and the unregulated system that allows them to exploit workers while profiting from systemic violations of employment law.

What do American citizens get in return for all this government-subsidized, Democrat-sponsored lawbreaking?  As commenter Eric explains, Americans suffer from downward pressure on their wages, more crime, larger prison populations, housing inflation, increased homelessness, more crowded public school classrooms, more uninsured motorists driving without licenses, more dangerous highways, greater demand upon emergency services, packed emergency rooms, higher healthcare costs, greater risk of terrorist attacks, and an accelerating number of “anchor” babies providing a hook for extended families of foreign nationals who don’t always acclimate well to American culture and who often don’t speak any English.

What else do American citizens get?  They get to pay for illegal aliens’ attorneys!  That’s right!  Democrats are so convinced that this is a winning policy issue that New York Governor Kathy Hochul even held a press conference promising to use taxpayer dollars to help illegal immigrants fight their own deportations.  So once again taxpayers are forking over money to government officials in order to help Democrats defend foreign nationals who are actively breaking our laws! 

So let’s get this straight.  State and federal governments steal money from hard-working Americans.  Government bureaucrats then reroute that money into the bank accounts of privileged professionals running NGOs.  Some NGOs aid and abet illegal immigration into the United States.  Other NGOs finance riots and domestic terrorism in defense of illegal immigration.  The more successful that this ongoing criminal enterprise is, the more that American citizens suffer.  But rather than help Americans suffering from the harms of illegal immigration, Democrat-controlled governments are using taxpayer dollars to pay for illegal aliens’ lawyers.  

Maybe Americans should keep their money, prosecute the NGOs, and exile the politicians to the foreign countries they really represent.  Why should taxpayers have to fund a government that hates them?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/06/americans_shouldn_t_have_to_subsidize_their_own_mistreatment.html