Le Journal

"Let's pray we can do better than that," the comedian adds The post Jimmy Kimmel’s Monologue Interrupted by Fan Urging Presidential Run: ‘Uh, Thank You’ | Video appeared first on TheWrap.

Sundance: Kubota Wladyka's third feature follows a woman getting her groove back after her husband's sudden death The post ‘Ha-Chan, Shake Your Booty!’ Review: Rinko Kinkuchi and a Singular Tone Keep Quirky Dramedy on Beat appeared first on TheWrap.

Demographics Deployed For Political Control Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times, People are talking ever more about the possibility of civil war in the United States. The scenes on the streets do not look good, to be sure. That said, we are nowhere near this point and certainly don’t have to be. The trigger for the unfolding of events speaks to a tactic of control that unleashes resistance (and counterresistence) like no other. If this issue is resolved in peace and within the rule of law, normalcy can be restored. Let’s review some of the deeper history. At the height of the Roman Empire, when conquering ever more territory was regarded as regime triumph, a strategy for control emerged that would long persist into the modern age. The military would urge Romanization of the conquered provinces. The aristocracy would flood provinces and towns, bringing language and technology and administrative leadership. Roman citizens, often veterans of these wars, were settled with land grants and created loyal Roman outposts. Many modern European cities trace origins to these settlements. The tactic assured regional loyalty, lessened local resistance, and helped blunt the efficacy of independence movements. The Spanish Empire took a similar approach in the Americas. Massive settler migration from Iberia led to the demographic replacement of indigenous populations. Spanish was imposed as the dominant language. Indigenous tongues were suppressed. Localized religions mutated to match priorities of the imperial faith. So it was in the Soviet Union. After the archives opened following the fall of communism, scholars found proof of what they had long suspected. Hundreds of thousands of ethnic Russians were directed to migrate to the Baltic states following the 1940 annexation. The priorities were the same as the above examples: spread the Russian language, intermarry, and build and administer infrastructure. This weakened national identities and secured Russian holdings. All of these are examples of what is called settler colonialism. It’s a tactic, often a brutal one because it touches the lives, languages, educations, and religion of everyone. It can often be pitiless toward the settled traditions that are being displaced. The USA was born as an experiment in the same way via the British Empire. The English Court and its industrial partners had every intention of using the colonies for the empire’s own purposes, restricting trade and taxing its residents. It did not go so well. After 150 years of experience with freedom in the colonies, Americans developed a sense of independent identity that led to a war of independence that the colonies won. It is true that the United States began as a nation of immigrants and has always been a welcoming country. The early Founding documents left the issue of citizenship to the states because people were citizens of their states. Following a horrible Civil War, the federal government took charge of determining citizenship, alongside a peculiar model of earning the right to vote. All people born within its borders were automatically granted citizenship rights. Immigration became a source of controversy in the late 19th century with floods of new asylum seekers from Russia, Italy, Ireland, and elsewhere, thus taxing infrastructure and giving rise to ethnic and religious tensions. The immigration acts of 1921 and 1924 sought to settle those problems with a strong legal preference for European migration. Forty years later, this prioritization was deemed discriminatory. The immigration act of 1965 reversed priorities and opened up the country to a wider range of newly arriving residents to become citizens. Even with this change, the subject of immigration was regarded as a manageable domestic policy dispute, with people on all sides favoring this or that. The debates concerned economics, religion, and the issue of acculturation. What was not in question was the idea of using demographics for purposes…

Putin Puts A Price Tag On Greenland, Appears To Relish NATO Turning On Itself "This certainly does not concern us," Russian President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday at a moment it seems the entirety of the West's attention is fixated on President Trump's designs on Greenland. "I think they will sort it out among themselves." Putin acknowledged the US and Denmark must ultimately settle the question, but he interestingly hinted his sympathies could be with the US position, given he offered up as a model for resolving the dispute America's historic acquirement of Alaska. He also offered up some quick math. via econlib.org He distanced himself from the inter-NATO spat and standoff, presenting some mediation-type advice at a meeting of the National Security Council in Moscow, which he chaired. Putin explained that Russia has experience in selling Arctic territories to the United States, recalling that the Russian Empire sold the sprawling and resource-rich Alaska peninsula for $7.2 million in 1863. "At today's prices, taking into account inflation over the decades, this sum is equivalent to about $158 million," Putin said. He then said that given Greenland is a bit bigger than Alaska, a similar deal would have seen Greenland priced at roughly $200 million to $250 million. Factoring in the relative value of gold at the time, he described that the true valuation could be pushed up to "probably about $1 billion." And he concluded, "Well, I think the United States can afford such a sum." On the politics of it, while stressing Moscow has no interest in entering this purely Western dispute, he said, "Incidentally, Denmark has always treated Greenland as a colony and has been quite harsh, if not ​cruel, towards it. But that is a different matter altogether, and hardly anyone is interested ‌in it now." This well-timed swipe at Denmark came in the context of Moscow having long been miffed at the tiny Scandinavian country for its outsized role in supporting Ukraine - even hosting a pilot program and sending fighter jets. The Russian leader also made passing reference to acquirement of the US Virgin Islands: He added that Denmark had sold the U.S. Virgin Islands to Washington in 1917 in exchange for recognizing its ownership of Greenland, and that Russia itself offloaded Alaska to the U.S. in 1867. As for Greenland, Washington and NATO leadership (specifically Mark Rutte) have expressed deep concern over supposed Russian and Chinese inroads in the Arctic region just off the large far northern island. Putin does math: Regarding Greenland… well, this doesn’t concern us at all—what happens with Greenland. But we do have experience in resolving similar issues with the United States in the 19th century, I believe in 1867. As we know, Russia sold Alaska, and the United States… pic.twitter.com/BF8sHjYmwg — Clash Report (@clashreport) January 21, 2026 But Russia is more likely enjoying this display of disunity within the alliance. Even Reuters has noted, "Moscow has watched ‌with glee as US President Donald Trump's drive to acquire Greenland has widened Washington's split with Europe, even though his moves ‌could have ramifications for Russia, which already has a strong Arctic presence." Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 14:40