Solerina

Our media fixation with Keir Starmer is becoming a literal drag on the country now. As I write this, I can already see the replies forming below, accusing me of being a Labour shill etc. but, believe it or not, I am not. Maybe it's worth setting this out — I have no party affiliation. None. I'm not 'on the right' … but that's as far as it goes. There are policies and people that I admire across the Lib Dems, Greens and Labour. Conversely, there are policies and people I am vehemently against within each of those parties as well. There are some decent Conservatives left but fewer and fewer in frontline politics and I can have excellent discussions with those moderate Tories that remain. Where my line in the sand is drawn though, as I'm sure you're all aware, is the far-right. Reform UK and Restore Britain. I have no common ground with their populism — I see through the propaganda. This doesn't mean that I think every member of Reform UK is a bad person, far from it, but I cannot rationalise their top-line bravado into credible politics. So, with all that being said, I think the witch-hunt of Keir Starmer is distracting the public from some far more serious crises. Since the very day Starmer took office, there has been an onslaught from the media; desperation to try and topple him and his principal team. This played out successfully with Angela Rayner, and they have been vicious and relentless pursuing Rachel Reeves. I listened to Paul Brand on LBC at the weekend continuously comparing Starmer to Boris Johnson in terms of sleaze. Have we collectively lost our minds? There is no other Prime Minister in history that compares to Johnson for scandal. The elephant in the room — Peter Mandelson. But is it really an elephant still? Clearly, Starmer should never have brought the Prince of Darkness into his team, that was a madness and severe failing of judgement. One for which he has accepted responsibility and apologised on multiple occasions. The vetting process appears to be, pretty much, a non-story, despite what Dan Hodges and GB News are shovelling out. So … we should be moving on. Shouldn't we? Kemi Badenoch and her famously robust judgement felt not yesterday, and spent more of her diminishing political currency by pushing Starmer with six questions at PMQs on the subject. She was met with a well briefed lawyer, that, in all honesty, made her look a bit silly for continuing her defeated line of questioning. While this continues to dominate the headlines, other far more crucial issues are being missed — we're going to run low on fuel soon, the cost of living is about to skyrocket, holidays will be cancelled imminently. But mainly ... the cost of living is about to skyrocket. We saw in yesterday's inflation rise that food is already moving upward, if Trump's ludicrous war in Iran continues, then we're all going to suffer the consequences. Surely, this is a far more pressing matter? One in which the government should be fully engaged in order to help protect the public — it's number one duty. It is very telling that Reform UK are spending very little time on the Starmer issue. They sent Lee Anderson out to raise this issue, for goodness’ sake. LEE ANDERSON. Farage is hyper focused on the local elections, safe in the knowledge that the media is obsessing over Keir Starmer, once again. He's making hay while the S*n shines on Labour. Jeez! This went on a bit, sorry, but it feels critical to me. We are being led around by the nose by the legacy media outlets. They smell blood in the water, but I really don't think the story is there. Not yet. And while the sharks circle, Reform UK are flying under the radar, ready to swoop on the local elections [sorry for the weird mixed metaphors — it's early!]. Have a lovely sunny day. 🌞

Yes! A couple of paws full of fellas joined our ranks during the past week. It's not the age. It's the attitude.

Deadlock over. The EU just cleared the way for the €90-billion-loan for Ukraine and the 20th sanctions package. Russia’s war economy is under growing strain, while Ukraine is getting a major boost. We will provide Ukraine what it needs to hold its ground, until Putin understands his war leads nowhere.

I have three monitors on my desk. The left one shows the order book. The middle one shows Truth Social. The right one shows the investigation queue. On April 21st, the left screen moved first. I am a Senior Surveillance Analyst at a commodities exchange. I have held this position for nineteen years. My job is to monitor trading activity for suspicious patterns and generate compliance reports. I am employee of the quarter. I have a mug. At 19:54 GMT on April 21st, someone placed 4,260 sell orders on Brent crude futures. They did this during post-settlement. The window after the market closes when daily volume is typically in the dozens. Sometimes single digits. Sometimes I watch the screen and nothing happens for forty minutes and I think about whether my daughter is happy. On April 21st, someone placed $430 million in directional bets in 120 seconds during that window. One hundred and twenty seconds. I timed it on my watch because the system clock rounds to the nearest minute and I have found, in nineteen years, that precision matters to no one but me. At 20:10 GMT, the President posted on Truth Social that he was extending the Iran ceasefire. Brent dropped from $100.91 to $96.83. I flagged the trade. I flag a lot of trades. I want to tell you what happens to my flags. My flags go into a system called TRACE. Trade Review and Compliance Evaluation. I did not name it. The system generates a report. The report goes to a committee. The committee has a name I am not allowed to share but I can tell you it meets quarterly and the conference room has a credenza with bottled water that is sparkling because someone once put still water in the room and a managing director sent an email about it that was longer than most of my surveillance reports. The committee reviews my flags. The committee has reviewed all of my flags. Here is the complete record of actions taken on my flags in 2026: Reviewed. That's it. "Reviewed" is a status. In compliance, a status is the absence of an action that has been given a name so it looks like one. Let me show you my flags. March 9th. Someone bet millions on oil falling at 18:29 GMT. Forty-seven minutes later, a CBS reporter posted that the President said the Iran war was "very complete, pretty much." Oil dropped 25%. Forty-seven minutes. I flagged it. March 23rd. Someone sold 5,100 lots of Brent and WTI crude futures between 10:49 and 10:50 GMT. Fourteen minutes later, the President posted on Truth Social about a "COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESOLUTION" to hostilities. Oil dropped 11%. Over 13,000 contracts traded in sixty seconds after the post. Fourteen minutes. I flagged it. April 7th. Someone established a $950 million short position in oil futures at 19:45 GMT. Three hours later, the President declared a two-week ceasefire. Nine hundred and fifty million dollars. I flagged it. April 17th. Someone placed $760 million in bearish bets twenty minutes before Iran's foreign minister confirmed the Strait of Hormuz would reopen. Seven hundred and sixty million. I flagged it. April 21st. The $430 million. Fifteen minutes. I flagged it. That is $2.1 billion in directional oil bets in April alone. Every one of them landed on the correct side of a presidential announcement. Every one of them was placed in a window so narrow you could measure it in bathroom breaks. I flagged every single one. The CFTC chair told a Congressional committee that his organization has "zero tolerance" for fraud and insider trading. I wrote that quote on a Post-it note and stuck it to my right monitor. The one that shows the investigation queue. The investigation queue has not moved since March. Zero tolerance. Zero staff. Zero budget. Zero prosecutions under the STOCK Act since it was signed in 2012. Fourteen years. The law has existed for fourteen years and has been enforced zero times. In compliance, we call that a compliance rate of one hundred percent. No cases filed means no cases lost. You cannot fail an audit you never conduct. We call that excellence. Last month the White House sent an internal email to staff. I was not on the distribution list but I have read reporting on it and I need you to sit with what I am about to say. The email instructed White House staff not to use insider information to place bets on prediction markets. The White House had to send a memo telling its own employees not to insider-trade. I want you to read that sentence again. Not because the instruction was unclear. Because the instruction was necessary. Because someone in the building looked at the same pattern I have been flagging for months on my three monitors and decided the appropriate response was an email. The President's son sits on the advisory board of Kalshi. He is an investor in Polymarket. Both are prediction markets. Both saw accounts created days before U.S. military action. One account. I cannot stop thinking about this account. It was called "Burdensome-Mix." It was created in December. On January 2nd, it placed $32,500 on Venezuela's president being removed from power. On January 3rd, Maduro was seized by U.S. special forces. Burdensome-Mix collected $436,000. Then it changed its username. Then it disappeared. One account is a coincidence. But there were six. Six accounts were created on Polymarket in February. All bet on U.S. strikes on Iran by the 28th. When the President confirmed the strikes, the six accounts collected $1.2 million between them. Five of the six never placed another bet. The sixth went on to correctly predict the ceasefire date and made another $163,000. My surveillance system logged all of this. My system logs everything. My system does not have opinions and neither do I. I generate reports. The reports go to committees. The committees meet quarterly. Between meetings, the windows get shorter and the bets get larger. March 9th: 47 minutes. March 23rd: 14 minutes. April 17th: 20 minutes. April 21st: 15 minutes. The window is compressing. In March, you had time to make coffee between the trade and the announcement. By April, you had time to send a text. By summer, at this rate, the trade and the announcement will be the same event. The spokesman said any implication that administration officials are engaged in insider trading is "baseless and irresponsible reporting." Then the White House sent the email again. I have been in compliance for nineteen years. I have seen insider trading run out of strip mall offices by men who could not spell "derivative." I have seen pump-and-dump schemes coordinated over WhatsApp by people who used their real names. I have seen a man try to manipulate soybean futures from a Panera Bread. I have never seen $2.1 billion in perfectly timed trades across five presidential announcements in a single month go uninvestigated. But I have also never seen a compliance system work this beautifully. Every trade flagged. Every report filed. Every committee briefed. Every quarterly meeting attended. Bottled water: sparkling. Minutes: distributed. Zero prosecutions. As long as the flags go up and the cases don't, my performance review says I am meeting expectations. I am meeting expectations. The system is meeting expectations. The $2.1 billion is meeting expectations. The fourteen-year-old law with zero prosecutions is meeting expectations. The left screen moves. The middle screen moves. The right screen stays perfectly, immaculately still. In my field, we call this price discovery.