Wednesday, June 17, 2026

Tanzhaus Zürich - Gabriella exploring Mittleurope

 Tanzhaus Zürich - Gabriella exploring Mittleurope


DOUBLE TROUBLE: DANCE. & THE WIZARD IS NOT REAL

The Tanzhaus collaborators from The Field invite you to an evening of solidarity: DOUBLE TROUBLE brings together two solo pieces that reinforce rather than compete with one another. 

In the wizard is not real, lisa laurent navigates grief through a grotesque yet poetic soundscape that oscillates between fragility and humour. 

Dance. by Gabriella Imrichova revolves, as an excessive tirade, around refusal, obsession and the all-consuming nature of control. Two radical bodies that, between collapse and self-empowerment, make intense, contradictory states visible.


Scholarships: Awarded the prestigious ATLAS scholarship at the ImPulsTanz International Dance Festival in Vienna. 

Login.gov – identifying data about you in third party control

 Give a soft answer to an angry person. If you touch a match to gasoline, you get an explosion. However, if you touch the same match to water, you extinguish the match.



Inside the White House Freakout Over the Epstein Files

CNN Reliable Sources: “Inside the White House Freakout Over the Epstein Files” is the title of Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan’s explosive excerpt from their forthcoming book “Regime Change.” Now comes the freakout over the “freakout” article. The New York Times published the “Regime Change” excerpt at 6 a.m. ET today, and it immediately intensified the White House’s anxiety about the book.

Follow up to Trump Mentioned in Epstein Files ‘More than One Million Times’ – The New York Times – Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan: “On July 17, 2025, at around 6 o’clock in the evening, President Trump’s top officials filed into the White House Situation Room — the secure bunker where classified and high-stakes national security matters are discussed and decided. This was where President Barack Obama, along with Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the president’s national security team, watched the raid that ended with the death of Osama bin Laden in 2011. 

Now, however, Trump’s most senior advisers had gathered — without him — to figure out how to gain some measure of control over a very different kind of crisis threatening to engulf the presidency: the Epstein files. Ten days earlier, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. had jointly released a memo that bluntly stated that their review had found no “client list” of powerful men for whom the notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein had allegedly procured underage girls and young women. 

Intended to put to rest years of speculation and end the pressure campaign to release the voluminous material in the department’s possession, the memo instead had the opposite effect, setting off a backlash that was notably loud among the MAGA base. And it was about to get worse: The Wall Street Journal was preparing a damaging article about Trump’s relationship with Epstein. The president’s desperate attempts to kill the story had failed. His team now had to get everyone onto the same page about how to counter the growing swarm of attention. 

They needed a gesture of transparency to appease an increasingly angry base, but also a way to convey the message that the president was sympathetic to his supporters’ concerns. Which itself was a problem, because he clearly wasn’t…”


Login.gov – identifying data about you in third party control

The Drey Dossier: “…Login.gov is open source, which means the government publishes its code in the open for anyone to read, so I read it, and I walked the recent changes, since every edit gets posted in public with a date stamped on it. Over the last couple of months somebody added a new piece and named it a proofing agent. 

Proofing is just the bureaucratic word for proving you are who you say you are, so a proofing agent is a stand-in that does the proving for you. What it actually does, according to the code, is let an approved outside organization hand login.gov your name, your Social Security number, your date of birth, your address, even your passport, and login.gov will run the full identity check on that pile of data and, if it all lines up, stamp you verified. You come out the far side a confirmed, government-trusted person, and you were never anywhere near it. So the single promise the whole system was built on, that it has to actually be you, is gone, traded for an approved organization that can conjure a verified you out of a spreadsheet. Of everything in this piece, that is the part that scares me most. And it appeared in the code right after a particular man arrived to run the place…” 

[Note – Login.gov – “The public’s one account for government. Use one account and password for secure, private access to participating government agencies” – this site is required to access services including Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Your personal identifying data has been compromised multiple times using portals such as these, with increased security breeches due to the DOGE project [Elon Musk] as well as other billionaire controlled government contracts awarded during this administration.]

See also Notes from the Circus: “…Trump installs DOGE personnel inside the Treasury payment system, the IRS database, the Social Security records, the security clearances database, in violation of the Privacy Act and a stack of other statutes. Some plaintiffs have managed to establish standing in some of these cases, after extended litigation. In many of the cases, plaintiffs have been dismissed on standing grounds. Where plaintiffs have survived, the merits proceed slowly while the data continues to be accessed…”



Trump's Bloody, Garish Birthday Gift to Himself: A White House UFC Fight 


The wild weekend in Washington began with MMA fighters menacing one another on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and ended with the Trump clan stalking the octagon. 

It was an imperial scene in the shadow of the executive mansion, a showcase of American excess to celebrate the president’s birthday.


“You wanna act like a fucking animal?”
The fight wasn’t until Sunday, but it was Friday night on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, where Martin Luther King Jr. said, “I have a dream,” and two MMA fighters were already getting physical. Ilia Topuria shoved Justin Gaethje in the stomach, and Dana White, the head of the UFC, stepped in to separate the two.
Look where we’re at, look at this beautiful view, and you want to act like an animal?” Gaethje said. “Like an emotional little animal, like a female.”
The ugly moment set against the neoclassical majesty of the background would set the tone for a wild weekend in Washington, where the garish spectacle and bloody combat of MMA fighting and its supporting culture descended on the capital for President Donald Trump’s 80th birthday. The main event, Sunday night’s UFC title card on the South Lawn of the White House, was ostensibly held to celebrate the nation’s 250th anniversary. But everyone knew why we were really here.
Trump wanted a big birthday party, one that would rival the military parade he sought for himself in the first term. Dana White loves Trump, and what fight promoter could resist such a massive spectacle at the White House? He liked the idea so much that TKO, the parent company of UFC, was willing to shell out more than $60 million—with ample help from donors like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Polymarket—to bankroll the show. Mark Zuckerberg, whose company Meta has a partnership with the UFC, had a prime seat. So did David Ellison, the head of Paramount, which has the exclusive rights to televise the competition. After the final bout, a riveting show that ended a little after 1 a.m. when Topuria was forced to withdraw because his face was beaten to a pulp, Trump’s progeny wandered around the blood-smeared octagon, smiling and chatting as fireworks erupted overhead.
Image may contain Concert Crowd Person Lighting Urban City and Field
The red-white-and-blue spectacle was allegedly a celebration of America's 250th anniversary—that just happened to fall on the president's birthday.
 
SAUL LOEB/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Billionaire heiress sues over $12 million tax sting following separation

Billionaire heiress sues over $12 million tax sting following separation

Billionaire heiress and renowned philanthropist Debbie Dadon is suing her top-tier financial advisers, alleging they botched her affairs to the point where she is facing a $12 million-plus tax bill.

Dadon, the daughter of Marc Besen – Highpoint Shopping Centre’s former owner and co-founder of the Sussan retail brand – is suing tax specialists from Deloitte and Pitcher Partners in the Supreme Court of Victoria, claiming both groups gave her bad advice.

Debbie Dadon is one of the Melbourne’s most respected philanthropists.

Dadon alleges in court documents that the advisers encouraged her to set up an investment structure to receive $58.3 million in dividends from business projects overseen by her and her former husband Albert Dadon’s property development and investment group Ubertas.

Under their advice, Debbie Dadon claimed a $17.4 million tax offset from the more than $58 million in income she earned in 2015 from four companies as the result of her financial separation from her jazz musician and businessman ex-husband.

Debbie Dadon alleges that the Australian Taxation Office has since refused to allow the offset, meaning that she now faces a $12.3 million tax shortfall – a sum that could increase significantly once penalties are included.

She alleges in court documents that both Deloitte Private (an arm of the accounting and consulting group, Deloitte) and Pitcher Partners provided representations that were false and misleading, acted negligently and provided advice that was not of a competent standard.

The 69-year-old comes from one of Melbourne’s most prominent and respected business and philanthropic families.

Her sisters, Carol Schwartz and Naomi Milgrom, and brother, Daniel Besen, are all accomplished business people who also have prominent roles in the arts and philanthropy.

The Dadons’ daughters, Stef and Jess, are hugely successful entrepreneurs in their own right, founding the wildly popular Twoobs environmentally conscious footwear brand.

Alongside her sisters, Debbie Dadon is a director of the Besen Family Foundation – one of the largest private family charitable organisations in the country.

The foundation provides grants to support the development and operation of a wide range of causes from children’s libraries to bird sanctuaries, Indigenous community programs and the Holocaust Museum.
Stef and Jess Dadon founded the hugely successful Twoobs shoe brand.PAUL HARRIS
It states on its website that it supports projects “which enable the community to thrive, in spirit of inclusion, equity, empowerment and unity”.

The Besen family also oversees an impressive art collection which is held at the Eva and Marc Besen Centre at the family’s Yarra Valley winery, TarraWarra. Marc Besen, a popular figure in Melbourne’s social circles, died in 2025, while his beloved wife, Eva, died in 2021.

The Dadon family is well known for its striking property developments including two major towers on St Kilda Road and an apartment complex overlooking Flagstaff Gardens.

According to court documents, Debbie Dadon was involved in the Ubertas business with her husband since 1982 until their financial separation in 2013 and 2014, after which the assets of the business were divided up between the couple.
Ubertas’ 350 William development rises above Flagstaff Gardens.JESSE MARLOW

The 2015 dividends that flowed through to Debbie Dadon were the result of the financial agreement from the couple’s separation two years earlier.

She alleges she was encouraged by Deloitte and Pitcher Partners advisers in 2015 to set up a new company, D Dadon Holdings, to receive the dividends as fully franked.

Fully franked dividends are a tax offset that represents the corporate tax a company has already paid on its income and is a common way to stop investors from being taxed twice on the same earnings.
As the result of Deloitte Private and Pitcher Partners’ allegedly poor advice, Dadon is now expected to pay more tax than what would have been otherwise levied on these sorts of dividends.
The case reveals that the Tax Office queried the arrangement in 2024 following a 2018 review of the Ubertas Group known as Project Sofia Audit – an audit that was later dropped by the Tax Office in 2024, according to court documents.
Deloitte, Pitcher Partners and lawyers for Debbie Dadon were all approached for comment.
As the lawsuit was only filed earlier this month, Deloitte Private and Pitcher Partners are yet to file a formal defence in response to Debbie Dadon’s claim

EDITOR'S PICK

Thinking outside the boxDebbie Dadon alleges that she was not properly informed by her financial advisers that the tax offset could not be applied unless her company held its interest in the shares for a continuous period of at least 45 days.


Inside Trump’s takeover of the American regulatory machine

 

There is neither happiness nor misery in the world; there is only the comparison of one state with another, nothing more. He who has felt the deepest grief is best able to experience supreme happiness. We must have felt what it is to die, Morrel, othat we may appreciate the enjoyments of life. 
" Live, then, and be happy, beloved children of my heart, and never forget, that until the day God will deign to reveal the future to man, all human wisdom is contained in these two words, 'Wait and Hope.
~ Alexandre Dumas


The Cop who Epstein Couldn’t Stop The Epstein Files by Julie K. Brown

Inside Trump’s takeover of the American regulatory machine

WSJ via MSN: “Trump has gotten involved in regulatory decisions big and small that once were made by independent agencies, according to interviews with business executives, lobbyists and administration officials, dramatically shifting the balance of power across Washington and reordering how influence campaigns are waged. 

Lobbying targeting the White House – Political appointees by nature tend to be closely aligned with the president’s worldview. But former agency officials across administrations say it is highly unusual for presidents to be so intimately involved in the details of regulatory reviews. 

Previous presidents were careful to avoid the appearance of influencing agency decisions, typically making a point of not publicly weighing in on matters until reviews were complete. Congress over the years authorized certain agencies to operate independently from the White House to keep some key government functions separate from politics, most of them governed by bipartisan boards whose members can only be removed for cause. 

CEO Chris Ruddy speaks during a 2018 meeting with President Trump and other business leaders. A few weeks after returning to the White House last year, Trumpsigned an executive order requiring independent agencies for the first time to submit major regulations to the White House budget office. 

Trump has fired the Democratic commissioners at multiple agencies, including the FTC, whose five-member commission is down to just two members, both Republicans. The Supreme Court is revisiting the question of whether a president can remove such officials without cause…”

These days, companies are directly approaching the president instead of pleading their cases with staff or senior officials at the agencies. Disclosures of lobbying targeting the White House increased 70% in 2025, according to an analysis of federal lobbying filings by Bloomberg Government, a government-affairs platform. Some current agency heads explicitly welcome Trump’s interventions…”


DOJ Hasn’t Taken Its Usual Steps to Protect 2026 Election

NOTUS: “President Donald Trump says “if you don’t have honest voting, you can’t really have a nation.” But five months out from the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress, his Justice Department has canceled election-integrity training sessions for prosecutors and FBI agents, deleted a 281-page guide to prosecuting election offenses, fired most of the lawyers in its Public Integrity Section and failed to replace the director of its Election Crimes Branch.

 Moreover, the DOJ has not taken the usual steps to establish a “command center” to monitor and address the typical emergencies that pop up around Election Day, three sources with knowledge of the situation told NOTUS. A command center team would address things like voter intimidation and targeted disinformation meant to hinder a fair process. 

These actions — and inactions — have alarmed current and former prosecutors, who say the Justice Department is not prepared to deal with threats to election integrity in the November elections…”

Ross Gittins - Normally, I’m a friend of the taxman. But now ...


 


Normally, I’m a friend of the taxman. But now ... 

Ross Gittins Economics Editor 
June 17, 2026

 As a believer that taxes should be higher rather than lower, I like to think of myself as a friend of the Australian Tax Office. But at present I’m finding the taxman pretty hard to like.

I note that complaints to the Inspector-General of Taxation about the tax office have more than doubled. And I have my own complaint to make.

Illustration by Simon LetchIllustration by Simon Letch


Inspector-General of Taxation and Tax Ombudsman Ruth Owen told Senate estimates earlier this month that complaints against the tax office had increased by 127 per cent, mainly because of the office’s increased focus on debt collection and its issuing of penalty notices.

“Most of those complaints are from people trying to pay their tax but who can’t meet the conditions set by the ATO,” she said. Small businesses were finding it tough to meet the conditions set by the office. “We continue to look out for people or businesses most at risk of falling between the cracks and for whom the tax system is not working as intended.

“I have publicly raised my concerns about how tax debt is being collected and enforced, and the impact on taxpayers who are trying to do the right thing. The ATO does have administrative powers to offer relief for taxpayers who are experiencing financial hardship, and we can continue to encourage them to use those powers, with empathy, as the community rightly expects,” Owen said.


As for my complaint, I’m expecting a massive refund from last financial year’s tax return but, though it usually takes only a couple of weeks for the office to process your return and issue its assessment, with a bill or, more usually, a refund attached, I’ve been waiting more than three months and have heard nothing.


Admittedly, my case is a strange one. I’m doing something few people would do, even if they could afford to. And the money involved is huge. So I’m not the least surprised the taxman wanted to take a good look at my return before giving it the tick.

But how long should that take? And here’s the thing: when I looked up the office’s website to find a number I could ring to ask what the problem is and offer to help them check my claim was legit, I followed various links on the topic and read a lot of friendly guff on the matter, only to be told to be patient.


Call them up? You could try. But getting a human being on the phone at the tax office is extremely complicated these days. They actually make it quite difficult for anyone to just ring up and ask what the problem is. Prepare for hours sitting on hold. They’ll do it in their own good time and, in the meantime, there’s nothing you can do about it. Really? This is a reasonable way to treat a long-suffering taxpayer?


Do it online, I hear you say. The website is indeed snazzy, making a great show of being helpful without being helpful at all.


As you may know, I was a chartered accountant before I became a journalist. It’s not a decision I regret. But this means I was myself a tax agent for many years before deciding I wouldn’t be doing people’s tax returns on the side and surrendered my badge, so to speak.


I thought the reason why the ATO makes it so difficult for punters like me to ring up with queries was partly because most people have their return done by a tax agent, who could do the ringing up for them.


When I inquired via a few mates, however, I discovered to my amazement that tax agents aren’t allowed to ring up with queries. Really? I can understand why the tax office doesn’t want every Tom, Dick and Harry phoning up and taking up its precious time, but when you won’t even talk to the professionals, that’s pretty high-handed.

We’re the government, so you have no choice but to deal with us. We command; you obey. We make the rules, and you get no say in them. It suits us to deal with your return in our own good time and you are required to wait your turn in silence.


If your return gets caught in the too-hard basket, that’s our prerogative and your tough luck.


I don’t think it was connected to this particular return, but I do remember getting a strange letter from the tax office. It said that some of the amounts I was claiming for were particularly large. It hoped I knew that exaggerating my claims was against the law. So maybe I’d like to take this opportunity to cut them back.

But please, please, please don’t send them any receipts. We feel free to insinuate that you’re dishonest, but please don’t attempt to prove your honesty by cluttering our office with your piddling receipts. We’re allowed to impugn you; you’re not allowed to defend your reputation.


When I see the tax office has become overzealous in its efforts to collect taxes owed, I wonder whether what we’re seeing is an effort to increase efficiency that has gone over the top.

If so, I guess the people leading this efficiency drive have no desire to offend upstanding citizens – especially not if they start complaining to the politicians about the way the bureaucrats are treating them.

Of course, it may be another case of the previous government’s robo-debt: the bureaucrats’ questionable behaviour is the result of pressure from their political masters. Then again, it may be just that old age is making me overly sensitive.

Ross Gittins is economics editor. 

Ross Gittins unpacks the economy in an exclusive subscriber-only newsletter. Sign up to receive it every Tuesday evening.

Tuesday, June 16, 2026

The DOJ Prosecutors Who Think They’re Trump’s Personal Lawyers

 

Congress Demands List of People Who Have Applied for Trump Slush Fund

Scott McFarlane Reports: “In a memo obtained by Meidas Touch Network, a group of Members of Congress have demanded a list of people who have applied for taxpayer-funded payouts from the Trump Administration’s controversial $1.7 billion slush fund. The 3-page memo, which was submitted to the Justice Department and Treasury Department, said the “conflicting” statements from the Trump Administration about the future of the fund have raised serious questions…”

The DOJ Prosecutors Who Think They’re Trump’s Personal Lawyers

The New Republic: “This week, more than 100 former federal prosecutors in Illinois sounded the alarm about the current leaders of the office where they all once served. “Regrettably,” their statement reads, “there is little doubt that actions taken by leadership in the last year have tarnished the reputation of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois.” They list some serious concerns, including the departure of an “extraordinary” number of experienced prosecutors and the “extraordinary collapse rate” of prosecutions. 

“When judges increasingly call into question the motivation or candor of prosecutors and agents,” they write, “that is a sure sign that a standard has been compromised.” What they have witnessed merits “serious public scrutiny” because the lawyers who work there “affect not only the quality of justice, but the lives of more than nine million residents” in the district. “We write because an educated public is the only hope against overzealous prosecutions,” they conclude. 

The letter is a remarkable statement of what prosecutors fear: that the public may lose trust in the justice system, or that their own career has lost its credibility. But it’s significant less for the set of concerns expressed than the fact that they were expressed at all. Things must be especially bad, in other words, for federal prosecutors to call for the serious scrutiny of the public. They are that bad and worse. Federal prosecutors hold a lot of power, which is one reason why the Trump administration has leaned so heavily on them to defend its dirty work. 


While technically U.S. attorneys work for the Department of Justice and not for the president, such distinctions feel quite hollow when the acting attorney general pledges his loyalty and affection to Donald Trump so openly—“Thank you very much, I love you, sir,” Todd Blanche said at a DOJ press briefing in April. No wonder Blanche was officially nominated this week to stay in the job. Before all this, he was best known as the president’s personal attorney. No wonder it seems like DOJ lawyers serve in that role too. Mercifully, some of them are not very good at hiding it…”