Features
30% OF AMERICANS BELIEVE TRUMP WAS SENT BY GOD
THIRD ANNIVERSARY OF JANUARY 6, 2021 INSURRECTION/TOURIST VISIT/FAMILY PICNIC
by Vijaya Chandrasoma
Donald Trump held a “Commit to Caucus Rally”, in Newton, Ohio yesterday, to memorialize the third anniversary of the failed Stop the Steal assault on the Capitol by his white supremacist supporters on January 6, 2021.
An in-depth report from the Economist cites a survey conducted by Denison University political scientist Paul Djupe, that around 30% of Americans believe that Trump was sent by God to save America.
According to white Evangelicals, God had played a part in the election of all past US presidents, except for President Obama, who was a Satan appointee. Americans believed that God had specifically chosen Trump for the presidency in 2016, because he seemed to be the perfect choice to guide His thrice-blessed nation to its manifest destiny of a white Christian haven. However, He appears to have made a divine miscalculation in his choice of Trump, who has proved to be a whining loser since 2020.
Or have we been unable to comprehend the ultimate divine wisdom of God’s Plan? Only time will tell.
The violence unfolding during the January 6, 2021 assault on the Capitol, as seen live on TV by everyone whose eyes were connected to their brains instead of Trump’s ass, was a savage insurrection of white supremacists, wearing horned headdress and Trump T-shirts, carrying confederate and TRUMP flags. Terrorists threatening to hang Vice-President Pence, having already built a gallows for the purpose on the premises, to kill Speaker Pelosi and all the lawmakers the mob was able to get their hands on.
A riot that resulted in five deaths and hundreds of injuries; millions of dollars’ damage to the Capitol, the seat of the nation’s government and one of its most iconic buildings; and the arrest, conviction and imprisonment of more than 1,100 rioters, most of whose defense was that they had been incited to attack the Capitol by Trump.
The week after the insurrection was repulsed, Senior Republicans, whose very lives had been threatened, had a vivid memory of the violence of that terrible day. They accused Trump, from the floor of the Congress, of inciting the brutal insurrection to prevent the constitutional transfer of power to President-elect Biden. They demanded accountability from Trump in the face of his evident guilt of incitement to violence. Those who so excoriated Trump included then Republican Senate and House leaders, Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy, current Speaker, Mike Johnson, Senator Leslie Graham and several other prominent Republicans.
Then the recollections of these craven Republicans had a miraculous transformation of memory.
They became terrified that their public opposition to Trump and his base, attacking him for his treason on January 6, may cost them what is most dear to their hearts – re-election. Their commitment to the truth, their oath to uphold the Constitution, be damned.
The current whitewashed recollections of the January 6 insurrections are best described by Republican Congressman Andrew Clyde: “Watching the TV footage of those who entered the Capitol and walked through Statuary Hall showed people in an orderly fashion staying between the stanchions and ropes and taking videos and pictures”.
Trump has since been found guilty of sedition for incitement to an insurrection against the United States after a year-long Congressional inquiry. He has also been indicted, arrested and on bail on four indictments and 91 felonies, including sedition, espionage and obstruction of justice, inter alia, in four separate jurisdictions.
The aftermath of the January 6 events has not brought the action immediately expected of any civilized country governed by the Rule of Law – the swift prosecution and imprisonment of all those responsible for an act of treason against a legally elected government.
The outcome in the USA has been the complete opposite. The former president, the leader of the insurrection to overthrow a legally elected government and to cling to power, walks free three years later, disgraced, impeached, indicted, arrested and on bail on 91 felonies, but still free. Free to spew his vitriolic, Hitler-like rants before adoring crowds of white supremacist neo-Nazis. Incredibly, this vulgar criminal remains a primary candidate to win re-election of the presidency, which he attempted to violently overturn in 2021, come November 2024.
A significant part of the nation has been corrupted by this white supremacist maniac, who will keep on fanning the racist flames while he keeps on pouring gasoline to keep them afire. A strategy which seems to be working, bringing to the surface the vast majority of white supremacists in fear of losing their white privilege with the invasion of brown-skinned vermin. Hitler may have failed, but his anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant white supremacist movement has been reborn throughout the western world, very much so in the greatest democracy the world has seen, the United States of America.
The corrupt, six/three Rublican majority Supreme Court of the United States was scheduled to rule, on January 5, 2024, on the extent of immunity available to a sitting president from prosecution for any crime committed during his incumbency.
This is a ruling that could enable any future president, who, having lost the election, could go berserk, commit any crime, including an attempt to topple the government, during his Lame Duck period – the 12-week period between the day of his defeat at the November election and the Inauguration of the President-elect on January 20 the following year. Over 12 weeks with the awesome powers of the presidency, in spite of having been roundly rejected by the electorate, with total immunity for any crimes committed throughout the term of presidency.
These changes represent a total repudiation of the original reason for the Revolutionary War (1775-83), when patriots in the original 13 colonies waged war against the cruel yoke of King George III of Great Britain, resulting in the formation of an independent American nation.
The American Revolution was waged against the rule of a foreign monarchy. And the Constitution of the new and independent nation was drafted as “The Great Experiment of Democracy”.
The presidency of Donald Trump has highlighted the obvious flaws in this Great Experiment, especially a total lack of public confidence in its elections, the cornerstone of any vibrant Democracy.
Perhaps the time is ripe, as suggested by Trump and his cult, to terminate an outdated Constitution, replace it with the Bible and establish an alternate form of government more in keeping with the nation’s white Christian traditions, especially in the face of an insidious invasion of brown-skinned immigrants.
Perhaps the United States is ready to maintain its status of white supremacy, for a system of government with a King, beholden not to the rule of earthly law but to the heavenly commandments of the Christian God. A Monarch of the home-grown variety, the head of a form of divine government of white Christians, devoid of petty restrictions like free speech and press, environmental protections, term limits, even the rule of law.
Much like the ancient British House of Windsor, America will have its own Orange Dynasty of Trump. After the job of Making America Great Again, Americans can rename their nation “Great America”, and change their national anthem to “God Save The Donald”, with appropriate lyrics; to be performed at the coronation of King Donald I by the January 6 Jailhouse Choir, sung in the background of Trump taking the Oath of Allegiance, waving an upside down Bible he has never read.
Post-Trump Republicans have become most adept at rewriting the history of the nation, especially whitewashing its history of genocide, slavery and the current infestation of immigrants. We are all aware of Trump’s conviction that brown-skinned immigrants, vermin who poison the blood of white people, are the cause of all that ails the nation – crime, drug addiction, murder and rape, which Trump will eradicate by closing the nation’s borders and enforcing mass deportation of all illegal immigrants. Hitler’s concept of the Final Solution is also not off Trump’s table.
Trump’s two leading rivals for the Republican nomination, Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley, have their own uniquely imaginative versions of the nation’s chequered and violent past. They had both been tiptoeing around Trump’s criminal past, and have only during the past week have been criticizing Trump on his indictments and 91 felonies. If they were serious opponents, they should have been shouting about these serious criminal charges from the rooftops, right from the beginning of their presidential campaigns,
They both seem to be either playing for the VP spot (Haley), 2028 or more likely, the hope that the Trump candidature will implode and burst into criminal flames.
During the 11 months left before the election, Trump will have a busy schedule. Besides running a presidential election campaign, he will have to present himself in court in four jurisdictions to defend himself on 91 serious felonies. An impossible schedule, which, with the help of a compliant Supreme Court, will enable him to delay a conviction, which is the real victory he is seeking. If he wins re-election, as seems likely now, all these criminal trials would automatically disappear, by self-pardon or dismissal.
Unless President Biden (whose current approval ratings in the polls are in the low 30s and is losing to Trump or any other Republican candidate by significant margins, if the presidential election were held today) and the Democratic Party make a startling comeback, King Donald I will be primed to destroy America’s Great Experiment of Democracy, come January 2025.
So I have a question for Republican Trumpers, which has baffled me over the years. Trump has always whined that every charge against him is a part of the greatest witch hunt in history, that he has committed no crime, and to use his own words, he is “the most innocent man in history”.
Seeing as he has been indicted and facing trial on several counts of sedition, obstruction of justice and espionage perhaps leading to treason, these protests come without a vestige of proof of his innocence.
Even Section 3, Amendment 14 of the Constitution specifies that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president for inciting, and providing aid and comfort, to insurrectionists, just as surely as he would be disqualified if he were 25 years old and born in Sri Lanka.
If he is so innocent, why does he keep on insulting and threatening the lives of those who criticize him, why does he vilify his judges and prosecutors as partisan fascists and leftists, out to imprison him on purely political grounds?
If he is so innocent, that the Constitution itself is unconstitutional and should be “terminated”, then why has his legal strategy over 40 years of criminal acts always been to deny, distract and delay, never to provide proof?
If his innocence was so self-evident, then wouldn’t he and his Republican supporters want this proven in a court of law as quickly as possible, so that he can face the electorate with an unblemished reputation? Obviously a rhetorical question.
However, I do agree with the 30% of Americans who believe that God sent Trump to America. However, white Americans may have miscalculated the real motive behind God’s decision, their belief is that Trump was sent to save white America.
My belief is that God’s real plan to send Trump to America was to punish Americans for all the carnage, genocide, slavery, racism and crimes they have committed in the past, often in His name. A divine motive far more in keeping with the final plan of an all-knowing, all-merciful God.
Trump is God’s retribution.
Features
The Digital Underground
Illegal Foreign Exchange, Undiyal, Hawala and Money Laundering, A Four-Part Investigative Series
Forex Platforms, Cryptocurrency, AI and the New Financial Battlefield
THE INVISIBLE FINANCIAL EMPIRE – PART III
The Boyfriend Who Was Never Real
Priya, a 34-year-old professional in Colombo, met “David” on LinkedIn. He claimed to work in fintech in Singapore. For six weeks they exchanged messages daily, about work, about life, about a recent trip he had taken to the Maldives. Eventually, the conversation turned, gently and naturally, to money.
“I’ve been trading on this platform, let me show you,” he said, sharing a screenshot of a sleek trading dashboard showing consistent, impressive returns.
Priya invested a small amount first, $500. Within days, her dashboard showed it had grown to $650. She withdrew $100 successfully, just to test it. It worked. Encouraged, she invested more. Then more. Over two months, she transferred a total of $42,000 into the platform.
When she tried to withdraw her full balance, the platform demanded a “regulatory release fee” of $8,000 before funds could be unlocked. She paid it. Then another fee appeared. Then the platform stopped responding altogether. “David” vanished. The trading dashboard, the customer support chat, the entire brokerage, all of it had never been real.
This is what investigators now call “pig butchering”, and, in 2026, the most disturbing development is not the scam itself, which has existed for years, but what now powers it: artificial intelligence has industrialised the entire operation.
From Manual Fraud to Machine-Generated Deception
For most of the past decade, romance-and-investment scams, like the one that targeted Priya, required enormous manual labour. Scam operations, many of them staffed by trafficked workers held against their will in compounds across Myanmar, Cambodia, and Laos, needed real humans to build relationships with victims over weeks, manage fake trading platforms, and respond convincingly to questions.
That labour-intensive model has now been substantially automated. According to financial-crime researchers tracking this shift through 2026, threat actors are standing up entire AI-generated “brokerage” experiences end-to-end, complete with KYC onboarding, branded customer-service chat, animated portfolio dashboards, and falsified live market data feeds, and operating them at industrial scale against multiple victims simultaneously. Generative-AI relationship managers now front the WhatsApp and Telegram conversations that once required real human scammers. AI-cloned regulator letters are generated on demand to justify the fake “release fees” that drain victims a final time before the platform disappears.
What has changed is not the deception itself, it is the production economics. The cost of running a credible synthetic brokerage against one additional victim has collapsed, meaning a single criminal network can now run hundreds of “Davids” simultaneously, each one indistinguishable from a genuine fintech professional until it is too late. (Figure 01)

Sri Lanka: From Victim Pool to Operating Base
Sri Lanka’s relationship to this global scam economy has shifted in an alarming direction over the past two years. The country is no longer only a source of victims, it has become an operating base for the criminal networks themselves.
In April, 2026, Sri Lankan police raided a five-star hotel property, in Ambakandavila, and arrested 150 individuals, including 133 Chinese nationals, 13 Vietnamese nationals, and one Malaysian national, allegedly running a cyber fraud centre with links to international criminal syndicates, based in Myanmar and Cambodia. Investigators say the operation followed a now-familiar regional pattern: recruiters advertise “online marketing” or “data entry” jobs on social media to lure foreign workers to Sri Lanka, confiscate their passports on arrival, and force them to operate scam campaigns under threat.
The Central Bank of Sri Lanka has formally flagged pig-butchering scams as a “developing threat,” warning that foreign scam networks are increasingly targeting overseas nationals through scam farms operating from Sri Lankan soil. A 2026 United Nations report estimated that at least 300,000 people have been trafficked into scam centres across Southeast Asia.
This is not an abstract international problem. It is unfolding in hotels and rented properties across the country, exploiting the same infrastructure, high-speed internet, affordable accommodation, accessible tourist visas, that Sri Lanka has built to attract legitimate digital businesses and tourists.
Where the Money Actually Goes: The Stablecoin Pipeline
Behind every successful pig-butchering scam sits a laundering pipeline that has been transformed almost as dramatically as the scams themselves, and the transformation has a single dominant feature: stablecoins.
According to the Financial Action Task Force’s March 2026, report, drawing on analysis from blockchain intelligence firms Chainalysis and TRM Labs, stablecoins accounted for 84% of the USD 154 billion in illicit virtual asset transaction volume recorded in 2025, the highest share ever observed, and a dramatic jump from just 15% only a few years earlier. TRM Labs separately found that illicit entities received USD 141 billion in stablecoins, in 2025 alone, the highest level observed in five years. (See Table 01)

The scale of state-level abuse is striking. A Russian sanctions-evasion network built around the ruble-pegged stablecoin A7A5 processed more than USD 72 billion in total volume in 2025.
Fighting Fire with Fire: AI on the Defensive Side
The same artificial intelligence reshaping financial crime is also, out of necessity, reshaping the defence against it. Legacy anti-money laundering systems, built on static, rule-based thresholds, have proven badly outmatched by AI-generated fraud operating at machine speed. Research cited by compliance technology analysts suggests that between 90% and 95% of alerts generated by legacy AML systems are false positives, consuming enormous investigator time while genuinely suspicious activity slips through.
This is not a frictionless transition. AI models are notoriously difficult to explain to regulators and examiners in the way traditional rule-based systems are. The practical compromise emerging across the industry is a hybrid model: AI handles the initial scoring and prioritisation of risk, while documented rule-based logic still governs the final decision that must be defensible to a regulator.
The Regulatory Response: Catching Up to the Digital Frontier
Regulators worldwide have begun moving to close the most dangerous gaps exposed by this digital transformation of financial crime. (See Table 02)

What Comes Next
We have now traced this investigation from the centuries-old mechanics of Hawala and Undiyal, through the three-stage architecture that turns criminal proceeds into apparently legitimate wealth, to the AI-generated frontier of digital financial crime reshaping all of it at machine speed.
In our concluding instalment, Part IV: “Sri Lanka at the Crossroads: Economic Consequences, Organised Crime and the Road Ahead”, we bring this series home. We examine precisely what all of this costs Sri Lanka in hard economic terms: lost remittances, exchange rate pressure, tax revenue forgone, and the 2026 FATF evaluation that will determine whether the country’s institutions can demonstrate, with evidence rather than legislation alone, that they are equal to this challenge. We close with a practical policy roadmap.
(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT, Malabe.
Views expressed in this article are personal.)
Features
‘There are no private universities in Sri Lanka’ – some considerations for higher education reform
Academics involved in education policy like to say that there is no such thing as a private university in Sri Lanka. The only ‘universities’ in the country are state universities; anything else offering degrees is a private higher education institution (HEI). This position is technically accurate. Yet, in the discourse and imagination of the public, private universities are very real – people teach in them, students register in them, families pay fees, and such degree holders enter job markets in Sri Lanka and outside.
For decades, activists concerned for public higher education have ignored or resisted looking at private HEIs, as if such scrutiny would taint them. Others have worked in both types of institutions, carrying practices from each to the other. The apex body governing state universities, the UGC, has, meanwhile, ignored the concept of conflict of interest and appointed individuals in private higher education in committees and leadership positions. It is unsurprising then that some of the ideologies informing private higher education appear in reform agendas in the state sector.
This is a good time then to consider the varying types of private HEIs around us, and to take a look at some of the issues within them in the hope that higher education reform agendas will include private, as well as state higher education.
What is a ‘private university’?
First, some clarifications. In the public imaginary, a ‘private university’ is typically an institution that provides a foreign or local degree for which the student makes a payment. But this broad classification encompasses a host of diverse institutions and types of degrees which I detail below.
The Non-State Higher Education Division (NSHE) of the Ministry of Education has recognised 295 degrees by 32 institutions. Most of these are private companies and include a handful of established, well-known private HEIs that are ‘university like’. The degrees are local degrees conferred by the institutions accredited by the NSHE Division. While private HEIs conferring local degrees must be accredited by the NSHE Division, there appears to be no legal consequence for not doing so. In addition, there are several permutations of the private degree that miss the net of this Division and the Standing Committee on Accreditation and Quality Assurance (SCAQA) that assists this Division.
For one, degrees conferred by foreign universities offered, via these same private HEIs, are not vetted by the NSHE Division. Secondly, there is a growing plethora of private HEIs which have either no physical presence locally or only a dubious presence. The University Grants Commission has notified the public, through their website, that foreign universities listed in the Commonwealth Universities Yearbook and the World Higher Education Database are recognised, but refrained from giving any other details – which degrees? Offered by what modes? These details are not known. Some of the foreign universities in the lists may be legitimate entities in their own land but the degrees conferred locally, in their name, may not adhere to curriculum or teaching specifications of the NSHE Division or the UGC.
Another troubling phenomenon is the ‘top up degree’, which appears to work on the same principle as that of a pre-paid mobile connection: if I have a Diploma or an HND of a sort, I am eligible to complete a course of study which provides me with a degree, usually from a foreign university. The idea that someone who does not initially qualify for a degree programme should be able to work their way towards one is a progressive notion. This is the concept that open and distance learning (ODL) was based on initially, but which is now sadly exploited. ODL models are expected to provide opportunity for learning for those who may be excluded from traditional learning institutions. In Sri Lanka, however, we have seen ODL become a marketplace offering easy to obtain, for-fee qualifications by institutions with little commitment to superior teaching and learning.
Finally, a perusal of the many types of private HEIs and their varied degrees bring to mind another question – how should the private degrees, provided by state institutions (that are not educational institutions), be regulated? Who should do so?
All of these create a host of problems for the public – for hopeful students and parents and trusting employers. For the higher education sector, recruitment of academic staff, too, has become difficult due to this plethora of ambiguous higher education qualifications, as I discussed in a previous Kuppi article (‘Recruiting academics to state universities’).
Some issues in private HEIs – a bellwether for change in state universities
In this second part of this article, I will discuss some aspects of work in private HEIs – albeit the more established institutions – given that such issues may appear in reform agendas in future.
Across state universities, all permanent staff of a specific category are paid according to the same criteria. The picture is not so clear when it comes to private HEIs since they are different entities legally, typically companies. Private HEIs have salary scales and financial incentives that are different to each other. The more established private HEIs reportedly have attractive renumeration packages, possibly a reason for academics of state universities migrating eagerly to such institutions during sabbatical years and on retirement. This may not of course be the case with other less established, or improperly registered HEIs of which we know little. Academic staff of these more accepted private HEIs seem to value the high financial remuneration they receive (in comparison to state universities) as something that makes their work rewarding.
Attractive remuneration is important to sustain the good life and is at times seen as the institution’s way of encouraging good work. Yet, this has implications for the future of the institution: to continue to deliver on promised financial packages, institutions must continue to have large profit margins. One strategy has been to enroll multiple cohorts of students per year, even up to three or four intakes per year. This can result in exploitative work conditions, since staff must cater to all these cohorts in that same year. If there is inadequate staff, employees are further burdened. On the other hand, if there is a sudden drop in enrolments (degrees can go out of fashion) unexpected layoffs occur. Similar to other sectors that employ short-term contract staff – including state universities – in private HEIs, too, individual teachers, who are on short term contracts that need regular renewal, can feel pressured to work under difficult or exploitative conditions.
At the same time, even in the more established private HEIs, work norms differ from those of state universities in that they include promotional work that keeps the institution’s name in the eye of the public. The Marketing (or similarly named) unit comes up in conversations as one of the most important departments. It appears to weigh in on decision-making related to the number of staff, the amount of re-sits per exams, and other pedagogically important matters. This is a worrying example of how financial rationales interfere with pedagogically or academically sound processes, resulting in problematic results in the classroom. On the plus side, junior colleagues, who had experience in both state and private HEIs, also felt that they faced less harassment in private HEIs – primarily due to the private HEIs ability to take swift action in reported cases of harassment. This is a real indictment on state institutions and their reluctance to address chronic issues of harassment in our universities.
Yet, while we hear much about problems in state universities, we hardly hear of problems that staff in private HEIs face. One rationale for a lack of public expressions by staff is that expressions of discontent might lead to trouble given the importance of reputation for private HEIs. The worry about reputational damage is a growing concern in state universities, too, as evidenced by social media policies and internal conversations on reputational damage, consequent to negative publicity. Institutional worries of reputational damage are harmful in the long run since these impact not only freedom of expression by student and staff, but also research that is possible in and about the education sector.
Some thoughts at the end…
A close look at the private higher education sector is important given its strong presence in the country. Impending reform needs to regulate this diverse array of higher education offerings in the private sector, as well as the state institutions that offer privately-funded options of higher education (a topic for a separate Kuppi on its own). It is time we carefully considered how to build a whole system of higher education out of this broken mess.
Kaushalya Perera is a senior lecturer at the University of Colombo.
Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.
Features
Ready for solo spotlight
Singer Nish Peiris is set to take the next big step in her music journey.
The talented vocalist, who has been seen and heard in the scene here for a short while, and was also featured with the now-defunct band, Inner Vision, has announced that she will be fully committing to her solo career, after completing her degree this year.
“I’m finishing my degree this year, and after that I’ll be fully committing to my solo music career,” Nish told The Island.
“I’ve already got a few tours lined up for next year, so I’m really excited for what’s ahead.”
Fans, no doubt, will remember Nish for her smooth voice and stage presence, and the good news is that she is now ready to chart her own path and bring new music to audiences at home and abroad.
With tours already planned for 2027, the year 2026 promises to be an exciting year for the young artiste as she steps into the spotlight on her own.
We wish Nish every success in this new chapter!
-
Features4 days agoTwo memorable excerpts from a former SLAF commander’s memoir
-
Business4 days ago‘Giving up was never an option’: The fisherman who fought back after losing millions in SL
-
Latest News4 days agoDavis cup Asia/Oceania Group IV 2026 to be held in Colombo from 20th to 25th July
-
Features4 days agoErdoğan’s New Republic
-
Life style4 days agoTaste of the Swiss Alps comes to Colombo
-
News5 days agoEvidence recorded in money laundering case against Yoshitha Rajapaksa
-
News5 days agoDengue outbreak gallops ahead: Infections surpasses 73,455, leaving 50 dead
-
News6 days agoMoney laundering case against Yoshitha, fixed for pre-trial conference
