MORE TO COME...

 

READ FROM TOP....

 

SEE ALSO: 

the YD continuum since 2005....

 

PLEASE DO NOT BLAME RUSSIA IF WW3 STARTS. BLAME AMERICA.

 

 

 

 

 

The legacy of outgoing US President Joe Biden will be defined by “many failures,” US House speaker Mike Johnson said in a post on X on Wednesday.

One of them was “engineering the worst border crisis in US history, bringing terrorists and violent illegals into our communities,” Johnson wrote.

According to data from US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), more than 300,000 people were illegally crossing into the US from Mexico at the peak of the influx in the winter of 2022, with the number subsiding to around 100,000 since then.

Biden’s other failure was “fueling skyrocketing inflation,” which peaked at 9.1% in June 2022, the house speaker said.

He also blamed the president for “weaponizing the [Department of Justice] to target political opponents,”apparently referring to the criminal cases launched against US President-elect Donald Trump.

“Pardoning his son despite saying he never would, and giving murderers and rapists clemency” was another of Biden’s blunders, according to Johnson.

Hunter Biden had been convicted of lying about his long-standing drug addiction when buying a handgun and also pleaded guilty to three felonies and six misdemeanor tax offenses. However, the president pardoned his son in December, claiming that he was prosecuted “selectively and unfairly” because of his familial ties.

The 81-year-old Biden was also “hiding from the American people his mental decline,” the speaker noted.

Biden withdrew from the presidential race in July and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as his replacement amid pressure from his own Democratic Party not to seek reelection after a poor performance during his first debate with Trump.

Johnson’s critique also included two foreign policy flops by the outgoing president, “orchestrating the disastrous withdrawal [of US forces] from Afghanistan” in 2021 and “emboldening enemies through a policy of appeasement.”

During his speech at the Department of State on Monday, Biden, who will be succeeded by Trump on January 20, claimed that “the US is winning the worldwide competition compared to four years ago”under his leadership.

READ MORE: Biden warns of ‘oligarchy’ 

“America is stronger. Our alliances are stronger,” he insisted, suggesting that the fact that nations like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea have been growing closer together during his term was a sign of their weaknesses.

https://www.rt.com/news/611015-biden-johnson-us-trump/

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

SEE ALSO: 

the YD continuum since 2005....

 

PLEASE DO NOT BLAME RUSSIA IF WW3 STARTS. BLAME AMERICA.

 

SEE ALSO:

biden's sacrifice...

We should acknowledge that Biden's dealings with Burisma/Ukraine were not corrupt, but HIGHLY CORRUPT. Mind you, Joe Biden was prepared to sacrifice his clean Christian image so the US could spread de-mo-cra-cy in Ukraine — in the name of justice and freedom the American way and take Ukraine away from the clutches of Nasty Russia. 

Ukraine being a highly corrupted country, in order to get a look in, one needed to play the game, even after the Revolution of Dignity (Maidan 2014 — inspired and financed in a great part by US cash to the Ukrainian Nazis).To recap:

Burisma was (is) a company that “belongs” to Zlochevsky, a former minister of Ecology in the Yanukovych government, who awarded gas and oil leases to himself. Corruption galore.

Burisma was thus prosecuted under the Poroshenko regime for Zlochevsky awarding gas and oil leases to himself when a minister. 

Poroshenko was a smart operator who wanted “some of the Burisma cake”. Poroshenko had made his fortune by importing chocolates, sinking and buying all his competitors and “making” deals with other big business in ways that could be compared to Mafia's protection money. When he became President of Ukraine, he got all the big companies investigated by the PGO. The concept was to stop all operations of these companies until they paid bribes. Poroshenko was not too greedy as to kill the goose (geese), though.

For example, Zlochevsky’s Burisma was asked to pay $1million a month to the Poroshenko outfit. This was in the form of free gas to Poroshenko’s own companies. Zlochevsky was still “investigated", but his company was thus allowed to operate. Zlochevsky was not too happy. he wanted the investigation closed. He made a proposal in 2015, relayed by a certain Onyschenko to Poroshenko:  $50 million to Poroshenko to close the investigation. Onyschenko secretly recording his conversation with Poroshenko (eventually the recording became public. There is a small connection to Shell and ExxonMobil being exempt of something).
Petro Poroshenko: "Kolya [Zlochevsky] is a good guy... I’ll think about what can be done. The Americans have been getting angry about him lately.” 
Oleksander Onyschenko: “in theory, They shouldn’t do anything against him, because Biden’s son is on the board. And so is Kwasniewski. So Westerners won’t be stepping on our toes when I talk to Kolya [Zlochevsky]. 
Petro Poroshenko: “Well, I’ll think about what can be done. say hello to Kolya for me."

Aleksander Kwasniewski, a former Polish president and a board member for Ukrainian gas company Burisma, said that when Hunter Biden was "asked" in 2014 to join its advisory board, he told him that the company was working to overcome a difficult past and was determined to be well-managed and transparent. Kwasniewski and Hunter Biden were placed on the Burisma board by Zlochevsky, for “protection”.

If Burisma succeeded in tapping into Ukraine's gas deposits, it would help Ukraine get energy independence from Russia, a key part of its broader struggle to exist as an sovereign nation. 

“Independence from Russia…” is the key to the whole charade…

Thus the US embassy in Kyiv was in two minds about investigating Burisma. Some  staff “wanted" an investigation. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt was neutral. And Poroshenko “had to agree with the Americans”… According to whistleblowers, this was seen "as a way to get some black cash for the US elections"… They could participate in the  collection of bribe moneys from Burisma. Biden saw Poroshenko in 2015. Joe Biden gave six hours to Poroshenko to stop the prosecution into Burisma. The Prosecutor was Shokin. 

Was this a corrupt act from Joe Biden? YES AND YES AND YES. ONE CANNOT GO IN ANOTHER COUNTRY AND INTERFERE WITH ITS JUSTICE SYSTEM, crooked or not... But Biden gloated about it:

“I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."

The investigations were terminated by prosecutor Lutsenko in 2017 who got a lot of money to stop the investigation — as well as Poroshenko.

----------------------

The investigators had raised the hard fact that Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma. This was annoying to their probe… Poroshenko could “not do everything… because the American (Hunter Biden) was there."

The prosecutors in Ukraine were afraid of losing their visa to the USA, should they prosecute Burisma, because of the US connection via Hunter Biden.

Despite Kwasniewski assurances, Zlochevsky had ONLY given the job to Hunter Biden to prevent any investigation into his company, as Joe Biden was the Vice President of the United States. This has been rigorously verified.

But in order to really stop the investigation, before Shokin came along, there were "suggestions” within Burisma of bribing the prosecutor general office (which demanded bribes to stop the investigation)…

Zlochevsky paid, sharing the money to Poroshenko and to the PGO… Controlling corruption by benefitting from corruption was the name of the game. It has been confirmed that investigations into Burisma started under prosecutor Vitaly Yarema.

Shokin (the new so-called “inefficient” prosecutor) had found out that Burisma didn’t just pay $50,000 every months to Hunter Biden but about $3.6 million in hidden money transfers to a Hunter Biden Company. Poroshenko told Onyschenko that Biden had interests into Burisma and they would close the case. So, Zlochevsky paid dark moneys to Biden and Poroshenko. Case closed (after Joe Biden’s intervention) — before the US elections. Now the case has been reopened.
Documents have shown that many members of the Ukrainian parliament had been bribed [by Poroshenko’s government] to vote in favour of Shokin’s removal as a prosecutor.
Meanwhile in the USA, Shokin would be described as "an inefficient prosecutor" by the State Department, replace by "someone who was solid at the time…"
And the “liberal” MSM publishes that Shokin was removed because he was inefficient… Joe Biden is above board. Easy fix. 
And we still don’t know of other Biden fiddles, which might surface tomorrow...
-----------------------------
"If His Name Was Hunter Smith He Probably Wouldn't Be Getting Paid"

 

SEE ALSO: https://www.rt.com/news/610994-hunter-biden-art-destroyed-fire/

 

SEE ALSO: https://johnmenadue.com/joe-bidens-legacy-the-palestinian-genocide/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMFJs3pmq54

Bill O'Reilly and Stephen A. Smith Reacts to Joe Biden's Farewell Speech on NewsNation

 

Bill O'Reilly and Stephen A. Smith voice their dissatisfaction with President Biden's goodbye speech on NewsNation with Chris Cuomo.

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

SEE ALSO: 

the YD continuum since 2005....

 

PLEASE DO NOT BLAME RUSSIA IF WW3 STARTS. BLAME BIDEN.

 

 

 

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer
Congress is poised to add $150 billion to the defense budget this week. Let's take a look at where that goes

 

BY WILLIAM HARTUNG

 

 

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

 

 

#1 The military-industrial complex (the MIC) is a special interest lobby on steroids.

In many ways the denizens of the MIC — the Pentagon, the uniformed military, the weapons makers, and their allies in Congress — are more concerned with lining their own pockets and deriving political benefits than they are with crafting well-considered plans for how best to defend America and its allies.

Unfortunately, since Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex in his January 17, 1961 farewell address, the military-industrial complex is more powerful than ever. The companies are larger, the budget is larger, and its influence is greater, so advocates of a more affordable, effective approach to defense have even a higher hill to climb than they did six decades ago.

#2 More Pentagon Spending Doesn’t Make Us Safer

Contrary to the common misconception that when it comes to military spending, more is always better, too often overspending on the Pentagon fuels costly and dangerous arms races and enables unnecessary wars by emphasizing military solutions and neglecting smart diplomacy. 

Our current, “cover the globe” strategy calls for the U.S. military to be able to intervene anywhere in the world on short notice. It calls for an immense, costly global military footprint that includes over 750 military bases and counterterror operations in 85 countries. It is a recipe for endless war. And when we’re not intervening directly, we’re often providing the weapons for other countries to fight wars, as is happening, with tragic effect, in the billions of dollars in arms the United States has supplied in support of Israel’s campaign of mass slaughter in Gaza.

If we want to defend ourselves, we should figure out what we need to defend ourselves, rather than just piling one weapon on another weapon on another weapon and hope that it all works out.

 

#3 The Military-Industrial Complex is a Terrible Jobs Program

The economy is getting weaker and debt exploding, so there is a premium on spending our tax dollars in ways that can counter, and hopefully reverse, that trend.

Jobs should be front and center in our national priorities. If you can’t make money, if you can’t feed your family, that’s a threat to your security, and, if enough people are in that category, it’s a threat to national security writ large.

Unfortunately, pumping up the Pentagon is not a solution to these adverse economic trends. As Heidi Peltier of the Costs of War Project has demonstrated, investing in alternatives like infrastructure, green energy, education and health care can generate anywhere from 9 percent to 250 percent more jobs for the same amount spent as giving the same amount of money to the Pentagon and the arms industry. 

Even worse, there is evidence to suggest that Pentagon spending will be an even poorer job creator going forward. According to the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA), the arms industry’s largest trade association, direct jobs in the arms manufacturing sector have dropped by almost two-thirds since the 1980s, from 3 million jobs then to 1.1 million jobs now. 

And a defense industrial base focused on software-based emerging tech weapons that utilize AI to produce pilotless aircraft, ships and armored vehicles will likely create even fewer jobs per amount spent than current military outlays.

 

#4 The majority of the Pentagon budget goes to contractors.

While Pentagon budget boosters always argue that higher military spending is good for the troops, analyst Stephen Semler has determined that more than half of the department’s budget goes to contractors. And at the same time these firms are reaping hundreds of billions of dollars of our taxes each year, there are military families who need food stamps to make ends meet, and sharp cuts in veterans benefits in the offing based on budget proposals for this year and next.

Meanwhile, the arms makers are producing dysfunctional weapons systems that don’t work as advertised, cost billions more than originally projected, and spend more time in the hangar than being ready to use. To add insult to injury, much of the new funding they have received in recent years has gone to $20 million CEO salaries, or billions in spending to bid up their own stock prices – none of this spending does anything to defend us, but it does enrich the weapons makers, their executives, and their shareholders.

Really taking care of the troops would require spending more to take care of them by providing affordable housing and health care; better, more realistic training before sending them into combat; weapons that work as advertised and don’t spend half the time being repaired instead of being ready for combat; and a more realistic strategy that doesn’t put them in impossible situations and unwinnable wars. 

And it would mean spending the $45 million-plus allocated for a military parade into directly investing in the needs of our veterans, and telling and honoring their stories rather than putting the focus on ostentatious displays of weaponry.

#5 It doesn't have to be this way

Promoters of ever higher Pentagon spending claim that pushing for more diplomacy, or having allies do more in their own defense is naive, because it’s a harsh world out there and it is necessary to have force and the threat of force as the leading elements of our foreign policy. Actually, if you want to defend the country, don’t overspend on the military, and don’t let special interests shape our foreign policy for their own financial gain. Don’t just assume that every solution has to be military. A military-first approach to foreign policy is not only naive, it is incredibly dangerous.

 

William Hartung

William D. Hartung is a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. His work focuses on the arms industry and U.S. military budget. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/defense-budget-reconciliation/

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

 

PLEASE DO NOT BLAME RUSSIA IF WW3 STARTS. BLAME DONALD TRUMP.