Connect with us

Politics

Biden Doesn’t Need Congress To Get ‘Urgent’ Aid To Ukraine, So Why Is He Blaming Republicans?

Published

on

President Biden’s latest State of the Union priorities had not so much to do with the state of our troubled union, but more with his reluctance to aid another country.

Over the last few months, the White House waged an intense pressure campaign on House Republicans to approve the “Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024” in order, the president and his surrogates say, to “save Ukraine.”

Senior Biden officials have pushed the bill for months. In February, after Ukrainian forces had to withdraw from the heavily fortified city of Avdiivka, Biden directly blamed Congress. Last week, in a meeting at the White House with Polish President Andrzej Duda, Biden said Congress must pass the bill “before it is literally too late.” CIA Director Bill Burns told Congress that without the supplemental bill, Ukraine losses would be “significant,” which would be a “massive and historic mistake for the United States.”

So what does the bill really say? How much is designated for Ukraine? And how much might realistically be shipped to Ukraine in 2024?

What’s in the Bill?

Proponents claim the bill will provide embattled Ukraine with $60 billion worth of military aid. Apparently, few have bothered to read the document.

The supplemental bill provides funds through three main channels: the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), Foreign Military Financing (FMF), and the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA).

The bill provides $13.8 billion for USAI until Sept. 30, 2025, or over the next two fiscal years, 2024 and 2025. FMF is allocated

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Politics

Nonprofit Sues Northwestern University Over Discriminatory Affirmative-Action Hiring Practices

Published

on

Whistleblowers from within Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law reported that highly qualified white men were rejected in favor of “mediocre and undistinguished women and racial minorities” in violation of federal anti-discrimination law, according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday.

The nonprofit group Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences (FASORP), formed “for the purpose of restoring meritocracy in academia,” is challenging the school’s “affirmative-action” hiring practices in court. Former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan F. Mitchell authored the lawsuit, which alleges Northwestern has violated several federal laws, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Title IX

“Faculty hiring at American universities is a cesspool of corruption and lawlessness. For decades, left-wing faculty and administrators have been thumbing their noses at federal anti-discrimination statutes and openly discriminating on account of race and sex when appointing professors,” Mitchell wrote in the lawsuit. “This practice, known as ‘affirmative action,’ is firmly entrenched at institutions of higher learning and aggressively pushed by leftist ideologues on faculty-appointments committees and in university DEI offices. But it is prohibited by federal law, which bans universities that accept federal funds from discriminating on account of race or sex in their hiring decisions.”

Bad Actors

The suit names a variety of individual bad actors as defendants in addition to Northwestern University. These include law school Dean Hari M. Osofsky, Professors Sarah Lawksy, Janice Nadler, and Daniel Rodriguez, and law review student editors Dheven Unni and Jazmyne Denman.

The lawsuit alleges then-Dean Rodriguez created a mandate 12 years ago

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

Jill Biden Vogue Cover Sparks Concern Over Her ‘Lust For Power’ After The President’s Disastrous Debate

Published

on

Vogue magazine drew heavy criticism this week for featuring First Lady Jill Biden as its August cover girl after her husband, President Joe Biden, suffered what was widely regarded as a failed debate performance against Donald Trump. 

The first lady spoke with the magazine from Camp David days after last week’s debate, vowing that she and Joe Biden would continue to fight. She did not directly respond to criticism of her husband’s debate performance, but she said he “will always do what’s best for the country.”

According to figures on both the left and the right, however, what is best for the country is for the 81-year-old president to step down — for his own sake and the nation’s.

Conservative commentator Katie Pavlich, who has 1 million followers on X, posted the glitzy magazine’s fawning cover. “This is something else,” Pavlich said reacting to the feature story.

This is something else:

“I If you want to know what power feels like, try to get yourself driven around in a motorcade. Flashing police chaperone lights form a perimeter as you blaze down an empty highway, waiting cars backed up on entry ramps as you pass. It’s as if the world… https://t.co/MLyqyEbe2d

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) July 1, 2024

“Her lust for power is on full display. She’s not even ashamed,” Jenna Ellis, a conservative radio host and lawyer, said in response to Pavlich’s tweet.

Former special assistant to President Trump Chad Gilmartin wrote, “America gets a part-time president who is easily

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

Ex-FBI Counsel Behind Russiagate, Biden Laptop Censorship Now Part Of Left-Wing Election Network

Published

on

The former FBI general counsel who pushed Twitter to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story is now working with a left-wing election influencers’ group. 

James Baker, also prominent for his role in pushing the FBI’s political persecution of former President Donald Trump for the “Russiagate” hoax, is listed as a member of the National Task Force on Election Crises. The group is a subsidiary of the left-wing Protect Democracy Project, a litigation group formed to oppose Trump’s policies, according to InfluenceWatch.

The task force pushes early and mail-in voting, claims to help prevent “cyber or other attacks by foreign adversaries or domestic disrupters,” promotes “pre-canvassing of absentee ballots,” seeks to discourage legal election challenges, and advocates for censorship of certain online speech about elections.  

Working for the Regime

Baker’s key areas of expertise, according to the group’s website, are “legal and legislative issues,” “political violence and intimidation,” “foreign and cyber interference,” and “election subversion.”

Baker certainly knows about “legal issues.” While serving as the FBI’s lead counsel, he met with Michael Sussmann — who he later admitted was a “friend” — and who provided “intel” supposedly proving connections between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, a Russian company. Sussmann claimed he was acting on his own behalf, though he was later found to have been working for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

Baker should also know about “political violence and intimidation,” considering that he prompted the FBI to investigate Trump using Sussmann’s faulty information. He also told Congress Sussmann’s lie

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Trending