A Looming Political Earthquake
The Inflation Reduction Act’s unprecedented climate spending — much of it uninvestigated — may soon lead to unprecedented scandals
By Mark P. Mills | City Journal | November 4, 2024
If it weren’t for the election season swamping news coverage, odds are more people would be talking about the revelation that, to quote a Bloomberg headline, “The World Bank Somehow Lost Track of at Least $24 Billion.” In fact, that may understate the reality: the World Bank’s “accounting gap” could be as big as $41 billion. The missing funds in question were for “climate finance” projects, “financed by taxpayer dollars from its member countries, the biggest being the US.”
According to the Oxfam report that was the source for the Bloomberg story, “There is no clear public record showing where this money went or how it was used, which makes any assessment of its impacts impossible.” It is possible that much, maybe even most, of the missing money went to the intended people and purposes. But only the hopelessly naïve would dismiss the probability of rampant waste, malfeasance, graft, and outright theft as explanations for that “gap.” Spending of such magnitude and velocity with sloppy oversight is an invitation to thieves.
But the oversight scandal at the World Bank is chump change compared with the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and its massive planned “climate finance” program. The misnamed IRA is, in the words of its advocates, the “largest climate policy in US history.” [emphasis added] The law’s ambitions dwarf those of the World Bank. By various estimates, the IRA will lead to some $3 trillion in direct spending on grants, subsidies, and the like, plus another $3 trillion in related spending induced by mandates and rules. For perspective, that’s far more than the cost of Obamacare, and even more than the $4 trillion the U.S. spent (inflation adjusted) to fight World War II.
It makes zero difference which side you’re on regarding the urgency of climate change: the associated policies and spending are almost entirely about trying to create an “energy transition.” Nor does it matter what you think about whether such a transition is sensible (it isn’t): the sheer immensity of IRA spending represents a “whole of government” opportunity for waste, abuse, and fraud on an unprecedented scale.
If the likelihood for waste and abuse doesn’t strike you as obvious, consider a few well-documented features of federal spending in general. A March 2024 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on overall federal government spending in FY2023 found that “more than $175 billion of errors were overpayments—for example, payments to deceased individuals or those no longer eligible for government programs,” and “$44.6 billion were unknown payments.” [emphasis added] The only “good news,” the GAO wrote, was that the “unknown” was $11 billion less than in the previous fiscal year, when Covid money was still being liberally ladled out. Again, only the naïve would conclude that waste, fraud, and abuse didn’t account for any of those “unknown” payments and “errors” in the normal course of our government’s $6 trillion annual budget.
Now along comes the IRA, another federal government gusher, with its overall $6 trillion directed at “climate finance,” with far fewer administrative and oversight guardrails than one normally finds in federal programs. What could go wrong?
Where are all the curious investigative journalists? Fortunately, a few still exist, notably James Varney at RealClearInvestigations, who has recently published a preliminary investigation: “Overnight Success: Biden’s Climate Splurge Gives Billions to Nonprofit Newbies.”
The purpose of Varney’s investigation wasn’t to question the efficacy of the underlying spending policies, their cost-effectiveness, or their capacity to achieve their stated goals. (For the record, we have good reasons to question both the policies’ efficacy and goals. For example, a new analysis from the National Bureau of Economic Research reveals that the “IRA spends $23,000 to $32,000 per incremental EV sold.”) Rather, Varney sought answers to simple questions that fall under the purview of investigative journalism: Who’s getting the money, and what is it being spent on? Let’s hope Varney will inspire more reporters to dig in, because the massive scale of this “whole of government” spending program cannot possibly be covered by one person.
By necessity, Varney focused on just one tiny corner: the White House’s $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. As an EPA press release announced this past April: “Biden-Harris Administration Announces $20 Billion in Grants to Mobilize Private Capital and Deliver Clean Energy and Climate Solutions to Communities Across America.” Varney found that there isn’t “much public information” about many of the organizations receiving the funding, nor about what they’re doing or planning to do with the money.
Merely reading the EPA press release would raise some reasonable questions about the potential for waste and the relevance to “climate.” For instance, the EPA announcement says that one of the awards aims to “[d]edicate over $14 billion toward low-income and disadvantaged communities, including over $4 billion for rural communities as well as almost $1.5 billion for Tribal communities—ensuring that program benefits flow to the communities most in need and advance the President’s Justice40 Initiative.” Need it be said that poor communities consume far less energy than wealthier ones? Thus, changing behaviors or purchases among them would do nearly nothing to achieve the IRA’s stated climate goals. Regardless, one would want to know more about what, exactly, the grant-receiving organizations are doing or will do, and who runs them.
Varney reported that one award recipient obtained nonprofit status in 2023 and eight months later received a $940 million award. Another awardee received $2 billion just one month after obtaining nonprofit status and showing a prior reported income of $100 (not a typo). Varney doesn’t accuse any of these organizations of misdeeds; he merely sets out to establish some clarity on who got what, when, and where the money is going. However, when he contacted various recipients, he received either no responses or elliptical ones.
Again, setting aside the question of whether the spending will be useful, a reasonable person might object that we’re still in the early days and that it’s hard to spool up such an ambitious program. All true. But of course, the beginning is precisely the time when opportunities for waste and fraud get baked into a program. Varney reports: “The [$27 billion] awards were made by the Environmental Protection Agency, which is new to the world of major grantmaking. The agency acknowledges it has never handed out such gigantic sums of money, and its inspector general told Congress last month it marked a ‘fantastically complex’ and ‘unusual’ setup that his small staff would be hard-pressed to follow.”
Thus, we come back to obvious questions, such as: How is the grant-giving entity organized to evaluate and monitor funding recipients? How many of the groups were formed by political insiders? Regarding the latter, such arrangements can be perfectly benign, since insiders know where the money and opportunities reside. But the public has a right to know more. Certainly, one would hope Congress will put in place effective oversight. It is a huge amount of money. Again, from Varney’s reporting: “‘I can’t say enough about how complex this system will be,’ EPA Inspector General Sean O’Donnell testified to a House subcommittee in September. ‘It’s like they created an investment bank. It’s fantastically complex. I think it’s unusual.’”
Democrats have been eager to extol the IRA’s virtues. (The law was passed without a single Republican vote, only the second time something so consequential was so partisan. The other was Obamacare, which, it bears noting, didn’t create a “whole of government” lallapaloosa of multibillion-dollar grant-giving programs.) Given the stated claims and goals of the IRA, and the quantity of money already ladled out, one would expect to have seen far more news and press releases touting program successes. The IRA is, after all, the most expensive effort ever made to restructure an entire U.S. sector.
In the absence of further information, we can make a few reasonable suppositions: if the IRA is subject to typical levels of waste, abuse, and fraud for government largesse, then odds are that a major political tectonic shift is on the horizon. Perhaps more than any other single factor, the undoing of the climate-industrial complex could come from the volume of money being pushed into the economy to accelerate an impossible goal: the “energy transition.”
The popular expression “follow the money” comes from the iconic 1976 movie, All the President’s Men, which dramatized the Watergate investigation and the subsequent political earthquake. IRA spending dwarfs anything that precedes it. If serious investigative journalists do follow the money, it’s a good bet that we’ll see gargantuan scandals emerge.
Mark P. Mills is a City Journal contributing editor, the executive director of the National Center for Energy Analytics, and author of The Cloud Revolution.
New Report Adds to Evidence That Cellphone Radiation May Cause Brain Cancer
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. |The Defender | October 22, 2024
Peer-reviewed studies showing a link between brain cancer and cellphone radiation are piling up — contradicting a recent World Health Organization (WHO)-led study that claimed there’s no evidence of a link.
South Korean researchers — who analyzed 24 studies and published their report on Oct. 10 in Environmental Health — found significantly higher risks for malignant brain tumors, meningioma and glioma on the side of the head where cellphones were held.
They also found heavy, long-term cellphone use was linked to an increased risk of glioma.
The South Korean study brings the number of meta-analyses published since 2016 linking cellphone radiation to an increased risk of brain cancer to seven, wrote Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., on his website.
Moskowitz — who directs the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, Berkeley — has conducted and disseminated research on wireless technology and public health since 2009.
“These seven peer-reviewed meta-analytic studies contradict the conclusion of the recent WHO systematic review,” he said.
“Seven studies is a lot and we anticipate more in the future,” Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia, director of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless program, told The Defender.
Eckenfels-Garcia said:
“We encourage the WHO to revise its stance, unlikely as this may be. It’s more likely that the WHO and other captured agencies will label non-industry friendly science as misinformation, even if this puts the public further in danger.”
Moskowitz said there’s evidence that the WHO picked industry-biased researchers to conduct its review.
Lennart Hardell, M.D., Ph.D., a leading scientist who found a link between cellphone use and gliomas, agreed. He told The Defender it was “striking” that the South Korean researchers reached a conclusion that directly contradicted the findings by the authors of the WHO study.
Hardell — an oncologist and epidemiologist with the Environment and Cancer Research Foundation who has authored more than 350 papers, almost 60 of which address wireless radiation — said:
“The WHO study authors should be responsible for their fraudulent behavior violating human health and the environment. Their lack of ethical principles in science gives a ‘green card’ to roll out this technology — and the misinformed layman is the victim.”
Brain tumor rates on the rise in Denmark
The South Korean study was published on the heels of new health data from Denmark showing that central nervous system tumors — including brain tumors — are on the rise.
Denmark is known for its high-quality tracking of cancer cases. So it’s concerning when their data show a clear increase, Mona Nilsson, co-founder and director of the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation, told The Defender.
The Danish Cancer Registry on Sept. 30 published a report on the number of new cancer cases in Denmark, Nilsson said. It shows that central nervous system tumors have been increasing among both men and women.
Nilsson compared Danish central nervous system cancer diagnosis rates since 1995. “The data show that tumors of the central nervous system, including brain tumors, are increasing and are among the cancers that have increased most rapidly over the past 10 years, between 2014 and 2023.”

Credit: Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation
The Danish statistics contradict the notion that the rate of brain tumors isn’t on the rise, Nilsson said. “That argument has been used to claim that cellphone use is not linked to an increased risk of brain tumors or cancers in general.”
A 2023 study on brain cancer rates worldwide from 1990-2019 found a significant rise in brain cancer among both men and women in nearly all parts of the world. The study authors noted that this increase was largely seen in Western countries.
In the U.S., overall brain and other nervous system cancer rates haven’t increased, according to the National Cancer Institute. However, there are many reasons tumors may go unreported in the U.S. and other countries, according to Moskowitz.
For instance, Hardell in a 2017 peer-reviewed study found indications of underreporting in the Swedish Cancer Register.
Although the incidence of reported glioma diagnoses in U.S. adults has remained steady, Moskowitz noted in a Sept. 25 webinar, there’s been an increase in glioblastoma — “the most common and most serious malignant brain tumor.”
“We have seen increases in brain tumor incidents among children and young adults,” he added. “Clearly, more research is needed to understand these increases in tumor incidents.”
Ellie Marks told The Defender she and her son founded the California Brain Tumor Association after discovering that her husband’s brain tumor was likely caused by long-term heavy cellphone use.
After the tumor diagnosis in 2008, Marks sent her husband’s medical and phone records to wireless radiation experts, including Hardell. “They got back to me and said, ‘Yes, he is the poster boy for the cellphone brain tumor correlation,’” she recalled.
Her husband survived, but it’s not easy living with a brain tumor — and her husband is far from alone, she said. “I know many others who have experienced brain cancer attributed to their cellphone use.”
FDA turned blind eye to research linking wireless radiation and cancer
The uptick in brain cancer cases isn’t surprising, Eckenfels-Garcia said, and U.S. health agencies saw it coming.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) claims there’s not enough scientific evidence to link cellphone use to health problems, including brain cancer — but it rejected the findings of a $30 million study it commissioned on the topic.
At the FDA’s request, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) did a multi-year study, concluding there was “clear evidence” that male rats exposed to high levels of wireless radiation like that used in 2G and 3G cellphones developed cancerous heart tumors, and “some evidence” of tumors in the brain and adrenal gland of exposed male rats.
When the NTP in 2018 released its findings, the FDA rejected the study and in February 2020, released an unsigned literature review that criticized the study.
Commenting on the increased incidence of brain tumors, Eckenfels-Garcia said, “So essentially this is an ‘I told you so’ moment. This is exactly what happens when our captured government agencies ignore science, as the FDA did with the NTP study.”
Moskowitz said the FDA should have followed up on the NTP study by conducting a formal risk assessment of wireless radiation, but that never happened. Instead, the U.S. government shut down NTP’s follow-up work on its 2018 study.
In April, CHD filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for documents and communications related to why the U.S. government stopped the work. The NIH has not responded to the request.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Mossad behind Italian ‘blackmail’ spying scandal
The Cradle | November 1, 2024
An Italian private intelligence firm that allegedly hacked government databases to collect information on thousands of prominent people, including politicians, entrepreneurs, and celebrities, is accused of working for Israeli intelligence and the Vatican, media reported on 30 October.
Police wiretaps leaked to Italian media show that Equalize, which employs former members of Italian intelligence, is accused of breaching the servers of government ministries and the police between 2019 and 2024 to collect information.
Yedioth Ahronoth reported that Equalize allegedly collected numerous classified files that contain sensitive information about prominent Italians to sell to clients – including major companies and law firms seeking information to gain an advantage over competitors, win court cases, or for blackmail and extortion.
Prime Minister Meloni described the alleged scheme as “unacceptable” and “a threat to democracy.”
At least four people are currently under arrest, while dozens more are under investigation. Fearing that Equalize may have obtained state secrets, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto ordered an urgent parliamentary investigation.
Corsetto added that the stolen personal information was just the “tip of the iceberg.”
Politico reported that according to the leaked wiretaps, members of the hacking network met with two Israeli agents at the firm’s office in Milan in February 2023 to discuss a deal worth €1 million.
“The job was a cyber operation against Russian targets, including President Vladimir Putin’s unidentified ‘right-hand man,’ and unearthing the financial trail leading from the bank accounts of wealthy figures to the Russian mercenary group Wagner. The information was then supposed to be passed on to the Vatican,” Politico wrote.
In 2022, Wagner – founded by Yevgeny Prigozhin – mobilized mercenaries to fight on behalf of Russia against Ukraine. Prigozhin was assassinated shortly after carrying out a mutiny where forces were sent to Moscow.
According to the leaked wiretaps, the Israelis had offered to provide original documents from the “Qatargate” scandal, in which European Parliament officials, lobbyists, and their families were bribed to act on behalf of the gas-rich Gulf state in Brussels, Politico added.
The Israelis also allegedly offered Equalize information on the “illicit trafficking of Iranian gas with Italian companies,” potentially benefiting one of its major clients, national energy company Eni.
According to a report released on Wednesday by Italian newspaper Corriere Della Sera, two unidentified Israeli intelligence agents were intercepted while visiting the firm.
The Israelis’ visit was coordinated by Lorezo De Marcio, a senior member of the police who worked for Italian intelligence.
FBI ran ‘honeypot’ operation on 2016 Trump campaign – whistleblower
RT | October 30, 2024
Former FBI Director James Comey personally ordered “honeypot” spies to infiltrate Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, according to an agency whistleblower. The off-the-books operation was described by the agency insider as a “fishing expedition” to find wrongdoing among Trump’s team.
The operation was “personally directed” by Comey and launched in June 2015 without any case file being created in the FBI’s database, according to a whistleblower report handed to the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday and seen by the Washington Times.
At the time, Trump had just announced his first presidential campaign and neither he nor anyone on his campaign team was suspected of any crimes. Nevertheless, Comey ordered two “honeypot” agents to infiltrate Trump’s team on the campaign trail with the aim of extracting damning information from adviser George Papadopoulos, the report claimed.
A “honeypot” agent refers to an attractive woman who uses a sexual or romantic relationship to gather intelligence from a target.
Comey’s operation took place a year before the FBI’s ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ investigation into the Trump campaign’s alleged contacts with Russia, which later morphed into Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s two-year ‘Russiagate’ probe. According to the whistleblower, the honeypot operation was kept “off the books” to conceal it from the US Justice Department’s inspector general, who later determined that Comey knowingly lied when submitting evidence to obtain a warrant to surveil Trump’s campaign.
Papadopoulos was eventually questioned by the FBI and in 2017 pled guilty to making false statements to agents regarding his alleged contacts with Russia the year before. He served 12 days in federal prison in 2018, and has claimed ever since that he was entrapped by FBI agents posing as Russians with damaging information on Trump’s 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton.
He complained about sloppy FBI agents “dropping information in my lap that I did not want regarding Hillary Clinton’s emails in the hands of the Russians” during the Crossfire Hurricane probe, and claimed to have been targeted by at least one “honeypot” beforehand. However, Papadopoulos thought that the woman was working for the CIA and “affiliated with Turkish intelligence,” he said in 2019.
The operation was canceled when a newspaper obtained a photograph of one of the agents and was about to publish it, the whistleblower claimed. The FBI allegedly contacted the newspaper claiming that the woman in question was an informant, and not an agent, and would be killed if the photo was released, successfully preventing its publication. One of the agents was then allegedly transferred to the CIA so she would not be available as a potential witness.
“The FBI employee personally observed one or more employees in the FBI being directed to never discuss the operation with anyone ever again, which included talking with other people involved in the operation,” the report states.
The Judiciary Committee told the Washington Times that it “plans to look into” the report. Trump fired Comey in 2017, describing him as a “liar” and a “slimeball.”
Concerts, restaurants, nightlife – Kiev regime hunting for conscripts
By Ahmed Adel | October 30, 2024
Ukraine is struggling to recruit troops to reinforce its front lines amid thousands of casualties in nearly three years of conflict. Under these conditions, the Kiev regime is hunting for recruits in places that were once off-limit, such as “upscale venues,” whilst also becoming increasingly reliant on foreign mercenaries to perform special operations.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Kiev regime has expanded its search network for military recruits to include “upscale venues” and “nightlife spots,” which is creating more social tension.
Even as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tries to secure more weapons and security guarantees from the US government, the “biggest immediate problem” in Ukraine is recruiting more soldiers, the US outlet said. To deal with this issue, the Kiev regime recently lowered the age of compulsory military service to 25 and imposed additional penalties for draft dodgers, seeking to bring more soldiers to the front lines in the face of advancing Russian forces.
However, the newspaper said that most of the men who wanted to join the Ukrainian armed forces had already done so, while others had fled the country or were in hiding to avoid being drafted. Some prominent figures, including state prosecutors, are also avoiding joining the military by claiming medical exemptions.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the military is stepping up its recruitment campaigns in public places in the capital and other major cities. Military agents check concert halls, grocery stores, and even luxury restaurants in the port city of Odessa.
Mathieu Boulègue, a researcher at the Transatlantic Defence and Security Programme at the Centre for European Political Analysis, believes “there is no easy solution” to Ukraine’s troop shortage.
“That is unfortunately a critical issue that you cannot solve by sending stuff over, short of sending Western troops,” the researcher told the American outlet.
Some Ukrainian officials, cited by the outlet, said they were building up reserves of conscripts to replace those who had lost their jobs. However, they warned that mobilising new troops would not be effective without “more Western supplies to arm new recruits properly.”
The deployment of new Ukrainian troops is not just a military problem for Kiev, the Wall Street Journal noted, but also a growing social and political issue for Zelensky.
“Among soldiers who have been serving on the front line for nearly three years, resentment is building against men avoiding military service,” while scandals continue to emerge involving officials who allegedly accept bribes to grant exemptions.
For this reason, the Kiev regime is increasingly reliant on foreign mercenaries to perform military operations since the citizenry does not provide enough soldiers. In effect, the presence of foreign mercenaries demonstrates the extreme shortage of experienced troops in Ukraine.
In the latest example, foreign mercenaries from the US, Canada and Poland, likely on a sabotage mission or raid, attempted to breach Russia’s Bryansk Oblast on October 27. The special operations mission the mercenaries were assigned required highly skilled operators capable of sabotage or reconnaissance, so given the lack of such people in the Ukrainian military, it is reasonable that they would turn to foreigners.
Emphasising this point is the fact a tattoo was discovered on the body of one of the eliminated foreigners, indicating that he was a member of the elite 75th Ranger Regiment of the US Army.
The discovery of the mercenary group makes a mockery of the West’s claim that soldiers from North Korea are fighting in Ukraine since it is Ukraine suffering from a shortage of troops and relying on foreigners. In fact, it is clear that the West planned the operation rather than Ukraine.
While South Korea and the Kiev regime spread fake news that North Korean troops are fighting in Ukraine, about 15,000 mercenaries from more than 100 countries have arrived in the country since February 2022 to join Ukrainian forces.
According to a Russian Defence Ministry report, Western secret services recruit mercenaries through the US private military companies Academi (formerly Blackwater), Cubic, Dark Horse Benefits, Dean Corporation, Forward Observations Group, Hyperion Services, and Sons of Liberty International, as well as the Polish ASBS Othago and the European Security Academy. At the same time, mercenaries are recruited by neo-Nazi and right-wing organisations from Germany, Italy, Portugal and other countries.
With Ukraine’s best troops dead, wounded or exhausted, the Kiev regime is now hunting for recruits all over the country, including in places that were once considered off-limits. This only deepens Kiev’s reliance on foreign mercenaries and, more importantly, demonstrates the hopeless position that the regime is in.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
AIPAC’s massive spending in US elections exposed in new report
Al Mayadeen | October 25, 2024
The Intercept published on Friday an investigation into the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s (AIPAC) unprecedented spending strategy in US congressional elections.
This investigation reveals that AIPAC, a historically influential pro-“Israel” lobby, has transformed its tactics from traditional behind-the-scenes lobbying to direct financial involvement in political campaigns.
Ahead of the 2024 cycle, AIPAC announced plans to spend an astonishing $100 million to shape the congressional landscape, making it one of the most influential spenders in US elections.
According to The Intercept’s findings, AIPAC’s newly formed political action committees have injected millions of dollars into over 80% of congressional races in 2024, targeting both Republican and Democratic candidates.
The group’s total involvement includes over $17 million for Republicans and $28 million for Democrats, thus ensuring that pro-“Israel” voices dominate both sides of the aisle.
In the lead-up to the 2022 midterms, AIPAC’s spending marked a new chapter for the organization, which had previously steered clear of direct campaign contributions in favor of issue-based lobbying.
Now, AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, has fueled independent expenditures to the tune of $41.9 million, strategically deploying funds through high-impact ads and get-out-the-vote efforts.
While AIPAC has supported candidates across party lines, it has also poured millions into defeating progressive candidates who are critical of US-“Israel” relations, particularly within the Democratic Party.
For instance, AIPAC directed $11.7 million to one race in Missouri against Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), a prominent critic, making it one of the most expensive campaigns AIPAC has backed. This financial reach indicates AIPAC’s evolving strategy of reshaping the electoral landscape to stifle critiques of “Israel.”
The PAC has concentrated resources on high-stakes races like those of Reps. Cori Bush (D-Mo) and Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), leading to some of the most expensive Democratic primaries in recent history.
Together, AIPAC’s funds for these high-profile races exceeded $30 million, intensifying its campaign against progressive members of Congress. In a notable victory, AIPAC-backed candidates prevailed over several progressive incumbents who had called for greater scrutiny of US aid to “Israel.”
The Intercept’s investigation further highlights how AIPAC has also partnered with other pro-“Israel” groups, like the Democratic Majority for Israel, and is backed by prominent billionaire donors, some of whom have previously supported former President Donald Trump.
In one example of the far-reaching impact, AIPAC spent $5.1 million against a single congressional candidate in California — a considerable investment, particularly as “Israel” was barely a topic in the race.
The piece concludes that AIPAC’s recent involvement could reshape not only future congressional races but also the larger discourse on US policy in the Middle East, sparking further debate over the role of big money in American politics and the growing influence of special interest groups in shaping foreign policy.
“AIPAC — like every other corporate super PAC — represents the most broken parts of our campaign finance system that gives a handful of billionaires a vehicle to advance their interests at the expense of millions of everyday people,” Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, which has recruited and backed candidates against AIPAC, told The Intercept.
“If we want to stop rising costs, protect our communities, and prevent another endless war abroad then we need to take big money out of politics once and for all.”
Dark Money, Darker Motives: Why is Bill Gates Backing Kamala Harris Using Shady Super PAC?
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 23.10.2024
Tech billionaire, philanthropist and WEF cheerleader Bill Gates has given Kamala Harris’s campaign a $50 mln boost using dark money super PAC Future Forward. The donation was intended to remain secret, but was uncovered by NYT this week.
What’s Future Forward?
Set up in 2018 by former Obama campaign staffers and coming out of left field in the final weeks of the 2020 race to fund a massive pro-Biden media blitz, Future Forward is a super political action committee funded mostly by Big Tech and venture capital firms, including Meta, Google, disgraced crypto financier Sam Bankman-Fried, Bain Capital and Bridgewater Associates.
The super PAC has raised a whopping $700 mln for the 2024 election cycle, rolling out $75 mln in pro-Harris ads last week.
What’s Behind Gates’ Electoral ‘Generosity’?
2024 is at least the second election cycle where Gates has used a dark money vehicle to support the Democratic Party’s candidate. In 2020, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation contributed nearly $70 mln to the New Venture Fund, a nonprofit belonging to DC consultancy Arabella Advisors, which bankrolls the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a goliath of undisclosed donations for Democratic politicians and liberal causes which raised nearly $390 mln four years ago. Publicly, Gates and his now former wife also gave $500,000 to Biden’s inaugural committee.
Mr. Gates has been an active supporter of Democratic candidates since at least 2008, contributing financially to and praising the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Gates’ ties to the Clintons are deeply rooted, with the billionaire becoming a top donor to the Clinton Foundation, and forging partnerships with the organization for global projects since at least 2013.
In a telling interview in 2016 in which he explained his preference for Clinton, Gates said “there have been questions about vaccines in general where some of the candidates have shown that they’re not as up to date about vaccines in general, and that’s got to be a concern.”
“Science in general, whether it’s GMOs or vaccines, there’s a lot of people out there who don’t give science the benefit of the doubt. In terms of experience, Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton have more experience in global health,” Gates said at the time.
How has Gates profited off the Dems’ agenda?
With Harris’ presidential bid expected to broadly continue the Biden/Clinton line on foreign and domestic policy, it makes sense for Gates to throw his influence behind the VP, given the perceived threat of the Trump brand of red-pill MAGA Republicans and their anti-vax, anti-tech, and anti-interventionist leanings.
“This election is different, with unprecedented significance for Americans and the most vulnerable people around the world,” Gates said this week after info about his $50 mln donation leaked out.
“I think it’s great to have somebody who’s younger, who can think about things like AI and how we shape that in the right way, and I certainly offer up my opinions to the politicians who are interested,” Gates said this summer after Biden dropped out and named Harris his successor.
The Gates Foundation’s fortunes got a big boost under Biden, with its endowment growing from $69 bln in 2020 to $75.2 bln in 2023.
Gates enjoyed a profits bonanza off mRNA coronavirus vaccines mandated by the Biden administration. In 2022, he sold off shares of BioNTech stocks he bought in 2019 as sales slowed. His foundation has also owned shares in Pfizer, CureVac and Vir Biotech going back to well before the pandemic.
The billionaire’s foundation supports the Global Virome Project – an ambitious initiative created in 2018 to predict pathogens that could trigger lethal pandemics, but accused of weaponizing viruses from a network of 150 biolabs worldwide.
Gates has also backed a broad array of World Economic Forum-affiliated initiatives, including projects to reduce emissions and create synthetic meat and dairy. In 2022, The Seattle Times revealed Gates’ secret lobbying to save Biden’s signature $2+ trln Build Back Better social and climate spending package.
Gates has also been a top backer of the Biden administration’s battle against media and online ‘misinformation’, with an explosive MintPress investigation from 2021 revealing that his foundation had bankrolled some $319 mln in media, including CNN, the BBC, Le Monde, the Financial Times, Der Spiegel and others to ensure favorable coverage of his agenda and that of his allies.
Trump alleges UK ‘interference’ in US election
RT | October 22, 2024
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign has filed a complaint over alleged election meddling in the upcoming US election by the ruling party in the UK.
Labour Party officials have reportedly advised US Democrats about strategies, while activists have worked in battleground states, but insist that this is all perfectly legal because they haven’t technically donated any money to the party.
In a complaint to the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the Trump campaign alleged “blatant foreign interference” by Labour in the US election, in the form of “apparent illegal foreign national contributions” accepted by the Democrats and their nominee, current Vice President Kamala Harris.
Foreign nationals are prohibited from making “a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation,” in support of an American candidate, “directly or indirectly,” the complaint said, citing US law.
Among the evidence cited by the campaign is a Washington Post report that “strategists linked to Britain’s Labour Party have been offering advice to Kamala Harris about how to earn back disaffected voters and run a winning campaign from the center-left.”
Likewise, the UK outlet Telegraph has reported that Morgan McSweeney, chief of staff to British PM Keir Starmer, as well as Starmer’s chief of communications Matthew Doyle, attended the Democrats’ convention in Chicago and met with Harris’s campaign team.
Last week, Labour’s head of operations, Sofia Patel, posted on LinkedIn that she had “nearly 100 Labour party staff, current and former, going to the US in the next few weeks, heading to North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Virginia,” advertising ten openings in North Carolina. Patel told potential applicants that “we will sort your housing.”
Trump supporters, including Elon Musk, have pointed to Patel’s post as a clear violation of campaign laws. The post has since been deleted. Democrats, however, insist that none of this is illegal because it doesn’t involve financial contributions.
“This is a normal thing that happens in elections,” British Employment Minister Alison McGovern told Sky News last week, noting that Labour activists have campaigned for Democrats many times before.
Democrats have made unsubstantiated allegations that Russia somehow “meddled” in the US elections and that Trump was “colluding” with the Kremlin, after his surprise victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016. Claims of “Russian collusion” were used to oust and even imprison several Trump advisers and campaign aides, while hobbling his presidency and driving US-Russia relations to their worst point since the Cold War.
Will A Potemkin Election Follow Biden’s Potemkin Presidency?
By James Bovard | Real Clear Policy | October 18, 2024
President Biden has been derided for being a Potemkin president, a figurehead in a vast charade portraying him actually running the government. Biden was forced to withdraw from the presidential race after his disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump in June. But is a Potemkin presidency being followed by a Potemkin election?
Biden’s expulsion from the presidential race did not herald the arrival of truth. Most of the media still tolerates pervasive secrecy on prime issues of the 2024 campaign.
In bygone times, elections were about self-government. Nowadays, voters merely have a cameo role to sanctify the nearly boundless power of officialdom. Every year, the federal government slaps a “secret” label on trillions of pages of information – enough to fill 20 million filing cabinets. And since the government is automatically benevolent (if a Democrat is president), there is no need to trouble citizens with the grisly details of how they are being served.
At the same time Special Counsel Jack Smith is racing to fling all possible dirt at Trump before Election Day, each week we learn of new cover-ups designed to deceive Americans about how badly they have been misgoverned:
- Biden administration has mostly succeeded in covering up the crime wave by illegal aliens ushered into the nation since 2021. Former Border Patrol Sector Chief Aaron Heitke testified to Congress last month that the Biden administration hid the adverse impact from deluging U.S. cities with illegal aliens, including those with terror ties.
- The National Archives announced on Wednesday that it would delay until after the election the release of potentially damning records on Vice President Joe Biden’s dealings with his son and foreign wheelers-dealers – records that have been sought for more than a year by conservative lawyers and activists.
- Biden’s Justice Department sought to bury all the tax charges against Hunter Biden but were thwarted thanks to courageous IRS whistleblowers. Hunter’s guilty plea last month to the tax charges confirms that the Justice Department’s offer a wrist-slap plea bargain to Hunter last year was a shameless obstruction of justice.
- Biden’s FBI last year created “a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump’s army of MAGA followers,” Newsweek reported. FBI whistleblowers have exposed the politicization of an agency that even secretly targeted traditional Catholics who prefer to hear mass in Latin. But the vast majority of FBI surveillance and entrapment abuses remain shrouded.
- Team Biden is covering up both Trump assassination attempts. Biden appointees have stonewalled bipartisan congressional investigations into the abysmal Secret Service failures at Butler, Pennsylvania. The Justice Department has indefinitely delayed hearings for Ryan Routh, the 58-year-old guy caught waiting to shoot Trump on his Florida golf course. Delaying proceedings against Routh assures that Americans will not learn before the election whether the would-be assassin had ties to the CIA, Pentagon, State Department or other agencies that assisted Routh with his massively-publicized campaign to recruit foreign soldiers to fight for Ukraine.
- The Biden administration continues covering up almost everything regarding its support for Ukraine’s fight against Russia. The best info Americans have received was thanks to a young military computer technician who leaked revelations that the Ukrainian military was in far worse shape than Team Biden claimed. Americans have been forced to pay hundreds of billions of dollars but are left in the dark regarding Biden administration machinations that risk pulling this nation into World War Three.
- The House Oversight Committee this week subpoenaed DHS for its records on Tim Walz’s possible ties to the CCP after being contacted by a whistleblower. There is zero chance that the Biden administration will release any of those records before Election Day.
- Political convenience is practically the sole determinant of what Americans are permitted to learn nowadays. After Biden dropped his re-election bid, the administration disclosed records showing that his son Hunter sought U.S. government handouts for Burisma when Joe Biden was Vice President. That scandal was buried until Joe Biden was no longer politically relevant.
Is censorship the biggest X factor for this election? Four years ago, the presidential election may have been swung by the coverup of the damning revelations in Hunter Biden’s laptop. The FBI and the CIA hustled to censor and defuse that story with false rebuttals in October 2020. According to multiple federal court rulings, federal agencies tampered with the 2020 election by censoring millions of comments by Americans who raised doubts about the trustworthiness of mail-in ballots and other election procedures. Federal judge Terry Doughty noted that “virtually all of the free speech suppressed was ‘conservative’ free speech.” A federal appeals court issued an injunction prohibiting federal officials from acting “to coerce or significantly encourage social-media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce . . . posted social-media content containing protected free speech.”
But the Supreme Court refused to recognize that the censorship victims had any legal standing and canceled the injunction. Americans will likely have no idea how many muzzles and blindfolds were secretly attached by federal agencies and federal contractors before Election Day.
Don’t expect journalists to suddenly get hot to thwart those Biden cover-ups. When the media shrouded Biden’s mental debility, it directly endorsed de facto secret rule. How much effort has the New York Times or Washington Post or National Public Radio exerted to reveal who is actually exercising the supreme power nowadays? Exposing that issue could derail Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign so it is ignored. But Biden is as oblivious as ever. When asked by a reporter on Thursday about the situation in the Hurricane Helene storm zone, Biden replied that those states “are getting everything they need. They are very happy across the board.”
Earth to Uncle Joe?!?
But as long as Donald Trump is not elected next month, most of the Washington media doesn’t care who is in control. If the Wizard of Oz was a contemporary political campaign story, the media would overwhelmingly side with the guy behind the curtain. As long as the Wizard recited “Orange Man Bad,” the media would cover up all his abuses.
But “informed consent” is a mirage if the feds blindfold voters. As long as Team Biden keeps a lid on its worst outrages until Election Day, Democrats can snare four more year to abuse the Constitution, the law, and the American people. Unfortunately, self-government is not retroactive.
James Bovard is a contributing editor for The American Conservative. He is the author of ten books, including Public Policy Hooligan, Attention Deficit Democracy, The Bush Betrayal, and Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty. His latest is Last Rights: The Death of American Liberty.
The Zionist lobby wins, but the U.S. loses
Deployment of American troops into the Middle East shows how the pro-Israel lobby profoundly influences American foreign policy

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 15, 2024
The U.S. has apparently made the decision to intervene directly in the large-scale conflict currently taking place in the Middle East. According to recent reports, American military units, including auxiliary groups and special forces, are being sent to Israel to more effectively support Tel Aviv’s forces in their land-to-air operations.
The main reason for the U.S. intervention is to support the IDF in air defense operations, and there is an official statement that there is no intention to use U.S. troops on direct combat lines. However, these claims have no practical credibility, since what we are seeing in the Middle East is a progressive escalation.
Previously, direct American assistance was limited to the naval front. Now, specialized troops are already operating air defense systems on “Israeli” soil. Soon, it is quite possible that there will be direct American combat involvement both in Gaza and on the border with Lebanon, since Washington clearly does not have the ability to impose limits on Israel.
The arrival of American troops in Israel at this time is highly significant because the Zionist occupation is going through one of the most difficult moments in its recent history. Israel failed to achieve any of its strategic objectives with the genocidal operation in the Gaza Strip, having killed thousands of civilians, but failed to defeat Hamas and free the prisoners of war. Now, after suffering a humiliation during the recent Iranian attack on Zionist military and strategic bases, Israel is carrying out a disastrous invasion of Lebanon, where it suffers from Hezbollah’s high qualification in guerrilla and attrition warfare – in addition to Israeli cities being increasingly easy targets for the Shiite militia’s missiles and drones.
It is fair to say that Israel is facing more difficulties now than at any other time in its military history. Tel Aviv is exhausting its defense and intelligence resources without achieving any meaningful objective, falling into a trap from which it will certainly not escape without profound changes in its state structure – if not its actual ceasing of existence as a state.
It would be naive to think that Pentagon strategists are unaware of this type of situation. Despite American propaganda encouraging Israel, senior American defense officials certainly know that entering Israel is strategic suicide for the United States, which is why the Pentagon’s recent decision seems even more irrational. However, it is important to understand that not all decisions made by a state are based on strategic sense and rationality, and that several factors influence it, such as historical and ideological ties and, above all, the stimulus of various lobbies.
Contrary to what many experts say, the reality of U.S.-Israeli ties cannot be understood by taking Washington as the main agent of relations. Israel seems to have much more influence on American politics than Washington has in Tel Aviv. It is no coincidence that, despite Democrats and Republicans disagreeing on many issues, they continue to agree on Israel, with support for Zionism being absolute among all American politicians.
In fact, what the decision to send American military personnel to Israeli soil reveals is that it is the Zionist lobby that really controls the main strategic decisions of the United States. Joe Biden and his main allies have made it clear several times that they are not willing to directly support Israel in a major regional war in the Middle East. With elections coming up and major domestic problems in the United States, all Washington wants to do is to resolve its own issues and avoid military engagement. However, American decision-makers do not seem to have enough strength to neutralize the influence of the Zionist lobby, giving in on several important issues, even though all strategic sense advises something different to be done.
In the end, it is possible to say that once again the Zionist lobby has won the American political game. It remains to be seen how long the U.S. will be able to resist the pressure from this same lobby for [increased] direct intervention.





