Hungarian news portal calls Biden’s decision to sanction minister ‘a slap in the face’
Remix News | January 9, 2025
In the wake of the United States sanctioning Antal Rogán, the minister in charge of Prime Minister Orbán’s cabinet office, the Mandiner news portal assesses the case as highly unusual.
The official statement from the U.S. Treasury Department quotes Bradley T. Smith, the Treasury Department’s Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, as saying: “The United States will not hesitate to hold accountable individuals, like Rogan, who use the power of their office to illicitly enrich themselves and their cronies at the expense of their country and their fellow citizens.”
The justification does not contain specific cases, but writes about general corruption, referring to the 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index. This index was prepared by Transparency International (TI), which receives support from organizations affiliated with the United States Department of State and George Soros, among others.
The sanctions action taken by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) was based on Presidential Executive Order 13818, which implements the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act.
The Magnitsky Act allows the United States to impose sanctions on individuals for either corruption or human rights abuses. As Human Rights First describes it, the U.S. Congress passed the original Magnitsky Act in 2012 in response to the death in custody of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian tax consultant who exposed a massive tax fraud scheme. The Magnitsky Act authorized the United States to impose sanctions on Russians involved in Magnitsky’s brutal detention and other human rights abuses against activists. Interestingly, the law does not define exactly what corruption means.
Between 2017 and 2023, the United States sanctioned 650 foreign individuals citing the law.
Even the soon-to-be-departing Pressman admitted that Antal Rogán’s sanctioning was unprecedented: “It is not common for the United States to designate a sitting minister. Even less common to do so in an Allied country.”
How unprecedented the case is, is well illustrated by the company in which the Biden administration placed the Hungarian minister.
People are usually put on the sanctions list for very serious reasons. Former Afghan parliamentarian Ajmal Rahmani, for example, was sanctioned in 2023 for allegedly mismanaging U.S. government aid intended for the reconstruction of his war-torn country and then building an extensive business and real estate empire in Germany and Dubai.
Under the Trump administration, a European politician was sanctioned as well. In December 2019, the U.S. government sanctioned Latvian politician Aivars Lembergs for money laundering, embezzlement, bribery, and abuse of office. Four entities owned or controlled by Lembergs were also designated, including the Ventspils Freeport Authority, which operated a major international port.
In 2021, the U.S. Treasury Department announced sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act against three Bulgarian individuals: former parliamentarian Delyan Peevski, prominent businessman Vasil Bozhkov, and former national security official Ilko Zhelyazkov. In addition, 64 entities allegedly associated with them were also sanctioned, Radio Free Europe reported.
Each of the cases mentioned above clearly shows that usually when someone is put on a sanctions list for corruption, their accomplices are also sanctioned, as well as the companies involved.
The Biden administration has a history of using the Justice Department and Democratic prosecutors against its own political opponents, so it is not surprising that it is using sanctions against the Hungarian government. The timing of the sanctions is also telling, as Joe Biden’s government will leave in two weeks, so this decision can be interpreted as a diplomatic slap in the face.
Biden to Rush Final ‘Substantial’ Weapons Transfer to Ukraine
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | January 7, 2025
Before President Joe Biden exits the White House later this month, he is planning a massive final aid package for Ukraine. The Pentagon will attempt to rush the weapons to Kiev before President-elect Donald Trump takes office.
Two defense officials said the new package would be announced on Thursday during a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group at an American military base in Germany, the Associated Press reported. The sources added that the weapons will come directly from US military stockpiles, and will be fast-tracked to Ukraine before Trump’s second term begins in less than two weeks.
The rush to provide Kiev with a “substantial” arms shipment before Trump returns to power appears aimed at undermining the president-elect’s stated goal of bringing the war in Ukraine to an end.
Since the American people voted for Trump to be the next president, the current administration has significantly escalated support for Kiev, even allowing Ukrainian forces to use long-range American missiles against targets inside Russia. Biden has also signed off on billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine since the war kicked off in early 2022.
The sources did not tell the AP how large the final package would be, though there is about $4 billion in congressionally authorized funding for Ukraine. The officials indicated that the Trump administration will have “more than a couple billion” in funding to send weapons to Ukraine.
While Trump pledged to bring the war to a close on the campaign trail, some incoming officials have stated that he intends to continue the arms shipments once he returns to power.
Since the start of the war, Washington has approved over $180 billion in aid to Ukraine; however, Kiev insists it has received only a fraction of that sum.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky elaborated during a recent podcast interview with Lex Friedman, saying “If we take, for example, money from the United States of America. During all this time of the war, around $177 billion have been voted for or decided upon, $177 billion.” He continued, “Let’s be honest. We have not received half of this money.”
The White House has announced at least $60 billion in military aid along with more than $100 billion in other forms of assistance, while America’s NATO allies have committed an additional $60 billion-plus in military support for the Ukrainian war effort.
Desperate Biden ignores precedent by arming the DPP
By Hamzah Rifaat | Al Mayadeen | January 5, 2025
US President Joe Biden is slated to make way for President-elect Donald Trump in January 2025. However, his departure is marked by abysmally low ratings domestically, which is partly due to his administration’s mishandling of “Israel’s” genocide in Palestine. Now, the disgraced President is seen desperately trying to reverse his domestic downslide by coming up with foreign policy stunts. The latest controversial stunt involves the greenlighting of military aid worth $571 million to Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) separatists in Taiwan. This has once again undermined the ‘One-China principle’ that the United States adheres to, as well as the precedents set in the previous joint communiques between the two countries.
This is nothing but desperation on the part of outgoing Joe Biden who has sought to address domestic disapproval by taking measures that undermine US-China ties. This is also evidence of a myopic and narrow-minded approach, which hints at self-destruction.
With his majority lost in the US Congress, Biden is adopting foreign policy blunders amid capitulation, which should have ideally resulted in a more pragmatic and visionary approach to global affairs.
That has not been the case.
Futile attempt to deflect domestic criticism
There should be little doubt that the Biden administration’s latest authorization of military aid to the DPP is nothing but an attempt to salvage lost domestic popularity. It comes after the Democrats were comprehensively defeated by the Republicans under Donald Trump in the 2025 US elections. Surveys conducted by America’s own business intelligence company, Morning Consult, clearly indicate that the Biden administration’s net approval rating has plummeted in 45 states compared to 18 during the start of his tenure. This can be attributed to his messy withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, his mishandling of the COVID-19 crisis, and rising inflation.
Ideally, in such circumstances, embattled leaders adopt more prudent policy-making and measured rhetoric to salvage lost pride and reverse the tide of declining approval ratings. However, Joe Biden sought to greenlight $571 million worth of military aid to Taiwanese separatists who are adamant that violating China’s inevitable national reunification is the right course of action. The DPP government also has a history of threatening the sovereignty of China through nefarious activities and militarization.
As a result, Bien has adopted a self-destructive strategy as it ignores both precedent and principle vis a vis US-China relations. Also, supporting separatism both politically and militarily constitutes a violation of the UN Charter which otherwise mandates all member states to respect the sovereignty of other states and refrain from actions that constitute brazen interference. Hence, the move to militarize Taiwan is unfathomable on the part of the Biden administration as arming Taiwan violates the ‘One China Principle’ as an integral part of American foreign policy, as well as precedents enshrined in the 1979 Joint Communique between the two sides.
For someone who often presents himself as a figure with a more globalized and integrated vision than his rival, Donald Trump, Joe Biden has clearly adopted a hypocritical approach in his final days in office. His push to present himself as an alternative to the more firebrand, populist, Donald Trump and his Republican Party stands exposed as he is not pushing for increased engagement with China but is supporting separatism and ignoring historical precedents instead. Recall that the decision to greenlight more military aid has been a recurring trend under his administration given his previous approval of $2 billion of arms sales to Taiwan in October 2024 which included, for the very first time, the delivery of an advanced surface-to-air missile defense system.
Will the Biden trend be reversed?
It is therefore important for the incoming President of the United States, Donald Trump, to adopt a more principled approach on the Taiwan issue vis a vis China as this can otherwise contribute to tensions between the two sides. Failure to do so would lead to a tit-for-tat reaction as no UN member state endorses interference or brazen arming of separatists on their territory, which poses a direct threat to their state sovereignty.
China’s response to Biden’s reckless adventurism has also been a sensible one as it is in line with precedents set out in the joint communiques and the UN Charter. As stated by China’s Taiwan Office, such nefarious designs and actions by the United States ‘contradict’ its leaders’ serious commitments to not supporting Taiwanese independence. Beijing also cautioned and warned the United States to tread with utmost caution and cease arming Taiwan. Clearly, the Biden administration has failed to acknowledge this incontrovertible reality, which now puts the incoming Trump administration into the spotlight over whether the US-China relationship can move forward on amicable terms.
Regardless, Biden’s decision to arm Taiwan has shown that crass desperation in the face of declining domestic approval ratings is now guiding the United States policy toward China. The death of late Jimmy Carter who was a great friend of Beijing and worked tirelessly toward improving relations should have ideally been a wake-up call for the American leadership. The key was to build on a legacy that brought China out of isolation in the 1970s rather than seek to isolate it further by propping up the Taiwan issue.
To date, Biden has failed to understand this, and Trump is set to continue from where his predecessor left off.
China should act proactively and thwart such nefarious designs in order for it to ensure that its sovereignty remains intact.
Biden Orders ‘Surge’ of Weapons to Ukraine in Response to Major Russian Attack
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | December 26, 2024
Russia launched a major missile and drone barrage targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure. The attack followed a Ukrainian drone strike on a Russian residential building. President Joe Biden said he was outraged by the Russian attack and ordered the Pentagon to continue to surge weapons to Ukraine.
On Wednesday, Russia fired an estimated 170 drones and missiles at Ukrainian energy infrastructure, causing several deaths, widespread damage, and power outages. “The purpose of this outrageous attack was to cut off the Ukrainian people’s access to heat and electricity during winter and to jeopardize the safety of its grid,” Biden said in response.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky denounced the attack on Twitter, and said blackouts remain. “ Over 70 missiles, including ballistic ones, and more than a hundred attack drones. The targets are our energy infrastructure. They continue to fight for a blackout in Ukraine,” he wrote. “Our defenders managed to shoot down more than 50 missiles and a significant number of drones. Unfortunately, there have been hits. As of now, there are power outages in several regions.”
Biden subsequently ordered a “surge” of military support for Kiev. “In recent months, the United States has provided Ukraine with hundreds of air defense missiles, and more are on the way.” He continued, “I have directed the Department of Defense to continue its surge of weapons deliveries to Ukraine, and the United States will continue to work tirelessly to strengthen Ukraine’s position in its defense against Russian forces.”
The Russian attack on Ukraine follows a series of provocations by Kiev. Ukraine has used long-range Western missiles to hit targets deep into Russian territory, fired drones at civilian targets in Russia, and assassinated a Russian general.
On Thursday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the Kremlin may target Ukraine’s decision-making centers if Kiev continues to order “terror” attacks. “We select targets for strikes on the territory of Ukraine, proceeding solely from threats to Russia. These may be military facilities and defense enterprises.” The diplomat added, “Decision-making centers in Kiev can also quite be such targets.”
Biden Regime Launches Task Force on Chinese Censorship, Drawing Criticism for Hypocrisy
By Didi Rankovic – Reclaim The Net – December 16, 2024
The Biden-Harris administration has revealed it was setting up an action group to “monitor and address the effects” of any censorship or intimidation of Americans by China.
Signed by President Joe Biden, the memorandum addressed heads of executive departments and agencies, while the task force is to be led by the assistant to the president for National Security Affairs and the director of the National Economic Council.
This move comes after the administration spent the past four years doubling and tripling down on policies encouraging unprecedented censorship at home and being sued and investigated for colluding (through pressure via third parties) with social platforms and other tech companies to do its (unconstitutional) bidding.
Hypocrisy this may be, but that might be the least of the problems with this sudden spurt of activity by an administration that is weeks away from exiting, stage left.
If we choose to forget that many of the censorship and surveillance mechanisms that permeated the soon-to-be former administration’s activities were regularly mentioned by critics as “inspired” by those used by China’s authorities, the question remains: why establish an entirely new “task force” and why now?
The departments and agencies that will be represented at assistant secretary or above level include the departments of state, defense, treasury, commerce, agriculture, education, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, the FBI, the director of National Intelligence, etc. – plus, “other agencies and offices as the President may, from time to time, designate.”
Opponents of the Chinese authorities and their notorious brand of censorship welcome the move and believe it should be endorsed by the incoming Trump administration, but also – somehow – expanded to China itself.
Declarative statements about the purpose of such “monitoring” outfits are one thing, but recent history shows how far those can veer off course.
One cautionary tale is the Department of Homeland Security’s Global Engagement Sector (GEC) which was set up to direct, lead, and coordinate US government efforts countering foreign state propaganda and disinformation.
What that turned out to be, however, is a weapon of censorship pointed at Americans, that used third parties to circumvent legal constraints and push biased, partisan narratives at home.
Blinken Announces New $500Mln Military Aid Package for Ukraine
Sputnik – 13.12.2024
The US will provide Ukraine with an additional military aid package worth $500 million, State Secretary Antony Blinken said on Friday.
“As part of the surge in security assistance that President Biden announced on September 26, the United States is providing another significant package of urgently needed weapons and equipment to our Ukrainian partners… This additional assistance, provided under previous drawdowns from Department of Defense stocks, is valued at $500 million,” Blinken said in a statement.
The package will include artillery munition, Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (c-UAS) munitions, ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), as well as protection equipment for chemical, biological, and nuclear threats, he added.
Russia believes that arms supplies to Ukraine hinder the settlement, directly involving NATO countries in the conflict. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov noted that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine would be a legitimate target for Russia. According to lavrov, the US and NATO are directly involved in the conflict, including not only by supplying weapons, but also by training personnel in the UK, Germany, Italy, and other countries.
Strikes deep into Russia ‘big mistake’ – Trump
RT | December 12, 2024
US President-elect Donald Trump has criticized Ukraine’s strikes deep into Russia using Western-supplied weapons, saying that they only escalate the conflict between Kiev and Moscow.
Trump made the statement on Thursday in an interview with Time magazine, which named him the 2024 Person of the Year.
“I disagree very vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles into Russia. Why are we doing that?” he asked rhetorically.
According to the president-elect, such attacks are “just escalating this war and making it worse.”
“That should not have been allowed to be done… And I think that is a very big mistake, very big mistake,” he said of strikes deep into Russia’s internationally recognized territory.
Trump returned to the issue later in the interview, saying that “the most dangerous thing right now” is the fact that “[Ukrainian leader Vladimir] Zelensky has decided, with the approval of, I assume, the President [Joe Biden], to start shooting missiles into Russia.”
“I think that is a major escalation. I think it is a foolish decision,” he stressed.
The US president-elect’s comments came a day after the Russian Defense Ministry reported that Ukrainian forces had fired six US-supplied ATACMS missiles at a military airfield near the southern city of Taganrog.
Two of them were shot down and the rest were diverted using electronic warfare during the attack, the ministry said. The fallen debris resulted in some injuries and minor damage to two buildings and several vehicles, it added.
On Thursday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia’s response to the strike on Taganrog “will follow at the time and in the way that will be deemed appropriate. But it will definitely follow.”
In late November, Russia used its new Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile system for the first time, striking the Yuzhmash military plant in the Ukrainian city of Dnepr.
According to Moscow, the deployment of the state-of-the-art weapon was a response to Washington and its allies allowing Ukraine to target internationally recognized Russian territory with the long-range weapons they supply to Kiev.
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned at the time that if Ukraine’s attacks deep inside Russia continue, Moscow reserves the right “to use our weapons against the military facilities of those countries that allow the use of their weapons against our facilities.”
The Real Scandal of Hunter‘s Pardon
By Ron Paul | December 9, 2024
Politicians and pundits spent much of last week commenting on President Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter for lying on a federal gun purchase form, failing to pay taxes, and any other offenses he may have committed over the past decade. Much of the controversy is because President Biden repeatedly pledged that he would never pardon his son.
Some have also observed that the pardon’s timeline starts the year Hunter Biden joined the board of the Ukraine energy company Burisma. This has led to speculation that President Biden is trying to block any investigation into links between his son’s business dealings and President Biden’s Ukraine policy.
What has not been widely discussed is the fact that Hunter Biden may be the only American President Biden has pardoned for violating unconstitutional federal gun and drug laws.
Hunter Biden was convicted of lying on federal Form 4473. This is a form Americans must fill out to get federal government “permission” to purchase a firearm. Specifically, Hunter Biden gave a false answer to the question, “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”
The Second Amendment forbids the federal government from limiting the ability of any American to exercise his natural right to own a firearm. Furthermore, federal drug laws are themselves unconstitutional.
The Constitution only creates three federal crimes: treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. All other crimes are under the jurisdiction of state and local governments. So, the required use of this form is a constitutional violation of the rights of Hunter Biden and all other Americans who are subjected to it when they seek to obtain a gun.
Form 4473 warns Americans that “the use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.” Thus, someone could be prevented from exercising his Second Amendment right because of his activities that are perfectly legal in his state. This turns federalism on its head.
Hunter Biden was also convicted of, and pardoned for, tax evasion and the filing of fraudulent tax returns. It is hard for anyone who values liberty to get upset at those who violate the tax laws since the income tax is a form of theft by the government of people’s hard-earned income.
An outrage of Hunter Biden’s pardon is President Biden’s hypocrisy. When he served as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the 1990s, then-Senator Biden played a major role in getting through Congress the Brady Law that created the federal gun purchase background check system that Hunter Biden was convicted of violating. Senator Biden also was a leading drug warrior who led the fight to pass the 1994 crime bill and was a champion of mandatory minimums and other infringements of civil liberties in the name of the war on drugs. President Biden also supported hiring more IRS agents to squeeze more money from taxpayers.
Then-Senator Biden wrote large parts of the PATRIOT Act. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Biden also led the effort to pass the unconstitutional (and disastrous) “authorization for use of military force” against Iraq.
President Biden should spend his last month in office pardoning more Americans for violations of unconstitutional drug and gun laws. This would serve as a small gesture of atonement for a political career spent advocating policies destructive of peace, prosperity, and liberty.
Kiev reveals terms of $20 billion US loan
RT | December 9, 2024
The Ukrainian government has approved the terms of a conditional agreement with the US Federal Financing Bank (FFB) for a 40-year loan of $20 billion which will be backed by profits from frozen Russian state assets.
It’s part of a broader $50 billion G7 loan deal, which includes a separate $20 billion EU commitment, and $10 billion to be split by G7 members Britain, Japan and Canada.
The money will be transferred to the Facilitation of Resources to Invest in Strengthening Ukraine Financial Intermediary Fund, established by the World Bank on October 10, “for the sake of the state,” a resolution issued by Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers on Friday stated.
The transfer will be based on a Certificate Purchase Agreement between Ukraine, the FFB, and the US Agency for International Development (USAID), along with a loan guarantee and repayment agreement between Ukraine and USAID.
Under the deal, Ukraine’s Finance Ministry will issue a certificate of indebtedness to the FFB, guaranteed by USAID, the government resolution said.
The loan, which has an annual interest rate of 1.3% plus the current average rate for one-year US Treasury bills, will be repaid using interest earned from immobilized Russian sovereign assets.
The US and its allies froze an estimated $300 billion in assets belonging to the Russian central bank following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. In June, G7 members pledged a $50 billion loan for Kiev, with the frozen Russian assets to be used as collateral, to help Kiev buy weapons and rebuild damaged infrastructure. The agreement was finalized in October.
Moscow has repeatedly denounced the asset freeze as “theft” and argued that tapping into these funds would be illegal and set a dangerous precedent. The Russian Finance Ministry has warned that it will initiate retaliatory measures mirroring the West’s actions against resources of Western investors held in the country.
The latest move is part of the current US administration’s last-minute strategy to bolster Kiev’s war effort, which includes a new $725 million military aid package to Kiev and another round of sanctions against Russia. It comes as uncertainty grows over Washington’s commitments under the upcoming presidency of Donald Trump, particularly after US House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed President Joe Biden’s request to include $24 billion in additional aid to Ukraine in a government funding bill last week.
Preemptive Pardons & Banana Republics
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | December 6, 2024
News that President Biden is contemplating issuing “preemptive pardons” of Dr. Anthony Fauci and others, even though they have not been charged with crimes, reminded me of an African dictator I have long considered to be one of the most colorful and bizarre in the world—namely, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, who has served as the second President of Equatorial Guinea since 1982, three years after he staged a coup against his uncle.
The Equatorial Guinea constitution provides Obiang sweeping powers, including the right to rule by decree, effectively making his government a legal dictatorship. He has also placed family members in key government positions. In other words, Obiang’s personal preferences in public affairs are the law.
A “preemptive pardon” is not a legal action and has no legal precedent. It is a purely political action that is based on the false proposition that President Trump will, once in office, possess the power to initiate federal investigations without having to adhere to legal procedures and rules of evidence.
Because Democrats and their friends in the media have conditioned millions of Americans to believe that Trump is an inherently defective authoritarian, the Biden Administration may be tempted to believe that it can get away with such a crass political maneuver.
This is a variation of the same gambit the Democrats deployed when they impeached Trump for merely requesting, in July 2019, that Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy investigate Joe Biden’s business activities in Ukraine. When this request came to light, Democrats and their friends in the media acted as though the mere request was an outrage, even though there was a mountain of evidence that the Bidens had, since 2014, participated in a spectacularly corrupt scheme in Ukraine for which they had received millions of dollars.
Five years after the Democrats in the House initiated impeachment proceedings against President Trump, President Biden pardoned his son for “offenses Hunter Biden has committed or may have committed or taken part in” between January 1, 2014, and December 1, 2024.”
Any “preemptive pardon” issued by President Biden should be viewed as the same species of corrupt political action, and not as a lawful act.
‘An Extraordinary Step’: White House Mulls ‘Preemptive’ Pardon for Fauci
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | December 6, 2024
Senior aides to President Joe Biden are “conducting a vigorous internal debate” on whether to grant preemptive pardons to Dr. Anthony Fauci and other current and former public officials whom they fear the incoming administration might target, Politico reported Wednesday.
CNN described the proposed pardons as “an extraordinary step” that would immunize people who have not been formally accused of a crime.
According to Politico, fears that current and former government officials may face inquiries or indictments “accelerated” after President-elect Donald Trump last week nominated Kash Patel to head the FBI. Patel has publicly stated he will pursue Trump’s critics.
Fauci, who according to Politico “became a lightning rod for criticism from the right during the Covid-19 pandemic,” did not respond to the outlet’s requests for comment.
Politico reported that White House counsel Ed Siskel is leading deliberations on the matter, and Chief of Staff Jeff Zients is also playing a key role in the discussions.
Zients, formerly the Biden administration’s COVID-19 “czar,” publicly promoted universal COVID-19 vaccination. In 2021, he spoke about “the winter of illness and death for the unvaccinated.”
Attorney Greg Glaser told The Defender, “The U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2, confirms the President’s power ‘to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States.’”
The Huffington Post reported that preemptive presidential pardons “are rare but not unprecedented.”
Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., professor of international law at the University of Illinois, told The Defender, “A blanket pardon by President Biden to Fauci would cover his gross violations [of] federal statutes that are too numerous to list” but “could not cover his crimes committed under the criminal laws of the 50 U.S. states.”
“Biden’s ‘get out of jail free’ card only applies to federal prison, not state prison,” Glaser said.
Joseph Sansone, Ph.D., who proposed legislation to ban COVID-19 and mRNA vaccines in Florida, told The Defender, “The use of preemptive pardons appears to be a violation of the Separation of Powers inherent in the U.S. Constitution.”
“The purpose of a pardon is to correct a judicial error or miscarriage of justice, not to preempt judicial action,” Sansone said. “Unless a coconspirator, no president could know the scope of the crimes being pardoned if the person has not been convicted or even charged.”
But according to Glaser, “A federal pardon by Biden cannot be overturned by President Trump or even reversed by Congress without a constitutional amendment to Article II, Section 2 or upon proof that Biden’s pardon was itself unlawful.”
Fauci pardon may help conceal ‘massive scale of criminal wrongdoing’
What would a preemptive pardon for Fauci cover? Criminal defense attorney Rick Jaffe told The Defender that if he were Fauci’s lawyer, he would seek a pardon that “covers all testimony provided to Congress since at least the start of the pandemic.”
The pardon could also include all actions relating to the U.S. government’s funding of gain-of-function research and all actions in which Fauci is alleged to be part of a conspiracy to mislead government officials and the public,” Jaffe said.
“I’d throw in immunity from any action by the federal government to terminate his pension or his royalty payments from pharma, because trying to do that will probably be very high on the new government’s list,” Jaffe added.
Journalist Paul Thacker, formerly a U.S. Senate investigator, told The Defender “Sen. Rand Paul has sent two separate referrals to the Department of Justice to prosecute Fauci” for “lying and/or misleading Congress. Fauci was also caught lying to Congress about his use of private email to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests, something that I have reported on, as has The New York Post,” Thacker said.
Brianne Dressen, a participant in AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials who was injured by the shot, later took part in a National Institutes of Health (NIH) study of vaccine-injured people “that got shot down and hidden.” Dressen told The Defender pardoning Fauci would silence vaccine injury victims. She said:
“The Biden administration silenced true stories of COVID vaccine injuries online at the same time that Fauci was flying COVID vaccine-injured to NIH headquarters to be studied. It’s no surprise Biden may close the loop to protect him.
“This pardon isn’t just about protecting him. Discovery alone would shine a light on things we still don’t know about that happened at the NIH, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.”
“How better to circumvent a process likely to reveal a massive scale of criminal wrongdoing — not just by Dr. Fauci but by layers and layers of his allies in both the government and the private sector — than by preemptively pardoning him?” asked Naomi Wolf, CEO of Daily Clout and author of “The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity.”
Fauci pardon would show public health decisions ‘beyond the reach of justice’
According to Politico, some congressional Democrats — “though not those seeking pardons themselves” — have engaged in “quiet lobbying” recently in an effort to convince Biden to issue the preemptive pardons.
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has come out in favor of Biden issuing preemptive pardons. In an interview with Boston Public Radio last week, Markey cited the precedent of former President Gerald Ford, who granted a preemptive pardon to Richard Nixon before any charges were filed against him following his impeachment.
However, the proposed preemptive pardons have “caused a stir” among other Democrats, “with some saying the move erodes Americans’ faith in the justice system,” the Huffington Post reported. According to Politico, some Democrats are concerned the pardons “could suggest impropriety, only fueling Trump’s criticisms.”
“I just haven’t heard a good case to be made for pardoning behavior that hasn’t yet been committed or hasn’t yet been defined,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) told USA Today. Referencing his term as Virginia’s governor, Kaine said he used pardon power “in individual cases to grant pardons to people who have been convicted.”
“The idea of just kind of general vague, pardon for unknown activities that haven’t been charged. That is so susceptible to abuse,” Kaine said.
According to CNN, “Attorneys across the political spectrum” have also “raised concerns about blanket pardons.”
“You would create the beginning of a tit for tat where, when any administration is over, you just pardon everybody,” Neil Eggleston, former White House counsel to President Barack Obama, told CNN.
According to The Washington Post, “The notion of sweeping preemptive pardons for offenses that have not yet been charged, and may never be, is largely untested.”
Jeffrey Crouch, J.D., Ph.D., an assistant professor of politics at American University and expert on presidential pardon powers, told USA Today that a president can grant a pardon as soon as a federal crime is committed, without waiting until someone is charged, tried or convicted.
Crouch said it is unclear whether beneficiaries of such pardons would be admitting guilt by accepting the pardon. Crouch said the Biden administration would be in “uncharted waters” and warned that preemptive pardons “could weaponize clemency” and stray far beyond the intended constitutional use of pardon power.
Sayer Ji, founder of GreenMedInfo, was named one of the “The Disinformation Dozen” by the Center for Countering Digital Hate in 2021 — a list subsequently used by the White House to pressure social media platforms to censor those individuals. He told The Defender preemptively pardoning Fauci would be an abuse of power.
He said:
“These were not mere administrative decisions, but profound exercises of authority that reached into the sanctum of personal liberty, that redefined the boundaries of state power and touched the very foundations of how citizens relate to their government.
“A preemptive pardon for Dr. Fauci would pierce the sacred covenant between those who govern and those who consent to be governed — a bond as old as democracy itself. Such an extraordinary shield … would signal that the architects of our most consequential public health decisions stand beyond the reach of justice.”
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.
Why Biden Allowed Ukraine to Fire US missiles into Russia
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – December 5, 2024
Washington’s (and London’s) decision to allow Ukraine to fire their missiles into Russia is a clear escalation, but the timing explains most of the puzzle underlying this decision.
It is not just Biden being reckless. It is not simply madness, either. It is politics with a touch of global geopolitics.
The Biden administration, having lost both presidential and congressional elections to the Republicans, appears to be following a scorched-earth policy. Before Trump is sworn in, and before he can move towards a negotiated resolution of the Russia-Ukraine (NATO) military conflict in 2025, the outgoing administration seems willing to make issues much more complicated – and deadly – than they currently are. At the heart of these calculated escalations is the American “deep state” unhappy with Trump’s success and the prospects of him pulling NATO back from Ukraine, thus undoing American hegemony. Trump claimed, during his campaign, that he will end wars. The American “deep state” does not want to let him do this – at least, not easily.
The Timing
For a long time, the Biden administration resisted allowing Ukraine to fire US missiles into Russian territory. This firing represents a “new phase” in the ongoing conflict for Moscow. There is potentially no other way for Moscow to see things. A pro-Democrats response is that the decision was motivated by the Biden administration’s desire to strengthen Ukraine’s position vis-à-vis Russia in the wake of upcoming possible negotiations. However, if this truly was the main intention, why did the Biden administration not reach the same conclusion during the peak time of the presidency, i.e., a year earlier, for instance? The Biden administration could have done the same escalation, hoping that this would push Russia to come to the negotiating table. Except, the Biden administration did not make such a decision for one chief reason.
They understood Moscow’s response would be deadlier, which would escalate the war more than Washington and NATO could handle. A deadly escalation, the Biden administration maintained, could cost them the elections. Now that they have already lost the elections – and there is nothing they can do about it now – they are escalating the war deliberately to scuttle the Trump administration. If the war escalates, it will make it harder for the Trump administration to negotiate with Russia. It will also make it harder for the Trump administration to negotiate with US allies in Europe as well. The more complicated the issue becomes, the more time it will take to find a resolution. Overall, this will give the Democrats a political opportunity to shift the blame to the Trump administration for its failure to quickly end conflicts. For the Democrats, this could be one of the key points they could raise in the midterm elections.
A key official of the Biden administration indirectly acknowledged the politics driving the decision. Matthew Miller, State Department spokesperson, defended the decision during a press briefing saying that the “American people elected Joe Biden to a four-year term, not to a term of three years and 10 months, and we will use every day of our term to pursue the foreign policy interests that, we believe, are in the interests of the American people.” One caveat is that the only interest that matters here is that of the Democrats.
The Reactions
The Trump administration understands this politics. In a post on X, Donald Trump Jr said the change was aimed at getting “World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives”. Trump’s pick for national security adviser, US Representative Mike Waltz, called it “another step up the escalation ladder … and nobody knows where this is going,” he said on Fox News. Former Trump cabinet member Richard Grenell also accused Biden of moving to “escalate the war in Ukraine during the transition period”. “This is as if he is launching a whole new war. Everything has changed now. All previous calculations are null and void,” he added.
This reaction makes sense because Ukraine has received only a few dozen of the ATACMS systems. If the Biden administration really wanted to strengthen Ukraine’s position, a first step would have been to ensure sufficient supplies of this system. If Ukraine is likely to fire up its entire stockpile too quickly to make any meaningful impact, the only sense this escalation makes is that it makes a negotiated end of the conflict much more complicated. Anymore escalation before Trump assumes control in January – and this escalation is very much possible – means the conflict will continue to rage in the months to come.
The End Game
Most people understand that the Trump administration would bring the conflict to an end. For one thing, Trump does not intend to use military conflicts to advance US foreign policy interests. Secondly, Trump has the “America First” policy at the heart of his politics. People who understand how misfit military conflicts are within the Trump camp include not only the Democrats but also Ukraine’s own president, who went on record two weeks ago to say that the conflict will end “sooner” now that Trump has won.
For the anti-Russia camp within the American “deep state”, this expectation is deeply unsettling. It would mean NATO will not be able to expand into Europe any further. NATO’s failure will create fresh openings for European states to chart their own foreign policy courses, including relations with Russia. In fact, this is already happening. When the German chancellor recently spoke with the Russian President, he did not do so to merely talk about the possibility of ending the conflict, but also to get a sense of their post-conflict bilateral relations. More importantly, Germany initiated the call. There is, thus, a possibility of Germany resuming gas supplies from Russia. Indeed, both leaders discussed the possibility of “cooperation” on energy trade.
In Washington, the fear is that this one call is going to encourage other European leaders to pick up their phones and talk to Vladimir Putin. It means Washington will lose control of the situation. These people in Washington do not want to let that happen; hence, a key geopolitical reason to escalate the conflict is to scuttle the end gam, which is very much on the horizon already.
Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.
Featured Video
7/7: Crime and Prejudice
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
How the Strategy of Fighting to the Last Ukrainian Was Sold to the Public as Morally Righteous
By Professor Glenn Diesen | November 26, 2024
For almost three years, NATO countries have boycotted diplomatic contacts with Russia, even as hundreds of thousands of men have died on the battlefield. The decision by diplomats to reject diplomacy is morally repugnant as diplomacy could have reduced the excess of violence, prevented escalation, and even resulted in a path to peace. However, the political-media elites skilfully sold the rejection of diplomacy to the public as evidence of their moral righteousness.
This article will first outline how NATO planned for a long war to exhaust Russia and knock it out from the ranks of great powers. Second, this article will demonstrate how the political-media elites communicated that diplomacy is treasonous and war is virtuous. … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
loongtip on The War On Free Speech In Aust… seversonebcfb985d9 on Scott Ritter Hiding the Domina… Richard Ong on Europe Economic Panic Kate on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on US announces Gaza ‘Board of Pe… Richard Jones on Peaceful Finland? Think Twice:… Richard Jones on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on Scott Ritter says he was … loongtip on Eilat port faces worst crisis… loongtip on British minister dreams of kid… loongtip on Kiev awards major mining proje…
Aletho News- Every House Democrat Votes Against Defunding A Cutout Of The CIA
- What a War on Iran Would Really Look Like — Beyond the Regime-Change Fantasy
- Scott Ritter Hiding the Dominant Minority Behind Geopolitics?
- Europe Economic Panic
- The War On Free Speech In Australia Is Getting Cartoonishly Absurd
- Disruptive science (part two)
- Palestinian prisoners in 2025: Shocking figures and escalating violations
- US announces Gaza ‘Board of Peace’ amid ongoing Israeli ceasefire breaches
- Hamas: Israeli minister’s boasting over Gaza’s destruction an open admission of genocide
- Peaceful Finland? Think Twice: Nazi Alliance Was Pre-Planned Before WWII
- If Americans Knew
- As world leaders squabble over controlling Gaza, another baby freezes to death – Not a ceasefire Day 100
- Trump “Board of Peace” for Gaza is stacked with Israel supporters – Not a ceasefire Day 99
- Iran Does Not Hate Americans… But It Has Legitimate Reasons to Do So
- How an Israeli Firm Spreads Lies and Chaos Around the World
- ADL ‘Helping’ Ted Cruz and Ben Shapiro ‘Take Down’ Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes, CEO Suggests
- Israel is Destroying Hope for the Future: Reproductive Violence in Gaza
- J Street is the new AIPAC in the Democratic Party
- The fate of Gaza’s disappeared remains unknown
- The U.S. has announced ‘Phase 2’ of the Gaza ceasefire. Here’s why it doesn’t matter for Palestinians.
- 30 tons of rubble for every resident of Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 98
- No Tricks Zone
- Philosopher Schopenhauer: Climate Science Certainty Stems From Stupidity, Ignorance
- New Study: Species Extinction Rates Declining Since 1980 – ‘Climate Change Is Not An Important Threat’
- Denmark Places Climate Protection Above Animal Welfare, Poisoning And Culling Cows
- New Study: Greenland Was 3-7°C Warmer And Far Less Glaciated Than Today 6000-8000 Years Ago
- German Media Report That Current Frigid Weather Can Be Explained By Arctic Warming!
- Berlin Blackout Shows Germany’s $5 Trillion Green Scheme Is “Left-Green Ideological Pipe Dream”
- Modeling Error In Estimating How Clouds Affect Climate Is 8700% Larger Than Alleged CO2 Forcing
- Berlin’s Terror-Blackout Enters 4th Day As Tens Of Thousands Suffer In Cold Without Heat!
- Expect Soon Another PIK Paper Claiming Warming Leads To Cold Snaps Over Europe
- New Study: Human CO2 Emissions Responsible For 1.57% Of Global Temperature Change Since 1750
Aletho News 