THE DOCTRINE OF THE N.A.F.T.A. GLOBALIST DEMOCRATS IS TO SERVE THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS WITH ENDLESS WAVES OF INVADING 'CHEAP' LABOR SUBSIDIZED WITH WELFARE FUNDED BY TAXES ON MIDDLE AMERICA.
In many speeches, Mayorkas says he is building a mass migration system to deliver workers to wealthy employers and investors and “equity” to poor foreigners. The nation’s border laws are subordinate to elites’ opinion about “the values of our country,” Mayorkas claims.
Tuesday, January 19, 2021
MITCH McCONNELL - LOVES TO KISS CHINESE ASS - THE BIDEN BOYS HUNTER AND JOE, ALONG WITH THE OLD WHORE AND WAR PROFITEER DIANNE FEINSTEIN TAUGHT HIM HOW TO KNEEL TO SUCK OFF THE CHINESE BRIBES
So tell me, Mitch, in these, your final hours as Senate majority leader: Were the judges and the tax cuts worth it?
Were they worth the sacking of the Capitol? The annexation of the Republican Party by the paranoiacs and the delusional? The degradation, possibly irremediable, of democracy itself?
Those close to him say that Mitch McConnell has his eye on his legacy, now more than ever. But I wonder whether he already understands, in some back bay of his brain where the gears haven’t been ground to nubs, that history will not treat him well.
McConnell may think that the speech he gave on the Senate floor on Jan. 6, objecting to the election deniers, will spare him history’s judgment. It will not. It did not make him a hero. It simply made him a responsible citizen.
If McConnell ultimately votes to convict Donald Trump in his second Senate impeachment trial — he has suggested he’s open to the idea — that won’t make him a hero, either. He will simply have done the right thing and likely not for the right reasons: As Alec MacGillis makes plain in his excellent book “The Cynic,” Mitch McConnell never does anything unless it serves the interests of Mitch McConnell.
Which is why McConnell made his unholy alliance with Donald Trump in the first place. By his own admission, McConnell plays “the long game” (it’s the name of his memoir, in fact). He’s methodical in his scheming, awaiting his spoils with the patience of a cat.So if hitching his wagon to a sub-literate mob boss with a fondness for white supremacists and a penchant for conspiracy theories and a sociopath’s smirking disregard for the truth meant getting those tax cuts and those conservative judges … hey, that’s the cost of doing business, right?
Isn’t it?
Well. Live by the mob, die by the mob. That’s what happened on Jan. 6.
What “long game” McConnell had failed to foresee: The problem was coming from inside the House. And the Senate. A quarter of his caucus helped fuel that siege by cynically disputing the results of a fair election. All that staring into the distance came at the expense of McConnell’s peripheral vision. He was now outflanked on his right.
Yet it shouldn’t have come as a surprise. Anyone who’s spent any time watching Republican congressional politics over the last quarter century has witnessed this phenomenon time and time again: A Republican leader, once hailed as a fire-spewing Komodo dragon, suddenly finds himself under attack from even more blistering fire-breathers within his ranks.
It happened to John Boehner, who came of age as an anti-establishment radical but lived out his days as speaker of the House under the implicit and sometimes explicit threat of a party coup. (He resigned his post in 2015 and eventually went into the weed business.) Years earlier, it happened to Bob Dole, who was known early in his Senate career as “Darth Vader” and “Aya-Dole-ah” and ended it as a befuddled majority leader, exasperated by all the proto-Gingriches who’d suddenly appeared in his midst.
For years now, the Republican Party has been radicalizing at a furious rate, moving rightward at a far faster clip than the Democrats have moved to the left. Political scientists even have a term for it: “asymmetrical polarization.” How we got to this frightening pass is complicated, but chief among the reasons is that the G.O.P. has been on a decades-long campaign to delegitimize government. Run against it long enough, and eventually you have a party that wants to burn the system to the ground.
THE INTERPRETER: Original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week.
McConnell, now on his seventh term, has been cynical and power-hungry enough to keep up with his party’s rightward lurch at every step.
When Republicans embraced the Southern Strategy, deciding that racial resentment — if not hatred — would power their rocket to the majority? No problem. His dalliance with the civil rights movement was only a youthful fling.
When the Republicans made their pact with social conservatives and evangelicals, realizing that pro-business policies couldn’t capture a majority’s imagination? No problem. He abandoned his support for abortion. (Yes, McConnell was once pro-choice.)
When anti-tax sentiment overtook the party’s desire to contain the deficit? No problem. He loved tax cuts, loved business, loved the rich (read Jane Mayer’s knockout McConnell profile from April for details about all the thumbs he has in moneyed pies).
When preserving power prerogatives overtook his party’s concerns about the former Soviet Union? No problem. McConnell refused to hear out warnings about Russian interference until weeks before the 2016 election (at which point he buried them), and he refused to consider bipartisan legislation that would attempt to curb foreign meddling until he earned himself the moniker “Moscow Mitch.”
When his party went from free trade to nativist populism, powered by xenophobia and racist resentment? Not a problem. He’d side with the populists, including their dangerous Dear Leader, until his workplace was overrun, five people were dead and the Constitution itself was among the critically injured.
It was only a matter of time before members of McConnell’s own caucus began to align themselves with — and inflame — the insurrectionist hordes. They were just doing what McConnell has done his whole political career: lunging at opportunities to serve their own political ends.
“They saw all of this behavior in McConnell,” the political scientist Norman J. Ornstein told me. “The ends-justify-the-means philosophy, the focus on winning over governing, the willingness to blow up every norm in the Senate and the political process.”
The mercenary focus on winning makes McConnell similar to someone else in his party, too: Donald J. Trump.
And power is really all the old-school G.O.P. has to cling to. Its philosophy of sharply limited government and free enterprise has never had enough appeal to win over a true majority. Staying in power required voter suppression, gerrymandering, the Electoral College, oceans of money.
McConnell has worked indefatigably to defend them all — and to make sure the Democratic agenda never succeeds. His dirtiest maneuver was to let a Supreme Court seat sit empty for a year, rather than allow Barack Obama to fill it. But his obstructionist warfare stretches back much further than that. While minority leader, he either threatened or made use of the filibuster at every turn; once he got control of the chamber, he still brought very little legislation to the floor.
And we wonder why voters in 2016 turned to a know-nothing vulgarian who promised to blow the place up.
McConnell is not an enabler. He’s a ringleader, as responsible for the politics of destruction — which has morphed from a metaphorical to a literal description in the last two weeks — as Trump himself.
If McConnell is truly concerned with how history views him, he should spend his waning Senate years actually doing things. Drumming up support to convict a dangerous former president. Allowing popular legislation to come to the floor regardless of which party initiated it or holds the reins. Imagining a world whose borders stretch beyond his brutish, small-minded self.
Being a leader, just once.
Schweizer: Mitch McConnell, Wife Elaine Chao Financially Tied to the Chinese Government
Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer on Sunday detailed how Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and his wife Elaine Chao are financially tied to the Chinese Communist Party.
Schweizer said on Fox News Channel’s “The Next Revolution” that McConnell’s “position on China has softened over the years,” which he argued is due to the growing relationship between the Chinese government and the Chao’s company.
“Really, it goes to the fact that Mitch McConnell and Elaine Chao, his wife, are financially tied to the Chinese government,” Schweizer outlined. “And it comes through the shipbuilding company that Elaine Chao’s family owns. That relationship was forged in December of 1993 when James Chao, Elaine Chao’s father, Elaine Chao, and the new son-in-law, Senator Mitch McConnell, visited Beijing, China, at the invitation of the China state shipbuilding corporation. This was a coup to Beijing because Tiananmen square had happened just four years earlier. Very few high officials went there. The result of that meeting and the deals that followed is that today the Chinese government finances the construction of the ships for the shipbuilding company, they build the ships, they provide the crews for the ship, and they provide the cargo for the ship. So, the Chinese government could pull the plug tomorrow on this business. And the reason they’re doing business with them, let’s make it clear, is because Mitch McConnell is a very powerful figure in Washington, D.C. And the problem is, Steve, that his position on China has softened over the years the closer that this commercial relationship has become, and he’s a direct beneficiary of what this business does.”
According to Schweizer, this is the “strategy” of the Chinese government across the globe.
“They seek out political elites and give them commercial deals,” Schweizer stated.
“They are wedded to the Chinese,” he added. “They don’t want to anger the Chinese because they could destroy their families financially.”
The Biden Institute, a policy research center founded by Joe Biden at the University of Delaware, has no plans to disclose its donors after the president-elect takes office, Politicoreported on Monday.
Legal experts and watchdog groups said the lack of transparency could create an ethical dilemma for Biden, particularly if he keeps his name on the institute and it continues to fundraise while he’s in the White House.
"They should at the very least disclose their donors, and I think the Biden family should at the very least take their name off if they’re going to continue to raise money," former George W. Bush administration chief ethics lawyer Richard Painter told Politico.
The Biden Institute, which had many of Biden’s incoming administration staffers on its payroll, is part of a network of foundations and policy centers that he established after his vice presidency.
The institute is currently in the middle of a large fundraising push to raise $20 million that is expected to continue well into Biden’s presidency.
A University of Delaware spokesperson told Politico that the university already publishes a list of contributors who give $100,000 or more to the school, but gave no indication that the institute plans to release the names of specific donors to the Biden Institute, or those who give less than six-figures.
Last year, a spokesperson for the university told the Washington Free Beacon that the Biden Institute would not disclose its donors because it isn’t required to do so.
The Penn Biden Center, another policy research group founded by Biden at the University of Pennsylvania, has also declined to reveal its contributors. A spokesperson told Politico that the funding comes from the University of Pennsylvania’s general operating budget, not from individually earmarked contributions. The University of Pennsylvania raked in $61 million from China-based donors after the Penn Biden Center opened in 2017, the Free Beaconreported, a significant uptick from the $19 million raised from China during the five years prior.
China Ties Raise Questions for Biden’s Pick for Top Defense Post
Colin Kahl works at a research center partnered with China's Peking University
Joe Biden's pick for a top Pentagon post works at a research center partnered with China's Peking University, a school that has long been eyed as a security risk by western intelligence.
Colin Kahl, whom Biden tapped for undersecretary of defense for policy, has served as a senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University since the beginning of 2018. The institute oversees the Stanford Center at Peking University in northern Beijing, which opened in 2012.
Peking University, which is run by former Beijing spy chief Qiu Shuiping and has been linked to multiple espionage cases in the United States, recently updated its charter to require loyalty to the Chinese Communist Party, according to an NPR report. The school has also been ramping up its student and faculty surveillance system in what China watchers see as part of the government's broader crackdown on independent scholarship.
Kahl is not the first Biden nominee whose employer has business entanglements in China. Biden's pick for secretary of state, Antony Blinken, cofounded the consulting firm WestExec, which helped U.S. universities raise money from China without running afoul of Pentagon grant requirements, the Washington Free Beaconreported last month. WestExec scrubbed the details of this work from its website over the summer.
The association could be an obstacle for Kahl, who will need Senate confirmation. Congressional Republicans and federal law-enforcement agencies have expressed growing concerns about China's attempts to influence American academics through university partnerships and donations. Last year, the Department of Justice charged at least 17 academics affiliated with U.S. universities with secretly working for China, including one medical researcher at Stanford University.
"China has made a no holds barred effort to compromise China scholars," said Steven Mosher, a China expert and human-rights advocate.
Kahl, a longtime Biden national-security adviser and DJ, was closely involved in crafting the Obama administration's Iran nuclear deal and reportedly played a key role in removing language identifying Jerusalem as Israel's capital from the 2012 Democratic National Convention platform.
Kahl has slammed the Trump administration's Asia policy as a "train wreck," accusing President Trump in a tweet of "falling in love with autocrats in NKorea & China" and "ignoring human rights in Hong Kong."
Kahl argued that Trump's financial ties to China made him vulnerable to pressure, tweeting last year that "the next time Trump breathes one word about Biden and China, remember this: Trump is up to his eyeballs in debt to the Bank of China … and the loan is due soon."
He also objected to the supposedly entrenched "view among elites in Washington" that the United States and China are locked in a "zero-sum showdown and should move to more rapidly ‘decouple' their economies" in an article he coauthored at War on the Rocks last spring. He argued for further scientific collaboration between the countries in light of the coronavirus pandemic.
"Such sentiments could frustrate responses to this virus and future public health challenges by driving the two scientific communities apart when they should be working together to develop treatments and vaccines," the article states.
Kahl and his employer, the Freeman Spogli Institute, do not appear to have weighed in on alleged human-rights violations at Peking University during his time at the institute.
Scholars at Risk, an organization that monitors academic freedom on campuses around the world, reports that since 2018 there have been at least 10 attacks on academic freedom at Peking University, with professors facing dismissal for being critical of the government and multiple campus labor activists being detained by police.
He Weifang, a law professor at Peking University, said faculty members are required to have lecture plans and conference presentations approved by the Communist Party Committee and that classrooms are monitored by cameras and facial-recognition software, according to a Scholars at Risk report.
Scholars at Risk did not respond to a request for comment.
A spokesperson for Stanford University declined to comment on whether the Freeman Spogli Institute has received funding from China, and the Freeman Spogli Institute did not respond to a request for comment. The Department of Education is currently investigating Stanford for failing to report the sources of over $67 million in donations from China since the Peking institute opened in 2012, a department spokesperson confirmed to the Free Beacon.
Kahl's work with the Freeman Spogli Institute has caught the attention of some Republicans on Capitol Hill.
"The closer you are to Biden world the more likely it is that you ended up in a ChiCom orbit," one GOP official told the Free Beacon.
Coit Blacker, a senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute, said his employer agreed to open its Beijing outpost after receiving "an intriguing offer from the leadership" at Peking University in 2007, according to the Stanford Daily. "The way things work in China is nothing like this comes about accidentally," he added, suggesting that the proposal emerged from upper levels of the Chinese government.
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute, a national-security think tank founded by the Australian government, has warned of a "high risk" for groups partnering with Peking University, because of its collaborations with the Chinese military.
"Peking University (PKU) is designated high risk for its involvement in defence research and links to China’s nuclear weapons program," the think tank said on its China Defence Universities Tracker site, noting that the school hosts at least four major defense laboratories.
The FBI recently homed in on Peking University as a potential recruitment ground for Chinese intelligence, according to NPR, which reported that at least five students were interviewed by federal agents after returning to the United States in the past few years. Last summer, a former George Washington University student pleaded guilty to spying on the United States for China while working as a researcher at Peking University. In 2010, a chemistry professor at the university was convicted of stealing trade secrets from DuPont Chemicals. When Harvard chemist Charles Lieber was indicted last year for failing to disclose his China funding, he was barred from having any contact with individuals at Peking University as part of the terms of his bail release.
In a letter to Stanford last August, the Department of Education questioned whether undisclosed Chinese funding to the school was linked to the Peking University center run by the Freeman Spogli Institute.
"As Stanford must know, Peking University is directly controlled by Chinese Communist Party officials and recently even amended its charter to reinforce its long-standing role as a tool of the Chinese communists," wrote the department.
The letter noted that the Stanford Center at Peking University's website "features a full-page banner image of Stanford students and faculty posing in front of a [People's Republic of China] monument commemorating the ‘front of the old railroad tracks in Dandong, Liaoning province, that helped transport Chinese troops into North Korea during the Korean War.'"
The department added that the banner was a "particularly bizarre (and extremely indecorous) image for Stanford to highlight," considering that over 30,000 U.S. troops were killed in the war.
Mosher, the human-rights advocate who was ousted from Stanford's Ph.D. program in the 1980s—which he attributes to Chinese pressure on the university—said there is "no academic freedom" at Peking University today.
"For Stanford to be there, it in effect endorses what the Chinese government is doing, by default," he said. "[That Stanford] tolerates these kinds of things sends a signal to the Chinese people that maybe America isn't the bastion of freedom of speech and freedom of inquiry that [they] thought it was."
A prominent American sinology professor, who asked that his name not be used so that he could speak freely, said the Stanford Center at Peking University is "not a place that people take seriously" in terms of academic rigor.
"There is no intellectual freedom at Peking University. … In that sense, it isn't really a university," he said. "They have silenced people, they have fired tenured professors, people have disappeared from there, the students are under close watch."
"I think Stanford has made a terrible mistake," he added.
"I think Stanford has made a terrible mistake," he added.
President Barack Obama walks with Senior White House Advisor Anita Dunn to debate preparation at the Kingsmill Resort in Williamsburg, Va., on Oct. 16, 2012. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)
President-elect Joe Biden on Friday named a senior advisor for his incoming administration who had resigned from the Obama White House in 2009 after a clip surfaced showing her praising Chinese communist dictator Mao Zedong.
Anita Dunn resigned from her post as the White House communications director in 2009 after Fox News surfaced a clip of her praising Mao as one of her “favorite political philosophers.”
“The third lesson and tip actually comes from two of my favorite political philosophers: Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa—not often coupled with each other, but the two people I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you’re going to make choices; you’re going to challenge; you’re going to say, ‘Why not?’; you’re going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before,” Dunn said in an address to the St. Andrew’s Episcopal High School in Washington in 2009, according to CNN.
After the clip surfaced, Dunn said the Mao reference was an attempt at irony which fell flat.
Mao led the communist Cultural Revolution and started a regime in China responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people.
“Anita Dunn brings decades of experience managing and winning political and advocacy campaigns and advising our nation’s leaders at the highest levels of government,” a press release from the Biden-Harris transition team states.
Dunn was the senior advisor to Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign. She was named as the co-chair of the Biden-Harris transition team in September last year. She served as the chief strategist for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and went on to become the White House Communications Director. In 2012, she helped Obama prepare for the presidential debates. She also worked in a number “of roles in and out of government for former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle and former U.S. Senator Bill Bradley,” according to the transition team.
Disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein reached out to Dunn for advice when he was facing allegations of sexual abuse, according to The New York Times. Dunn helped Weinstein strategize and did not charge for her advice, the newspaper reported.
So the “disaster” Thomas Donilon, who first advised Sen. Biden in 1988, is the likely source for Joe Biden’s claim that the Chinese Communists are “not bad folks, folks” and “not competition for us.” This is the Fannie Mae hustler who “orchestrated” Joe Biden as the point man for China policy. On Biden’s watch, China ramped up internal repressions and became more aggressive, modernizing their military and creating island bases that put keyAmerican allies and interests at risk.
Schweizer: We’ve Never Had a President ‘This Commercially Linked to Our Chief Adversary,’ China as Biden
On Tuesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer stated that President-Elect Joe Biden is the most “commercially linked to our chief adversary, which is China” of any president.
Schweizer said, “I don’t think we’ve ever had an American president that has been this commercially linked to our chief adversary, which is China. … I mean, you look at Donald Trump. He had some dealings, his family had dealings in China. He had legitimate businesses. You look at Michael Bloomberg, same thing. He had dealings in China, legitimate businesses. By no stretch of any imagination do the Bidens have any kind of a legitimate business that the Chinese were pouring money into. It was all about currying favor.”
President Barack Obama walks with Senior White House Advisor Anita Dunn to debate preparation at the Kingsmill Resort in Williamsburg, Va., on Oct. 16, 2012. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)
No comments:
Post a Comment