Biden Mulls Tapping US Army’s Own Funds In Scramble To Arm Ukraine
The Biden White House is so desperate to provide further immediate funding to Ukraine, with the House still firmly blocking the sought after $60+ billion, that it is considering a move to try and tap $200 million from US Army funding.
While $200 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the total Ukraine aid still being sought, it would be hugely symbolic, showing that Biden is ultimately willing to put Ukraine’s defenses first – while taking from America’s domestic defense budget to do it.
Drawing on Pentagon reserves would free up funds to replenish critically low supplies at a moment Ukraine is by and large retreating from front lines in the east, however, Bloomberg has reported that the final decision hasn’t been made yet.
Bloombergnoted that the “Debate over utilizing a small amount of Pentagon reserves underscores the furious effort at the White House to find any possible support for Ukraine.”
“The White House is focused on urging the US House to pass the national security supplemental, and aides continue to believe that if the speaker were to put the bill to a vote, it would pass overwhelmingly, a spokesperson for the National Security Council said,” the report added. Biden renewed his call during Thursday night’s State of the Union address.
Meanwhile, some small European nations are stepping up in an attempt to fill a huge gap in the wake of the US arms stoppage.
“A Czech-led plan to buy 800,000 rounds of ammunition for Ukraine to fight Russia’s invading forces has secured enough funding, with contributions from 18 countries,” Czech President Petr Pavel described Thursday.
According to more from Reuters, “The most pressing need for Ukraine two years after Russia’s full-scale invasion began has become artillery ammunition, which is running low as the sides use heavy cannon fire to hold largely static, entrenched positions along the 1,000-km (620-mile) front line.”
The European Union a year ago promised to deliver one million ammunition rounds by now but has failed to do it, as European defense companies are being pleaded with by EU government leaders to expand infrastructure and production.
LIVE FROM WASHINGTON, D.C.
Senator Ron Johnson: Ukraine can’t ask us for money when they’ve got no plan
“Enough of this fantasy. If you want any funding for Ukraine, tell me how you’ll spend it to try to bring the war to an end.”
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s President Zelensky is still pledging ‘victory’ against Russia, but he’s still recently admitted that his forces are running woefully low on weapons and ammunition, and that if more ammo doesn’t come from the US “within a month” – it will spell disaster for Ukraine’s efforts to pushback the invasion.
Israel isn’t planning to send early warning systems to Ukraine out of solidarity but is really trying to curry more favor with the US as its war with Hamas reaches the endgame, though Tel Aviv is disguising its true intentions as a signal of displeasure with Moscow’s balancing act between Israel and Hamas.
Israel’s Permanent Representative to the UN announced late last month that his country is “working to provide Ukraine with early warning systems”, which was followed by a hardline lawmaker promising that “Israel will take a more aggressive stance against Russia.” This came after the new Israeli Ambassador to Russia caused a scandal in early February by misportraying Russia’s regional policy, which readers can learn more about in this analysis here that hyperlinks to nearly two dozen relevant pieces about it.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova reacted to this development by lamenting “The fact that people in the region, especially Israeli politicians, perceive and follow the path imposed on them by the ‘exceptionalists’ – the US”, which has “exacerbated and brought closer this catastrophic situation in the region, given it an eerie momentum, provoked it.” Although Israel is still legally considered a “friendly” country by Russia, that could soon change depending on what it does.
So long as it refrains from sending offensive arms, however, then it might not make that list. Even if it does, then Russia might still keep it off of there for now in order to explore whether diplomacy can result in reaching a “new normal” between them before tensions spiral out of control, similar in spirit to why Russia didn’t designate Turkiye despite it sending Ukraine attack drones. Relations with Ankara remained manageable and mutually beneficial for the most part so ties with Tel Aviv might end up the same way.
Nevertheless, this shift in Israel’s approach towards NATO’s proxywar on Russia through Ukraine – which is already an undeclared but limited hot war after German Chancellor Olaf Scholz inadvertently revealed that Western troops are secretly on the ground there – isn’t being done out of solidarity with Kiev. Rather, it superficially appears to due to Israel’s displeasure with Russia’s balancing act between it and Hamas but is really an attempt by Tel Aviv to curry favor with Washington as its war with Hamas reaches the endgame.
Two detailed reports from American media in late November can be interpreted as an evolution of the Biden Administration’s pressure campaign against Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu. The Washington Post informed their audience how he let Qatar fund Hamas, while the New York Times claimed that Israel was allegedly aware of Hamas’ sneak attack plans more than a year before its early October sneak attack. Both are damning and could fuel more protests against him once the conflict ends.
About those, the Biden Administration was already implicated in the unprecedented nationwide ones that rocked Israel last spring, which were analyzed here as being motivated by its ruling liberal-globalists’ ideological opposition to the self-professed Jewish State’s conservative-nationalist government. Anticipating a repeat of those events upon the conclusion of another ceasefire ahead of Ramadan, it’s very possible that Bibi sought to preempt more meddling by agreeing to send those systems to Ukraine.
In his mind, this desperate move could potentially alleviate some of the expected grassroots pressure upon him in that scenario by influencing the US to exercise a greater degree of self-restraint by not involving itself as much in any forthcoming round of Color Revolution unrest. The public pretext upon which these early warning systems are being sent is Israel’s displeasure with Russia’s balancing act between it and Hamas in order to deflect scrutiny from his real motives.
After all, there’s no credence to the claim that Russia supported Hamas’ sneak attack, whether militarily or politically. The Kremlin has repeatedly condemned it as an act of terrorism but also condemned Israel’s collective punishment of the Palestinians in response. Moscow’s hosting of Hamas’ political wing is solely intended to revive peace talks and secure the release of the hostages, the latter task of which “is under the personal control of the president of the Russian Federation” according to a senior diplomat.
However much Israel might dislike this policy due to its desire that all countries take its side over Hamas’ per the zero-sum choice that it’s pressured them to make, this could continue to be conveyed through conventional diplomatic means instead of escalating matters by unilaterally sending such systems to Kiev. The reason why Israel’s export of this early warning equipment is so concerning to Russia is because it could lead to “mission creep” whereby air defense systems and possibly offensive arms soon follow.
Any significant Israeli-backed improvement of Ukraine’s air defense capabilities could lead to a symmetrical Russian-backed improvement of Syria’s, though this analysis here argues that Moscow won’t risk a wider war to stop Tel Aviv’s increasingly frequent strikes against Damascus. At any rate, these two might slip into a dangerous security dilemma since each might accuse the other of obstructing their strikes against what they consider to be legitimate military targets in those neighboring nations.
The consequences could see Russia and Israel ramping up their respective strikes in Ukraine and Syria so as to more effectively break through these new defenses there. That won’t change the military-strategic dynamics of the Ukrainian Conflict but could risk a worsening of the West Asian Crisis if Iran feels comfortable enough to attack Israel from Syria under its host’s Russian-supplied umbrella. In that event, Israel could either react with a ground operation or might even launch one preemptively.
From Bibi’s self-interested political perspective, widening the war to Syria in any ground or special forces capacity could perpetuate the West Asian Crisis to his domestic and international benefit. On the home front, he’ll likely be able to exploit that move to remain in power and avoid (possibly politically driven) corruption charges, while the foreign one could see the US alleviating potentially impending Color Revolution pressure upon him due to Israel more directly containing Iran in Syria per their joint interests.
It’s unclear whether he’s gamed everything out this far, and even if he did, it can’t be taken for granted that events will evolve in that direction and not be offset by some hitherto unpredictable variables. Regardless of whatever his plans may be and however far he’s looking into the future, the fact of the matter is that Israel’s partial compliance with the US’ anti-Russian demands risks ruining ties with Moscow, and this could quickly reverberate throughout West Asia depending on the scenario trajectory.
At the State of the Union address this week, President Biden and the Democrats intend to leverage a tragic situation involving a woman who suffered a medical emergency during her pregnancy in order to advance their own abortion agenda. My heart goes out to this mother and any other mother experiencing a similar situation. It is heartbreaking to lose a child under any circumstances. But while President Biden exploits this tragedy for political gain, one critical piece of information you won’t hear during his address is that all state pro-life protections have provisions to protect mothers experiencing medical emergencies.
Unfortunately, Biden and the Democrats think it is more politically expedient to scare women into believing they cannot access the care that they need than to roll up their sleeves and help the majority who want to parent. Peer-reviewed research found nearly 70% of post-abortive women describe their abortions as inconsistent with their own values and preferences, with one in four describing their abortions as unwanted or coerced. What are Biden and the Democrats doing to address this epidemic? They are peddling ever more abortion for any reason, past the point at which unborn children can feel pain and indeed at any time during a pregnancy. Theirs is North Korea and China-style abortion policy – and it utterly fails to align with the compassion and aid Americans desire for women facing difficult pregnancies.
Meanwhile, the pro-life community has quietly built a vast network of charitable organizations across the nation that exist to address the needs of pregnant women who want to keep their babies but lack resources. In 2022 alone, pregnancy resource centers met with clients over 16 million times and delivered services with an estimated total value of at least $358 million. They saw almost 975,000 new clients and provided pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, parenting education programs, baby diapers, wipes, formula, clothing, and much more – all at no cost. These pregnancy resource centers not only meet the material needs of women, they can quite literally save their lives.
That is what happened in the case of survivor Jean Marie Davis, who had been trafficked for nearly three decades in 33 states when an unintended pregnancy became the impetus for her escape. With no money and running from a pimp who was trying to kill her, Jean Marie had almost nowhere to turn. After endless calls, she was finally connected to a pregnancy resource director who changed everything. Jean Marie ultimately escaped a life of drugs, violence, and serial abuse, without sacrificing the son she loves, and today she helps women in similar circumstances by running a pregnancy resource center of her own.
Hundreds of maternity homes across the nation also provide pregnant women in need with long-term housing and the material, medical, educational, and emotional resources to transform their lives and live their dreams. Rachel already had a young child, but her partner had turned abusive toward her, and then she found out she was pregnant again. She knew for the sake of her children she had to leave but had no vehicle and nowhere to turn until she found a maternity home which agreed to help. That home provided a safe and loving environment – plus all the resources Rachel needed to heal and thrive. While there, she pursued her education in the medical field and is now a registered nurse working at a local hospital.
Now if Biden and the Democrats have their way, the charitable organizations that stepped in to help Jean Marie, Rachel, and the countless other women who come to them because they want to keep their children would no longer exist. From overt calls to “shut them down,” to an HHS proposal to revoke any public funding for these centers, to the DOJ’s refusal to protect them from the massive wave of disturbing pro-abortion violence post-Dobbs, the message is clear: For Democrats, abortion is the only option.
While the president and Democrats say they care about women, their actions speak otherwise.
Marjorie Dannenfelser is president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and author of “Life is Winning: Inside the Fight for Unborn Children and Their Mothers.”
Killadelphia: 8 Teens Shot Near SEPTA Bus In Northeast Philly
Just hours after the last shooting injuring four and killing one involving mass transit in Philadelphia was reported, yesterday it hit the wires that another “mass shooting” took place near a SEPTA bus in Northeast Philadelphia.
One teen is “fighting for his life” while 7 other teens are recovering, NBC Philadelphia reports.
The incident occurred at around 3 p.m. near Northeast High School at Cottman and Rising Sun avenues, where students were waiting for a bus. Three assailants opened fire, shooting over 30 rounds from across the street, wounding eight teenagers.
Surveillance captured them exiting a blue Hyundai Sonata and attacking as a bus arrived, then fleeing. The victims, aged between 15 and 17, included seven boys and a girl; two are critically injured.
Descriptions of the gunmen have been released. The shooting prompted a lockdown at a nearby elementary school and hit two SEPTA buses without injuring passengers.
Police have impounded a car believed to be involved in the shooting, seizing a blue Hyundai Sonata found parked on Roselyn Street in the Olney area of the city on Wednesday night. The vehicle, now at a local impound lot, is said to match the description of the dark blue 2019 Hyundai Sonata identified as the getaway car in surveillance footage.
Mayor Cherelle Parker commented: “The purpose of our being here today is to inform you all that enough is enough. That every law enforcement partner that we have here in the city of Philadelphia is actively engaged in working together to ensure that every resource that is needed is readily available so that the work can be done to solve crimes.”
Philadelphia Police Commissioner Kevin Bethel added: “It’s hard to sit here in three days and have 11 juveniles shot who are going and coming from school. The cowardly acts that we’ve seen over the last three days are unacceptable, The downstream impacts if we do not address gun violence and we do not address guns is what we see today.”
“We cannot ignore what we’re seeing over the last three days. I will not sit here and people call me and tell me what I should or should not be doing,” Bethel continued.
“This is what we see when we give guns in the hands of juveniles and what they do with them. Telling kids they should not carry guns because they’re scared. Really? This is the end results of what we see. So we’re going to work hard and continue with the men and women behind me and my team to get these guns off the street and stop this from happening.”
This marks the fourth recent shooting near SEPTA properties, with 11 juveniles shot in the city this week. Other incidents involved fatal shootings and arguments, with no arrests made yet.
WANTED for shooting 8 juveniles on 3/6/24 at 7300 Rising Sun Ave. Suspects armed and dangerous – do not approach. If you have information on these suspects -please call or 215-686-TIPS(8477) or 911 pic.twitter.com/cspPIL5LLv
— Philadelphia Police Department (@PhillyPolice) March 7, 2024
The pace of FBI arrests and the opening of new Jan. 6 criminal cases quickened so much in late 2023 and early 2024 that District of Columbia federal courts could bend under the weight.
In the past two months, 93 people have been arrested and charged, according to Department of Justice (DOJ) reports.
At the current rate, some 445 new cases could hit the docket in 2024—more than in 2022 and 2023, according to one estimate.
In total, up to March 6, at least 1,358 people have been arrested by the FBI and criminally charged by the Department of Justice (DOJ) for crimes related to Jan. 6.
If the current trend is to hold, total arrests could be 2,150 by the time the statute of limitations on Jan. 6 crimes expires in early 2026, according to Jacob Rugh, associate professor of sociology at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. Mr. Rugh and researcher Isabella Felin have been publishing Jan. 6 statistics and data visualization on X and Instagram since August 2022.
William Shipley, a former federal prosecutor who has represented more than 50 Jan. 6 defendants, said he noticed an upswing in cases starting in September 2023.
“Within the past two months, three months, it seems like you’re seeing six, eight, 10 a week,” Mr. Shipley said on Feb. 23 during an Epoch Times panel discussion at the Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Maryland.
“Every day, every day you see two or three more,” Mr. Shipley said. “My own view: it’s a political operation. Just my personal opinion. I think the Department of Justice, the Biden administration, is committed to continuing to keep this story front and center for purposes of the campaign.”
Mr. Shipley said there was a six- to eight-month pause in arrests and prosecutions starting in early 2023 due to the strain Jan. 6 cases put on D.C. federal courts.
“You’ve got a five-year statute of limitations, you don’t need to arrest everybody and prosecute them in the first 18 months, and there was a pause,” Mr. Shipley said. “There was a clear period of time where there weren’t arrests of any significant number happening.”
The top arrest states include Florida (129), Texas (104), Pennsylvania (93), California (90), New York (80), Ohio (71), and Virginia (67). Together they comprise nearly 50 percent of all Jan. 6 defendants, according to research by Mr. Rugh.
About 63 percent of Jan. 6 criminal cases have been adjudicated and defendants sentenced, according to DOJ figures. About 58 percent of defendants were given jail or prison time, 19 percent received home detention, and another 3.5 percent received a combination.
Of the 769 defendants who pleaded guilty to charges, 69 percent were for misdemeanors and 31 percent for felonies, the DOJ reports.
Some 1,276 defendants were charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, and 486 were charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers.
More than 350 were hit with the controversial “corruptly obstructing, influencing or impeding an official proceeding” charge. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on April 16 on a challenge to how the DOJ has used 2002-era corporate fraud statutes to prosecute Jan. 6 defendants for interrupting the counting of Electoral College votes.
Perfect Conviction Rate
Perhaps the most remarkable Jan. 6 statistic comes from jury boxes in the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse in Washington D.C.
Every one of the more than 100 Jan. 6 defendants who chose a jury trial were found guilty of at least some of the charges. That’s a perfect 100-percent conviction rate for federal prosecutors, a statistic cited repeatedly in change-of-venue motions. One hundred percent of those motions have been denied.
Mr. Shipley told The Epoch Times that the DOJ’s historical conviction rate in the District of Columbia is about 65 percent, lower than the 90 percent that is “more typical” in other federal court districts.
He said, “The way the question needs to be framed today and put before the judges again is, ‘How many trials and how high a conviction rate is necessary before the judges start to consider maybe it’s not the evidence but the jurors?’”
District of Columbia jurors seated on Jan. 6 cases “are simply not open to listening to explanations from defendants who testify, or accept any of the ‘progress’ against the evidence made by defense counsel in cross-examination,” Mr. Shipley said.
The DOJ has stated since Jan. 6 that finding, arresting, and prosecuting those who were at the U.S. Capitol is a top priority, carried out at “unprecedented speed and scale.” The FBI launched the largest investigation in its history in response to Jan. 6.
Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, paints Jan. 6 in the dramatic tones of warfare as he pledges prosecutors will continue their work unabated into 2024 and beyond.
“In scenes often reminiscent of a medieval battle, officers engaged in hand-to-hand combat with members of the invading force, many of whom carried dangerous weapons including firearms, chemical sprays, tasers, stabbing weapons and makeshift weapons across the Capitol [grounds] and in the Capitol itself,” Graves said on Jan. 6, 2024.
Jan. 6 was “likely the largest single-day mass assault of law enforcement officers in our nation’s history,” Mr. Graves said.
The preamble to the DOJ’s monthly statistical update on Jan. 6 cases states: “The Department of Justice’s resolve to hold accountable those who committed crimes on January 6, 2021, has not, and will not, wane.”
Mr. Shipley said the pace of arrests helps perpetuate the idea that supporters of former President Donald Trump comprise a threat to society.
“They want to continue to have that argument that some portion of the political opposition is actually a criminal element,” he said. “They use the branding of all these J6 defendants to say, ‘See that sliver of the MAGA movement, they’re insurrectionists, they’re foes of democracy.’”
The prosecution posture was set early on.
Prosecution Machine
Not even three weeks after the Jan. 6 incursion, the DOJ named senior prosecutors to go after the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and other alleged “white nationalist” groups, according to internal documents obtained by Judicial Watch.
A document dated Jan. 25, 2021, named assistant U.S. attorneys to investigate and prosecute white nationalists and militias, the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers. Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, founder of the Oath Keepers who in 2023 was sentenced to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other charges, was named as an early target in a DOJ list obtained by Judicial Watch.
Mr. Rhodes was added to the target list on Jan. 11, 2021, and his case assigned to FBI special agent Michael Palian, who testified against Mr. Rhodes and other defendants in the first Oath Keepers trial in 2022. Mr. Rhodes was not indicted and arrested until Jan. 13, 2022.
“I’m not at all surprised that I was added to the target list on Jan. 11, 2021, long before there could have been any actual substantive investigation into me,” Mr. Rhodes told The Epoch Times in an email. “Goes to show that ‘show me the man, I’ll show you the crime’ was exactly their M.O.”
Mr. Rhodes said the media set the tone for such a focus on the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys.
“The fixation on the Oath Keepers came first from the mass media, which immediately in the hours and days after the Trump supporters entered the Capitol began to highlight the row of Oath Keepers walking up the steps and breathlessly calling it a ‘military stack formation’ and alleging that the Oath Keepers were leading the crowd,” Mr. Rhodes said.
“Total nonsense. But since Oath Keepers and Proud Boys were already the two groups the leftist media loved to demonize and focus on,” Mr. Rhodes said, “no surprise those two groups became the focus of print and cable ‘news’ coverage of Jan. 6, spinning the false narrative that Oath Keepers and Proud Boys were ‘central’ to the events of Jan. 6 or were the ‘leaders.’”
Rapid Indictment Team
According to the DOJ draft plan, a branch would be established for “Priority Incidents and Subjects,” including the Jan. 6 pipe bombs, the shooting of Ashli Babbitt outside the Speaker’s Lobby, the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, use-of-force allegations against Capitol Police and Metropolitan Police officers, and assaults on federal officers by rioters.
Another branch was to be established for priority investigations and rapid indictments and prosecution of Jan. 6 subjects. A branch would be established for “Advanced Litigation Support,” including mass data collection, discovery for defendants, and technology support to “store, process, analyze, and produce the unprecedented amount of data.”
Judicial Watch obtained the plan as part of a 2021 Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the DOJ.
“These documents detail a troubling and unprecedented deployment of federal resources to prosecute Americans caught up in the January 6 disturbance,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The documents seem to describe a massive political and spy operation masquerading as a law enforcement operation.”
Treniss Evans, a former Jan. 6 defendant and founder of the legal advocacy group Condemned USA, said the prosecution efforts are squarely aimed at harming President Trump.
Watch: Indian Navy In Dramatic Sea Rescue Of True Confidence Crew After 3 Sailors Died
On Wednesday we reported on the deadly Houthi missile strike on the MV True Confidence, a Liberian-owned vessel, in the Red Sea. The attack resulted in the first fatalities since the Houthi campaign against international shipping began in reaction to the Israeli offensive in Gaza. Three sailors tragically died while the rest of the crew abandoned the stricken vessel as it was on fire.
The UK embassy in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa, confirmed on X: “At least two innocent sailors have died. This was the sad but inevitable consequence of the Houthis recklessly firing missiles at international shipping. They must stop.” A statement by US Central Command later increased the death toll to three.
The vessel’s owners and operator had said it was drifting 50 nautical miles southwest of Aden. True Confidence Shipping and Greece-based operator Third January Maritime Ltd said in a joint statement “The vessel is drifting” and that there the ship had no current connection with any US entity. However, the Indian Navy responded and was able to rescue several crew members, captured in a dramatic video below:
Reuters has confirmed Thursday that “India’s navy evacuated all 20 crew from a stricken vessel in the Red Sea on Thursday, after a Houthi attack killed three seafarers in the first civilian fatalities from the Yemeni group’s campaign against the key shipping route.”
The vessel’s owners have contacted and expressed condolences to the families. Two of the deceased were Filipino nationals, while the third was Vietnamese.
The Indian Navy conducted a daring helicopter rescue from a small life raft in choppy waters. According to more from Reuters, “Some wounded were shown lying in the bottom of a navy lifeboat sent to assist.”
“They were carried on stretchers onto the ship and were shown later with heavily bandaged limbs as they were evacuated to the Djibouti hospital,” the report continued.
CENTCOM photo showing the vessel on fire and drifting following a direct hit by Houthi missile…
The owners and managers further said in the statement: “The vessel is drifting well away from land and salvage arrangements are being made.” However, even salvage efforts will be high risk at a moment these waters off Yemen come under daily Houthi drone and rocket attacks.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) accused Special Counsel Jack Smith of election interference in a complaint filed with the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) inspector general on Wednesday.
In a letter to Inspector General Michael Horowitz, Mr. Gaetz asserted that Mr. Smith’s resistance to delaying a trial stems from an unspoken drive to hold it before the upcoming November presidential election.
Last week, former President Donald Trump’s lawyers and Mr. Smith’s office filed motions requesting different trial dates in the classified documents criminal case in Florida. President Trump’s lawyers have argued that a fair trial cannot be held in an election year when he is the leading Republican candidate.
“The witch hunt against President Trump by Attorney General Garland and Special Counsel Smith is a partisan exercise, and the American people know it!” Mr. Gaetz wrote on X (formerly Twitter).
“Jack Smith’s attempt to speed up the trial against President Trump violates the DOJ’s rules and the law,” he continued. “His public comments and his office’s briefs before the Supreme Court demonstrate that he has no reason for his actions other than to unlawfully interfere in the 2024 presidential election.”
In his letter, Mr. Gaetz pointed to statements by Mr. Smith in court filings where he has urged a “rapid” review of the case and stressed its “public importance.” This, according to the Florida congressman, shows that the case is an attempt at election interference.
“Were there a legitimate, non-election related purpose for this request, these attorneys, who have filed in appeals courts many times, would have listed such,” Mr. Gaetz wrote (pdf).
“Since charges have been filed and the defendant himself is taking a legal position on timing and lodging various appeals, that justification cannot, for example, be the rights of the defendant under the Constitution or Speedy Trial Act,” he continued.
President Trump’s legal team made a similar argument last month, writing in a court filing that Mr. Smith was twisting “into logical knots” in his argument against delaying the trial.
“The Special Counsel’s latest filing raises a compelling inference of a political motive—the motivation to influence the 2024 Presidential election by bringing the leading Republican candidate to trial before November 5, 2024,” President Trump’s lawyers wrote.
Mr. Gaetz argued in Wednesday’s letter that Mr. Smith’s apparent rush to trial raises questions about compliance with DOJ policy. According to a 2022 memo issued by Attorney General Merrick Garland, law enforcement officers and prosecutors are prohibited from taking actions that could impact elections.
The memo cites the DOJ’s Justice Manual, which has also been highlighted by President Trump’s legal team. The manual sets clear guidelines against using investigative steps, public statements, or criminal charges for electoral advantage.
Citing legal scholars, including Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith, Mr. Gaetz suggested in his letter that the rush to trial lacks a constitutional or statutory rationale, indicating a possible political motivation. Mr. Goldsmith, in an article referenced by Mr. Gaetz, questions the need for speed in the case and raises concerns about the consequences of such haste.
Mr. Gaetz accused Mr. Smith of violating the law by trying to expedite the case in court.
“It is the core of prohibited conduct that a purpose (not the purpose) of any official action of a prosecutor be to affect any election,” Mr. Gaetz wrote. “It may be morally correct that the American people should see swift resolution of this case, perhaps with dropped charges or a Trump acquittal before the November 2024 Presidential election, but wielding Executive Branch authority in the service of this is a violation of law. Prosecutors must be held to a higher standard.”
Mr. Gaetz urged Mr. Garland to conduct an immediate investigation into potential violations of departmental regulations by Mr. Smith.
The Epoch Times contacted Mr. Smith’s office for comment.
Last week, Mr. Smith’s office requested a new trial date of July 8. On the same day, attorneys for the former president asked for a delay of the trial until after the 2024 election or, alternatively, for it to be held on Aug. 12.
President Trump’s attorneys have argued that the U.S. Constitution affords him the right to run for president, engage in political speech-making protected by the First Amendment, and participate in legal proceedings, a right protected by the Sixth Amendment.
President Trump is accused of violating the Espionage Act through unauthorized possession of national defense information, as well as conspiring to obstruct justice and making false statements.
China Blasts ‘Unfathomable Absurdities’ Of US Trade Curbs While Hailing Deepened Russia Ties
China’s top diplomat on Thursday hit out at Washington’s “bewildering” trade policy during the much anticipated annual Foreign Minister’s briefing held during the ongoing “two sessions” gathering of China’s rubber stamp legislature.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi charged that the US is “devising various tactics to suppress China” and described that its “lengthening” unilateral anti-Beijing sanctions list is now at “bewildering levels of unfathomable absurdity,” according to Bloomberg.
China has been pushing and touting high-tech development, but this is amid significant barriers erected by Washington. Wang questioned on trade between the world’s two largest economies, “If it gets jittery whenever it hears the word China, where is its confidence as a major country?”
He continued to lash out at the United States by saying, “If it only wants itself to prosper, but denies other countries legitimate development, where is international fairness? If it persistently monopolizes the high end of the value chain and keeps China at the low end, where is fairness and competition?“
The over four hour-long engagement with reporters on a wide array of topics is a rare moment of the year where the foreign ministry can articulate the country’s foreign policy vision directly to reporters.
However, the briefing is typically highly choreographed, and so there’s deep significance in the fact that the first foreign reporter to be called upon for a question was a Russian state media journalist.
Wang praised robust Russian trade ties with China, which have increased in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine over two years ago. China-Russia trade reached a historic high of $240 billion, smashing President Xi and Putin’s target of $200 billion which had been set in a 2019 agreement.
“Russian natural gas is fueling numerous Chinese households and Chinese-made automobiles are running on Russian roads,” Wang in the press conference. “All this shows the strong resilience and broad prospects of China-Russia mutually beneficial cooperation.”
“China and Russia have forged a new paradigm of major country relations that differs entirely from the obsolete Cold War approach on the basis of non-alliance, non-confrontation and not targeting any third party,” he emphasized.
On the question of the Ukraine war, Wang once again urged peace talks and called on all parties to avoid “unthinkable” escalation.
China’s FM Wang Yi with 4 straightforward questions for the US, in the context of the bill to ban TikTok, the semiconductors sanctions on China, and the multiplication of banned Chinese products in the US (EV cars, port cranes, etc.)pic.twitter.com/CG1CnQSHyT
On the issue of rising tensions in east Asian regional waters, which was just this week on display in the South China Sea with a collision incident between Chinese and Philippine Coast Guard vessels, he warned outside powers (of course primarily meaning the US) to not interfere and avoid provocations.
“In the face of deliberate infringement, we will take justified actions to defend our rights in accordance with the law. In the face of unwarranted provocation, we will respond with prompt and legitimate countermeasures,” Wang asserted. “We also urge certain countries outside the region, not to make provocations, excite or stir up troubles.“
Imposing restrictive lockdown measures during the COVID-19 pandemic led to higher excess mortality in such nations while also damaging their economies, according to a recent Swedish study.
Published in the Economic Affairs journal on Feb. 11, the study—which looked at the health and economic effects of COVID-19 lockdowns in Sweden—found that its less restrictive COVID-19 policies led to lower excess mortality compared to many European nations that imposed stronger lockdown rules. Sweden also suffered a lower negative impact on gross domestic product (GDP) growth during the pandemic period.
Many policymakers made two key mistakes, researchers concluded.
“First, they introduced lockdowns that were too stringent and had negligible positive health effects despite the evidence available at the time pointing toward the limited benefits of such broad measures.
“Second, they responded to the downturn in economic activity with fiscal and monetary policies that were excessively expansionary.”
Researchers looked at the excess mortality in Sweden between January 2020 and July 2022, comparing it to other European nations in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) group.
“Sweden and the other Nordic countries had among the lowest cumulative excess mortality rates of all European countries towards the end of the sample period,” they found. “Countries such as Finland and Norway, with the lowest average lockdown rate, show the lowest excess mortality, actually displaying a negative excess mortality rate.”
“Sweden, which lagged behind other countries in March 2020 in introducing lockdown measures and then largely had an average lockdown rate, has one of the lowest cumulative excess mortality rates towards the end of the pandemic.”
Nations that imposed more stringent lockdown measures didn’t have a lower excess mortality rate, the study said.
For instance, school closures were likely an “inefficient policy” since kids were “relatively mildly affected by Covid-19 and were not a major source of the spread of the virus.”
Of the 20,000 deaths in Sweden during the pandemic, only 21 people younger than the age of 19 years died even as all primary schools remained open throughout the pandemic, the study noted.
Economic Implications
Among economic effects, a “clear negative pattern” was observed in GDP growth rates between 2019 and 2021.
“Countries with a higher lockdown rate displayed poorer economic growth.”
Sweden was found to be doing better than others.
“Sweden, with an average lockdown rate of 39 for 2020–21, shows a weak cumulative GDP growth of 3 percent during the two years 2020–21. Compared with an average annual pre-pandemic growth rate of 2.6 percent, the Swedish economy lost approximately one year of growth,” the study said. However, “countries with a higher lockdown rate lost between one and three years of economic growth.”
“In other words, the Swedish economy took a hit as a result of the pandemic, but it was nevertheless possible to maintain a positive growth rate by avoiding the more severe lockdown measures applied in other countries.”
Lockdown measures also had a fiscal impact. Sweden’s budget deficit due to COVID-19 restrictions was less than 3 percent of its GDP. Nations with more stringent lockdown measures had a higher deficit. For instance, the United Kingdom had a budget deficit of 27 percent, Italy 17 percent, and France 16 percent.
After the pandemic, Sweden had a debt-to-GDP ratio of 36 percent at the end of 2021, just slightly higher than the 35 percent before the pandemic. By the end of 2022, that had declined to 34 percent.
By contrast, France’s debt-to-GDP ratio after the pandemic was higher than what Greece encountered in 2009 at the beginning of the European debt crisis.
“The unprecedented expansionary fiscal measures may have been necessary to support businesses and households through the pandemic and the lockdowns,“ the study said. ”However, the fiscal cost of these measures became exceedingly high in those countries that opted for a higher lockdown rate.”
Researchers recommended that any response to a pandemic crisis in the future “should focus on the long-term perspective” as well.
“We are not all dead in the long run—many have to live with the consequences of the pandemic crisis response. It is essential that crisis policies do not cause more harm than good.”
The research was conducted by Frederick N.G. Andersson and Lars Jonung, two professors from Lund University in Sweden.
Mr. Andersson is a macroeconomist specializing in long-term economic transitions. Mr. Jonung is a professor emeritus at the Department of Economics in the university and served as chairman of the Swedish Fiscal Policy Council during 2012-13.
Litany of Lockdown Harms
Other studies also have detailed lockdown-related harms.
A report published by the Centre of Social Justice (CSJ) think tank last year found that the COVID-19 pandemic was the “dynamite” that blew open the “gap between those who can get by and those stuck at the bottom” in the United Kingdom.
“During lockdown: calls to a domestic abuse helpline rose 700 percent; mental ill-health in young people went from one in nine to one in six; and nearly a quarter amongst the oldest children; severe school absence jumped by 134 percent,” it said.
In addition, “1.2 million more people went on working-age benefits; 86 percent more people sought help for addictions; prisoners were locked up for more than 22 hours per day, and a household became homeless every three minutes.”
In an interview with Bill Maher last year, Scott Galloway, a marketing professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business, acknowledged that his decision to push for harsher lockdown policies during the COVID-19 pandemic was wrong.
“I was on the board of my kids’ school during COVID. I wanted a harsher lockdown policy, and, in retrospect, I was wrong. … The damage to kids from keeping them out of school longer was greater than the risk.”
Mexico “Still Hasn’t Seen Science” From US Proving Genetically Modified Corn Is Safe
Mexico submitted an official reply to the United States in the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) trade dispute about importing genetically modified (GM) corn. Mexico argued that the herbicide glyphosate in the corn is unsafe for human consumption. Corn plays a vital role in the Mexican diet, particularly as the primary ingredient for tortilla flour.
In a written submission to a USMCA panel, Mexico, the top buyer of US corn, used science to show how GM corn and Glyphosate harm human health. This has given Mexico the authority to ban GM corn for human consumption.
The submission outlined policies aimed at safeguarding consumers against the potential health effects of GM corn, asserting that these measures would have minimal trade impacts on US farmers.
The scientific evidence of GMO safety presented by the US is out of date, much of it from industry studies not supported by peer-review. According to Mexico, the US did not present any peer-reviewed study showing it safe to eat large quantities of GM corn exposed to Glyphosate in minimally processed form over a lifetime. Mexico makes the case that the US regulatory process is not stringent enough ensure that products are safe for Mexicans to consume at high levels.
On public health, the submission details that GM corn, especially Bt corn engineered to kill insect pests, can have adverse impacts on non-target animals. Mammals have been shown to suffer damage to their digestive systems from a GM trait that kills its targets by attacking their guts.
Mexican tortillas have been proven to be contaminated with GM corn and Glyphosate, the latter in residues from treatments of GM corn engineered to tolerate the herbicide featured in Roundup. Mexico shows that even low-level exposures can have negative long-term health impact.
Mexican Deputy Agriculture Secretary Victor Suarez told Reuters:
The United States “argues that the decisions in Mexico are not based on science and that their decisions are … But we still haven’t seen the science of the United States or the companies. We are looking forward to that study with great pleasure.”
Karen Hansen-Kuhn, IATP’s director of trade and international strategies, wrote in a statement:
“We welcome this vigorous defense of Mexico’s programs to transform its food system. The science they present backs up longstanding civil society campaigns for healthy foods and biodiverse agricultural systems. There’s a lot here that could contribute to more substantive debates on our food and agriculture system in the US, as well.”
IATP Senior Advisor Timothy A. Wise said:
“Ever since Mexico first announced its intentions to limit GM corn and glyphosate in its tortilla chain, the US government has asserted that Mexico’s policies are not based on science.”
Wise continued:
“This comprehensive response refutes that claim, presenting hundreds of academic studies that show cause for concern about human health and the threat to native corn diversity.”
Agri-chemical companies like Bayer have spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing GM crops for worldwide export out of the US. They also spend tens of millions of dollars in defending GM foods.
Meanwhile, Glyphosate is banned or limited in at least 25 countries and some areas within the United States. In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer declared Glyphosate a probable human carcinogen.
Maybe Mexico is right. Question the chemicals in the food.
Are GMO foods the reason why there are more increased celiac and gluten sensitivity cases?
