Lew Rockwell Institute

From the Tom Woods Letter:

Tulsi Gabbard is on her way towards confirmation as Director of National Intelligence.

Democrats, and some Republicans, are concerned that Tulsi might not lie 24 hours a day, spreading CNN/CIA propaganda that would insult a third-grader, but the rest of us are intrigued by what it might be like to have someone in that position who isn’t a clone of Mitt Romney or Hillary Clinton.

What’s been interesting to watch in all this has been the conduct of Bernie Sanders, who’s been his usual phony self.

That Bernie endorsed Hillary Clinton in the face of DNC shenanigans against him and, much more importantly, Hillary’s hawkish and morally repugnant foreign policy — which in the old days progressives would have considered non-negotiable and disqualifying — told us pretty much what we needed to know.

But his behavior regarding Tulsi takes the cake.

He knows full well that the dumb-guy criticisms are false, but because he goes along to get along, he jumped on the anti-Tulsi bandwagon anyway.

Tulsi actually stepped down as vice chair of the Democratic National Committee over its unfair treatment of Bernie, and then went to work for him.

And this is what she gets in return.

In the past, Bernie has described Tulsi as “one of the important voices of a new generation of leaders. As a veteran of the Iraq War she understands the cost of war and is fighting to create a foreign policy that not only protects America but keeps us out of perpetual wars that we should not be in.”

The only reason Bernie opposes Tulsi is his obeisance to the Democratic Party. He surely realizes that from his (alleged) point of view Tulsi is the best he is going to get in that position, and anyone else who might get nominated in her place would be much worse. He knows that. He opposes her anyway.

I used to hear Bernie described as the left’s answer to Ron Paul. You have to be kidding me.

Dr. Paul’s congressional career was entirely different. Ron believed in things — and had a spine.

The post Bernie the Sellout (Again) appeared first on LewRockwell.

In early February, barely two weeks after his inauguration, President Trump intimated that Gaza would become a US territory, with a view to developing a luxury real estate project with mansions, luxury apartments, hotels and casinos.

How many years would it take to remove the ruble and rebuild?

Under Trump’s advisory, Palestinians would be relocated and excluded from their homeland.

“I would like Egypt to take people,…You’re talking about probably a million and a half people, and we just clean out that whole thing and say: ‘You know, it’s over.’” [Trump told the king of Jordan] ….

“I would love for you to take on more, ‘cause I am looking at the whole Gaza Strip right now, and it’s a mess. It’s a real mess.”

Video: President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu: Press Conference

Will this Multi-billion Dollar Real Estate Project be Carried Out?  

It’s doubtful. There is an unspoken objective, which is barely mentioned by the mainstream media.

As outlined by Felicity Arbuthnot with foresight 11 years ago in a December, 30 2013 article:

“Israel is set to become a major exporter of gas and some oil, “If All Goes to Plan”.  

Arbuthnot was referring to the ownership of Gaza’s maritime natural gas reserves, which belong to the State of Palestine.  

At the time of writing, the Netanyahu government is planning to appropriate these maritime gas reserves. What this signifies is that Israel is intent upon annexing Gaza as well as destroying an entire country. 

The maritime gas reserves belong to Palestine. Israel’s war against Gaza commenced prior to October 7, 2023 with the outright theft of Palestine’s maritime natural gas reserves. 

Already in July 2023, Israel’s Ministry of Energy (IEM) opened the bidding for the exploration of maritime natural gas in Gaza.

And then, three weeks after October 7,  the Ministry (IEM) announced the granting of licenses to both Israeli and international companies to explore for maritime natural gas.

On October 29, the Ministry on behalf of the Israeli government announced the winning bidders for two Zones within OBR4 (Gaza overlapping with Israeli territorial waters).

The companies include Eni S.p.A (Italy), Dana Petroleum (UK based subsidiary of the South Korean National Petroleum Company), and Ratio Petroleum (an Israeli company).

“Israel awarded gas exploration licenses for Zone G, a maritime area adjacent to the shores of Gaza as depicted in the green area of Map 2 above.

Notably, 62 percent of Zone G falls within  the maritime boundaries declared by the State of Palestine in 2019, in accordance with provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), of which Palestine is a signatory.

In addition to the licenses already awarded in Zone G, Israel has also issued tenders for Zones H and E (as depicted in pink on Map 2); 73 percent of Zone H falls within Palestine’s declared maritime boundaries, along with five percent of Zone E.:” See Adalah

For additional information, please view the Ministry’s press release.

Gaza: “A U.S. Territory”? Is Trump “Attempting” to Bypass Netanyahu?  

Visibly, the illegal ownership of Gaza’s maritime gas reserves by the State of Israel (as mentioned above) is in blatant contradiction with Donald Trump’s recently announced plan to transform Gaza into a U.S territory.

If Trump’s project of a U.S Territory were to be carried out, Gaza’s maritime offshore gas reserves, worth billions of dollars WOULD NOT BE MANAGED BY ISRAEL. They would be brought under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Government with a status similar to America’s 14 territories including Guam, America’s Samoa, the US Virgin Islands. What is at stake is Colonial-style theft in derogation of International Law. Negotiations with oil and gas companies would be under the jurisdiction of the “US Territory”, in liaison with Washington. 

“Territories are areas that belong to and are governed by the “parent” country” [U.S.]

“Territories of the United States are sub-national administrative divisions and dependent territories overseen by the federal government of the United States.

Media reports have casually dismissed  Trump’s US. Territory” Option. No serious analysis or statements were put forth.

At a Press Conference in Washington: Trump suggested that:

“displaced Palestinians in Gaza be permanently resettled outside the war-torn territory and proposed the U.S. take “ownership” in redeveloping the area into “the Riviera of the Middle East.”

 President Trump confirmed that the U.S annexation of Gaza would be in the form of a “long-term ownership position”. Meanwhile, Trump has been calling for the exodus of the entire population of the people of Palestine from Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

Ironically,  the protest movement against Netanyahu has shifted. Both Netanyahu and Trump are accused of ethnic cleansing and genocide.

“The long-term ownership” position is tantamount to an act of colonization against the People of Palestine. It suggests the creation of a U.S Territory, which would enable the US government to acquire ownership of Gaza’s maritime natural gas reserves, as well as establish a military base in Gaza. (see below)

Trump Is Leading the Genocide 

Let us be under no illusions. It was carefully a planned “False Flag” Intelligence Op.  The evidence is overwhelming. Western governments as well as the ICJ and IDC have casually identified Israel as the victim of a Palestinian led War resulting in tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths of women and children and the destruction of an entire country.

The False Flag is casually omitted. The word “Genocide” is not mentioned by the International Criminal Court. The Law of Armed Conflict is not addressed. Killing civilians is a crime against humanity. 

The Genocide was carefully planned. The US is not only the driving force behind a military-intelligence operation (US-Israel-NATO), Washington has also provided sophisticated weaponry to kill and destroy, transforming Gaza into a pile of rubble.

Trump is leading  the genocide and the exodus of Palestinians from their homeland.

It’s categorized as a criminal undertaking under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. see below

The End Game is the Appropriation of Palestine’s Maritime Natural Gas and the transformation of Gaza into A U.S Territory.

In solidarity with the People of Palestine. For Truth in Media.

The original source of this article is Global Research.

The post Why Does Donald Trump Want To Transform Gaza Into a “U.S. Territory”? appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post What’s Trump’s Next Move on Ukraine? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Rick Rozoff.

The post Tucker Carlson to Piers Morgan: Biden wanted to k*ll Trump appeared first on LewRockwell.

 Writes Ginny Garner

Lew,

Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick, was confirmed last week. See here.

Lutnick is a big supporter of Israel including its war on Gaza. More at this link including articles by the Jewish Forward, Whitney Webb and Mark Goodwin. See here.

The post Trump’s Confirmed Commerce Secretary Supports War on Gaza appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Vasko Kohlmayer.

The post Cartoon: Two Great American Revolutions appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Wayne Goodfellow:

Trump and/or Musk have  talked about a new Golden Age, the prosperity in the U.S. before 1913 when the Federal Reserve was formed in violation of the Constitution, and recently hiring Ron Paul, author of End The Fed, to audit the Federal Reserve. 

See this.

The post Are we going back to a gold standard? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

AXIOS

The post FBI finds secret JFK assassination records after Trump order appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

CNBC

The post What end of the penny means for the economy, piggy banks, and prices appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Rick Rozoff.

The post President Trump pardons former Governor Rod Blagojevich appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Rick Rozoff.

Trump is breaking media brains / NIH cuts indirect payments and scientists freak out.

The post Trust the science: MY science, my pseudo-science, my junk science appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Saleh Abdullah. 

https://off-guardian.org/2025/02/04/hegemony-and-propaganda-love-your-servitude/ 

https://archive.org/details/pdfy-U2KGKF1O-8lR-Saj/

https://svalispeaks.wordpress.com/

https://mises.org/mises-wire/needy-are-human-shields-american-regime

https://mises.org/mises-wire/forced-sterilizations-peru-paid-us-taxpayers

The post Hegemony and Propaganda: Love Your Servitude! appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Rick Rozoff.

Sputnik News

The post Bigger Than USAID Scandal? Clinton Probe to Expose Gates, Soros, and Epstein Links appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Rick Rozoff.

Sputnik News

The post Insider Trading, Color Revolutions, USAID Money-Laundering: What Could Soros Be Jailed For? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

DW News

The post Gaza: The Trump family’s Middle East business interests appeared first on LewRockwell.

The tyranny of COVID-19 caused many doctors  to – quite reluctantly – wake up to the life damaging fraud they were party to and – for many – leaving the Pharma Based Sickness Treatment Model to recreate themselves in the now burgeoning Wellness-Promoting Health System.

One such is Dr. Leigh Willoughby from New Zealand who’s journey took her from, at first, promoting vaccines to later being prosecuted when she tried to stop the fraud after she herself became injured after taking a COVID-19 vaccine.

At first, she was duped by the fear campaigns and took the jab but after becoming vaccine injured (her fellow doctors told her her severe pain and damage was all in her head) – she then – after doing her own research and starting to speak out – was prosecuted!

This is a vitally important – and tragic – story of bravery about this courageous woman.

Her painful journey will inspire you – and likely outrage you – and hopefully will help you help others learn more before they take another poisonous jab themselves.

Please watch the entire interview, HERE – but if you’re time limited – please at least watch @1.5x Speed the 12.5 minute section from ~07:00 to 19:30.

Highly Recommended

The post Medical Gaslighting: How a Medical Doctor Was Vaccine Injured AND THEN Prosecuted For Speaking Out About It appeared first on LewRockwell.

This week, President Trump upended US Middle East policy by announcing that the United States would “take over” war-ravaged Gaza and turn it into “the Riviera of the Middle East.” President Trump also said the Palestinians living in Gaza would be (temporarily?) relocated to Jordan or Egypt.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul came out strongly against the proposal. Senator Paul pointed out that the plan contradicted the American people’s vote for “America First.” What was more surprising was that South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham expressed skepticism about sending Americans to take over Gaza. This may be the first time in Senator Graham’s political career that he has opposed sending US troops abroad.

Senator Graham is correct that most South Carolinians are not excited about sending Americans or US tax dollars to take over Gaza. Neither are most other Americans. In fact, polls show that the majority of Americans oppose providing military aid to Israel or other countries.

One of the best comments was made by libertarian scholar and podcaster Tom Woods. He suggested that Trump’s Gaza proposal is the type of wasteful overseas spending that DOGE should be working to eliminate.

Trump’s plan has also been criticized by the government of Saudi Arabia. This could mean that if President Trump follows through with this proposal it will further push Saudi Arabia away from the United States and toward the BRICS alliance.

Some of the BRICS nations want to challenge the dollar’s world reserve currency status. One of the foundations of the dollar’s world reserve currency status is the “petrodollar.” This arose from the deal Henry Kissinger negotiated with Saudi Arabia where the Saudis agreed to use dollars for oil trade in exchange for US support for the Saudi regime. Recently, Saudi Arabia has given signs that it will be willing to use other currencies, such as the Chinese renminbi, for its oil trade.

The loss of the dollar’s world reserve currency status would cause a major US economic crisis. It would force the government to make massive cuts in warfare and welfare spending and could lead to violence and a government crackdown on our liberty.

US “ownership” of Gaza, accompanied by forcible relocation of Palestinians, would cause increased resentment of the US. This could result in increased terror attacks against the US.

Even if a long-term US occupation of Gaza went 100 percent according to plan, the US government, which has an over 36 trillion dollars and growing debt, cannot afford another open-ended overseas military commitment. Instead, President Trump should follow though on his campaign rhetoric about withdrawing from unnecessary military commitments. This, not tariffs, will help make America more competitive on the international economy.

The best thing the United States can do to rebuild Gaza and promote peace in the Middle East is to stop funding Israel’s occupation and blockade of Gaza. Instead, the US should work toward peaceful relations backed by free trade with Israel and its neighbors.

The post The US Should Not Take Over Gaza appeared first on LewRockwell.

In his article “Why They Raped, Pillaged, and Plundered,” Tom DiLorenzo reviews the evidence of war crimes in “General William Tecumseh Sherman’s famous ‘march to the sea’ at the end of the War to Prevent Southern Independence,” observing that: “The Lincoln cult – especially its hyper-warmongering neocon branch – has been holding conferences, celebrations, and commemorations [of the march to the sea] while continuing to rewrite history to suit its statist biases.” The dominant historical narratives admire Sherman’s “total war” policies as a corollary of their admiration for Lincoln’s war. Sherman’s war crimes are well-documented, and the aim of this article is not to revisit the evidence of his war crimes but to examine some of the justifications that are often advanced to exonerate Sherman.

The fact that burning civilian towns and homes is a war crime is well understood, and should be obvious to anyone familiar with what Walter Brian Cisco calls the “code of civilized warfare.” In his book, War Crimes Against Southern Civilians, Cisco explains:

Through the centuries, by common consent within what used to be called Christendom, there arose a code of civilized warfare. Though other issues are covered by that term, and despite lapses, it came to be understood that war would be confined to combatants… breaking the code on one side encourages violations by the other, multiplying hatred and bitterness that can only increase the likelihood and intensity of future wars.

Cisco reports that despite this “code of civilized warfare,” some principles of which had been enshrined in the Lieber Code, Sherman insisted that it was necessary to treat civilians in the South as combatants. Cisco explains:

Yet warring against noncombatants came to be the stated policy and deliberate practice of the United States in its subjugation of the Confederacy. Shelling and burning of cities, systematic destruction of entire districts, mass arrests, forced expulsions, wholesale plundering of personal property, even murder all became routine… Abraham Lincoln, the commander in chief with a reputation as micromanager, well knew what was going on and approved.

The Lincoln cult, far from regretting the horrors of that war, continues to view the burning of the South as worthy of celebration. The triumphalist view of Lincoln’s war is reflected in an opinion piece published in the New York Times in 2015, which argued that Sherman’s war crimes were intended “to widen the burden and pain of the war beyond just rebel soldiers to include the civilian supporters of the Confederacy, especially the common folk who filled the ranks of the rebel armies.”

That is depicted as a necessary price to pay to meet Lincoln’s goal of saving the Union: “the March to the Sea reveals the moral ambiguity of war and the extent to which Americans are willing to go when our national existence is at stake.” Sherman himself is exonerated: “the burning of the South Carolina capital was in reality a result of confusion, misjudgment and simple bad luck. It was, in sum, an accident of war.” This moral ambiguity presumes that the morality of war varies according to which side one supports—a blatantly vacuous morality.

Some triumphalists rationalize their celebration of Sherman’s crimes by arguing that war crimes are in some sense “worth it” to bring war to a swift conclusion. David Gordon traces the roots of the view that brutality helps to end war, a view held by people who believe a “humane” war would only drag on needlessly:

As I have already mentioned, the antiwar movement of that time wanted to end war, not make it more humane, and indeed Tolstoy was sometimes tempted to go further. In War and Peace, Prince Andrei suggests that soldiers in battle should act as ruthlessly as possible, for example killing enemy prisoners out of hand. Increasing the horror of war might make it more likely that people would end it. By no means was this view confined to fictional characters; Tolstoy himself was of this opinion, though he later withdrew it, and the great Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz spoke in similar terms. Moyn lists a number of examples, but one should be added as well: General William Sherman, who justified his tactics of wanton destruction with this same argument.

The argument that Sherman’s atrocities were necessary to end the war is also associated with the perception that if a war is just, and is fought for a “righteous cause,” or what is sometimes described as “the right side of history,” it follows that any atrocities committed to advance that cause are also just. Such theories appeal to those who believe the end always justifies the means. That is a convenient ruse deployed in the service of brutal regimes, but in any case, it must also be asked: what “righteous cause” was Sherman engaged in? As DiLorenzo observes, “The reason Lincoln gave for launching a military invasion of the South was to save the Union.” Saving the Union cannot be a righteous cause for wars of aggression. Wars of aggression are always wrong, as a just war is one fought in defense. As for apologists who argue that Sherman should not be blamed for the devastation caused to civilians by his own troops, because he did not specifically order them to pillage, rape, and murder, that too must be rejected. If this argument were accepted, there would be little way of ever holding army officers morally responsible for the outrages committed by their men.

Another version of the “end justifies the means” argument focuses on the abolition of slavery, arguing that the end of slavery is sufficient justification for not being too concerned about the war. This argument ignores the repeated insistence of both Lincoln and Sherman that they were not fighting for abolition of slavery. Both men were perfectly happy for slavery to continue, and only wanted to prevent secession of the Confederate States. Sherman’s views on the inferiority of black people were so well-known that no one could be under the illusion that he was fighting to promote black welfare. According to the New Georgia Encyclopedia:

During the Atlanta campaign of May-September 1864, General Sherman opposed Black enlistment with word and deed. An avowed white supremacist and a reluctant liberator at best, Sherman made no effort to conceal his contempt for African Americans or to disguise the racist dogma behind his opposition to Black soldiers. Such phrases as “niggers and vagabonds,” “niggers and bought recruits,” and “niggers and the refuse of the South” filled his personal letters. Anxious to employ Black workers as laborers, Sherman was determined that the forces under his command would remain exclusively white. On June 3, 1864, he issued Special Field Order No. 16 forbidding recruiting officers to enlist Black soldiers who were employed by the army in any capacity.

Some people argue that even though Sherman repeatedly defended slavery, we should treat that as irrelevant because all that matters is that slavery was, in fact, abolished. So what if Sherman was a “reluctant liberator at best”? Suffice it that liberation followed. They would argue that abolition by itself constitutes an ex post “righteous cause” for the war that can also be attributed to Lincoln and Sherman even though they did not endorse it—they see this as a welcome, albeit unintended, consequence of the war. This argument assumes that slavery would never have ended had the war not happened—an argument that is purely speculative, and makes no attempt to link the war causally to the ending of slavery. For example, it does not explain why other countries in the West were able to end slavery without waging deadly wars.

A final illustration of the abject moral failure of Sherman’s defenders comes from those who now simply ignore the entire war, treating Sherman’s crimes as inconsequential. The New York Times 1619 project, which aims to “reframe American history” as one shaped by slavery, pays scant attention to the reasons for the war or its conduct. Lincoln and Sherman play only a minor role as “white allies” in this version of revisionist history, which asserts that slaves emancipated themselves. Union soldiers are seen as allies of slaves, while Confederate soldiers are cast as enemies of slaves. In this cartoonish view of history, the process of reframing history “requires us to place the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story.”

Accordingly, it is the activities of black Americans—rather than the Radical Republicans, Lincoln, or Sherman—that are presented as central to the emancipation story. The war is reframed as having been fought by hundreds of thousands of slaves freed from the rebel states by Lincoln’s Emancipation Declaration, who joined the Union army and fought to liberate their brethren still held captive. The justification given for this fictitious framing is that “by acknowledging this shameful history [of slavery], by trying hard to understand its powerful influence on the present, perhaps we can prepare ourselves for a more just future.” But no “just future” can be founded on fairy tales. A just future can only be built on the truth. As David Gordon puts it, “The 1619 Project wants to replace what actually happened with an ideological myth.”

Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.

The post Revisionist History and Sherman’s War Crimes appeared first on LewRockwell.

“It is axiomatic that those who are beneficiaries of waste, fraud and unnecessary government spending will be the most threatened by the cuts that DOGE is making in these programs. These beneficiaries of waste and fraud are also extremely worried about the reputational, legal and potential criminal risk they will suffer by being exposed by DOGE” — Bill Ackman

I’m so glad that The New York Times explained what Kendrick Lamar was up to in his Superbowl half-time act because all I could make out was a grown man dressed-up like an eight-year-old hollering nursery rhymes in front of a flash-mob. Apparently, KL is engaged in a feud with another rapper named Drake, whom KL styles as a child molester. So, you see, the whole thing was just a bit of wholesome family entertainment. Thank The NY Times, for putting a grad-school spin on it:

Speaking of metanarratives — and apart from the private vendettas on Planet Rap — a nice one is developing at center-stage of US political life: the Party of Chaos using federal judges to oppose the dismantling of their gigantic grift scaffold. In other words, more lawfare to obstruct any earnest effort to effectively reform the management of our country. So, last week, you get Judge Carl J. Nichols in the DC District arguing that the DOGE shutdown of USAID was unauthorized and potentially illegal, lacking congressional approval.

Then, late Friday (when most citizens are checking out of the week’s struggles) Judge Paul Engelmayer out of the Southern District of New York blocked DOGE and other executive branch officials from accessing US Treasury record of expenditures. The injunction, comically, prevents Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant from seeing what his agency doles out money for — that is, from managing anything his department does. The suit that prompted the ruling was brought by nineteen states’ Attorneys General led by NY AG Letitia James. So, you see how this works.

You must also imagine that the White House was prepared for these lawfare shenanigans, though they haven’t shown their hand in response so far. This is a constitutional quarrel, of course, since it concerns who has authority between the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary over agency spending and, in particular, who gets to audit it. The actual objective by the plaintiff in these cases (the Party of Chaos) is simply to delay any corrective action.

The DOJ under Pam Bondi can designate the US Solicitor General to petition the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) for certiorari — to expedite the resolution of this constitutional issue as to whether Mr. Trump, as chief executive, and his bona fide appointees, can carry out executive functions. The arguments against that appear to be weak.

It is the President’s duty to see that the laws are faithfully executed, meaning that the departments under him do their jobs correctly, which would give him inherent authority to audit and restructure agencies like USAID. Both judges Nichols and Engelmayer are arrogating executive and legislative functions on policy-making for themselves, triggering a separation-of-powers dispute that the SCOTUS must adjudicate promptly.

What matters most in these cases is that SCOTUS has an opportunity to put up new guardrails against the hijacking of the federal courts for the purpose of lawfare — that is, for political dirty-fighting under color-of-law. The law is slow-moving, arcane, and incomprehensible to most non-lawyer citizens and that is why the Party of Chaos has misused it so liberally.

In any event, DOGE is moving ahead on many other fronts and the next battleground looks like the US Department of Education, an agency which, since its creation in 1979, has only presided over an epic degeneration in the academic performance of young people. The agency has grown since 1979 to 4,400 employees overseeing a $238-billion budget. Otherwise, what it’s mainly accomplished is to enrich the various teachers’ unions and to raise the cost of college tuitions astronomically while degenerating the purpose and value of higher ed. The fifty states were arguably doing a better job on their own without any DOE on the scene.

Meanwhile, it’s satisfying to see the security clearances revoked from Antony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Lisa Monaco, Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, Andrew Weissmann, Mark Zaid, and Norm Eisen. The reason: among other crimes, they all dabbled in election interference. And “Joe Biden” lost his, too, on account of being too feeble-minded to be trusted with classified information. Who knows what other legal complications lie in waiting up ahead for that whole gang? Lawfare giveth and lawfare taketh away. Or FAFO.

Reprinted with permission from JamesHowardKunstler.com.

The post Warfare on Lawfare appeared first on LewRockwell.

With revelations emerging about USAID’s spending spree on friends and pet projects, I was reminded of the following April 2023 exchange between Senator Rand Paul and Samantha Power, Administrator of USAID from 2021 to 2025. I vividly remember the vexation I felt as I listened to the recording on my evening jog the next day. Note how she repeatedly looks Senator Paul directly in the eye and insists that USAID has disclosed the grant documents he has repeatedly requested, even though he repeatedly admonishes her that he KNOWS she isn’t telling him the truth because he has never seen them.

Note as well that in October 2019, when USAID officially ceased funding PREDICT, papers like the New York Times lamented that, bereft of such funds, the program would not be able to predict emerging infectious diseases.

A great deal of evidence indicates that this was precisely the time it became apparent that a novel SARS coronavirus was circulating in Wuhan, almost certainly the result of GoF research conducted as part of the PREDICT program.

In other words, PREDICT predicted nothing—it actually created the monster.

Yet another irony was a letter that Elizabeth Warren—the Supreme Self-Righteous Bloviator of the Senate (SSBS)—wrote on January 20, 2020 to the then Administrator Mark Green, demanding to know why PREDICT funding had been cut off.

I would bet a considerable sum that at least someone in USAID knew in October 2019 about the circulating monster that PREDICT had created with the assistance of the $207 million the agency had given the program over a ten year period.

The evidence is clear: USAID has long been a rogue agency that should indeed be brought under direct State Department Control with new, stringent transparency requirements about its activities and long prison times for people like Samantha Power who conceal the agency’s activities and then lie to Senators about them.

This originally appeared on Courageous Discourse.

The post Rand Paul’s Questioning of Samantha Power About USAID to China for SARS-CoV Research appeared first on LewRockwell.