Biden administration
Subterms
More stories
- in US Politics
‘Republicans are defunding the police’: Fox News anchor stumps congressman
The Fox News anchor Chris Wallace made headlines of his own on Sunday, by pointing out to a senior Republican that he and the rest of his party recently voted against $350bn in funding for law enforcement.“Can’t you make the argument that it’s you and the Republicans who are defunding the police?” Wallace asked Jim Banks, the head of the House Republican study committee.The congressman was the author of a Fox News column in which he said Democrats were responsible for spikes in violent crime.“There is overwhelming evidence,” Banks wrote, “connecting the rise in murders to the violent riots last summer” – a reference to protests over the murder of George Floyd which sometimes produced looting and violence – “and the defund the police movement. Both of which were supported, financially and rhetorically, by the Democratic party and the Biden administration.”Joe Biden does not support any attempt to “defund the police”, a slogan adopted by some on the left but which remains controversial and which the president has said Republicans have used to “beat the living hell” out of Democrats.On Fox News Sunday, Banks repeatedly attacked the so-called “Squad” of young progressive women in the House and said Democrats “stigmatised” law enforcement and helped criminals.“Let me push back on that a little bit,” Wallace said. “Because [this week] the president said that the central part in his anti-crime package is the $350bn in the American Rescue Plan, the Covid relief plan that was passed.”Covid relief passed through Congress in March, under rules that meant it did not require Republican votes. It did not get a single one.Asked if that meant it was “you and the Republicans who are defunding the police”, Banks dodged the question.Wallace said: “No, no, sir, respectfully – wait, sir, respectfully … I’m asking you, there’s $350bn in this package the president says can be used for policing …“Congressman Banks, let me finish and I promise I will give you a chance to answer. The president is saying cities and states can use this money to hire more police officers, invest in new technologies and develop summer job training and recreation programs for young people. Respectfully, I’ve heard your point about the last year, but you and every other Republican voted against this $350bn.”Turning a blind eye to Wallace’s question, Banks said: “If we turn a blind eye to law and order, and a blind eye to riots that occurred in cities last summer, and we take police officers off the street, we’re inevitably going to see crime rise.”Wallace asked if Banks could support any gun control legislation. Banks said that if Biden was “serious about reducing violent crime in America”, he should “admonish the radical voices in the Democrat [sic] party that have stigmatised police officers and law enforcement”.Despite working for Republicans’ favoured broadcaster, Wallace is happy to hold their feet to the fire, as grillings of Donald Trump and Kevin McCarthy have shown.He has also attracted criticism, for example for failing to control Trump during a chaotic presidential debate last year which one network rival called “a hot mess, inside a dumpster fire, inside a train wreck”.Last year, Wallace told the Guardian: “I do what I do and I’m sitting there during the week trying to come up with the best guests and the best show I possibly can and I’m not sitting there thinking about how do we fit in some media commentary.“We’re not there to try to one-up the president or any politician.” More
- in US Politics
Republicans will ‘move forward’ on infrastructure after Biden veto threat
A lead Republican negotiator has welcomed Joe Biden’s withdrawal of his threat to veto a $1.2tn bipartisan infrastructure bill unless a separate Democratic spending plan also passes Congress.Senator Rob Portman of Ohio said on Sunday he and fellow Republicans were “blindsided” by Biden’s comment, which the president made on Thursday after he and the senators announced a rare bipartisan compromise on a measure to fix roads, bridges and ports.“I was very glad to see the president clarify his remarks because it was inconsistent with everything that we had been told all along the way,” Portman told ABC’s This Week.Moments after announcing the deal, Biden appeared to put it in jeopardy by saying it would have to move “in tandem” with a larger bill that includes a host of Democratic priorities and which he hopes to pass along party lines.Biden said of the infrastructure bill on Thursday: “If this is the only thing that comes to me, I’m not signing it.”The comments put party pressure on the 11 Republicans in the group of 21 senators who endorsed the infrastructure package. One Republican, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, told Politico Biden had made his group of senators look like “fucking idiots”.Biden issued a statement on Saturday that said he had “created the impression that I was issuing a veto threat on the very plan I had just agreed to, which was certainly not my intent … The bottom line is this. I gave my word to support the infrastructure plan and that is what I intend to do.”The White House said Biden would tour the US to promote the plan, starting in Wisconsin on Tuesday.“We were glad to see them disconnected and now we can move forward,” Portman said.A key Democrat, the West Virginia centrist Joe Manchin, told ABC he believed the bipartisan proposal could reach the 60 votes needed to become law.“This is the largest infrastructure package in the history of the United States of America,” Manchin said. “And there’s no doubt in my mind that [Biden] is anxious for this bill to pass and for him to sign it. And I look forward to being there when he does.”Manchin also appealed to progressives to support the bill as part of a process which will see Democrats attempt to pass via a simple majority a larger spending bill containing policy priorities opposed by Republicans.“I would hope that all my colleagues will look at [the deal] in the most positive light,” Manchin said. “They have a chance now to review it. It has got more in there for clean infrastructure, clean technology, clean energy technology than ever before, more money for bridges and roads since the interstate system was built, water, getting rid of our lead pipes. It’s connecting in broadband all over the nation, and especially in rural America, in rural West Virginia.”Another Republican, Mitt Romney of Utah, said he trusted Biden. He also delighted in needling Democrats over the separate spending package.“This is a bill which stands on its own,” Romney told CNN’s State of the Union about the infrastructure deal. “I am totally confident the president will sign up if it comes to his desk. The real challenge is whether the Democrats can get their act together and get it on his desk.”Romney said Republicans “are gonna support true infrastructure that doesn’t raise taxes”. Another Republican negotiator, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, told NBC’s Meet the Press he thought the minority leader Mitch McConnell, “will be for it, if it continues to come together as it is”.But, Romney, said, “Democrats want to do a lot of other things and I think they’re the ones that are having a hard time deciding how to proceed.”A leading House progressive, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, told NBC it was “very important for the president to know that … the Democratic caucus is here to ensure that he doesn’t fail.“And we’re here to make sure that he is successful in making sure that we do have a larger infrastructure plan. And the fact of the matter is that while we can welcome this work and welcome collaboration with Republicans … that doesn’t mean that the president should be limited by Republicans, particularly when we have a House majority, we have 50 Democratic senators and we have the White House.“I believe that we can make sure that [Biden] is successful in executing a strong agenda for working families.” More
- in US Politics
White House seeks to put infrastructure deal back on track after Biden blunder
The White House scrambled to put Joe Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure deal back on track on Saturday, after Republican senators balked at his surprise demand to pair the nearly $1tn plan with an even bigger investment package covering progressive policy priorities, a demand the president made on Thursday even while hailing the deal.In a statement, Biden said he had “created the impression that I was issuing a veto threat on the very plan I had just agreed to, which was certainly not my intent”.Biden said on Thursday he would not sign a bill arising from the infrastructure deal unless it was accompanied by trillions more in spending in a separate measure passed with only Democratic votes.One senior Republican said the president had therefore made him and others look like “fucking idiots”.Tensions appeared to have cooled by Saturday, after White House negotiators Steve Ricchetti and Louisa Terrell assured senators Biden remained enthusiastic about the deal and would make a forceful public case for it in trips around the US.In his statement on Saturday afternoon, Biden said: “To be clear, our bipartisan agreement does not preclude Republicans from attempting to defeat my Families Plan. Likewise, they should have no objections to my devoted efforts to pass that Families Plan and other proposals in tandem. We will let the American people – and the Congress – decide.”He added: “The bottom line is this. I gave my word to support the infrastructure plan and that is what I intend to do.”A White House official subsequently said Biden’s first trip to promote the two plans would take him to Wisconsin on Tuesday.You look like a fucking idiot now. I don’t mind bipartisanship, but I’m not going to do a suicide missionThe controversy pointed to the difficult path ahead. The two measures were always expected to move together through Congress, the bipartisan infrastructure plan needing 60 votes while the second bill would advance under rules allowing for passage solely with majority Democratic votes.But what had been a celebratory moment for Biden and a group of 10 senators on Thursday was jolted by the president’s surprise insistence at a news conference that he would not sign the bipartisan bill unless Congress also passed his broader package. Some senators felt blindsided. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told Politico: “If he’s gonna tie them together, he can forget it! I’m not doing that. That’s extortion! I’m not going to do that. The Dems are being told you can’t get your bipartisan work product passed unless you sign on to what the left wants, and I’m not playing that game.”Graham said “most Republicans” had not known about any linkage strategy.“There’s no way,” he said. “You look like a fucking idiot now. I don’t mind bipartisanship, but I’m not going to do a suicide mission.”On Friday the White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, said senators should not have been surprised. The two-track strategy, she said “hasn’t been a secret. He hasn’t said it quietly. He hasn’t even whispered it.”Psaki said Biden would stand by the commitment he made to the senators “and he expects they’ll do the same”.Nonetheless, the White House sought to allay concerns. In a call to the Democratic negotiator, Arizona senator Kyrsten Sinema, Biden said he looked forward to signing both bills, the White House said.The two-track strategy seeks to assure liberals the infrastructure deal won’t be the only one and that the companion package, now containing nearly $6tn in childcare, Medicare and other spending, remains on the table.The White House also wants to show centrist Democrats including Sinema and Joe Manchin of West Virginia it is working with Republicans before trying to push the broader package through Congress.On Saturday, Biden said: “Some Democrats have said they might oppose the infrastructure plan because it omits items they think are important. That’s a mistake in my view.“Some Republicans now say that they might oppose the infrastructure plan, because I am also trying to pass the American Families Plan. That is also a mistake in my view.“I intend to work hard to get both of them passed because our country needs both.”Speaking to the Associated Press on Friday, Senator Rob Portman of Ohio, the lead Republican negotiator, said: “My hope is that we’ll still get this done. It’s really good for America. Our infrastructure is in bad shape. It’s about time to get it done.”Ten Republicans will be needed to pass the bipartisan deal. While the senators in the group which negotiated with Democrats are among some of the more independent-minded lawmakers, it appears Republican leader Mitch McConnell could peel away support. More
- in US Politics
Kamala Harris takes heat from both sides in daunting border visit
The sun beat down on the 30ft border fence that separates El Paso, Texas from Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, as temperatures headed towards 100F on the southern border that stands as a symbol for so much in American politics.The heat was also on for Vice-President Kamala Harris, who was making her first trip to the border since being tasked with immigration policy by Joe Biden more than three months ago.It is not an easy job. She was handed one of the toughest issues in American politics and one that has plagued successive American presidents for several decades, no matter what political party was occupying the White House.Criticism for Harris came from both sides of the political aisle for the length of time it took her to make the trip on Friday. More attacks came from Donald Trump, who had accepted an offer from Texas’ rightwing governor Greg Abbott to tour the border ahead of an attempt by Republican-run Texas to fund the completion of a border wall. “If Governor Abbott and I weren’t going there next week, she would have never gone!” Trump said.But Trump’s criticism of Harris was hardly the only voice raised against her as she seeks to come to grips with immigration and border security. She was also criticized by immigration activists and many on the left of the Democratic party for the message she delivered during an early June visit to Guatemala.“Do not come. Do not come,” she said. “I believe if you come to our border, you will be turned back.”The blunt message was ill-received by those who pointed out that Harris’ parents were also immigrants.“[Her comments] reinforced the years of attacks on the rights of refugees and asylum seekers by the previous administration,” said Dylan Corbett, the director of a local non-profit organization that focuses on immigration policies and aiding migrants in El Paso and Ciudad Juárez. “The message should be: ‘How can we, together, build a future where your children don’t have to migrate?’”After touring a border patrol facility to kick off her visit, Harris made an unannounced stop at the Paso Del Norte port of entry, a busy international bridge that connects the downtown centers of El Paso and Ciudad Juárez.While there, she met with five girls detained at the bridge’s processing center, aged between nine and 16 and all from Central America. The meeting was closed to the press, but her office described the meeting as positive, with the girls calling Harris an inspiration and drawing photos for her.Approximately 1,600 children just like those girls are being housed in shelters at the US army’s Fort Bliss in El Paso, according to US media, where there are lengthy stays, poor conditions and infrequent meetings with lawyers.But a visit to the controversial shelter on Fort Bliss was not part of the vice-president’s visit, despite the announcement of an investigation of the housing for migrant children.Across the street from her meeting with the girls, a small group of immigration advocates chanted from the corner, “Si, se puede!” after Harris left. She headed back to the airport, where she met with the leaders of immigrants rights organizations. The focus of their discussion was reported as the root causes and drivers of immigration to the United States.Behind the talk, though, is a brutal reality.The trip from Central America for many immigrants is long and potentially lethal, especially for children. There are deaths from heat stroke as migrants trek through triple-digit desert heat, or fall from the 30ft high border wall already in place in high-traffic areas along the international line.Migrants who survive that fall are just a few of the people who are taken to a local non-profit organization, Annunciation House, which operates as a network of shelters, helping to connect migrants with family in the States and legal representation for asylum cases.The injuries range from fractured ankles to head injuries that have left a woman quadriplegic, according to the director of Annunciation House, Ruben Garcia.“We have such little appreciation for what they’re risking to be safe, to put food on the table,” Garcia said. “These people aren’t coming here because they want to put jacuzzis in their houses.”Nor is getting to the border, or even across it, the end of the story. Should migrants survive the trip from their home countries, through Mexico and across the border into the US, in most cases, they are not currently allowed to stay in the US, even when seeking asylum.Nearly 100,000 migrants have been expelled from El Paso, Texas, into Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, since October, according to data provided by the border patrol. The expulsions are still taking place under a policy known as Title 42, implemented by the Trump administration. Thus far, Title 42 has been kept in place by the Biden administration despite outcry from immigration organizations.“The expulsions under Title 42 are still rampant,” Garcia said.The policy falls under the umbrella of public health and was implemented as a response to Covid-19. “We all know it had nothing to do with the pandemic, it had to do with immigration control,” Garcia said. “I tell people: Donald Trump did get his wall. It’s called Title 42.”There was little sign Harris planned to end that. Nor is there much doubt that the debate over immigration and the border in the US will remain toxic after a Trump era when many Republicans – including the former president – made openly racist statements about immigrants.“In the United States, there is an incredibly significant population that doesn’t want you, they speak extremely derogatorily about you,” said Garcia. “They wouldn’t care if you die on the way, they wouldn’t care if you fell off the wall and broke your back.”Harris sought to draw a little of that poison on her trip. “Let’s not lose sight that we’re talking about human beings,” she said.After meeting with Harris, Linda Rivas, the executive director of Las Americas, a non-profit organization that provides legal representation during immigration processes, said she was grateful to share the stories of her clients with the vice-president but also called for more action. “The Biden-Harris administration must improve the asylum process and end the cruel border policies that ripped families apart,” Rivas said.But as the policy debate continues and Harris mulls her next steps, the heat is unlikely to relent – either in US politics or at the sweltering border itself.In a statement last week, US Customs and Border Protection described crossing the border in the desert in the summer. “The terrain along the border is extreme, the summer heat is severe, and the miles of desert migrants must hike after crossing the border in many areas are unforgiving,” it said.At the moment, not much looks likely to change that. More
- in US Politics
Kamala Harris says US-Mexico border situation is ‘tough’ but claims progress
Kamala Harris described the situation as “tough” at the US-Mexico border where migrants are being held in detention and routinely expelled before their pleas for sanctuary can be heard, as on Friday she made her first visit there as vice-president.In El Paso, west Texas, she met with five girls, aged between nine and 16, who had been held at a Customs and Border Protection processing center after crossing the border.She then visited the border itself at the nearby Paso del Norte port of entry, across from the Mexican city of Juárez, where there are frequently scenes of misery and chaos as people huddle in peril there and at other points along the border, waiting for a chance to be allowed to make a legal case to be in the US.“We inherited a tough situation,” Harris said during a meeting with faith-based organizations, as well as shelter and legal service providers.She added: “In five months we’ve made progress, but there’s still more work to be done.”She is tasked with addressing causes of migration, particularly from Central America, which range from violence, poverty and corruption to climate change.“The stories that I heard today reinforce the nature of those root causes,” she said.Meanwhile, the Biden administration is looking into conditions for migrant children at the Fort Bliss army base in El Paso, it was announced during Harris’s journey to the border, amid testimonials presented in court that conditions are desperate.Symone Sanders, Harris’s spokeswoman, told reporters aboard Air Force Two en route that Joe Biden and Harris “have instructed [homeland security secretary Xavier] Becerra to do a thorough investigation” of the conditions where children are being held in tents at the military facility.“The administration is taking this very seriously. Extremely seriously,” Sanders said.However, a White House spokesman later sent a statement that conditions at Fort Bliss had improved and that: “HHS [the health and human services department] has already been looking into [the] facility on their own. At no time did The White House recommend a probe of the facility.”Harris faced the most politically challenging moment of her vice-presidency during her visit, as part of her role leading the Biden administration’s response to recent increases in families and unaccompanied children migrating across the US-Mexico border.Harris was asked by a reporter why “right now was the right time” to make her first trip to the border.She replied that it was not her first trip, although it is her first trip as vice-president and since Joe Biden put her in charge of solving immigration and migration problems.After taking questions, Harris was briefed by border patrol on the agency’s efforts to computerize records to speed up processing of migrants’ legal cases. Many are seeking asylum from human rights violations, and children, in particular, aim to reunite with family members already in the US while their cases are dealt with.Harris did not visit the secure facilities at Fort Bliss. Last month, Becerra announced he was walking back plans to house thousands of children younger than 12 there, after Democratic lawmakers and immigration activists protested that the facility did not meet basic child welfare standards.The temporary shelter is one of a dozen or so makeshift sites the government set up to provide more capacity beyond the traditional, licensed shelters that the health and human services department oversees.The vice-president has faced bipartisan criticism for declining to make the trip thus far , as well as remarks on her trip to Guatemala, when she starkly spelled out the Biden administration’s message to those seeking sanctuary in the US: “Don’t come.”Those comments “reinforced the years of attacks on the rights of refugees and asylum seekers by the previous administration”, Dylan Corbett, the director of a local non-profit organization that focuses on immigration policies and aiding migrants in El Paso and Ciudad Juárez, told the Guardian.With Donald Trump visiting the area less than a week after Harris and the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, making increasingly rightwing remarks about immigration, Republicans will be watching the vice-president’s visit closely for fodder for further attacks.Aside from party politics, CBP, the federal agency, recently reported nine deaths of migrants along the border just in the El Paso sector, but said they were only reporting the number of deaths where agents find the deceased individual or are involved in an emergency response. The actual number is likely to be higher.Those are deaths such as by heatstroke as migrants trek through triple-digit desert heat, or falls from the 30t-high border wall.“We have such little appreciation for what they’re risking to be safe, to put food on the table,” Ruben Garcia, the director of the Annunciation House network of shelters in the area, said. “These people aren’t coming here because they want to put jacuzzis in their houses.”Biden’s first few months in office have seen record numbers of migrants attempting to cross the border.CBP recorded more than 180,000 encounters on the Mexican border in May, the most since March 2000.Those numbers were boosted by a coronavirus pandemic-related ban on the legal facility for seeking asylum from persecution, a rule called title 42 begun by Trump and continued by Biden that allows most people unlawfully crossing the border to be summarily expelled into Mexico, at their peril.Harris was joined on the trip by the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, Illinois Democratic senator Dick Durbin and local Democratic congresswoman Veronica Escobar.Escobar called El Paso the new Ellis Island, the facility in New York harbor that processed millions of migrants to the US a century ago. Looking forward to welcoming @VP Harris to El Paso – America’s new Ellis Island.As I told VP last March, El Paso has chosen to employ compassion toward those seeking refuge, and her visit will provide key context for her diplomatic efforts to address root causes of migration.— Rep. Veronica Escobar (@RepEscobar) June 24, 2021
Harris did not visit Fort Bliss on Friday, nor the memorial to victims of the mass shooting by a man professing hatred of immigrants, at an area Walmart store in 2019.Domingo Garcia, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, a Latino civil rights organization, called Harris’s visit “a day late and a dollar short”. More - in US Politics
Justice department sues state of Georgia over laws that 'deny the right to vote' – video
The justice department is suing the state of Georgia over the new voting laws it says violate the Voting Rights Act and suppress Black Americans’ right to vote.
Attorney General Merrick Garland made the announcement after the justice department scrutinized a wave of new laws in Republican-controlled states that tighten voting rules.
Under the bill, the legislature gave itself power to remove local election officials deemed to be underperforming and added a voter ID requirement for mail ballots. It will result in fewer ballot drop boxes in metro AtlantaUS politics latest updates More
The Reassuring Presence of Multiple Threats
In April, the US director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, presented an important document produced by the nation’s intelligence community, the 2021 Annual Threat Assessment. It was designed to demonstrate that the newly inaugurated president, Joe Biden, is ready to respond to any or all of the manifold threats, fear of which has been the key to unifying the nation.
China and Iran figure prominently, as do the Islamic State (IS) and al-Qaida. Beltway politicians will find the continuity with the fears of previous administrations reassuring. Even though the last three — the Islamic Republic of Iran, IS and al-Qaida — would not even exist today had the United States not actively provoked them into existence through its obsessive meddling in Middle Eastern affairs, many will be pleased to note that their confirmed presence on the list continues to justify the intelligence community’s ever-expanding scope. China, of course, is a special case because it has never threatened the US militarily or economically. Yet the headline of a New York Times article on the report reads, “China Poses Biggest Threat to U.S., Intelligence Report Says.”
The Death of Meaningful Live Coverage in US Media
READ MORE
How indeed should we understand the Chinese threat, announced as the biggest of them all? Haines explains that China is guilty of “employing a comprehensive approach to demonstrate its growing strength.” The Chinese leadership has apparently failed to understand that only one nation in the world is authorized to “demonstrate its growing strength.” They should accept that it is madness to think there may be a need for China’s strength to increase. If the Chinese simply allow the US to govern the world’s affairs, they can be assured that they will always be in safe, democratic hands.
Russia predictably appears in the full list of threats, although Haines admits that it “does not want a conflict with the United States.” That may be so, but everyone who has paid the slightest attention to the verities associated with Russiagate should now realize that Vladimir Putin’s cronies or lackies have developed a quasi-nuclear capacity to publish misinformation on Facebook, a reprehensible act that no other nation, party or person would ever think of doing. It appears that such practice can be fatal for democracy, even leading to the corrupting of an American election, the pristine model of transparent democratic procedure.
Haines focuses on Russia’s use of “malign influence campaigns.” This apparently means cherry-picking only negative things to say about the United States, whether factual or invented. Haines recycles the favorite trope of Russiagate enthusiasts over the past five years when she speaks of Russia’s intent to “sow discord.” Whenever Americans don’t agree on some fundamental things about their own country, the Russians must have had something to do with it.
Embed from Getty Images
Haines gets to the end of her list without mention one nation some people find profoundly disturbing: Saudi Arabia, known for its extremely repressive social practices, its summary justice against anyone suspected of “sowing discord” (which may even include Washington Post journalists) and its brutal military campaigns designed to produce the world’s worst humanitarian disasters. But for the fact of its special relationship with the US based on oil and money, there might be some merit in considering Saudi as a possible threat, especially after the 2019 shooting of three Americans by a Saudi officer in Pensacola, Florida and the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.
New evidence emerged this week concerning the training in the US of Khashoggi’s murderers. It revealed a suspicious level of complicity between the Saudi regime, which has funded terrorism for decades, and the US State Department, which authorized the educational collaboration. When asked for comment, State Department spokesman Ned Price explained: “This administration insists on responsible use of U.S. origin defense equipment and training by our allies and partners, and considers appropriate responses if violations occur. Saudi Arabia faces significant threats to its territory, and we are committed to working together to help Riyadh strengthen its defenses.”
Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:
Significant threats:
For the US government, any person, group, nation or even abstract idea that in any way challenges the global network of bulwarks and bastions, weapons and sanctions that constitute a body of resources dedicated to national defense, equally including the regimes of sanguinary dictators, predatory businesses and the actions of irresponsible mercenaries, all of whom are guided by the democratic ideals that drive such policies and actions
Contextual Note
The twin concepts of threat (the action of others) and defense (our actions) sum up the logic of the security state. So long as a threat exists — and the more that can be listed the merrier — the system of defense can thrive and grow. Haines calls the money spent on defense and surveillance an investment, which most experts on Wall Street and any true economist might find slightly abusive. Here is how she describes the value of the intelligence assessment of threats: “In short, at no point has it been more important to invest in our norms and institutions, our workforce, and the integration of our work. Doing so, provides us with the opportunity to meet the challenges we face, to pull together as a society, and to promote resilience and innovation.” Investment, in this sense, simply means more money that the US can spend, basically on creating or entertaining fear.
Fomenting fear is easy, especially if you have the means (unlimited budget) of making it appear serious, detailed and scientific. Interestingly, in her quest for thoroughness, Haines correctly designates climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic as major threats. Everyone already knows the threat is real. Rather than using her platform to trumpet what everyone knows, it might be more productive to look at mobilizing resources to confront such threats. She could, for example, have signaled the urgency of finding ways to allow the developing world to produce its own vaccines rather than beg for Western handouts. But that would raise the delicate question of pharmaceutical patents, which must be protected even at the cost of the world’s health. Instead, the threat she chooses to highlight is the “vaccine diplomacy” of Russia and China.
As for climate change, Haines highlights the grim perspective for the globe itself and especially for “vulnerable populations.” But there is nary a word about the contributing causes or the prospect for possible solutions, such as calling into question the economic system that feeds the crisis. This in spite of Haines’ insistence that the intelligence agencies are not simply Cassandras, put in place to strike fear into brave citizens’ hearts, but have a positive role to play. “The American people should know as much as possible about the threats facing our nation and what their intelligence agencies are doing to protect them,” she says. It would be nice to learn more about the “doing” part of it.
Historical Note
Since the Second World War, the entire pattern for economic success and industrial growth has been structured around the notion of fear. The Cold War officialized fear as the major motivating factor serving to keep capitalism intact, essentially by transforming free market capitalism into monopolistically structured state capitalism (privatized socialism), in which the needs of defense drive innovation. In the first half of the 20th century, free market capitalism had begun to reveal all the contradictions Karl Marx predicted for it. After the Wall Street crash in 1929, capitalism was on the brink of collapse in the US, which also happened to be the nation that controlled the debt of the European nations who had spent all their capitalistic resources in a catastrophic world war.
.custom-post-from {float:right; margin: 0 10px 10px; max-width: 50%; width: 100%; text-align: center; background: #000000; color: #ffffff; padding: 15px 0 30px; }
.custom-post-from img { max-width: 85% !important; margin: 15px auto; filter: brightness(0) invert(1); }
.custom-post-from .cpf-h4 { font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
.custom-post-from .cpf-h5 { font-size: 14px; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
.custom-post-from input[type=”email”] { font-size: 14px; color: #000 !important; width: 240px; margin: auto; height: 30px; box-shadow:none; border: none; padding: 0 10px; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-pen-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: center right 14px; background-size:14px;}
.custom-post-from input[type=”submit”] { font-weight: normal; margin: 15px auto; height: 30px; box-shadow: none; border: none; padding: 0 10px 0 35px; background-color: #1878f3; color: #ffffff; border-radius: 4px; display: inline-block; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-email-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: 14px center; background-size: 14px; }.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox { width: 90%; margin: auto; position: relative; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;}
.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label { text-align: left; display: block; padding-left: 32px; margin-bottom: 0; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px;
-webkit-user-select: none;
-moz-user-select: none;
-ms-user-select: none;
user-select: none;
order: 1;
color: #ffffff;
font-weight: normal;}
.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label a { color: #ffffff; text-decoration: underline; }
.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input { position: absolute; opacity: 0; cursor: pointer; height: 100%; width: 24%; left: 0;
right: 0; margin: 0; z-index: 3; order: 2;}
.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:before { content: “f0c8”; font-family: Font Awesome 5 Free; color: #eee; font-size: 24px; position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0; line-height: 28px; color: #ffffff; width: 20px; height: 20px; margin-top: 5px; z-index: 2; }
.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:before { content: “f14a”; font-weight: 600; color: #2196F3; }
.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:after { content: “”; }
.custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:after { position: absolute; left: 2px; width: 18px; height: 18px; margin-top: 10px; background: #ffffff; top: 10px; margin: auto; z-index: 1; }
.custom-post-from .error{ display: block; color: #ff6461; order: 3 !important;}During the 1930s, Nazism and Soviet communism, two brands of militaristic totalitarianism, became the principal objects of fear for Americans. The business class feared the communists and the working class, decimated by capitalism’s failure, feared the fascists. The Nazis emerged as the threat that justified the war effort. Once that was successful, Washington’s elite elected the Russian communists to play the role.
After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, Islamist terrorism eventually slid into the role of existential threat number one. But the policies mobilized to defeat it had the effect of seriously weakening the American system of state capitalism. With things becoming desperate, new threats were needed. Avril Haines and the Biden administration have produced the updated catalog.
*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More
