newswars--2020-01-30--George Soros Drove Effort To Give Ukraine Billions For Defense Against Russia

‘ Progressive ’ billionaire donor George Soros , born in Hungary , has been advocating for years for the world community to provide more than $ 50 billion to Ukraine to form a military bulwark against oil exporter Russia .
The Obama administration agreed with Soros ’ policy , though Vice President Joe Biden held up a billion dollar U.S. loan guarantee to Ukraine until the nation fired the prosecutor-general looking into the gas company Burisma Holdings , which featured his son Hunter on its board .
Former White House national security adviser John Bolton also agreed with Soros , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funded by Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk ’ s foundation that President Trump would not be able to radically transform U.S. foreign policy against the wishes of the neoconservative/neoliberal policy class .
Bolton is now claiming that President Trump wanted to withhold aid to Ukraine until they agreed to investigate Biden , but that claim has not been confirmed , and most Republicans understand that Democrats have impeached Trump due to a policy disagreement .
Harrison Smith comments on the latest win for America as President Trump signs the USMCA .
Trump campaign adviser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 told the Ukraine lobby that Trump would not commit to guaranteeing a military aid package .
Trump ’ s impeachment trial continues .
George Soros wrote an editorial for The New York Review of Books on January 8 , 2015 , entitled “ A New Policy To Rescue Ukraine , ” which is preserved on Georgesoros.com .
The sanctions imposed on Russia by the US and Europe for its interventions in Ukraine have worked much faster and inflicted much more damage on the Russian economy than anybody could have expected .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and companies access to the international capital markets .
The increased damage is largely due to a sharp decline in the price of oil , without which the sanctions would have been much less effective .
Russia needs oil prices to be around $ 100 a barrel in order to balance its budget .
( It is now around $ 55 a barrel . )
The combination of lower oil prices and sanctions has pushed Russia into a financial crisis that is by some measures already comparable to the one in 1998 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of hard currency reserves and defaulting on its debt , causing turmoil in the global financial system .
This time the ruble has dropped by more than 50 percent , inflation is accelerating , and interest rates have risen to levels that are pushing the Russian economy into recession .
The big advantage Russia has today compared to 1998 is that it still has substantial foreign currency reserves .
This has enabled the Russian Central Bank to engineer a 30 percent rebound in the ruble from its low point by spending about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 24 billion swap line with the People ’ s Bank of China .
But only about $ 200 billion of the remaining reserves are liquid and the crisis is still at an early stage .
In addition to continued capital flight , more than $ 120 billion of external debt is due for repayment in 2015 .
Although , in contrast to 1998 , most of the Russian debt is in the private sector , it would not be surprising if , before it runs its course , this crisis ends up in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be more than what the US and European authorities bargained for .
Coming on top of worldwide deflationary pressures that are particularly acute in the euro area and rising military conflicts such as the one with ISIS , a Russian default could cause considerable disruption in the global financial system , with the euro area being particularly vulnerable .
There is therefore an urgent need to reorient the current policies of the European Union toward Russia and Ukraine .
I have been arguing for a two-pronged approach that balances the sanctions against Russia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ larger scale .
This rebalancing needs to be carried out in the first quarter of 2015 for reasons I shall try to explain .
Sanctions are a necessary evil .
They are necessary because neither the EU nor the US is willing to risk war with Russia , and that leaves economic sanctions as the only way to resist Russian aggression .
They are evil because they hurt not only the country on which they are imposed but also the countries that impose them .
The harm has turned out to be much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the midst of a financial crisis , which is helping to turn the threat of deflation in the eurozone into a reality .
By contrast , all the consequences of helping Ukraine would be positive .
By enabling Ukraine to defend itself , Europe would be indirectly also defending itself .
Moreover , an injection of financial assistance to Ukraine would help stabilize its economy and indirectly also provide a much-needed stimulus to the European economy by encouraging exports and investment in Ukraine .
Hopefully Russia ’ s troubles and Ukraine ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to give up as a lost cause his attempts to destabilize Ukraine .
Unfortunately neither the European public nor the leadership seems to be moved by these considerations .
Europe seems to be dangerously unaware of being indirectly under military attack from Russia and carries on business as usual .
It treats Ukraine as just another country in need of financial assistance , and not even as one that is important to the stability of the euro , like Greece or Ireland .
According to prevailing perceptions , Ukraine is suffering from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis that morphed into a public debt and banking crisis .
There are international financial institutions devoted to handling such crises but they are not well suited to deal with the political aspects of the Ukrainian situation .
In order to help the Ukrainian economy , the European Union started preparing an Association Agreement with Ukraine in 2007 and completed it in 2012 , when it had to deal with the Viktor Yanukovych government .
The EU developed a detailed roadmap showing what steps the Ukrainian government had to take before it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revolutionary transformation since then .
The roadmap ought to be adjusted accordingly , but the cumbersome bureaucratic processes of the European Commission do not allow for that .
Accordingly , Ukraine ’ s problems have been cast in conventional terms : • Ukraine needs international assistance because it has experienced shocks that have produced a financial crisis .
The shocks are transitory ; once Ukraine recovers from the shocks it should be able to repay its creditors .
This explains why the IMF was put in charge of providing financial assistance to Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a member of the EU , European institutions ( like the European Commission and the European Central Bank ) played only a secondary part in providing assistance to it .
The IMF welcomed the opportunity to avoid the complications associated with the supervision by a troika consisting of the EU , the European Central Bank , and the IMF that was used to deal with Greece and others .
This new arrangement also explains why the IMF-led package was based on overly optimistic forecasts and why the IMF ’ s contribution of approximately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is so much larger than the approximately $ 10 billion of various commitments associated with the EU , and even smaller amounts from the US .
• Since Ukraine has had a poor track record with previous IMF programs , the official lenders insisted that Ukraine should receive assistance only as a reward for clear evidence of deep structural reform , not as an inducement to undertake these reforms .
• From this conventional perspective , the successful resistance to the previous Yanokovych government on the Maidan and , later , the Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separatist enclaves in eastern Ukraine are incidental .
These events are seen as simply temporary external shocks .
This perspective needs to be altered .
The birth of a new Ukraine and the Russian aggression are not merely temporary shocks but historic events .
Instead of facing the remnants of a moribund Soviet Union , the European Union is confronted by a resurgent Russia that has turned from strategic partner into strategic rival .
To replace communism , President Putin has developed a nationalist ideology based on ethnic grounds , social conservatism , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race , homophobia , and holy Russia .
He has cast what he calls Anglo-Saxon world domination as the enemy of Russia—and of the rest of the world .
Putin has learned a lot from his war with President Mikheil Saakashvili ’ s Georgia in 2008 .
Russia won that war militarily but was less successful in its propaganda efforts .
Putin has developed an entirely new strategy that relies heavily on using both special forces and propaganda .
Putin ’ s ambition to recreate a Russian empire has unintentionally helped bring into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Russia and seeks to become the opposite of the old Ukraine with its endemic corruption and ineffective government .
The new Ukraine is led by the cream of civil society : young people , many of whom studied abroad and refused to join either government or business on their return because they found both of them repugnant .
Many of them found their place in academic institutions , think tanks , and nongovernmental organizations .
A widespread volunteer movement , of unprecedented scope and power unseen in other countries , has helped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Its members were willing to risk their lives on the Maidan for the sake of a better future and they are determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past , including the political infighting that undermined the Orange Revolution .
A politically engaged civil society is the best assurance against a return of the old Ukraine : activists would return to the Maidan if the politicians engaged in the kind of petty squabbling and corruption that ruined the old Ukraine .
The reformists in the new Ukrainian government are advocating a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is intended to have a dramatic impact .
This program aims to break the stranglehold of corruption by shrinking the bureaucracy while paying the remaining civil servants better and by breaking up Naftogaz , the gas monopoly that is the main source of corruption and budget deficits in Ukraine .
But the old Ukraine is far from dead .
It dominates the civil service and the judiciary , and remains very present in the private ( oligarchic and kleptocratic ) sectors of the economy .
Why should state employees work for practically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ position as a license to extort bribes ?
And how can a business sector that was nurtured on corruption and kickbacks function without its sweeteners ?
These retrograde elements are locked in battle with the reformists .
The new government faces the difficult task of radically reducing the number of civil servants and increasing their pay .
Advocates of radical reform claim that it would be both possible and desirable to shrink the ministries to a fraction of their current size , provided that the general population would not be subjected to severe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would allow the discharged civil servants to find jobs in the private sector and the employees retained on the payroll to be paid higher salaries .
Many obstacles to doing business would be removed , but that would require substantial financial and technical support from the EU .
Without it , the “ big bang ” kind of radical reforms that Ukraine needs can not succeed .
Indeed , the prospect of failure may even prevent the government from proposing them .
The magnitude of European support and the reforming zeal of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now , the Europeans kept Ukraine on a short leash and the Arseniy Yatsenyuk government did not dare to embark on radical structural reforms .
The former minister of the economy , Pavlo Sheremeta , a radical reformer , proposed reducing the size of his ministry from 1,200 to 300 but met such resistance from the bureaucracy that he resigned .
No further attempts at administrative reform were made but the public is clamoring for it .
That is where the European authorities could play a decisive role .
By offering financial and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reforms , they could exert influence on the Ukrainian government to embark on radical reforms and give them a chance to succeed .
Unfortunately the European authorities are hampered by the budgetary rules that constrain the EU and its member states .
That is why the bulk of international efforts have gone into sanctions against Russia , and financial assistance to Ukraine has been kept to a minimum .
In order to shift the emphasis to assisting Ukraine , the negotiations have to be moved from the bureaucratic to the political level @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difficult to put together even the $ 15 billion that the IMF considers the absolute minimum .
As it stands , the European Union could find only €2 billion in its Macro-Financial Assistance program , and individual member states are reluctant to contribute directly .
This is what led Ukraine to pass on December 30 a stopgap budget for 2015 with unrealistic revenue projections and only modest reforms .
This is an opening bid in the negotiations .
The law allows for modifications until February 15 , subject to their outcome .
European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unused borrowing capacity of the EU itself and find other unorthodox sources to be able to offer Ukraine a larger financial package than the one currently contemplated .
That would enable the Ukrainian government to embark on radical reform .
I have identified several such sources , notably : 1 .
The Balance of Payments Assistance facility ( used for Hungary and Romania ) has unused funds of $ 47.5 billion and the European Financial Stability Mechanism ( used for Portugal and Ireland ) has about $ 15.8 billion of unused funds .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ member states but could be used to support Ukraine by modifying their respective regulations by a qualified majority upon a proposal by the European Commission .
Alternatively , the Commission could use and expand the Macro-Financial Assistance Facility , which has already been used in Ukraine .
There is indeed a range of technical options and the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker should propose a way forward as soon as the Ukrainian government has presented a convincing set of priorities .
2 .
Larger matching funds from the European Union would enable the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by $ 13 billion and to convert the existing Stand-By Agreement into a longer-term Extended Fund Facility program .
This would bring the total size of the IMF program to fifteen times Ukraine ’ s current IMF quota , an unusually large multiple but one that already has a precedent in the case of Ireland , for example .
3 .
European Investment Bank project bonds could yield €10 billion or more .
These funds would be used to connect Ukraine to a unified European gas market and to break up Naftogaz , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would greatly improve Ukraine ’ s energy efficiency and produce very high returns on investment .
It would help create a unified European gas market and reduce not only Ukraine ’ s but also Europe ’ s dependence on Russian gas .
The breakup of Naftogaz is the centerpiece of Ukraine ’ s reform plans .
4 .
Long-term financing from the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development for restructuring the banking sector .
This should yield about $ 5 billion .
The 2009 Vienna Initiative for Eastern Europe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in limiting capital flight and stabilizing the banking system , should be extended to Ukraine .
The foundations for such an extension were already laid at the inaugural meeting of the Ukrainian Financial Forum in June 2014 .
5 .
Restructuring Ukraine ’ s sovereign debt should free in excess of $ 4 billion scarce foreign exchange reserves .
Ukraine has almost $ 8 billion in sovereign debt coming due in the private bond markets in the next three years .
Instead of a default that would have disastrous consequences , Ukraine should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be relatively few ) a voluntary , market-based exchange for new long-term debt instruments .
In order to make the exchange successful , part of the new financial assistance should be used for credit enhancements for the new debt instruments .
The foreign assistance needed for this purpose would depend on what bondholders require to participate in the exchange , but it could free at least twice as much foreign exchange over the next three years .
6 .
Ukraine must also deal with a $ 3 billion bond issued by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2015 .
Russia may be willing to reschedule the payments by Ukraine on the bond voluntarily in order to earn favorable points for an eventual relaxation of the sanctions against it .
Alternatively , the bond may be classified as government-to-government debt , restructured by the group of nations officially called the Paris Club , in order to insulate the rest of Ukrainian bonds from their cross-default provisions ( which put the borrower in default if he fails to meet another obligation ) .
The legal and technical details need to be elaborated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be mobilized in full but where there is a political will , there is a way .
German Chancellor Angela Merkel , who has proved to be a true European leader with regard to Russia and Ukraine , holds the key .
The additional sources of financing I have cited should be sufficient to produce a new financial package of $ 50 billion or more .
Needless to say , the IMF would remain in charge of actual disbursements , so there would be no loss of control .
But instead of scraping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would hold out the promise of the maximum .
That would be a game-changer .
Ukraine would embark on radical reforms and , instead of hovering on the edge of bankruptcy , it would turn into a land of promise that would attract private investment .
Europe needs to wake up and recognize that it is under attack from Russia .
Assisting Ukraine should also be considered as a defense expenditure by the EU countries .
Framed this way , the amounts currently contemplated shrink into insignificance .
If the international authorities fail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ program in response to an aggressive Ukrainian reform program , the new Ukraine will probably fail , Europe will be left on its own to defend itself against Russian aggression , and Europe will have abandoned the values and principles on which the European Union was founded .
That would be an irreparable loss .
The sanctions on Russia ought to be maintained after they start expiring in April 2015 until President Putin stops destabilizing Ukraine and provides convincing evidence of his willingness to abide by the generally accepted rules of conduct .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ body bags from Ukraine have made President Putin politically vulnerable .
The Ukrainian government has recently challenged him by renouncing its own obligations toward the separatist enclaves in eastern Ukraine , under the Minsk cease-fire agreement , on the grounds that Russia failed to abide by the agreement from its inception .
After Ukraine ’ s challenge , Putin immediately caved in and imposed the cease-fire on the troops under his direct command .
It can be expected that the troops will be withdrawn from Ukrainian territory and the cease-fire will be fully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be a pity to allow the sanctions to expire prematurely when they are so close to success .
But it is essential that by April 2015 Ukraine should be engaged in a radical reform program that has a realistic chance of succeeding .
Otherwise , President Putin could convincingly argue that Russia ’ s problems are due to the hostility of the Western powers .
Even if he fell from power , an even more hardline leader like Igor Sechin or a nationalist demagogue would succeed him .
By contrast , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ukraine not only to defend itself but to become a land of promise , Putin could not blame Russia ’ s troubles on the Western powers .
He would be clearly responsible and he would either have to change course or try to stay in power by brutal repression , cowing people into submission .
If he fell from power , an economic and political reformer would be likely to succeed him .
Either way , Putin ’ s Russia would cease to be a potent threat to Europe .
Which alternative prevails @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the future of Russia and its relationship with the European Union but also to the future of the European Union itself .
By helping Ukraine , Europe may be able to recapture the values and principles on which the European Union was originally founded .
That is why I am arguing so passionately that Europe needs to undergo a change of heart .
The time to do it is right now .
The Board of the IMF is scheduled to make its fateful decision on Ukraine on January 18 .

‘Progressive’ billionaire donor George Soros, born in Hungary, has been advocating for years for the world community to provide more than $50 billion to Ukraine to form a military bulwark against oil exporter Russia.
The Obama administration agreed with Soros’ policy, though Vice President Joe Biden held up a billion dollar U.S. loan guarantee to Ukraine until the nation fired the prosecutor-general looking into the gas company Burisma Holdings, which featured his son Hunter on its board.
Former White House national security adviser John Bolton also agreed with Soros, assuring his internationalist audience at a speech funded by Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk’s foundation that President Trump would not be able to radically transform U.S. foreign policy against the wishes of the neoconservative/neoliberal policy class.
Bolton is now claiming that President Trump wanted to withhold aid to Ukraine until they agreed to investigate Biden, but that claim has not been confirmed, and most Republicans understand that Democrats have impeached Trump due to a policy disagreement.
Harrison Smith comments on the latest win for America as President Trump signs the USMCA.
Trump campaign adviser Sam Clovis told me that the campaign in 2016 told the Ukraine lobby that Trump would not commit to guaranteeing a military aid package. Trump’s impeachment trial continues.
George Soros wrote an editorial for The New York Review of Books on January 8, 2015, entitled “A New Policy To Rescue Ukraine,” which is preserved on Georgesoros.com.
George Soros writes:
The sanctions imposed on Russia by the US and Europe for its interventions in Ukraine have worked much faster and inflicted much more damage on the Russian economy than anybody could have expected. The sanctions sought to deny Russian banks and companies access to the international capital markets. The increased damage is largely due to a sharp decline in the price of oil, without which the sanctions would have been much less effective. Russia needs oil prices to be around $100 a barrel in order to balance its budget. (It is now around $55 a barrel.) The combination of lower oil prices and sanctions has pushed Russia into a financial crisis that is by some measures already comparable to the one in 1998.
In 1998, Russia ended up running out of hard currency reserves and defaulting on its debt, causing turmoil in the global financial system. This time the ruble has dropped by more than 50 percent, inflation is accelerating, and interest rates have risen to levels that are pushing the Russian economy into recession. The big advantage Russia has today compared to 1998 is that it still has substantial foreign currency reserves. This has enabled the Russian Central Bank to engineer a 30 percent rebound in the ruble from its low point by spending about $100 billion and arranging a $24 billion swap line with the People’s Bank of China. But only about $200 billion of the remaining reserves are liquid and the crisis is still at an early stage.
In addition to continued capital flight, more than $120 billion of external debt is due for repayment in 2015. Although, in contrast to 1998, most of the Russian debt is in the private sector, it would not be surprising if, before it runs its course, this crisis ends up in a default by Russia. That would be more than what the US and European authorities bargained for. Coming on top of worldwide deflationary pressures that are particularly acute in the euro area and rising military conflicts such as the one with ISIS, a Russian default could cause considerable disruption in the global financial system, with the euro area being particularly vulnerable.
There is therefore an urgent need to reorient the current policies of the European Union toward Russia and Ukraine. I have been arguing for a two-pronged approach that balances the sanctions against Russia with assistance for Ukraine on a much larger scale. This rebalancing needs to be carried out in the first quarter of 2015 for reasons I shall try to explain.
Sanctions are a necessary evil. They are necessary because neither the EU nor the US is willing to risk war with Russia, and that leaves economic sanctions as the only way to resist Russian aggression. They are evil because they hurt not only the country on which they are imposed but also the countries that impose them. The harm has turned out to be much bigger than anybody anticipated. Russia is in the midst of a financial crisis, which is helping to turn the threat of deflation in the eurozone into a reality.
By contrast, all the consequences of helping Ukraine would be positive. By enabling Ukraine to defend itself, Europe would be indirectly also defending itself. Moreover, an injection of financial assistance to Ukraine would help stabilize its economy and indirectly also provide a much-needed stimulus to the European economy by encouraging exports and investment in Ukraine. Hopefully Russia’s troubles and Ukraine’s progress would persuade President Vladimir Putin to give up as a lost cause his attempts to destabilize Ukraine.
Unfortunately neither the European public nor the leadership seems to be moved by these considerations. Europe seems to be dangerously unaware of being indirectly under military attack from Russia and carries on business as usual. It treats Ukraine as just another country in need of financial assistance, and not even as one that is important to the stability of the euro, like Greece or Ireland.
According to prevailing perceptions, Ukraine is suffering from a more or less classical balance of payments crisis that morphed into a public debt and banking crisis. There are international financial institutions devoted to handling such crises but they are not well suited to deal with the political aspects of the Ukrainian situation. In order to help the Ukrainian economy, the European Union started preparing an Association Agreement with Ukraine in 2007 and completed it in 2012, when it had to deal with the Viktor Yanukovych government. The EU developed a detailed roadmap showing what steps the Ukrainian government had to take before it would extend assistance. Ukraine has undergone a revolutionary transformation since then. The roadmap ought to be adjusted accordingly, but the cumbersome bureaucratic processes of the European Commission do not allow for that.
Accordingly, Ukraine’s problems have been cast in conventional terms:
• Ukraine needs international assistance because it has experienced shocks that have produced a financial crisis. The shocks are transitory; once Ukraine recovers from the shocks it should be able to repay its creditors. This explains why the IMF was put in charge of providing financial assistance to Ukraine.
• Since Ukraine is not yet a member of the EU, European institutions (like the European Commission and the European Central Bank) played only a secondary part in providing assistance to it. The IMF welcomed the opportunity to avoid the complications associated with the supervision by a troika consisting of the EU, the European Central Bank, and the IMF that was used to deal with Greece and others. This new arrangement also explains why the IMF-led package was based on overly optimistic forecasts and why the IMF’s contribution of approximately $17 billion in cash to Ukraine is so much larger than the approximately $10 billion of various commitments associated with the EU, and even smaller amounts from the US.
• Since Ukraine has had a poor track record with previous IMF programs, the official lenders insisted that Ukraine should receive assistance only as a reward for clear evidence of deep structural reform, not as an inducement to undertake these reforms.
• From this conventional perspective, the successful resistance to the previous Yanokovych government on the Maidan and, later, the Russian annexation of Crimea and the establishment of separatist enclaves in eastern Ukraine are incidental. These events are seen as simply temporary external shocks.
This perspective needs to be altered. The birth of a new Ukraine and the Russian aggression are not merely temporary shocks but historic events. Instead of facing the remnants of a moribund Soviet Union, the European Union is confronted by a resurgent Russia that has turned from strategic partner into strategic rival. To replace communism, President Putin has developed a nationalist ideology based on ethnic grounds, social conservatism, and religious faith—the brotherhood of the Slavic race, homophobia, and holy Russia. He has cast what he calls Anglo-Saxon world domination as the enemy of Russia—and of the rest of the world. Putin has learned a lot from his war with President Mikheil Saakashvili’s Georgia in 2008. Russia won that war militarily but was less successful in its propaganda efforts. Putin has developed an entirely new strategy that relies heavily on using both special forces and propaganda.
Putin’s ambition to recreate a Russian empire has unintentionally helped bring into being a new Ukraine that is opposed to Russia and seeks to become the opposite of the old Ukraine with its endemic corruption and ineffective government. The new Ukraine is led by the cream of civil society: young people, many of whom studied abroad and refused to join either government or business on their return because they found both of them repugnant. Many of them found their place in academic institutions, think tanks, and nongovernmental organizations. A widespread volunteer movement, of unprecedented scope and power unseen in other countries, has helped Ukraine to stand strong against Russian aggression. Its members were willing to risk their lives on the Maidan for the sake of a better future and they are determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past, including the political infighting that undermined the Orange Revolution. A politically engaged civil society is the best assurance against a return of the old Ukraine: activists would return to the Maidan if the politicians engaged in the kind of petty squabbling and corruption that ruined the old Ukraine.
The reformists in the new Ukrainian government are advocating a radical “big bang” reform program that is intended to have a dramatic impact. This program aims to break the stranglehold of corruption by shrinking the bureaucracy while paying the remaining civil servants better and by breaking up Naftogaz, the gas monopoly that is the main source of corruption and budget deficits in Ukraine.
But the old Ukraine is far from dead. It dominates the civil service and the judiciary, and remains very present in the private (oligarchic and kleptocratic) sectors of the economy. Why should state employees work for practically no salary unless they can use their position as a license to extort bribes? And how can a business sector that was nurtured on corruption and kickbacks function without its sweeteners? These retrograde elements are locked in battle with the reformists.
The new government faces the difficult task of radically reducing the number of civil servants and increasing their pay. Advocates of radical reform claim that it would be both possible and desirable to shrink the ministries to a fraction of their current size, provided that the general population would not be subjected to severe cuts to their living standards. That would allow the discharged civil servants to find jobs in the private sector and the employees retained on the payroll to be paid higher salaries. Many obstacles to doing business would be removed, but that would require substantial financial and technical support from the EU. Without it, the “big bang” kind of radical reforms that Ukraine needs cannot succeed. Indeed, the prospect of failure may even prevent the government from proposing them.
The magnitude of European support and the reforming zeal of the new Ukraine are mutually self-reinforcing. Until now, the Europeans kept Ukraine on a short leash and the Arseniy Yatsenyuk government did not dare to embark on radical structural reforms. The former minister of the economy, Pavlo Sheremeta, a radical reformer, proposed reducing the size of his ministry from 1,200 to 300 but met such resistance from the bureaucracy that he resigned. No further attempts at administrative reform were made but the public is clamoring for it.
That is where the European authorities could play a decisive role. By offering financial and technical assistance commensurate with the magnitude of the reforms, they could exert influence on the Ukrainian government to embark on radical reforms and give them a chance to succeed. Unfortunately the European authorities are hampered by the budgetary rules that constrain the EU and its member states. That is why the bulk of international efforts have gone into sanctions against Russia, and financial assistance to Ukraine has been kept to a minimum.
In order to shift the emphasis to assisting Ukraine, the negotiations have to be moved from the bureaucratic to the political level. The European financial bureaucracies find it difficult to put together even the $15 billion that the IMF considers the absolute minimum. As it stands, the European Union could find only €2 billion in its Macro-Financial Assistance program, and individual member states are reluctant to contribute directly. This is what led Ukraine to pass on December 30 a stopgap budget for 2015 with unrealistic revenue projections and only modest reforms. This is an opening bid in the negotiations. The law allows for modifications until February 15, subject to their outcome.
European political leaders must tap into the large unused borrowing capacity of the EU itself and find other unorthodox sources to be able to offer Ukraine a larger financial package than the one currently contemplated. That would enable the Ukrainian government to embark on radical reform. I have identified several such sources, notably:
1. The Balance of Payments Assistance facility (used for Hungary and Romania) has unused funds of $47.5 billion and the European Financial Stability Mechanism (used for Portugal and Ireland) has about $15.8 billion of unused funds. Both mechanisms are currently limited to EU member states but could be used to support Ukraine by modifying their respective regulations by a qualified majority upon a proposal by the European Commission. Alternatively, the Commission could use and expand the Macro-Financial Assistance Facility, which has already been used in Ukraine. There is indeed a range of technical options and the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker should propose a way forward as soon as the Ukrainian government has presented a convincing set of priorities.
2. Larger matching funds from the European Union would enable the IMF to increase its lending to Ukraine by $13 billion and to convert the existing Stand-By Agreement into a longer-term Extended Fund Facility program. This would bring the total size of the IMF program to fifteen times Ukraine’s current IMF quota, an unusually large multiple but one that already has a precedent in the case of Ireland, for example.
3. European Investment Bank project bonds could yield €10 billion or more. These funds would be used to connect Ukraine to a unified European gas market and to break up Naftogaz, the Ukrainian gas monopoly. These changes would greatly improve Ukraine’s energy efficiency and produce very high returns on investment. It would help create a unified European gas market and reduce not only Ukraine’s but also Europe’s dependence on Russian gas. The breakup of Naftogaz is the centerpiece of Ukraine’s reform plans.
4. Long-term financing from the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development for restructuring the banking sector. This should yield about $5 billion. The 2009 Vienna Initiative for Eastern Europe, which proved to be highly successful in limiting capital flight and stabilizing the banking system, should be extended to Ukraine. The foundations for such an extension were already laid at the inaugural meeting of the Ukrainian Financial Forum in June 2014.
5. Restructuring Ukraine’s sovereign debt should free in excess of $4 billion scarce foreign exchange reserves. Ukraine has almost $8 billion in sovereign debt coming due in the private bond markets in the next three years. Instead of a default that would have disastrous consequences, Ukraine should negotiate with its bondholders (who happen to be relatively few) a voluntary, market-based exchange for new long-term debt instruments. In order to make the exchange successful, part of the new financial assistance should be used for credit enhancements for the new debt instruments. The foreign assistance needed for this purpose would depend on what bondholders require to participate in the exchange, but it could free at least twice as much foreign exchange over the next three years.
6. Ukraine must also deal with a $3 billion bond issued by the Russian government to Ukraine coming due in 2015. Russia may be willing to reschedule the payments by Ukraine on the bond voluntarily in order to earn favorable points for an eventual relaxation of the sanctions against it. Alternatively, the bond may be classified as government-to-government debt, restructured by the group of nations officially called the Paris Club, in order to insulate the rest of Ukrainian bonds from their cross-default provisions (which put the borrower in default if he fails to meet another obligation). The legal and technical details need to be elaborated.
Perhaps not all these sources could be mobilized in full but where there is a political will, there is a way. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has proved to be a true European leader with regard to Russia and Ukraine, holds the key. The additional sources of financing I have cited should be sufficient to produce a new financial package of $50 billion or more. Needless to say, the IMF would remain in charge of actual disbursements, so there would be no loss of control. But instead of scraping together the minimum, the official lenders would hold out the promise of the maximum. That would be a game-changer. Ukraine would embark on radical reforms and, instead of hovering on the edge of bankruptcy, it would turn into a land of promise that would attract private investment.
Europe needs to wake up and recognize that it is under attack from Russia. Assisting Ukraine should also be considered as a defense expenditure by the EU countries. Framed this way, the amounts currently contemplated shrink into insignificance. If the international authorities fail to come up with an impressive assistance program in response to an aggressive Ukrainian reform program, the new Ukraine will probably fail, Europe will be left on its own to defend itself against Russian aggression, and Europe will have abandoned the values and principles on which the European Union was founded. That would be an irreparable loss.
The sanctions on Russia ought to be maintained after they start expiring in April 2015 until President Putin stops destabilizing Ukraine and provides convincing evidence of his willingness to abide by the generally accepted rules of conduct. The financial crisis in Russia and the body bags from Ukraine have made President Putin politically vulnerable. The Ukrainian government has recently challenged him by renouncing its own obligations toward the separatist enclaves in eastern Ukraine, under the Minsk cease-fire agreement, on the grounds that Russia failed to abide by the agreement from its inception. After Ukraine’s challenge, Putin immediately caved in and imposed the cease-fire on the troops under his direct command. It can be expected that the troops will be withdrawn from Ukrainian territory and the cease-fire will be fully implemented in the near future. It would be a pity to allow the sanctions to expire prematurely when they are so close to success.
But it is essential that by April 2015 Ukraine should be engaged in a radical reform program that has a realistic chance of succeeding. Otherwise, President Putin could convincingly argue that Russia’s problems are due to the hostility of the Western powers. Even if he fell from power, an even more hardline leader like Igor Sechin or a nationalist demagogue would succeed him.
By contrast, if Europe rose to the challenge and helped Ukraine not only to defend itself but to become a land of promise, Putin could not blame Russia’s troubles on the Western powers. He would be clearly responsible and he would either have to change course or try to stay in power by brutal repression, cowing people into submission. If he fell from power, an economic and political reformer would be likely to succeed him. Either way, Putin’s Russia would cease to be a potent threat to Europe. Which alternative prevails will make all the difference not only to the future of Russia and its relationship with the European Union but also to the future of the European Union itself. By helping Ukraine, Europe may be able to recapture the values and principles on which the European Union was originally founded. That is why I am arguing so passionately that Europe needs to undergo a change of heart. The time to do it is right now. The Board of the IMF is scheduled to make its fateful decision on Ukraine on January 18.
George Soros passage ends


newswars--2020-01-30--Watch: John Bolton Praised Trump’s Ukraine Call Before Getting Fired

U.S. President Donald Trump ’ s former national security adviser John Bolton changed his tune on how he felt about @ @ @ @ @ 25 call with his Ukrainian counterpart after he was fired from his White House post @ @ @ @ @ resigned in early September 2019 , Trump said he fired him .
On August 27 @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s July 25 phone conversations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to Radio Free @ @ @ @ @ as “ very warm and cordial calls ” and acknowledged that corruption poses a significant @ @ @ @ @ , Bolton ’ s story changed after Trump allegedly fired him .
Bolton now claims @ @ @ @ @ contents of the July 25 conversation between Trump and Zelensky .
The phone call is @ @ @ @ @ impeachment and ongoing Senate trial to remove or acquit Trump .
Harrison breaks down the @ @ @ @ @ as the continued persecution of President Trump is on full display in the Senate .

U.S. President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton changed his tune on how he felt about the commander-in-chief’s July 25 call with his Ukrainian counterpart after he was fired from his White House post.
While Bolton claims he resigned in early September 2019, Trump said he fired him.
On August 27, 2019, Bolton described Trump’s July 25 phone conversations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) as “very warm and cordial calls” and acknowledged that corruption poses a significant problem for Ukraine.
However, Bolton’s story changed after Trump allegedly fired him.
Bolton now claims he was concerned about the contents of the July 25 conversation between Trump and Zelensky. The phone call is at the heart of the impeachment and ongoing Senate trial to remove or acquit Trump.
Read more
Harrison breaks down the ridiculous arguments from the Democrats as the continued persecution of President Trump is on full display in the Senate.


newswars--2020-01-30--Not So Subtle Cover-Up: From Zero To 50 Iran Attack Injuries In Under 3 Weeks

The Pentagon casually slipped in an update to their ever evolving casualty numbers from the Jan.8 Iranian ballistic missile attack on Ayn al-Assad air base in Iraq , which the American public was initially told resulted in “ no casualties ” and that “ all is well ” : “ Of these 50 , 31 total service members were treated in Iraq and returned to duty , including 15 of the additional service members who have been diagnosed since the previous report , ” Pentagon spokesperson Lt. Col. Thomas Campbell said late Tuesday .
“ Eighteen service members have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment.
” To review , Trump ’ s first address to the nation following the major unprecedented attack on US forces in retaliation for Qassem Soleimani ’ s death indicated “ no casualties ” and that “ all is well !
” .
Two weeks later , the Pentagon stunned reporters by indicating 11 US troops actually suffered traumatic brain injury ( TBI ) .
And two days after this the count shot up to 34 , and it became evident that among these up to half had serious enough injuries to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with most transferred to Germany , and some later taken back to the United States for continued observation .
Four days following last Friday ’ s “ 34 ” update , we ’ re now up to 50 troops injured .
In summary , the figures went from zero to 11 to 34 to 50… and who knows where from here .
It must also be remembered that US officials and media pundits slammed Iranian state media for its repeat claims that the Jan.8 ballistic missile attack resulted in major casualties .
Iranian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emergency medical evacuations of US personnel from the scene .
US officials scoffed and laughed at this “ fake news ” at the time — and just days ago the semi-official major Iranian media outlet Fars News had its English news website taken offline by order of US Treasury for sanctions violations and state propaganda .
But now we know the accurate headline in the wake of the attack should have read : “ 50 Americans Injured , Some Seriously… ” .
So here ’ s the awkward truth : Iranian state media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pentagon and US administration propaganda the public was fed .
The Pentagon has claimed the “ concussion-like symptoms ” didn ’ t immediately present themselves .
Yet now we ’ re talking 50 troops close enough to missile impact sites to suffer head trauma — a number so large it would be impossible for the chain of command to “ miss ” what was the single most important attack on a US facility in years .
This evolving casualty count should be a major scandal , yet it ’ s barely elicited a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ve repeatedly pointed out since last summer ’ s “ tanker wars ” , Trump has painted himself into a corner on Iran , jumping from escalation to escalation ( to this latest “ point of no return big one ” in the form of the ordered Soleimani assassination ) — yet all the while hoping to avoid a major direct war .
The situation reached a climax where there were “ no outs ” ( Trump was left with two ‘ bad options ’ of either back down or go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finally launched a serious retaliation Jan.8 , the “ out ” was simply to lie .
The “ no casualties ” cover-up line was offered so Trump could quickly move on without the political pressure of being “ forced ” into retaliation tit-for-tat style , leading to war .
Ironically , it might be the first time the American public was force-fed naked war propaganda for the sake of not going to war .

The Pentagon casually slipped in an update to their ever evolving casualty numbers from the Jan.8 Iranian ballistic missile attack on Ayn al-Assad air base in Iraq, which the American public was initially told resulted in “no casualties” and that “all is well”:
The Pentagon now says 50 American military service members suffered traumatic brain injuries following Iran’s Jan. 8 missile attack on a base in western Iraq that was housing the U.S. military personnel. — ABC News
“Of these 50, 31 total service members were treated in Iraq and returned to duty, including 15 of the additional service members who have been diagnosed since the previous report,” Pentagon spokesperson Lt. Col. Thomas Campbell said late Tuesday. “Eighteen service members have been transported to Germany for further evaluation and treatment.”
To review, Trump’s first address to the nation following the major unprecedented attack on US forces in retaliation for Qassem Soleimani’s death indicated “no casualties” and that “all is well!”. Two weeks later, the Pentagon stunned reporters by indicating 11 US troops actually suffered traumatic brain injury (TBI).
And two days after this the count shot up to 34, and it became evident that among these up to half had serious enough injuries to be evacuated to hospitals outside the country, with most transferred to Germany, and some later taken back to the United States for continued observation.
Greg Reese reporting from Washington DC
Four days following last Friday’s “34” update, we’re now up to 50 troops injured. In summary, the figures went from zero to 11 to 34 to 50… and who knows where from here.
It must also be remembered that US officials and media pundits slammed Iranian state media for its repeat claims that the Jan.8 ballistic missile attack resulted in major casualties. Iranian media went so far as to report emergency medical evacuations of US personnel from the scene. US officials scoffed and laughed at this “fake news” at the time — and just days ago the semi-official major Iranian media outlet Fars News had its English news website taken offline by order of US Treasury for sanctions violations and state propaganda.
But now we know the accurate headline in the wake of the attack should have read: “50 Americans Injured, Some Seriously…”.
So here’s the awkward truth: Iranian state media was closer to the truth than the Pentagon and US administration propaganda the public was fed.
‘THEY HAD HEADACHES’: President Trump told reporters injuries sustained by several U.S. service members airlifted from Iraq after the Iran missile attacks were “not very serious” compared to combat injuries he’s seen that have resulted in lost limbs. https://t.co/2UHJ5xQXUq pic.twitter.com/kKSbMOrXTL — World News Tonight (@ABCWorldNews) January 22, 2020
The Pentagon has claimed the “concussion-like symptoms” didn’t immediately present themselves. Yet now we’re talking 50 troops close enough to missile impact sites to suffer head trauma — a number so large it would be impossible for the chain of command to “miss” what was the single most important attack on a US facility in years.
This evolving casualty count should be a major scandal, yet it’s barely elicited a yawn in the mainstream media.
As we’ve repeatedly pointed out since last summer’s “tanker wars”, Trump has painted himself into a corner on Iran, jumping from escalation to escalation (to this latest “point of no return big one” in the form of the ordered Soleimani assassination) — yet all the while hoping to avoid a major direct war. The situation reached a climax where there were “no outs” (Trump was left with two ‘bad options’ of either back down or go to war).
Thus when Iran finally launched a serious retaliation Jan.8, the “out” was simply to lie. The “no casualties” cover-up line was offered so Trump could quickly move on without the political pressure of being “forced” into retaliation tit-for-tat style, leading to war.
Ironically, it might be the first time the American public was force-fed naked war propaganda for the sake of not going to war.


newswars--2020-01-30--Virginia Congress Continues Gun Control Frenzy With 9 More Bills, Ignores Massive Protest

Despite a massive and peaceful turnout on the Lobby Day rally on January 20th , the Virginia State Congress remained totally unphased by what the people wanted and proceeded to advance numerous unconstitutional gun laws over the following week .
While everyone has been focused on the Wuhan coronavirus , state lawmakers have been quietly eroding gun rights .
Proving they don ’ t care at all about the opinions of the people of Virginia , the state ’ s Senate passed a “ red flag ” gun law only two days later .
Here ’ s the summary of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any attorney for the Commonwealth or any law-enforcement officer may apply to a general district court , circuit court , or juvenile and domestic relations district court judge or magistrate for an emergency substantial risk order to prohibit a person who poses a substantial risk of injury to himself or others from purchasing , possessing , or transporting a firearm .
If an emergency substantial risk order is issued , a judge or magistrate may issue a search warrant to remove firearms from such person .
An emergency substantial risk order shall expire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the order .
The bill requires a court hearing in the circuit court for the jurisdiction where the order was issued within 14 days from issuance of an emergency substantial risk order to determine whether a substantial risk order should be issued .
Seized firearms shall be retained by a law-enforcement agency for the duration of an emergency substantial risk order or a substantial risk order or , for a substantial risk order and with court approval , may be transferred to a third party 21 years of age or older chosen by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The bill allows the complainant of the original warrant to file a motion for a hearing to extend the substantial risk order prior to its expiration .
The court may extend the substantial risk order for a period not longer than 180 days .
The bill provides that persons who are subject to a substantial risk order , until such order has been dissolved by a court , are guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor for purchasing , possessing , or transporting a firearm ; are disqualified from having a concealed handgun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a licensed firearms dealer .
The bill also provides that a person who transfers a firearm to a person he knows has been served with a warrant or who is the subject of a substantial risk order is guilty of a Class 4 felony .
The bill creates a computerized substantial risk order registry for the entry of orders issued pursuant to provisions in the bill .
( source ) If at first you don ’ t seceded…West Virginia ’ s Gov makes the legal & economic case for Virginia jurisdictions to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Liberty University ’ s Jerry Falwell , Jr. Of course , we all know the dangers of red flag gun laws .
Anyone can swear out a complaint against a gun owner – including an abuser who doesn ’ t want his victim to be able to protect herself or himself .
Add to that , numerous law-abiding citizens have been killed when police burst in to serve the warrant and seize the gun owner ’ s firearms .
But that ’ s not all that Virginia has in store for gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rally of gun owners , the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a proposed new law that would make it more difficult for Virginians to get a concealed carry permit in the form of SB263 .
Obviously , this makes it more difficult for rural residents to take the required training and it makes it more expensive for poverty-stricken gun owners .
On Friday the House advanced the following bills to the Senate for further approval .
HB2 would criminalize the private transfer of firearms in the Commonwealth .
Unlike SB70 , which was passed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost all firearm transfers – not just sales .
Under this extreme legislation , even lending a brother your rifle for a deer hunt or letting your daughter borrow a handgun for self-defense could land otherwise law-abiding Virginians with a felony conviction and up to 5 years in jail .
Additionally , the recipient could face up to a full year of incarceration .
HB674 would create a “ red flag ” gun confiscation procedure that is similar to that created by SB240 .
Just like the senate bill , HB674 would empower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s constitutional right to keep and bear arms and seize their firearms pursuant to an ex parte order .
However , whereas SB240 would require a commonwealth ’ s attorney or two law enforcement officer to petition the court , HB674 provides even less safeguards – allowing a single law enforcement officer to petition for a confiscation order .
HB812 would ration the right to keep and bear arms by limiting Virginians to one handgun purchase per 30-day period .
Unlike SB35 , which has passed the full Senate , HB812 does not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CHP holders .
From 1993 to 2012 , Virginia had a “ one-handgun-a-month ” law that rationed the number of handguns law-abiding gun owners could purchase to one a month .
In 1993 , Gov .
L. Douglas Wilder and other gun control advocates sold the handgun rationing measure as a way to curb gun trafficking from Virginia to more restrictive Northeast states , particularly New York .
HB812 comes along after New York City billionaire and gun control financier Michael Bloomberg spent an exorbitant sum in the 2019 election cycle .
According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fewer firearms traced to Virginia in the three years after the law was repealed than in the three years prior to repeal .
HB9 would re-victimize burglary and robbery victims by penalizing a crime victim who fails to report the theft of a firearm to law enforcement within 24 hours of discovering the theft .
These victims would be fined up to $ 250 .
In the aftermath of a burglary , victims are occupied with a host of concerns .
The first and foremost concern is the physical safety and well-being of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place an additional burden on crime victims in their moment of despair is the ruthless act of a callous state that exhibits no regard for the hardship victims face as they put their lives back together .
HB412 would eliminate Virginia ’ s state firearms preemption law .
Current law ensures that those living and traveling throughout Virginia are subject to the same predictable state statutes wherever they are in the Commonwealth .
With this regimen , law-abiding gun owners can move about the state without fear of being ensnared by a confusing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to predict or comprehend the contours of the various ordinances in Virginia ’ s 95 counties and 38 independent cities , CHP holders would be forced to forego their Right-to-Carry for fear of running afoul of an obscure or complicated local law .
HB1004 would prohibit those subject to a §19.2-152.10 protective order from possessing firearms .
Those subject to a §19.2-152.10 protective order are already prohibited from purchasing or transporting firearms while the order is in effect .
Unlike other protective orders that trigger a firearm possession prohibition , a petitioner for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bear any relation to the respondent .
The absence of a relationship requirement opens the §19.2-152.10 protective order procedure up to abuse .
Verbal altercations between co-workers , neighbors , or less formal acquaintances where one party perceived , or claimed to perceive , the other as making a “ threat ” could result in the extinguishment of a person ’ s Second Amendment rights and the forfeiture of their firearms .
HB1083 severely restricts parental decisions about firearms in the home by making it a Class 6 felony to leave an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a child or teenager under the age of 18 .
Current law only applies this restriction to children under the age of 14 and provides that the punishment for such conduct is a Class 3 misdemeanor .
This law is unnecessary as Virginia already has a child abuse and neglect statute that provides felony penalties for parents who engage in dangerous conduct .
( source ) Is it any wonder that parts of Virginia are considering secession from the state ?
The protest meant nothing in the eyes of Virginia lawmakers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a slap in the face to every gun owner who has protested in person , written or emailed his or her members of Congress , and attended local meetings .
It shows that the people currently in office don ’ t care what Virginians have to say about the laws they pass .
It underlines their blithe dismissal of the Sanctuary municipalities and of the massive peaceful protest that even saw protesters cleaning up the area before they left .
The protest may have meant nothing to lawmakers , but to gun owners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that people in Virginia will stand up for their rights .
It means they will not back down .
It means they ’ re willing to put themselves on the line to protect the 2nd Amendment in a state that still has a flag that says “ Sic Semper Tyrannis.
” But as for the state government ?
You know , the one purchased by presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg ?
This is not a government that represents the people of Virginia .

Despite a massive and peaceful turnout on the Lobby Day rally on January 20th, the Virginia State Congress remained totally unphased by what the people wanted and proceeded to advance numerous unconstitutional gun laws over the following week.
While everyone has been focused on the Wuhan coronavirus, state lawmakers have been quietly eroding gun rights.
“Red Flag” gun law passed
Proving they don’t care at all about the opinions of the people of Virginia, the state’s Senate passed a “red flag” gun law only two days later. Here’s the summary of SB240.
Creates a procedure by which any attorney for the Commonwealth or any law-enforcement officer may apply to a general district court, circuit court, or juvenile and domestic relations district court judge or magistrate for an emergency substantial risk order to prohibit a person who poses a substantial risk of injury to himself or others from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm. If an emergency substantial risk order is issued, a judge or magistrate may issue a search warrant to remove firearms from such person. An emergency substantial risk order shall expire on the fourteenth day following issuance of the order. The bill requires a court hearing in the circuit court for the jurisdiction where the order was issued within 14 days from issuance of an emergency substantial risk order to determine whether a substantial risk order should be issued. Seized firearms shall be retained by a law-enforcement agency for the duration of an emergency substantial risk order or a substantial risk order or, for a substantial risk order and with court approval, may be transferred to a third party 21 years of age or older chosen by the person from whom they were seized. The bill allows the complainant of the original warrant to file a motion for a hearing to extend the substantial risk order prior to its expiration. The court may extend the substantial risk order for a period not longer than 180 days. The bill provides that persons who are subject to a substantial risk order, until such order has been dissolved by a court, are guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor for purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm; are disqualified from having a concealed handgun permit; and may not be employed by a licensed firearms dealer. The bill also provides that a person who transfers a firearm to a person he knows has been served with a warrant or who is the subject of a substantial risk order is guilty of a Class 4 felony. The bill creates a computerized substantial risk order registry for the entry of orders issued pursuant to provisions in the bill. (source)
If at first you don’t seceded…West Virginia’s Gov makes the legal & economic case for Virginia jurisdictions to secede and join W VA, joined by Liberty University’s Jerry Falwell, Jr.
Of course, we all know the dangers of red flag gun laws. Anyone can swear out a complaint against a gun owner – including an abuser who doesn’t want his victim to be able to protect herself or himself. Add to that, numerous law-abiding citizens have been killed when police burst in to serve the warrant and seize the gun owner’s firearms.
But that’s not all that Virginia has in store for gun owners.
Also two days after the rally of gun owners, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a proposed new law that would make it more difficult for Virginians to get a concealed carry permit in the form of SB263.
Concealed handgun permits; demonstration of competence. Removes the option for concealed handgun permit applicants to demonstrate competence with a handgun by completing an electronic, video, or online course conducted by a state-certified or National Rifle Association-certified firearms instructor. The bill does not affect any in-person means of satisfying the requirement to demonstrate competence with a handgun under current law. (source)
Obviously, this makes it more difficult for rural residents to take the required training and it makes it more expensive for poverty-stricken gun owners.
On Friday the House advanced the following bills to the Senate for further approval.
HB2 would criminalize the private transfer of firearms in the Commonwealth. Unlike SB70, which was passed by the Senate, HB2 would criminalize almost all firearm transfers – not just sales. Under this extreme legislation, even lending a brother your rifle for a deer hunt or letting your daughter borrow a handgun for self-defense could land otherwise law-abiding Virginians with a felony conviction and up to 5 years in jail. Additionally, the recipient could face up to a full year of incarceration. HB674 would create a “red flag” gun confiscation procedure that is similar to that created by SB240. Just like the senate bill, HB674 would empower the government to strip an individual’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms and seize their firearms pursuant to an ex parte order. However, whereas SB240 would require a commonwealth’s attorney or two law enforcement officer to petition the court, HB674 provides even less safeguards – allowing a single law enforcement officer to petition for a confiscation order. HB812 would ration the right to keep and bear arms by limiting Virginians to one handgun purchase per 30-day period. Unlike SB35, which has passed the full Senate, HB812 does not provide an exemption to this restriction for CHP holders. From 1993 to 2012, Virginia had a “one-handgun-a-month” law that rationed the number of handguns law-abiding gun owners could purchase to one a month. In 1993, Gov. L. Douglas Wilder and other gun control advocates sold the handgun rationing measure as a way to curb gun trafficking from Virginia to more restrictive Northeast states, particularly New York. HB812 comes along after New York City billionaire and gun control financier Michael Bloomberg spent an exorbitant sum in the 2019 election cycle. According to ATF Trace data, there were fewer firearms traced to Virginia in the three years after the law was repealed than in the three years prior to repeal. HB9 would re-victimize burglary and robbery victims by penalizing a crime victim who fails to report the theft of a firearm to law enforcement within 24 hours of discovering the theft. These victims would be fined up to $250. In the aftermath of a burglary, victims are occupied with a host of concerns. The first and foremost concern is the physical safety and well-being of themselves and their loved ones. To place an additional burden on crime victims in their moment of despair is the ruthless act of a callous state that exhibits no regard for the hardship victims face as they put their lives back together. HB412 would eliminate Virginia’s state firearms preemption law. Current law ensures that those living and traveling throughout Virginia are subject to the same predictable state statutes wherever they are in the Commonwealth. With this regimen, law-abiding gun owners can move about the state without fear of being ensnared by a confusing patchwork of disparate local ordinances. Unable to predict or comprehend the contours of the various ordinances in Virginia’s 95 counties and 38 independent cities, CHP holders would be forced to forego their Right-to-Carry for fear of running afoul of an obscure or complicated local law. HB1004 would prohibit those subject to a §19.2-152.10 protective order from possessing firearms. Those subject to a §19.2-152.10 protective order are already prohibited from purchasing or transporting firearms while the order is in effect. Unlike other protective orders that trigger a firearm possession prohibition, a petitioner for a §19.2-152.10 protective order does not need to bear any relation to the respondent. The absence of a relationship requirement opens the §19.2-152.10 protective order procedure up to abuse. Verbal altercations between co-workers, neighbors, or less formal acquaintances where one party perceived, or claimed to perceive, the other as making a “threat” could result in the extinguishment of a person’s Second Amendment rights and the forfeiture of their firearms. HB1083 severely restricts parental decisions about firearms in the home by making it a Class 6 felony to leave an unlocked and loaded gun in the home with a child or teenager under the age of 18. Current law only applies this restriction to children under the age of 14 and provides that the punishment for such conduct is a Class 3 misdemeanor. This law is unnecessary as Virginia already has a child abuse and neglect statute that provides felony penalties for parents who engage in dangerous conduct. (source)
Is it any wonder that parts of Virginia are considering secession from the state?
The protest meant nothing in the eyes of Virginia lawmakers.
The advancement of these gun laws is a slap in the face to every gun owner who has protested in person, written or emailed his or her members of Congress, and attended local meetings.
It shows that the people currently in office don’t care what Virginians have to say about the laws they pass. It underlines their blithe dismissal of the Sanctuary municipalities and of the massive peaceful protest that even saw protesters cleaning up the area before they left.
The protest may have meant nothing to lawmakers, but to gun owners, it meant everything. It means that people in Virginia will stand up for their rights. It means they will not back down. It means they’re willing to put themselves on the line to protect the 2nd Amendment in a state that still has a flag that says “Sic Semper Tyrannis.”
But as for the state government? You know, the one purchased by presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg?
This is not a government that represents the people of Virginia.


newswars--2020-01-30--“Racist” Video Shows Commuters Covering Their Faces Near Chinese Woman

A “ racist ” video has emerged showing commuters on public transport in Paris covering their faces as a Chinese woman sits nearby .
“ This is RACIST , ” tweeted the user who posted the clip , which shows a man and a woman , both white , covering their mouths and noses with their clothing as a Chinese woman on her phone sits opposite with her suitcase beside her .
However , one black respondent pointed out that Chinese people acted in a similar way during the ebola outbreak .
“ Better safe than sorry .
You should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ebola was around , ” he tweeted .
Others asserted that the behavior of the man and the woman was not racist .
“ I don ’ t think fear is the same as being racist .
These people are scared and just want to stay alive you know , ” said one .
“ So taking preventive measures to secure yourself from a deadly virus with no cure is racist .
Wow , ” added another .
The coronavirus outbreak has prompted innumerable warnings about “ racism ” as many authorities seem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the actual spread of the epidemic .
As we reported yesterday , the UK Boarding Schools Association warned its students that any expressions of “ xenophobia ” against Chinese people would not be tolerated , despite none being recorded .
Instead of telling people who will be gathered in enclosed spaces to practice proper hygiene and wash their hands , the Association appears to be more concerned about mean words .
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever .
It is CRUCIAL that you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the free newsletter here .
Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown .

A “racist” video has emerged showing commuters on public transport in Paris covering their faces as a Chinese woman sits nearby.
“This is RACIST,” tweeted the user who posted the clip, which shows a man and a woman, both white, covering their mouths and noses with their clothing as a Chinese woman on her phone sits opposite with her suitcase beside her.
However, one black respondent pointed out that Chinese people acted in a similar way during the ebola outbreak.
“Better safe than sorry. You should have seen how chinese were brazen when Ebola was around,” he tweeted.
Better safe than sorry. You should have seen how chinese were brazen when Ebola was around. — TeRah-King (@terahking) January 29, 2020
Others asserted that the behavior of the man and the woman was not racist.
“I don’t think fear is the same as being racist. These people are scared and just want to stay alive you know,” said one.
I don’t think fear is the same as being racist. These people are scared and just want to stay alive you know — Lona-Jasmiin (@JasmiinLona) January 29, 2020
“So taking preventive measures to secure yourself from a deadly virus with no cure is racist. Wow,” added another.
I don’t think fear is the same as being racist. These people are scared and just want to stay alive you know — Lona-Jasmiin (@JasmiinLona) January 29, 2020
The coronavirus outbreak has prompted innumerable warnings about “racism” as many authorities seem more concerned about people being offended than the actual spread of the epidemic.
As we reported yesterday, the UK Boarding Schools Association warned its students that any expressions of “xenophobia” against Chinese people would not be tolerated, despite none being recorded.
Instead of telling people who will be gathered in enclosed spaces to practice proper hygiene and wash their hands, the Association appears to be more concerned about mean words.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


newswars--2020-01-30--Study of Coronavirus Victims Finds “96% Identical Genome Level to a Bat Coronavirus”

A new scientific study that took samples from five coronavirus victims found that the strain is “ 96 % identical at the whole genome level to a bat coronavirus.
” Following the viral spread of videos out of China and other Asian countries showing people eating bat soup , the media attempted to debunk a link between the coronavirus and bat eating , partially by insisting the connection was “ racist.
” This debunking campaign came despite Chinese authorities admitting that the source of the outbreak was an illegal animal market at which snakes and bats are sold in Wuhan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soup is not particularly commonplace in the country ” and that the connection to bats was “ misinformation , ” despite linking to a new study in their own article which proved the opposite .
The results of the study , titled ‘ Discovery of a novel coronavirus associated with the recent pneumonia outbreak in humans and its potential bat origin ’ , were published on the archive website for the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory .
The full abstract of the study reads as follows ; Since the SARS outbreak 18 years ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respiratory syndrome related coronaviruses ( SARSr-CoV ) have been discovered in their natural reservoir host , bats .
Previous studies indicated that some of those bat SARSr-CoVs have the potential to infect humans .
Here we report the identification and characterization of a novel coronavirus ( nCoV-2019 ) which caused an epidemic of acute respiratory syndrome in humans , in Wuhan , China .
The epidemic , started from December 12th , 2019 , has caused 198 laboratory confirmed infections with three fatal cases by January 20th , 2020 .
Full-length genome sequences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early stage of the outbreak .
They are almost identical to each other and share 79.5 % sequence identify to SARS-CoV .
Furthermore , it was found that nCoV-2019 is 96 % identical at the whole genome level to a bat coronavirus .
The pairwise protein sequence analysis of seven conserved non-structural proteins show that this virus belongs to the species of SARSr-CoV .
The nCoV-2019 virus was then isolated from the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of a critically ill patient , which can be neutralized by sera from several patients .
Importantly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uses the same cell entry receptor , ACE2 , as SARS-CoV .
Bats were also responsible for both MERS and SARS , but the media appears to be more concerned about Chinese people being upset by racist memes .
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever .
It is CRUCIAL that you support me .
Please sign up for the free newsletter here .
Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy @ @ @ @

A new scientific study that took samples from five coronavirus victims found that the strain is “96% identical at the whole genome level to a bat coronavirus.”
Following the viral spread of videos out of China and other Asian countries showing people eating bat soup, the media attempted to debunk a link between the coronavirus and bat eating, partially by insisting the connection was “racist.”
This debunking campaign came despite Chinese authorities admitting that the source of the outbreak was an illegal animal market at which snakes and bats are sold in Wuhan.
The BBC reported that “bat soup is not particularly commonplace in the country” and that the connection to bats was “misinformation,” despite linking to a new study in their own article which proved the opposite.
The results of the study, titled ‘Discovery of a novel coronavirus associated with the recent pneumonia outbreak in humans and its potential bat origin’, were published on the archive website for the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
The full abstract of the study reads as follows;
Since the SARS outbreak 18 years ago, a large number of severe acute respiratory syndrome related coronaviruses (SARSr-CoV) have been discovered in their natural reservoir host, bats. Previous studies indicated that some of those bat SARSr-CoVs have the potential to infect humans.
Here we report the identification and characterization of a novel coronavirus (nCoV-2019) which caused an epidemic of acute respiratory syndrome in humans, in Wuhan, China.
The epidemic, started from December 12th, 2019, has caused 198 laboratory confirmed infections with three fatal cases by January 20th, 2020. Full-length genome sequences were obtained from five patients at the early stage of the outbreak. They are almost identical to each other and share 79.5% sequence identify to SARS-CoV.
Furthermore, it was found that nCoV-2019 is 96% identical at the whole genome level to a bat coronavirus.
The pairwise protein sequence analysis of seven conserved non-structural proteins show that this virus belongs to the species of SARSr-CoV. The nCoV-2019 virus was then isolated from the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of a critically ill patient, which can be neutralized by sera from several patients. Importantly, we have confirmed that this novel CoV uses the same cell entry receptor, ACE2, as SARS-CoV.
Bats were also responsible for both MERS and SARS, but the media appears to be more concerned about Chinese people being upset by racist memes.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


newswars--2020-01-30--EXCLUSIVE: D.O.D. Buying Up American Food Supplies For Coronavirus Outbreak

Alex Jones talks to Keith Bansemer of My Patriot Supply about how important it is for patriots to have access @ @ @ @ @ water in case of global pandemics such as the coronavirus .

Alex Jones talks to Keith Bansemer of My Patriot Supply about how important it is for patriots to have access to storable food and clean water in case of global pandemics such as the coronavirus.
Watch the full interview here:


newswars--2020-01-30--5G Launches In Wuhan Weeks Before Coronavirus Outbreak

In this Infowars Special Report , Greg Reese connects the dots between the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak , the Bill and @ @ @ @ @ Netflix docuseries pitching vaccines as a solution to outbreaks , Wuhan ’ s recent launch @ @ @ @ @ experts who say 5G could cause “ flu-like symptoms.
” Watch as Reese tries to @ @ @ @ @ of the Chinese government website announcing the launch of 5G and is blocked by a @ @ @ @ @ goes against Community Standards.
” Try sharing the link on Facebook and you will receive @ @ @ @ @ HERE

In this Infowars Special Report, Greg Reese connects the dots between the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a Netflix docuseries pitching vaccines as a solution to outbreaks, Wuhan’s recent launch of 5G and warnings from experts who say 5G could cause “flu-like symptoms.”
Watch as Reese tries to share a link on Facebook of the Chinese government website announcing the launch of 5G and is blocked by a notice claiming the post “goes against Community Standards.”
Try sharing the link on Facebook and you will receive the same notice. CLICK HERE


newswars--2020-01-30--Watch: Justice Roberts Refuses To Read Question from Sen. Rand Paul About Eric Ciaramella

Supreme Court Justice John Roberts refused to read a question from Sen. Rand Paul ( R-Ky. ) containing the name of suspected whistleblower Eric Ciaramella during the Senate impeachment trial Thursday .
After reading the question to himself , Roberts announced , “ The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted.
” Sen. Paul later held a press conference where he read his question and insisted he “ made no reference to any whistleblower.
” Sen. Paul also addressed the matter on Twitter , adding that his question was not about any “ whistleblower , ” but rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Misko , who work at the National Security Council , may have conspired to impeach Trump ahead of impeachment proceedings .
Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together 1/2 and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings .
2/2 Journalists and others on social media slammed Justice Roberts ’ decision to censor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t even utter the name of the individual who started this whole farce , it suggests he may similarly refuse to subpoena the whistleblower , whom @ RCInvestigates identified as Eric Ciaramella , should the Senate vote to call witnesses .
https : //t.co/ZwCUgjphcb Given Chief Justice John Roberts ’ censorship of a senator in the discharge of the senator ’ s duties , the following question must now be posed on the floor : In the event a chief justice were impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roberts did nothing while the FISA court which he personally oversees illegally spied on an American citizen .
He did nothing when DOJ determined the court was defrauded .
But when a senator asked a question ?
Roberts shut that down .
Twice .
What a disgraceful coward .
Rand Paul ’ s question was brilliant because the question did *not* reveal the alleged identity of the whistleblower The media claiming that Paul revealed the identity of the whistleblower proves 1-thing : That they knew who the whistleblower was and hid it from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did the Chief Justice just block a question from @ RandPaul on the origins of this circus ?
America deserves to know the truth , including who did Schiff meet with , when and why !
Harrison breaks down the ridiculous arguments from the Democrats as the continued persecution of President Trump is on full display in the Senate .

Supreme Court Justice John Roberts refused to read a question from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) containing the name of suspected whistleblower Eric Ciaramella during the Senate impeachment trial Thursday.
Senator @RandPaul sends question to the desk during Impeachment Trial. Chief Justice Roberts: “The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted.” pic.twitter.com/Yk89V9ermF — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) January 30, 2020
After reading the question to himself, Roberts announced, “The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted.”
Sen. Paul later held a press conference where he read his question and insisted he “made no reference to any whistleblower.”
Sen. Paul also addressed the matter on Twitter, adding that his question was not about any “whistleblower,” but rather about whether the court was aware Ciaramella and Misko, who work at the National Security Council, may have conspired to impeach Trump ahead of impeachment proceedings.
My exact question was: Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together 1/2 — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 30, 2020 and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings. 2/2 — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 30, 2020
Journalists and others on social media slammed Justice Roberts’ decision to censor Sen. Paul:
If Roberts won’t even utter the name of the individual who started this whole farce, it suggests he may similarly refuse to subpoena the whistleblower, whom @RCInvestigates identified as Eric Ciaramella, should the Senate vote to call witnesses. https://t.co/ZwCUgjphcb — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 30, 2020 Given Chief Justice John Roberts’ censorship of a senator in the discharge of the senator’s duties, the following question must now be posed on the floor: In the event a chief justice were impeached for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, who would preside over his trial? — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 30, 2020 John Roberts did nothing while the FISA court which he personally oversees illegally spied on an American citizen. He did nothing when DOJ determined the court was defrauded. But when a senator asked a question? Roberts shut that down. Twice. What a disgraceful coward. — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 30, 2020 Rand Paul’s question was brilliant because the question did *not* reveal the alleged identity of the whistleblower The media claiming that Paul revealed the identity of the whistleblower proves 1-thing: That they knew who the whistleblower was and hid it from the American public https://t.co/OV0yy138BS — Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) January 30, 2020 Why did the Chief Justice just block a question from @RandPaul on the origins of this circus? America deserves to know the truth, including who did Schiff meet with, when and why! — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) January 30, 2020
Harrison breaks down the ridiculous arguments from the Democrats as the continued persecution of President Trump is on full display in the Senate.


newswars--2020-01-30--Pentagon Report Finds Lockheed’s F-35 Can’t “Shoot Straight”

The annual review of the fighter jet found over 800 flaws in the aircraft ’ s capabilities , with dozens of them having a direct effect on pilot safety and readiness for combat , if not fixed .
The US Department of Defence found hundreds of deficiencies in Lockheed Martin ’ s F-35 fighter jet in its annual assessment by Pentagon ’ s test specialists , Bloomberg reported on Thursday .
The Pentagon review , conducted by its director of operational test and evaluation , Robert Behler , pointed out a long list of deficiencies , 13 of which have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaning they are necessary to be fixed due to their direct effect on safety or combat capability .
“ Although the program office is working to fix deficiencies , new discoveries are still being made , resulting in only a minor decrease in the overall number , ” the assessment reportedly said , adding that there are still “ many significant ‘ ’ flaws not yet addressed .
The number of technical deficiencies that have been identified as of November 2019 was 873 .
Though the number of flaws is less than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it still raises questions about the reliability and availability of the aircraft and its maintenance systems .
The list of F-35 weaknesses included serious problems such as “ unacceptable ” accuracy in its 25mm gun , that apparently does not shoot straight , unresolved cybersecurity “ vulnerabilities ” , reliability , aircraft availability and maintenance systems .
Jon Rappoport joins The Alex Jones Show to break down how the coronavirus pandemic could be used to implement a world government forced-innoculation program .
Despite the huge amount of unresolved deficiencies and the incomplete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US Congress continues to accelerate purchases of the aircraft .
Congress reportedly added 11 to the Defence Department ’ s request in 2016 and in 2017 , 20 in fiscal 2018 , 15 in 2019 and 20 this year .
By late September 2019 , almost 500 jets were delivered to customers worldwide and all will need extensive retrofitting following the findings .
“ Although we have not seen the report , the F-35 continues to mature and is the most lethal , survivable and connected fighter in the world , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said , according to the news outlet .
“ Reliability continues to improve , with the global fleet averaging greater than 65 % mission capable rates and operational units consistently performing near 75 % .
” Mike Adams joins The Alex Jones Show to break down the reports of coronavirus breaking out in the US .

The annual review of the fighter jet found over 800 flaws in the aircraft’s capabilities, with dozens of them having a direct effect on pilot safety and readiness for combat, if not fixed.
The US Department of Defence found hundreds of deficiencies in Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet in its annual assessment by Pentagon’s test specialists, Bloomberg reported on Thursday.
The Pentagon review, conducted by its director of operational test and evaluation, Robert Behler, pointed out a long list of deficiencies, 13 of which have been labeled as “must-fix”, meaning they are necessary to be fixed due to their direct effect on safety or combat capability.
“Although the program office is working to fix deficiencies, new discoveries are still being made, resulting in only a minor decrease in the overall number,” the assessment reportedly said, adding that there are still “many significant‘’ flaws not yet addressed.
The number of technical deficiencies that have been identified as of November 2019 was 873. Though the number of flaws is less than the 917 found in the previous annual review, it still raises questions about the reliability and availability of the aircraft and its maintenance systems.
The list of F-35 weaknesses included serious problems such as “unacceptable” accuracy in its 25mm gun, that apparently does not shoot straight, unresolved cybersecurity “vulnerabilities”, reliability, aircraft availability and maintenance systems.
Jon Rappoport joins The Alex Jones Show to break down how the coronavirus pandemic could be used to implement a world government forced-innoculation program.
Despite the huge amount of unresolved deficiencies and the incomplete testing of the F-35 fighter jet, the US Congress continues to accelerate purchases of the aircraft. Congress reportedly added 11 to the Defence Department’s request in 2016 and in 2017, 20 in fiscal 2018, 15 in 2019 and 20 this year.
By late September 2019, almost 500 jets were delivered to customers worldwide and all will need extensive retrofitting following the findings.
“Although we have not seen the report, the F-35 continues to mature and is the most lethal, survivable and connected fighter in the world,” Brett Ashworth, a spokesperson for Lockheed, said, according to the news outlet. “Reliability continues to improve, with the global fleet averaging greater than 65% mission capable rates and operational units consistently performing near 75%.”
Mike Adams joins The Alex Jones Show to break down the reports of coronavirus breaking out in the US.


newswars--2020-01-30--Michigan State University Rolls Out Website For ‘Undocumented Students’

Michigan State University has announced the launch of a new website created for “ undocumented students.
” The “ Undocumented Student Resource ” center , which is operated by the Office for Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives , provides answers to a variety of frequently asked questions and addresses the unique concerns of current or prospective students with dubious immigration status .
“ Michigan State University is committed to creating a welcoming and inclusive environment for all , ” the school explains on the site .
“ That includes our commitment to admit and support students from all backgrounds , adhering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is diverse , equitable and free from discrimination.
” “ We are aware undocumented students , refugees and recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ( DACA ) program , as well as students , staff and faculty with mixed-immigration status often face barriers and challenges as they navigate campus policies requiring support services to address their unique needs .
To assist , multiple units across campus are working together to increase institutional support for these students as well as provide training and advising related to admissions , financial aid , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials do everything possible to effectively shield ‘ undocumented ’ students from interference by federal immigration authorities , adding that campus police “ operates with the premise that it is the responsibility of the federal government to enforce federal immigration law , not local police departments.
” While ‘ undocumented ’ students are not eligible for federal student aid , the site invites them to seek state financial aid , private scholarships , and merit scholarships offered by the school .
“ I am sickened to my stomach that my money is going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the law , ” student and conservative activist Sam Larey told The Morning Watch , which initially broke the story .
“ By aiding undocumented aliens , we spit in the face of immigrants who followed our laws , ” Larey said .
Deanna Lorraine is running for Congress against Nancy Pelosi in a bid to regain control of the seat on behalf of the American people .
By the way , people who know what ’ s coming are taking advantage of our healthy & delicious storable food !

Michigan State University has announced the launch of a new website created for “undocumented students.”
The “Undocumented Student Resource” center, which is operated by the Office for Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives, provides answers to a variety of frequently asked questions and addresses the unique concerns of current or prospective students with dubious immigration status.
“Michigan State University is committed to creating a welcoming and inclusive environment for all,” the school explains on the site. “That includes our commitment to admit and support students from all backgrounds, adhering to our values of being a campus that is diverse, equitable and free from discrimination.”
“We are aware undocumented students, refugees and recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, as well as students, staff and faculty with mixed-immigration status often face barriers and challenges as they navigate campus policies requiring support services to address their unique needs. To assist, multiple units across campus are working together to increase institutional support for these students as well as provide training and advising related to admissions, financial aid, and residency reclassification.”
MSU asserts school officials do everything possible to effectively shield ‘undocumented’ students from interference by federal immigration authorities, adding that campus police “operates with the premise that it is the responsibility of the federal government to enforce federal immigration law, not local police departments.”
While ‘undocumented’ students are not eligible for federal student aid, the site invites them to seek state financial aid, private scholarships, and merit scholarships offered by the school.
“I am sickened to my stomach that my money is going to the education of those who broke the law,” student and conservative activist Sam Larey told The Morning Watch, which initially broke the story.
“By aiding undocumented aliens, we spit in the face of immigrants who followed our laws,” Larey said.
Deanna Lorraine is running for Congress against Nancy Pelosi in a bid to regain control of the seat on behalf of the American people.
By the way, people who know what’s coming are taking advantage of our healthy & delicious storable food!
Dan Lyman: Follow @CitizenAnalyst