Month: August 2022

There is an air of unreality surrounding Progressives’ objections to providing adequate funding for America’s defense.  The Pentagon budget accounts for about 13% of federal spending, but in a press release, the Progressive Caucus criticized the amount of the appropriation, and called for increased dollars for domestic programs. Sen. Bernie Sander argues that “we do not need a massive increase in the defense budget.” 

On the other hand, supporters of adequate military preparations point to the fact that the dramatic inflation rate hampers the ability of the Pentagon to gain the resources necessary to carry out its mission. 

The Washington Post notes that the most recent Biden budget “doesn’t even match our 7.9 percent inflation much less our urgent needs. At the very least, Congress should double that hike. Ideally, it would do much more.”

The warnings come also from Defense News   “America’s military leaders state time and again that China’s forcible assault on Taiwan, and therefore our response to it, is a near-term challenge. Given the lengthy time to plan, program, build and field credible combat power, a 2027 problem is really one of today. Alarm bells should be ringing in Congress as the president’s latest defense budget cuts readiness. Given that ongoing support for Ukraine is straining some key U.S. military supplies and munitions, everyone should be concerned the China fight would demand even more and faster.”

Opponents to an adequate defense budget treat military spending as just another government program that Washington can deal with on its own time table. 

Inflation is a key challenge, but the greatest problem confronting the Defense Department is far more serious, and certainly not something under U.S. politician’s control.  The growing Russian-Chinese alliance, and the blatant belligerence on the part of both Moscow and Beijing, places America in unprecedented jeopardy. Never before has Washington faced an adversary that has greater industrial might, a larger nuclear force, and the planet’s largest navy. In addition, the population and geography of the two nation dwarfs that of the U.S. 

A Russian news article describes the latest development in the Chinese-Russian Axis: 

“China is willing to continue to offer mutual support to Russia on issues concerning our core interests such as sovereignty and security, intensify strategic coordination between the two countries, and strengthen communication and coordination in major international and regional organizations such as the United Nations, BRICS, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization,” Xi was quoted as saying by China’s state media outlet CCTV. In the phone call, which fell on Xi’s 69th birthday, the two leaders noted that relations between Russia and China “have reached an unprecedentedly high level and are constantly improving,” 

Neither the Kremlin nor the ruling Chinese Communist Party has been shy about their aggressive intentions. Russia’s war on Ukraine and China’s dramatic armed expansion throughout the Indo-Pacific region are clear examples. 

Officials in both nations have made clear their threats. Two top Chinese colonels, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, in a book entitled Unrestricted Warfare, made the case for assaulting America, while voicing contempt for U.S. military competence, contemptuously noting that the America has been unable to actually succeed in combat since the Second Gulf War. 

And from Moscow, officials have unabashedly threatened the U.S. with advanced nuclear missiles. The most recent example: The head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos Dmitry Rogozin has threatened the use of  Moscow’s Satan-2 intercontinental ballistic missile, a repeated theme of Vladimir Putin

The size and scope of the threats, combined with the inadequate funding of the Pentagon, has led some to sound alarm bells. The Center for Strategic and International Studies warns that American national security is “staring into an abyss” unless the trend of not keeping spending levels up with inflation is halted.

The calendar may read 2022, but in historical terms, today is December 6, 1941, the day before the Pearl Harbor attack.

Photo: “Pearl Harbor” U.S. National Archives

The Biden Administration’s bizarre policy of unilateral retreat and de-escalation is emboldening America’s adversaries, bringing the nation to the threshold of conflict.

There has been a marked change in Moscow and Beijing’s perspectives since the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. While the drawdown of U.S. forces had universal approval, the failure to leave a small force behind to prevent the victory of the Taliban, a precise repeat of then-Vice President Biden’s strategic error in Iraq earlier this century which gave rise to the ISIS caliphate, signaled that the current White House lacked expertise in foreign affairs.

The Administration has puzzled observers with a penchant for hastily providing concessions without seeking anything in return.

Despite the recognition that space was rapidly becoming a strategic realm of battle, Biden unilaterally ceased testing of American anti-satellite weaponry. In April, Vice-President Harris announced the self-imposed ban, receiving nothing in return from Russia or China.

Biden’s own Defense Department has noted that “Russia and China, our primary strategic competitors, are taking steps to undercut the United States and our allies in the space domain. Both nations view space as a requirement for winning modern wars, especially against Western nations, and look to prove themselves as world leaders. Since early 2019, competitor space operations have increased in pace and scope across nearly all major categories …China and Russia value superiority in space. And as a result, they’ll seek ways to strengthen their space and counter-space programs and determine better ways to integrate them within their respective militaries…”  

The Gatestone Institute blasted the move. “Space has already become the scene of an ongoing “shadow war” in which China and Russia conduct attacks against U.S. satellites with lasers, radiofrequency jammers, and cyber-attacks every day, according to General David Thompson, the U.S. Space Force’s first vice chief of space operations..Fifteen years after China’s ASAT strike, we still lack the ability to defeat an attack on our space systems or launch an offensive strike if circumstances warrant…”

Back on Earth, as Russia built up its forces neighboring Ukraine, the White did next to nothing. No defensive weapons were provided to Ukraine to discourage Putin’s planned adventurism.  After Moscow began the war, Biden provided just enough assistance to allow the Kiev government to hang on, but not win, the conflict.  

Senator Ted Cruz issued a critique of Biden’s failure.

“President Biden has repeatedly, systematically undermined our Ukrainian allies in the face of Russian aggression to placate Putin. And it’s worth noting, Biden does this for the same reason he undermines Taiwan—he undermines Taiwan to placate the Chinese Communists, he undermines Ukraine to placate Putin. To placate Putin, the Biden administration has repeatedly withheld military aid packages to Ukraine. Other times he has withheld diplomatic support to pressure our Ukrainian allies into supporting his misguided Nord Stream 2 surrender to Putin. Biden’s actions for the past year have emboldened Putin, who acted on that weakness and has put Europe on the brink of war.”

Biden’s actions towards China are the most worrisome of all. He has reversed former President Trump’s efforts to combat Beijing’s prodigious espionage efforts. He has allowed it to buy land next to strategic American defense sites. As its navy has grown far larger than its U.S. equivalent, the President inexplicably has submitted budgets to Congress that shrink, rather than expand, the nation’s maritime force.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan broke no new diplomatic ground. Indeed, decades ago, then Speaker Newt Gingrich made the same journey. This time, however, China responded to the trip by surrounding the island nation and threatening war, b oth against Taiwan and the U.S. 

Clearly, it felt no fear of reaction from the Biden White House.

Frank Vernuccio serves as editor-in-chief of the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.

North Korea is spending heavily on the development of its nuclear weapons program and is “ready to mobilize,” according to North Korea’s President Kim Jung Un. In Seoul, downward trends in recent budget allocations indicate the country’s military reserve forces may be in trouble due to decreased levels of funding and substandard training events. There also are declining levels of support and respect for the country’s military service among the citizenry, coupled with rising rates of dissatisfaction among those considering it as a career, according to Brendan Balestrieri and Won-Geun Koo of War on the Rocks. The decades-long negative trends do not bode well for the South’s readiness to fend off an invasion from the North. 

Balestrieri and Koo suggest that the country “continues to emphasize fourth-generation defense initiatives at the expense of training and equipping its mostly conscript army.” New battleships and aircraft create the outward appearance of a nation able to conduct modern warfare. Few resources, however, are devoted to addressing the potential that the North could conduct a blitzkrieg-style raid on South Korea using hybrid techniques and guerilla warfare. 

The threat from the North has grown over the years as Kim has emphasized his country’s asymmetrical warfare capabilities. Balestrieri and Koo point out that “As North Korea’s conventional force capability deteriorated over the past two decades, the North Korean regime increasingly emphasized asymmetric warfare capabilities such as nuclear weapons, short-range ballistic missiles, special operations forces, and the development of insertion platforms such as hovercraft and submarines.” The situation in Seoul today no longer resembles the strong allegiance to the state following the 1968 attempted assassination of the country’s president by North Korean commandos. At that time, South Korea had about 2.5 million reservists, including over 10,000 women who signed up with the local reserve forces. 

In recent years Seoul has used its reservists to reinforce active-duty divisions. The homeland security reserve divisions, in particular, support rear area operations, and would be the most likely to be called up to counter North Korean special forces or asymmetric threats, according to Balestrieri and Koo. With only three days of training each year, including time spent on administrative paperwork tasks, reservists have few opportunities to practice warfighting skills in the field. Since mid-2018, there also has been a decrease in combined US-Korean military training exercises. 

In-Bum Chun, a former deputy commander of South Korea’s First Army, described the situation by saying that the “conditions for training are very, very bad.” He pointed out the lack of live fire training saying it will take until at least 2027 to make significant readiness improvements in the troops. South Korea suffers from a 60% annual turnover rate among the troops, with some service members not experiencing a live fire training exercise in 12 years. The US commander of the Eighth Army in Korea, Lt. Gen. Bill Burleson, contradicted Chun saying the South is ready to fight and pointed to high technology reconnaissance planes flying and the artillery batteries. That does not account for the lack of training for the infantry.

Some South Korea units are using WWII-era equipment, according to interviews Balestrieri and Koo conducted with the country’s senior military officers. During an invasion military analysts suggest that as many as 200,000 well-trained, North Korean special forces could form the point of the spear. Unlike the NATO modernization plan, in which Member states are improving the interoperability of their various national forces, South Korean military doctrine continues to view their branches as separate and distinct entities. Add to it the North’s cyber warfare capabilities, and the balance begins to change in favor of Kim Jung Un’s regime in a conventional war. 

Historical data covering military preparedness in the South does not trend well for repelling Kim’s forces. There have been a number of incidents since the 1968 assassination attempt at the Blue House in Seoul. On September 18, 1996, a North Korean Sang-O-class submarine ran aground off the coast of South Korea while returning to pick up several spies inserted to gather intelligence on a nearby airbase. It took months to track down those involved in the operation. A 1997 report indicates that only 34% of reserve troops responded and mobilized on day one of getting called up. Use of alcohol while on duty, cases of AWOL, and fratricide also have dogged its military in recent decades. Add to that a demographic time bomb which threatens to further reduce the number of available citizens who could join the military in the coming years. South Korea today can cite few overall improvements in its troop preparedness  despite some advances in its advanced-technology weapons systems. 

The political-military leadership of South Korea, according to Balestrieri and Koo, should be alarmed. They point out that research into the importance of the will to fight as a critical component of military capability continues to evolve, but “Regrettably, declining levels of support among young South Koreans for public service is beginning to extend beyond the military, as evidenced by declining competition ratios for South Korea’s much-feared civil service exam. It may soon become necessary for the United States to extend an offer to the South to revamp its military training to counter threat from the North.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

Two nuclear powers on alert, live fire exercises east of Taiwan, and the third person in line for the US presidency visiting Taipei. What could go wrong? Progressively belligerent behavior by China represents an increase in the risk that a mistake could lead to kinetic conflict between China and the United States and, perhaps, include America’s allies in the region. During Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent Taiwan visit the US Navy deployed a carrier battle group and increased patrols near Taiwan in the Philippine Sea to ensure her safety after threats from Beijing. In response to the announcement of the Speaker’s potential visit, the Chinese government ordered its navy to encircle the island and conduct live fire exercises and naval drills. Commercial airliners and ships were forced to detour three hours out of their way to avoid the hostile marine environment. Of the 11 Chinese missiles launched east north, and south of Taiwan, five landed in Japan’s economic zone. China’s actions went far beyond those of its navy. 

Less reported by the mainstream media was Beijing’s highly coordinated, propaganda campaign to undermine the visit. As China’s physical strength has increased, so has its ability and determination to launch disinformation campaigns promoting false evidence on everything from the recent Supreme Court abortion ruling to bioweapons in Ukraine. Patrick Tucker, technology editor of the publication Defense One, says that “US cybersecurity company Mandiant discovered that the Chinese group, dubbed HaiEnergy, had published ‘two articles critical’ of Pelosi (D-CA), ‘in response to reports that she may visit Taiwan in early August.’”

Last Thursday HaiEnergy warned that Pelosi should stay away from Taiwan, claiming that a visit would “tarnish” relations between the US and China. Earlier this year in March the same group attacked former US Secretary of State Pompeo’s trip to Taiwan, using fake Taiwanese news sites, and pushed the narrative that the Washington would be an unreliable partner to Taipei in the event of a Chinese invasion. HaiEnergy has a long track record of going after academics and others who protest or expose China’s human rights abuses. Their operations are complex and multinational.

Using fake letters purporting to show that German anthropologist Adrian Zenz was receiving money from US government sources, HaiEnergy first tweeted a photo of the fabricated letter, which contained spelling and grammatical errors, and then used a fake Swiss news site to report on the tweet, according to Tucker. The group then apparently linked one of the faked letters to US Senator Marco Rubio (FL-R) and former White House Chief strategist Steve Bannon. “The other two letters implied that the financial support came from grants awarded to Zenz from the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation in 2020 and 2021,” according to US cybersecurity company Mandiant.When former US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo traveled to Taiwan in March, the group used fake Taiwanese news sites to suggest that the US would be an unreliable partner if China decided to invade the island. In Ukraine the group purported to show that the US used biochemical weapons against Russia. “In June, Mandiant traced a coordinated information campaign around rare-earth minerals back to a separate Chinese group called DRAGONBRIDGE, but Mandiant believes the tactics and digital infrastructure used in both cases suggests that they are separate efforts, according to Tucker.” So far, Mandiant has identified 72 websites (59 domains and 14 subdomains) hosted by Haixun, which were used to target audiences in North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. This is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Chinese disinformation campaigns. One military analyst in Washington suggested that China uses cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns to “soften up the populations of western countries,” split opinions, and improve China’s standing. While the physical threat of a live military drill may be blatantly aggressive, China’s cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns represent a more insidious threat to the long-term stability of the international community. These threats are subtle, increase in intensity over an extended period of time, and recur often enough that the message earns credibility simply through repetition.  The danger is that too often members of a free society tend to believe what sounds familiar without independently corroborating the facts. Missiles are dangerous weapons but so are the fabrications the CCP uses to harm its competitors and enemies.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Illustration: Pixabay

What was once expected to be a short war in Ukraine has stretched from winter into summer and shows no signs of shutting it down as we approach fall. Now Putin is growing more concerned over a separate Russian enclave, Kaliningrad, that was separated from the country after the dissolution of Soviet Union in 1991. There are two aspects that are particularly critical: transportation links between Kaliningrad and Russia proper and changes in the Kaliningrad population’s attitudes because of their neighbors’ actions. The “populace [are] less like their nominally Russian ethnic counterparts and potentially less loyal” to Russia, according to Paul Goble of the Jamestown Foundation. The area is separated from the Russian Federation by Lithuania and Poland.

Recently Lithuania imposed and then removed a ban on the movement of EU sanctioned goods between Russia and Kaliningrad. Last year a NATO exercise appeared to practice the taking of Kaliningrad in a war. For Putin, this represents a clear and long-term threat to his country as he continues to face regionalist sentiment in various regions of Russia. Renamed Kaliningrad by Joseph Stalin at the end of World War II the region has lingering negative feelings about ethnic Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians brought into the enclave as the original residents , “the people of Koenigsberg,” view themselves as distinct from other groups. 

“Some have even talked about becoming ‘the fourth Baltic republic’ and formed a political party to promote that outcome,” says Goble, and “such feelings are further intensified by the Kaliningrad population’s far more frequent visits to Lithuania and Poland, both EU and NATO members, than to Russia proper, as well as by earlier efforts on the part of Kaliningrad officials to promote tourism, playing up German, Lithuanian and Polish links in the past and present.” Since last November Putin has cracked down on even the slightest hints of separatism and, in particular, against the German influence that remains in the region.

Lithuanian influence in the region is targeted due to the impact of Putin’s “special military operation” in Ukraine and its recent moves to restrict the flow of goods to the exclave. Goble calls the Kremlin’s action “both harsh and possibly dangerous given the reactions of Kaliningrad residents, who had been loyal to Moscow up to now—even if these moves are still flying under the radar in the West.” Since early July, Russian officials have gone after Lithuanian cultural institutions in Kaliningrad itself. It is viewed as an act of revenge against Vilnius’ failed attempt to impose a partial blockade on the region and to limit Lithuanian influence on Kaliningrad.

Last week, at the insistence of the Russian Ministry of Justice, officials closed the Association of Teachers of the Lithuanian Language in Kaliningrad. The group totaled about 20,000 ethnic Lithuanian. Putin’s political motivation was obvious as the activist association and has served as a base for teachers since 1995.  The publication Lituanika.ru  points out this week that its members are appalled because they care about their nation and about Kaliningrad and believe that the association has served both equally well. It raises questions concerning how far Putin will go to secure Kaliningrad. 

Maksim Makarov, reports Goble, heads the Russian community in Kaliningrad Oblast. Earlier Makarov garnered attention for his fight against “Germanization,” saying the closing of the association was absolutely correct, if belated, because the group has been funded by Vilnius and has tried to organize opposition within Kaliningrad to Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine. At this point Russia is using propaganda to dissuade those in the enclave from dissociating themselves from Russia. Msocow’s mouth piece, Makarov calls the association “an LGBT organization” and “the chief structure of the special services of Lithuania on the territory of Kaliningrad Oblast.” There are other cases where Russia is interfering in Kaliningrad in recent weeks.  A Lithuanian children’s ensemble was blocked from traveling to a festival in the Russian Federation and acts of vandalism have also been committed against Lithuanian statues and busts in various parts of the oblast simply because they represent “the wrong nationality.” No one is sure what will next happen in this campaign to defend “Russianness” in the enclave. “In the current environment… more attacks, both official and unofficial, on Lithuanian groups in Kaliningrad are probable in the coming days, a reflection of Kremlin fears that even folkloric groups can undermine the population’s Russian identity and its loyalty to Moscow,” according to Goble. Putin’s war may yet spread and not close to a conclusion.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

Photo: Kaliningrad museum (Pixabay)

Examined individually, the positions advocated by progressives, now empowered through the Biden Administration and big city government, appear to be isolated acts of irrationality.

What is the end goal of their ideas such as allowing violent criminals to walk the streets? Reducing defense preparedness even as authoritarian enemies grow stronger and more threatening? Spending far more than the national income, leading eventually to confiscatory taxes? Encouraging racial division? Claiming that parents should have no say in the education of their children? Opening the southern border to massive illegal immigration? Restricting the development of energy, even as Americans struggle to pay fuel and heating bills?

Clearly, those favoring these concepts are aware of how they do not stand up to scrutiny. That is why there has been a concerted effort to throttle the First Amendment. From college campuses that intimidate non-leftist professors and students, to politicians that use the power of government to intimidate their opposition, the level of degradation of what was once seen as sacred American rights is truly shocking.

Those ideas, taken singularly, appear illogical, but they are advocated in the pursuit of ending the American experiment in individual rights. 

Throughout most of human history, the concept of personal freedom, of rights granted by God or nature and not government, barely existed. Whether ruled by emperors, kings, chieftains, or strong men, the idea that an individual could assert their rights was essentially a nonstarter.

Piece by piece, Western Civilization, as we now know it, began to evolve. First came great religious figures that introduced the concept that each human was precious to the heart of God. Centuries later came the idea that inhabitants of an area were not “subjects” of monarchs, but citizens of a nation.

It’s no wonder, then, that many progressives disdain the concept of nation states, advocating the concept instead of “open borders,” that the Biden Administration now pursues despite numerous denials of reality.  Similarly, the idea of religion, an entity independent of government, is frequently targeted, because the Judeo-Christian ethic cherishes the soul of each man and woman.

The American concept of individual rights, expressed in and guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, was a truly revolutionary concept, refuting the normal mode of rule that had prevailed throughout history.  Through the genius of the Constitution, flaws in the execution of that concept were eventually eliminated, so that in the 21^st Century, the concept of personal freedom has reached its highest expression.  And that has powerfully upset those that prefer authoritarianism.

The counter-revolution against the concept of inherent rights and individual freedom reaches the highest levels. During the 2010 confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, she evaded answering a question about whether she even believed in the concept of inherent rights.

Senator Schumer (D-NY) actually introduced legislation to limit the First Amendment’s application to some political speech. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) boldly announced that he would “love to be able to regulate the content of speech.” During the Obama Administration, those disagreeing with the President were harassed by the IRS and the Department of Justice.

The progressive strategy is dangerously real and coherent. Create disorder through crime that will eventually makes authoritarian government attractive. Transfer funding from defense to welfare-style programs that make much of the population financially dependent on Washington. Reduce the ability of citizens to meet their own needs through hiked taxes and inflation. Distract voters from the growing power of government by turning races and ethnic groups against each other. Dilute the concept of citizenry by opening up the border, then allowing aliens to vote, as has already been done in New York City. Remove the influence of parents, as progressives have attempted so vigorously through our education system, so that an entire generation is overwhelmingly influenced by big government.

It’s a roadmap to the end of freedom. 

Photo: White House Spokesperson Jen Psaki (Twitter photo)

Are America’s armed forces sufficient for the threats the nation faces?

The National Defense publication argues that     “If Biden’s ‘no-growth’ pattern continues in coming years, [America’s military] will shrink rapidly, according to a recent report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, ‘U.S. Military Forces in FY 2022 — The Budget and Strategy Overview.’

Biden’s fiscal blueprint called for a decrease in active-duty end strength, from 1,351,000 personnel in 2021 to 1,346,400 in 2022.

The defense budget constitutes about 14% of the federal budget. The U.S. spends about 3.5% of its GDP on defense, compared to 4.1% for Russia.

The key question is whether the Pentagon can adequately deter the growing danger from near-equal adversaries such as China and Russia, and growing threats from nations such as North Korea and Iran. Russia has a larger nuclear force. China has a larger navy.

The Heritage Foundation’s recently released Index of Military Strength   reveals serious challenges to America’s national security, and breaks down the problems each branch of the armed forces faces.

The Army needs50 brigade combat teams. It currently has only 42. As a result, the analysis classifies the Army as only  “Marginal.” The Army is aging faster than it is modernizing. It remains “weak” in capacity with only 62 percent of the force it should have. Its capability score remains “marginal” given the age of its equipment and the size and maturity of its modernization programs.

The Navy needs 400 battle force ships. It currently has only 296, and that inadequate number may be reduced under current budget restrictions.  The Navy’s intensified operational tempo combine to reveal a service that is much too small relative to its tasks. It desperately needs a larger fleet of 400 ships, The service is aging rapidly,making it easier for major competitors to achieve technological parity. It also has made it difficult for the Navy to conduct the training essential to achieving high levels of readiness. The Navy is rated “marginal” on a downward slope to “weak” in readiness.

The Air Force has 1,200 fighter/ground-attack aircraft. The average age of Air Force  aircraft is 31 years, and some fleets, such as the B-52 bomber, average 60 years. In addition, KC-135s comprise 78 percent of the Air Force’s 483 tankers and are more than 59 years old on average. In total, the USAF shrunk by 120 planes since 2020. The advanced age of key aircraft in the Air Force’s inventory is driving the service to retire planes faster than they can be replaced. The service also lost ground in readiness compared with the preceding year. A score of “weak” in this area is the result of a shortage of pilots and flying time that implies a lack of effort or focused intent given the general reduction in operational deployments as U.S. actions overseas have ebbed.

The Marine Corps requires 30 battalions.  It currently has only 27. In the absence of additional funding in FY 2022, the Corps intends to reduce the number of its battalions even further from 24 to 21, and this reduction, if implemented, would harm the Corps’ overall ability to perform its role.  It remains hampered by old equipment and problematic funding.

The Space Force does not have enough assets to track and manage the explosive growth in commercial and competitor-country systems being placed into orbit. The majority of its platforms have exceeded their planned life span, and modernization efforts to replace them are slow and incremental. The force also lacks defensive and offensive counter-space capabilities.

America’s Nuclear Capability is in danger of degradation.  Nearly all components of the nuclear enterprise are at a tipping point with respect to replacement or modernization and have no margin left for delays in schedule.

Photo: U.S. Army

The Progressive obsession with censorship continues, changing only in the type of attack.

Much of it has to do with electoral politics.  Some social media sites block the accounts of those who oppose Democrat candidates. During the 2020 election, to take just one example, stories about the Hunter Biden laptop were censored by many media sources. It is reasonable to speculate that news about the wide-ranging corruption of Biden family members would have resulted in a far different result in that year’s presidential campaign.

Progressives engage in partisan, misleading and false “fact checking” of those who bring up the failed policies and scandals of those on the left and exert their influence and pressure tactics on information outlets.  Case in point:  It is now undoubtedly clear that Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) completely lied when he repeatedly stated that he had undeniable “proof” that Donald Trump engaged in “Russian Collusion.”  After years of research and investigation, it has been found that no such activity ever existed.  Despite that, Donald Trump was thrown off some social media sites, but Adam Schiff, perhaps the most comprehensive perpetuator of false information in recent U.S. political history, remains.

The 2020 election was clearly tainted by media censorship and partisan reporting.  However, those bringing that reality to light are themselves censored.

The New York Post, which broke the Hunter Biden Laptop story, found itself on the receiving end of Progressive cancelling. Despite that, it continues campaigning against media bias and censorship. Its Benjamin Weingarten recently noted that “YouTube is censoring journalism for the Biden Administration… Big Tech is selectively censoring that which is obviously journalism… YouTube’s move is as hypocritical as it is detrimental to our discourse. Don’t hold your breath looking for instances of it disappearing corporate media interviews in which prominent Democrats lie, let alone Xi Jinping’s speeches.”

The foulest practice is the use of official government agencies to silence opponents of the incumbent Administration. Breitbart reports that Igi Sohn, the Biden Administration’s nominee for FCC Commissioner, has sought to break-up broadcasters who engage in honest journalism. Technology reporter Allum Bokharifound that “She…is tied to far-left activists, and praised an organization that described policing as a “violent institution that must end.”  She also personally called on the FCC to investigate the Sinclair Broadcasting Group, which is likely why progressive groups like MovementLabs are touting the potential for future regulatory action against the conservative-leaning network of local TV stations.”

When the planned abuse of government agencies are exposed, excuses are made to achieve the same goals under seemingly innocuous and “good government” organizations. The Biden Administration’s proposed “Disinformation Governance Board,”  which supposedly was designed to address material from states such as China and Russia, was stopped when it was revealed that it was to be led by a partisan individual,   Nina Jankowicz, and would focus not on foreign activities but on domestic sources critical of the Biden White House.

Not to be denied, the Biden Administration has returned with yet another attempt to establish an agency with censorship rights. In June, it was announced that Kamala Harris would lead a new “Harassment and Abuse Internet Task Force.” Once again, the advertised excuse for creating the group sounds innocuous: it proposes to “Assess and address online harassment and abuse that constitute technology-facilitated gender-based violence.” Surely, that sounds like a great idea.  But in reality, will this be another excuse to foster the institution of partisan government censorship?  Considering the overall record, chances are good that it will be exactly that.

The real collusion, not the made-up version used by Adam Schiff, is that between Progressive media barons and corrupt politicians.

Illustration: Fake News