Ignoring Bipartisanship – USA Gov Policy

The news media hasn’t dwelled very much on the near-unanimous bipartisan success of two legislative items concerning Hong Kong and animal cruelty, discussed in a prior New York Analysis of Policy and Government article. One concerned the prevention of animal cruelty. The other, actually a collection of two bills, dealt with measures aimed at Beijing for its attempts to illegally deprive the people of Hong Kong of their civil rights.

Bipartisanship can occur. There is another version of America, not covered by the media, desperately wishing that the nation’s business would start to take precedence over party politics. But the news media doesn’t like that idea—it’s not controversial, and doesn’t provide ratings or clickbait. Nor does it comply with its hard-left political leanings.

There is clearly a cancer in the news business. Recently, the Washington Times reported that Bloomberg News has blatantly stated that they would not cover investigate Democrat candidates, while continuing to examine President Trump. “Shortly after the billionaire jumped Sunday into the 2020 race, Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait said in a staff memo that the news division would refrain from investigating Mr. Bloomberg, his finances and his family, describing that policy as part of its journalism ‘tradition.’ In addition, he said, Bloomberg News will refrain from conducting investigations into Mr. Bloomberg’s Democratic rivals — but will continue to investigate President Trump and his administration — and that several Bloomberg editors and editorial board members will jump temporarily to the campaign.

While dwelling almost pathologically on any inartful use of language or Twitter decorum by Republicans, extremely bizarre statement by Democrats are barely mentioned. Former presidential candidate, Senator, Secretary of State and First Lady Hillary Clinton was a virtual production line for statements that would have ruined any GOP career, but she remained largely shielded by many key media sites. Just one example: “Who is going to find out? These women are trash. Nobody’s going to believe them,” speaking of the accusing statements made by women her husband molested or raped.

All of which brings former Vice President Joe Biden into the discussion. Biden has a long history of truly weird acts and comments, which have received more play on Saturday Night Live then they have in establishment news sources. His invasion of the personal space of females young and old has been caught numerous times on camera. His antics, most notably in the vice-presidential debate with Paul Ryan, were outside the bounds of any definition of normality. But these have received scant notice.

Assists with shorter work for eager moms, and additionally essentially less need for medicine, a great deal less despondency and nervousness, and shorter healing center remains. viagra soft tablet If you are depressed or having anxieties, stay away from situations that amerikabulteni.com generic tadalafil cause these emotional unbalances. However, there is an tadalafil in canada added bonus to this method since it also helps you achieve and maintain a solid erection. UK citizens have been struggling to come to terms with the fact and investigate the viagra free consultation cause of the impotence in men.

Now, however, Biden is, according to some estimates, a front runner for the 2020 presidential election. According to some estimates, he is far ahead of his rivals in national ratings. There are serious questions about his mental fitness for the position. America has survived presidents lacking personal scruples (think Bill Clinton), odd personalities (Richard Nixon) and many who were ineloquent. But there are serious questions about his mental fitness, and that is whole other level of concern.

These concerns are not just the criticism of Republicans or conservatives, or even his Democratic primary opponents. (By the way, the portrayal of Biden as a moderate are as far off as the attempts to characterize him as a “blue collar” guy. His policies are solidly on the elite left. He only looks less radical when compared to the most extreme elements of his party.) They come from individuals who one would reasonably assume would be firmly in Biden’s camp.

Biden served as President Obama’s Vice President, and was wholly supportive of him and his policies. Obama’s refusal to endorse Biden or support his campaign in any way speaks volumes. It gets worse for the ex-VP. Obama campaign strategist and key Democrat operative David Axelrod has been especially critical.

Many in the media see Biden as the strongest candidate to defeat President Trump, and so reporting on the possibility of mental fitness issues has been light. The barons of the media seem to prefer partisanship to the safety of the nation.

Photo: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.