Slava Slush Fund: despite economic crisis, Congress readies $12 billion more for Ukraine + More

U.S. has now allocated over $80 billion to Kiev.

Sure, financial markets and national currencies are imploding worldwide, but the military industrial regime needs to keep churning, and that means pumping more money into the Slava Slush Fund.

Slava Slush Fund: despite economic crisis, Congress readies $12 billion more for Ukraine

Related:

There’s no debating it: Biden will get billions in new Ukraine aid

“Oversight of Ukraine aid is sorely needed,” Julia Gledhill, a defense analyst for the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), tells Responsible Statecraft. “The State and Defense departments are handling billions of dollars in Ukraine funding, but neither have permanent inspectors general in place to investigate and prevent abuse of funds.”

Senate advances spending bill for Ukraine with $12 Billion

After the Senate invoked cloture for the legislative vehicle to carry out the CR, it will now be up for a full vote by the Senate. The House will next vote on it, likely on Friday.

Report: US Preparing $1.1 Billion Arms Package for Ukraine

The weapons package will likely include HIMARS rocket systems, HIMARS ammunition, counter-drone systems, radar systems, training, and technical support.

The arms package is expected to be provided to Kyiv using the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) as opposed to sending the arms directly from US military stockpiles. The USAI allows the Biden administration to purchase military equipment for Ukraine from the US arms industry.

Critics of Biden as being a ‘progressive’ are mistaken. Understanding what ‘progressive’ means isn’t so easy.

The difference between “progressive” and “liberal” gets to the core of what politics in the real world is actually about, and of whether the nation is being controlled by the public (a democracy), or instead is controlled by the tiny percentage of the population who are enormously wealthy (an aristocracy — a capitalistic dictatorship, or also called “fascism” — so that the public are actually the nation’s subjects, instead of the nation’s citizens). Whereas progressivism is 100% supportive of democracy, liberalism is supportive of control by an elite, but one that supposedly represents the interests of the public. There is a big difference between progressivism and liberalism. Most simply phrased: Aristocrats always control the public by employing the popular mythology so as to motivate the majority to accept their own subordination to the aristocracy; and, whereas liberals support that, progressives don’t. This deception by the aristocracy minimizes the amount of physical coercion that will be needed in order for them to control the public. Progressives reject any mythology, and oppose any aristocracy. Liberals simply do not. Conservatives are the aristocracy. The noblesse oblige conservatives are the liberal aristocrats who say that they serve the public interest, but the other aristocrats say that they have no such obligation, and that their being an aristocrat proves their worthiness. And that is the way things function, in the real world. The ‘news’-media are important in deceiving the public so as to enable the aristocracy to control, and this is the reason why aristocrats buy ‘news’-media even regardless of whether those ‘news’-media are directly profitable: owning the ‘news’-media is providing a major service to the entire aristocracy, and therefore becomes repaid to such an owner in many other ways — all aristocrats want to please that member. It’s gratitude to a fellow-aristocrat, and that check can be cashed in many different ways.

Critics of Biden as being a ‘progressive’ are mistaken. Understanding what ‘progressive’ means isn’t so easy.