https://www.leefang.com/p/usaid-funded-journalism-needs-scrutiny
The USAid operation is dead. Propaganda wise, thumb on the scale bureau on domestic/foreign policy death, yes. Rubio's portfolio is unsure, as to the hunger part USAid addressed, but it too may die.
There is much more to the Lee Fang post than is considered here/now. People in other nations may find it interesting that U.S. deep state propaganda went with feeding hungry children and adults. Not that it would have been overlooked that "hearts and minds" can follow full bellies.
Fang asserts Politico is not a part of USAid propaganda, but rather an independent private-sector fee-for-service operation with a substantial paywall fee structure for certain of its reporting. Not unlike other outlets. Etc. Follow the link for that. The part of Fang's post Crabgrass quotes:
[...]
The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), a major investigative news outlet responsible for the Panama Papers and other blockbuster news series, relies heavily on State Department and USAID funding. Ryan Grim recently reported that U.S. government money comes with strings – officials have used their leverage over OCCRP to influence editorial and personnel decisions at the outlet.
Although largely focused on uncovering corruption relating to U.S. adversaries such as Russia, OCCRP has occasionally reported on American figures. Their reporting on Rudy Giuliani's political work in Ukraine was a significant factor in congressional investigations into the first Trump administration.
Here is OCCRP’s most recent audit report, showing its government funding sources – $11 million from U.S. agencies, including $5.7 million from USAID.
[...]
So two dots, Liz Cheney, as neocon deep state as any, put in time on the impeachment front. And USAid's deep state mucking into reporting - deep state related and influenced reporting - went after Trump. Trump went after USAid.
Two dots. Connect the dots. Absent more sunlight shined on things, it does seem as if Trump 47 has an abiding dislike of neocon deep statists, as a reflection of their trashing his Trump 45 person/Presidency.
Goes around, comes around being the cliche for Blowback against tricky sneaky stuff from the propaganda arm of an operation - getting into a domestic bias status. Stuff going domestic during Trump 45 appended to a compelling liking the neocon affection for Ukraine's valiant effort against Russia and Russia's neighborhood land grab. Biden's people, Jake Sullivan and Blinken fueling that anti-Russia fire on their USAid Presidential times of service.
...................................................
Is Trump right or wrong in chasing to alter neocon deep state shenanigans? Your answer may depend upon your view of proper governing reach.
Dead Henry Kissinger, here, here, here, here and here. All youtube where you can scan-listen, different times with different priorities. Henry fits his pedantic thoughts to the times, and at bottom, had no better feel for how things were to move than you or Crabgrass. Viewed as a pundit, he went with the U.S. push-and-shove flow, be it anti-Marxist, don't push NATO expansion, Ukraine should join NATO, and worry about nuclear war.
Worrying about nuclear war is always a good thing to have in mind, but how that translates over time is not an answer to how aggressive in intrigues the U.S. should be, politically, in balance against the nation being more isolationist politically, while always aggressive in economic integration of the world with the U.S. atop. That being Kissinger's understated consistent notion, and Trump's, and bankers rejoice and prosper.
Crabgrass opinion remains that Bernie's rebuttal of Trump's latest long-winded speech was more sound and wide-ranging than the rebuttle by ex-spook-in-Iraq, Ms. Slotkin, chosen by Mr. Schumer. Isolationism is a possible government road rather than international intrigue, and if you really, really like Dick Cheney, younger Bush, and their neocons - research them - then you don't like isolationism.
If neocon international intrigue is favored, (whoever, domestically or other side of the world, is calling the shots for where the nation sword-in-hand heads) over isolationism, then you need a deep state sized government, and if isolationist, you can trim a bureaucracy down to a favored set. The problem comes when you want to trim it to a Bernie set favoring fairness to all, you trim differently than if you want billionaire taking of all and screw the people wanting fairness.
Rephrased, Trump/Musk/JD -and- Berniespeak don't overlap. JD shines on as if it does, but JD has actions by which he can be judged, as well as words. And like Slotkin and the Pelosi spouses, JD is only a multi-millionaire, presently, not a billionaire but ambitious - to "serve" the nation, to serve man.
 |
| image link |
Long enough, meandering enough, Crabgrass leaves it there for now.