Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
Axios has a much better track record at this point than the New York Times or the Washington Post. They either use fewer fake sources, or they’re better at faking their fake sources.
It seems unlikely that there is any discussion of ending funding of the Ukraine, but due to their record, I do take claims from Axios more seriously. Many of the sources being used here are just public statements, but Axios claims to have discussed the issue behind the scenes and believes that in a Republican majority, the Ukraine couldn’t be funded.
Of course, they could be claiming this to push the Democrat vote, given that many Democrats are more than willing to weather an economic collapse or even a nuclear war to ensure the destruction of Russia.
RT:
The extensive assistance provided by Washington to Ukraine amid its conflict with Russia may be cut if the Republican Party takes control of Congress in the midterm elections on November 8, Axios has reported.
Even the harshest critics of Vladimir Putin among the Republicans now acknowledge that there’s been a “noticeable shift away from what was once a broad bipartisan consensus” on providing aid to Kiev, the outlet reported on Wednesday.
It cited House minority leader Kevin McCarthy, who told Punchbowl News earlier this week: “I think people are gonna be sitting in a recession and they’re not going to write a blank check to Ukraine. They just won’t do it.”Ukraine might be important, but it can’t be the only thing on the agenda of the US administration, he insisted.
The previous position of both McCarthy and Mitch McConnell was that the Ukraine is the only thing that matters. They’ve stated plainly that “everything in the world” is secondary to the Ukraine.
Republican Congressman Don Bacon also said he’d “noticed” a decline in support for Ukraine. “You see it a little bit on social media, you see it with some of our members,” he said.
Bacon’s colleague Kelly Armstrong told Axios that the mood swing was likely a result of the feedback that the lawmakers had been getting from their constituents. “When people are seeing a 13% increase in grocery prices; energy, utility bills doubling… if you’re a border community and you’re being overrun by migrants and fentanyl, Ukraine is the furthest thing from your mind,” he pointed out.
What it means is that Tucker Carlson is the single most powerful person in the Republican Party. The entirety of Fox News is shilling the Ukraine every single day. Both Sean Hannity and Jesse Waters called for Putin to be assassinated. Tucker has stood tall and defended what was good and right, and said that Putin did nothing wrong, and it’s none of our business anyway. He’s called out the powerful forces behind this fake war in the Ukraine.
Tucker is better spoken and more principled than Trump, but Trump would have the more power if he had the platform. Since he does not have the platform, his relevance is limited, as people just don’t even know what he is saying.
The website also cited a senior House Republican, who claimed that “after the $40 billion [in aid package in May], there were a lot of Republicans saying: ‘This is the last time I’m going to support Ukraine funding.’”
In a comment to Axios, Congressman Jim Banks, who chairs the Republican Study Committee (RSC), pointed out that his party is going to focus on domestic issues after the midterms. “RSC believes you can’t lead abroad when you’re so weak at home. Our GOP agenda in the new majority needs to secure our own border and get America back on our feet by addressing energy cost and inflation,” he explained.
Asked to comment on McCarthy’s remarks, White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre insisted that the Biden administration would “continue to work with Congress, as we have these past several months, on these efforts and support Ukraine as long as it takes.” Jean-Pierre reminded that this was a “commitment” that Joe Biden made to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky.
Again – as long as it takes to do what? No one has explained. To take back Crimea? To do regime change in Russia itself? We don’t know, and they’re not saying. It would be appropriate for the White House to publish some kind of white paper on this, but all we have is insane materials from State Department linked Jew think tanks, which basically all call for regime change, often through an outright invasion of Russia.
The Congressman saying that we have to be strong at home before trying to fix the world is obviously correct, but he doesn’t even explain how insane this all is. Republicans and Democrats ostensibly disagree about everything, but they agree that we are spreading “American values” by having a war with Russia.
As I’ve said many times, both parties refuse to explain what these values are. However, the Republicans are ostensibly against gay marriage, mass nonwhite immigration, and transsexualism, which are the precise “values” being spread by the West in the Ukraine.
In practical terms for the people living in the Ukraine, what is being determined by this conflict is whether or not the East of the Ukraine will be subjected to child tranny indoctrination in schools, to an invasion by black Africans and Moslems, and to anal marriage. There are no other actual implications for the population of the country.
If it is about “values” for the Republicans, then it is about values very different from the ones they are claiming to support in the United States. If instead it is about the “grand chessboard,” and preventing Russia from being able to control its borderlands, if it’s about Russian support for Syria and Iran (and therefore about Israel), if it’s about attempting to unseat Vladimir Putin, then the Republicans need to say that, and explain it.
Right now, McConnell and McCarthy are saying that it’s a good idea to risk nuclear war in the name of promoting these child tranny classes in the Donbass, and that should not fly regardless.
