US funding for war in Ukraine in 9 months:

Mar: $ 13.6 billion
May: $ 40b
Nov: $ 37.7b: Biden's new request

That $ 91.3 billion is 33% more than Russia's *total military spending for the year*

It's *double* the US's average annual expenditure for its own war in Afghanistan
If we project out to a year, that would be $120 billion each year to fuel the US proxy war in Ukraine.

That's roughly 1/8 of the entire US military budget for the year: by far the world's largest.

Congrats to Raytheon, General Dynamics and CIA!

pbs.org/newshour/polit…
Don't worry: I'm sure these billions and weapons flying around DC and Ukraine are being meticulously accounted for.

That's why Dems and GOP united to block @RandPaul's amendment for oversight.

No need! Raytheon, CIA and Ukraine are famous for transparent, honest accounting.
(In case anyone objects to calling what's happening in Ukraine a "US proxy war," that's not a real debate. Top US officials and the most influential defense policy operatives in DC call it that repeatedly, as @NoahCarl90 documented here, because it is):

noahcarl.substack.com/p/is-ukraine-a…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Glenn Greenwald

Glenn Greenwald Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ggreenwald

Nov 18
The neurotic fixation by employees of liberal media corporations on "the death of Twitter" is motivated by only one thing:

Musk suggested there may be mildly less censorship on Twitter, and they can't stand the possibility that one influential venue by defy their control.
Liberals have complete hegemony in Hollywood, media, academia, and Big Tech (whose employees donate to Dems by more than 90%).

For employees of liberal outlets, censorship is their power, their only way to control thought. Panic ensues at the mere possibility it may erode. Image
As Freddie deBoer showed in this definitive essay, being a liberal "journalist" at digital outlets is miserable. They do no fulfilling work. Their industry is dying. The public despises them.

They have only one joy: to be the dominant clique on Twitter:

freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/its-all-just…
Read 4 tweets
Nov 18
Hakeem Jeffries is the notorious embodiment of everything sleazy and corporatist in establishment Dem politics, what "the Squad" claims to oppose: a corporate lawyer, he rose in the House by serving corporate lobbyists.

So of course @JamaalBowmanNY supports him for Dem Leader:
What makes Bowman's support for Jeffries extra pathetic is Jeffries was one a key Dem leader who tried to save the job of Eliot Engel - the establishment Dem Bowman defeated - by endorsing him over Bowman. The Squad has no dignity: the more Dems scorn them, the more they submit. Image
But Dems are already exploiting identity politics to hide show shitty they are: touting Jeffries as the 1st-ever Black leader, they make him appear revolutionary instead of the supreme status quo guardian. AOC, in 2018, told me these are "trojan horses":

Read 4 tweets
Nov 15
This claim was mindlessly shared by more mainstream commentators, political leaders (including @JustinTrudeau and @tedlieu), "journalists" and activists than one could count. It went mega-viral.

Just basic skepticism would've revealed it had no credible sourcing from the start:
It is true the US's closest allies -- Saudi Arabia and Egypt -- do often order and implement mass executions of dissidents. And nobody disputes that the Iranian regime commits brutal human rights abuses. But this recklessness is what erodes trust in news:

nbcnews.com/tech/misinform…
And this is the reason that large media corporations employ so many "journalists" to monitor ordinary citizens on FB and 4Chan, and why billionaires fund a scam "disinformation industry": to conceal that *they are the greatest purveyors of disinformation:

Read 4 tweets
Nov 15
These are absolutely reasonable question to ask the FBI Director -- not just reasonable but necessary.

But within liberal political culture, any questioning of authorities is castigated as "deranged conspiracy theories." Only blind and uncritical acceptance is deemed honorable.
Liberals now have all sorts of memes and clichés they've been trained to recite that mock the notion of "just asking questions."

That's what it means to build an authoritarian culture: FBI, DOJ and CIA leaders are to be honored and believed, not questioned or doubted.
One reason (of many) that it's so sinister to hire huge numbers of former US Security State operatives as TV stars and "news analysts" -- as NBC and CNN compulsively do -- is it trains their liberal audience to see Security State operatives as trusted allies, not trained liars.
Read 10 tweets
Nov 14
Credit to the NYT for writing this unflinching look at how puberty blockers have been handed out to kids as young as 8 with almost no data on their safety, yet now studies are finding - surprise! - they cause all kinds of harms, including to bone density:

nytimes.com/2022/11/14/hea…
One of the most dishonest debate-closing tactics has been to imply those who write a lot about trans issues (that does not include me) are creepily obsessed with what adults do to their bodies.

It's just a lie: most of the debate is about what society is doing to *young kids.*
That liberals have been able to basically force people to swallow new, very radical gender realities with no data is a testament to their hegemony in media, politics, Hollywood, etc.

But it's immoral to ban debate over science, especially for kids' health. Read the NYT article.
Read 11 tweets
Nov 14
So revealing how many liberals and "leftists" are telling Musk he's stupid and reckless for speaking irreverently to a Senator (!), especially one with power over his companies.

These people are such fucking authoritarians: you speak to Democratic Senators with respect or else!
This has been the most overlooked part of the debate over Big Tech censorship from the start. This is not, as liberal censorship defenders claim, a case of private companies deciding to censor. They're doing it under explicit punishment threats from Dems:

greenwald.substack.com/p/congress-esc…
And @SenMarkey in particular has been one of the Democrats most explicit in telling Big Tech executives: you either "take down" the posts we regard as dangerous, or you will face legal and regulatory punishment. This is a core Democratic Party threat:

Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(