Opinion: China's Increasing Hostility

• Chinese surveillance balloon destroyed after traveling across the U.S.
• The Pentagon waited more than a week before shooting down the craft
• President Biden's decision-making process showed weakness
• America needs to reset its relations with China to address its hostility

The nation's eyes turned skyward as a Chinese surveillance balloon wafted over America last week. China brushed off the episode claiming it was a weather balloon gone astray, a preposterous lie even for a Communist regime.  Make no mistake: This was a deliberate provocation by China's military.  

Americans watched in disbelief as the balloon maneuvered over an underground nuclear missile silo in Montana.  The balloon hovered over the site before continuing its trek through our airspace. After nearly a week, President Biden green lighted the downing of the balloon over the Atlantic Ocean.  

The president was under increasing political pressure because the optics of a Chinese craft in American airspace called for a response. Military brass, according to the White House, advised against shooting down the ballon for days because of the risk of harmful debris in populated areas.

Finally on Saturday, an Air Force F-22 Raptor jet fired one air-to-air A9X sidewinder missile that tore through the balloon at an altitude of 58,000 feet.  The airship tumbled into the the Atlantic Ocean, scattering debris over a seven-mile area.  Military officials hope to recover sensitive spy electronics.

The administration expects popping the balloon to close the book on the Chinese spy drama.  But the entire episode raises a range of disturbing issues about America's slow response, future relations with the Communist nation and the increasing confrontational hostility of China.

China's use of an old-school espionage balloon was a curious decision. Surveillance balloons were first used in World War I.  Today's superpowers use low orbit satellites, packed with sophisticated electronics, to  photograph, eavesdrop, scoop up signals intelligence and map military installations.

So why did China use a low-tech, highly visible balloon?  The guess is that China's strategy was to invade American airspace to test America's response.  If that was the mission, the Biden administration flunked.  The president's decision-making response showed weakness that will be exploited by China.

China will not only factor Biden's actions into future military decisions, but the Communist regime will take advantage of the episode to sow skepticism among U.S. allies about America's role in protecting their interests when it cannot defend its homeland. 

There is also the issue of the Pentagon's decision to keep Americans in the dark about the approaching Chinese craft. Reports confirm the Pentagon knew January 28 that the balloon was headed to the continental U.S. after flying over Alaska, the Aleutian Islands and Canada.  

Once the airship was over Alaska, Biden should have called China's Xi Jinping and served notice the balloon would be shot down. The balloon could have been destroyed over lightly populated Alaska or the Aleutian Islands.  Inexplicably, the president said he was notified until February 1.   

If the roles were reversed, China would have obliterated a U.S. spy balloon as soon as it entered that country's airspace.  

Now there are news reports a Chinese spy balloon crashed into the Pacific off the coast of Hawaii four months ago.  Another spy airship flew over portions of Texas and Florida during the Trump administration. What other Chinese aggression has been kept secret from the American people?

Americans deserve answers.  

Congress must call the military brass accountable for its lack of transparency. The agency never acknowledged the spy balloon until it was captured by amateur photographers and television news cameras as the airship drifted over Montana.  This is not the transparency we were promised.

Why did the Pentagon wait so long?  It  seems plausible that the administration preferred to hide the airspace incursion from Congress and Americans. Perhaps, it was a desperate attempt to salvage Secretary of State Antony Blinken's upcoming diplomatic trip to China to ease tense relations. 

Once the Pentagon ended its charade, Blinken had no choice but to nix the visit to China.  If the trip had gone forward, it would have signaled America was willing to forget the affront and return to business as usual relations with the Communists.

The balloon incident underscores China's growing bellicose actions. Under Xi, China has invaded Taiwan airspace on numerous occasions and conducted military exercises near the island nation.  China has cozied up to Russia since its Ukraine invasion, even conducting joint military exercises. 

A recent memo authored by Four Star Air Force Gen. Mike Minihan warned he believes that the U.S. and China will go to battle in 2025. His warning comes on the heels of CIA Director Williams Burns' revelation that President XI has ordered his military to be ready for action no later than 2027.

America needs to stop treating China as a friendly nation.  Business ties between the two countries have skewed our perspective.  China's stated goal is dominate the world militarily and economically, spreading its Communist doctrine to every nation. Hopefully, the spy balloon is America's wake-up call. 

Spendaholics Put America In Debt Ceiling Crisis

• America's debt is $31.5 trillion and growing by $102 million every hour of every day
• Interest on the nation's debt is projected to skyrocket to $1.2 trillion by 2032
• Washington has spent a record $13 trillion in the last two fiscal years
• Runaway government spending fuels inflation and cripples the economy

The kerfuffle over raising the ceiling on the country's debt is Washington theatre at its best.  Biden Administration officials are indignant over the House of Representatives plan to slow the Bataan-like march of federal government spending in exchange for increasing the debt amount.

The media, led by The New York Times, are sounding alarms about financial Armageddon. Failing to lift the debt ceiling "would prevent Congress from doing the basic tasks of keeping the government open, paying the country's bills and avoiding default on America's trillions of dollars in debt," the Times wrote.

Scare mongering is a tactic that has often been used by both parties in discussions about the debt limit.  This time is no different as Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen raised the specter of military veterans going without benefits; no payments to Social Security recipients; and, pulling the plug on Medicare.

Yellen keeps reminding the public the debt limit increase is needed to pay for money already spent by the government as if that precludes reining in spending. No Republican (or Democrat) will vote to end entitlements, despite the babbling statements from the White House press secretary.   

Congress has never failed to lift the debt ceiling.  This Congress will do the same. Although President Biden insists there will be no negotiations with the House, his former boss President Obama reached a budget deal to avoid a shutdown in 2013 after a protracted battle with the GOP-controlled House.  

While the debt issue elicits hysteria, there was no outrage from the media or the administration when the federal government broke all spending records in fiscal year 2021 by doling out $6.8 trillion. The Democrat controlled Congress followed that gusher with a near-record $6.27 trillion in fiscal year 2022.

In the madcap dash before the new House could be seated, Congress agreed to a $5.8 trillion budget.  The limitless spending helps explain why the current national debt is $31.5 trillion and growing $102 million every hour.  Yellen's solution? Just raise the debt limit to accommodate more reckless spending.

The mountain of debt has risen so fast that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects government spending will result in multi-trillion dollar deficits stretching through 2032, adding $15.7 trillion to the national debt.  

Current debt is 124% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). That puts the U.S. in company with countries such as Bahrain, Zambia and Sir Lanka.  For comparison's sake, U.S. debt averaged 65.2% of GDP from 1940 until 2022.  

The CBO has repeatedly warned since the last decade "the current trajectory of federal borrowing is unsustainable and could lead to slower economic growth in the long run as debt rises as a percentage of GDP. " Their admonition has fallen on deaf ears in Congress.  

In fiscal year 2021, just the interest on national debt reached $562 billion.  Last fiscal year, it soared to $724 billion, an increase of 30% in a single year.  The CBO estimates the interest on national debt will skyrocket to a record $1.2 trillion by 2032, representing 3.3% of GDP, the highest ever recorded.

Too often Americans fail to take notice of the debt.  It doesn't effect them directly, they falsely believe.  As debt grows, it will sap growth of the economy.  That directly impacts jobs and pay.  An economy in decline effects those who can least afford to ride out a recession. 

Overheated federal government spending also fuels inflation, which raises the prices of goods for all Americans. Inflation last year was 8.7%, making it harder for Americans to make ends meet. Deficit budgets will inevitably lead to tax hikes on average earners to pay for the excessive spending.

Every American has a vested interest in this squabble over the debt and spending. 

Irregardless of what politicians think, Americans aren't being fooled by the rhetoric,  A Scott Rasmussen National Survey found that 45% of Americans think the debt ceiling should only be raised on the condition there are spending cuts. Sixteen percent say the debt ceiling should not be raised at all. 

The prudent course is for Congress and the administration to reach a deal to increase the debt level in exchange for spending cuts.  Just bowing to the president's demand for no negotiations is an act of surrender.  Unchecked spending is the biggest threat to the economy, not the debt limit.    

Racial Quotas Are Another Form of Discrimination

Racial preferences in American college admissions are anathema to those who share the views of Dr. Martin Luther King. The civil rights icon preached judging people on the content of their character not the color of their skin. Yet most colleges today use some form of race-based formula to admit students.

Perhaps, the most egregious example is that Ivy League bastion Harvard. Students for Fair Admissions (SFA) sued Harvard in 2020 for using "racial classification" to discrimination against Asian Americans. In that case, the U.S. attorney general for civil rights argued before the First Circuit Court:

"Harvard monitors the evolving composition of the class by race at evert stage in the process. The application summary sheets used by admissions officers use race. First readers use race, second readers use race, subcommittees use race. The overall rating Harvard assigns each applicant uses race."

In the quest to achieve equity, Harvard's rules discriminate against primarily Asians, but whites too. Colleges continue to argue for racial preference based on the discrimination against African-Americans 60 years ago. Institutions cling to the rationale that blacks are unable to compete on a level playing field. 

Harvard's race-based policies are unambiguous. Here's the racial make-up of Harvard 2026 class: 42.5% white; 14.4% black; 27.6% Asian; 11.9% Hispanic and 3.6% Native American or Hawaiian.  The university's de facto policy is to exclude Asian applicants because they are overrepresented.  

Harvard, despite its liberal reputation, has a shameful history of discrimination,  In 1925, students of Jewish faith represented 27.6% of the campus.  Their numbers had increased from 10% in 1909.  The university decided it had a "Jewish problem" and was determined to limit admissions to Jews.

In 1926, the university discarded its academic admissions standard and changed its policy to focus on "character," a subjective tool to exclude "brilliant scholars."  It was a charade based on its desire to lower standards to admit more non-Jewish students of "average intelligence."  

Harvard and other universities believe without subjective admission policies, blacks would fail on their merit. This is demeaning to African-Americans and blatant racial discrimination. This isn't equality. It's the height of hypocrisy that universities embrace Critical Race Theory yet practice discrimination. 

This year the U.S. Supreme Court will take up racial allotments when it hears arguments involving the Harvard case and one associated the University of North Carolina.  The court has the opportunity to overturn a precedent set in 1978 when the justices first ruled on affirmative action in higher education. 

This should be a slam dunk decision for the court based on the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act.  Racial preferences violate Title VI of the Civil Rights act of 1964.  The 14th Amendment prohibits the denial of any person "the equal protection of the laws." 

But the court has shied away from overturning racial preferences because justices fear being branded anti-African American. The high court also is reluctant to overturn precedence set in past decisions upholding affirmative action. 

Public opinion supports an end to racial preference. A Pew Research Center poll in 2020 found 73% of Americans did not believe that race or ethnicity should be a factor in college admissions. Majorities of white, black, Hispanic and Asian respondents agreed. Pew ran the same poll this year.  The numbers had not changed.

Dr. King passionately championed equality for all races, black or white or brown.  He abhorred the idea of favoring one race over another. He believed America should stand for equality for all.  That concept should overcome whatever case precedent has been established by the Supreme Court. 

Cover-Up Of the Classified Documents Fiasco

Make no mistake about it.  Attorney General Merrick Garland's appointment of a special counsel is about politics not justice. His action gives the White House cover to deflect any questions about President Biden's mishandling of classified documents. No information is the new Biden transparency.

The president's press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre rebuffed any reporter's questions about the president's lapse in protecting classified information in his possession, referring the media to the special counsel.  Of course, she knows the special counsel cannot comment on an ongoing investigation.

Because a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime, Biden anticipates the outcome will be a slap on the wrist.  Meanwhile, the special counsel will dither for 18 months to keep the lid on the scandal.  As the president's wingman, Garland did the president a solid by naming a prosecutor.

By now the whole world knows about the four batches of classified documents Biden took from the White House after his term as vice president ended. Those documents were removed by Biden from his office six years ago.  What took his lawyers so long to suddenly discover the government records? 

The answer should be obvious to all but Democrat partisans,  The first tranche of documents were uncovered by lawyers November 4, four days before the mid-terms.  The White House pollsters knew the Republicans were poised to take the House and launch probes of the president.

A White House team had already been assembled months before to prepare for a full court press by the House for Biden's documents. The team sent lawyers scurrying first to the Penn Biden Center located in Washington. Americans are supposed to believe Biden didn't tell his lawyers where to search.

Once Biden's crony Garland learned of the first batch of documents he asked the FBI on November 9 for an assessment. He did not order an FBI raid on Biden's residence. The FBI didn't snap photos of Biden's classified documents to distribute to the media. Double standards are Garland's idea of justice.

According to multiple news sources, the documents found at Penn Biden were top secret intelligence reports on Ukraine and Iran.   

When the story broke, the media immediately wrapped Biden in a protective cocoon.  The Penn Biden Center documents were not the same as the cache at President Trump's private residence.  Then classified documents were found at Biden's private residence.  Bet Karine didn't see that coming.

The media oligarchy did what it always does--dredging up former President Trump to defend Biden.  Poor old Joe just forgot he had these classified documents.  Trump deliberately took documents and locked them in his Florida residence.  Mean, bad Trump.  Joe gets a pass because he's "honest."

What a crock. The media is right about the difference in the two cases.  Biden went six years before the documents came to light. Documents were haphazardly squirreled away in four locations at Penn Biden and his residence. No one knew he had the documents. The FBI knew the location of Trump's cache.

After the raid on Trump's home, Biden told CBS that it was "irresponsible" for the former president to keep classified documents in his private residence.  Biden's words came back to haunt him after documents were uncovered in his private residence in three different places, including his garage.

But the documents also cast a spotlight on Biden's relationship with the University of Pennsylvania, raising more questions about the president's ethics.

With his classified documents in tow, Joe's Penn Biden Center gig proved to be very lucrative.  Biden's tax returns show the University of Pennsylvania paid Biden $911,644 between 2017 and the spring of 2019, when he stepped aside to formally announce his bid for the presidency.  

Biden's China connections from his time as vice president handsomely benefited the university. A review of Department of Education records shows Penn collected more than $67.6 million in donations from China between 2013 and 2019. The majority, $47.7 million, flowed during the years Biden was at Penn.

To shroud the identity of donors, Penn says it collected $20 million from anonymous donors.  Those donors should be disclosed by the university.  Just releasing a press statement acknowledging the money came from China is not transparency.  Did the university collect money from "foreign agents" of China?

Surely, this is a coincidence and has no connection to the former vice president's role in China under the Obama Administration.  Not to mention his son Hunter's extensive business dealings with Chinese firms. After all, Americans should trust Joe because well, he's honest. Nothing to see here.

Those coincidences are piling up because it has been discovered the Chinese money and grants to Penn, courtesy of the Biden connection, had a purpose.  After the FBI became concerned about Chinese money targeting American academia, Garland quietly reversed the bureau's initiative.  

But look, President Biden would never be involved in a quid-pro-quid with China.  If he had known he had classified documents, including some designated top secret, he would have turned them over to the National Archives.  He's just average, honest Joe, his media acolytes assure the public. 

Every day seems to expose another Biden scandal. Soon it's bound to permanently damage the president and end his hopes of running for a second term. Biden defenders will be left to crying, "But Trump was worse." Biden is president not Trump.  He should be judged on his own unethical behavior. 

Nearly Guaranteed Top 12 Predictions For 2023

No one is shedding a tear over the end of 2022.  Sharp inflation. Record food price hikes. Highest ever gasoline prices. Worrisome product shortages. Rising interest rates. Steep stock market losses. A porous border. Runaway federal government spending.  War in the Ukraine.  Good riddance to 2022. 

No even Nostradamus could have predicted the gloom of 2022.

When the calendar flipped to 2023, forecasters with short memories are peddling cheery news about everything from the stock market to inflation.  Optimists claim the new year will make Americans forget 2022.  Not so fast.  My occasionally reliable, highly unpredictable crystal ball is blinking red.

1. The country sinks into a recession, as predicted by a majority of economists and large banks.  The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will be negative for at least two straight quarters this year.  The Biden Administration will avoid using the "r" word, referring to the crisis as a "temporary retraction." 

2. The economy will shed 1.1 million jobs as more major companies in the technology sector and big firms are forced to layoff employees in the face of less consumer spending.  First time unemployment claims increase each month.  Expect the unemployment rate to climb to 4.5% by year's end.

3.  Adding to the economic woes consumer credit card debt and personal loan delinquencies surge in the new year.  Consumers have been on a spending binge the last two years seemingly immune to inflationary prices.  A consumer retrenchment will negatively impact corporate earnings. 

4.  After the worse market since 2008, equities managers are clinging to history that shows markets tend not to experience two negative years in a row.  Equities bounce around early on before gaining momentum. Stocks finish the year strong with the S&P (+20%) outperforming the NASDQ and Dow. 

5. Home sales will reach their lowest point since the 1980's as interest rates make real estate less affordable, especially for first-time buyers. The good news is that the overheated increases in prices will abate except in a few markets where demand for high-end homes flourishes such as Texas and Florida.

6. The Federal Reserve, as promised by Jerome Powell, will continue to raises rates in the new year as inflation persistently refuses to fall lower than 5.8%. Food and energy prices leap higher than the CPI. Eventually, Fed hikes dampen growth, prompting Powell to forego a rate hike in fourth quarter.

7.  COVID infection rates soar past 70% in China after the Communist nation abandons its COVID Zero policy. New highly infectious variants develop as the virus rages, killing 1 million Chinese.  Chinese travelers spread the virus globally, leading to worldwide outbreaks.  

8. The Supreme Courts ends its temporarily halt of Title 42, which allows the expulsion of illegal immigrants under pandemic-era restrictions. The move unleashes a torrent of border crossings, prompting the forced resignation of Alejandro Mayorkas.

9. More fast food restaurants will join the robot revolution as testing by Chipotle, White Castle and others proves diners are satisfied with food prepared by robots.  The fast food industry will move quicker to adopt robots and AI as wage increases and the difficulty hiring workers persist.   

10.  The collapse of FTX Exchange, once a $32 billion enterprise, prods the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to issue regulations for the cryptocurrency industry.  As more crypto exchanges and lenders file for bankruptcy, the new rules clamp down on the industry, softening currency demand.    

11.  The Chinese will not launch an invasion of Taiwan instead increasing menacing militaristic tactics to cower the island.  When the U.S. fails to intervene, China finds an excuse to encircle the island with a naval armada.  China threatens a blockade unless Taiwan makes concessions.  

12. Trying to speculate on Putin's strategy in Ukraine is a fool's pursuit.  But the most likely scenario is the European Union will push for a settlement as energy supplies dwindle, sapping economic growth. Ukraine is pressured into a diplomatic solution when EU/US commit billions to rebuild the country.   

Print this column and wave in your prognosticator's face at the end of 2023.  However, if you have your own predictions you would like to share, I would like to read them.  After all, the prediction business is full of people who get it wrong every year.  And that has never stopped anyone, including me.  

NY Times: Yes, Virginia, There Is NO Santa Clause

 Dear Editor:

I am eight years old.  Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus.  Papa, says, "If you see it in The New York Times, it's so. Please tell the truth, is there a Santa Claus?

Virginia O'Hanlon

115 West 95th Street

Virginia, you did not include your gender or personal pronouns, so we at the prestigious and pompous The New York Times are in a quandary.  How do we address you?  Also, you may be eight but do you identify as a 10-year old?  You see the conundrum you have created with your brief letter.

Let me first say, I am surprised someone eight even has to ask the Santa Claus question.  Are you being home schooled?  Every third grader knows Santa Claus is just a ruse to allow greedy corporate titans to sell toys to overindulgent parents. Public schools teach the truth about the Santa myth.  

George Soros funded fact-checkers at The Washington Post gave five Pinocchios to your parents' claim about Santa Claus.  Supposedly, Santa Claus has been around for like a thousand years.  Really, Virginia, you would have to be as gullible as an FTX Exchange investor to believe that fairy tale. 

So, no, Santa Claus does not exist. Tell your parents they are enemies of the government for spreading misinformation.  I suggest you turn them into the new Disinformation Governance Board created by our Dear Leader Joe Biden.  It's not snitching if your loving, caring parents spread lies.  

Judging from your naiveté, I should warn you that crime in your New York neighborhood is not rising, no matter what your Dad says.  We have a saying around The New York Times, "Don't believe the official crime reports from NY Police.  Police are racists and Ultra Mega white supremacists."

Obviously you lead a sheltered life, so I suggest you question your gender identity.  Perhaps, you believe you are a girl, but you may actually be a boy trapped in a female body.  Or you could be non-binary.  In that case, you may get a government job in the administration of Our Dear Leader.

There are surgeries available to address gender fluidity.  Don't tell Mommy or Daddy but you can get counseling at your local public school.  Teachers will help you explore options for gender mutilation. You can go from Virginia to Vincenzo in one afternoon.  Exciting stuff, huh? 

Question everything your parents tell you. They may not have you best interests at heart.  I mean they have already lied about Santa Claus.  What other untruths have they told?  Surely, they didn't tell you there is a  God?  Rely on the federal government and the FBI for honest, truthful information.  

Above all, don't listen to your friends, especially those whose parents drive gasoline cars. They are squeezing the life out of our planet. Your home will be destroyed by rising seas. The polar bears in the New York Zoo will all die.  You will have to relocate to Mars.  You don't want that, right?

To save the planet we all must sacrifice, Virginia. Here are some things you can do. Use only one sheet of toilet paper in the bathroom. Don't eat beef because cows produce methane gas.  Eat plant-based steaks instead. Throw red paint on artworks at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.  

You didn't mention your parents' race, Virginia. But I assume by your name they are lily-white.  No parent of color would burden their child with an alabaster name.  Your parents family probably owned slaves. That means you are racist and should shame your parents into paying reparations.

In closing, I want to invite you to a holiday Drag Queen Show just for youngsters hosted by The New York Times. This will open your mind to the wonderful world you live in.  Who knows, you have grow up to be a queen one day! The possibilities for someone your age are limited only by the government. 

Editor-in-chief

Author Saltburger Jr.

P.S. I don't recommend a career in journalism, Virginia. Slave laborers make more money than a Times reporter.  I should know, I set the pay scales around here. 

Crypto Billionaire's Democrat Connections

The stench of a scandal involving crypto billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried is creating a stink for powerful Washington politicians. The beleaguered owner of cryptocurrency exchange FTX has been a mega-donor to the Democratic Party for years, pledging $1 billion in funding during the recent midterms. 

Democrats are rushing to return millions of dollars in donations to avoid the offensive whiff of ties with the bankruptcy of Bankman-Fried's crypto currency trading platform.  The 30-year-old crypto kingpin stepped down from FTX after its collapse. He's currently holed up in his penthouse in the Bahamas.

Unsuccessful Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O'Rouke is giving back $1 million, joining Democrats Sen. Kristen Gillibrand (NY), Rep. Durbin (lIlinois) , Rep. Chuy Garcia (AZ), Rep. Lucy McBath (GA), Salud Carbajal (CA) and a host of other red-faced Congressional members scurrying for cover.

Although the mercurial billionaire bankrolled mostly Democrats, he tried to leverage two  Republicans on the Senate Agriculture Committee as part of his lobbying effort to put the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in charge of crypto regulation.  They each received $5,800. 

All those dollar signs are just a trickle of the gusher of cash that was unleashed by the crypto fraudster.  The majority of Bankman-Fried's largess was showered on Democrat campaign committees and so-called dark money organizations.  That money will never be returned. 

The political stampede began after Bahamian-based FTX filed for bankruptcy, sending shivers through the crypto industry and unnerving anxious investors.  A company document showed FTX has less than $1 billion in liquid assets and nearly $9 billion in liabilities.  The company listed 100,000 creditors. 

Questions are also swirling around the handling of customer funds at Alameda Research, a trading firm 90% owned by Bankman-Fried. Money allegedly was funneled from FTX to the trading outfit, disappearing into a black hole that investigators are trying to untangle.  

The epic crash of FTX conjured up similarities with the Bernie Madoff scandal.  Embarrassed U.S. regulators claimed there was no resemblance.  However, like Madoff, Bankman-Fried was hailed as a financial genius and  philanthropic champion with powerful friends in Washington. 

Bankman-Fried shoveled money like crop fertilizer throughout the halls of Washington, gaining access to top federal officials.  The crypto magnate donated $5.2 million to President Biden's 2020 campaign, according to OpenSecrets. That cash opened doors to top administration officials.  

Official records show Bankman-Fried visited the White House in June, where he made his $1 billion pledge, which he later reneged on.  The entrepreneur met with the White House counselor Steve Ricchetti in April and May, according to White House logs.  Ricchetti is a top Biden advisor.  

He powwowed with Charolette Butash, a policy advisor to the White House deputy chief of staff. At the time, FTX was lobbying Congress to shape crypto regulation. Crypto currency watchdog, Consumer Choice Center, warned that Bankman-Fried wanted to use regulation to strangle smaller competitors.  

Eight months before Bankman-Fried's empire crumbled, he joined s video call with top financial regulator Gary Gensler, according to The New York Times.  The former chief executive was seeking approval for exemption from the threat of fines for securities violations by cryptocurrency firms.

Gensler is the current chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which regulates the securities industry and protects investors.  He was appointed to this position by President Biden in 2021.  Now Gensler is under fire for his agency's lack of oversight of the cryptocurrency industry.

Money buys influence in Washington and no one used that lever better than Bankman-Fried.  The disgraced financier doled out $39.8 million in the midterms, all but $989,856 going to Democrats. He was the sixth largest midterm election donor, only dwarfed by George Soros' $128.4 million. 

Bankman-Fried doled out $6 million on the Democrat House Majority PAC. He shelled out $28 million to the Protect Our Future PAC in an effort to ingratiate himself with lawmakers weighing crypto regulations, according to an article in Politico.  

Bankman-Fried, FTX co-CEO Ryan Salane and Director of Engineering Nishad Singh collectively poured $70.1 million in the mid-terms, a staggering sum of money.  The amount is ten times more than FTX contributed in the 2020 presidential election, reports OpenSecrets.  

The list of Bankman-Fried's PAC donations stretch for two pages on the website for OpenSecrets, which uses filings with the Federal Elections Commission to compile its data.  Follow the money if you want to know who carries political clout in Washington.  

The question is how long will Joe Biden's Department of Justice and SEC dither until they charge Bankman-Fried?  When will he be expedited? Bankman-Fried apparently isn't worried.  He is making the media rounds, trying to restore his shattered reputation while apologizing for the FTX implosion. 

Investors want justice.  But Bankman-Fried paid for political protection and influence.  Washington politicians never eat their benefactors. That's why no one should expect a full investigation of Bankman-Fired's efforts to buy influence with Democrats and the administration.