'Risk for the prosecution'

'He also spied on Chinese opposition figures in Germany for the intelligence service'

One helicopter descended onto a sports field‚ while another crashed into a nearby swimming pool

News The Watchers The Watchers Have Their Eyes on Dakota Fanning in Ishana Night Shyamalan’s Debut Film Who watches the… oh‚ you know the rest. By Molly Templeton | Published on April 23‚ 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share Very few things involving two-way mirrors are good‚ and the big mirror in The Watchers‚ the directorial debut of Ishana Night Shyamalan‚ is no exception. When Mina (Dakota Fanning) finds herself stranded (with her bird&;#33;) in an Irish forest‚ there are noises‚ vibrations‚ weird happenings—and a door. She has five seconds to get inside before something bad clearly happens. The Watchers is produced by M. Night Shyamalan; Ishana is his daughter. The movie is based on the book by Irish writer A.M. Shine. The new trailer is creepy and baffling: How is all this weirdness contained to one forest&;#63; What is real&;#63; What the heck is going on&;#63; Why does the bird kind of sound robotic&;#63; (I still don’t want anything to happen to the bird.) Does this mirror-walled room have an attached bathroom or are we in a typical science fiction prison situation here where no one ever has to pee&;#63; In a recent interview‚ Shyamalan said that her film “is a journey of suspense that hopefully leads into a feeling of wonder at the end. My hope is it’s an experience that plays on that sense of unease—then takes you to a bigger‚ wonderful place.” The Watchers also stars Olwen Fouere‚ who is really having a moment; she’s also been in The Northman‚ Halo‚ and the also-creepy-looking All You Need Is Death. Watch The Watchersi in theaters June 14th.[end-mark] The post &;lt;i&;gt;The Watchers&;lt;/i&;gt; Have Their Eyes on Dakota Fanning in Ishana Night Shyamalan’s Debut Film appeared first on Reactor.

Book Recommendations Dissecting the Dark Descent Portrait of a Monstrous Human: “Bright Segment” by Theodore Sturgeon Rich in psychological complexity‚ this tale reveals hidden depths as its central tragedy plays out… By Sam Reader | Published on April 23‚ 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share Welcome back to Dissecting The Dark Descent‚ where we lovingly delve into the guts of David Hartwell’s seminal 1987 anthology story by story‚ and in the process‚ explore the underpinnings of a genre we all love. For an in-depth introduction‚ here’s the intro post. Theodore Sturgeon is probably best known for his science fiction work. Over his prolific career‚ he wrote countless novels and stories (some which dealt with homosexuality and queer themes‚ a rarity for the 1950s) touching on humanity‚ relationships‚ psychology‚ and gender politics. His motto was always “Ask the next question‚” a phrase meant to encourage people to keep thinking past established knowledge and tradition. His horror and crime work were similarly groundbreaking‚ taking his gift for psychologically complex situations and explorations of humanity and applying it to terrifying effect. All of this is on display in “Bright Segment.” While the premise of a grotesque introvert nursing a young ingenue back to health is one that’s been played for tragedy‚ horror‚ and (perversely enough) romantic comedy‚ Sturgeon’s gift for the psychological allows him to twist that simplistic premise into a tragic and horrifying noir. By setting the human and monstrous sides of his troubled protagonist into conflict‚ Sturgeon offers a more complex and tragic take on a familiar narrative. A fifty-six-year-old department store janitor finds a young woman with razorblade wounds bleeding out near his apartment. Suddenly gripped by a strange impulse‚ he scoops her up and brings her into his home‚ knowing nothing about her. As she bleeds out on his floor‚ he desperately begins the long and gruesome process of treating her wounds‚ hoping to “fix it right” and save her before he has a dead body on his hands and the police start asking questions. As she recuperates‚ unconscious‚ he finds himself becoming more and more fond of her presence. While he spends his time “fixing” his new guest and tending to her wounds and infections‚ an uncomfortable question arises between them: What happens when she’s healed‚ and their time inevitably comes to an end&;#63; What makes “Bright Segment” a tragedy is something right there in the title. The protagonist‚ a man with the appearance and social graces of a fairytale ogre‚ finds the only bright moments in his life when he tends to the wounded young woman. He’s resourceful and intelligent‚ figuring out how to treat slashes from razor blades (he fixes a femoral artery wound‚ something that usually means death from blood loss in a matter of minutes) and perform major surgery with a sewing kit and some silversmithing tools. Despite being in a high-stress situation‚ he’s able to think through his actions clearly and run through a list of possible options while under pressure. Within the confines of his apartment‚ in his interior landscape‚ he’s capable of functioning at a high level‚ even better than most people. When other people enter the equation‚ though‚ things get more complicated. The protagonist speaks in broken sentence fragments and with a limited vocabulary‚ possibly due to some verbal or psychological handicap. His social interactions are stunted—he mentions early on that in fifty-six years he’s barely talked to anyone apart from when shopping or going to work‚ and it’s painfully awkward to watch him call in sick. He’s even aware of how he’s seen by others‚ with his internal monologue hinting at trauma and harassment that forced him into his current grotesque and socially stunted state. It’s become clich&;eacute; to say‚ “he’s not evil‚ just misunderstood‚” but that’s what makes the main character a tragic monster: He’s incapable of being understood by anyone‚ and incapable of understanding anyone else. Whether through his own actions or the psychological battery of the world around him‚ he’s completely incapable of functioning in society. This is even seen when he takes care of the young woman‚ whom he treats more like a treasured pet than a human being‚ buying her nice things and keeping her cooped up inside. When she tries to do something for him—going outside his understanding of their relationship by taking initiative and making him a full breakfast—he reacts violently‚ screaming “You don’t fix&;#33; I fix everything&;#33;” That violence is where the tragedy and horror fully come into play. “Bright Segment” is an apt title—the time between the ogre and the young woman in his home is a finite moment‚ a segment in time that must end. As much as he wants to believe otherwise‚ she’s a real‚ human person with her own wants‚ desires‚ and agency. When she finally reveals she can talk and lays out exactly how she came to be bleeding out on the street‚ the moment ends. It must. She can’t live in the protagonist’s apartment forever. Meanwhile‚ he can’t see beyond the moment‚ reacting with shock‚ horror‚ and sadness when he realizes that he’ll go back to being trapped in his head alone. It’s not a betrayal and the readers know treating a human woman like a pet isn’t sustainable without something bad happening‚ but to him‚ the only person capable of understanding him‚ the only other person in his whole world‚ suddenly wants to leave. In that moment of despair‚ he (maybe accidentally) hits her in the back of the head with an iron and gets back to work “fixing” her so he can start the process all over again‚ keeping her imprisoned in his room. With that transformative act (one telegraphed by the impulse to pick up the young woman in the first place)‚ the main character becomes the monstrous figure his outward appearance suggests‚ and the tragedy coalesces. When faced with losing his toxic‚ one-sided relationship‚ he acts out of desperation and does the only thing he can think of to sustain it. The illusion is immediately shattered. That he lashes out and forces the cycle to continue in a moment of subconscious violence is the horror. Understanding that he committed an act of violence (and possibly killed someone‚ it’s left ambiguous at the end of the story) to maintain an illusion of social acceptability—one that even he has started to realize was unsustainable—is the tragedy. His attempts to “fix it right” again and keeping the woman as a pet are monstrous‚ but the disconnect from any kind of normal socialization‚ pain‚ trauma‚ and our glimpse at an interior world add pathos and make him more than a simple monster. He’s still a monster‚ but a more complex and tragic monster for his downward spiral. The synthesis of the tragic and monstrous is important in how “Bright Segment” elevates its central character. He might be a misunderstood societal outcast‚ but he still acts in villainous‚ impulsive‚ childish‚ and damaging ways. He might be a monster‚ but his internal monologue‚ rich interior life‚ and desperate need to be understood by someone else add a definitive note of tragedy. For all “human monsters” are easy to characterize as base grotesques driven by irrational impulse‚ actually watching the janitor struggle with his humanity and nature only for his more monstrous side to violently reassert itself has more of a ring of truth. He’s a tragic figure driven by impulse and emotion who desperately scrabbles for humanity only to lose everything (ironically enough) when‚ in a moment of crisis‚ he decides to hold on to that humanity (and his now unwilling captive) too tightly. “Bright Segment” might be about a human monster‚ but it understands the complexity of both “human” and “monster‚” and that both are important. And now to turn it over to you. Was the janitor in “Bright Segment” a monster‚ a tragic figure‚ or both&;#63; Have you read much of Sturgeon’s horror and crime work&;#63; Does the ambiguity at the end of “Bright Segment” add to the complexity‚ or take it away by possibly making it possible to interpret the main character’s final act an accident&;#63; Please join us in two weeks as we watch a mad doctor destroy minds piece-by-piece in master of horror-fantasy Clive Barker’s extreme horror story‚ “Dread.”[end-mark] The post Portrait of a Monstrous Human: “Bright Segment” by Theodore Sturgeon appeared first on Reactor.

News Blink Twice Blink Twice: If Channing Tatum Invites You to a Private Island‚ Don’t Go Beware billionaires offering… honestly‚ just beware billionaires. By Molly Templeton | Published on April 23‚ 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share If someone had asked‚ “What do you think Zoe Kravitz’s debut film as a director will be&;#63;” would you have guessed “a film in which Channing Tatum invites people to a private island and then fucks with their memories&;#63;” I can’t say I would have come up with that—but I’m glad Kravitz did. Blink Twice (which was originally titled Pussy Island) has a certain Glass-Onion-gone-haywire vibe: Tatum plays a billionaire tech bro with a bunch of questionable friends who invites two women he apparently just met (Naomi Ackie and Alia Shawkat) to a debauched gathering on his private island. At least‚ that’s what seems to happen. At first. But there’s a moment where this trailer takes a wild turn‚ and Ackie’s character finds herself the only person who remembers Shawkat’s Jess. Jess‚ naturally‚ is the one who wonders‚ “So do you think the human sacrifice is before or after dinner&;#63;” As Christian Slater’s character says‚ “There’s something weird going on here.” The hints are all there; one guy is desperate to find his knife‚ while another has a mysterious black eye he seems unconcerned about. Things simply don’t track‚ and in a most intriguing way. Kravitz co-wrote the film with E.T. Feigenbaum‚ who also wrote an episode of the Kravitz-starring High Fidelity series. Blink Twice also stars Kyle MacLachlan‚ Haley Joel Osment‚ Adria Arjona‚ Geena Davis‚ Simon Rex‚ and Liz Caribel. It’s in theaters August 23rd.[end-mark] The post &;lt;i&;gt;Blink Twice&;lt;/i&;gt;: If Channing Tatum Invites You to a Private Island‚ Don’t Go appeared first on Reactor.

News Robot Dreams Meet Dog and Robot and Love Them Both in Robot Dreams Trailer A dog and a robot maybe hold hands and we are emotionally unprepared. By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on April 23‚ 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share The Oscar-nominated animated feature Robot Dreams is finally heading to U.S. theaters so you and I can watch and cry our eyes out. The Pablo Berger-written and directed film premiered last year at Cannes‚ and since then has garnered rave reviews and also the Annie Award for Best Independent Feature. This latest trailer focuses on the lighter side of Dog and Robot’s relationship‚ when the two grow feelings for each other (and maybe… start holding hands&;#63;&;#33;) while exploring their version of New York City. Things‚ however‚ take a sad turn. The expanded synopsis of the movie below teases how: A tender‚ affecting tale of friendship‚ the animated Robot Dreams—adapted from the graphic novel of the same name by Sara Varon—is set in a 1980s NYC populated solely by pigs‚ birds‚ cats‚ and other animal clans. Yet Dog leads a lonely existence‚ eating TV dinners in his East Village walkup. When he sees an infomercial for a robot-building kit‚ he seizes the chance for the perfect city buddy: Dog and Robot eat hot dogs together on 5th Avenue‚ roller skate in Central Park‚ venture to Coney Island—to the groove of their song‚ Earth‚ Wind &; Fire’s “September.” But when Robot gets stranded at the beach‚ Dog is helpless to rescue him; and‚ as the seasons change‚ they both endure a separation that will change them forever. Will the ending be sad&;#63; Bittersweet&;#63; Happy&;#63; I’m still in the dark about that‚ but if Guillermo del Toro describes the film as “beautiful‚ unexpected‚ and tender‚” it will be a worthy watch. The U.S. theatrical premiere of Robot Dreams will happen on May 31‚ 2024‚ at Film Forum. Check out the latest trailer below. [end-mark] The post Meet Dog and Robot and Love Them Both in &;lt;i&;gt;Robot Dreams&;lt;/i&;gt; Trailer appeared first on Reactor.

Movies &; TV Babylon 5 Babylon 5 Rewatch: “Infection” Sinclair ducks a reporter and Garibaldi investigates a mysterious death… By Keith R.A. DeCandido | Published on April 23‚ 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share “Infection”Written by J. Michael StraczynskiDirected by Richard ComptonSeason 1‚ Episode 4Production episode 101Original air date: February 16‚ 1994 It was the dawn of the third age… A reporter from Interstellar Network News (which‚ for some reason‚ is abbreviated ISN)‚ Mary Ann Cramer‚ has arrived on B5 in order to interview Sinclair‚ an interview he is ducking. It’s the second anniversary of B5 going live‚ and ISN wants to interview the guy in charge. Garibaldi is stuck running interference with her. Franklin is surprised to get a visit from his mentor‚ Dr. Vance Hendricks‚ who promises him a grand adventure like nothing he’s ever seen before‚ so that can’t be good. Meantime in the docking bay‚ a customs officer questions Hendricks’ partner‚ Nelson Drake‚ suspecting him of smuggling something. Drake eventually kills the customs officer due to the fact that he is smuggling something. Garibaldi investigates the death of the customs officer‚ the cause of which seems to be a simple heart attack‚ though Garibaldi still thinks it suspicious. Hendricks explains that he and Drake retrieved some artifacts from Ikarra VII. They were sponsored by Interplanetary Expeditions. What they found are thousands of years old‚ but in perfect shape—and are also organic‚ which is why Hendricks brought them to Franklin to examine. This may give them the breakthrough to create organic technology like what the Vorlons and Minbari have. Hendricks also lies and says that the items went through quarantine at their previous stop on the way to B5. While unpacking some items‚ one glows and hits Drake with a massive electric discharge‚ throwing him across the cabin into the bulkhead. Drake does not report this to anyone‚ nor do Franklin or Hendricks notice his bizarre subsequent behavior. Sinclair continues to duck Cramer. Garibaldi’s attempt to get her to talk to him results in her asking him probing questions about all the prior jobs he’s been fired from‚ at which point he‚ too‚ ducks her. Franklin goes to MedLab to find it darkened and a transformed Drake inside. The latter says‚ “Protect&;#33;” and fires a nasty ray-beam at Franklin. Hendricks says that it appears that one of the devices they found bonds to a person‚ enhancing them. He promises to do more research. He also says that Drake handled all the paperwork for getting them through customs. Drake kills two people in downbelow. The zappy thing gets more powerful with each shot‚ to the point that CinC can pick up the blasts on scanners. But his first confrontation with security ends with Drake blasting through a bulkhead and escaping. It’s quickly determined that the zappy thing needs time to recharge‚ but that time decreases with each shot‚ plus it gets more powerful each time. Hendricks and Franklin’s research reveals that the tech they found was constructed in order to create soldiers who would defend only “pure Ikarrans‚” basing its programming on ideology rather than science. The problem was that there was no such thing as a “pure Ikarran‚” and eventually the soldiers wiped out everyone‚ even the ones on their side. Sinclair lures Drake away from populated areas‚ and also taunts him‚ saying he failed‚ and finally gets him to access the host’s memories‚ as Drake has been to Ikarra VII as it is today: a dead world. The tech figures out that it failed and discorporates in a puff of illogic. Franklin found a device for cardiac stimulation in Drake’s things that matches two markings on the customs officer’s neck. If used on a healthy person‚ it would induce a heart attack. Drake is guilty of murder. Hendricks offers Franklin half the money he’ll get from IPX—which‚ he says‚ is a front for a bio-weapons developer—if he doesn’t turn him in. But Franklin called security before he confronted Hendricks. Later‚ two people from EarthDome show up to confiscate the bio-tech. Finally‚ Sinclair sits down with Cramer and speaks his mind—including why he thinks‚ despite the expense and the skepticism of many back on Earth—it’s vital that humanity continue to go out into space. Nothing’s the same anymore. Garibaldi calls Sinclair on his constant need to barge in and do all the rough missions his own self‚ making it clear that it’s not just because he’s the top-billed character but also because he still hasn’t figured out how to stop fighting in a war. Ivanova is God. When Cramer tries to barge her way into CinC during a crisis‚ Ivanova gets rid of her by standing in front of her and very calmly saying‚ “Don’t—you’re too young to experience that much pain.” Cramer immediately departs. The household god of frustration. Sinclair tells Garibaldi that he’s avoiding Cramer because the last time he gave an interview to a journalist and spoke his mind‚ he was transferred to a distant outpost. Garibaldi tells him that he shouldn’t fret—just speak his mind again‚ and worst case‚ he’s transferred out and Garibaldi gets his job. What’s the problem&;#63;&;#63;&;#63;&;#63;&;#63; Welcome aboard. Marshall Teague plays his first of three roles in the franchise‚ as Drake; he’ll return in the recurring role of Ta’Lon throughout seasons two to five‚ and again in Crusade’s “The Long Road” as Captain Daniels. Patricia Healy makes her first of two appearances as Cramer; she’ll be back in “By Any Means Necessary.” But the big guest is our first Robert Knepper moment of the B5 Rewatch‚ as I had totally forgotten that the late great David McCallum played Hendricks. McCallum is‚ of course‚ best known for his iconic role of Ilya Kuryakin in The Man from U.N.C.L.E. and his long-running final role as Dr. “Ducky” Mallard for the first two decades of NCIS. Trivial matters. This episode has the first mention of the possibly very dodgy Interplanetary Expeditions‚ which will be seen a bunch more again. This was the first episode written and produced once the show went to series‚ though it was never intended to be the first aired. Only four of the ten people listed in the opening credits appear in this episode. Bill Mumy and Caitlin Brown have yet to make their first appearances‚ despite being credited. The echoes of all of our conversations. “There’s one thing that every scientist on the planet agrees on: whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years‚ eventually our sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens‚ it won’t just take us—it’ll take Marilyn Monroe and Laozi and Einstein and Morobuto and Buddy Holly and Aristophanes‚ and all of this… all of this was for nothing unless we go to the stars.” —Sinclair’s answer to Cramer’s interview question‚ and also the only worthwhile part of the episode. The name of the place is Babylon 5. “What’s the worst that could happen&;#63;” It’s never a good sign when an episode of B5 doesn’t have any of the three most interesting characters in it. Delenn‚ G’Kar‚ and Mollari are the heart and soul of this show‚ and that none of them appear in this episode is but one of a billion problems with it‚ the biggest of them being that it’s awful. Seriously‚ this script would make for one of the weaker episodes of Space: 1999 or Buck Rogers in the 25th Century or the original Battlestar Galactica or Gene Roddenberry’s Andromeda‚ much less the show that promised to be the vanguard of a new age of great SF TV. B5 got some great guest stars over its run‚ and I thought I remembered all the good ones‚ but I’d totally forgotten that David McCallum was ever on this show. It’s a testament to how truly dreadful this episode is that it made me forget that McCallum was in it. “Infection” is a tiresome collection of weak clich&;eacute;s‚ boring action‚ and tired tropes‚ from the mentor-gone-evil to the manly hero avoiding the plucky female journalist who just wants to ask him some questions to the laughable look of Drake after being transformed. It does have one redeeming feature‚ but the problem is‚ you have suffer through the entire crappy episode to get to it. Sinclair’s answer to Cramer’s question about whether humanity should continue to go into space or stay home where it’s safe and only has humans in it is brilliant (and quoted in “The echoes of all our conversations” above)‚ erudite‚ and‚ most of all‚ quite true. (I wish half the people he cited weren’t from twentieth-century Western civilization‚ but I also love that his list included the creators of both the Tao Te Ching and “Peggy Sue.”) Some might say that Garibaldi’s come-to-Jesus speech to Sinclair is a redeeming feature‚ too‚ but I’m not one of them. It’s a legitimate complaint from Garibaldi‚ and it certainly provides justification for Sinclair being at the forefront of the action all the time. But it feels too much like Straczynski came up with a Marvel No-Prize to explain why the guy at the top of the opening credits does all the cool actiony stuff‚ rather than an actual bit of characterization. Next week: “The Parliament of Dreams.”[end-mark] The post &;lt;i&;gt;Babylon 5&;lt;/i&;gt; Rewatch: “Infection” appeared first on Reactor.

The only two states that apportion Electoral College votes in presidential races by congressional district are poised to scrap what makes them unique.  In these systems‚ presidential candidates get one electoral vote for each congressional district they win in the state. Unlike in other states‚ the Democratic‚ Republican‚ and other party candidates could end up splitting a state’s electoral votes among them. The usually blue Maine and generally red Nebraska each had one battleground congressional district that would sometimes draw presidential candidates. But the Maine Legislature moved to give its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote—regardless of who carries the state.  Nebraska lawmakers are considering becoming like 48 other states with winner-take-all elections‚ meaning the candidate who captures the majority of the state’s popular vote takes all of the state’s electoral votes. Nebraska’s change—if adopted—would affect the 2024 presidential election‚ while the Maine change likely wouldn’t. Last week‚ Maine Democratic Gov. Janet Mills announced she would let a bill making Maine the 18th state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact become law without her signature after it narrowly passed the state Legislature.  Maine Joins National Popular Vote Compact https://t.co/e6tvfYRH6H via @democracynow— NationalPopularVote (@NatlPopularVote) April 21‚ 2024 Under the multistate compact‚ Maine agrees to give its four electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the national popular vote. The states that make up the compact thus far represent a combined 209 electoral votes. Those votes will only activate when the compact reaches the required 270 electoral votes needed to elect a president.  Meanwhile‚ Nebraska’s Republican Gov. Jim Pillen is considering calling a special session of the state Legislature‚ which already adjourned on April 18‚ to adopt a winner-take-all system for the state’s five electoral votes.  Pillen said he would only call a special session “when there is sufficient support in the Legislature to pass it.” Prominent conservative commentators such as Charlie Kirk and Mark Levin have supported the change in Nebraska. JUST IN—The Great One‚ Mark Levin‚ gets behind turning Nebraska into a winner-take-all electoral college state. The coalition is growing. Listen to @marklevinshow break down why this is critical ahead of November&;#63; pic.twitter.com/97PbsKAp3P— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) April 9‚ 2024 Maine enacted its rule to divide its electoral votes by congressional district ahead of the 1972 election. It took another 20 years for Nebraska to follow suit‚ which it did ahead of the 1992 election.  However‚ split votes have been rare. The first time Nebraska had a split came when Democrat Barack Obama won the swing Nebraska district in the Omaha area in the 2008 election‚ the first time since 1964 that a Democrat won an electoral vote in the state.  In 2016‚ Republican Donald Trump won Maine’s 2nd Congressional District‚ which includes most of the state outside of Portland or Augusta‚ netting one electoral vote from the state. He was the first Republican since 1988 to win a Maine electoral vote.  In 2020‚ Democrat Joe Biden captured Nebraska’s 3rd Congressional District and its electoral vote. The post These 2 States Are Poised to Scrap Fractured Electoral College System—in Different Ways appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Sen. Lindsey Graham‚ R-S.C.‚ a leading neoconservative‚ is making the rounds on media touting his support for the $61 billion Ukraine aid bill. His rationale: It’s a loan. Crediting former President Donald Trump for the idea‚ Graham told “Fox News Sunday” host Shannon Bream that he supports the foreign aid package currently before Congress because it’s structured differently from a previous deal he opposed in February. “This aid package has a loan component to it‚” Graham said Sunday. “President Trump has created a loan component to this package that gives us leverage down the road.” But does it&;#63; Propaganda Alert: Lindsey Graham gives Trump credit for House passage of Ukraine aid‚ &;quot;Ukrainians are fighting like tigers. This aid package has a loan component to it and this would not have passed without Donald Trump.&;quot;*Trump has promised to end all aid to Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/hcEetO7iQP— Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) April 21‚ 2024 What Graham fails to mention is the fine print. Of the $61 billion in the foreign aid package‚ only $9.5 billion comes in the form of a “forgivable loan” for the Ukrainian government‚ according to Heritage Action. (Heritage Action is the grassroots arm of The Heritage Foundation‚ which founded The Daily Signal in 2014). There’s another catch for the so-called loan: President Joe Biden has the power to cancel 50% of the total after this coming Nov. 15. And the remaining 50% may be canceled by the president after Jan. 1‚ 2026. The ‘loan’ for Ukraine is all smoke and mirrors. It allows the president to cancel up to 50% of funds owed after November 15‚ 2024‚ and all remaining funds owed after January 1‚ 2026. No bank would allow this. #AmericaLast pic.twitter.com/W8lKzGauJU— Rep. Scott Perry (@RepScottPerry) April 17‚ 2024 “This bill isn’t intended to come due‚” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts wrote for The Hill last week. “The ‘loan’ would be structured at 0% interest‚ would be waivable by President Biden‚ and would be financed with more U.S. debt. No one in Washington seriously plans to ask for the money back. And if they did‚ Ukraine could simply default on the loan.” Graham was one of 29 senators—26 of them Republicans—to oppose an earlier version of Biden’s supplemental spending request in February. At the time‚ Graham said: “Pulling the plug on Ukraine only invites further aggression in other areas of the world‚ particularly from China. However‚ as I have been consistently saying‚ we must deal with our border first. … The border must be addressed before we can move to other areas.” When senators vote on the $95 billion foreign aid package‚ they won’t consider any legislation related to the border crisis. That’s because House Speaker Mike Johnson‚ R-La.‚ opted not to include a separate border bill as part of the foreign aid legislation. Still‚ Graham has signaled he’ll support the package—even if the loan concept he endorsed in February is different from the one in the current legislation. “A loan on friendly terms allows America‚ who is deeply in debt‚ a chance to get our money back and changes the paradigm of how we help others‚” Graham said in February. In this case‚ no one expects the United States to be repaid. “The American people will never see this money again‚” Rep. Troy Nehls‚ R-Texas‚ said. Graham’s office did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. $60.84B to Ukraine&;#63; I’m not a no‚ but a HELL NO. The president can forgive 50% of this “loan” after November 15‚ 2024. The American people will never see this money again. pic.twitter.com/VLeilc5Il0— Congressman Troy E. Nehls (@RepTroyNehls) April 17‚ 2024 The post What Lindsey Graham Isn’t Telling You About US ‘Loan’ to Ukraine appeared first on The Daily Signal.