Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Thursday sued the Biden administration for allegedly encouraging the spread of COVID-19 at the border by allowing large numbers of migrants into the U.S., often into overcrowded facilities. In a statement announcing the legal challenge, Paxton stated:

"President Biden's outright disregard of the public health crisis in Texas by welcoming and encouraging mass gatherings of illegal aliens is hypocritical and dangerous. This reckless policy change stifles the reopening of the Texas economy at a time when businesses need it the most and when our children need to get back to in-person learning as soon as possible."

The Biden administration has been facing a spike in migrant encounters at the border, particularly in Texas. Shocking images have emerged of overcrowded facilities in places like Donna, Texas, where migrants were pictures packed together side-by-side, often without masks. Texas officials have also protested about instances where COVID-positive migrants were released into the U.S.

Critics have accused Biden of inflaming the situation by rolling back Trump-era border protections like the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) and not applying Title 42 public health protections to unaccompanied children -- whose numbers have increased rapidly in recent months. They say that has encouraged migrants to make the treacherous journey north and indicated to migrants that the border is open.

Question 1 — For the last 4 years, Democrat leaders have blamed Russia for allegedly meddling in the 2016 elections. Now the Democrats - who control all three branches of government — have the power to reset US foreign policy and take a more hostile approach to Moscow. But will they?

At present, there are roughly 40,000 US-NATO troops massed along the Russian border conducting military exercises while scores of Russian tanks, artillery and an estimated 85,000 Russian troops are now located about 25 miles from Ukraine's eastern border. Both armies are on hair-trigger alert and prepared for any sudden provocation. If the Ukrainian Army invades the Russian-speaking region of Ukraine (Donbas), Moscow will likely respond.

So, will there be a conflagration in the Ukraine this spring and, if so, how will Putin respond? Will he limit the scope of his campaign to the Donbas or push onward to Kiev?

Israel Shamir - If the Russian army crosses the Ukrainian border, it won't stop in the Donbas. The war will be brief and the Ukraine will be split into pieces. But will it happen?

In another stunning revelation concerning the self-styled "independent" Syrian rescue and aid organization the White Helmets, Canada this week revealed that it has ended all funding for the controversial group yet without detailing why.

A bombshell new report in The Globe and Mail says only that the government of Canada, dubbed "one of the staunchest backers of the White Helmets", ended support "shortly after the death of the group's British co-founder, James Le Mesurier, who committed suicide in November, 2019."

Russia has expelled five staff members at Poland's embassy in Moscow in a tit-for-tat move after Warsaw declared three Russian diplomats in Poland personae non gratae for violating their diplomatic status.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on April 23 it had summoned Poland's ambassador to Russia, Krzysztof Krajewski, to the ministry in Moscow where he was informed of the decision.

It said the move, which gives the Polish diplomats until May 15 to leave Russia, was made because Warsaw was "consciously pursuing a course toward the further degradation and destruction of our bilateral relations."

Russian President Vladimir Putin has revealed that he is ready to welcome his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky "at any convenient time in Moscow." The suggestion comes after Kiev offered to meet in war-torn Donbass.

Speaking before talks with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko on Thursday, Putin said Zelensky should first discuss the problems of Donbass with the heads of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics before speaking with representatives of third countries. He included Russia in this category.

"And if we are talking about the development of bilateral relations, then, please, we will receive the president of Ukraine in Moscow at any time convenient for him. If President Zelensky wants to start restoring relations, Russia will only welcome it."

The Russian leader's statement comes after Zelensky, earlier this week, suggested a summit:

"anywhere in the Ukrainian Donbass where the war is going on. Ukraine and Russia, despite their shared past, look to the future in different ways. We are us. You are you. But this is not necessarily a problem; it is an opportunity. At the very least, an opportunity, before it is too late, to stop the murderous mathematics of future war losses."

The U.S. has given Iran examples of sanctions it could lift as part of efforts to return to compliance with the 2015 Obama-era nuclear agreement that former President Trump withdrew from in 2018, a senior State Department official said Wednesday in a briefing with reporters.

The step by the U.S. is part of indirect discussions between Washington and Tehran taking place in Vienna. In the talks, the two sides are discussing incremental steps each could take to bring them both into compliance with the international agreement, formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Iran has called for the Biden administration to lift all sanctions imposed by the Trump administration when it withdrew from the international agreement.

But the U.S. team, led by President Biden's special envoy for Iran Rob Malley, have said that they are likely only considering sanctions inconsistent with the JCPOA, and are not likely to lift a vast array of other punitive measures the previous administration imposed targeting Iranian sectors that are deemed to be supporting terrorism.

An internal report revealing a disturbing racial prejudice at human rights organisation Amnesty has been leaked six months after it was written. While groups like it and Oxfam hold governments to account, who do they answer to? Truth hides in the darkness, if we go by the latest revelations surrounding Amnesty International.

The human rights organisation, whose stated aim is "campaigning for a world where human rights are enjoyed by all," decided not to release a damning internal report to the press. It somehow found its way to the back of the filing cabinet to gather dust.

But now it's been released to the wider world, aided by a group of whistleblowers. It's beyond hypocrisy that an organisation which continually pumps out diktats calling for change decided to keep its own failings in-house.

As an example, in the past week alone, Amnesty has produced reports about where the death penalty is used, Japan's refusal to pay damages to South Korean women forced into sexual slavery during World War II, an alleged alarming crackdown on human rights defenders in Republic of Congo, and a call for the Russian government to immediately stop the deportation of Tajikistani nationals detained during a peaceful protest.

There may be merit in these claims, depending on the information and veracity of whatever investigations were conducted. But how can such a pious organisation deflect away from its own serious failings?

The House on Wednesday passed legislation restricting arms sales to Saudi Arabia over the gruesome killing of U.S.-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018.

The legislation, called the "Protection of Saudi Dissidents Act of 2021", passed the House with a bipartisan majority, 350 to 71 vote. It is unclear if the Senate will take up the measure.

The bill passed the House with a two-thirds majority, required under a fast-track process for bills that receive widespread support. It was authored by Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), who represents the district where Khashoggi lived while in the U.S.

The bill halts the sale and export of certain defensive materials to Saudi Arabia unless the president can certify that the Kingdom is not engaged in repression and torture of dissidents and arbitrary detention of U.S. or international citizens.

Putin's address to the Russian Federal Assembly - a de facto State of the Nation - was a judo move that left Atlanticist sphere hawks particularly stunned.

The "West" was not even mentioned by name. Only indirectly, or via a delightful metaphor, Kipling's Jungle Book. Foreign policy was addressed only at the end, almost as an afterthought.

For the best part of an hour and a half, Putin concentrated on domestic issues, detailing a series of policies that amount to the Russian state helping those in need - low income families, children, single mothers, young professionals, the underprivileged - with, for instance, free health checks all the way to the possibility of an universal income in the near future.

Of course he would also need to address the current, highly volatile state of international relations. The concise manner he chose to do it, counter-acting the prevailing Russophobia in the Atlanticist sphere, was quite striking.

First, the essentials. Russia's policy "is to ensure peace and security for the well-being of our citizens and for the stable development of our country."

Yet if "someone does not want to...engage in dialogue, but chooses an egoistic and arrogant tone, Russia will always find a way to stand up for its position."

He singled out "the practice of politically motivated, illegal economic sanctions" to connect it to "something much more dangerous", and actually rendered invisible in the Western narrative: "the recent attempt to organize a coup d'etat in Belarus and the assassination of that country's president." Putin made sure to stress, "all boundaries have been crossed".

The plot to kill Lukashenko was unveiled by Russian and Belarusian intel - which detained several actors backed, who else, US intel. The US State Department predictably denied any involvement.

Putin: "It is worth pointing to the confessions of the detained participants in the conspiracy that a blockade of Minsk was being prepared, including its city infrastructure and communications, the complete shutdown of the entire power grid of the Belarusian capital. This, incidentally means preparations for a massive cyber-attack."

And that leads to a very uncomfortable truth: "Apparently, it's not for no reason that our Western colleagues have stubbornly rejected numerous proposals by the Russian side to establish an international dialogue in the field of information and cyber-security."

Perhaps the most pressing matter today for advocates of freedom is the prospect of the Left completing the institution of a totalitarian state. There is no other way to read the multiprong approach and the political maneuverings that political operatives are taking to rule under "Biden." I put "Biden" in quotation marks here because the current president of the United States is not a singular person named Joe Biden. It is a central executive committee consisting of party rulers and advisers, plus corporate-state apparatuses. Make no mistake, the power grab that the Left is undertaking poses the most grievous threat to liberty in recent history, regardless of its effects on the Republican Party.

The signals could not be any clearer. In addition to the swath of executive orders, clearly composed by executive committee members and aimed at either ingratiating and expanding the Democratic Party's base or extending federal power, the Democrats have initiated a growing body of laws which would, if passed, ensure uniparty rule for the foreseeable future.

These include especially H.R. 1, or the For the People's Act, passed by the House. Should it pass the Senate (with the eradication of the filibuster), H.R.-1 would grossly favor Democratic candidates in federal elections. Notwithstanding the expansion of the Democratic base through various means, including overriding existing voter ID laws in many states and mandating that all states allow mail-in ballots without IDs, it would further centralize federal election oversight and, according to the Institute for Free Speech, "[e]xpand the universe of regulated online political speech (by Americans) beyond paid advertising to include, apparently, communications on groups' or individuals' own websites and e-mail messages."

The legislative maneuverings include the ''Judiciary Act of 2021,'' which would simply expand the Supreme Court to twelve members plus the chief justice. This move, which would amount to adding four Democrat-approved justices, would essentially effect a legislative takeover of the Supreme Court, as the Democratic-controlled Supreme Court would increasingly "legislate from the bench" and likewise expand the power of the Democratic-controlled legislative and executive branches beyond official perimeters. The odds of its passage, as is, are slim, but the overture is indicative of an attempted power grab not seen since FDR.

But the most conspicuous sign of the nearing consolidation of totalitarian government is the effective merger of corporate and state functionaries, with corporations and other organizations acting as appendages of the government and enforcing corporate-state desiderata. The indications of this merger are so many and sundry that any exhaustive recounting of them would entail a book-length treatment.