How Biden’s Policies Threaten American Freedom, Privacy, and Way of Life

The Biden Record: Rising Crime, Broken Promises, and the Impact on Black Communities and the American People

Read the facts below:

1) The 2021–2022 inflation surge and its causes

• What happened: Inflation rose sharply in 2021–2022, producing the highest consumer price increases in decades and squeezing households. The pandemic-era supply-chain disruptions and commodity shocks (energy, shipping), strong demand for goods, and large fiscal stimulus (including the American Rescue Plan).

2) Border management and migrant encounters. 

Policy changes (including the end of Title 42 expulsions in 2023) altered how migrants are processed and contributed to operational strains. Critics argue the administration’s policies did not adequately deter illegal crossings; defenders point to legal and operational constraints. U.S. Customs and Border Protection+1. 

Blue States’ Immigration Policies and Impact on Residents

Several blue (Democrat-led) states have welcomed large numbers of immigrants, including undocumented migrants, into their communities. While this reflects a more open immigration stance, it has created significant challenges for local residents:

• Housing and Resources Strain:
  Many blue states provided temporary housing and support services for immigrants. This placed enormous strain on local infrastructure such as shelters, schools, hospitals, and social services.

• Use of Taxpayer Money:
  Tax revenues in these states were allocated to fund immigration support programs, sometimes diverting funds away from existing residents’ needs.

• Residents Felt Neglected:
  Longtime residents in some areas experienced overcrowded schools, longer wait times for medical care, and increased competition for housing and jobs.

• Immigrants Often Received More Immediate Aid:
  Emergency assistance, food programs, and housing support targeted immigrants who were newly arrived, which created perceptions of unfairness and resentment among residents struggling to access similar help.

• Political and Social Tensions:
  This dynamic has fueled debates about immigration policy, state budgets, and priorities—especially in communities already facing economic challenges.

• Officer Morale and Staffing Declined:
  The cuts, combined with increased hostility toward law enforcement, led to lower morale and some officers leaving their jobs, creating staffing shortages.

• Rise in Violent Crime:
  Many of these areas experienced spikes in violent crimes such as shootings, assaults, and robberies, affecting community safety

• Impact on Minority Communities: Unfortunately, Black and other minority neighborhoods often suffered disproportionately from the rise in violent crime, despite being key supporters of reforms.

• Public Demand for Action: As crime rates rose, residents called for restoring police funding and better crime prevention measures.

• Biden Administration and Migrant Flights from Venezuela and Other Countries

  Background:

  • The U.S. immigration system under Biden saw a significant increase in migrants arriving at the southern border, including those from Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba, and other countries experiencing political and economic crises.

  • The administration at times chartered flights and transported migrants from various countries to different U.S. cities as part of processing and resettlement efforts.

  Venezuela and Migrant Flights:

  • Venezuela’s ongoing political and economic turmoil has caused many Venezuelans to flee the country.

  • Some Venezuelan migrants were flown into the U.S. as part of immigration processing.

  • Critics and some border officials have expressed concerns that inadequate vetting could allow individuals with criminal records or gang affiliations to enter.

  Concerns About Criminals Entering:

  • There have been reported cases where individuals with criminal backgrounds or ties to criminal organizations entered the U.S. via the southern border during this period.

  • Immigration officials and border patrol agents have expressed frustration with limited resources and challenges in thorough background checks.

  • Some argue that the administration’s policies and enforcement practices created gaps allowing some criminals to cross undetected.

  Administration’s Response:

  • The Biden administration has stated that they maintain efforts to screen migrants thoroughly.

  • The Department of Homeland Security has ramped up some security and enforcement measures but also aims to balance humanitarian considerations.

  • Public safety remains a stated priority, but critics argue enforcement has been insufficient.

Teacher Shortages and Educational Impact in Chicago’s Black Schools

In Chicago, many experienced teachers have left or been reassigned from predominantly Black neighborhoods, creating challenges for local schools:

• Teacher Pullout & Reassignments:
  Some qualified and veteran teachers were moved or chose to leave Black-majority schools, often due to poor working conditions, lack of resources, and safety concerns.

• Focus on Supporting Immigrant Students:
  Resources and attention have sometimes shifted toward schools with growing immigrant populations, including those receiving more funding or specialized programs for English language learners.

• Impact on Black Students:
  This has contributed to a decline in educational quality in some Black neighborhoods, widening the achievement gap and limiting opportunities for Black students.

• Calls for Equity:
  Community leaders and parents have raised concerns that Black students are being underserved compared to immigrant students, sparking demands for better support, funding, and retention of good teachers.

Record-High Suicides Among Agents

• In 2021, CBP reported 11 agent suicides; in 2022, that number rose to 15, the highest in recent agency history, followed by 2 in 2023 Congress.govWashington Examiner.

• A former senior agent estimated that BP agents now have the highest suicide rate among U.S. law enforcement personnel India Today.

• What Is the World Economic Forum (WEF) Agenda?

  The WEF is an international organization that promotes public-private cooperation on global issues like climate change, economics, and technology. Its "Great Reset" agenda includes:

  • Reshaping Economies: Advocates for sustainable development, green energy transitions, and new economic systems.

  • Urban Planning: Concepts like “15-minute cities,” where daily needs are within short travel, aiming to reduce carbon footprints.

  • Global Governance: Encourages cooperation among governments, corporations, and organizations to address global challenges.

  Critics claim the WEF's agenda threatens national sovereignty, individual freedoms, and economic independence, arguing it promotes top-down control and elitism.

• Why Did Biden Support WEF-Related Policies?

  • Alignment on Climate & Economy: Biden’s policies, such as the Inflation Reduction Act and green energy incentives, align with WEF’s emphasis on climate action.

  • Global Cooperation: Biden supports international collaboration on issues like climate change and pandemic response, key WEF themes.

  • Political & Financial Influences: Some allege close ties between Biden’s administration and corporate partners linked to WEF initiatives.

3) The Afghanistan withdrawal (August 2021) — operational failures and consequences

• What happened: The U.S. withdrawal and the rapid collapse of the Afghan government in August 2021 resulted in a chaotic evacuation from Kabul, the deaths of civilians and U.S. service members, and significant criticism of planning and execution.

• Official reviews / oversight: Congressional and oversight reports, and GAO and DOD after-action materials, documented weaknesses in contingency planning, evacuation readiness, and interagency coordination. House and Senate reports criticized the administration’s planning and execution; the White House later produced its own account. foreign.senate.govHouse Oversight CommitteeThe White House.

• U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan: People Left Behind, Equipment Abandoned, and Costs

  People Left Behind:

  • Estimates vary, but thousands of Afghans who assisted U.S. forces or were vulnerable—such as interpreters, their families, and other at-risk groups—were left behind during the chaotic withdrawal in August 2021.

  • The Biden administration and allies evacuated around 124,000 people during the withdrawal, including U.S. citizens and eligible Afghans.

  • However, reports indicate up to several thousand people remain in Afghanistan unable to leave, facing danger under Taliban rule.

4) Classified documents and disclosure controversies

• What happened: Classified documents from Biden’s time as a senator/vice president were discovered in private locations (e.g., a think-tank office, his home) in 2022–2023, prompting searches, reviews, and political controversy. Cover up of his documents.  e Washington Post

5) Military readiness and modernization concerns

• What experts say: The U.S. military faces readiness and modernization pressures that predate any single administration, but GAO and senior military leaders have repeatedly warned the U.S. must accelerate procurement and recapitalization, close readiness gaps, and adapt to emerging threats (e.g., drones, electronics). Critics sometimes argue that policy choices or shifting priorities have not sufficiently restored readiness quickly enough. The GAO’s ongoing readiness work documents long-term challenges. Government Accountability Office+1

• Equipment Left Behind:

  • The U.S. left behind a significant amount of military equipment as the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces collapsed rapidly.

  • Estimates suggest over $80 billion worth of equipment was provided to Afghan forces over two decades; much of it fell into Taliban hands.

  • This included vehicles, aircraft (helicopters, drones), weapons, communication gear, and other military hardware.

  Cost to the U.S.:

  • The total cost of the war in Afghanistan over 20 years is estimated at over $2 trillion, including military operations, reconstruction, and veteran care.

  • The final withdrawal cost includes the loss of equipment and the humanitarian impact of people left behind.

  • The rapid collapse and equipment abandonment have raised serious questions about strategic planning and long-term impact.

6) Ukraine & foreign aid oversight concerns (accountability questions)

• What happened: The U.S. committed large military and economic aid packages to Ukraine after Russia’s 2022 invasion. Oversight and valuation issues have been flagged by GAO and in congressional hearings (for example, asset valuation and tracking of drawdowns). Critics question the scale and oversight of the aid; supporters emphasize strategic necessity. Government Accountability OfficeCongress.gov

War as a Business: How Industrial Giants Profit from Conflict

1. Huge Profits Backed by Taxpayer Dollars

• Over the past two decades, the Pentagon has spent more than $14 trillion on defense. A significant slice—between one-quarter and one-third—was captured by just five major contractors, including Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman. (turn0search2; turn0search3)

• In 2020 alone, Lockheed Martin received an estimated $75 billion in Pentagon contracts—well beyond the budget for the entire State Department and USAID combined. (turn0search2)

• Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Lockheed Martin's stock rose 37% and Northrop Grumman’s 40%, boosted by government contracts. (turn0search0)

• In 2025, Lockheed reported $1.71 billion in net income and revenue of nearly $18 billion, driven by sustained demand for systems like the F-35 fighter. (turn0news17)

• A Flashpoint for Ethical Concerns: “War Profiteering”

  • Commentator Bernie Sanders calls the behavior "war profiteering," noting that while weapons multiply in cost, actual deliveries to allies can drop—suggesting profits trump mission needs. (turn0search0)

  • Investigative projects estimate that $31–$60 billion was lost to fraud or waste in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just five major corporations held most of the contracts. (turn0search2)

7) Economic dislocations for certain industries and energy policy effects

• Energy & industry: The administration’s early focus on green energy and permitting changes, plus pandemic shocks and global energy market volatility, coincided with higher energy prices (2021–22) that affected households and energy-intensive industries. Policy tradeoffs here are complex: some actions aim to accelerate clean energy transition and onshoring (e.g., CHIPS, IRA), while critics say the transition and regulations have hurt traditional energy and certain manufacturers. For context on trade and industry ties with China, see CFR backgrounder on U.S.–China trade. The White HouseCouncil on Foreign Relations

How the "Inflation Reduction Act" Was Misleading—and Centered on Green Policy

Critics Say It Was Politically Rebranded Climate Legislation

• Senator John Thune (R-SD) labeled the IRA “deceptively named,” arguing it failed to reduce inflation and instead added to the deficit.
  thune.senate.gov

• A fact-check by AP/PolitiFact found that most independent estimates show the IRA will have very limited impact on inflation—likely too delayed and small in scale to affect the recent surge.
  PolitiFact

• Economists quoted by PBS NewsHour affirm that while inflation did fall—from 9% to 3.2%—the IRA played little to no role. Their consensus credits the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes and improving supply chains instead.
  PBSAP News

• The “15-minute city” is an urban planning model that aims to make essential services—like groceries, schools, parks, and healthcare—accessible within a 15-minute walk or bike ride from home. It was popularized by Paris planner Carlos Moreno and implemented in cities like Paris, Portland, and Cleveland. Teen VogueEncyclopedia Britannica.

• The Role of the World Economic Forum (WEF)

  • The WEF, known for its global summits and policy advocacy, has promoted “The Great Reset” agenda, which includes sustainable urban development and smart city planning.

  • The WEF highlights 15-minute cities as a strategy to combat climate change, reduce traffic congestion, and build resilient cities in its reports and discussions.

  • They emphasize integrating technology, green infrastructure, and community-based living in these models.

  • Biden’s Connection and Alignment with the WEF

    • WEF Themes in Biden’s Agenda: Biden’s policy agenda, including the Green New Deal-inspired infrastructure plans, climate commitments, and economic “Great Reset” style recovery approaches, echo many themes promoted by the WEF.

    • Public Statements: Biden’s speeches and policy documents have highlighted goals such as clean energy transition, racial equity, building back better, and global cooperation, which overlap with WEF’s sustainability and economic resilience messaging.

    • WEF Meetings: Biden’s administration officials have participated in or engaged with WEF events. For example, the 2021 WEF Annual Meeting in Davos included U.S. delegation members discussing shared priorities.

    • The World Economic Forum (WEF) is often criticized for pushing a global agenda that many believe aims to control and restrict individual freedoms. Critics argue that the WEF’s vision of “stakeholder capitalism” and initiatives like 15-minute cities are not about sustainability or progress, but about creating a system where a small elite becomes the ultimate bosses — essentially enslaving the masses under their control.

      Backup: Klaus Schwab, WEF founder, openly discusses "The Great Reset," which includes reshaping economies and societies worldwide through centralized control (WEF, 2020). Critics warn this “reset” could concentrate power in the hands of a few corporations and global leaders, undermining democratic institutions (Source: The Great Reset Explained - The Post Millennial).

    • In short, rather than empowering people, critics say the WEF’s agenda is a blueprint for global domination by unelected elites who want to reshape the world to serve their interests — leaving the rest of humanity as controlled subjects.

      Backup: Investigative reports and opinion pieces have raised alarms about WEF's partnerships with multinational corporations and governments that may prioritize profit and control over individual rights (Source: WEF and corporate power - The Guardian; WEF and global governance concerns - The Epoch Times).

8) Trade, China, and supply-chain dependence

• What critics highlight: Longstanding U.S. economic integration with China — dependency in manufacturing and critical supply chains — continued into the Biden years; critics say U.S. policy has not rapidly reversed offshoring trends and that Chinese economic/strategic competition remains a central national-security challenge. The administration passed targeted industrial policy (e.g., CHIPS Act) to onshore some critical manufacturing, but structural dependencies and trade imbalances remain. Council on Foreign RelationsCongressional Budget Office

• Hunter Biden’s Business Ties to China

• BHR Partners: Hunter Biden was a co-founder and board member of BHR Partners, a private equity firm launched in 2013 with Chinese state-backed investors. He reportedly invested around $420,000 in the company and held a 10% stake.

  • Source:

    • The Wall Street Journal — "Hunter Biden Invested in Chinese Firm After His Father Became Vice President" (Oct 14, 2020)
      WSJ Article

    • New York Times — "Hunter Biden and Business Partner Paid in Chinese Equity Deal" (Oct 14, 2020)
      NYT Article

• These articles confirm Hunter Biden’s involvement in business ventures with Chinese entities during Joe Biden’s vice presidency.

9. Where “greed,” enrichment, or “sold to China” assertions run into limits

• What’s documented vs. what’s asserted: There are public debates about whether certain policies disproportionately benefited corporations, specific industries, or actors — and whether U.S. economic strategy failed to protect domestic jobs in some sectors. However, broad claims that the administration “sold out” the U.S. to China or that specific officials personally profited in illegal ways need careful, documented evidence (investigations, indictments, verifiable financial records). Mainstream reporting documents strategic missteps, oversight lapses, and lobbying influence; but allegations of criminality or intentional “sellouts” require substantiation beyond partisan talking points. For a rigorous case, you’d want primary-source documents, audited financial records, or proven legal findings. For trade/China context see CFR timeline and official trade statistics. Council on Foreign Relations.

Biden’s Use of Public-Private Partnerships

• The Biden administration has promoted various PPPs, especially in areas like infrastructure, climate initiatives (including the Inflation Reduction Act), and COVID-19 response efforts.

• For example, programs to promote clean energy, electric vehicles, and infrastructure upgrades often involve government funding combined with private company participation.

10. Biden’s Draining of U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserves: Costs and Consequences

Background:

• Since 2021, the Biden administration authorized several large releases of oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), aiming to lower gasoline prices and respond to global supply disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war.

• These releases were some of the largest in SPR history — over 200 million barrels were sold off or loaned out between 2021 and 2023.

Where Did the Oil Go?

• Much of the released oil was sold to oil companies and refineries, intended to increase supply in the market and reduce pump prices.

• Some barrels were loaned or exchanged with allies facing shortages.

• However, critics argue that much of this oil ended up in private hands or was even exported abroad, rather than staying in the U.S. to directly reduce domestic prices.

Cost to the Government:

• The SPR was originally filled at much lower prices — often below $40 per barrel.

• The oil sold during Biden’s releases was sold at market prices that fluctuated widely, sometimes above $80-$100 per barrel.

• The government is effectively selling low-cost oil reserves during periods of higher market prices, which is a financial loss compared to maintaining the reserves.

• Additionally, the government has to buy replacement oil to refill the reserves later, likely at higher prices, increasing the long-term cost.

Economic and Strategic Impact:

• The release temporarily increased supply and arguably helped stabilize prices in the short term.

• However, draining the SPR reduces the nation’s emergency oil stockpile, weakening energy security if future crises arise.

• Critics say the strategy was politically motivated rather than a long-term energy solution.

• The U.S. is more dependent on foreign oil imports and subject to global market volatility due to reduced reserves.

Biden's Statements on MAGA Republicans:

• "Semi-Fascist" Label: In a 2022 fundraiser, President Biden referred to "extreme MAGA Republicans" as a "semi-fascist" movement, expressing concern over their rejection of the 2020 election results and support for political violence. Yahoo+2The Week+2. Attacking and labeling the American Mega groups. 

• "Vermin" Comparison: In 2023, Biden condemned former President Donald Trump for using the term "vermin" to describe political opponents, suggesting it echoed Nazi-era language. ABC News+2The Independent+2

• "Poisoning the Blood" Comment: Biden also criticized Trump's remark about immigrants "poisoning the blood of our country," drawing parallels to Nazi rhetoric. ABC News+1

Criticism and Support:

• Critics' Perspective: Some supporters of the MAGA movement and conservative commentators argue that Biden's language is divisive and unfairly stigmatizes millions of Americans. Baptist News Global

• Supporters' Perspective: Biden's allies contend that his remarks are necessary to highlight what they view as extremist elements within the political landscape and to safeguard democratic institutions.

Policies That Critics Say Hurt American Freedom and Privacy Under Biden

1. Expanded Government Surveillance and Public-Private Partnerships

• Biden’s administration has pushed for greater collaboration between the government and big tech companies to monitor and control “misinformation” online.

• Programs like the “Disinformation Governance Board” and coordination with social media platforms raised alarms about censorship and privacy violations.

• Public-private partnerships blur lines between government authority and corporate power, potentially threatening free speech and individual privacy.

• Critics say this mirrors a surveillance state where private data is shared with government agencies without clear oversight.

• 2. Inflation Reduction Act & Green Energy Policies

  • The Act funds massive green energy projects often partnered with private corporations, expanding government influence in the economy.

  • Critics argue it leads to government mandates on energy use, electric vehicles, and lifestyle changes, limiting consumer choice and freedom.

  • Push for “15-minute cities” and urban planning restricts mobility and private property rights under the guise of sustainability.

  3. Pandemic Response and Public Health Mandates

  • Biden’s aggressive COVID-19 vaccine mandates for businesses and federal contractors sparked debates about bodily autonomy and government overreach.

  • Enforcement through private companies created a public-private enforcement mechanism seen as undermining constitutional freedoms.

  4. Immigration Policies and Border Enforcement

  • Loosened immigration enforcement and massive influxes of undocumented migrants strained public resources and services.

  • Critics claim this was done without sufficient congressional oversight or input from affected communities, eroding trust in government responsiveness.

  5. Increased Federal Spending and National Debt

  • Massive spending bills increased national debt, raising concerns about future tax burdens and economic instability.

  • Some view this as undermining the American capitalist system and fiscal responsibility, impacting personal financial freedoms.

Here are several additional points highlighting actions or policies under Biden that critics argue were negative or posed challenges to the U.S. Constitution and democracy:

1. Expanded Federal Power and Overreach:

   • Increased use of executive orders to bypass Congress on major issues such as immigration, environmental regulations, and COVID mandates. Critics say this undermines the constitutional balance of powers.

2. COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates:

   • Federal mandates for vaccines on businesses and federal employees sparked debate about personal freedoms and bodily autonomy, with lawsuits claiming these mandates exceeded federal authority.

3. Public-Private Partnerships and Censorship:

   • Collaborations between government agencies and big tech companies to regulate and censor online speech have raised constitutional concerns about free speech and government overreach.

4. Border Crisis and Immigration Policy:

   • Alleged failure to enforce immigration laws strictly and the opening of borders have been seen by some as neglecting national sovereignty and security obligations.

5. Manipulation of the Justice System:

   • Allegations of political interference in investigations or prosecutions, which critics argue threaten the independence of the judiciary and rule of law.

6. Election Integrity Concerns:

   • Support for federal voting legislation perceived by some as federal overreach into state-controlled election laws, raising questions about states' rights and election security.

7. Increased National Debt and Spending:

   • Massive government spending without balanced budgets poses a threat to long-term economic stability and burdens future generations.

8. Surveillance Expansion:

   • Expansion of surveillance programs and data collection, sometimes justified by national security, but criticized as invasions of privacy without sufficient oversight.

9. Suppression of Dissent:

   • Labeling political opponents or protesters as extremists or threats has been criticized as chilling free speech and peaceful political dissent.

10. Undermining Law Enforcement:

    • Support for "defund the police" rhetoric in some circles, leading to debates about public safety and respect for law and order.

National Debt Increase Under Biden Compared to Previous Presidents

• Joe Biden (Jan 2021–Present):

  • When Biden took office in January 2021, the national debt was approximately $27.75 trillion.

  • As of mid-2025, the debt is over $33 trillion (approximate figure, varies with monthly Treasury reports).

  • This represents roughly a $5.25 trillion increase in about 4.5 years.

• Barack Obama (Jan 2009–Jan 2017):

  • Debt increased from about $10.6 trillion to $19.95 trillion, about $9.35 trillion over 8 years.

From January 2021 to January 2025, the U.S. national debt increased approximately as follows:

• January 2021: Around $27.75 trillion

• January 2025: About $35.8 trillion (estimated, based on trends through 2024)

Total increase: Approximately $8 trillion over 4 years.

In 2023, the U.S. came dangerously close to defaulting due to delayed debt ceiling agreements, causing volatility in financial markets and widespread concern about the economy.

The federal government, under President Biden's administration, has continued the longstanding practice of borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund to finance other government expenditures. This is done by issuing special Treasury securities, which are legally required to be repaid with interest.USA Housing Information.

As of December 2024, the Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund held approximately $2.5 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities, representing about 33% of the total intragovernmental debt. This indicates that a significant portion of the government's borrowing comes from the Social Security Trust Fund. Peterson Foundation.

Conclusion:

The debate over President Biden's rhetoric reflects broader tensions in American politics. While some perceive his comments as a necessary defense of democratic values, others view them as inflammatory and polarizing. This ongoing discourse underscores the challenges of navigating political discourse in a deeply divided society.