Tag: donald-trump

DEAL OR NO DEAL

As always, the contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

Below please find my observations, thoughts and opinions with respect to the war with Iran:

  1. Here’s a statement on which all sane, rational, objective persons can agree. IRAN CAN NEVER BE ALLOWED TO POSSESS NUCLEAR CAPABILITY! Anyone who cannot endorse that statement needs to have their head examined. Furthermore, they should be automatically disqualified from holding any responsible government political office or leadership position (on the grounds of deficient mental acuity). Apparently, that includes many if not most of the Dem politicians.
  2. Trump did not want a war. He reiterated that point over and over again. He wanted to make a deal, but a deal the US could live with such as (1) an Iran devoid of nuclear capability, (2) unfettered and independent inspections, and (3) penalties for non-compliance, among other things. The Iranian leadership has been gaslighting us on this for decades. They say they want to make a deal, but they don’t really want to do so. Like I said in my previous blog it’s the Iranian version of “rope-a-dope.”
  3. A nuclear capable Iran would pose an existential threat not only to Israel, not only to the ME, but to the entire world. Its leaders are religious fanatics. They hate and want to kill anyone who is not a “true believer.” They are fanatical enough to use it, even if it would mean mutual destruction. They simply don’t care.
  4. The concept that America is protected by two vast oceans is outdated. In a war we would be in range of our enemies’ ballistic missiles. Moreover, there is the threat from within posed by terrorist cells.
  5. As I write this, the war is eleven days old. Militarily, it has been a success beyond all expectations. In that short period the US and Israel have destroyed Iran’s Air Force, sunken in excess of 60 naval vessels (which constituted most of its navy), and taken out most of its missiles and missile launchers. 
  6. Enjoying complete air superiority, Israeli and US bombers have had free rein to attack any targets they choose. As I write this, they have destroyed more than 5,500 targets inside Iran, and Trump has said there will be more to come.
  7. They have killed the Supreme Leader, virtually all of the top echelon of leaders and advisors and most of the second tier.
  8. Trump has made it clear that the Ayatollah’s replacement must have his support, or else he won’t “last long.” We don’t want to end up with a government of more of the same. They have chosen Mojtaba Khamenel, son of the late Supreme Leader, who likely will likely be more of the same.
  9. Anyone who doubts the urgency and legitimacy of this war should listen to Steve Witkoff, the US’s co-chief negotiator. He told Fox News that at the latest meeting the Iranian negotiators’ first comment was to brag about how they had surreptitiously developed 460kg of 60% enriched uranium. It’s been estimated that Iran could have enriched it up to 90%, which is weapons grade, in a mere ten days or fewer. At that point Iran would have possessed nuclear weapons.
  10. Iran tried to gaslight Witkoff by insisting its nuclear goals were peaceful, but Witkoff denoted that if that were true there would have been no need to enrich beyond 20%.
  11. The Iranians told Witkoff they viewed it as their “inalienable right” to develop such weapons. Witkoff responded that it was our “inalienable right” to stop them. At that point it was clear that there would be no deal.
  12. The Strait of Hormuz, which is just South of Iran, is a vital choke point for oil that is shipped to and from the ME. Some 20% of the world’s oil is shipped through it. In order to disrupt the oil markets Iran has attempted to blockade it and attack ships traversing it. A few days ago, it sunk three oil tankers, and it sought to mine the strait even though Trump had warned them not to do it.
  13. As a result of Iran’s actions, the price of oil has been fluctuating wildly. A few days ago, it hit a high of $119.50 per barrel before retreating to $90 on Monday. We sunk their warships, which is good, but we’re not completely out of the woods yet. It has been reported that Iran still has a multitude of small boats, minesweepers and sea explosives.
  14. The International Energy Agency, which for decades has monitored global crude oil supplies and helped to prevent price shocks, announced that its 32 member countries would release 400 million barrels of oil from their respective strategic reserves. That would represent the largest release ever and the first such coordinated action since 2022. However, the IEA has not yet released details about when countries will start releasing oil, nor how much they will be able to put into the market at a time. The goal is to moderate rising oil prices prospectively.
  15. Hezbollah, in an ill-advised strategic move, has been attacking Israel with barrages of rockets. Israel has responded with waves of airstrikes in Lebanon and an extensive ground campaign. To date, more than 630 people have been killed in Lebanon, and some 1,500 others have been injured.
  16. The primary critics of the war have been the Dem politicians and their allies in the media. They can’t help themselves. As I have said in prior blogs this war is not one of choice. It is of necessity. This is not a replay of the Bush Administration’s false claims of “weapons of mass destruction.” Naturally the Dems have been critical. First, they claimed that it was illegal since Congress was not consulted beforehand, and only Congress has the constitutional authority to declare war. Nevertheless, precedent for a president starting a war is clearly on Trump’s side. Presidents have been doing so all the way back to Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates Wars (beginning in 1803). The idea of consulting with Congress on war strategy is absurd on its face. There would be no confidentiality. One does not disclose to the enemy when and where one will be attacking. That claim was thwarted.
  17. Now, many of them are still claiming there is no clearcut strategy. They just don’t “get it.” For example, Senator Richard Blumenthal (D CT) told reporters, “I emerged from [last Tuesday’s] briefing [to the Senate Armed Services Committee] as dissatisfied and angry, frankly, as I have from any past briefing in my 15 years.” I say, why, about what? Our goals are crystal clear. Chuck Schumer (dead man walking politically) still professes that Trump’s justification for the war is “confusing” and exhibits “blatant disregard” for [the safety of] American soldiers. I didn’t realize he was that ignorant of history. Maybe, he should research the preamble to WWII and read my last two blogs.
  18. Although Iran cannot defeat us militarily, it does present a real clear and present danger via possible terrorist attacks. It likely has a plethora of terror cells in the US that it could activate if it hasn’t already. We are especially vulnerable since the Dems have caused a government shutdown which is undermining the effectiveness of the DHS and the secret service, which have responsibility for ferreting out and preventing terrorist attacks. I urge Congress to agree on a deal to end the shutdown asap. (Schumer, are you listening, or are you confused about that too?

Conclusion

Iran miscalculated our power and our resolve. They were not the first, and they won’t be the last to do so. They are paying dearly for their miscalculation. Iran’s only hope is to turn American public opinion against the war like with the Vietnam War.

We must exhibit resolve in the face of economic adversity. This war is too important, and I don’t believe it will last a long time. I view it as short-term pain, long-term gain. I repeat, IRAN CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE NUCLEAR CAPABILITY.

No deals, except unconditional surrender.

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

THE WAR WITH IRAN

As always, this blog is based on a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

The decision to go to war with Iran was not a “reckless,” “spur of the moment” decision as some Dems and other critics would have you believe. President Trump repeatedly advocated for a peaceful settlement, but due to Iran’s intransigent negotiating strategy it became obvious that it would never agree to curtail its quest to become a nuclear power. He warned them what would happen, and then he followed through. As I have always said, Trump says what he means and means what he says.

I believe that in retrospect we can all see that Trump began to lay the groundwork for a potential war with Iran in his first administration beginning with the Abraham Accords. Furthermore, he has nurtured a positive relationship with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States most of which are also fearful of a nuclear-armed Iran. So, this was a well-planned, well-thought-out operation. Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

Remember, every war has its underlying causes and an immediate cause. In this case the underlying causes were thousands of years of religious antipathy and 47 years of terrorist activities committed by Iran and its proxies. In 1979 a group of religious fanatics overthrew the government run by Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (aka “The Shah of Iran”). Since then, Iran has become the primary source of terrorist activities in the Middle East, the US and Europe. It has been well-funded by oil money and its allies such as Russia and China.

In recent years Iran has engaged in various negotiations with the US and others aimed at achieving a lasting peace in the ME. Lately, however, it has become increasingly apparent that Iran does not really want peace and never did. It has engaged in several negotiations and agreed to various peace deals such as the toothless Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or Iran nuclear deal, but it never abided by them. What it does want and has always wanted is nuclear capability, and recently the evidence shows unequivocably that it was very close to achieving that, maybe within weeks. According to Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, currently the US’s chief negotiators with Iran, the Iranian negotiators admitted as much at the most recent meeting, even bragging about how it had achieved that status surreptitiously,

What many have long suspected became obvious. All of the negotiations with prior presidents were just camouflage, an Iranian “rope-a-dope,” if you will. The US has tried to bribe Iran with various concessions and billions of dollars, all of which failed. Finally, in Donald Trump we have a president who was not deceived, who realized that the world was being “gas lighted” big-time, who would not be deterred from what must be done, who had the cojones to do what was right as opposed to what was politically expedient, and who realized that the world was rapidly approaching Armageddon. The timing was propitious. Iran had been weakened by previous attacks, and its citizens were rising up against the government. The feeling was if not now, when?

Simply put, Trump realized what these prior administrations did not or were afraid to act on. Iran, a country that was governed by religious fanatics who were virulently antisemitic, anti-Israel, anti-America, and anti-Christian and had repeatedly openly declared that its goal was to destroy Israel and the US, could never be allowed to possess nuclear capability. Surely, they would not hesitate to use it. Even the mere threat of them using it would destabilize the entire ME if not the world. That realization was the immediate cause. Anyone who doubts the righteousness of Trump’s decision need only recall the preamble to WWII. During the 1930’s European leaders repeated appeased Hitler in the hope of avoiding war. We all know how that worked out.

I am perplexed why any clear and objective thinker would criticize this war. Yet, the Dems have not disappointed. They are predictably consistent, the gift that keeps on giving. The defenders of criminals, illegal aliens, election fraud, and boys participating in girls’ sports cannot help themselves. Their DNA requires them to criticize anything Trump advocates or does. In the words of the late former president Ronald Reagan, “there they go again.”

Many members of Congress are mad that Congress wasn’t asked for prior approval or even consulted beforehand. For example, Hakeem Jeffries said that “the Trump administration must explain itself to the American people and Congress immediately, provide an ironclad justification for this act of war, clearly define the national security objective and articulate a plan to avoid another costly, prolonged military quagmire in the Middle East.” For good measure he opined we would lose the war. Majority leader Chuck Schumer, said this war is “not necessary.” He called for “more information.” In her typically “wishy-washy” manner, NY Governor Kathy Hochul was all over the place, afraid to offend anyone. She “blasted” the Iranian regime as a “global threat,” but then in the next breath she commented that “it is deeply disturbing that we entered a war without an exit strategy.” My response to them is Trump’s actions were no different than those of other recent presidents. Also, once a decision was made speed and confidentiality were paramount to success. You don’t tell the enemy where and when you are coming. Finally, words of wisdom from Senator John Kennedy (R LA), he of the acerbic wit; “We’re not trying to start a war…We’re trying to end it.” And, with respect to the late Ayatollah, “may he rest in ‘pieces.’ ”

Trump is angry with some of our European allies including the UK, Spain and France, among others for refusing to allow the US to utilize their bases to refuel during the attacks particularly since their countries have already been victimized by Iranian-sponsored terrorism, and they are already within the range of Iran’s missiles. He denigrated UK’s PM, Keir Starmer, as “no Winston Churchill.”

Conclusion

An Iran with nuclear capability would have presented an existential threat not only to Israel and the US, but to the entire world. Be honest. Would you have rested easy in that case? I think not.

As I said, already some of its ballistic missiles have the capability to reach parts of Europe. That makes our European allies’ actions even more puzzling. In a short time, Iran would likely have developed enhanced weaponry with the capability to reach parts of the US as well. Heretofore, the nations that have had nuclear capability have exercised responsibility and restraint. They may bluster and threaten from time to time, but they know that using a nuclear weapon would likely provoke an all-out war that would devastate everything and everyone. I and many others believe that the Mullahs of Iran, being crazy, deranged lunatics, could not be counted on to follow suit.

This should be an all-out war. No halfway measures. Finish the job once and for all. Don’t fight not to lose. Fight to win. When Iran loses, and it will lose, I advocate unconditional surrender.

Trump’s critics, which are legion, have characterized this war as a “war of choice.” In fact, in my view it is just the opposite. It is a war of survival. Therefore, Trump should be applauded, not criticized, for his actions. To his critics I say take a deep breath, hold your nose, swallow your pride, suspend your TDS and be grateful he is our president.

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

STATE OF THE UNION

The contents of this blog are a compendium of multiple media reports supplemented by my personal opinion where indicated.

In accordance with Article II, Section 3, Clause 1 of the US Constitution the President “shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” The Constitution does not offer any specifics, such as the date and manner of delivery.

President George Washington delivered the initial SOTU in person to a joint session of Congress on January 1, 1801. Thereafter, most presidents chose to deliver a written report. In 1913 President Woodrow Wilson broke with tradition and commenced the practice of delivering the SOTU in person. Later, with the advent of radio, then TV and later the internet, the SOTU began to be communicated live to a nationwide and worldwide audience. Traditionally, presidents have delivered the SOTU between January 1 and March 1.

Typically, presidents utilize the SOTU to present a positive account of their past accomplishments and prospective plans. Political sycophants in the audience frequently interrupt the speech to stand and applaud while political opponents often just sit stone-faced. Most viewers are aware that the SOTU is short on facts and long on politics, hyperbole and theatre. Fact checkers would have a field day. As the expression goes, “it is what it is.” It should be noted that the opposition party gets to offer a rebuttal.

Last night President Trump delivered the SOTU for 2026. Everyone will have his or her own opinion. Below please find my comments and takeaways:

  1. Trump’s speech was typical “Trump.” That is, he sprinkled the serious content with moments of humor and sarcasm. For example, on several occasions he chastised Dems in the audience for not standing up to acknowledge his special guests, and then when many of them (not Nancy Pelosi) did stand up to show support for the “Stop Insider Trading Act,” which aims to prohibit congressmen from profiting from trading on inside information, he feigned surprise. Undoubtedly, some of his detractors will criticize him for his style, but I loved it.
  2. Many Dems exhibited a considerable lack of class and professionalism. Approximately 70 of them boycotted the speech entirely; some texted; some interrupted by shouting slogans; one or two nodded off; once again Al Green had to be ceremoniously escorted out of the chamber; and most who did attend mostly sat on their hands even for poignant and patriotic moments.
  3. He admonished the Dems for their stance on various “80-20” issues, such as gender transition of minors without their parents’ consent or even knowledge, sanctuary policies, and opposing voter ID for elections. As I have blogged previously we all know that the only reason to oppose voter ID is to foster cheating.
  4. On several occasions he denoted that the Dems’ policies inexplicably favored illegal aliens over citizens, whereas the Repubs’ policies appropriately favor American citizens over illegals.
  5. He called out NYC mayor Mamdani for his hypocritical stance of requiring volunteer snow shovelers to present multiple forms of ID in stark contrast to his advocating no IDs to vote.
  6. He criticized Dems for causing multiple government shutdowns in order to defund ICE and to gain Medicare and other rights for illegals.
  7. He vowed to continue the fight to reduce healthcare costs.
  8. On the international front he mentioned the many peace deals he had brokered to settle longstanding conflicts and the ongoing negotiations between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas. He reiterated that Iran will “never” be allowed to possess nuclear capability. I believe Trump knows Iran is stalling (its version of a “rope a dope”), and he will attack sooner rather than later.
  9. My one criticism was he couldn’t resist admonishing the Supreme Court for its recent opinion, which struck down his “reciprocal tariff” policy. He characterized it as “a very unfortunate ruling.” He didn’t have to do that, particularly since his Administration is already pursuing alternate pathways to achieve his goal, and most of the other countries have indicated that they will honor their tariff agreements anyway. Moreover, he will need the court’s support on other crucial matters prospectively.
  10. He emphasized several of his major accomplishments, such as reducing inflation, improving the economy, passing the Big Beautiful Bill, closing the border, and drastically reducing the flow of fentanyl and other deadly drugs. Inflation, unemployment, food prices and gas at the pump are down. Oil production and the financial markets are up. (Remember, the financial markets are a leading indicator, so this bodes well for the economy prospectively.) The BBB will provide the most substantial income tax reduction for the middle and working classes in my lifetime, such as no tax on tips or overtime, reduced taxes on social security for most seniors and the advent of the “Trump Accounts” for children of American citizens.
  11. On several occasions he repeated the theme of patriotism. For example, he lauded the Olympic gold medal performance of the men’s hockey team. They had been his guests at the White House, and he introduced them to wild and sustained applause (even from some, but not all Dems in attendance). In addition, he presented the star goalie with the Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. The women’s gold medal team was also invited. They could not attend due to a scheduling conflict, but it is expected that they will prospectively. He introduced a 100-yer-old veteran of the Korean War and a WWII veteran who will be celebrating his 100th birthday on July 4 and presented them both with the Congressional Medal of Honor.
  12. He touted America’s upcoming 250th Birthday Celebration on July 4 and its hosting of the 2026 World Cup this summer and the 2028 Republican Convention in 2028.

Conclusion

A sampling of post-speech polls was generally favorable. For instance, 54% believed that Trump was focusing on the right issues; a majority opined that his immigration and economic policies are “in line with the nation’s best interest;” 45% expressed full faith in his leadership; 43% support his using US military power “responsibly;” and a plurality of 38% felt that he would be able to deal with Iran “appropriately.” Respondents were evenly divided on his tariff policy. However, 45% felt he was paying insufficient attention to the cost of living, and 40% expressed “no confidence” that he could make things more affordable. These polls are merely a snapshot. They are informative but no means dispositive.

Since he entered politics Trump has been heavily criticized for many things, but one cannot deny his patriotism. His deep love for America is epitomized by his twin slogans “MAGA” and “America First.” When all is said and done, I, for one, will rest easily as long as he is the President.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

VOTER ID LAWS

As always, the following is gleaned from a compendium of multiple media accounts supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

Once again, the Dems are espousing the wrong side of an 80-20 issue. It should be surprising that they keep finding themselves in this position, but it seems to be their modus operandi. It seems that they can’t help themselves. Their TDS overrules all rationality. Anything President Trump is for they must be against regardless of the will of the people. The current issue is whether or not a person should be required to produce proper identification in order to vote.

Before 2006, no state required a person to present ID in order to vote. However, in 2006 Indiana became the first state to pass a law requiring voters to produce ID at the polls. Its legality was challenged, but eventually, the Supreme Court upheld this requirement as long as the laws were “neutral and did not significantly burden voters.” According to Wikipedia currently thirty-six states have implemented voter ID laws with varying degrees of stringency. The other 14 states plus Washington D.C. still allow voting without ID. Support for voter ID laws is often fueled by concerns over voter fraud. A 2013 poll disclosed that 43% of voters believed that voter fraud was “relatively common,” and a 2010 survey revealed that some 80% of respondents supported some form of ID requirement.  At the present time various polls have reported bilateral support. Some 80% of the public, including some 70% of Dems, support voter ID laws.

Critics of strict voter ID laws argue that they disproportionately affect minority, low-income, and elderly populations. Furthermore, they claim it is a “non-issue” as voter ID fraud is “exceedingly rare.” I don’t subscribe to these arguments. Our history is replete with instances of elections whose results were tainted by suspicions of voter irregularities, if not outright fraud. For example, for years there were suspicions that “machines” such as NYC’s Tammany Hall perpetrated such irregularities. In the 1960s it was suspected that Chicago Mayor Richard Daley padded Dem votes. The joke was that in Chicago even dead people voted. The 2000 presidential election results were tainted by irregularities such as the infamous “hanging chads” in Florida. Eventually the Supreme Court had to weigh in. To this day, many Gore supporters insist he was the real winner. Most recently many Trump supporters have questioned the validity of the 2020 presidential election.

The arguments against voter ID laws had some validity in the South during the “Jim Crow” period when voter suppression of Blacks was common. Nowadays, I don’t believe that is an issue. In fact, many minorities view the Dems’ opposition to voter ID as an insult and racist in and of itself. The implication is that Dem politicians such as Chuck Schumer, Kamala Harris and Jamie Raskin, to name a few, consider minorities and women to be incapable obtaining a valid ID via the DMV or the internet. Schumer has even characterized voter ID laws such as the Trump sponsored SAVE America Act as “Jim Crow 2.0.” Pollsters who have queried minorities regarding this matter have generally been met with puzzlement or indignation.

Let’s be honest. We all know the real reason for the Dems’ opposition. They want legions of non-citizens to be able to vote. They feel that most of them would vote Democrat in order to continue to get freebies from the government, and that would result in Dems having a better chance to win elections. I and many others firmly believe that that was one of the reasons why they pursued the open borders policy during the Biden Administration.

Conclusion

Voter ID requirements are necessary in order to engender confidence that elections are fair and equitable. Furthermore, one is required to produce ID for a myriad of routine activities in everyday life such as driving a car, flying on an airplane, gaining employment, applying for or receiving government benefits, getting a marriage license, and age-restricted purchases such as alcohol or cigarettes. Why not for voting, which in my view is the most important act for a citizen.

Fair and equitable elections are one of the cornerstones of our democracy. If the public does not have confidence in election results our entire system of government would dissipate.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

ICE OFFICER KILLS PROTESTER IN MINNEAPOLIS

This blog is a compendium of various media accounts supplemented by my personal opinion, where indicated.

It was just a matter of time. It was bound to happen sooner or later. On one side there were DHS and ICE officials determined to seek and detain illegal migrants in accordance with federal law; on the other side, in close proximity, were pro-migrant protesters fueled by irresponsible and inaccurate rhetoric from left-wing politicians, civic leaders, and media outlets. It was like placing a lit match next to a stick of dynamite. In reality, I’m surprised it didn’t happen sooner.

In my view the incident was a tragedy. No one wants to see a person killed in that manner. I extend my heartfelt sympathies to Renee Nicole Good’s family and friends.

That said, I have to ask, what was she thinking? Like most of you I have viewed the footage of the incident multiple times from different vantage points. Good was in a maroon SUV that was clearly blocking the street impeding law enforcement vehicles. A crowd of protesters was gathered in the vicinity. ICE agents pulled up to said vehicle, exited their vehicle and appeared to tell the woman behind the wheel to exit her vehicle. At that point, most people would comply. The idea is to recognize you are in a tense situation, and rather than exacerbate it you should try to calm it down. She appeared to ignore the order.

One of the agents moved to open the driver’s door. Another agent was positioned near the front of the vehicle. Suddenly, Good backed up then caused the car to lurch forward toward the officer. She appeared to hit the officer as she drove off. Reflexively, the officer fired twice killing the woman. Subsequently, the SUV lost control and crashed into a nearby parked vehicle. Incidentally, back in June the officer had been seriously injured when he was attacked and dragged by another vehicle, so one can understand that he would be wary of a recurrence.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and other federal officials characterized the incident as a “domestic terrorist attack.” At a press conference later in the day she informed reporters that Good had been “stalking and impeding” immigration agents “throughout the day.” She added that the DHS has commenced an investigation.

One has to wonder what in the world was Ms. Good thinking. What would cause a seemingly normal wife and mother to brazenly stalk, impede and disobey federal officers in the legal performance of their duties? What did she think was going to happen? I’ll offer my opinion below.

Predictably, various Dem politicians and “experts” in the media have felt compelled to comment. Never mind that the incident is still under investigation. These bloviators have already tried and convicted the officer, DHS and, of course, President Trump. As they should know, in the US one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. We don’t jump to conclusions based on incomplete or inaccurate information.

For example, Comrade Zoh characterized the incident as “murder.” To my knowledge Zoh does not possess a law degree and does not have the foggiest notion of the legal definition of “murder.” MN Governor Tim Walz (the “buffoon”) and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey issued expletive-laced tirades directed at DHS and Trump that ICE has no right to be in MN, and they don’t want them nor need them there. I beg to differ. The history and current empirical evidence say otherwise. Along those lines Fox News commentator Lawrence Jones opined, “what is Jacob Frey thinking? Does he want his city to burn again?” I believe the buffoon sees the incident as a welcome distraction from the massive fraud in MN currently under investigation.

In a post on Truth Social, President Trump commented that an ICE officer was “viciously” run over. “It is hard to believe he is alive, but [he] is now recovering.” To be fair, I think “viciously” was an exaggeration.

Conclusion

The real tragedy is that the entire incident was unnecessary and preventable. Let’s be clear. In my opinion the “root cause” of the problem was the Biden Administration’s open border policies that enabled untold millions of illegal migrants to gain access to the US. As one would expect a goodly portion of them settled in sanctuary jurisdictions like MN. Under federal law DHS has not only the authority, but also the responsibility to ferret out these persons, detain them, and have them expelled from the country. In all instances federal law supersedes state and local laws such as sanctuary to illegal migrants.

Anyone who impedes the federal officers in their performance of those duties is in contravention of federal law and should be prosecuted. That includes not those who interfered physically, but also those who continually spew out inciteful language. Such language is very damaging as it encourages certain easily influenced persons like Ms. Good to violence. These aiders and abettors should be prosecuted as well.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

MURDEROUS ATTACK ON NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL

The following is based on a compendium of media reports and my own opinion where indicated.

It was inevitable. It was only a matter of time. It was just a question of who, where, when and how many. Of course, I’m referring to an unprovoked, premeditated, murderous terror attack by an improperly vetted alien on two US National Guard personnel while they were in legal performance of their assigned duties. One, Sarah Beckstrom, subsequently died from her injuries; as I write this, the other one, Andrew Wolfe, remains in critical condition.

As most of you know, the National Guard was deployed to the nation’s capital as part of Trump’s federal takeover of the city and crime crackdown in August. All indications are that this initiative was working as crime has declined dramatically. Even Muriel Bowser, the Dem mayor of DC, had praised the program. According to the most recent update, there were 2,188 National Guard personnel assigned to D.C.

According to multiple media accounts the perpetrator, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan national, allegedly drove from Washington State to Washington, DC specifically to target Guard members. Film footage from the crime scene revealed that he “barreled around the corner” and just commenced firing on the victims with a .357 Smith & Wesson revolver. Washington DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro reported that he attacked “without provocation, ambush style,” struck one of the victims, leaned over and shot the individual again, before firing at the other National Guard member “several times.” The shooting took place around 2:15 p.m. last Wednesday near the Farragut West Metro station. As I write this there is no known motive. Due to the heinous nature of this crime Attorney General Pam Bondi and Attorney for DC Jeanine Pirro have both vowed to seek the death penalty. I concur.

According to various law enforcement sources Lakanwal entered the United States in 2021 under the Biden Administration’s “Operation Allies Welcome Program.” FBI Director Kash Patel noted that the FBI received confirmation from the Department of Defense and CIA “that the subject had a relationship in Afghanistan with partner forces,” which enabled him to enter the United States in 2021 under that program.

CIA Director John Radcliffe asserted that nevertheless Lavanthal “should never been allowed to come here.” Kristi Noem opined that at some point he became radicalized, and some media outlets have speculated he may have become afflicted with PTSD, which fueled his rage.

He applied for asylum and was granted it in April 2024 under the Trump Administration. According to multiple reports “he was vetted, and the vetting came back clean.” He has a wife, five children and a brother in the U.S. Apparently, he has been unable to find employment because he had an expired work permit. Moreover, he had become more isolated the past few months, could not pay rent or afford food, was relying on others for help and was growing desperate.

For years many of us have been warning that Biden’s lax open border policy had enabled millions of illegal and/or improperly vetted aliens into the country. We don’t know how many, but some people put the number as high as 18 million. In many cases we don’t know who they are, where they are, and their intent. As I have denoted in previous blogs this policy exhibited absolutely no regard for the safety and security of American citizens. It was part of a broader policy that favored illegal immigrants over American citizens. Furthermore, it has had and will continue to have far-reaching negative ramifications on Americans politically, militarily, economically and socially.

Beckstrom was a native of a small town in WVA. According to friends she enlisted in the NG because she wanted to serve her country, help people, and gain experience to enable her to attain her long-term goal of joining the FBI. By all accounts she was a good person who in the words of her ex-boyfriend would “do anything for anyone who needed it.” Her mother described her as having “a heart of gold.” Attorney General Pam Bondi, commented that she could have gone home for the TG holiday, but she volunteered to remain in DC “so others could be home with their families.”

In the wake of this heinous crime the US is re-examining the entire aliens’ vetting process. In my opinion this is long overdue. It is apparent that the vetting of aliens has been incomplete and unreliable. More on this later.

The NY Post reported that of the thousands of aliens who were allowed to enter into the US under the expedited processing required by the Program, DHS investigations have now discovered “potential derogatory information” relating to national security, “public safety,” “fraud” and inclusion on “watch lists” with respect to 6,800 or more of them. This is unacceptable and calls into question the veracity of the entire vetting process. According to the NY Post former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker asserted that “you have to have an analyst, or an agent look at every doggone one of them and do it critically and set some objective criteria for disqualification.” It should be noted that Trump opined it was “virtually impossible” to deport people who arrived under the aforementioned Program.

US Senator Chuck Grassley has long been a critic of this process and has denoted various “red flags.” He received no cooperation from Biden Administration officials, but Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has been providing Grassley with the information requested.

Part of the problem is the difficulty of obtaining complete and accurate information. This is often exacerbated by the huge influx of applicants as happened with the sudden collapse of Afghanistan. You may recall that the US withdrawal was totally botched.

Additionally, asylum seekers have not been subjected to any periodic updates. Applicants who seem to be all right initially can become radicalized after they enter the US. That seems to have been the case with Lavanthal.

Conclusion

One should not ignore or downplay the effect that the irresponsible rhetoric emanating from the left (in particular the “Seditious Six”) and their allies in the media has had in fomenting violence. As we have seen with the assassination attempts on Trump, the murder of Charlie Kirk, and several other instances unstable persons like Lavanthal are particularly susceptible to being influenced.

Trump has initiated prompt and decisive action. (1) He has “stopped indefinitely pending further review of security and vetting protocols” any immigration requests “relating to Afghan nationals.” (2) He has ordered a review of all asylum vettings approved by the Biden Administration. (3) He has authorized a “sweeping review” of the millions of green card holders from 19 countries, which have been deemed security risks. US Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow announced that his department “has halted all asylum decisions until we can ensure that every alien is vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible. The safety of the American people always comes first.”

These actions will affect the lives of millions of asylum applicants and green card holders the majority of which are not problematic. It will likely engender complaints and even accusations of bias and racism, but I maintain they are long overdue. It is a shame that a good person had to die beforehand.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

DEMS FOMENTING INSURRECTION

For ten years Dem politicians and their supporters in the media and elsewhere have employed a myriad of means, some illegal, to hamper Donald Trump’s presidency. For example, they spread false and malicious rumors that he was a puppet of the Russians; they impeached him twice on “trumped up” charges; they indicted him for fake crimes; they tried to imprison him; they tried to bankrupt him; and they tried to incite violence against him by continually call him “Hitler,”, “Nazi,” “evil,” and an “existential threat to democracy.”

As I have explained in previous blogs each of these tactics was ultimately exposed to be mendacious with evil intent. Now the Dems are so desperate they have outdone themselves. Recently, several lawmakers, including Sen. Elissa Slotkin of MI, Sen. Mark Kelly of AZ and Reps. Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania and Jason Crow of Colorado all of whom have served in the military or the intelligence community and should know better, released a video containing a message that, in my view, advocates insurrection.

It advises national guardsmen and military personnel that they may and, in fact, should disobey any order that they deem to be illegal. Their message stated, in part, “our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders,” they said, taking turns delivering virtually identical lines as if from a prepared script. So, in their opinion, if an enlisted person were to disagree with a lawful order by a superior officer to enforce one of President Trump’s policies for instance to engage an enemy combatant or detain illegal immigrants who are wreaking havoc in a US city he can and should disobey it. To me, that is a clear attempt to incite insurrection.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the US Constitution states, in part, that “the President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States…” It defines insurrection as a violent uprising against an authority or government. For example, the IA empowers the president to deploy federal troops and/or to federalize the National Guard units of the individual states in specific circumstances, including, among other things, the suppression of “civil disorder.” Persons attacking ICE personnel who are enforcing federal law, such as we have been witnessing on tv is a classic instance of “civil disorder.” In my opinion, inciting insurrection by words or deeds is a clear violation of that law. There is no ambiguity. We cannot have privates debating the merit of lawful orders with lieutenants in the heat of battle. (We are not talking about orders, for example, to torture a non-combatant.)

I maintain that the Justice Department should prosecute those people in accordance with the Insurrection Act of 1807 and/or other applicable laws. Otherwise, we risk anarchy or an attempted coup, (which is probably what these insurrectionists want). Certain Dems have made it clear that they oppose Trump’s military deployment in various cities. The Trump administration sharply criticized their communique.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said those Dem lawmakers are “openly calling for insurrection.” Many people, including me, agree. Attorney General Pam Bondi averred on Fox News that the DOJ would be investigating. I hope it follows through and metes out appropriate punishment to the inciters.

The deployment of federal troops to deal with local criminal matters is not unique. “Well, it’s been invoked before,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. He’s correct. It has been many times, for example, in southern states in the 1950s to enforce civil rights and in various cities in the 1960s to suppress anti-war violence. Trump has asserted that troops are needed now to protect federal property and personnel in carrying out their lawful duties, as well as assisting in an overall drive to round up and deport illegal aliens and suppress crime.

In other related news:

  1. Reuters has reported that a federal judge has temporarily barred Guard troops from heading to Portland, Oregon. I expect that this outlier ruling will be overturned on appeal as others have in the past.
  2. In a separate, but similar ruling another judge has allowed for now a deployment to proceed in Chicago, where federal agents have embarked on a sweeping crackdown regarding illegal immigration. Illinois Governor Pritzker has been a constant critic of the deployment of federal troops in Chicago. This is ironic as Chicago has one of the highest crime rates and murder rates in the country. It’s obvious that federal assistance is needed there desperately, and Pritzker cares more about opposing Trump than the safety of his own citizens. Meanwhile, people are dying. President Trump has characterized Chicago as “a great city where there’s a lot of crime, and if the governor can’t do the job, we’ll do the job. It’s all very simple,”

CONCLUSION

Many liberal/progressive/socialist/communist commentators have tried to poo-poo this incident, but you know if a Republican had said the same thing about a Dem Administration multiple law enforcement agencies would have raided his house en masse at 3:00 AM with tv cameras at the ready to record it. This cannot be swept under the rug. An example must be made to forestall similar incitements prospectively.

by Tags: , , Leave a comment

THE SCHUMER SHUTDOWN

The contents of this blog are a compendium of information gleaned from multiple media sources. Any content that is my opinion is noted as such.

As of today, October 1, the Federal government is shut down due to Congress’ failure to pass a CR to extend the federal government’s funding for next year. It seems that every year the funding agreement is a bone of contention between the Dems and the GOP. Normally, the two sides negotiate down to the wire and reach an agreement at the “eleventh hour,” but not this year.

As the deadline approached, a bill to keep the government operating passed in the House barely, but it failed in the Senate 55-45. (60 votes were required for passage.) President Donald Trump and a bipartisan group of congressional leaders met at the White House on Monday in a last-ditch effort to forestall a shutdown, but no compromise was reached. The Senate is expected to vote again on Wednesday, likely on the same two measures that failed Tuesday, and likely with the same result. So, we have a shutdown. The primary issue seems to be that Congressional Democrats are demanding overhauls to Medicaid cuts and extensions to health care tax credits, which would cost an estimated $1.7 trillion. Republicans are opposed, but they have signaled they would agree to address those concerns in a separate bill.

The current situation is far from unique. Since 1976 the government has undergone ten shutdowns and numerous additional funding gaps that did not result in a shutdown. The last shutdown was from December 22, 2018, to January 25, 2019 during President Trump’s first term. It lasted 35 days and was the longest ever. The primary issue was Congress’ refusal to provide funding for the U.S.-Mexico border wall. Another recent notable shutdown was for 16 days in 2013 during the Obama presidency over the GOP’s demands to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Prior to the 1980s, funding gaps did not normally result in shutdowns. The difference between the two is a funding gap occurs whenever Congress has missed the deadline to pass a budget or a stopgap spending bill (also called a continuing resolution). In those instances, federal government agencies were able to continue to operate on the “assumption” that funding would eventually be restored. And eventually it was. No harm, no foul.

After 1980, however, Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti issued legal opinions that eliminated this tactic. His opinion stated that under federal law agencies were prohibited from spending money without prior congressional approval. Only essential services – such as national security, air traffic control and law enforcement – could continue. Thus, funding gaps morphed into shutdowns.

Some of the implications of the current shutdown are as follows:

  1. “Essential” personnel – such as military service members (including hundreds of members of the National Guard that Trump has deployed to various U.S. cities), law enforcement officers ICE agents, and air traffic controllers – would be required to keep working, with pay deferred until funding has been restored.
  2. Federal contractors, including hourly workers such as janitors and security guards, are not required to work and are also not guaranteed back pay.
  3. Congresspersons would continue to get paid their $174,000 annual salaries (naturally).
  4. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid disbursements would continue unabated, although there could be delays.
  5. Various “nonessential” federal services, such as national parks, monuments and museums, would be halted, reduced, or closed.
  6. Hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions of nonessential government employees would be furloughed, placed on unpaid leave, or terminated. Most significantly, the determination of which employees get furloughed, placed on unpaid leave or terminated will be the sole province of the Executive Branch, i.e. President Trump and the Budget Office without recourse. Thus, they could take this opportunity to effect further DOGE cuts, which the Dems have opposed. The Office of Management and Budget has not yet provided an estimate of how many federal workers are expected to go without pay, furloughed or fired. However, OMB Director Russ Vought has threatened mass firings. Democrats have called this an intimidation tactic, but they cannot stop it.
  7. Mail would continue unabated as the U.S. Postal Service has its own revenue stream independent of government funding.
  8. Ultimately, the ramifications of the shutdown will likely spread beyond the purely political arena and impact the lives of many Americans who rely tangentially on the above government payments and services.

Conclusion

In my opinion, once again, the Dems have walked into a trap and find themselves on the wrong side of a critical issue. According to a recent NYT/ Siena Poll 65% of Americans are opposed to a shutdown.

In my view the blame for this one rests squarely on the Senate Dems and their inept, blundering leader, (Up)Chuck Schumer. His approval rating is very low, and he is facing a primary challenge for his Senate seat from AOC, which many believe he will lose. Moreover, the left wing of his party is dissatisfied with his leadership, and he faces a likely challenge there as well. I believe he is doing this to placate the left wing, but it will backfire.

To make matters worse Fox News has been playing recordings of Schumer, Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and other Dems condemning past government shutdowns, which contradict their current ranting in favor of this one. I don’t know how they can spin that discrepancy. The optics are really bad. Yes, they will try to blame the GOPers for the shutdown, but the public will not be fooled.

It is in the Senate where the Dems have blocked the CR. Even though the GOP has a slim majority there the Dems were able to prevent them from getting the required 60 votes.

Eventually, this shutdown, like all the others, will be resolved via a CR, and government operations will return to normal (such as they are). This shutdown will become known as the “Schumer Shutdown” and will constitute his political epitaph. Regular readers of my blogs are cognizant of my extreme antipathy for him and, I will not be sorry to see him go.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

CHARLIE KIRK’S LEGACY

In my view, we can all agree that the assassination of Charlie Kirk was a senseless, horrific tragedy (those of us that are sane, anyway). Charlie was a healer, not a divider, and the outpouring of praise, respect and love for him since his assassination has been astounding. It’s almost what one might expect for a Head of State. As his wife, Erika and many others have said, if the goal of the assassin was to silence Charlie and his cause the assassin miscalculated greatly, and the repercussions for those who opposed Kirk will be just the opposite.

In fact, it has already begun. His death has sparked international attention and has reignited the condemnation of violence rather than peaceful and respectful discourse as a means of resolving political differences.  To paraphrase what Erika said in Charlie’s eulogy and what many other commentators have since reiterated, “they have unleashed the whirlwind.” Trump announced that Kirk would posthumously receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is the highest medal that can be awarded to a civilian.

Charlie has been martyred. As I said, he has become more popular in death than he was in life. In the aftermath (of his assassination), millions of people who had never heard of Charlie Kirk and his forum, Turning Point, have become ardent supporters. They have become cognizant of what he stood for and his ability to communicate peacefully and respectfully with young people, especially college students. TP’s popularity has never been higher. Recently, tens of thousands of fans have been attending TP’s sessions and often there have been many more who could not get into the venue. Fox News has reported that there have been in excess of 120,000 requests for new TP chapters.

Kirk was born and raised in the Chicago suburbs of Arlington Heights and Prospect Heights. He attended Harper College, but he dropped out after one semester to pursue his real dream, political activism. (He was a prime example of “college is not for everyone.”)

He published a range of books and hosted The Charlie Kirk Show, a talk radio program. He co-founded Turning Point (USA) (TPUSA) in 2012 and was its executive director. Kirk described it as a student organization advocating for free markets and limited government.  Kirk remained the executive director, chief fundraiser, and the public face of Turning Point USA until his death. Kirk was one of the most prominent voices of the MAGA movement and an ardent supporter of President Trump. Many people viewed him as an icon of contemporary conservatism.

He became renown for visiting college campuses where he would debate peacefully and respectfully with anyone, not only students but also anyone in the audience who espoused an opposing viewpoint. He would listen patiently to their side of an issue and then say “prove me wrong” as he rebutted their arguments.

According to the Associated Press and other media outlets video clips of these campus appearances spread online. AP reported that the result was “a steady stream of donations that transformed TPUSA into one of the country’s largest political organizations.”  Eventually, TPUSA began holding massive rallies in which top conservative leaders addressed tens of thousands of young voters. 

Commencing in October 2020 Kirk hosted a daily three-hour radio talk show, The Charlie Kirk Show, on Salem Media Group’s “The Answer” radio channel. Also, he launched “Turning Point Live,” which was a three-hour streaming talk show aimed at Gen Z’ers. It was among the most-popular podcasts on Apple Podcasts. According to internal data from TPUSA, Kirk’s podcast was downloaded between 500,000 and 750,000 times each day in 2024.  

In 2021, TPUSA launched Turning Point Academy, an online alternative to schools that were “poisoning our youth with anti-American ideas.” TPA was intended to cater to families seeking an “America-first education.”

In a March 2025 interview with California Governor Gavin Newsom Kirk related that while building TPUSA, “I recognized that there was an ideological imbalance on a lot of these college campuses, and we wanted to provide a counterpoint rooted in conservative, pro-freedom, pro-liberty, America First ideas.”  He added that when TPUSA began, about 75% of college students identified as Democrat. Non-progressive students were afraid to voice their opinions and beliefs for fear of retaliation from students, professors, and school administrators. TPUSA provided emotional support for them.

TPUSA sought to make both the colleges and professors accountable for their actions. TPUSA’s goal was to shift the youth vote at least 10 points toward Republicans, a target that they achieved by the 2024 presidential election. I believe this shift helped Trump win the election. TPUSA’s other activities include the publication of the “School Board Watchlist” and the “Professor Watchlist,” which are lists sourced by published news stories that describe instances of radical behavior among college professors and schools.

Conclusion

In view of the foregoing, it is easy to see how Kirk became a target of the radical left. In retrospect it should not be surprising that a deranged far-left activist, fueled by the irresponsible, hateful and inaccurate characterizations spewed by Dem politicians and their supporters in the media would decide to assassinate him. Erika Kirk has said she “forgives” the assassin, which is her right, but I and many others cannot. Charlie was a great man, an icon, who was an inspiration to millions. The assassin’s goal was to silence him, but as I said above, it has had the opposite effect.

Rest in peace, Charlie. You will be sorely missed and long remembered.

by Tags: , , 2 Comments

LEFT WING VIOLENCE

The empirical evidence keeps mounting up. The senseless, horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk was the latest example of an alarming trend that began a decade ago. Just off the top of my head I can recall several examples of left-wing violence since then, such as:

  1. The two assassination attempts of Donald Trump in Butler, PA and at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach. In the first one the assassin missed by a fraction of a millimeter and only because Trump fortuitously turned his head at the last minute to make reference to a chart off to the side. Unfortunately, an innocent bystander was killed. In the second instance an assassin was able to hide in the bushes on the golf course for hours lying in wait for Trump to pass by until an alert secret service officer discovered him.
  2. The near murder of Senate Majority Leader Steve Scalise as part of a mass shooting in June 2017 during a practice session for the annual Congressional Softball Game in Alexandria, VA.
  3. The “Black Lives Matter” riots in various cities including Minneapolis, NYC and Portland in May 2020 after the killing of George Floyd by police. These were characterized by instances of vandalism, looting, and clashes with authorities. Many Dems dismissed these riots as “nonviolent,” but tell that to the victims.
  4. The over 8,700 Antifa-inspired riots that occurred in 68 locations throughout the country between May 25th and July 31st, 2020. The images of cities burning, businesses being destroyed and people being carjacked, assaulted and worse are indelibly etched in my mind.
  5. The assassination attempt on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in June 2022. The assassin planned to break into Kavanaugh’s home, kill him, and then commit suicide, but, for some reason, he had a change of heart.
  6. The continuing lawlessness being perpetrated in our cities predominantly those run by Dems due to sanctuary policies, lax law enforcement, no cash bail, and woke DAs and juries. Ironically, most of the victims of these crimes are minorities, the poor, and the disadvantaged, the very people that the Dems profess to sympathize with and seek to help.
  7. The wanton destruction of much of Minneapolis, Chicago and other cities during the summer of 2021.
  8. The assassination of Charlie Hurt. This was a huge blow to the psyche of America. Charlie was beloved by a goodly number of people. In particular, many young people idolized him. He was not an antagonistic person. Far from it. He was a healer, a good person whose aim was to foster discussions of differences of opinion openly and peacefully, often on college campuses, and he was very good at it. His assassination was such as waste. His legion of fans and supporters are beside themselves with grief. Many of them as well as his wife, Stephanie, have vowed to continue or even enhance his work.

These are merely a few examples. The Dems are fond of saying that there is violence on both sides, but that is a false narrative. I cannot think of any violence within recent memory planned and perpetrated by conservatives. (I don’t count the January 6 protest because it was overblown by the Dems and their allies in the mainstream media to damage Trump, and the protesters didn’t kill anyone. A cop shot one of the protesters unnecessarily.) If you can, I would like to hear it.

Why is this? Why do lefties have the urge to settle political differences violently rather than by peaceful debate? There are several reasons for this, but in my view the primary factor is the hateful rhetoric emanating from (1) left-leaning politicians, such as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, (2) news commentators such as Rachel Maddow, Morning Joe and virtually anyone on CNN or MSNBC, (3) celebrities such as Robert DeNiro, and (4) social media postings.

It has become quite common to refer to any conservative or Republican as “racist,” “Nazi,” “Hitler,” “evil,” and “a threat to democracy.” If a lie is repeated often enough, it becomes believable. Most of us realize that these monikers are ridiculously false, but there are many unstable people that take them seriously. In their twisted minds they perceive that those characterizations from the types of sources I mentioned give them license to attack those persons so labeled.

In a moment of sanity Comcast, which owns MSNBC, fired Matthew Dowd, one of its political analysts, for his “insensitive” and “inappropriate” commentary regarding the Charlie Kirk assassination. In my view there are many others in the media who deserve the same fate. Furthermore, Comcast cautioned its commentators to “maintain a respectful exchange of ideas” regardless of whether or not they agree with Kirk’s views.

Conclusion

The details of the Charlie Kirk assassination are so horrific that many people hope that it will be the “last straw,” that it will shock Americans enough to put an end to the senseless violence that has been plaguing our country. I, too, hope so, but I fear it will not.

The only way to stop the senseless and arbitrary violence is to win elections. Get out and vote, vote, vote!

by Tags: , , Leave a comment