America First Policy Institute Demands Key Battleground States Enforce Ban On Non-Citizen Voting

The American First Policy Institute (AFPI) is demanding that key battleground states enforce their constitutional duty to ensure that non-American citizens do not vote in the upcoming 2024 election, the Daily Caller learned first.

AFPI addressed nine letters to the chief elections officers of Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New York, Nevada, Michigan, Illinois, California and Arizona, where the organization says there are the most amount of illegal aliens, the Daily Caller learned. The letters, obtained by the Daily Caller, demand that each state, under the National Voter Registration Act, ensure that only eligible citizens are registered to vote.

“This issue should be straightforward – the federal government should be doing everything in its power to ensure that only US citizens vote in federal elections. This is their constitutional duty. Yet, the actions of the Biden Administration paint a different story,” Chad Wolf, former Acting Homeland Security Secretary and Executive Director of the America First Policy Institute, said in a press release obtained by the Daily Caller. “The American people deserve to know that states will take all necessary steps to ensure only American citizens exercise our sacred right to vote.”

The letters call on each state’s leader of elections, whether the secretary of state or executive director, to oversee how the state complies with the National Voter Registration Act.

“Due to the failure of the Biden Administration to secure the border, it is now incumbent on officials like you to ensure that the 2024 election is not compromised by illegal aliens casting votes. Since 2021 no less than 11 million illegal aliens have entered the country. This is a population greater than that of eleven states and the District of Columbia combined, which together account for 41 electoral votes in a presidential election,” the letter to Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes reads.

Fontes responded to the letter in a statement to the Daily Caller, pledging to commit the “ensuring the integrity” of the 2024 election.

“The Office of the Secretary of State is committed to ensuring the integrity of our electoral system by upholding all applicable federal and state laws regarding voter registration and eligibility,” the Arizona Secretary of State office told the Daily Caller in a statement.

“Under the National Voter Registration Act, we maintain accurate and updated voter rolls, ensuring that only eligible citizens are registered to vote. Suggestions and concerns from any orgs are reviewed in accordance to these legal standards,” the statement continued.

Ahead of the 2024 election, Republicans are focusing their efforts on election integrity initiatives. House Speaker Mike Johnson met with former President Donald Trump on April 12 to discuss the topic. Following his meeting with Trump, Johnson announced election integrity legislation to make individuals prove that they are American citizens before voting in a federal election.

Election integrity has been a hot-button issue for Republican voters and has been a topic of conversation since the 2020 election. A previous Daily Caller analysis, with about eight months until the 2024 election, showed that several key battleground states, including those that helped Biden in the 2020 election, are still expected to use many of the election procedures in 2024 that caused controversy in the last presidential election.

“There are already a number of municipalities and a dozen states which could allow non-citizens to vote in state/local elections,” Hogan Gidley, Vice-Chair of AFPI’s Center for Election Integrity, said in a press release obtained by the Daily Caller. “Our mission is simple, make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. Illegal voting by non-citizens would be cheating. So, what are these states’ plans to stop it?”

AUTHOR

REAGAN REESE

White House correspondent.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Admin Spending Millions To Protect Foreign Borders As America’s Is In Crisis

‘They Are Miles Ahead’: Despite ‘Election Integrity’ Hype, GOP Could Be Walking Into 2024 Legal Buzzsaw

Former Czech prime minister: Mass migration ‘a poison used for the assisted suicide of Europe and its culture’

Shocking Turn-Out at Biden Event

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Half Of Americans Would Support Mass Deportation Of Illegal Migrants: POLL

Just over half of Americans now say they would support the mass deportation of illegal migrants, a poll released Thursday found.

The 51% who approve of the action includes 42% of Democrats, as well as 68% of Republicans and 46% of independents, according to the Axios Vibes/The Harris Poll survey. Approximately two-thirds of respondents believe illegal immigration is a legitimate crisis as President Joe Biden’s administration has seen record numbers of border crossings.

Mark Penn, chairman of The Harris Poll, told Axios that Biden’s “efforts to shift responsibility for the issue to [former President Donald] Trump are not going to work.”

“I was surprised at the public support for large-scale deportations,” Penn said.  “I think they’re just sending a message to politicians: ‘Get this under control.’”

Border Patrol had 137,480 encounters at the southern border in March, and has already seen 1 million in fiscal year 2024, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data. Fiscal year 2022 included nearly 2.2 million encounters and fiscal year 2023 had 2 million.

A majority of White Americans would support mass deportations, while 45% of Latinos and 40% of black respondents said the same, according to the poll.

Increased crime rates, drugs and violence; added costs to taxpayers; and potential terrorism and national security risks are Americans’ top concerns related to illegal immigration, according to the poll.

The survey also found that Americans largely support immigration as long as it’s legal, with 65% saying the U.S. should make it easier for those wanting a better life to legally enter the country so they don’t try to illegally.

“The tradeoff here in the poll is, people would take expanded legal immigration if they saw there’s a crackdown on the border,” Penn said.

Click here, here, here, here and hear to view pictures of the lack of border security.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was impeached by the House in February over his handling of the border crisis, but the Democratic-controlled Senate dismissed the two articles without a trial on April 17.

The issue has become a main point on the campaign trail as illegal immigration continues to rank among the top concerns Americans have ahead of November. Polling suggests voters trust Trump by double digits more than Biden on the issue.

The poll surveyed 6,251 U.S. adults between March 29-31, April 5-7 and April 12-14, and it has a margin of error of plus or minus 1.5%.

Neither Biden’s campaign nor the White House immediately responded to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s requests for comment.

AUTHOR

MARY LOU MASTERS

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘For the love of god’: Leaked audio reveals Dem gov ripping Biden admin over border security

Americans Are Now Most Concerned About Immigration, Poll Finds

Media Outlets Are Misrepresenting Crime Stats To Biden’s Benefit

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Republicans Sound Alarm On Efforts To Shield Ukraine Funding From American Voters

As President Joe Biden signed legislation Wednesday to send billions of dollars more in aid to Ukraine, officials from Brussels to Washington are working to hamstring former President Donald Trump from taking a different route should he win back the White House.

With Congress granting Biden additional “drawdown” authority to send weapons to Kyiv, and NATO allies in Europe seeking to take the power to send aid away from the White House, multiple Senate Republicans, strategists and former Trump officials told the Daily Caller efforts to “Trump-proof” foreign aid are misguided and futile.

“There are things that they’re setting in motion here that are going to make it very difficult for Trump to, if he’s elected president, to undo this, to extricate us, from these arrangements,” Utah Sen. Mike Lee said. “I mean, look there are a thousand things you can do with government contracting that can make it either easier or harder for a subsequent administration to take a different approach.”

Lee is among the lawmakers and officials who opposed the aid package that will send $26.4 billion of funding to Israel, $8.1 billion of funding to Taiwan and $61 billion of more aid to Ukraine. Several of the opponents noted that, in their view, Ukraine is unlikely to prevail in the long-term against Russia and a settlement must be negotiated sooner rather than later.

“The fact is that the strategy isn’t working. There is no strategy,” Fred Fleitz, the vice chair of America First Policy Institute’s Center for American Security said. “And Trump understands that. And it’s just not fair for these Democrats to say, well, we’re going to Trump-proof NATO. We’re going to Trump proof aid for Ukraine.”

Polling also shows that sending additional aid to Ukraine is not particularly popular with battleground state voters, who are more focused on border security in the U.S. as border crossings and illegal immigrant apprehensions have hit record highs under the Biden administration.

A growing constituency in the Republican Party has endorsed halting further aid to Ukraine until progress is made on stemming the tide of illegal immigration in the U.S. While Trump has not expressed blanket opposition to more aid for Ukraine, some of his strongest allies at the Capitol are the biggest proponents of putting America’s border first.

In early April, Politico reported that the “U.S. and other Western countries are considering transferring to NATO a U.S.-led multinational group that coordinates the shipment of weapons to Ukraine, one of several new proposals that could help maintain the flow of arms to Kyiv under a second Donald Trump presidency.”

The group was created at the beginning of the war by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley with a goal “to coordinate Western support for Kyiv’s defenses.”

Several Democrats in the Senate told Politico in February that they need to take new steps to protect NATO from a potential second Trump term.

Conservatives pushed back on these efforts, and characterizations of Trump as anti-NATO, in conversations with the Caller.

“We’re seeing fear mongering by President Trump’s political opponents. And I think a lot of it has to go to the fact that they are absolutely standing with President Biden’s policy on Ukraine. That has no strategy. Trump has said, I want to stop the killing. He hasn’t said he wants to cut off Ukraine,” Fleitz said.

“Now, I read in the article that there’s some members of Congress who want to prevent Trump from pulling out of NATO. Trump doesn’t plan to pull out of NATO. As far as I know. He hasn’t said that,” Fleitz continued. “But what he has said is that he wants to hold NATO members accountable for their treaty obligations, to spend 2% of the GDP on defense. And Trump is not the only president to call for that. He’s just the only president who’s been serious about it.”

Richard Grenell, the former Acting Director of National Intelligence under Trump, told the Caller that the idea of Trump-proofing weapons for Ukraine is “silly politics during an election year.”

“What I would say is nothing undermines NATO more than being a member of a military alliance and yet not being able to contribute to that military alliance in any meaningful way,” Grenell said. “I don’t even want to speculate because Donald Trump made NATO stronger. You know, hundreds of billions of dollars more came into NATO than ever before.”

“Everyone knows exactly what Donald Trump is going to do for NATO, because they saw it for four years. There are no surprises. He’s going to absolutely demand that countries pay their 2014 commitment and their obligations. We don’t see that from the Biden team. They don’t demand it. They don’t bring it up,” Grenell added.

Republican Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson said after reading the Politico report, “the first thought through my mind was, in terms of danger to world peace, President Biden has posed a far greater danger than anything Trump could pose.”

“I’m getting a little sick of Europe relying on U.S. debt to provide a defensive shield for Europe. Their combined economies are as big as the U.S.. They do this themselves,” Johnson added.

Fleitz echoed that sentiment: “If there’s an effort by Democratic politicians and members of, and European leaders to somehow Trump proof Ukraine by having Europe provide more military aid. I’m all for that. Because the big problem here is that countries like Germany and France are giving a pittance when it comes to aid to Ukraine. We’re bearing the majority of the burden, and they really shouldn’t be criticizing us when they are not doing nearly enough to help Ukraine.”

John Ullyot, a National Security Council spokesman under Trump, told the Caller that “Democrats who say otherwise and take steps to jam up Trump on NATO are putting Europe First, not America First. That simply doesn’t fly with U.S. taxpayers and voters as a matter of common sense.”

Trump had expressed support for giving some additional aid to Ukraine in the form of a loan, and Congressional Republicans sold him on that as part of the latest aid package. About $10 billion of the $60 billion was enacted as a loan, but it is forgivable if the White House opts not to make Kyiv pay it back.

“I believe $10 billion of the $60 billion aid package it has designated as a loan. And that’s for humanitarian aid. And we expect Ukraine to pay it back. Realistically, given how their economy has been devastated, even when the war is over, it doesn’t seem likely we’ll be able to pay that in the immediate future,” Fleitz said.

Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott told the Caller that a loan makes more sense than grants for foreign aid, but that it should not be forgivable.

“I mean, I think having a loan makes a lot more sense than just grants. I think that’s what we ought to be doing with our foreign aid. If you want to give your money away, that’s one thing, for your federal government to give your money away, that’s something totally different,” Scott said. “So I think that this ought to be in the form of a loan and it shouldn’t be forgivable.”

Johnson referred to the loan as “mere window dressing” and “political cover” saying: “We are going to be discussing when this war finally ends, how do you rebuild Ukraine to the tune of what, something around a $1 trillion price. Do you think a $10 billion loan is going to even enter that equation? So no, it’s window dressing. It’s nothing but mere political cover for those members whose constituents, by and large, would prefer they not vote for sending $60 billion down the drain.”

“It’s not really a loan. It’s a loan that has a thousand different ways that the loan can be waived built into the bill. And it’s pretty plain to me on the text of the statute that what they’ve got in mind is, getting this set up and then making sure the Biden administration forgives the loan. They’ve made it very, very easy to do that. And so to call something a loan when you’ve built into the law mechanisms to make it sort of optional. It’s very deceptive,” Lee said.

Despite the anger over the aid package from the Republican base, Trump, for his part, did not try to stop it. He even provided encouragement to the increasingly-maligned Speaker Mike Johnson, saying he’s “trying very hard.”

AUTHOR

HENRY RODGERS

Chief national correspondent. Follow Henry Rodgers On Twitter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Senate Passes Foreign Aid Package, Bill That Could Ban TikTok

‘This Is Our Opportunity’ — Top GOP Senators Game McConnell’s Ouster After Botched Border Deal

GOP Civil War Deepens As Senators Claim McConnell Threw Party’s Voters ‘Under The Bus’ On Ukraine, Border

‘Weaponized His Leadership’: Insurgent Senate GOP Forms Post-McConnell Plan

Senate Republicans Sound Off On Leaked Border Deal Proposals, Say They Will Absolutely Not Vote For Them

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Prime Minister Netanyahu: ‘Campus Antisemitism Reminiscent of 1930s Germany’

“What’s happening in America’s college campuses is horrific.” — Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel.


Netanyahu: ‘Campus antisemitism reminiscent of 1930s Germany’

The Prime Minister condemned the antisemitic incidents and protests currently occurring on university campuses in the US and called on administrators to stop them.

By: Israel National News, Apr 24, 2024:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a video in English on Wednesday in which he condemned the anti-Israel and antisemitic rallies currently being held in universities in the United States.

“What’s happening in America’s college campuses is horrific. Antisemitic mobs have taken over leading universities. They call for the annihilation of Israel. They attack Jewish students. They attack Jewish faculty. This is reminiscent of what happened in German universities in the 1930s. It’s unconscionable. It has to be stopped. It has to be condemned and condemned unequivocally. But that’s not what happened. The response of several university presidents was shameful,” the Prime Minister stated.

With this, he noted that “fortunately, state, local, and federal officials, many of them have responded differently but there has to be more. More has to be done. It has to be done not only because they attack Israel, that’s bad enough, not only because they want to kill Jews wherever they are, that’s bad enough, it’s also when you listen to them, it’s also because they say not only, ‘Death to Israel. Death to the Jews,” but “death to America.’ And this tells us that there is an antisemitic surge here that has terrible consequences.

“We see this exponential rise of antisemitism throughout America and throughout Western societies as Israel tries to defend itself against genocidal terrorists, genocidal terrorists who hide behind civilians. Yet it is Israel that is falsely accused of genocide, Israel that is falsely accused of starvation, and all sundry war crimes. It’s all one big libel. But that’s not new. We’ve seen in history that antisemitic attacks were always preceded by vilification and slander, lies that were cast against the Jewish people that are unbelievable yet people believed them.”

Netanyahu added: “Now, what is important now is for all of us, all of us who are interested and cherish our values and our civilization, to stand up together and to say enough is enough. We have to stop antisemitism because antisemitism is the canary in the coal mine. It always precedes larger conflagrations that engulf the entire world.

“So I ask all of you, Jews and non-Jews alike, who are concerned with our common future and our common values to do one thing: stand up, speak up, be counted. Stop antisemitism now,” he concluded.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Report: Biden Regime Behind Imminent Arrest Warrants for Senior Israel Officials

Now Harvard Is Taken Over By Genocidal Terrorists

Terrorists Blocking Bridges Get Free Bail—And the Democratic Party’s Fundraising Platform Gets a Cut

All the Tents, Signs, Keffiyehs Are the Same: America’s Worst Enemies Funding America’s Ruin

Vast Majority of Terrorism Supporters on US Campuses are NOT American Students

France: Young Jewish Girl Kidnapped, Raped Migrant Messaged Her Mother That He Was Going to Prostitute Her “For Palestine”

Columbia President’s on 9/11 Attacks : ‘Terrorism is a Form of Protesting’

RELATED VIDEO: Iran’s Nuclear Program buried by thousands of Israeli UAV’s!

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

U.S. State Department Stabs Israel in the Back, Twists the Knife

Biden administration promotes Hamas propaganda by smearing Israel as a human rights abuser.

On Tuesday, the State Department published its 2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. What should have been a non-political document completed the betrayal of Israel that the Biden administration began on March 25, when it refrained from having the U.S. veto a UN resolution calling for a Gaza ceasefire, the impact of which would enable the leadership of Hamas to survive and launch more attacks on Jews and Jewish babies. The clear meaning of the October 7 massacre was witnessed in Palestinians burning infants alive to cries of “Allahu Akbar” as though the incineration of the innocent – should they be Jews – is a holy sacrament rather than a sick episode in the wretched history of humanity’s inhumanity to its weakest members.

Far from being horrified by this celebration of evil, the Biden administration conflated the practices of the only civilized society in the Middle East with the monsters seeking its destruction.

Fox News noted that the Biden State Department report “highlighted Israel prominently, featuring concerns over the country’s precautions to minimize the civilian toll of Palestinians on the first page, which is normally reserved for the most egregious of human rights abusers.”

Not only does the report include Israel among the most barbaric human rights abusers – China, Putin’s Russia, the Taliban, and Iran, the would-be exterminators of the Jewish state — but “Israel was mentioned before the Biden administration’s State Department addressed ‘ongoing and brutal human rights abuses in Iran’ or ‘the Taliban’s systemic mistreatment of and discrimination against Afghanistan’s women and girls.’”

In Iran, they chant “Death to America” and have been waging war against their own people, brutally suppressing nationwide riots that broke out after Sharia police murdered a young woman, Mahsa Amini, who had been arrested for not wearing her hijab properly. In Afghanistan, girls have been denied the right to an education, and the Taliban regime’s Supreme Leader announced in late March: “We will flog women in public, we will stone them to death in public.” No similar quotes were offered by the State Department from Israel’s leaders… because there are none.

The State Department report treats Israel as a worse human rights abuser than any of the above.

As far as the State Department is concerned, Israel’s alleged human rights violations are so egregious that they warrant being discussed immediately after the report mentions “the Kremlin’s disregard and contempt for human rights,” which “are on full display in its war against Ukraine,” and the “horrific violence, death, and destruction, including mass killings, unjust detentions, rape, and other forms of gender-based violence” that the Sudanese Armed Forces have unleashed in that country. In other words, Israel – the only non-racist democracy in the Middle East – is worse than the slaveocracy in Sudan, when it comes to the Jews’ human rights records.

This is an obscene libel. John Spencer, who is chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute (MWI) at West Point, analyzed the IDF’s actions in Gaza and reported in late March that “Israel has implemented more precautions to prevent civilian harm than any military in history—above and beyond what international law requires and more than the U.S. did in its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Likewise, the British Colonel Richard Kemp stated early this month that in Gaza, “the ratio of deaths of civilians to military personnel was far lower than in other wars where armies had not been accused of war crimes, adding that he was ‘not aware of any war crimes [committed by the IDF].’”

The State Department has ignored both Spencer and Kemp, and shown its appreciation for Goebbels’ infamous advice that people will more readily believe a Big Lie than a small one – as it happens in this case also to further the latest campaign – to exterminate the Jews “from the river to the sea.”

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has insisted that not a single Jew will be allowed to live in a Palestinian state. This is not a plan for coexistence; it’s a recipe for genocide.

An Egyptian imam, Muhammad Hussein Ya’qoub, made that plain in a 2009 televised sermon in which he articulated the neo-Nazi character of the anti-Israel war, saying that Muslim hatred of Jews had nothing to do with Israel and everything to do with the Qur’an:

“If the Jews left Palestine to us, would we start loving them? Of course not. We will never love them. Absolutely not…. Your belief regarding the Jews should be, first, that they are infidels, and second, that they are enemies…. You must believe that we will fight, defeat, and annihilate them, until not a single Jew remains on the face of the Earth.”

Got that, Secretary of State Blinken? This is a thousand-year Islamic imperative, rooted in the Qur’an’s calls to “kill them wherever you find them” (2:191, 4:89, cf. 9:5).

Israel is in the midst of a war for its survival – not as a state but as the home of the Jews. The war against the jihadist military base in Gaza is not a political war but a desperate effort to stave off a genocidal campaign which has been pursued without relief for 75 years in Gaza and more than a thousand years in the historic home of the Jews – the land around the Jordan. Yet its principal foes are radical Islamists – aided and abetted by a criminal White House seeking votes and support from a neo-Nazi Left based in American universities and funded by a self-hating Jew – George Soros – who long ago should have been prosecuted for organizing illegal street demonstrations attacking Wall Street and endangering the lives of ordinary Americans in the process.

Thanks to the oddities of American elections, the Jews’ main enemy at this point is a criminal sitting in the White House who is desperately seeking votes in Michigan and selling his political influence to America’s enemies – and giving less of a damn about American citizens than any president in history before him.

AUTHORS

RELATED ARTICLES:

MEF Report Details ‘Principles of Victory’ in Gaza and Beyond

France: Muslim, 16, plotted jihad massacre at Olympics, wanted to ‘die as martyr in name of Islamic caliphate’

Germany: Schoolchildren converting to Islam, Christian students feel like outsiders and are desperate to fit in

Biden, His Uncle, Cannibalism, and Papua New Guinea

Egypt: Muslims attack Christian homes following rumors of planned church construction

Italy: Muslim migrant screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ spray-paints ‘Allah’ on church wall

Ritchie Torres and the Million-Dollar Grant to the Bronx Muslim Center

Pakistan: Muslim drugs 13-year-old Christian boy and coerces him into converting to Islam

Fatah TV anchor accuses Hamas of killing aid workers, stealing food and water, manufacturing Gaza food crisis

RELATED VIDEO: U.K. Police Visit Man for Saying ‘Christians Need to Take a Stand’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Where Is the Safe Space for Jews?

A recent trend on college campuses is to install “safe spaces,” places where students — or certain identity-group subsets of students — can go to feel safe. These safe spaces are exclusionary by design; they protect students by insulating them. In extreme cases, safe spaces have been deemed to cover entire campuses, leading to the exclusion or disinvitation of undesirable visitors.

This “safe space” trend has been rightly ridiculed for its tendency to protect college students’ feelings from exposure to opposing viewpoints. Such exposure serves to sharpen the mind and used to be college’s main virtue. Thus, protecting students from “harm” by sequestering them from intellectual diversity undermines the whole point of college education.

But the silly “safe space” trend adopted the language of harm and safety because those are important considerations. Sticking with the collegiate context, students can’t devote themselves to their studies if they take their life in their hands every time they walk across campus. Fertilizing their mental acreage is orders of magnitude more difficult when outside sounds like a warzone, or a rock concert, or both at the same time.

The safety of college campuses — most of whom have a department devoted to preserving it — is often taken for granted, else loving parents would think twice before sending sweet Suzy off to a dormitory. Basic physical safety should be a guarantee on which all students can rely, regardless of their background. Unfortunately, that guarantee is no longer universal.

Where is the safe space for Jews?

On Sunday, Rabbi Elie Buechler of Columbia University’s Jewish Learning Initiative on Campus (JLIC) strongly recommended that Jewish students “return home as soon as possible and remain home until the reality in and around campus has dramatically improved.”

“The events of the last few days, especially last night, have made it clear the Columbia University’s Public Safety and the NYPD cannot guarantee Jewish students’ safety in the face of extreme anti-Semitism and anarchy,” wrote Buechler. “It is not our job as Jews to ensure our own safety on campus. No one should have to endure this level of hatred, let alone at school.”

Last Thursday, anti-Semitic activists took over Columbia University’s central quad, turning it into a tent city overnight. The activists, many of whom are students, have praised Hamas’s military arm Al-Qassam, called for the destruction of Israel, and openly invited the killing of counter-protestors. Despite more than 100 arrests on Thursday, the rabble have only grown bolder.

Now, university administrators appear to have given up any hope of reasserting control of their campus property. The rabbi’s counsel to Jewish students was “the reason why classes went virtual at Columbia today,” Rabbi Yaakov Menken, managing director of the Coalition for Jewish Values, said Monday on “Washington Watch.” By Tuesday, Columbia University announced it was switching to hybrid classes for the remainder of the semester.

“There was one professor, Shai Davidai, who was having none of it,” Menken continued. “He said, ‘I am bringing 10 students and alumni with me Monday morning. We’re going to go on to the campus. We’re going to go right into the middle of that anti-Semitic demonstration, and we insist you keep us safe.’”

Rather than keep him safe, “Columbia deactivated the access card of their professor,” Menken related in disbelief. “Professor Shai Davidai of Columbia University had his access card deactivated by the university to prevent him from interfering with the anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas demonstration at that campus.” Columbia University COO Cas Holloway personally appeared at the campus gate to prevent Davidai from entering the.

Davidai is an assistant professor in Columbia Business School’s Management Division, and he also leads Columbia’s anti-Semitism task force. Columbia administrators had to know that barring the head of the anti-Semitism task force from campus would provoke outrage, yet they chose to confront the backlash rather than confront the unruly mob that has taken over their campus. “Columbia was confronted with a clear choice either the anti-Semitic barbarians or the Jews. They expressly chose the anti-Semitic barbarians,” exclaimed Menken. “The entire administration of Columbia is utterly compromised by Jew hatred.”

Where is the safe space for Jews?

Certainly not at Columbia University, nor at Yale. Sahar Tartak, a Jewish student at Yale who is also a conservative reporter, was physically assaulted and blocked by protestors while attempting to film the pro-Hamas demonstration — which included taking down an American flag on a university flagpole — at that university. After demonstrators surrounded and blockaded her, a keffiyeh-garbed man stabbed Tartak in the eye with a Palestinian flag he carried.

At this point, the terrorist groupies aren’t even pretending to be motivated by non-violent, humanitarian concern for Palestinian civilians. “Anti-Semitism is always about finding a façade, a pretense, and then moving on to their end goal, which has always been ethnic cleansing and genocide,” argued Menken. “They were never anti-Israel protests. They were always anti-Semitic protests that glorify terrorism, that glorify atrocities, actual beheading of babies and rapes and holding hostages. These are not decent human beings.”

Where is the safe space for Jews?

You won’t find one at MITNYUUniversity of MichiganOhio State UniversityUC Berkeley, or Boston University. I’m sure that’s only the tip of the iceberg, since the anti-Semitic protests have reached even smaller, lesser known schools like Cal Poly Humbolt or UNC Charlotte.

At this point, it seems like American Jews are safest anywhere that isn’t a college campus. But that’s obviously not a workable solution in the long run. Today’s students are tomorrow’s lawyers, bankers, and politicians — not to mention professors. Are American Jews simply supposed to accept a second-class status, where they don’t get to go to college and are governed by those who hate them? How well did that work in 1930s Germany? If Jews aren’t safe on American college campuses, then ultimately they won’t be safe anywhere else in America.

Where is the safe space for Jews?

Jews could perhaps find a safe haven on other shores. But a cursory glance around the world shows the same violent anti-Semitism on shameful display in American universities. Judging by U.N. voting records, America sits near the top of the list of pro-Jewish countries. If Jews can find few countries friendlier than the U.S., and they are hated here, where can they go?

Where is the safe space for Jews?

The obvious exception is the world’s only Jewish-majority nation-state (although two million Arabs also live there peacefully), the postage stamp-sized parcel of seacoast known as Israel. Established in 1948 in response to the Holocaust, the modern state of Israel has provided a safe haven for persecuted Jews of every nationality.

Yet Israel’s Jews are not safe even within their own paper-snowflake borders. Hamas proved that on October 7, 2023, when they launched an unprovoked invasion on a Jewish holy day, slaughtering more than 1,200 Jews, kidnapping more than 200 prisoners, burning, raping, and pillaging wherever they could. Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist group supported by America’s geopolitical adversary Iran, openly calls for Israel’s “annihilation” and has broadcast its intention to repeat its October 7 attack as often as it is capable.

Hamas is not Israel’s only threat. Hezbollah, another Iran-backed terror group, operates out of Israel’s northern neighbor Lebanon, and it has kept up frequent rocket barrages against Israel to divide its attention. “There are, I believe, about 80,000 Israelis who can’t go home every night because the rockets being shot in by Hezbollah out of Lebanon,” Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wisc.) remarked on “Washington Watch.” “Obviously Israel cannot permanently tell 70 or 80,000 of their citizens, ‘you can’t go home at night.’”

Behind these groups lies Iran, a global terror sponsor, which is close to developing a nuclear weapon and is avowedly committed to Israel’s destruction.

Where is the safe space for Jews?

But perhaps the campus mobs openly supporting Hamas are ignorant of Hamas’s goal and merely want American Jews to return to Israel. If that were true, they would also have to be ignorant of the words coming out of their own mouth.

“From the river to the sea, Palestine is almost free,” they chanted. That’s a strange twist on their classic, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” By “free,” they mean free of Jews. By “from the river to the sea,” the chant invokes (and confuses) the boundaries of the land God promised to give to Israel in Deuteronomy 11:24, “from the River, the River Euphrates, to the western sea.” The technical term for seeking to drive all people of a given ethnic group out of a given territory is “ethnic cleansing.”

Again, they chanted, “There is only one solution: intifada, revolution.” “One solution” echoes the Nazis’ “Final Solution to the Jewish problem”: extermination camps. Intifada and revolution — both terms for riots or armed uprisings — are the means by which this chant proposes to achieve its end: the annihilation of all Jews everywhere.

No, the protestors know very well what unthinkable barbarity these chants call for. They share the end of Hamas.

Where is the safe space for Jews?

The utmost irony is that these disgraceful displays of anti-Semitism were sparked by the attack on Israel. When most sovereign nations suffer an unprovoked attack by an international terrorist outfit, they receive universal acknowledgements of sympathy, solidarity, and solace, even from parties who usually maintain a frosty distance. But when Israel was attacked, that outrage provoked not only sympathy for Israel but also expressions of solidarity with those who attacked her — even before Israel had mounted any military response.

This has led some Jews, even non-Zionists, to the inevitable conclusion that Israel’s demise would only result in further attacks on Jews everywhere. “The idea that Jews can be safe anywhere if they’re not secure in Israel has just been shattered,” said foreign policy expert Caroline Glick. “It’s very clear that the security of all Jews everywhere is contingent on Israel defeating our enemies in Israel.”

Under the Biden administration, Israel’s closest and most powerful friend is working overtime to snatch that rightful victory away from them. If that happens, it will lead right back to the question we’ve been asking all along.

Where is the safe space for Jews?

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Remembering the Passover in Troubled Times

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

WATCH: Biden Praises AOC’s Vile Defense of Violent Anti-Jewish Pogroms on University Campuses

AOC, speaking alongside Joe Biden at a climate hoax event, endorses the pro-Hamas takeover of college campuses.

This is the awful depths America has sunk to under the party of tyranny.

AOC lauded by Biden after she applauds ‘peaceful’ student protests at Columbia, Yale, and Berkley

By Ryan King, NY Post, April 22, 2024:

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hailed the “peaceful” student-led protests at Columbia University Monday, one day after campus rabbi Elie Buechler warned Jewish students to leave due to “extreme antisemitism.”

The “Squad” member’s praise for the demonstrations on Morningside Heights came as she introduced President Biden at an Earth Day event at Prince William Forest Park in Triangle, Va.

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Columbia University: Protestors Call Jews ‘Pigs’ As Qur’an Says

Columbia President’s on 9/11 Attacks : ‘Terrorism is a Form of Protesting’

France: Young Jewish Girl Kidnapped, Raped Migrant Messaged Her Mother That He Was Going to Prostitute Her “For Palestine”

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

On Israel, Soros Funds the Protests and the Protested

What’s the real difference between Biden and Hamas supporters?

Outside the mob of Hamas supporters were chanting “Genocide Joe” while inside Joe Biden was trying to raise more money.

Yet the terrorist supporters and the president both shared a funding source.

The Soros clan has been accused of providing an estimated $15 million to the pro-terrorist groups storming cities in support of Hamas, and an estimated $758,000 already to Biden.

Both of those are only partial estimates of much larger spending by the family of radical billionaires which have simultaneously been funding the anti-Israel movement, trojan horse Jewish groups and the Democratic Party politicians whom they are busy pressuring.

No accounting of Sen. Schumer’s infamous speech attacking Israel can overlook the fact that Alex Soros, the son of the elderly former Nazi collaborator who has defended Hamas, has met at least nine times with Sen. Schumer and called him “his good friend”. The younger Soros has continued meeting with Senate Dem candidates on whose victory Schumer’s Senate Majority Leader role depends.

The outside game of pressure campaigns, street blockades and violent attacks in the streets may get more attention, but is subsidiary to the inside game mastered by the Soros family.

$60 million has been pumped from the Soros network into its own Democracy PAC to help Democrats win. Millions from that PAC have gone to the Democratic Party’s Senate Majority PAC and House Majority PAC. And so when the Soros clan speaks, top House and Senate Democrats like Sen. Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries listen closely and then take action.

George Soros was always known as a savvy investor, but his son Alex has been even savvier as a political investor, building a spectrum of political funds that are not only vital to the election prospects of the Democrats, but that also cover an array of anti-Israel groups with different brands and tactics.

The Soros fortune extends to funding Linda Sarsour’s Arab American Association which took part in a rally celebrating the Oct 7 attacks where the pro-Hamas mob attacked police officersJewish Voice for Peace, a fake Jewish group which has blocked traffic to stop Israel from attacking the terrorists, J Street, which falsely claims to be “Pro-Israel” and “Pro-Peace”, but has actually lobbied against Israel’s fight against terrorists, and Bend the Arc: Jewish Action, a vanity group co-founded by Alex Soros, which tries to provide Jewish cover for members of the antisemitic ‘Squad’ while accusing their Jewish critics of “weaponizing antisemitism”.

Meanwhile, in Israel, Al-Haq, a Soros funded Muslim group tied to terrorists, had described Oct 7 as a case of “Palestinian armed groups engaged in an operation in response to escalating Israeli crimes against the Palestinian people” while the International Crisis Group has become so entangled with Iran that its members have been described as agents of the regime.

Viewed separately, JVP, J Street, Al-Haq, the Arab American Association, the Crisis Group and many others appear to represent different views, but actually represent different fronts in the war on Jews. While the groups may appear different, they follow the usual Soros tactic of networking smaller groups together into larger ones to create not just organizations, but a movement.

Soros money funds Muslims, leftists and people of Jewish ancestry who support killing Jews under a variety of banners and names, but they share the traditional hateful Soros agenda.

What Sen. Schumer or J Street believe about Hamas, may be less relevant than what George Soros thinks about Hamas. And what does Soros think about the Islamic terrorist group?

“America and Israel must open the door to Hamas,” Soros had once urged in an editorial. “Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah can be treated merely as targets in the war on terror because both have deep roots in their societies,” he argued in yet another editorial. “AIPAC must bear its share of responsibility for aiding and abetting policies such as Israel’s heavy-handed response to Hezbollah last summer and its insistence on treating Hamas only as a terrorist organization.”

Following the money is always a good idea and the profound shift made by many Democrats and liberal organizations from supporting Israel after Oct 7 to opposing it can be seen as a reflection of the agenda of their funder. Soros-funded groups quickly rallied after Oct 7 to undermine support for the Jewish State using everything from street violence to fake claims of Islamophobia and atrocities. But the invisible inside game is no less real even if it leaves behind no fingerprints. There is no way to know what happened behind the scenes at some organizations where the reversals were fast enough to make heads spin.

On Oct 9, J Street had issued a statement denouncing the attacks and stating that “we stand in solidarity with the Israeli people and with the Israeli armed forces that have been battling desperately to protect them. Two days later, J Street was back on track, condemning the “occupation of Palestinian Territory” and ten days later was labeling Israel’s campaign to stop Hamas as an “escalation.” What happened behind the scenes at the leftist group?

What we do know is that Alex Soros has continued his father’s tradition of elemental hostility toward the Jewish State.

On August 7th, months before the Hamas attacks, Alex Soros co-signed a letter falsely accusing the “current Israeli government” of a “campaign is so severe and so consequential that it merits a proportionate reaction by Israel’s chief ally, the United States of America” such as voting against Israel at the UN and other ways of undermining the Jewish State.

Despite the attacks of Oct 7, all 7 of the demands for actions against Israel were either enacted, moved forward or otherwise entered consideration by the Biden administration.

While the pro-Hamas mobs may condemn the Biden administration, both ‘Genocide Joe’ and the Hamas supporters share a common anti-Israel agenda and a common funding source.

The difference between the inside and the outside game, lies in the facades. What’s the real difference between Biden and Hamas supporters? Appearance. The combination of internal and external pressures, mob violence and massive checks, is a campaign of total warfare against Israel that is designed to appear as if it were coming from many diverse voices.

But behind many of the facades lies one agenda.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel Carefully Measured Its Response

After Iran Killed 3 US Soldiers, It Promised to Stop. Now It’s Attacking Again.

Harassing Chelsea Handler

How the Neo-Nazi Left Brainwashes its Recruits to Kill

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

WATCH: The Democrats and Biden Inextricably Linked to China ‘Blood Money’!

Our reader TL sent us this information and the video exposé below about how the Democrat Party, Biden and his family are inextricably linked to the Communist Party of China.

Peter Schweizer is co-founder and president of the Government Accountability Institute, a senior contributor at Breitbart News, and a bestselling author. His latest book, “Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans,” reveals the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “Disintegration Warfare” manifesto.

Expect never-before-revealed bombshell after bombshell exposing the CCP’s covert operations in America designed to rip the nation apart—and the U.S. elites who passively allow it.

Watch this revealing interview on Huckabee.

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

WATCH: Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Passover Message

“We will overcome those who seek our lives.” 


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began his Passover message with the eternal question, “What makes this night different from all other nights, citizens of Israel?””

“On this night, 133 of our dear brothers and sisters are not around the Seder table, and they are still held hostage by Hamas in hellish conditions,” he continued.

“But why is this night not different? … This time as well, we will overcome those who seek our lives – thanks to the faith of our people, the daring of our fighters, and the unity among us.”

WATCH: Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Passover Message

PM Netanyahu and wife hosted IDF “Lone Soldiers” at Pesach seder

PM Netanyahu wrote on his Telegram account about his seder with “lone soldiers” – Soldiers whose parents live abroad.

“Sarah and I hosted individual soldiers and female soldiers for an exciting Pesach seder night.

The soldiers who immigrated from the USA, Canada, Great Britain, France, Italy, Russia and South Africa are serving in combat units, and most of them fought in Gaza.

We left an empty chair in the center of the seder table and on it we displayed photos of all 133 hostages who are still in Hamas captivity.

I am committed to returning all the hostages home.

I congratulate the soldiers for choosing to tie their fate to the State of Israel, and to take part in the generational effort to prevail over those who “rise up against us to annihilate us”.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Dr. Jeff Meyers: Young Christians Have Been Lied to About the Israel/Hamas War

Marxist & Terrorist Ties of Palestinian Agitators Explained | TIPPING POINT

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Newsrael column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Former AG Bill Barr: ‘Biden Administration Is Greater Threat to Democracy’ than Trump

A one-time Trump ally is pointing out that the former president is not a threat to America, but the radical agenda of the Democratic Party is. In a Saturday interview, former U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr explained that he will be voting for his old boss Donald Trump in November, despite his criticisms of the former president.

“I’m not happy with the choice,” Barr said, referring to a Trump-Biden matchup. “But it is a choice, and at the end of the day we have to select between two individuals. … I think it’s my duty to pick the person I think will do the least harm to the country and … that’s clearly Trump and a Republican administration.”

“I think getting control over the border, stopping the lawlessness in our cities, building up the strength of the United States in an ever-more-dangerous world … these are critical things that have to be done,” Barr opined. “And we’ll get them done under a Trump administration.” The former AG added, “At the same time, I think the Biden administration is, in fact, the greater threat to democracy. I think they have a totalitarian temper, they have bought into the progressive movement, and they’re trying to squelch opposition and freedom of speech.”

Upon leaving the Trump administration, Barr became a critic of the former president, calling him “a consummate narcissist” and a “fundamentally flawed person,” largely in relation to Trump’s handling of the 2020 election results. Referring to his prior criticisms of Trump, Barr said Saturday, “I don’t think Biden should be anywhere near the Oval Office, that’s the fact.” He later said, “At the end of the day, you have to remember, serving in his administration, I was fine with his policies. I think his policies were good policies. My problems came with his behavior which I found very troubling after the election.” Barr added:

“And I think the idea that he’s going to be an autocrat and take over power like some right-wing dictator is not the threat facing our country. The threat to our country is from the far-left and the drift that’s been occurring toward really a socialistic system and one that brooks no opposition, that cancels people, that has only one viewpoint taught in colleges, that tries to push parents out of the picture when it comes to the education of their children. It is a heavy-handed bunch of thugs, in my opinion, and that’s where the threat is.”

Barr made similar, though less certain, comments in February. Addressing the Forum Club of Southwest Florida, Barr said, “Voting for Trump is playing Russian roulette with the country. Voting for Biden is outright national suicide.” Ex-Republican Representative Liz Cheney immediately lashed out at Barr, saying that the former AG was “absolutely wrong” in his assessment. Failing to address incumbent president Joe Biden’s growing unpopularity and his administration’s abuses of power, she quipped, “So electing Donald Trump’s not Russian roulette — electing Donald Trump would mean putting in power a man who’s committed to unraveling our constitutional framework. So Bill Barr is just wrong on that.” Cheney also added that, this November, “the most important thing is to defeat Donald Trump, and I’ll do whatever it takes to do that.”

Barr reiterated this position in an earlier interview last week. Barr posited, “I’ve said all along, given two bad choices, I think it’s my duty to pick the person I think would do the least harm to the country. And in my mind, I will vote the Republican ticket. I will support the Republican ticket.” He continued, “I think the real danger to the country — the real danger to democracy, as I say — is the progressive agenda. Trump may be playing Russian roulette, but a continuation of the Biden administration is national suicide in my opinion.”

Barr served as attorney general during the last year of Trump’s presidency. Previously, he had served as attorney general from 1991 to 1993 under President George H.W. Bush.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Judge Imposing Double Standard By Gagging Trump But Giving Michael Cohen Free Rein, Legal Experts Say

‘This Week on the Hill’: Scalise Talks Impeachment, Border Security, Voting

House Passes Bill Banning TikTok despite Chinese Lobbying

RELATED VIDEO: The Sad Reality: Republicans Never Had Real Control of the House With Speaker Johnson

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

The U.S. Navy faces a new crisis: Years of delays expected for new warships

The U.S. Navy’s ambitious shipbuilding projects, including the Constellation-class frigates, Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers, and Virginia Block V submarines, are facing significant delays.


These setbacks, highlighted in a Navy review ordered by Secretary Carlos Del Toro, stem from supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, and budget constraints.

Notably, the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines, critical to America’s nuclear deterrent, are delayed by over a year due to issues like tardy deliveries of essential components and challenges in workforce recruitment at key shipyards. Such delays could compromise the readiness and effectiveness of the Navy’s future fleet.

Delays in Ship Delivery Threaten U.S. Navy’s Future Fleet Capabilities

The U.S. Navy’s highly anticipated shipbuilding projects all face years-long delays. The upcoming Constellation class of frigates, the next Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, and the latest Virginia Block V submarines are just some of the vessels impacted by these delays, according to a review ordered earlier this year by Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro.

The report concluded that a range of shortfalls are contributing to the delays, including supply chain issues, labor shortages, and budgetary constraints.

The Columbia-Class SSBN

Designed to replace the Navy’s Ohio class, the Columbia class of ballistic missile submarines will uphold America’s sea-based nuclear deterrent. But the Navy expects the lead ship of the new class, the USS District of Columbia (SSBN-826), to arrive more than one year later than planned.

Manufacturers General Dynamics and Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) were tasked with constructing the 12-boat class for approximately $130 billion.

As part of the development phase, HII is charged with building what it calls super modules, fitted with specific systems and connections, before shipping these parts to General Dynamics for final assembly. However, according to reports, HII is 13 months behind schedule. To make matters worse, the turbine generators Northrop Grumman is building for the class are not projected to be delivered until 2025.

Constellation-Class Frigates

The Navy’s new Constellation-class guided-missile frigates will conduct air warfare, surface warfare, electronic warfare, anti-submarine warfare and information operations. These are critical capabilities, but the ships are falling behind schedule, with the lead ship of the class expected to be delivered at least one year later than expected.

According to reports, Fincantieri’s Marinette Marine shipyard has undertaken its own review to determine the extent of the issues. The manufacturer’s program executive officer for unmanned and small combatants revealed that the shipyard is having trouble hiring enough welders.

These new warships are based on the Italian FREMM multi-mission frigate, and they are currently sitting at 80% design completion.

Virginia-Class Block V Submarines

The latest Virginia-class iteration will be one of the best underwater vessels in the world once introduced.  These highly sophisticated submarines will feature the Virginia Payload Module, equipping the Block V SSNs for seabed warfare operations.

Additionally, the class’ extended mid-body section will store extra Tomahawk cruise missiles and other munitions, increasing the ships’ payload substantially. But the Block V variants are looking at a nearly three-year delay.

All of the Navy’s next-generation projects are important, and frequent delays in production jeopardize the prowess of the fleet.

Originally published by The National Interest

AUTHOR

Maya Carlin

Maya Carlin is an analyst at the Center for Security Policy, located in Washington D.C. She also has a M.A. in Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security from IDC Herzliya’s Lauder School of Government in Israel.

RELATED ARTICLES:

“Death to America” is the plan, not just a chic slogan on campus

Securing America – Is the Biden administration going to sanction Israel?

Military Could Hit Troops With Courts-Martial For Refusing To Use Preferred Pronouns, Experts Say

Why Does the United States Operate Blind in Yemen?

RELATED VIDEO: Sam Harris – ‘Muslims do not Have a clue about what constitutes a civil society’

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Too Little, Too Late’: Congress’ $60 Billion Aid Package Won’t Get Ukraine Off The Ropes, Experts Say

Congress’ new $60 billion aid package is unlikely to move the needle in Ukraine’s war against Russia, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The House overwhelmingly voted to pass the $60.8 billion package on Saturday that aims to bolster Ukraine’s war effort and replenish U.S. stockpiles, and the Pentagon is reportedly quickly sketching up a plan to deliver Kyiv tactical vehicles, armored personnel carriers and missiles if the bill is ultimately signed off on by President Joe Biden, according to Politico. But given the lack of an endgame strategy to end the war and Ukraine’s failed counteroffensive in the face of a growing Russian military, the aid could help bolster Kyiv’s defenses for a while, but is unlikely to push it closer to a military victory, former U.S. officials and defense experts told the DCNF.

“By itself, the latest tranche of U.S. aid is not zero-sum and it’s hard to imagine it will prompt a turning point in the war. However, if used properly the funds should be helpful for a period of time,” Michael Bars, former White House senior communications advisor and National Security Council official, told the DCNF. “It’s disappointing that another $60 billion went out the door without a penny for U.S. border enforcement, on which the Speaker long-conditioned additional Ukraine aid.”

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, who helped spearhead the bill’s creation and passing, previously insisted that any future Ukraine aid needed to be tied to border security. Johnson ultimately discarded that idea and helped pass the Ukraine bill separately, provoking ire from several GOP lawmakers.

This is the U.S. House of Representatives under the direction of Speaker Mike Johnson. Democrats are celebrating his total capitulation with no victory for securing our border. #MTV pic.twitter.com/TtaIgnX9eg

“I think there’s not enough money available, either in this bill or in a much larger one, to help Ukraine achieve their goals of retaking all their territory or even go on offense in a sustained way,” Benjamin Friedman, policy director at Defense Priorities, told the DCNF. “So in a sense, moving forward is beyond their grasp, even if we give them a lot more weapons. The aid might be useful in helping them hold the line and not suffer some kind of breakthrough where the Russians start to make real progress. So I think it’s a little bit opaque exactly how dire things are for Ukraine.”

Ukraine has thus far received approximately $73 billion in aid, including military and economic assistance, from the U.S. alone since the country’s war with Russia began in February 2022. Ukraine has burned through existing aid and yet has failed to make any territorial advances in its counteroffensive operations.

Ukraine suffers not only from a lack of munitions and weaponry but also a shortage of manpower, having lost an estimated 70,000 troops as of December, U.S. officials previously told The New York Times. Ukrainian forces took a significant blow during the withdrawal of Avdiivka in Eastern Ukraine amid a shortage of manpower as Russian forces advanced and seized control of the city.

Zelenskyy is lowering broadening conscription standards in a bid to increase mobilization, but it may be too late to make a difference now, even with additional munitions, Michael DiMino, a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and former CIA officer, told the DCNF.

“It’s kind of too little, too late,” DiMino told the DCNF. “Even if you mobilize those people now, you’re 30 points down right now… if you want to do the right thing, Zelenskyy should have made that call two, three years ago at this point.”

Complicating matters further is Russia’s military-industrial complex, which, despite heavy sanctions from the West, is at full operational capacity and producing armaments at a swift rate. Despite sustaining heavy manpower losses, Russia’s military has recovered back to pre-war levels and is growing much faster than Ukraine’s, head of U.S. European Command Gen. Christopher Cavoli warned Congress last week.

“It appears that Russia, with a reputedly sanction-proofed economy, is prepared for a long haul and will continue insisting on territorial concessions from Ukraine,” Bars told the DCNF. “This will put the U.S. on the hook for even more aid down the road as part of protracted conflict.”

Russia has economically allied itself more closely with Western adversaries such as China, Moscow’s largest trading partner as of 2024, to ease some of the weight of sanctions. Russia has also deepened its military cooperation with Iran and North Korea, both of whom are also burdened by sanctions.

The new Ukraine aid package, if signed into law, will provide Kyiv with approximately $14 billion for the direct purchase of weapons and munitions through the Pentagon’s Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. At least $13.4 billion will go toward replenishing the U.S.’ weapons stockpile, which can be transferred to foreign allies through the presidential drawdown authority.

Roughly $10 billion will be provided as an economic loan under the package, which the president would eventually be able to waive in its entirety.

“The loan system itself is an innovation and allows for much-needed oversight. Otherwise, it would be a straight grant and no oversight,” Johnson’s office told the DCNF on Monday. “Every single dollar that goes to Ukraine for aid is now a loan. The other money goes to our own national security and replenishes our stockpile.”

“The loan system is split in a tiered system so it cannot all be forgiven immediately or at one time,” Johnson’s office told the DCNF. “The process for congressional review puts heavy oversight on the president’s ability to forgive the loan.”

DiMino told the DCNF he is not opposed to sending Ukraine more military aid so long as it is attached to a cohesive war strategy, which he felt has thus far not been presented by the Biden administration or supporters in Congress.

“Whether people are in favor of the aid or not, I don’t really care about that. What I care about is, what is the theory of victory? I would argue right now that this current administration does not have a theory of victory.” DiMino told the DCNF. “President Biden mentioned Ukraine for two minutes at the top of the State of the Union, and he said, ‘Putin is evil, and democracy is important.’ And that’s great, and we can probably agree on that. But that’s not a strategy to win a war. That doesn’t actually discuss the tactical realities on the ground.”

“$50 billion, $60 billion, $10 billion — it doesn’t matter. It has to be tied to a strategy and to an objective that’s achievable,” DiMino told the DCNF. “It has to be a realistic objective. And I would argue that taking back 100% of Ukraine’s territory is not really a feasible military objective at this juncture.”

AUTHOR

JAKE SMITH

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Stunning Betrayal’: Republican Voters Opposed Shoveling Billions More Into Ukraine. GOP Leadership Did It Anyway

House Bursts Into Pro-Ukraine Chant During Foreign Aid Vote

NBC Host Presses Zelenskyy On Timeline Of Ukraine War After House Passes More Funding

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Military Could Hit Troops With Courts-Martial For Refusing To Use Preferred Pronouns, Experts Say

The military could seek to formally punish service members for refusing to use another service member’s preferred pronouns under existing policy, according to military experts.

A 2020 Equal Opportunity law opened the door for commanders to subject someone who refuses to affirm a transgender servicemember’s so-called gender identity to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for charges related to harassment, Capt. Thomas Wheatley, an assistant professor at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. Such a move would likely infringe on a servicemember’s constitutional rights to uphold their conscience, but it might not prevent leaders from employing more subtle ways of disciplining service members.

Military experts told the DCNF Congress should step in before it’s too late.

The military “is right to want to protect the rights and welfare of its transgender service members. But it owes the same protection to those who share a different perspective on the issue, especially when that perspective is a deep-seated expression of personal conscience,” Wheatley told the DCNF.

None of the military’s rules explicitly prohibit so-called “misgendering,” when someone uses pronouns to describe a transgender person which do not correspond to the person’s new gender identity, Wheatley explained. However, existing guidance implies that using pronouns rejected by another person violates Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) regulations against sex-based harassment and discrimination.

The UCMJ enforces those regulations.

Service members could conceivably be court-martialed for “refusing to use another person’s self-identified pronouns, even when their refusal stems from principled religious conviction,” Wheatley told the DCNF. “This law applies to service members at all times and in all locations, even when they’re off duty and in the privacy of their off-post residence.”

The UCMJ also prohibits “conduct unbecoming of an officer” under Article 133 and activity that could be seen to discredit the military institution under Article 134 — the same article the military uses to prosecute child pornographers and other acts of sexual deviance, he explained.

“Is it now ‘unbecoming’ and incompatible with service as a commissioned officer to openly hold sincere religious convictions surrounding the act of creation and the nature of human sex?” Wheatley asked.

Wheatley said his interest in the issue was sparked four years ago, when the Army updated its MEO policy stating “violations of MEO and Harassment Prevention and Response policies may result in disciplinary action under the UCMJ.”

The possibility of levying a criminal trial on a servicemember for perceived harassment if that person “misgendered” another service member troubled Wheatley, he said. The Supreme Court had just ruled on Bostock v. Clayton County in favor of the gay and transgender plaintiffs alleging their employers fired them on the basis of their self-described sexual orientation, or gender identity. Conservative justices warned the case could have far-reaching consequences for organizations operating based on religious belief and free exercise of religion in the workplace.

“I knew, given the cultural gap between the civilian world and the military, the issue would be overlooked as it concerned service members. So, I got to work,” he told the DCNF.

In a peer reviewed article recently published in the Texas Review of Law and Politics, Wheatley argued that, despite the existing EO policy, Articles 133 and 134 of the UCMJ are not strong enough to prosecute troops for spurning another’s preferred pronouns.

Under a legal doctrine that “obligates military courts to avoid interpreting the UCMJ in a way that brings it into conflict with the Constitution if possible, that would normally be the end of the analysis,” he wrote. But, the national security imperatives inbuilt with military service often justify curtailing a servicemember’s constitutional rights — for example, the UCMJ’s Article 134 “indecent language.”

Wheatley countered in the article that the military’s special mission can inform judicial analysis but does not require a separate standard.

“A court that applies a standard lower than strict scrutiny would be placing not just a thumb on the scale in the government’s favor, but an anvil — one which virtually guarantees victory for the government in every case where a service member asserts his or her First Amendment rights,” he wrote. It would be “tough” for the military to prove it had a strong enough mission-related argument to mandate gender-pronoun usage.

Arguments that might be considered, such as preserving harmony within military units and safeguarding transgender troops’ emotional and psychological well-being, are certainly important, he wrote. But the former relies too heavily on the vicissitudes of individual interpretation to survive judicial review, while the latter does not take into account the health of the servicemember seeking to live out their religious convictions.

“Preserving unit cohesion and safeguarding the mental and emotional health of transgender service members, though compelling government interests, do not justify the sweeping prior restraints on speech,” made possible in the Army policy, Wheatley wrote.

Previous case law shows that even in military contexts, the standard for what may be prohibited compelled speech is strong, he found.

Looking at previous cases of public employment law governing speech, where free speech has been more frequently challenged than in military-specific case law, he likewise found no strong case for mandating pronoun use.

“The use of one pronoun over another reflects the speaker’s private views on human sex and gender” and isn’t conditioned on the person’s employment, Wheatley argued.

The Pentagon referred the DCNF to the services, which did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

Wheatley’s research highlights ongoing concerns about the military’s respect for matters of conscience.

Pentagon leaders have pushed diversity and inclusion as an indispensable component of warfighting effectiveness. Opponents say the focus focus on race, gender and sexual identity has distracted the military from more important issues and unfairly privileged minorities. DEI priorities have now overtaken matters of conscience in multiple domains. 

In lawsuits over the slow-rolling of religious waivers to the COVID-19 vaccine, for example, victims argued the services issued blanket denials rather than considering each request individually, as they are legally required to do.

Defense Department documents, including the 2022 Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Strategic Plan, discuss the freedom to “speak candidly” about issues as a “readiness imperative,” ensuring troops feel included as part of a whole.

“The military policy and legal infrastructure clearly exist to wage war on Americans with deeply-held traditional beliefs about man and woman,” William Thibeau, director of the Claremont Institute’s American Military Project, told the DCNF. Wheatley’s article “should be a red flag to policy makers and elected officials to end this tyranny of liberalism before it is formally levied against American Soldiers preferring to live in reality.”

Experts were not aware of any incidents where a branch of the armed services had attempted to use the UCMJ to punish a servicemember for refusing preferred pronouns.

Commanders do have a wide berth to discipline servicemembers in ways that do not involve a criminal trial but can still have serious implications for a servicemember’s career, possibly including separation from the military under less than honorable circumstances, Wheatley said. Such measures resolve more quickly, have a lower burden of proof than “are almost always shielded from public scrutiny.”

Instead of leaving it to chance, Congress could force the military to establish a servicemember’s “unqualified” right to use pronouns consistent with their religious convictions, a one-pager provided by Claremont suggested. The experts advocated stronger measures too, including decriminalizing unspecified MEO violations and to narrow its scope so that it only applies to activities a servicemember performs while on normal duty hours or contributing to an official military mission.

Congress should develop a public record of incidents in the military where religious freedom is seen to come under threat, the document stated.

Claremont suggested the military conduct regular training on the importance of religious freedom throughout the armed forces and study ways to strengthen protections on service members’ religious expression.

Wheatley also said service chiefs could consider demands for a service member to speak in violation of his or her religious convictions as harassment.

AUTHOR

MICAELA BURROW

Investigative reporter, defense.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pentagon Won’t Respond To New Research Casting Doubt On Studies Supporting Military’s DEI Push

Last Straw-Title IX Abolishes Gender!

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Texas Border Operation Captures Half a Million Illegal Immigrants, Thousands of Felons

The Biden administration’s failure to secure the Mexican border forced Texas officials to establish a security initiative that has endured heavy criticism from Democrats and the media despite its success in apprehending hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants—including thousands of criminals—and seizing millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. It is known as Operation Lone Star, and it was launched by Governor Greg Abbott in March 2021 as the illegal immigration crisis gripped his border state. Under the program, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Texas National Guard pick up the slack for the federal government, which is charged with protecting the famously porous southern border but has failed miserably to do so. Operation Lone Star works to stop the smuggling of drugs, weapons and people into Texas, and interdict transnational criminal activity between ports of entry.

This month the state published an update on the security initiative’s work. Since it was put into place, over 507,200 illegal immigrants have been captured and more than 41,500 criminal arrests have been made with more than 36,900 felony charges filed. Additionally, Texas officials have transported over 100,000 illegal aliens to sanctuary cities throughout the country that openly welcome and protect migrants. New York received the largest chunk—42,000—of relocated migrants caught entering Texas illegally, followed by Chicago (34,400), Denver (18,000), Washington D.C. (12,500), Philadelphia (3,400) and Los Angeles (1,500). “Operation Lone Star continues to fill the dangerous gaps created by the Biden Administration’s refusal to secure the border,” reads the statement announcing the latest figures. “Every individual who is apprehended or arrested and every ounce of drugs seized would have otherwise made their way into communities across Texas and the nation due to President Joe Biden’s open border policies.”

Among the examples offered in the latest update is the arrest of an illegal immigrant from Mexico by the DPS after a brush team working the Rio Grande Valley saw the man get picked up by a human smuggler while crossing the Rio Grande River on a jet ski. After vetting the migrant, Gabriel Gutierrez-Perez, the law enforcement agency found that he was wanted in Florida for sexual assault on a child, sexual battery on a child and child molestation. In another case a DPS trooper busted a smuggling operation during a traffic stop after observing two passengers, illegal immigrants, attempting to conceal themselves in the rear of the vehicle. Two more migrants were in the car’s trunk and the driver was arrested and charged with smuggling of persons. All four were Mexican nationals. During a separate traffic stop a DPS trooper noticed multiple people crammed in the rear of a large sports utility vehicle. It turns out five illegal immigrants were smuggled in the vehicle and the driver and passenger were both charged with smuggling of persons. The passenger was also charged with evading arrest and resisting arrest.

Texas is not the only state to take matters into its own hands in the absence of federal immigration enforcement. A handful of others, such as Arizona, Montana, and North Dakota, have enacted measures to help mitigate the mess caused by the president’s open border policies, though Texas has been the most proactive and its initiative has had the biggest impact. As we delve deeper into the Biden presidency, the situation is only getting worse, leaving local governments on their own to deal with national security threats, elevated crime, and other detrimental impacts of lawlessness along the southern border. In fiscal year 2021 a then record-setting 1.73 million illegal aliens entered the country through Mexico only to be topped the following year with 2.4 million. In fiscal year 2023 a ghastly 2.48 million illegal aliens entered the U.S through Mexico and, unbelievably, 2024 is on track to surpass that. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) records recently published in a congressional report show that the agency recorded 256,094 encounters nationwide in February alone, accounting for the worst February for illegal immigration in decades.

RELATED ARTICLES:

FBI Records Indicate Fauci Agency Funded Gain-of-Function Wuhan Lab Research ‘Would leave no signatures of purposeful human manipulation’

Jailed Felons among Thousands who Scammed COVID Relief Program out of Billions of Dollars

Patronis flips script on Whitehouse, demands any records related to wife and Citizens Insurance

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.