Senior Iranian Regime Officials Warn Of Iran’s Coming Nuclear Breakout

/in , , , , , , /by

Iran | Inquiry & Analysis Series No. 1761

Introduction

Since Iran’s April 14, 2024 drone and missile attack on Israel, named “True Promise,” by the Iranian regime, and against the backdrop of statements by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director general Rafael Grossi that Iran is “weeks rather than months” away from having enough enriched uranium to develop a nuclear bomb, [1] Iranian regime officials, particularly those from the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), have stepped up their warnings of coming Iranian nuclear breakout, that is, production of a nuclear bomb.

The open and explicit discussion of this issue seems to herald a change in Iran’s nuclear policy, and is aimed at getting the public, in Iran and in the international community, accustomed to the idea that an Iranian nuclear weapon is no longer taboo.

Hints, and even warnings, that Iran will be changing its declared nuclear doctrine from civilian to military, and will act to develop nuclear weapons, have come from the following officials: IRGC Brig. Gen. Ahmad Haq Taleb, who is in charge of security for Iran’s nuclear facilities; Javad Karimi Ghadossi, a member of the National Security Committee in the Majlis; Abdallah Ganji, a member of the government’s informational council; Saeed Lilaz, reformist activist who served as advisor to Iranian President Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005); and Mahmoud Reza Aghamiri, president of Beheshti University who is himself a nuclear scientist. Also issuing these hints and warnings were various Iranian media outlets.

On April 15, the moderate conservative website Asr-e Iran acknowledged that Iran has the capability to produce a nuclear warhead and warned that it would do so and would use it in its next missile attack on Israel. Abdallah Ganji, the member of the Iranian government’s informational council, explained on April 16 in an article in the IRGC-affiliated Javan daily that Iran was in a direct war against the Western nuclear powers and that the smallest mistake on their part could prompt Iran to change its nuclear program.

On April 18, IRGC Brig. Gen. Ahmad Haq Taleb, who is in charge of securing Iran’s nuclear facilities, had warned that Iran would rethink its nuclear doctrine – that is, it would act to produce a nuclear weapon if there was a threat from Israel.

Then, several hours after Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Qan’ani announced, in an effort to reassure the West, that “nuclear weapons have no place in Iran’s defensive doctrine,”[2] Majlis National Security Committee member Javad Karimi Ghadossi tweeted in Farsi on April 22 that “if approval is given [by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei], it will be a week until the first [nuclear] test.”

To date, regime officials have frequently mentioned the nonexistent nuclear fatwa attributed to Supreme Leader Khamenei that they say bans the production of nuclear weapons (see Appendix II: MEMRI Reports On The Nonexistent Nuclear Fatwa). This has been in order to lay to rest the international community’s fears about Iran’s development of its nuclear program. In recent days, several officials, among them Beheshti University president and nuclear scientist Mohammad Reza Aghamiri, have told Iran’s Channel 2 TV that Khamenei can change this fatwa at any time.

All this is in addition to statements by American Iranian Council (AIC) founder and president and Rutgers University professor Hooshang Amirahmadi,[3] who unsuccessfully ran for president of Iran in 2005, 2013, and 2017. He said that Iran must change its declaration that Islam bans nuclear weapons and instead declare that it does not ban them, and that it should produce them as its only deterrence against Israel.

Another notable claim made by several officials who have called for developing nuclear weapons is that Iran has the right to defend itself. The premise is that although Iran attacked Israel, the world considers this a defensive move. That is, Iran views its offensive move as defensive after Israel’s April 1 attack on IRGC officials in Damascus, from there considers that it is entitled to respond by changing its nuclear strategy from civilian to military.

It should be noted that this claim in statements by Iranian officials justifying the Iranian regime’s  development and possession of nuclear weapons as a defensive response was already raised when President Biden took office in January 2021, particularly in the context of the impasse in the nuclear negotiations with the U.S. in August 2022. (see Appendix I: Iranian Officials Call For Obtaining And Producing Nuclear Weapons – MEMRI TV Clips And Reports 2021-22.)

Then too, Iranian spokesmen described a situation in which Iran’s development of nuclear weapons was a defensive response to a possible attack on Iran, or that it would officially serve as compensation for additional future U.S. violations of the JCPOA nuclear agreement. By “violations,” they meant another U.S. withdrawal from the agreement if it reentered it, or in the event that the U.S. reneged on any economic commitments it would make to Iran. (See MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 1648, Shift In Iranian Regime Statements On Nuclear Weapons: Regime Spokesmen Talk Openly About Them, Aiming For Western Acquiescence To Iran As A Nuclear Threshold State, August 2, 2022.

The proliferation of these messages from so many Iranian sources within a short span of time calling for producing nuclear weapons for “self defense” indicate a new line of policy, decided in advance and supported by Iran’s leadership. This report will review the Iranian regime’s warnings of coming nuclear breakout by the Iranian regime:

Javad Karimi Ghadossi, Majlis National Security Council Member And Former Senior IRGC Official: “If Approval Is Given [By Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei], It Will Be A Week Until The First [Nuclear] Test”

On April 22, 2024, Javad Karimi Ghadossi, Majlis National Security Council member and former senior IRGC official, warned that Iran would carry out a nuclear test within a week of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s order to do so. The following is his post on X:

“If approval is given [by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei], it will be a week until the first [nuclear] test. #Iranian_Might”

IRGC Brig. Gen. Ahmad Haq Taleb, In Charge Of Securing Iran’s Nuclear Facilities: “It Would Be Reasonable To Change Iran’s Nuclear Doctrine And Policy And To Deviate From The Considerations Declared In The Past”

The day before the April 18 attack on Iran’s air defense systems near the nuclear facilities in Isfahan, that is attributed to Israel, IRGC Brig. Gen. Ahmad Haq Taleb, who is in charge of securing Iran’s nuclear facilities, discussed a possible Israeli operation in response to Iran’s “True Promise” drone and missile attack on Israel several days previously. He stressed that it was reasonable for Iran to now change its nuclear doctrine from civilian to military – that is, to direct its program towards nuclear weapons and away from peaceful purposes – and warned that Iran would attack Israel’s nuclear facilities if Israel attacked Iran. He said:

“These [Israeli] threats did not originate today, or yesterday. Beginning years ago, the false Zionist regime engaged, in addition to threats, in sabotage and terrorism against the [Iranian] state’s nuclear industry. Despite the international protocols and regulations, and the IAEA’s rules and regulations, all countries refrained from attacking nuclear facilities. At the same time, Iran was always, from the beginning, ready to tackle these [Israeli] threats.

“Recently, the Zionist regime violated all the international laws and regulations, by attacking the consular department of the Iranian Embassy in Syria, and it is unacceptable for it to threaten to again attack our country’s nuclear facilities, in another act of desperation,. We are ready to deal with any Zionist regime threat with air defense systems and very advanced facilities and equipment, as well as by having decentralized our country’s nuclear facilities across our vast country.

“Iran’s armed forces are on full alert. The Zionist enemy’s nuclear facilities are known, and we have the required information about all the targets. Our finger is on the trigger to fire powerful missiles to destroy the noted targets, in order to respond to any possible operation on their part.

“If the Zionist regime wishes to act against our nuclear centers and facilities, it will absolutely face our response, and, on the [principle of] an eye for an eye, we will attack its nuclear centers with advanced weapons. If the false Zionist regime wants to threaten to attack our country’s nuclear centers, as a way of pressuring Iran, it would be reasonable to change Iran’s nuclear doctrine and policy and to deviate from the considerations declared in the past [from civilian to military].

“If the Zionist regime carries out an aggressive act against Iran, the Iranian army’s armed forces will be responsible for responding. They should be certain that the blow against them by [Iran’s] armed forces will go down in history just like True Promise did.

“We promise the dear and honorable people of Iran that your revolutionary sons in the IRGC, in the zealous and strong army of Iran, and in the country’s security forces are defending the nuclear facilities, centers, and sites in the country, using air defense systems and the most advanced defense and security equipment, such that our country’s nuclear centers are absolutely secure.”[4]

Abdallah Ganji, Government Informational Council Member, In IRGC-Affiliated Javan Daily: “Any Mistake By Israel And Its Sponsors – France, Britain, And The U.S. – Could Prompt Iran To Rethink Its Nuclear Strategy”

In an April 16, 2024 article in the IRGC-affiliated Javan daily, Abdallah Ganji, a member of the government’s informational council, stated that Iran, whose might against the U.S., Britain, and France was revealed in the April 14 drone and missile attack on Israel, was in a direct war against the Western nuclear powers. Warning that the smallest mistake on the latter’s part “could prompt Iran to rethink its nuclear strategy,” that is, to develop nuclear weapons, he stated that even though it was Iran that attacked Israel, the world considers this a defensive move. That is, Iran views its offensive move as defensive, and from there considers that it is entitled to change its nuclear strategy from civilian to military in self defense.

The following are the main points of Ganji’s article in Javan:

“…An important lesson from the Iranian attack on Israel is that that night, the side (countering) the attack comprised four nuclear powers – that is, the U.S., France, Britain, and Israel. All these deployed in Jordanian airspace, but Iran, which they say belongs to the third world, penetrated [their defense] (and managed to strike Israel)…

“At this stage, the limitations of the U.S.’s deterrent capability have become more obvious, and at the same time, Israel’s growing dependence on the U.S. is the most significant outcome of this attack. Israel’s deterrent capability was in doubt, and there could also have been a change in the strategy of the Arab militaries in the region. Iran’s capability has been verified, and all the experts in the West see [Iran’s] attack as the largest drone attack in history…

“We must know that we are not only fighting Israel, because in Israel’s defensive – not offensive – position, Western forces are in a direct war against us. This issue clarifies Israel’s importance as a red line for the West.

“At the same time, any mistake by Israel and its sponsors – France, Britain, and the U.S. – could prompt Iran to rethink its nuclear strategy. We attack, but in the eyes of the world, this is considered defense. We have accomplished this as a result of the enemy’s mistakes.”[5]

Moderate-Conservative Website Asr-e Iran: “Iran Has The Capability To Produce A Nuclear Warhead, But Hasn’t Yet Done This… But This Doesn’t Mean That It Will Always Be This Way”

On April 15, the day after Iran’s attack on Israel, the moderate-conservative website Asr-e Iran warned, in an article, about Iranian nuclear warhead production, which has not yet happened, adding that this could change. About the missiles Iran fired at Israel, the outlet said that future Iranian missiles fired at Israel could include those with nuclear warheads, leading to “historic destruction.”

The following are the main points of the article:

“… It can be said that Israel has an atom bomb and Iran does not. This statement is correct, but the point here is that Iran has the capability to produce a nuclear warhead but has not done so, for understandable reasons.

“But this doesn’t mean that it will always be this way. Particularly now, when it is clear that even with 300 missiles it is possible to overcome the joint Israeli-American-English-French-Jordanian defensive wall, and certainly if this number of missiles is tenfold or more, the damage in Israel will be greater. The Israeli generals know better than anyone what will happen if even one of them [the Iranian missiles] carries a [nuclear] warhead whose destruction is historic!”[6]

Saeed Lilaz, Reformist And Advisor To Iranian President Khatami: “Iran Will Test Its First Nuclear Weapon [If] Israel And America Respond… In Terms Of A Military Attack On Iranian Soil”

Reformist activist and advisor to Iranian president Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005) Saeed Lilaz said in an interview with the Rouydad24 outlet that the West was to blame for Iran’s rush to nuclear weapons. He said that the attack on the Iranian consular building in Damascus, attributed to Israel, was a pretext for Iran to produce a nuclear weapon, and explicitly warned that Iran would do so if the U.S. or Israel attacked it on its soil.

The following are the main points of his statements:

“… After the [1979] victory of the Islamic Revolution, it was the West’s behavior towards Iran, from the beginning of the revolution, that pushed Iran towards nuclearization.

“In my view, the Israeli operation attacking the Iranian consulate and the threats that came [afterwards] destroyed the last justification for Iran to not test its own nuclear weapon and to enter the nuclear club.

“My prediction is that after Iran’s attack on Israel, if Israel and America respond even slightly in terms of a military attack on Iranian soil, Iran will test its first nuclear weapon. The last obstacle to doing so will have been removed by the possibility of an American and Israeli attack on Iran. This warning is clear to the Americans, and the Americans are absolutely aware of it. In this context, Iran’s hands will never be bound.”[7]

Mahmoud Reza Aghamiri, Beheshti University President And Nuclear Scientist: Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei Can Change His Fatwa Banning Nuclear Weapons Production At Any Time; Our Nuclear Capabilities Are “High,” Producing A Bomb Is “Not Complicated”

In an April 7, 2024 interview on Iranian Channel 2 TV, Mahmoud Reza Aghamiri, president of Beheshti University and himself a nuclear scientist, said that Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei could change his fatwa banning nuclear weapons production at any time. He added that Iran’s nuclear capabilities are “high” and that as soon as a country has nuclear capability, producing a bomb “is not complicated.” He also said that Iran is in the top five countries in all things connected to nuclear capability.

To view the main points of Aghamiri’s interview on MEMRI TV, click here or below:

Hooshang Amirahmadi, American Iranian Council Founder And President And Rutgers University Professor, And Iranian Presidential Candidate: “Iran Must Produce A Nuclear Bomb”; It Must “Take Advantage Of This Opportunity And Quit The IAEA And JCPOA And Say That Islam Does Not Ban Nuclear Weapons”

American Iranian Council (AIC) founder and president and Rutgers University professor Hooshang Amirahmadi,[8] who resides in the U.S. and who also unsuccessfully ran for president of Iran in 2005, 2013, and 2017, said that Iran should produce a nuclear weapon that will allow it to attain deterrence against Israel. He urged the Iranian regime to do so, stating that nuclear weapons are “a unique deterrent factor” and that “when Iran has a bomb, it won’t even need to fire missiles at Israel.” He went on to call on Iran to quit the IAEA and the JCPOA, which would allow it to create a nuclear weapon.

The following are the main points of his statements:

“Iran  has missiles, drones, and airplanes, and [Israel] does as well. It has an atom bomb, but Iran does not. In such a situation, where the balance of power does not yet favor Iran, there is no deterrence. In today’s world, only nuclear weapons are a deterrent factor. No other  kind of power has this capability…”

“Deterrence in international relations means that the other side does not have the courage to attack. For example, before Pakistan produced a bomb, it faced attack by India several times. Of course, Pakistan defended itself, but it did not have the standing to tell India ‘Enough, don’t attack!’ [This was the situation] until Pakistan made a bomb, and India was forced to sit still and not move.

“Such a situation does not exist in the Middle East between Israel and its enemies. None of Israel’s enemies in the region is capable of telling Israel to ‘die and sit still! Don’t attack so much, don’t kill so many Palestinians.’ Iran, with all its might and the might of its proxies, has not made Israel sit still, stop carrying out these operations in Gaza, or agree to a resolution of the Palestinian issue. Israel says ‘This is my policy’ – and why? Because it has a [nuclear] bomb, and others do not. Otherwise, Israel would have nothing that we do not.

“A nuclear bomb is highly deterrent. Iran has two options: One is not to intervene in the Palestine-Israel conflict, or to treat it like Saudi Arabia does. The other is to confront Israel, and this is the option Iran has chosen. But Israel has nuclear weapons. Against such strength, we must attain a balance of power [and produce a nuclear bomb]…

“This struggle has continued for 70 years, and will continue for another 70 years. There is only one way to end this dispute – like Pakistan and India. Such a transition demands a balance of power. This means that Iran must produce a nuclear bomb. This is because the Arab countries arew not motivated [like Iran is] to stop Israel.

“If Iran goes nuclear, it will not even need to fire missiles at Israel. It would be enough to threaten Israel, because this threat would have enough weight. As a peace-seeking man, who has spent his entire life dealing with peace, I have arrived at the understanding that an atom bomb causes peace. No better option than a [nuclear] bomb has yet managed to provide peace and stability in the last 70 years.

“In my opinion, if Iran wants a better future for itself, for Palestine, and even for the Israelis, it must have nuclear weapons. Even if we have a million rockets, we will not be able to contain Israel until we have [nuclear] bombs… Against a country that has a nuclear bomb, there can be no deterrence without nuclear weapons. I am for a nuclear Iran because I am for peace and for Iranian deterrence…

“I don’t think that Iran will respond to the [April 19] Israeli attack [at Isfahan], but it must take advantage of this opportunity and quit the IAEA and the JCPOA, and say that Islam does not forbid nuclear weapons production. After that, [it must] make a deal with America about the [Iranian] proxy forces, and get a green light from America to produce an atom bomb. In my opinion, under the existing conditions, America is ready to give Iran a bomb in order to obtain a balance of power with Israel. For years, I have been saying that the only way to peace and stability in the Middle East is for Iran to produce a bomb…”[9]

* Ayelet Savyon is Director of the MEMRI Iran Media Project.

Appendix I: Iranian Officials Call For Obtaining And Producing Nuclear Weapons – MEMRI TV Clips And Reports 2021-22

MEMRI TV Clips

To view the MEMRI TV clip “Khamenei’s Foreign Policy Advisor Kamal Kharrazi: Iran Has Become A Nuclear Threshold Country – We Have The Technical Capability To Produce A Nuclear Bomb,” click here or below:

To view the MEMRI TV clip “Former Iranian Deputy FM Mohammad-Javad Larijani: If We Decide To Build A Nuclear Bomb, Nobody Will Be Able To Stop Us; The Non-Proliferation Treaty Is Dead,” click here or below:

To view the MEMRI TV clip “Former Iranian Majles Member Ali Motahari: When Iran Started Its Nuclear Program, Our Goal Was To Build A Bomb; We Failed To Keep It A Secret Before Conducting A Nuclear Test; Having A Nuclear Bomb For Deterrence Is Not A Bad Thing,” click here or below:

To view the MEMRI TV clip ” Iranian Political Analyst Emad Abshenas: Iranian Support Grows For Producing A Nuclear Bomb To Eliminate Possibility Of War Against Iran; Sanctions On North Korea Are Less Severe Because It Poses A Nuclear Threat,” click here or below

To view the MEMRI TV clip “Former Iranian Diplomat Amir Mousavi: A Fatwa Is Not Permanent; Khamenei Might Change Fatwa Forbidding A Military Nuclear Project; Iran Forced Obama To Sign The JCPOA, And It Has The Cards To Force Biden To Return To It,” click here or below:

MEMRI Reports

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1556, Iran Uses ‘Maximum Pressure’ On Biden Administration To Have Sanctions Lifted And Be Recognized As Nuclear Threshold State – And Based On This, To Attain Nuclear Balance Of Terror, February 5, 2021.

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1559, Iran Uses ‘Maximum Pressure’ On Biden Administration – Part II: Supreme Leader Khamenei: ‘If The Islamic Republic [Of Iran] Decided To Obtain Nuclear Weapons, Neither You [The Zionist Clown] Nor Those Greater Than You [The U.S.] Would Be Able To Stop It,’ February 23, 2021.

Special Dispatch No. 9170, Iranian Expediency Council Official In Article In ‘Tabnak’ Daily: ‘Why Iran Is Demanding A Nuclear Bomb’, February 4, 2021.

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1609, Former Head Of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Abbasi-Davani, Hints That Iranian Nuclear Chief Mohsen Fakhrizadeh Was Working On Nuclear Weapons And That Is Why He Was Assassinated; IRGC-Affiliated Commentator Confirms That Abbasi-Davani Was Talking About Nuclear Weapons; Abbasi-Davani Says Enemy Sabotage, Assassinations Should Be Stopped By Iran’s ‘Cross[ing] Several Scientific Borders As Soon As Possible To Show Our Capability And Defend Our People’, November 30, 2021.

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1631, Against The Backdrop Of The Crisis In The Vienna Nuclear Talks, Iranian IRGC-Affiliated News Agency States That ‘If, At [Upcoming] IAEA Board Of Governors Meeting, The False Dossiers And Accusations [Against Iran] Are Not Closed, [Iran’s] Enrichment [Of Uranium] To 90% Will Be Closer Than Ever’ April 8, 2022.

Special Dispatch No. 9938, Fatwa By Iranian Grand Ayatollah: There Is No Ban On Acquiring Knowledge And Practical Capability To Produce A Nuclear Bomb; Iranian Politician: “When We Began Our Nuclear Activity, Our Goal Was Indeed To Build A Bomb,” April 29, 2022.

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1701, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei: ‘If It Were Not An Islamic Principle, And If We Had The Will To Build Nuclear Weapons, We Would Do So – Even The Enemies Know That They Cannot Stop Us’; MEMRI: The Fatwa Banning Nuclear Weapons That Is Attributed To Khamenei Does Not Exist, June 26, 2023.

Appendix II: MEMRI Reports On The Nonexistent Nuclear Fatwa

The following are MEMRI reports on the issue of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s fatwa banning nuclear weapons – which does not exist:

Inquiry and Analysis No. 825, Renewed Iran-West Nuclear Talks – Part II: Tehran Attempts to Deceive U.S. President Obama, Sec’y of State Clinton With Nonexistent Anti-Nuclear Weapons Fatwa By Supreme Leader Khamenei, April 19, 2012

Special Dispatch No. 5406, Release Of Compilation Of Newest Fatwas By Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei – Without Alleged Fatwa About Nuclear Bomb, August 13, 2013

Special Dispatch No. 5461, President Obama Endorses The Lie About Khamenei’s ‘Fatwa’ Against Nuclear Weapons, September 29, 2013

Inquiry and Analysis No.1022, The Official Iranian Version Regarding Khamenei’s Alleged Anti-Nuclear Weapons Fatwa Is A Lie, October 3, 2013.

Special Dispatch No. 5574, Iranian President Hassan Rohani In Article In Saudi Daily: While Avoiding Confrontation And Hostility, We Shall Be Diligent In Pursuing Our Supreme Interests, December 23, 2013

Special Dispatch No. 5681, Prominent Iranian Analyst, Author, And Columnist Amir Taheri: Nobody Has Actually Seen Khamenei’s Anti-Nuclear Fatwa, Which Obama Often Quotes, March 17, 2014.

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1080, U.S. Secretary Of State Kerry In New And Unprecedented Statement: ‘President Obama And I Are Both Extremely Welcoming And Grateful For The Fact That [Iranian] Supreme Leader [Khamenei] Has Issued A [Nonexistent] Fatwa’ Banning Nuclear Weapons, March 31, 2014

Special Dispatch No. 5881, Tehran Again Offers Khamenei’s Nonexistent Fatwa In Negotiations As A Guarantee That It Is Not Developing Nuclear Weapon, November 14, 2014.

Inquiry and Analysis No.1151, Iranian Regime Continues Its Lies And Fabrications About Supreme Leader Khamenei’s Nonexistent Fatwa Banning Nuclear Weapons, April 6, 2015.

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1394, Insights Following Exposure Of Iran’s Military Nuclear Program – Part I: The Leadership Of Iran’s Religious Regime Lies About Essential Islamic Matters, Manipulates Religion To Justify Its Grip On Power, Regional Expansion, May 6, 2018

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1458, Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif Reiterates Iran’s Lie, Promoted By Obama Administration, That Supreme Leader Khamenei Issued Fatwa Banning Nuclear Weapons; No Such Fatwa Ever Existed, May 31, 2019.

Daily Brief No. 433, Khamenei’s ‘Nuclear Fatwa,’ Once Again, November 29, 2022.

Inquiry and Analysis No. 1701, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei: ‘If It Were Not An Islamic Principle, And If We Had The Will To Build Nuclear Weapons, We Would Do So – Even The Enemies Know That They Cannot Stop Us’; MEMRI: The Fatwa Banning Nuclear Weapons That Is Attributed To Khamenei Does Not Exist, June 26, 2023.

SOURCES:

[1] Dw.com/en/irans-nuclear-activity-raises-eyebrows-at-iaea/a-68893952, April 23, 2024.

[2] Tasnimnews.com, April 22, 2024.

[3] Amirahmadi.com/en/biographical/biography, accessed April 25, 2024.

[4] Tasnimnews.com, April 18, 2024.

[5] Javanonline.ir, April 16, 2024.

[6] Asriran.com, April 15, 2024.

[7] Rouydad24.ir, April 14, 2024.

[8] Amirahmadi.com/en/biographical/biography, accessed April 25, 2024.

[9] Asriran.com/fa, April 20, 2024.

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

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

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

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.

Biden White House, Small Business Admin Officials Violated Political Ethics Law, Watchdog Alleges

/in , , , , , , , /by

Officials in President Joe Biden’s White House and Small Business Administration (SBA) violated a law preventing government employees from engaging in certain forms of political activity, watchdog Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT) alleged in a Thursday complaint.

PPT accused officials of political activity to benefit Biden while attacking Republicans in violation of the Hatch Act, according to the complaint to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Biden administration officials from the White House and SBA repeatedly violated the act by using the term “MAGA,” which is former President Donald Trump’s campaign slogan and an acronym for “Make America Great Again,” PPT alleged

“The intent of the Hatch Act is pretty straightforward: If you’re part of the current government, you can’t engage in political speech in the course of your official duties,” PPT Director Michael Chamberlain told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “And OSC’s directives against using campaign slogans are pretty clear. But, as Karine Jean-Pierre’s multiple violations show — and these incidents from the White House and SBA appear to provide more evidence of — it seems that these requirements escape some members of the Biden administration.”

The Daily Caller News Foundation exclusively obtained the complaint as well as over 2,300 pages of emails PPT received from a public records request to the SBA.

Federal employees are prohibited from using their “e-mail account or social media to distribute, send, or forward content that advocates for or against a partisan political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group,” according to a guide posted by the office in 2014. They are also barred from sending or forwarding “partisan political emails to others while on duty or in the workplace,” according to the OSC.

However, White House Senior Communications Assistant Brianna Stonick in January 2023 sent an email titled “Talking Points: House Republican MAGA Economic Plan” to four other White House employees. The email contained talking points and a fact sheet, both of which have been completely redacted.

A group of SBA employees appears to have received the emails, as the agency’s communications director Terrence Clark forwarded it to the address “talkers@sba.gov,” according to the documents.

Stonick also in March sent an email titled “Talking Points: President Biden’s Veto of Extreme MAGA Republican Bill,” in which the talking points have also been redacted. An SBA official named Christina Hale appears to have forwarded this email to an address labeled “ICG.” PPT alleged this address belongs to SBA Administrator Isabel Guzman as the letters represent her full initials, with her middle name being “Casillas.”

The SBA has not responded to PPT’s inquiry about the redactions as of Wednesday, according to the complaint.

Associate SBA Administrator Mark Madrid forwarded an email in March 2023 to two colleagues to request that they print out three copies of an email from the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs titled “What They Are Reading in the States: Biden-Harris Administration is Investing in America; Local Communities Reap Benefits.”

The email contains a passage detailing “what’s at stake if MAGA Republicans in Congress get their way and repeal the Inflation Reduction Act and slash funding for manufacturing, research, and innovation.”

PPT alleged that this is a clear use of a political campaign slogan to advocate for one candidate while criticizing the party opposing him.

“The American public expects their tax dollars will not be used for politicking and that the officials who serve them in government won’t be using their positions to engage in partisan electioneering,” Chamberlain told the DCNF. “Unfortunately, those seem to be hard lessons for too many executive branch inhabitants to learn.”

Officials sent these emails months before the OSC issued a June advisory opinion directing federal employees not to use campaign slogans in their official capacity, including “MAGA.”

“Employees may not, for example, wear or display items, or post or tweet messages with campaign slogans, including ‘Build Back Better,’ ‘Finish the Job,’ ‘Make America Great Again,’ or ‘MAGA’ while they are on duty or in the workplace,” the opinion states.

However, a December 2022 advisory opinion after Trump announced his candidacy in November of that year also appears to suggest that federal employees should not use “MAGA” in emails for or against the former president.

“This prohibition is broad and encompasses more than displays or communications (including in-person and via email or social media) that expressly advocate for or against former President Trump’s election,” it states. “For example, while on duty or in the workplace, employees may not wear, display, or distribute items with the slogan ‘Make America Great Again,’ ‘MAGA,’ or any other materials from former President Trump’s 2016, 2020, or 2024 campaigns or use hashtags such as #MAGA or #Trump2024 in social media posts or other forums.”

The documents and PPT’s complaint contain numerous additional examples of officials using the term “MAGA.”

Penalties for violating the Hatch Act can consist of “removal from federal service” and a fine of up to $1,000, according to the OSC. PPT’s complaint requests an immediate investigation as well as penalties for the aforementioned officials.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre previously violated the Hatch Act by making derogatory comments about Republicans during official press briefings by using the phrase “MAGA Republicans” ahead of the 2022 midterm elections, the OSC found in June.

The White House, SBA and OSC did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

JASON COHEN

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Isabel Guzman Was Scheduled To Attend 17 ‘Equity’ Meetings In Less Than One Year

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.

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

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

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.

Top Automaker Takes $1.3 Billion Dollar Bath On Key EV Line

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Top American automaker Ford hemorrhaged over a billion dollars on electric vehicles (EV) in the first quarter, leading to massive losses per vehicle.

Ford sold 10,000 vehicles in its EV Model e unit in the first three months of the year, losing $1.3 billion on the line altogether, equating to a loss of $130,000 per vehicle sold, according to data from the company’s first quarter earnings report. Despite the loss on EVs, Ford’s net income was $1.3 billion, selling over a million vehicles with $42.8 billion in revenue in the quarter.

The Biden administration has sought to boost demand and production of EVs as part of the president’s sweeping environmental agenda, offering a $7,500 tax credit for some EVs in an attempt to ease high costs using funds from the $750 billion Inflation Reduction Act. Federal regulators have also put in place tailpipe emission standards for consumers that will effectively require 67% of all light-duty vehicles sold after 2032 to be electric or hybrids.

“Ford Model e revenue was down, as wholesales declined and significant industrywide pricing pressure continued to affect electric vehicles currently on the market,” the company’s first quarter report reads. “The segment had an EBIT loss of $1.3 billion, with costs that were flat year-over-year. The company expects EV costs to improve going forward, but be offset by top-line pressure.”

Sales for Ford’s EV line were down 20% compared to last year, and revenue was down 84%. Ford’s combustion engine line, Ford Blue, sold 626,000 vehicles, which is a decline of 11% from last year, with revenue down 13% in that same time frame.

Not all EVs sold by Ford fall under its Model e unit, with commercial fleets being sold under the Ford Pro unit, including an unspecified number of EVs, according to the earnings report. The Ford Pro unit sold 409,000 vehicles, up 21% since last year, with revenue up 36%.

Ford lost $4.7 billion on EVs in 2023, higher than the $4.5 billion loss the company predicted mid-year. Other automakers have seen similar losses on EVs, such as General Motors, which reported a $1.7 billion loss in the fourth quarter of 2023.

EV demand across the whole U.S. economy slowed in the first quarter of 2023, with growth in EV sales decelerating to 2.7% compared to 5% for all vehicles. As a result, EVs’ market share dropped from 7.6% to 7.1%.

Ford did not immediately respond to a request to comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

AUTHOR

WILL KESSLER

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Boeing Posts Massive Loss Following Slew Of Safety Issues

Biden’s EPA Says Sweeping Power Plant Regs Won’t Harm America’s Grid — Experts Are Saying The Exact Opposite

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.

Police Arrest Over 100 Protesters At Emerson College As Pro-Palestinian Protests Flare Across Country

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Boston Police Department (BPD) arrested over 100 pro-Palestinian protesters Wednesday evening at Emerson College, the Daily Caller News Foundation confirmed.

Students have been protesting since Sunday and created an encampment in an alleyway partially owned by the college despite being warned that they were in violation of city ordinances, according to CBS News Boston. Police made a total of 108 arrests and broke up the encampment after warning protesters again to leave the area, a BPD spokesperson told the DCNF.

“108 arrests, 4 injured officers, 3 minor, 1 more serious. All non-life threatening,” the spokesperson said. “No protestors in custody have reported injuries at this time. Protestors will be arraigned in Boston Municipal Court.”

The department did not elaborate on whether the protesters had been released or what they were being charged with. The school has not made a statement on the arrests but classes were canceled Thursday, according to CBS News Boston.

The administration urged protesters in a statement Wednesday to abide by city laws and clear out the encampment, according to an announcement to the school.

“Most notably, the Commissioners expressed that the tents occupying Boylston Place Alley violate city ordinances prohibiting tents in a public right-of-way,” the announcement reads. “They also noted alleged violations involving blocking pedestrian access to the alley, public noise violations, and ongoing reports of fire hazards posed by blocking doors and hydrants. These are not Emerson College rules but laws and ordinances enforced by the city and the commonwealth.”

The college also noted that it had received reports that there had been “targeted harassment and intimidation of Jewish supporters of Israel and students, staff, faculty, and neighbors seeking to pass through the alley” from protesters and that this behavior was “unacceptable,” according to the school’s announcement.

Pro-Palestinian protests have been erupting across the country following the arrest of nearly 100 students at Columbia University who were protesting the school’s ties to Israel. Multiple groups at Yale, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, among others, have started encampments, calling for the universities to meet their demands to boycott, divest and sanction Israel over its war with Hamas.

Hamas launched an attack on Israel on Oct. 7 killing over 1,200 people and taking over 250 hostages, including Americans.

Emerson did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

KATE ANDERSON

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Harvard Suspends Student ‘Palestine Solidarity Committee’ As Campuses Work To Rein In Protests

NPR’s Old CEO Was Accused Of ‘Racism’ For Asking Employees For ‘Civility’: REPORT

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

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

/in , , , , , , , /by

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.

‘Trial By Ambush’: Former Federal Prosecutors Say Alvin Bragg’s Strategy Is Unlike Anything They’ve Seen Before

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

When defendants go on trial, the allegations against them are generally clear. Not so with former President Donald Trump and his “hush money” case.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office offered new transparency not only to the public, but seemingly also Trump’s defense attorneys on Tuesday when, one year after indicting the former president, they finally pulled back the curtain to reveal the motivating crime in their case: a violation of state election law. Former federal prosecutors told the Daily Caller News Foundation Bragg’s lack of clarity is unfair to the defense, who can’t prepare to argue against a charge they don’t know, and unlike what they’ve seen before.

“I don’t recall ever having a trial where the defense didn’t know what the government was trying to prove,” former federal prosecutor Jonathan Fahey told the DCNF, likening Bragg’s approach to a “trial by ambush.”

Bragg’s indictment last April charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records allegedly related to a $130,000 paid to keep porn star Stormy Daniels from telling her story of an alleged affair ahead of the election. To charge the eight-year old misdemeanor offenses as a felony, he argued it was done to commit or conceal another crime — presumably, a federal campaign-finance violation. But he never specified.

That is, until Tuesday, when it came out after defense attorneys objected to prosecutor Joshua Steinglass’ line of questioning that they were claiming Trump violated New York Election Law § 17-152. The statute makes it a misdemeanor for any two or more people to “conspire” to influence an election using “unlawful means.”

During opening statements Monday, Matthew Colangelo, senior counsel for the district attorney and a former top official in the Biden Department of Justice, argued that the records Trump allegedly falsified in relation to Daniels’ payment are part of a broader “conspiracy” to influence the 2016 election involving Trump, his former attorney Michael Cohen and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker.

Prosecutors are seeking to demonstrate that conspiracy — which they clarified is rooted in the election statute, though it is not named in the indictment — through witness testimony.

Former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasky said the theory put forward by Bragg under the statute is “bizarre.”

“The misdemeanor statute of limitations is expired on this offense, just as it is expired on the underlying offense, raising a significant legal question about the propriety of this approach,” he told the DCNF.

“One of the biggest issues in this case is that the prosecution has essentially withheld this theory until trial has started,” Cherkasky continued. “The defense has complained about this the entire time, but the judge has refused to require identification of the felony escalator at an earlier stage. This amounts to another form of ‘trial by fire,” which is not how the American criminal justice system is supposed to work.

John Malcolm, vice president for the Heritage Foundation’s Institute for Constitutional Government and former deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s Criminal Division, said there are three things about the revelation that “amaze” him as a former prosecutor.

“First, that Alvin Bragg’s office did not provide advanced notice of the precise allegations in order to enable former President Trump’s legal team to prepare an adequate defense,” he said. “Second, that the statutory code section cited by the lead prosecutor (New York Penal Code Section 17-152) prohibits a conspiracy ‘to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means …,’ but Bragg has still not divulged what those ‘unlawful means’ were.”

“And third, and most shockingly, that penal code section is a misdemeanor, which means that Alvin Bragg is claiming that committing a misdemeanor (making a false business entry) in order to conceal the commission of another misdemeanor (conspiring to promote someone’s candidacy in an unlawful manner) can – like magic – be converted into 34 felony offenses,” he continued.

Fahey told the DCNF that everything about the case “stinks to high heaven.”

“If this was anyone other than Donald Trump, this would be laughed out of court,” he said.

AUTHOR

KATELYNN RICHARDSON

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Prosecutor Finally Reveals Key Details Of ‘Crime’ Alleged In Alvin Bragg’s Indictment Of Trump

POSTS ON X:

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.

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

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

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

DAVID HOROWITZ AND ROBERT SPENCER

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.

INTERSECTIONALITY VIDEOS: The ‘Queer Gnostic Cult’ — Factual Content

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Perfect example of intersectionality…

Two words the dialectical left use we need to understand.

“Intersectionality” and “queer.”

We understand the word queer to mean gay or better, homosexual. But it has been repurposed by the left to mean a kind of corralling of all deviant sexual identities to weaponize them as battering rams against classical civilization and healthy values. Intersectionality, means the point at which various dialectic attacks which are on the surface quite different such as feminism and Islam, but both have the intention of destroying the West. This may be given different names in order to hide the intention somewhat, like “the patriarchy” or “Dar al Harb” the world of war where the infidels rule. But intersectionality is where all groups no matter how different work together to the same purpose.

Below, is just too good an example not to post.

For a much better explanation of the nature of Queer as a concept, please search out James Lindsay’s video on the subject. If I get time, I will add it to this post later on.

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with videos posted by  is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Roughly Half of Gen Z Voters ‘Are Sympathetic to Hamas’

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Last weekend, multiple anti-Semitic protests broke out on college campuses including Ohio State University, Columbia University, and Yale University. The demonstrators tore down American flags, chanted about the death of Israelis and praises of the October 7 attacks, as well as some injuries and arrests. Ever since the war between Israel and the terrorist group Hamas broke out, intense targeting of Jews in the U.S. sparked as well.

Initially, people questioned whether the anti-Semitism was new or simply uncovered by the Hamas terrorist attack. But now, as more protests occur, many worry that colleges have become a breeding ground for not only leftist agendas at large, but also for much of this resurgence of Jewish hatred. Considering the amount of anti-Semitism displayed on college campuses in recent months, the news that a survey found roughly half of Gen Z voters “are sympathetic toward Hamas” is, for many, not a shock.

Summit Ministries and RMG Research released data on Monday showcasing “the startling difference between the sentiments of all voters and Gen Z voters specifically, those born between 1997 and 2012,” Breitbart reported. These particular results, which involved 1,003 registered voters, highlighted Gen Z’s terrorist sympathies with the label, “Landmark poll: Gen Z sides with Hamas.”

The respondents were asked, “Do you believe that Israel’s wealth and military power make its campaign against Hamas unjust?” According to Breitbart, “While most voters across the board, 58 percent, believe that Israel’s campaign is ‘just’ — compared to 21 percent who believe it is unjust — only 42 percent of voters aged 18-24 believe Israel’s campaign against Hamas is just. A plurality of voters aged 18-24 believe Israel’s campaign against Hamas is unjust,” Breitbart reported. This is despite the fact that roughly 60% of Gen Z voters “agree with the U.S. government classifying Hamas as a terrorist group.”

The survey also revealed that “one-third of Gen Z voters believe Israel does not have the right to exist as a nation. Across the board, just ten percent hold that same sentiment, showcasing the radicalization of America’s youth.” Comparatively, a Pew Research Poll from March found “roughly six in ten Americans (58%) say Israel’s reasons for fighting Hamas are valid,” even if they did not all agree with how Israel responded to Hamas.

However, even though the majority of the U.S. voters appear to side with Israel amid the war, the poll from Monday made it unmistakenly clear that almost the majority of young voters do not.

Meg Kilgannon, Family Research Council’s senior fellow for Education Studies, shared with The Washington Stand, “When colleges and even primary and secondary schools are educating their students in the ‘oppressor/oppressed’ paradigm, it’s little wonder that Gen Z will identify with Hamas as indigenous and believe that Israel is a ‘colonizing’ force.”

She continued, “We know that this is totally and biblically inaccurate, but this is a generation that has been formed by social media very profoundly where these ideas are pervasive.” As such, it leads to “a situation where there is very little downside for being a pro-Palestine protestor on a college campus in most states,” especially considering the fact that “universities have policies where they provide the police force and the court system to meet their need for (social) justice.”

Unfortunately, Kilgannon concluded, “this horrific situation is sadly not surprising.”

 

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

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

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

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

Expel and Deport Ivy League Terrorists

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

RELATED PODCAST: The Struggle Between Liberty and Authority

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.

Where Is the Safe Space for Jews?

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

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 MIT, NYU, University of Michigan, Ohio State University, UC 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.

It’s Not Hypocrisy & It Isn’t Corruption

/in , , , , , , , , /by

At this point its past undeniable that a communist revolution has taken place in North America, and frankly over a great deal of what was Western Civilization overall.

It has become so obvious that the word communism as an adjective for various events and policies, which mere months to a few years ago caused grimacing and smirks in all listeners, has now become a common descriptor, even among the less aware commenters out there. (No offence meant to the linked hosts. They point out important aspects of the revolution and show clips of Trudeau that all need to see)

A large part of this revolution has been the imposition of pseudo-realities, and forcing people to play along with them. This strategy has been applied to everything from immigration to covid to the created Trans-issue and the created climate ‘crisis’.

Governments across the world are rapidly criminalizing expressing opposing views to government dialectics on things like Global Warming using the ‘hate-speech’ catch-all.

Opposing one of these efforts is what made Jordan Peterson famous and influential. He came on the scene because as a Prof. at U of T, he objected to being forced to use pronouns that people chose for themselves. He referred to this as compelled speech. A much more severe form of communist control than mere censorship. And of course he was entirely correct, even if he himself could not see through the same strategy as it applied to Covid and the Vaxx.

As a commenter said below this excellent example of the captured institution, Scientific American under its article on Gender:

“If a man wants to pretend he’s a woman, that’s up to him.

If that man wants me to pretend he’s a woman, that’s up to me.

No actually it isn’t. It is now up to the state. This is an excellent juxtaposition of Socratic thinking Vs. Hegelian. Anyone who likely reads this site would find what he said to be a pithy and accurate description of the nature of free thought. One actually worth fighting over. Which it certainly is. But in order to do that and win, we need to understand where we actually are now on a political map. And where we are on that map is well demonstrated on the Scientific American article to which the tweet above is a Response:

One of the complains quite often made on this site is when people confuse hypocrisy with dialectics. The difference is subtle, and yet it isn’t.

Here is a fumbly attempt to explain the difference:

Hypocrisy, like corruption, all exist within a single overarching system. Corruption is when a person or group takes advantage of a position, or weakness within the system to advantage themselves in some way.

Hypocrisy is similar. A person speaks or even leads people in a way that indicates self sacrifice, or claims to behave in a way that results in delayed gratification, or advocates for other morally superior behaviours, while in secret they behave in exactly the way they advise others not to do. In both examples, the hypocrites and the corrupt require our Western system to be intact, in order to take advantage of it.

But the system we all knew and grew up with has been replaced with another one.

Therefore, the advocates of that system are not corrupt. They are in fact ideologically pure, but of another system altogether.  They may, and usually do, speak in a way that lets their fellow travellers know what they really mean and intend, (with Trudeau being an excellent example), while knowing full well how the uninitiated will understand their words.

For example, when Trudeau says that those who will not take the mRNA gene therapy shots are racist, misogynists who take up space, he is really saying they are counter-revolutionaries and must be eliminated, or at least their views must be, with the people who refuse government directives being marginalized and disenfranchised. No travel, no leaving or entering Canada, no restaurant access etc.

As an example of what corruption actually is or better, corruption Vs. revolution, The MAFIA requires that the banks and other institutions work as they always have as they need a place to store their own wealth. They need to know that they can build their own homes with cement that will not fall apart after 6 months. They need to know that the cancer that they often are on civilization, does not fully metastasize. Because organized crime, even regular crime for that matter needs a healthy host.

I read a story recently about gangs of people in the US robbing stores, and opening their own sidewalk stores to sell the goods they just stole. I couldn’t help but wonder when gangs will rob those sidewalk shops and set up their own shops with that same merch another block away.

Now while that would make for a decent comedy sketch, we all know why it won’t happen.

The initial robbers who stole the merch from the legal owners, are unencumbered by the rules that stop actual legal merchants from using force against thieves.

In other words, you can rob from the stores with total impunity in many places in the US. Leftist places. Blue cities and states. But try and steal from the thieves and you will be hurt badly or killed.

The following Tweet by president Trump is a powerful indicator of how the courts and justice overall is now dialect as opposed to, well justice based.

The trial isn’t rigged. Trials no longer do what we all thought they did.

Courts, like the CPSO hearings, like the Helen Grus hearings, like many many processes in the Western World which have been captured have re-tuned their entire process to create a pre-determined political outcome, and no longer exist to determine what is true, or lawful or in the interests of society as a whole.

It is no longer using evidence and reason to a rational outcome, but a needed outcome that determines what reasoning and evidence will be allowed.

Looking at the take-over of the Columbia U campus, and other campuses by leftists and Muslims:

We all know that if anything even 10% as antisocial as this happened by Trump supporters what would happen. Or people opposed to Trudeau mandates in Ottawa. What is being permitted on campuses, like what was permitted in 2020 in Seattle and in many cities where the Marxist revolutionary group wearing a beard of Black victimhood called BLM is not hypocrisy.

It is the product of a fundamentally changed system. We need to understand this going forward.

This means there is no changing things back to individual rights and a truth based system by using the system, even if there are partial and occasional victories in the courts.

We need to see first how those victories translate into policy that actually is put into effect to know if our institutions still have any meaning as we thought, and many still think they do.

We, as freedom minded people, as classical liberals perhaps, as believers in the rights of the individual including the right to private property, and raise our children according to our own values, cannot develop effective tactics if we cannot understand the enemy strategy, and more importantly or at least more immediately, know where we are on the game board and what stage of the game is being played.

Senator Babet in Australia does a decent job of listing some of the dialectic attacks for which their system is being re-tuned. Censorship is the new normal now. It has been for decades really, but its enforcement is now overt and exponentially more common. The focus is the same though. Again, David Suzuki and Nuclear Winter as a stunning example of how dozens if not hundreds of hours of TV appearances by Canada’s Fruit Fly Scientist who was banging a drum daily about how Western industry would block out the sun and cause an ice age, are impossible to find. Al Jolson videos from the 1920s. But nothing from Suzuki’s Nuclear Winter narrative attacks from the 1970s. There was video tape by then. Two kinds.

Read the full text by clicking here.

Canada does an excellent job of demonstrating dialectical enforcement of protests for or against narrative positions:

Gender identity protestors face arrest in BC if law bans demonstrating at schools

British Columbia’s NDP government is considering new legislation that makes it illegal to demonstrate within 20 metres of school grounds to block gender identity curriculum protests.

Premier David Eby said that the Ministry of Education “has documented 18 major disruptions” of protests at schools in the province since the start of the 2023-24 school year, which he claims disrupt educational activities and intimidate students. 

“We’ve had people banging on school windows in British Columbia,” he said.

“It never crossed my mind to be worried that a grown adult would be waiting on the school perimeter to yell at my child about pornographic books or about puberty blockers,” added Eby.

In fact, the Government of BC is passing a law creating bubble zones around schools in the same way the Fed Guv did around abortion clinics.

Laws which are enforced strictly enough that a man who stood with a sign which merely read: “Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of our civilization” was arrested for holding it across the street and yards down the block from an abortion facility. And now, you won’t be able to protest the state sterilizing your own children near a school. Interestingly, both policies have the same outcome. No babies. Quell Coincidence non?

Meanwhile, at NYU:

Columbia U:

Not Hypocrisy.

Revolution.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Russian Political Scientist Ivan Timofeev: ‘The Idea Of Jointly Countering The U.S. Finds Support In Both Moscow And Beijing’

Biden Admin Resurrects Failed Obama-Era Policy To Increase Overtime Pay Eligibility

Biden’s Former ‘Disinformation’ Czar Teams Up With Liberal Operatives For New Gig

Trump Pins Blame For Pro-Palestinian Campus Protests On Biden: ‘Disgrace To Our Country’

Anti-Trump Legal Commentators Are Reportedly Coordinating Their Media Talking Points Behind Closed Doors

RELATED VIDEO: Biden Administration Argues It’s Racist to Not Hire Criminals | TIPPING POINT

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Biden Admin Used Border Wall Funds On ‘Environmental Planning’ And Cleanup, Government Watchdog Says

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The Biden administration spent taxpayer dollars meant to fund a border wall to pay for “environmental planning,” according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

At the request of Republican Reps. Jack Bergman of Michigan and Jodey Arrington of Texas, the GAO investigated whether the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) broke the law when it effectively blocked the use of taxpayer dollars to build a wall along the southern border. While GAO’s final report clears the DHS of breaking the law, it confirmed that DHS used congressionally-appropriated funds meant for the wall to pay for “environmental planning” and efforts “to remediate or mitigate environmental damage from past border wall construction.”

Republicans on the House Budget Committee, including Bergman and Arrington, characterized the GAO’s finding as confirmation that the Biden administration has spent taxpayer funds meant to enhance border security to further its environmental agenda.

Congress previously approved funds for DHS to build a border barrier between fiscal year 2018 and fiscal year 2021, but President Joe Biden and his appointees quickly instituted a new policy whereby “no more American taxpayer dollars (would) be diverted to construct a border wall” upon entering office in 2021. Cabinet secretaries, including DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, were ordered to work together to produce plans for how to shift funds away from border wall construction.

In 2021, DHS released a report detailing how it would look to redirect funds meant for the wall to instead pay for things like “environmental planning,” reviewing upcoming eminent domain actions and considering environmental remediation efforts in areas that had been the site of previous construction, according to GAO’s report. The agency then changed its plans in July 2022, applying an amendment that made environmental remediation a top priority for the agency’s expenditure of the funds appropriated for fiscal years 2018-2021.

The Biden administration has made great efforts to roll back or replace many of the immigration and border policies of former President Donald Trump, but the situation at the border has deteriorated massively since 2021. There have been nearly 8 million land encounters at the southwest border since October 2021, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Congressional Budget Office reported in January that more than 3.3 million people came to the U.S. illegally, were released into the country via parole or overstayed their permission to remain in the country in fiscal year 2023 alone.

The situation at the border set the stage for congressional Republicans to attempt to impeach Mayorkas earlier this spring. The House voted to impeach Mayorkas in February, but the Senate quickly dismissed an impeachment trial along partisan lines earlier in April.

Neither the White House nor the DHS responded immediately to requests for comment.

AUTHOR

NICK POPE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Admin Spending Big To Make Ports Of Entry Green While Trying To Yank Border Wall Funds

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

Terrorists Welcome: Chronic Counterterrorism Lapses at the Border Demand Investigation and Congressional Intervention

Biden Admin Mulling Plan To Give Legal Status To Illegal Alien Spouses

RELATED VIDEO: What “Allahu Akbar” Really Means

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.

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

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Who hired her? Why hasn’t she been fired?

The leftist/Islamic cabal, a.k.a. Red/Green Alliance, has hijacked every major institution, government agency, and legacy media outlet in the cause of America’s ruin and destruction.

In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Columbia University’s current president, Minouche Shafik, sparked controversy by referring to terrorism as ‘a form of protesting’ during an event just two months later.

This statement has ignited a heated debate on social media, with various users questioning the implications of such a characterization and expressing a range of opinions from outrage to support. The discussion has touched on broader themes of terrorism, its victims, and the perception of protest in the context of violent acts.

WATCH: Columbia’s president Minouche Shafik call the 9/11 attacks a ‘form of protest’ just two months after thousands of Americans were killed.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

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

RELATED VIDEO: Qatari official explains the intention to murder the world’s Jewish population

POST ON X:

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