Biden administration’s $4.2 billion bloody blackmail of Ukraine and Congress

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

The Biden administration has once again confirmed that it has the authority to transfer $4.2 billion of military aid for Ukraine, but is not delivering this vital aid to Ukraine.

Despite this admission, the administration has accelerated its months-long attacks on House Republicans, who have nothing to do with the fate of the $4.2 billion, for not passing supplemental security bill.

On February 20, three high-level administration’s officials almost simultaneously sent around seemingly logical but essentially fundamentally flawed message. Pentagon Deputy Press Secretary Sabrina Singh, National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby and President’s National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan have mounted their attack on the Congress consisting of two key elements.

First, they not only admitted, but purposefully underscored recent Ukraine’s heavy losses on the battlefield, especially the painful retreat of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) from the fortified city Avdiivka, due to lack of military supplies.

MS. SINGH: Well, Avdiivka unfortunately — it was a strategic withdrawal that Ukraine made in order to conserve their own artillery and ammunition.

MR. KIRBY: Ukrainian troops were forced to withdraw from the city of Avdiivka in the eastern part of Ukraine — and that happened on Saturday; I think you all know that — because they practically ran out of supplies, including artillery ammunition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Over the weekend, as you all have seen, Ukrainian troops were forced to withdraw from Avdiivka, a town in eastern Ukraine where they’d been battling Russia for many months, handing Putin his first notable battlefield victory in a year. This happened in large part because Ukraine is running out of weapons due to congressional inaction.  And Ukrainian troops didn’t have the supplies and ammunition they needed to stop the Russian advance.

Second, they blame the House for holding up support for Ukraine.

MS. SINGH: So, we are going to continue to urge Congress to pass this urgent supplemental request so that we can deliver Ukraine the air defenses, artillery and ammunition they need to defend themselves.  And as the vice president said in Munich last weekend, the failure to not pass a supplemental would be a gift to Vladimir Putin… we need the House to urgently pass and act — and work to pass this bipartisan supplemental agreement that passed last week in the Senate.

MR. KIRBY: Let’s be clear about this: Ukraine’s decision to withdraw from Avdiivka wasn’t because … we can’t get the supplemental funding and get the kinds of arms and ammunition into the hands of Ukrainian soldiers as soon as possible…

MR. SULLIVAN: …I think that individual House members have a responsibility to speak out and call for a vote, call for their Speaker, their elected leader, to put this bill on the floor for an up or down vote.  Because if it gets an up or down vote, it will pass overwhelmingly, on a bipartisan basis.

But resources for this purpose are available to the Biden administration not tomorrow, but today and even yesterday. Since December 27, 2023, the funds at the White House’ disposal has remained $4.2 billion. High-level officials confirmed that the administration has this legal authority given to the administration by Congress.

Q:  The Pentagon, I think still has $4 billion of authority…

MS. SINGH:  That’s right.

Officials insist that Congress must replenish stocks before they can provide military assistance to Ukraine, because otherwise the administration does not feel “comfortable”.

MR. KIRBY:  The replenishment authority is important.  Because we have provided so much, we’ve got to be mindful of our own stocks for our own national security purposes… …to your other question about the existing PDA and the importance of it — yes, there’s existing authority left, but without the replenishment authority, as I said, it’s not cost-free in terms of our own national security needs.

Q:  … to draw down but you don’t have any replacement money.  So why can’t an $800 billion institution just risk drawing down $4 billion of inventory on the assumption at some point you’re going to get it from Congress? Is that being discussed at all in the building?

MS. SINGH: …It’s an absolute risk for us to incur.  We don’t have the replenishment funds needed to resupply our own stocks.  So if we can’t do that, then we’re not able or we don’t feel comfortable enough to draw down or to give another PDA until we have those replenishment funds.

This explanation is problematic. Congress set a ceiling for military aid to Ukraine via the PDA channel at $25.5 billion, while also appropriating $25.9 billion for replenishment of those stocks. As of today, the Pentagon used all $25.9 billion for replenishment of stocks, but delivered only $19.7 billion to Ukraine via PDA. Therefore, military aid has been underused by $6.2 billion.

Additionally, the administration admits that they will get replenishment  funding eventually, but it still does not change the administration’s attitude towards comfort.

Q:  You manage risk here, but we’re talking like one-five-five shells, and a lot of weapons that wouldn’t be used in a fight against China.  Has there been discussion that why don’t we just put out $4 billion of PDAs on the assumption we’re — we’re going to get funding eventually if not soon?

MS. SINGH: Well again, we can say that we’re going to get funding eventually, but we’ve been ringing the alarm bell since October.  And so we’re already into February, the two-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is coming up at the end of the week.  We don’t know when we’re going to get the funding.

It appears the only real reason the administration refuses to provide the available military aid to Ukraine is that they want supplemental bill to be passed by the House.

MS. SINGH: And we’re going to continue — the discussions that we are having right now at the Secretary’s level, across the interagency, as we need Congress to give us a supplemental.

MR. KIRBY:  …We need the supplemental funding.  We absolutely have to have the supplemental funding to be able to continue to support Ukraine.

MR. SULLIVAN: …we need Congress to… take urgent action on this National Security Supplemental bill…

The White House’s determination to get the supplemental bill passed is apparent in the exchange between a journalist and Jake Sullivan.

Q:  …could you also address consideration for a loan to Ukraine absent congressional action?  Is that something that the White House is talking about?

MR. SULLIVAN: With respect to a loan to Ukraine, as I’ve said before, what we have requested and what the Senate passed on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis last week is both military assistance and economic assistance.  That economic assistance is in the form of grants, because asking Ukraine to take on and shoulder a substantial amount of debt right now, as it’s fighting for its life, we don’t regard that as the best way forward.  We think that the package we put together and that Democratic and Republican senators voted for last week is the right package. So, as far as I’m concerned, what we need to see from the House is that they move forward and pass this legislation, rather than have the United States negotiate against itself.

Finally, despite Ukraine’s heavy losses on the battlefield, the Biden administration is ready to continue to blackmail against both Ukraine and House.

Q:  … Can you tell us what other cities may be at risk of falling in Ukraine after Avdiivka?  Cause last week, the Pentagon was saying that the situation remains critical across (inaudible).

MS. SINGH:  …Look, if we don’t get more — if we don’t get the supplemental — I outlined that at the very top — but if we don’t get the funding needed from the Senate — or sorry, from the House to pass the Senate supplemental, we will not be able to provide these critical PDA packages and Ukraine will have to make choices and decisions on what cities, what towns they can hold with what they have and what partners can — can continue to supply them.

Thus, Biden administration high level officials confirmed:

  1. The Biden administration stopped delivery of military aid to Ukraine after December 27, 2023. As of now, it has not transferred it to Ukraine for two months.
  2. The aid deliveries stopped despite the fact that the White House has the authority to transfer military aid to Ukraine through the PDA channel in the amount of $4.2 billion.
  3. The Biden administration had underused, not overused, military aid to Ukraine via PDA. It spent $25.9 billion for replenishment of stocks, or $6.2 billion more than it sent military aid to Ukraine ($19.7 billion).
  4. The Biden administration also has funds at its disposal in the amount of $7.9 billion via the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) channel, which are intended to be placed as orders for the production of military items for Ukraine, but for the last year and half have not been placed yet.
  5. Therefore, over two years of war, the White House has not used at least $12.1 billion in military aid to Ukraine, which is a quarter of the $47.8 billion appropriated by Congress for these purposes.
  6. Biden administration refused to use a loan mechanism and did not initiate Ukraine Democracy Lend-Lease Act overwhelmingly supported by Congress to send supplies to munitions-hungry Ukraine fighting for its survival.
  7. The Biden administration cites “not feeling comfortable enough” as the reason for blocking the transfer of military assistance to Ukraine. This term is absent in U.S. legislation, and such justification for non-compliance with U.S. laws by the executive branch is, to put it mildly, an innovation.
  8. The White House agrees that the supplemental bill passed by the Senate will ultimately be passed by the House, allowing funds to replenish military supplies. Despite this, the administration’s is still blocking military aid to Ukraine.
  9. The Biden administration admitted that the price of blocking military assistance to Ukraine was Avdiivka, a strategic fortified position for Ukrainian armed forces, falling to Russian forces, accompanied by significant losses of Ukrainian troops.
  10. The Biden administration predicts that its continued lack of military assistance to Ukraine might force Ukrainian forces to abandon other Ukrainian cities and towns.

As it is known, the supplemental funding bill approved in the Senate and currently sent to the House, does not contain measures to stop millions of illegal immigrants at the southern border, but does contain multi-billion dollars funding for the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian Authority in dire violation of the Taylor Force Act.

In addition, this bill does not specify the exact amounts of U.S. military assistance to Ukraine must be delivered to the victim of the Russian aggression in either fiscal year 2024 or 2025.

Even if the House passes this bill, the Biden administration may take exactly the same position it takes now regarding the existing unused funds. In other words, the delivery of military assistance to Ukraine through the PDA channel may be stopped by the administration at any time because it might “not feel comfortable enough,” while funds to order weapons and military equipment through the USAI channel may not be placed among manufacturers without any justification. Then the administration would again try to blame its own failure on its political opponents, using it as a way to support some other items in its political agenda.

The Biden administration’s treatment of Congress and Ukraine, which is fighting for its very survival, cannot be called anything other than cynical bloody blackmail. The price is the lives of tens and hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians today and the destruction of the United States tomorrow.

AUTHOR

Andrei Illarionov

Senior Analyst for Russian and European Affairs.

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

Ghastly 7,300% Surge in Illegal Immigrants from Same Nation as College Student’s Murderer

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

While most mainstream media coverage flagrantly omits that the man charged in the murder of a Georgia nursing student is an illegal immigrant who entered the United States through the famously porous southern border, other important nuggets are also being left out of most reports. The 26-year-old suspect, Jose Antonio Ibarra, comes from a country—Venezuela—run by a dictator with close ties to terrorists who refuses to accept deportees. This is especially disturbing because the U.S. has seen a shocking 7,300% spike in migrants from Venezuela under the Biden administration’s disastrous open border policies and now we are stuck with all of them. There is no telling how many other violent criminals or terrorists are among the hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans who have been released inside the country by our government in the last few years.

Ibarra and his brother, another delinquent recently charged with possessing a fake green card, crossed into El Paso, Texas in September 2022 and was released in the country like millions of other migrants under the Biden administration’s policies. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) confirmed in an Atlanta news report that Ibarra “was paroled and released for further processing.” Federal authorities say the brother, 29-year-old Diego Ibarra “claimed a credible fear” of being returned to his native Venezuela when he got arrested, which is a scandal-plagued tactic used by millions of illegal immigrants to avoid getting deported. Before the most recent arrest for murder the younger Ibarra had been arrested several times, for driving under the influence of alcohol and driving without a license, shoplifting and failure to appear for an offense. One of the arrests occurred in New York City, which offers illegal immigrants sanctuary and does not report criminals to the feds for removal.

A few days ago, Ibarra got charged with malice murder, felony murder, aggravated battery, aggravated assault, false imprisonment, kidnapping, hindering a 911 call, and concealing the death of another. Police say he killed 22-year-old nursing student Laken Hope Riley, whose body was found in the woods behind a lake on the University of Georgia campus. “On February 22, 2024 at approximately 12:07 p.m., the UGA Police Department received a call from a friend of Laken’s who was concerned that she had gone to run at the Intramural Fields earlier in the morning and had not returned as expected,” according to a statement issued by the University of Georgia Police. “Officers responded to the area and immediately began a search at approximately 12:20 p.m. and located her shortly afterward. She was unconscious and not breathing, and had received visible injuries. Officers immediately began rendering medical aid. Emergency medical responders determined that she was deceased upon their arrival.”

Evidence shows that Ibarra acted alone. Only conservative media has bothered to report the highly relevant details surrounding the Venezuelan’s immigration status and that he moved to Athens, Georgia because it offers illegal aliens sanctuary. The mainstream media mostly sugarcoated or avoided the subject altogether. One national news outlet shamefully wrote that Riley’s violent murder has once again put the spotlight on the dangers female runners face. While failing completely to mention pertinent information about the illegal immigrant suspect, the article delves into a survey by athletic wear company Adidas that reveals 92% of women reported feeling concerned for their safety while running with half afraid of being physically attacked. More than a third of women experienced physical or verbal harassment, including sexist comments, and being followed, according to the athletic wear survey.

It is distressing enough that a young woman lost her life to a suspect who should not have been in the country and could have been deported after previous arrests. We must also grapple with the fact that there has been an inconceivable surge in illegal immigrants from Venezuela since Biden became president. This is especially alarming because the South American nation operates under a Marxist regime that encourages international terrorist groups to run free. Venezuela’s government issues travel documents to individuals linked to terrorism and allows terrorists to operate with relative impunity. The country also has close ties with Iran and other notorious state sponsors of terrorism. A State Department report reveals that Venezuelan Dictator Nicolas Maduro and his associates “use criminal activities to help maintain their illegitimate hold on power, fostering a permissive environment for known terrorist groups.” That includes the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-D), the Colombian-origin National Liberation Army (ELN), and Hizballah sympathizers. In a separate assessment the State Department writes that Maduro has defined himself through his opposition to the United States, regularly criticizing the U.S. government, its policies, and its relations with Latin America.

POST ON X:

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

How Much Crime and Chaos Will It Take for Biden to ‘Address This Disaster’ at the Border?

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

Laken Riley was a 22-year-old nursing student at the University of Georgia. She was known as a person who was caring, driven, and the definition of a “true friend.” But when Riley went on a jog Thursday morning, she faced a brutal, untimely death.

Jose Antonio Ibarra, an illegal immigrant, has been accused of murdering the young student after “disfiguring” her skull. As Fox News reported, Ibarra “is charged with the felonies of malice murder, murder, kidnapping, false imprisonment, aggravated assault, aggravated battery and concealing the death of another, as well as the misdemeanor of physically hindering a 911 call.”

In its story covering the incident Monday, CNN claimed “there is little evidence indicating a connection between immigration and crime,” but a variety of experts and statistics definitively say otherwise.

On Monday’s episode of “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins,” Todd Bensman, senior national security fellow for the Center for Immigration Studies, said, “[W]e do need to keep in mind … that the mass migration crisis at the southern border is the ultimate stranger danger.”

He continued, “[It’s] virtually impossible to verify criminal histories of even a tiny fraction of all of the millions of people that have crossed in over that border” — a number that has skyrocketed since the Biden administration has been in office. And yet, Biden and his team have repeatedly denied that the 10 million of illegal immigrants who’ve flooded into the U.S. since his inauguration is a crisis. But Family Research Council President Tony Perkins wondered: Could Riley’s murder “finally spur this administration to address this disaster of their own making?”

Bensman and Perkins discussed the shift from immigrants who came to America mostly from Mexico and Central America to now “it’s the entire world coming across the southern border,” Perkins said. Bensman noted that we now “have the greatest percentages in American history coming over that border from 170 countries other than Mexico and Central America.”

He added that there are more Chinese than Mexicans coming into the country, with at least 45,000 in the last 36 months. There are “350 people from Muslim majority countries who are on the FBI’s terrorism watch list. … People coming from every nation on the continent of Africa, including places where there are tribal conflicts with atrocities and warlords,” he explained. “… [W]ho knows who’s coming over that border? They just say, ‘My name is Mickey Mouse,’ and we let them in.”

While the Left claims there isn’t a connection between illegal immigration and increased crime, Bensman contended that the cities facing the highest amount of migrants, particularly sanctuary cities, are seeing “new kinds of crime” as people come to the states and are unable to provide for themselves.

“Far too many crimes should not have ever happened, because those people should have never been here,” he said. But part of the issue, Bensman emphasized, is that the process for these illegal immigrants entering the country is too simple. Not only can they enter the U.S. far too easily, but once they’re in, they’re supposed to “voluntarily report into an [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] office later,” which he emphasized “statistics and data” reveal “the vast majority of them never report in.”

Ultimately, he added, “When somebody is arrested for a criminal act, we are supposed to call ICE. But in the sanctuary cities, they don’t call ICE. They have a ban on calling ICE. There’s nothing more immoral [to them] than calling ICE on a criminal arrested in any of these cities.” But then, as a consequence to this way of thinking, the result is a seemingly endless cycle of crime.

Perkins asked, “What benefits are illegal immigrants getting when they come into the country?” Bensman replied, “Everything.”

He elaborated that when someone comes into this country illegally, in many cases, they get “100% support” in terms of housing, food, transportation, school, clothing, and medical care. “For example,” he said, “in Chicago, each immigrant is getting $7,000 cash a year” and other needs. Additionally, there are several ways they can work “illegally and fraudulently.”

As Representative Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) summarized: “The Biden administration’s open-border policies have fueled crime, undermined public safety and overwhelmed our federal, state and local law enforcement officers. … Illegal entry into our nation is perceived as commonplace, and it is conducted with little fear of consequences. That must change, both for the security of our nation and to help restore the dignity and importance of legal immigration in the eyes of all Americans. This crisis is fixable. President Biden must reverse his misguided policies so Congress can work to resolve our broken immigration system.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEO: Marco Rubio: The largest migratory smuggling operation in the world is operating at the US border

POST ON X:

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

Trump Leads Biden Nationally in Polls, Gains Support Among Young Voters

/in , , , , , , , /by

As Super Tuesday draws nearer, Donald Trump is leading Joe Biden in major polls. A recent Emerson College/The Hill survey found that 46% of Michigan voters favor former President Donald Trump, while 44% prefer incumbent Joe Biden, with 10% undecided. Significantly, Independent voters prefer Trump to Biden 43% to 37%. Ahead of the primary on March 5, nearly 70% of Republicans plan to vote for Trump, 20% plan to vote for former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley, and 11% are undecided. When undecided voters are asked which candidate they lean towards, Trump’s support increases to 76% and Haley’s to 24%.

According to the poll, 31% of Michigan voters rated the economy as their chief concern. Other top concerns included immigration (13%), threats to democracy (12%), and health care (10%). Voters most concerned about the economy prefer Trump over Biden 56% to 33%, and voters most concerned about immigration prefer Trump over Biden by a staggering 86% to 7%. Additionally, 57% of Michigan voters expressed concern over Biden’s age. Among voters under the age of 50, 63% expressed concern over Biden’s age.

This follows an Axios/Generation Lab Youth poll showing that Trump is gaining on Biden among young voters across the nation. Biden maintains a four-point lead over Trump (52% to 48%) among voters aged 18 to 34. Young voters also rated the economy as their top concern (39%), with abortion (16%), immigration (11%), student debt (11%), and climate change (10%) also of concern. Other surveys, however, have shown Trump leading Biden among young voters. A New York Times/Siena poll in December showed Trump leading Biden 49% to 43% among voters under the age of 30, while an NBC News Poll in November showed voters aged 18 to 34 preferring Trump over Biden 46% to 42%. In the 2020 presidential election, Biden had a 20-point lead over Trump among young voters, according to exit polls and the Pew Research Center.

Nationwide, Trump is expanding his lead over Biden. A Rasmussen Reports survey released last week and conducted the week before found Trump leading Biden 47% to 41% among voters across the country, with 9% supporting “some other candidate” and 2% undecided. As in other polls, Trump had a strong lead over Biden among independent voters, leading the incumbent Democrat by 16 points. When third-party candidates were included in the running, Trump still led Biden 43% to 37%, with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. garnering 12% support and other candidates claiming 5%. Even then, Trump maintained a 10-point lead over Biden among independent voters.

A recent HarrisX poll also found Trump leading Biden nationally, 47% to 38%. According to that survey, Trump still maintains a 10-point lead over Biden (40% to 30%) among independent voters. The HarrisX poll also shows Trump garnering greater support from Republicans (87%) than Biden earns from Democrats (77%).

Another poll — this one from Bloomberg News/Morning Consult — also shows Trump leading Biden in seven swing states, 48% to 42%. According to that poll, Trump leads Biden in Arizona (47% to 44%), Georgia (49% to 41%), Michigan (47% to 42%), Nevada (48% to 40%), North Carolina (49% to 39%), Pennsylvania (48% to 45%), and Wisconsin (49% to 44%). When third-party candidates are included, Trump would still garner 44% support across the seven swing states, while Biden would only claim 35%. Additionally, 53% of respondents said the country was better off under Trump than under Biden, and more respondents trusted Trump than Biden to handle issues such as the economy (51% to 33%), crime (48% to 31%), immigration (52% to 30%), U.S.-China relations (49% to 31%), the Russia-Ukraine conflict (45% to 33%), and the Israel-Hamas conflict (45% to 30%).

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

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

RELATED ARTICLE: How Much Crime and Chaos Will It Take for Biden to ‘Address This Disaster’ at the Border?

RELATED VIDEO: Bret Baier breaks down the Michigan GOP primary results: Trump is ‘rolling’

POST ON X: Lara Logan testimony on Freedom of Speech to Senate Committee

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

PODCAST: Democrats’ lawfare against Trump!

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

GUESTS & TOPICS

REVERAND BEN JOHNSON

Rev. Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand. His writings have also appeared in The (UK) Guardian, Human Events, The Stream, Real Clear Policy, Conservative Review, The Daily Caller, and have been cited by National Review, CBS News, and Fox News. He was managing editor of FrontPage Magazine and U.S. Bureau Chief at LifeSiteNews. He is the author of two books on tax-exempt foundations, as well as Party of Defeat (2008, Spence, with David Horowitz). Before turning to online journalism and editing, he spent more than a decade in all facets of radio broadcasting, including news and talk.

TOPIC: Teachers agree! Trans, CRT Lessons Hurt Rather Than Help Schools!

MARTHA ZOLLER

Martha Zoller is a conservative strategist, activist, policy expert, and pundit with extensive campaign and government experience. For twenty years, Martha has hosted radio programs and was named to the Talkers Top 100 Radio Shows in America multiple times. She was a regular contributor on Cable and Broadcast News and served as a longtime panelist on Fox 5 Atlanta’s The Georgia Gang. Martha is the host of “Morning Talk with Martha Zoller” heard weekdays on WDUN AM550 and WDUN FM102.9.

TOPIC: What are Georgians saying about Fani Willis?

©2024. Conservative Commandos Radio Show. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Hannity: Democrats are trying to use every tool to destroy Trump

VIDEO: Two out of Three Americans Gone in 2025!

/in , , , , , /by

Donald J. Trump is a New Yorker from the Borough of Queens. Boroughs are their own governmental districts in New York City since 1898; they collectively make up the New York City government. There are Americans who find Trump from Queens brash, a strong personality, not predictable though predictable and consistent in his beliefs to Make America Great Again! His statement is more than a mere catchy political marketing slogan, it is a core belief of Donald Trump. Briefly read what President Trump accomplished in four short years and given the myriad attacks he withstood.

North Korea was quiet and respectful, and President Trump even made the journey to be the first U.S. President to step foot into North Korea. Russia and China were not threatening nor aggressive, even respectful of America. The Middle East was uneventful and willing to work with America as an ally. Iran was most cautious and non-threatening. America again brought order to the world communities. We also brought economic stability, and even success; created responsibility to nations historically living off of American resources without carrying their own responsibility, and here at home, pride and historic American values were once again not timid but shown front and center for all to gladly salute and celebrate.

Yes…the globalists and their Uni-Party acolytes fear Trump and are moving at all deliberate speed to collapse America. What is transpiring at our once defined southern Border is an example of this well-designed collapse now underway. The video below shows a most disturbing representation of the invasion launched to alter and forever change the United States into something our founders never, ever would accept nor should we. The video shows “The Hegellian Dialectic” in action. The Hegellian Dialectic is a produced problem that deliberately invokes contradictions between opposing sides; for instance, good trying to help much needy individuals versus the plan to overwhelm and collapse America with terrorists, gangsters, terribly needy and those who instinctively know how to steal and rob as their jobs.

Yes…the globalists and their Una-party acolytes fear Trump returning to the White House. (For the record, I disagree with the comment made about Trump near the conclusion of the video).

©2024. All rights reserved.

American Palestinian And Arab Communities Have Decided Not To Vote For Biden In The November Elections

/in , , , , , , , /by

Professor John Dabeet, the president of the U.S. Palestinian Council said in a February 24, 2024 interview with Falestinona TV that the Palestinian and Arab communities in the U.S. have decided not to vote for President Biden in the coming presidential elections. He said that in the coming elections, these groups will focus on helping candidates in the Democratic Party who are fighting this administration. Professor Dabeet is the Business Department chair and a distinguished professor of Economics and Statistics at Muscatine Community College, Muscatine, Iowa.

TRANSCRIPT

John Dabeet: “We want there to be a massive turnout in the elections by our people and our community, in order to get our friends who support us into [Congress]. In the Democratic Party, these are the people who are fighting this administration, which is based towards the Zionist entity.

“We need to support them in order to keep them in Congress, and we should also support the new candidates running in the elections, in order to get them in, so we will have more supporters in Congress. As for the presidential elections, it’s a done deal. We – the Palestinian and Arab communities – have decided not to vote for President Biden in the November elections.”

Source: Falestinona TV (Fatah-Lebanon)

RELATED ARTICLES:

Former Lebanese Environment Minister Wiam Wahhab: The Israelis Know That Hizbullah Will Destroy Them If They Enter A Ground War With Lebanon; Hizbullah Purchased Javelin Missiles On The Ukrainian Black Market; I Also Bought Some

Hamas’s Military Wing Releases Trial Version Of Media App For Android Users

RELATED VIDEO: Palestinian Activist Complains About Inability to Hijack Planes | TIPPING POINT

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

VIDEO: America at a Tipping Point with Senior Chief Geoff Ross, U.S. Navy (Ret.) on Dissent Television

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

Senior Chief Geoff Ross, U.S. Navy (Ret.) joins us on Dissent Television to discuss why America is at a “tipping point.” America was founded as a Republic with a Constitution and unless we the people protect it, it may disappear.

There are traitors amongst us that want to turn it into a democracy, like that in Venezuela and Cuba.

Senior Chief Ross explains the historical background of this movement to destroy our Constitutional Republican form of government and fundamentally transform it into a dictatorship.

WATCH: “America at a Tipping Point” with Senior Chief Geoff Ross, U.S. Navy (Ret.)

ABOUT SENIOR CHIEF GEOFF ROSS

Geoff, as the son of a retired U.S. Navy Chief, travelled the world as a boy.

Geoff enlisted in the U.S. Navy in Fort Walton Beach, Florida and on July 29th, 1982, at the age 19, entered the Naval Diving and Salvage Training Center in Panama City, Florida.

Geoff completed two tours on the USS Holland and one tour on the USS Orion forward deployed in La Maddalena, Italy from 1990-1993.

Geoff served on staff duty in Pensacola, Florida from 1987-1990, and as the Assistant Division Officer for logistics at the Naval Diving and Salvage Training Center from 1993-1996.

Geoff received various awards and decorations including the Navy and Marine Corps Medal for heroism, Navy Commendation Medal, Navy Achievement Medal (5 awards) and various unit awards.

As the former President and CEO of the Rogue Patriot Group Inc. from 2008-2013 Geoff had various bodyguard duties for dignitaries including former Governor Sarah Palin, Colonel Bud Day, former Florida Governor, now Senator, Rick Scott.

Geoff also worked for a year at a Fox News radio affiliate as a political commentator.

Geoff now works as the East Coast Event Coordinator and Fox News liaison for the Combat Veterans for Congress PAC.

Like his father, Geoff retired as a Senior Chief U.S. Navy.

©2024. Host Dr. Rich Swier and Dissent Television. All rights reserved.

RELATED PODCAST: The Power of Persistence: A Community’s Fight Against Federal Overreach

RELATED VIDEOS:

IN FOCUS: George Soros & Censorship in an Election Year with Dennis Prager – OAN

Everything You Need to Know about the Government’s Mass Censorship Campaign

Attacks in West Bank Highlight Futility of Two-State Solution: Expert

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

Last week, an Israeli civilian was killed and several were left wounded after a Palestinian terrorist shot at cars around the Maale Adumim settlement. In response to the attack, Israel’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, announced that over 3,000 housing units would be built in the West Bank, also known by their biblical names of Judea and Samaria. This decision, however, seems to have sparked further controversy.

As The Jerusalem Post reported, other than a short period of time during the Trump administration, “Israeli settlements in the West Bank have almost always been a thorn in the relations between Israel and the U.S.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken has already condemned the construction initiatives. He stated that he’s “disappointed” because “settlements are counter-productive to reaching an enduring peace” and “inconsistent with international law.” He added that the Biden “administration maintains a firm opposition to settlement expansion,” holding the belief that the settlements “only weakens … Israel’s security.”

Some have pointed out that Blinken’s comments, as well as Biden’s developing stance on the issue, are the opposite of “the Trump administration’s view in 2019, which did not consider Israeli settlements in the West Bank as inconsistent with international law.” But as Family Research Council President Tony Perkins pointed out on “Washington Watch” Monday, the Biden administration has only widened the “divide between the U.S. and our strategic ally Israel.”

In addition to that statement, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman said that the claim Blinken made during Friday’s press conference, that Israel’s decision was inconsistent with international law, was simply “not true.” He stated that Blinken’s belief implies “the Jewish people have no right to live in their biblical homeland.” And ultimately, “It really is just a gut punch to those who take a theological view to biblical Israel.” And “people need to know,” Perkins added, “when you hear this term ‘West Bank,’ we’re talking about everything we read about in the Bible.”

But aside from the biblical significance, Friedman highlighted that “Biden’s been nothing but difficult on some of Israel’s most important issues.” For instance, Biden has pushed for a two-state solution, Friedman pointed out, “which nobody in Israel wants. … [N]obody with half a brain should want.” In the past, when a two-state solution was in place and the Palestinians in Gaza were self-governing, Perkins noted that “all they did was focus on how they could attack Israel.”

Not to mention that the people in Gaza “have yet to denounce the October 7th attacks on Israel,” Perkins said. As a matter of fact, the Palestinian National Authority (PA) “has a pension system … where they award funds to terrorists … based upon the severity of the terrorist attack,” Friedman explained. In short, “The more Jews you kill or wound or maim, the more money you get as a pension,” he said. “And this goes on to this day.” In other words, Perkins explained, “the PA is just hostility by another name.”

Biden’s agenda for Israel, Friedman argued, would only lead to “another terrorist state and another October 7.” Perkins agreed, adding, “It would not even be kicking the can down the road, because we know exactly what’s going to happen with this setup. They regroup and they attack again.” To which Friedman concluded, whether it’s a two-state solution or ceasefire the administration is pushing, “It’s just a terrible idea on many fronts.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

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.

China Funnels Machine Gun Parts into U.S. while Expanding Space Weapon Arsenal

/in , , , , /by

A new book has revealed that the Chinese government is inundating the U.S. with illegal gun parts that transform handguns into fully automatic machine guns as part of a strategy to create chaos within America. The news comes as a report has surfaced indicating that the communist regime is pursuing a plan to use weapons in space to threaten U.S. satellites.

On Monday, Breitbart revealed that a new book by Senior Contributor Peter Schweizer details how Chinese manufacturers, under the watchful eye of the regime, are shipping “thousands” of boxes of illicit “auto sear switches” to America, which are small metal devices that can convert semi-automatic handguns into fully automatic machine gun-style weapons. The devices are illegal for virtually all gun owners in the U.S.

As Schweizer argues in “Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans,” the auto switch shipments are part of the regime’s “Disintegration Warfare” strategy, which seeks to undermine the U.S.’s “national will, values, and cohesion” by flooding the black market with the devices, which then fall into the hands of criminals, gangs, and drug dealers.

After U.S. authorities began discovering and blocking direct shipments of the switches from China, Schweizer observes that the porous southern border resulting from the Biden administration’s lax policies is aiding China’s efforts to get the switches into the U.S. via Mexico, just as the crisis is also aiding the distribution of Chinese-manufactured fentanyl. In recent years, the number of switches seized by law enforcement rose “570% during a period of 2017 to 2021, compared to the previous five years.”

Illegal auto switches aren’t the only illicit gun parts making their way into the U.S. via China, Schweizer writes. He reported that a “huge influx” of firearm suppressors, or “silencers,” began to hit America beginning in 2019. “[C]landestinely imported Chinese suppressors enabled criminal gangs and drug cartels in America to get around those requirements and buy them in large quantities,” he wrote. “And over the next three years, federal officials traced an astonishing 42,888 suppressors arriving from China. Those were only the devices they traced. How many more got through?”

Despite the high volume of illegal gun parts originating from China ending up on the streets of the U.S., Schweizer noted that the Biden administration and congressional lawmakers have been curiously silent on the topic. “President Biden has pressed for gun restrictions on ordinary Americans but has never publicly discussed this problem,” he writes, nor has Biden brought up the issue with Chinese dictator Xi Jinping during his recent visits. Similarly, a bill introduced by 11 senators to restrict the switches did not propose any action against China, nor did Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) in their 2021 letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland expressing alarm over the switches.

Similarly, lawmakers have so far not expressed alarm over a Washington Times report published Monday that China is pursuing deploying weapons in space that threaten American satellites, including a nuclear warhead that currently orbits the Earth. The lack of reaction stands in stark contrast to what occurred two weeks ago with the uproar surrounding reports of Russia’s intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space.

The Washington Times story, based off of a U.S. Air Force think tank report, details how the Chinese military has adopted a “space coercion” strategy that includes the use of both ground-based missiles “capable of hitting satellites orbiting at all altitudes,” as well as orbital missiles — including nuclear warheads — which would target “reconnaissance and early warning systems, communication hubs, and command centers; logistics systems, military-industrial bases, electric power and energy systems, and other infrastructure; and counter-force targets, including missile positions, airfields, naval bases, nuclear bases, and information warfare installations.”

While reducing conventional U.S. military power, the report notes that the biggest threat of China’s “space coercion” strategy would be its ability to undermine U.S. nuclear deterrence through a precision-strike nuclear warhead “backed by spaced-based intelligence and tracking,” which would give China’s military “a greater ability to track, target and attack American nuclear forces.”

In addition, the strategy calls for non-nuclear “electronic warfare strikes against satellites, radars, and communications nodes and computer network attacks.” These “[k]inetic attacks would be conducted suddenly, used in short duration, and limited,” according to the report.

During testimony before the House in January, FBI Director Christopher Wray gave a succinct summary of the threat he believes the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) poses to the U.S. “The CCP’s dangerous actions — China’s multi-pronged assault on our national and economic security — make it the defining threat of our generation.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEO: Exposing Chinese Organized Crime Rings Operating in Maine | TIPPING POINT

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.

10 Times as Many Teachers Say Trans, CRT Lessons Hurt Rather Than Help Schools

/in , , , , , , /by

A new survey reveals a cavernous gap between teachers’ unions and the views of most parents, teenagers, and teachers on whether public schools should teach LGBT ideology to students — and whether parents should have the right to opt their children out of those classes.

While elite teachers’ unions such as the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) believe schools should teach sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) classes to children, their customers — parents and students — disagree, as do many of their members, according to a series of new polls released last week.

More than 10 times as many teachers said debates over LGBT ideology, including sexual orientation and gender ideology, “have had a negative impact on their ability to do their job,” compared to 4% who said they improve learning, according to the Pew Research Center: 41% to 4%. Social Studies and English teachers were the most likely to say SOGI topics harmed their teaching time; they were also the classes most likely to discuss those issues, the survey found.

Yet some left-wing activists are working to change that. MacKenzie Scott, the ex-wife of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, donated $10 million to a group that instructs math teachers to “infuse social justice into mathematics.”

Teachers, Parents, and Students Do Not Want LGBTQIA+ Issues in the Classroom

Half of all teachers say “students should not learn” about gender identity issues in school, including 62% of elementary school teachers, 45% of middle school teachers, and 35% of high school teachers. Among those who believe the school should weigh in on such divisive topics, 33% of teachers say gender “can be different than sex assigned at birth,” while 14% believe in biological sex. More than twice as many elementary teachers believe transgender ideology as believe in biology; the proportion reaches three-to-one among high school teachers (45% vs. 15%).

The poll apparently shows those supportive of transgender beliefs are more likely to address the topic in school. Just under one-in-three teachers say sexual orientation or transgender ideology come up occasionally (21%) or frequently (9%). But teachers who belong to the Democratic Party were 15 points more likely to confess that LGBT issues creep into their classrooms than Republican teachers (36% to 21%).

Although a plurality (48%) of teachers believe parents should be able to opt their children out of transgender ideology indoctrination classes, one-third of instructors believed such classes should be compulsory.

“On both topics, parents’ views were more evenly split than the views of teachers,” according to the Pew survey. For instance, a majority of parents (54%) believe they should be able to determine whether teachers can subject their children to trans ideology.

The largest percentage of teens do not want to hear about LGBT ideology in the classroom, either: 48% say the topics should not be taught at school. Teens are also slightly more likely to believe in biological sex than in transgenderism (26% vs. 25%). But Democratic students are 525% more likely than Republican students to say gender identity is not tied to physiognomy.

Teenage students are more likely to feel uncomfortable hearing about transgender or sexual orientation issues than feel comfortable (33% vs. 29%). More than twice as many Republican students are more likely to feel uncomfortable hearing about such topics than to feel comfortable.

Only 14% of all teens say transgenderism or homosexuality “has never come up in any of their classes.”

The poll seems to indicate many teachers believe parents have too much say in their children’s education. While a plurality of teachers said parents had “the right amount” of influence, teachers were more likely to say parents had “too much influence” than not enough (32% to 19%). Democrats were 42% more likely than Republicans to believe parents had too much influence.

Republican-leaning teachers are more likely to honor parents’ views on these subjects, the poll found: 69% of Republican teachers say schools should not be in the business of teaching LGBT issues, and 80% say parents should decide whether their children attend such classes. Half of Democratic teachers say public school LGBT classes should be mandatory, and 53% say schools should teach transgender ideology.

A strong majority of teachers (58%) belongs to the Democratic Party, Pew noted.

Asian and “[w]hite Democrats are more likely than [b]lack and Hispanic Democrats to say parents should not be able to opt their children out of learning about sexual orientation and gender identity,” Pew stated. In all, 53% of Asian Democrats and “six-in-ten [w]hite Democrats say this, compared with 42% of Hispanic Democrats and 34% of [b]lack Democrats.” A plurality of black Democrats say parents should be able to opt out of LGBT indoctrination (46%, compared to 34% who oppose it).

Teachers’ Unions Out of Touch with Students, Poll Shows

The views of teachers, parents, and students strongly conflict with the stance of the nation’s largest teachers’ unions, the three-million-member NEA and the 1.5-million-member AFT. The NEA provides model legislation to teach LGBT ideology in public schools and carries out numerous training sessions to promote gender ideology to teachers.

The NEA’s “Pronoun Guide” includes “Ze, Zim, Zir, Zay or Zee.” It urges teachers, “Inspire and encourage your student” with its two-page list of “LGBT+-affirming books.” It instructs teachers in 33 states how they can obtain a free “Rainbow Library” from GLSEN.

“You can use your work environment,” e.g., the classroom, “to show support for students of all backgrounds — for example, by hanging a Black Lives Matter poster or Pride flag or making clear that you will use a student’s personal gender pronouns,” the NEA advises teachers.

The union’s leadership has strongly emphasized its commitment to radical LGBTQ advocacy, regardless of parental objections or, seemingly, state law. “We will say gay! We will say trans!” bellowed NEA President Becky Pringle at the group’s 2022 Annual Meeting and Representative Assembly, taking aim at the popular “Parental Rights in Education” law, signed into law by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R), who went on to win a rousing double-digit reelection months later. The bill says teachers may not “encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity” before the fourth grade. The NEA stated its union members would “validate our students,” presumably when children’s gender choice conflicts with their parents’ values.

The NEA’s chief union rival, the AFT, “also coached its members on how to inject gender identity politics into the classroom,” found a report from the Defense of Freedom Institute. The AFT’s Together Educating America’s Children (TEACH) conference last July held sessions on “Affirming LGBTQIA+ Identities in and out of the Classroom” and “The TGNCNB [Transgender, Gender-Nonconforming, Nonbinary] Inclusive School and Classroom.”

Teachers in Tennessee’s Clarksville-Montgomery County School System, which strongly supported President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, learned that the U.S. operates as a “system of oppression” that confers “privilege status” on “white,” “able-bodied,” “men, cisgendered,” “heterosexual,” “Christian” Americans; but the U.S. allegedly brands an “oppression status” on any “person of color”; “woman, trans, nonbinary, genderqueer,” “LGBQ+, polyamorous”; and people whose religious views are “pagan.”

The LGBTQ movement’s advocacy goes outside the classroom to the restroom, locker room — even the hotel room. Last summer, teachers at Governor’s Ranch Elementary School in Littleton, Colorado, attempted to force a fifth-grade girl to share a bed with a boy who identified as a girl on an overnight field trip. Last July, the AFT adopted a resolution supporting “inclusive” policies allowing men to access female facilities, “including, but not limited to, bathrooms and locker rooms.” AFT President Randi Weingartenwalked away from a reporter who asked her about girls who do not feel safe undressing in front of boys in their locker rooms.

“Both teacher unions ignore the reality that most teachers want to teach, not affirm a student’s gender identity, either due to their personal values or their beliefs that doing so oversteps their authority and encroaches on the role of parents,” says the Defense of Freedom Institute.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

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.

‘No Federal Right To An Abortion’: Idaho GOP Members Lead Amicus Brief Supporting Pro-Life SCOTUS Case

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

Idaho Republican Sen. Jim Risch and fellow GOP Rep. Russ Fulcher filed an amicus brief Tuesday with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of defending the state’s pro-life case against the Biden administration, the Daily Caller learned first.

In a press release obtained by the Daily Caller, two leading Republicans were joined by the state’s entire delegation, along with 24 U.S. senators, and 93 U.S. representatives, to advocate for the pro-life law, the Defense of Life Act, after the Biden Administration previously attempted to override it. Prior to the GOP leaders’ move, an opening brief was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 20 by the state’s Republican Attorney General Raúl Labrador asking the high court to intervene in a legal battle between federal officials, motivating Republican leaders to also push for the case.

“Idahoans have passed a strong law to protect the lives of mothers and the unborn, yet the Biden administration is seeking every opportunity to expand abortion. This administration cherrypicked pieces of existing statute and wrongfully reinterpreted it to fit their agenda,” Risch stated. “Their manipulation of federal law cannot usurp state law, and there is no federal right to an abortion. This amicus brief demonstrates how the administration’s substantial federal overreach is aimed at undermining pro-life protections not only in Idaho but around the nation.”

In 2020, Idaho enacted a measure that made it a felony for doctors to perform most abortions, with exceptions when “necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman” or within the first trimester if the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. Following Roe v. Wade’s overturning in June 2022, the law came into effect. However, nearly two months later in August, the Justice Department sued the state over the measure.

The Biden administration claimed that the state was in violation of the Constitution and was ultimately prevented by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). However, the state claims that there is not only no conflict between EMTALA and Idaho’s law, but also argues that the Biden administration is attempting to “rewrite” the health act to prevent the state from enforcing the pro-life law, according to Labrador.

23-726 Amicus Brief of 121 … by hailey

EMTALA, enacted by Congress in 1986, requires hospitals with emergency departments to provide any patient with a medical examination and prohibits the departments from “refusing to examine or treat individuals with an emergency medical condition.” Notably, while there is a duty to pregnant women and the “health” of her unborn child within EMTALA, there is no mention of abortion.

While the state continued its back-and-forth legal battle with the Ninth Circuit panel, by January, SCOTUS ultimately placed a stay on two cases, Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, that were impacted by the Biden administration.

“The case of Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States involves an elective, induced abortion which is against Idaho law,” Fulcher stated. “The Biden administration has no authority to use EMTALA to avoid holding these individuals accountable for breaking the law, and this sets a precedence that is harmful to women and children around the country.”

The GOP leaders are seeking to have the amicus brief clarify EMTALA’s correct definition, proper federal use, and the determination of no Constitutional right to an abortion based on the SCOTUS ruling within Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. Additional supporting organizations behind the legal move are: Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, National Right to Life, March for Life Action, Americans United for Life, Alliance Defending Freedom, Family Research Council, Catholic Vote, Concerned Women for America, Family Policy Alliance and Human Coalition Action.

“The Supreme Court has ruled it is the states’ ability to protect the right to life, yet the Biden Administration continues to exercise federal overreach to advance its abortion agenda,” state Republican Sen. Mike Crapo stated. “The Administration must stop its ongoing attacks on state-issued pro-life protections, including in Idaho.”

Arguments for the cases are set to appear before SCOTUS during their April session.

AUTHOR

HAILEY GOMEZ

General assignment reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Alabama Supreme Court Rules Frozen Embryos Are Children

Republican Lawmakers Set Their Sights On Abortion ‘Trafficking’ In Latest Post-Dobbs Fight

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

Federal Court Rules Major Biden Spending Bill Was Passed Unconstitutionally

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

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that a $1.7 trillion spending bill was unconstitutionally passed in December 2022 due to the lack of a quorum, blocking enforcement of a law about pregnant women in the workplace.

United States District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas said that the House of Representatives improperly passed the spending package because a quorum of members was not physically present. The then-Democrat-controlled body allowed proxy voting for the measure, which 215 Democrats and nine Republicans supported.

“Although the Court finds that the passage of the Consolidated Appropriations Act violated the Constitution, Texas does not seek an injunction of—and the Court does not enjoin—the entire Act,” Hendrix wrote in the 120-page opinion. “Rather, the Court enjoins only the application of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act against Texas. The relief granted here is limited to abating the injury that Texas has proven will occur.”

“Based on the Quorum Clause’s text, original public meaning, and historical practice, the Court concludes that the Quorum Clause bars the creation of a quorum by including non-present members participating by proxy,” Hendrix added. “Supreme Court precedent has long held that the Quorum Clause requires presence, and the Clause’s text distinguishes those absent members from the quorum and provides a mechanism for obtaining a physical quorum by compelling absent members to attend. This power to compel attendance makes little sense divorced from physical presence.”

Paxton sued President Joe Biden in February 2023 for signing the measure, arguing in court documents that congressional power to force absent members to attend “would make little sense if the Constitution did not require physical attendance.”

“Congress acted egregiously by passing the largest spending bill in U.S. history with fewer than half the members of the House bothering to do their jobs, show up, and vote in person,” Paxton said in a Tuesday afternoon release. “Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi abused proxy voting under the pretext of COVID-19 to pass this law, then Biden signed it, knowing they violated the Constitution. This was a stunning violation of the rule of law. I am relieved the Court upheld the Constitution.”

The Supreme Court ruled against Republican efforts to challenge the proxy voting rule put in place during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic in January 2022.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

AUTHOR

HAROLD HUTCHISON

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: DCNF Reporter Details Dem Rep.’s Proxy Voting-Enabled High Life

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.

Meet Marwan Barghouti, Serial Killer and Possible Palestinian President

/in , , , , , , , /by

The most popular potential leader of a future Palestinian state is Marwan Barghouti.

He isn’t hiding in a tunnel in Gaza, like Yahya Sinwar, nor living the life of Riley in a luxury hotel in Doha like Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh, Moussa abu Marzouk, and Khaled Meshaal. Nor is he living in a $13 million presidential palace in Ramallah like Mahmoud Abbas.

No, he’s in an Israeli prison, and has been for decades. That makes him a hero in the eyes of most Palestinians. Barghouti, you see, was convicted of masterminding the murders of Israelis and sentenced to five life terms.

And that is one of the reasons for his popularity: he’s a real killer of Israelis, and has spent 33 years in an Israeli prison to prove it.

Why does the Western press anoint Barghouti as the best candidate to become head of the Palestinian Authority after Mahmoud Abbas retires or, more likely, dies? Because, as noted above, he isn’t corrupt. The Western journalists fail to recognize that he’s not corrupt only because he hasn’t had a chance; there is no reason to think he would not follow in the footsteps of Mahmoud Abbas (who together with his sons Yasser and Tareq has accumulated a family fortune worth $400 million), or the three Hamas leaders Khaled Meshaal ($4 billion), Ismail Haniyeh ($4 billion) and Mousa abu Marzouk ($3 billion). And he has Palestinian street cred — the kind that 33 years in an Israeli prison can provide.

Incredibly, many of these Barghouti enthusiasts make no mention at all of the innocent people he was convicted of murdering. That’s like murdering them twice. 

This is what most endears him to the Palestinian street. The blood of innocent Israeli victims on his hands is precisely what makes him such a popular figure. He not only called for the murder of Israelis, but actually masterminded the murders of four Israelis and a Greek priest mistakenly taken for a Jew.

A second reason is that unlike the three Hamas leaders — Haniyeh, Marzouk and Meshaal —and the rais in Ramallah, 88-year-old Mahmoud Abbas, Barghouti hasn’t stolen billions of dollars from aid meant for the Palestinians because, of course, behind bars he hasn’t had that opportunity.

More on this serial killer so beloved of the Palestinians can be found here:

The Serial Killer Who Might Be the First President of Palestine

by Moshe Phillips, JNS.org, February 22, 2024

A Greek Orthodox priest named Georgios Tsibouktzakis was murdered for the crime of driving while mistakenly being perceived as Jewish. And now his killer is being widely touted as the likely first president of “Palestine.”

In recent weeks, pundits in The New York Times, The Guardian and other news outlets have promoted Marwan Barghouti as the best candidate to replace Mahmoud Abbas as head of the Palestinian Authority and then become the first president of the “Palestine” that they hope to establish.

Incredibly, many of these Barghouti enthusiasts make no mention at all of the innocent people he was convicted of murdering. That’s like murdering them twice. Here’s some information on one of Barghouti’s victims.

Georgios Tsibouktzakis was born and raised in the picturesque northern Greek town of Evosmos, a name that means “pleasant scent.” Among its notable sites is the Agios Athanasios Church, which is more than 200 years old.

The Tsibouktzakis family must have been impoverished because upon completing primary school, at age 12, Georgios set aside his studies and found a job in a local fabric factory.

At some point, young Georgios experienced a religious awakening. He adopted an extremely humble lifestyle, giving away his belongings, including his most precious possession—his bicycle—and entering a Greek Orthodox religious order.

After studying at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Georgios decided to go to Israel. And why not? Christianity was born in the Land of Israel. The Christian Bible is filled with references to Judea (although there is no mention of “Palestine,” for some reason). As a devout man of faith, he wanted to spend the rest of his life in the Holy Land.

In 1990, Georgios arrived in Israel and resumed his religious studies at a local Greek Orthodox seminary. After three years, he became a monk and was given the name Father Germanos. Eventually, he was ordained a priest and deacon. He was assigned to live at St. George’s Monastery.

Read more.

AUTHOR

Hugh Fitzgerald

RELATED ARTICLES:

The World Prepares to Recognize a Hamas Palestinian State

Dearborn is Dictating U.S. Israel Policy

UK Politician: ‘Islamic supremacists, the extremists and the antisemites are in charge now.

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

The World Prepares to Recognize a Hamas Palestinian State

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

A “Palestinian” state will be a state of the terrorists, by the terrorists and for the terrorists.

Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the PLO’s Palestinian Authority and the other Islamic terrorist groups who make up the official “Palestinian” leadership have been invited for unity talks in Moscow.

The terrorist unity talks scheduled by the Putin regime for the end of February are a homecoming for a “Palestinian” movement invented by Soviet propagandists. Mahmoud Abbas, the long-serving dictator of the PA, wrote his Holocaust denial thesis while studying at Moscow’s Patrice Lumumba University which had trained a generation of third world terrorists.

The invitation to Moscow comes from Putin’s Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov. Materials from a KGB defector revealed that Abbas had worked for the KGB under Bogdanov. Back then Abbas had the KGB codename “mole”, these days, his code name is “president”.

Some of the same ex-Soviet operatives who helped set up and fund the PLO, the PFLP and the rest of the “Palestinian” movement are now trying to unite them all under one single banner.

While the State Department in D.C. and British Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron are talking about immediately recognizing a “Palestinian” state as soon as they can force Israel to stop its campaign to destroy Hamas, the Palestinian Authority is trying to bring Hamas into the state.

The media claimed that Abbas had visited Qatar to hold talks with the Islamic tyranny’s leaders on a “ceasefire”. In reality, the Palestinian Authority leader had been meeting with the Qatari regime, another state sponsor of Hamas, to pursue unity talks with the fellow terror group.

Putin’s relationship with Iran makes Moscow, like Doha, home turf for Hamas. Some weeks after Oct 7, top Hamas leaders had flown out to Moscow to meet with Bogdanov after the Russian official had previously chatted with leaders of the terror group in their home base in Qatar.

In 2006, Putin had reacted to the Hamas takeover of Gaza by declaring that “we are maintaining our contacts with Hamas and intend, in the near future, to invite the leadership of this organisation to Moscow” and emphasized that, “we have never called Hamas a terrorist organisation.” Putin invited Hamas leader Khaled Mashal, who recently claimed that “the Russians told us they would study our Oct. 7 attack in their military academies.”

A week after the Oct 7 attacks, Hamas stated, “we in the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) appreciate Russian President Vladimir Putin’s position on the ongoing Zionist aggression against our people and his opposition to the siege of Gaza”.

After Oct 7, Putin and China’s Xi had blocked a UN condemnation of the Hamas atrocities. Now Russia is working on uniting its old PLO friends and its new Hamas friends. But Russia and Qatar are not alone. The Biden administration and the European Union are all pushing for a “Palestinian” state after they force a ceasefire. And that state will inevitably include Hamas.

“Russia has invited all Palestinian factions who will be meeting on the 26 of this month in Moscow. We will see if Hamas is ready to come to the ground with us,” Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh informed the Munich Security Conference. “We are prepared to engage. If Hamas is willing to join us, that’s positive. We need Palestinian unity,”

“One should not continue focusing on October 7,” he warned attendees at the forum.

“Hamas is an essential part of the Palestinian political map. Israel’s talk of eliminating Hamas will not happen and are not acceptable to us,” Shtayyeh had told Qatar’s Doha Forum in December around the same time that the PA was holding unity talks with Hamas in Doha.

After the Oct 7 attacks, Biden claimed that, “the vast majority of Palestinians are not Hamas. Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people.” In reality, polls show that Hamas would easily win any current election, as it won the last set of “Palestinian” elections in 2006, leading Abbas and his Fatah faction to seize total control of the West Bank and reject any future elections. Hamas was able to take over Gaza leading to the two “Palestinian” statelets.

In January, Abbas’ spokesman had promised to “hold general elections, and if Hamas wins, the president will hand over the [Palestinian] Authority.”

With polls showing that Hamas would handily win an election, If Abbas is serious this time, that means recognizing a “Palestinian” state will mean creating a Hamas state inside Israel.

Hamas and the Palestinian Authority had been holding unity talks on and off, including four months before the Oct 7 attacks, and quickly began holding them again afterward.

The current proposal, like previous ones coming out of the unity talks, places Palestinian Authority officials up front, so that terrorists can receive foreign aid from America and the EU, while Hamas officials maintain an official subsidiary role but continue to control Gaza.

In the past, Hamas had been able to siphon foreign aid through UNRWA, but as it now faces the possibility of utter destruction in Gaza, it may be more willing to accept the proposal being advanced by Qatar, Russia, the EU and the Biden administration. While Russia and Qatar may be more publicly supportive of their Hamas allies, all the proposals come down to a government of “technocrats” serving as the public face of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

Shtayyeh is an example of one of those “technocrats”, academics with experience in extracting foreign aid and telling foreign diplomats what they want to hear, but with no actual political power, who were put into place to act as a cover for the Arafat and Abbas regimes. A similar puppet regime of technocrats subsidiary to Afghanistan’s warlords had operated in Kabul before it fled the Taliban. The Taliban and the Biden administration have resurrected a version of its “technocrats” to administer the funds going from the United States to Afghanistan.

The current plan is to blame Oct 7 entirely on Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas in Gaza, and a few of his cronies, to demand their expulsion, and then to make a deal with the “moderate” Hamas leaders in Doha before putting the plan for a “Palestinian” state in overdrive. But the Moscow summit is a warning that any such state will never be anything other than a terror state.

The primary difference between the Qatari and Russian positions, and the Biden and EU position, is plausible deniability. Qatar and Russia want Hamas out front, while Biden and the EU prefer it out back. And we already know from Afghanistan how that will end up working out.

The Qataris negotiated our deal with the Taliban that would have made the Islamic terrorist group a part of a multilateral government. Americans died to maintain that State Department fiction as the Taliban were advancing to take over the entire country. Hamas had its chance to be part of a multilateral government with other Islamic terrorists and each time it chose to try and take everything. Biden and the EU may want to keep Hamas in the background, but history tells us that, like the Taliban, it will eventually seize power and dominate any “Palestinian” state.

It’s difficult to know whether Secretary of State Blinken and the State Department personnel who pretended until the last moment that the Taliban were not trying to take over Afghanistan, but only to take a stronger position in the negotiations for a united government really believed that. It’s also difficult to know whether they truly believe that their proposed “Palestinian” state will be anything other than a terrorist state that will eventually fall into the hands of Hamas.

But we know that not only Qatar and Russia, but the Biden administration and the EU, have urgently fought against any Israeli move into Rafah that would finish off Hamas in Gaza.

It’s obvious why Qatar or Russia’s Bogdanov are condemning an attack on Rafah, but the Biden administration has introduced a draft UN resolution calling for a ceasefire, and from Biden on down have warned Israel against going into Rafah. The internal reasoning is probably similar to the one that guided Nixon and Kissinger during another October war 50 years ago.

During the Yom Kippur War, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had told Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin that “my nightmare is a victory for either side.” He warned that without negotiations and a deal, “the Israelis [will] have pushed the Arabs out of every territory and “If we do nothing by Tuesday, Wednesday at the latest, Arabs will have been defeated.”

“I do not mean to imply that he wanted Israel to lose the war, he simply did not want Israel to win decisively. He wanted Israel to bleed just enough to soften it up for the post-war diplomacy he was planning,” Admiral Elmo Zuwalt, the former head of the Navy, wrote in his memoir.

The Biden administration also wanted Israel to defeat Hamas, but not to defeat it too much.

The administration is worried that if Israel wins in Rafah, it will win too much and be much less interested in its diplomatic solution of creating a “Palestinian” state which it believes is the real solution to the conflict. And it needs Hamas to provide pressure on Israel to create such a state.

The same failed idea that has haunted the region for decades is that Islamic terrorism can only be defeated by giving the terrorists some, but not all, of what they want. Much as it did not occur to the State Department that the Taliban would want everything, it refuses to believe that Hamas would want everything. And every time the negotiations fall apart, history is rewritten again.

In an article published in early October, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan described the negotiations that had brought peace between Hamas and Israel. “We have de-escalated crises in Gaza,” he boasted. The online version of the article has been edited to remove those words.

Since December, Sullivan has taken to warning Israel to “transition” to a new “phase” of the war in which it stops its military campaign and goes back to occasional drone attacks on Hamas leaders. And then he and the rest can get started building their “Palestinian” state. And when Hamas takes over again, more articles will have to be edited and more bodies will be buried.

The Biden administration, the European Union (for now only being held off by Hungary), Russia and the rest of the international community are preparing to reward Oct 7 with a terrorist state. A ‘Palestinian’ state will be a state of the terrorists, by the terrorists and for the terrorists.

The 10/7 attacks reminded Israelis of what Americans had known and forgotten after 9/11.

The Israeli soldiers battling in Gaza are not just fighting for their country, but to remind America and the world that it is possible to defeat Islamic terrorists, instead of negotiating with them. A victory there will show everyone that we can all fight and win, instead of surrendering to Islam.

A lot is riding on that battle for Israel, for America, Europe and the free world. That is why the leaders of the international community and the diplomats of the world are fighting to save Hamas. What happens in the next weeks will hand the Islamic terrorists and their enablers either one of their greatest defeats or their greatest victory: a Hamas ‘Palestinian’ state.

AUTHOR

DANIEL GREENFIELD

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Regime Warns Israel Not to Interfere With Hamas Members Stealing Aid

Biden’s Strikes Against the Houthis Haven’t Touched a Fraction Of Their Arsenal

Hamas Supporters Protest Chinese New Year Parade

How the Media Misreported the Hezbollah-Israel Exchanges of Fire

UK: Ministry of Justice hosts speaker who said ‘Jews need to get in the queue behind Muslims’

France: 11-year-old Muslim boy arrested for glorifying terrorism and threatening to murder a teacher

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