Displaying posts published in

March 2024

Shredding the Law to Get Donald Trump Peter O’Brien

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/america/2024/03/shredding-the-law-to-get-donald-trump/

Nothing has shocked me as much recently as the result of New York Attorney-General Letitia James’ prosecution of Donald Trump, following closely, as it did, on the absurd award of $83 million in damages for defamation to memory-challenged alleged sexual assault victim, E. Jean Carroll. 

If you’re not reporting for  the mainstream media, you know this is a politically motivated hit-job. In other words, an attack on the very essence of American democracy.  You know, the ultimate sin of which Trump stands accused.  The one for which he must be defeated later this year. James told us exactly that when she campaigned for election on a platform of getting Trump:

I will never be afraid to challenge this illegitimate president,” James said in a video during the campaign. “I believe that this president is incompetent. I believe that this president is ill-equipped to serve in the highest office of this land. And I believe that he is an embarrassment to all that we stand for.” She went on to say Trump should be indicted on criminal charges and charged with obstruction of justice.

So, even before she had any case, she was determined to pursue him, not because of any crime she may have suspected he committed but because in her eyes he was both an illegitimate president and incompetent. But, no doubt under the influence of Trump Derangement Syndrome, James would have been confident a fishing expedition would yield some dirt.  

There are many troubling aspects to this case.  The first is the staggering amount of the fine – US464 million.  And the second is that this matter was prosecuted as a civil fraud case.

New York, which reputedly has some of the toughest fraud legislation in the country, recognises two types of fraud – civil and criminal.  Here, from the website of East Coast Laws, is a short summary:

Fraud can be both a civil and criminal offense in New York. Civil fraud involves a breach of contract or a violation of a legal duty, resulting in harm to another party. The victim of civil fraud can sue the perpetrator and seek damages in court. Criminal fraud, on the other hand, involves intentionally deceiving someone for personal gain, which is a violation of the law. Criminal fraud is prosecuted by the government, and the penalties can include fines, imprisonment, and other criminal sanctions.

The ex-Democrat catching Trump’s and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s eyes Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has gone from running for president as a Democrat in 2020 to interest in the open VP slots for Trump and Kennedy in 2024.By Allan Smith and Alex Seitz-Wald

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/ex-democrat-catching-trumps-robert-f-kennedy-jrs-eyes-rcna143941

Tulsi Gabbard wanted to be president. Now she wants to be vice president. And while that’s hardly unusual, the paths — plural — she’s considering to get there are. 

Neither involve the Democratic Party, which Gabbard used to represent until she left it in 2022. The four-term former member of Congress from Hawaii is now getting consideration for both former President Donald Trump’s and independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s tickets, two sources familiar with the candidates’ deliberations told NBC News.

It’s a remarkable turnaround for the onetime progressive rising star, who within the span of eight years has gone from supporting Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign to running for the Democratic presidential nomination herself in 2020, eventually endorsing President Joe Biden, before then gravitating to the right and becoming a regular conservative media personality and conference speaker. 

More so, it’s exceedingly rare for a politician to attract interest from more than one presidential ticket or party. (Ahead of the 1952 election, Democrats and Republicans led dueling efforts to draft another politically ambiguous veteran, Dwight Eisenhower, the former supreme Allied commander in Europe during World War II, for the presidential race.)

But Gabbard’s 2024 possibilities are not fully in her control, nor are they both equally likely. As one source said, Gabbard would be more likely to seriously consider running as Kennedy’s vice presidential nominee had she not been swept up by the possibility of serving with Trump. This person said Gabbard “was enticed” by the chance of serving on Kennedy’s ticket but is now focused on the possibility that Trump will select her. 

“My understanding is that Tulsi is convinced that Trump is going to pick her,” this person said. “Had that not been the case, she probably would have gone with Kennedy.”

Professors at Embattled Rutgers Center Call for Genocide Andrew Harrod

https://www.meforum.org/campus-watch/65704/professors-at-embattled-rutgers-center-call-for

Palestinian Arabs “have sought a future of liberation from the river to the sea for all peoples,” claimed Noura Erakat, a Rutgers University associate professor of Africana studies during a late February webinar. Although she tried to whitewash this

Palestinian Arabs “have sought a future of liberation from the river to the sea for all peoples,” claimed Noura Erakat, a Rutgers University associate professor of Africana studies during a late February webinar. Although she tried to whitewash this well-known call for the genocide of all Israeli Jews between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, her comments to Rutgers’ Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR) remained objectively horrifying.Erakat addressed the webinar on the topic of “Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine,” the title of her 2019 book. Israel’s ongoing campaign to destroy the jihadist terrorist organization Hamas following its brutal Oct. 7 massacre was the background for her discussion.

Sahar Aziz, the factually challenged director of CSRR and its jihadist apologetics, moderated the webinar. CSRR recently drew the scrutiny of Washington lawmakers in the wake of revelations that Adeel Mangi, nominated by President Joe Biden to the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, formerly served on the Center’s advisory board.

Moreover, recent research revealed that Aziz received $143,000 from anti-Israel billionaire George Soros’s network and that Erakat “participated in an online workshop along with senior Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad.”

Their comments on law and “Palestine” confirmed lawmakers’ concerns about the Center.

Destroying Hamas is the only goal that makes sense There is a lot more at stake here than another October 7th. Moshe Phillips

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/387184

On March 18 Jake Sullivan, the United States National Security Advisor, said “The president told the prime minister again today that we share the goal of defeating Hamas.”

And the very next day, on March 19, Matthew Miller, Spokesperson for the United States Department of State, said “every step must be taken to degrade Hamas so such an event like October 7th can’t be repeated.”

Is the State Department now saying that the Biden Administration policy is to see Hamas degraded and not destroyed? If the defeat of Hamas remains “the goal” why hasn’t State corrected its March 19 statement?

Is the delivery of conflicting signals intentional?

To have the goal that Hamas does not ever carry out another October 7th type event assumes that Hamas is evil and both needs and deserves to be utterly and completely destroyed. Destroyed because it is evil. The moral thing to do is to destroy evil when it poses a “clear and present danger” or likely will again.

When the Allies after World War Two conducted a systematic effort of denazification it was not because the Nazi Party or Nazi ideas were going to be threat in 1946 or 1947 but because the Nazis’ ideas were dangerous enough that if not outlawed and fought and vanquished on the battlefield of ideas then the Allies had every right to believe that they might have to return to combat on the actual battlefield in the 1950s or 1960s and fight the Nazis yet again. Israel has fought Hamas too many times already.

The purpose of war is to permanently eliminate the threat coming from your enemy. Far too often history has revealed the eternal truth that wars are things that must be won decisively or they will cause subsequent conflicts that will grow in both intensity and the degree of devastation. Evil must be confronted and evil must be destroyed. Hamas is evil. Hamas is the enemy. Hamas must be eliminated.

Destroying Hamas is the right thing to do.

Destroying Hamas is a necessary thing to do.

My Union Dues Are Being Used Against Israel Jewish grad students at MIT already face antisemitism on campus. Their anti-Israel union won’t divert their dues to charity. By Will Sussman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/my-union-dues-are-being-used-against-israel-mit-grad-school-d106b26a?mod=opinion_lead_pos10

Cambridge, Mass.

“Your objection to paying dues or fees is based on your political views and not your religious belief.” That is what my union told me when I objected to paying dues to a union that seeks the destruction of Israel.

I came to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2021 to get a doctorate in computer science. I consider myself a student, but the National Labor Relations Board in 2016 brushed aside decades of precedent and ruled that graduate students are employees subject to unionization. A plurality of MIT graduate students (46.7%) voted to install the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, known as UE, as our exclusive bargaining agent, and the university capitulated to its demand for a contract with mandatory dues.

UE endorses the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement and “urges the union at all levels to become engaged in BDS.” Minutes of a meeting in 2020 of the MIT Graduate Student Union confirm that the UE local is engaged in BDS. The GSU website uses Squarespace , according to a member of the union organizing committee, because “Wix is an Israli-owned [sic] company, which conflicts with BDS.”

Since Oct. 7, Jewish students at MIT have been terrorized by anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hate on campus. When the university warned unruly protesters who were occupying a building that they risked suspension, the GSU backed the protesters and condemned “MIT’s threats against students exercising their basic First Amendment rights.”

Blinken’s Rafah blunder: Ruthie Blum

https://www.jns.org/blinkens-rafah-blunder/

In a press conference on Thursday in Cairo, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken reiterated his opposition to an Israeli ground operation in Rafah, saying that such a move would be a “mistake.”

An invasion into the southern Gaza city, he stated, was “unnecessary” to achieving the goal of defeating Hamas. This attitude, which the Biden administration has been expressing with increasing fervor, runs counter to Israeli assessments.

It has become the key bone of contention between Washington and Jerusalem since the start of the Oct. 7 war, spurred by a massacre of Jews that hadn’t been seen since the Holocaust.

Other disagreements—surrounding the use of Israeli force, civilian Palestinian casualties and plans for “the day after”—have been mild in comparison. Or at least they’ve been treated by Israel as arguments that can be addressed through a presentation of the facts.

This hasn’t been simply a tactical ploy to avert discord. On the contrary, the justice of destroying the genocidal terrorist organization that controls territory along Israel’s southern border and vows to repeat the atrocities of Oct. 7 “again and again and again” is irrefutable.

Anyone disputing Israel’s duty to eradicate Hamas—for the survival of the Jewish state, as well as for the benefit of the region and the world—is on the wrong side of history. Period.

Furthermore, Israel has the data to support the extreme measures it employs to avoid non-combatant deaths in Gaza. It has proof of the huge quantities of humanitarian aid entering the Strip. It also has evidence of its efforts to prevent Hamas from stealing the goods.

‘We Will Shoot You.’ War in Darfur Raises New Fears of Genocide. Victims recount another round of atrocities two decades after mass killings in Sudan drew worldwide attention By Gabriele Steinhauser

https://www.wsj.com/world/africa/darfur-sudan-genocide-war-05f5ead8

Her chest tightening in panic, Taiba Hassan Adam watched as a group of men splashed gasoline on the small brick and grass house. Their comrades kept their rifles trained at her. Hassan Adam’s three youngest children—10-year-old Mohamed, 8-year-old Awadia and 7-year-old Faiz—were stuck inside.

Moments earlier, the gunmen had moved chairs to block the building’s one metal door. Then they dropped matches into the shimmering liquid.

Hassan Adam had hoped the house would shelter her family from a wave of attacks in Sudan’s Darfur region. Now it was on fire, and all she could do was pray that her children would somehow find a way out.

“We will shoot you if you try to go in,” she says the men shouted at her and the other adults they held in the house’s yard. As the screams of her children broke through the flames, the men, Hassan Adam says, started to cackle. 

“They were just laughing,” says Hassan Adam, still stunned into grief in a sprawling refugee camp in Chad, across the border from her Sudanese homeland. “They knew there were children inside.”

About 50,000 refugees from Darfur live in the Ourang camp in eastern Chad.

Hassan Adam’s story is just one in a grim pattern of atrocities perpetrated by mostly Arab fighters against Darfur’s Black indigenous communities over the past 11 months. Officials say these acts are a continuation of the mass killings two decades ago that prompted worldwide protests and high-visibility outrage from celebrities like George Clooney and Don Cheadle. They’re being revived amid a broader war for control over Sudan—Africa’s third-largest country—between the country’s two most powerful generals.

Biden’s Dangerous Cease-Fire Game at the United Nations The U.S. baits vetoes from Russia and China at a cost to Israel.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-united-nations-security-council-ceasefire-israel-hamas-china-russia-6e05fe71?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

The Biden Administration got what it wanted Friday at the United Nations, and Israel will pay the price. Tired of being criticized for supporting an ally, the U.S. proposed a cease-fire resolution that was anti-Israel enough to draw 11 of the Security Council’s 15 votes while still baiting Russian and Chinese vetoes.

To garner meaningless votes, the Biden Administration revised its initial resolution to introduce more daylight between the U.S. and Israel. The final U.S. draft “determines the imperative of an immediate and sustained cease-fire” to protect civilians and facilitate more aid but not necessarily to free Israeli hostages. That direct linkage was dropped from a prior draft.

Instead, the linkage comes only at a remove, in expressing support for diplomacy “to secure such a cease-fire in connection with the release of all remaining hostages.” The U.S. couldn’t “demand” the release of hostages if it wants to be popular at the U.N. In case President Biden forgot, among the 134 hostages left in Gaza are five U.S. citizens who may still be alive.

Despite all the word games, Russia and China vetoed the resolution, as all knew they would. The resolution includes several obvious poison pills for these nations, including condemnation of Hamas. The U.N., for all its posturing, won’t do that.

This allowed the U.S. Ambassador to comment right after the veto that “Russia and China still could not bring itself to condemn Hamas’s terrorist attacks on Oct. 7. Can we just pause on that for a moment?” It’s worth reflection, but at the U.N. condemning Hamas for Oct. 7 is a way of trying to draw a veto, not get a text passed.

After that veto, the Council passed a resolution demanding more delivery of humanitarian aid, with no condemnation of Hamas and no cease-fire. The U.S. and Russia abstained.

The Triumph of the Blood Libel Caroline Glick

https://carolineglick.com/the-triumph-of-the-blood-libel/

According to Canada’s La Presse, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a vampire, and he is poised to suck the life out of the Palestinians in Rafah, Hamas’s final outpost in southern Gaza. The publication that was once a paper of record in Canada ran a political cartoon on March 20 portraying Netanyahu as a vampire, with a huge hooked nose, pointy ears and claws for fingers, dressed in Dracula’s overcoat while standing on the deck of a pirate ship.

The caption, written in blood-dripping red letters, read: “Nosfenyahou: En Route Vers Rafah.” Nosferatu, the Romanian word for vampire, was the title of a proto-Nazi German silent horror film from 1922 chock-full of anti-Semitic poison. The film, which became something of a cult flick, featured a vampire with a long Jewish nose. He arrived at an idyllic German town with a box full of plague-carrying rats that he released on the innocent villagers as he plotted to suck his realtor’s blood.

La Presse’s cartoon didn’t leave any room for imagination. It wasn’t making a political or military argument against Israel’s planned ground operation in Rafah. Its goal wasn’t to persuade anyone of anything.

The Netanyahu-the-vampire cartoon asserted simply that Netanyahu is a Jewish bloodsucker and, more broadly, the Jewish state—and Jews worldwide—must be vigorously opposed by all right-thinking people who don’t want Jewish vampires to kill them.

As the paper no doubt anticipated, the cartoon provoked an outcry from Canadian Jews and some politicians. And after a few hours, the newspaper took it off its website and apologized. Anyone who thinks that means that the good guys won misses the point of the move. The Jewish outcry and pile-on by politicians and media coverage proved the point. Jews are evil and control everything, even what a private paper can publish. Like Nosferatu in its day, the cartoon will become a piece of folklore, additional proof that the Jews are the enemy of humanity.

In other words, the cartoon was a blood libel.

America, look at Sweden and beware the chaos of uncontrolled immigration Douglas Murray

https://nypost.com/2024/03/21/opinion/american-reps-will-speak-up-for-illegal-immigrants-while-not-bothering-to-help-the-law-abiding/

I don’t think many Americans realize how difficult it is to come to America legally. 

Among my own friends, I know an academic who has spent the past year in legal limbo, not allowed to work between teaching positions and constantly waiting to learn whether he can stay in America. 

In Georgia, I know a couple — the husband is American, the wife British — who can still not legalize as a couple, despite years of marriage and years of being together, who want to get themselves to America. 

The only reason I mention the plight of the law-abiding is because it stands in such stark contrast to the situation of the law-breaking. 

Our pro-immigration politicians in America are loudly on the side of anyone who comes to America illegally. 

But it is rare to find representatives who are on the side of people who are trying to do everything by the book. 

While lots of representatives speak up for the law-breaking, few speak up for or help the law-abiding. 

That is because it is perfectly clear that the immigration situation in this country has run away from its representatives. 

Human cost 

The human scale of this is devastating