Trump's 'Deal' With Iran ... Soleimani Dead

. . . Contrasting Trump's decisive action in Iran with Obama's Middle East malfeasance.

by Mark Alexander: Our military forces carried out another remarkable precision strike in Baghdad, Iraq, on Thursday. Killed in that strike were Gen. Qasem Soleimani, leader of Iran’s elite terrorist Corps-Quds forces, and Soleimani’s Iraqi counterpart, paramilitary commander Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes. For decades, Iran has been the wealthiest and most significant state sponsor of Islamic extremists in the Middle East — and Soleimani has directed that terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syria.

Boldly, Soleimani traveled to Iraq to oversee the Iran-backed Shiite militia assault on our embassy there, thinking that his forces could overtake it much as his boss, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, had done with our Tehran embassy in 1979. Recall then, 52 American diplomats and citizens were taken hostage and held for 444 days — and released immediately after Ronald Reagan took his oath of office on January 20, 1981. Fortunately, Jimmy Carter was no longer president then, but Soleimani was operating as if Barack Obama was still president now — a fatal flaw in his plan.

Apparently Soleimani thought he was more bomb-proof than Islamic State terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who we sent to hell last October.

President Donald Trump responded swiftly and decisively to the embassy attack, sending in rapid-force Marine units and Army air reinforcements to repel the militants. He then ordered the death of those who planned it. To suggest this was a “shot across the bow” of Iran’s regime would be grossly understated. This was not a feckless “line in the sand” threat like Obama issued in Syria.

As OIF veteran and frequent Trump critic David French noted, “This was no Benghazi. … There was no American defeat. The embassy still stands.” That was a reference to Obama’s failure to defend our embassy officials in Libya and the subsequent political coverup ahead of his 2012 election.

As I have noted for years, our operations in the Middle East since the 9/11 attack have been quietly but primarily focused on preventing Iranian-backed terrorists from detonating a fissile weapon in an East Coast urban center.

For context, after George W. Bush launched Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003, many U.S. military casualties were the direct result of Iranian-backed militias. The Bush administration made slow but steady progress to contain the Islamic threat in the region, but when Obama entered the diplomatic debate in 2009, all the blood and treasure expended in Iraq became nothing more than political fodder for his regime’s policy of appeasement.

Recall that in 2012, Obama centered his reelection on his “success” in the Middle East, declaring that al-Qa'ida was “on the run” and using that false claim to initiate a politically expedient withdrawal from Iraq. Predictably, a Middle East meltdown followed, which led to the most catastrophic humanitarian crisis in recent history as millions of Syrian refugees fled into the desert.

How did Obama respond to that crisis?

In a feat of Middle East policy malfeasance unmatched in generations, Obama, Hillary Clinton, and her understudy, John Kerry, empowered Iran’s nuclear capacity with a “Nuke Deal” that advanced the threat of an “Islamic Bomb” detonation in the U.S. And they followed that up by lifting sanctions against Iran and flying in $400 million in cash that, arguably, bolstered its terrorist operations.

Fortunately President Trump put an end to that insanity, restoring sanctions against Iran, supporting pro-democracy movements in the region, and, in the last 24 hours, responding to Iranian aggression with force. The message this sent to pro-democracy leaders in Iran can’t be understated.


Of course, much saber-rattling followed, with Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif laughably calling the strike an “act of international terrorism” and insisting that Tehran would “exhaust all its political, legal and international capacities … to hold the terrorist and criminal regime of the United States responsible regarding this obvious crime.”

Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi played along, issuing a politically necessary statement condemning the attack as a violation of the terms agreement for maintaining U.S. troops in Iraq. But Abdul-Mahdi clearly understand the Iranian threat to his country and the necessity to abate that threat.

Most assuredly, an escalation of Iranian aggression will follow, but that was inevitable.

Deeply mired in their Trump impeachment mess, the current crop of Democrat Party leaders criticized our military operation as reckless and unconstitutional. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) protested, “Did America just assassinate, without any congressional authorization, the second most powerful person in Iran?” Yes, he declared Soleimani was “assassinated.” As for constitutionality, David French laid those Demo claims to rest in a series of social-media posts.

And a final note: Recall that in October of last year, President Trump was subjected to a barrage of criticism from armchair media experts for his agreement with Turkey regarding the Kurdish lines on the Turks’ southern border in Syria. Amid all the criticism, we noted in “The REAL U.S./Turkey Strategic Endgame — Iran” that “formulating foreign policy and military strategy is akin to a complex multi-dimensional chess match — except the objectives are rarely black and white, and the targets are constantly moving.” We noted further, “Turkey provides the U.S. with strategic airbase access, which will be essential in any regional operations, most notably those against Iran. … In other words, there exists a more pressing but unmentioned objective: containing or eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat.”
-------------------
Mark Alexander Writes for The Patriot Post.

---

Tags: Trump's 'Deal' With Iran, Soleimani DeadMark Alexander, The Patriot Post To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Judicial Watch Sues CIA and DOJ for Communications of Eric Ciaramella

by Judicial Watch: Judicial Watch announced today that it filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against both the DOJ and CIA for communications of CIA employee Eric Ciaramella, who reportedly worked on Ukraine issues while on detail to both the Obama and Trump White Houses.

The lawsuit against the DOJ was filed after it failed to respond to November 2019 FOIA requests seeking communications between Ciaramella and former FBI agent Peter Strzok, former FBI Attorney Lisa Page, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and/or the Special Counsel’s Office (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-03809)).

Judicial Watch filed suit against the CIA after it failed to respond to November 2019 FOIA requests seeking all of Ciaramella’s emails from June 1, 2016, to November 12, 2019 (Judicial Watch v. Central Intelligence Agency (No. 1:19-cv-03807)).

Ciaramella’s name appears in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on the 2016 presidential election, in reference to two emails Ciaramella sent to then-Chief of Staff John Kelly and other officials, describing a meeting between President Trump, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak:


In the morning on May 10, 2017, President Trump met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the Oval Office. 468

###
468… (5/9/17 White House Document, “Working Visit with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov of Russia”) … (5/10/17 Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.). The meeting had been planned on May 2, 2017, during a telephone call between the President and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and the meeting date was confirmed on May 5, 2017, the same day the President dictated ideas for the Comey termination letter to Stephen Miller…. (5/10/17 Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.).Information about this phone call was subsequently leaked to The New York Times.

Ciaramella is widely reported as the person who filed the whistleblower complaint that triggered the impeachment proceedings. His name reportedly was “raised privately in impeachment depositions, according to officials with direct knowledge of the proceedings, as well as in at least one open hearing held by a House committee not involved in the impeachment inquiry.”

“There is significant public interest, thanks to the Obama Spygate scandal and the related abusive impeachment of President Trump, in what Eric Ciaramella was up to,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “CIA operative Ciaramella is documented to be involved in the Russia collusion investigation, and was a key CIA operative on Ukraine in the both the Obama and Trump White Houses. Our lawsuits are designed to break through the unprecedented cover-up of his activities.”

Judicial Watch recently compiled an extensive list of persons Ciaramella met while in the Obama-era White House. That list includes, but is not limited to, Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Soros-funded Anticorruption Action Center (AntAC) in Ukraine; Gina Lentine, formerly the Eurasia program coordinator at Soros funded Open Society Foundations; and former Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who had extensive involvement with Clinton-funded dossier. The logs also reveal that Alexandra Chalupa, a contractor hired by the DNC during the 2016 election who coordinated with Ukrainians to investigate President Trump and his former campaign manager Paul Manafort, visited the White House 27 times.
--------------------
H/T Judicial Watch

---

Tags: Judicial Watch, sues, CIA and DOJ, communications of, Eric Ciaramella To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Left-wing Insanity, Tehran's Terrorist Chief Dead

Gary Bauer

by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Left-wing Insanity
The progressive reaction to President Trump's order to eliminate Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iran's chief terrorist, is dangerous and revealing. Here's a sampling of the response from the left:

• Joe Biden, a supposed foreign policy expert and the "moderate" in the Democrat primary, said this: "President Trump just tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinder box."
• Bernie Sanders said: "Trump's dangerous escalation brings us closer to another disastrous war in the Middle East."
• Speaker Nancy Pelosi blasted the president's action as "provocative and disproportionate."
• Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez accused the president of engaging in "an act of war" and insisted that "Congress now has a moral and legal obligation to reassert its power to stop this war and protect innocent people from horrific consequences."

Once again, we see virtually every leading figure on the progressive left referring to President Trump -- not Iran, the world's leading state-sponsor of terrorism -- as the greatest threat to peace. Their rhetoric in every case could have been -- and should have been -- made in reference to Iran!

Donald Trump is not blowing up oil tankers, attacking one of the world's largest oil production facilities in Saudi Arabia or firing rockets at Israel. Iran is.

Donald Trump is not slaughtering peaceful pro-democracy protestors. The ayatollah is.

If anything is taking us closer to another disastrous war, it is Iran's belligerent actions throughout the entire Middle East!

When was the last time Nancy Pelosi condemned the "provocative and disproportionate" actions of the Islamic Republic? Her statement reads as if she would prefer that Soleimani were still alive and plotting against us.

Does Rep. Ocasio-Cortez feel she has a moral and legal obligation to protect innocent Americans? Has she ever accused the ayatollah of committing "acts of war"? Many innocent Iraqis and Iranians are suffering horrific consequences due to Tehran's actions, not Trump's.

These Democrats are giving Iran exactly what it wants by dividing the American people and preventing a united response to Iran's aggression. That is extremely dangerous because it will only embolden the regime to lash out even more believing that many American politicians are weak and feckless.

We don't want war with Iran. But Iran is intent on dominating the Middle East, killing Americans and annihilating the state of Israel.

Not that long ago, politics in America used to stop at the water's edge. Sadly today, too many Democrats are too busy resisting Donald Trump to resist the evil regime in Tehran.

Just something to remember in November!

Tehran's Terrorist Chief Dead
I am at Reagan National Airport heading to a big evangelical event in Miami, where the president is scheduled to speak later this afternoon. But as you know, it has been an eventful 24 hours for America.

Rumors began swirling last night that something huge had happened in Baghdad. I began hearing from my contacts that we had taken out a top American nemesis. Within an hour various sources began reporting that General Qassem Soleimani, the leader of Iran's elite Quds Force, and various associates had been killed by a drone attack at the Baghdad airport.

If you know a young veteran in your neighborhood or family who is missing a limb or two, or an eye, the odds are overwhelming that Gen. Soleimani had their blood on his hands. He was responsible for the production of super IEDs, the explosively formed penetrators that could pierce armored vehicles.

Soleimani exported that technology to the Iraqi resistance and to fighters in Afghanistan for one reason and one reason only -- to bloody the United States as much as he could. Thousands of our brave warriors are maimed because of this monster. At least 600 U.S. soldiers were killed because of him.

The United States officially designated Soleimani as a terrorist in 2005, and he was even sanctioned by the United Nations. Incredibly, those sanctions were lifted under Barack Obama's 2015 nuclear deal, with predictable results. Iran's behavior got worse after the deal as Soleimani directed Iran's war efforts throughout the Middle East in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq.

Last night, President Trump posted one of his greatest tweets ever. It was simply an image of an American flag.

Why Now?
The short answer is that Gen. Soleimani was responsible for the attack on an Iraqi base last week that killed a U.S. contractor and wounded several U.S. soldiers. He was also responsible for the assault on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.

Moreover, we had intelligence indicating that he flew to Baghdad in order to plan more attacks against U.S. interests. In other words, Soleimani posed an imminent threat to U.S. personnel.

President Trump warned Iran that it would be held "fully responsible" for its nefarious actions, and he acted accordingly.

By the way, one of those killed in the drone strike that took out Soleimani was Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the leader of the Iraqi Shiite militia that carried out the attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.

The Reaction
Many people in the Middle East are celebrating today. Soleimani exported his murderous ways to numerous countries. Even in Iraq, there are demonstrations in support of the U.S. action.

But the Middle East is full of jihadists, and they are furious. The Iranian government is threatening "severe revenge." I guarantee you that Tehran is being warned through back channels not to cross any red lines.

Then there is the reaction in the U.S. It was particularly disturbing to see multiple senators suggest that the "assassination" of Soleimani was unjustified or potentially illegal. (Here, here and here.)

The president is right -- and has every right -- to respond to any imminent threat. Period.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) tweeted that the president ordered the strike to distract from impeachment. She's wrong on so many levels. But it is sad that the instinctive reaction of this member of Congress is to always side with America's enemies.

The reaction from the "experts" in Hollywood was similar. Predictably, they attacked the president and even apologized to Iran!

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich had a different take, tweeting:

"President Trump's targeted attack on the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard while he was in Baghdad was symbolically a perfect measured response to the escalating Iranian provocations. It hurt the dictatorship profoundly while avoiding wholesale combat. Well done!"

Retired Brigadier General Anthony Tata told Fox & Friends this morning:

"All this outcry about us attacking an individual. No, he was a terrorist. He was a designated terrorist leading a designated terrorist organization and he's fair game after attacking U.S. property and people and the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised President Trump's decision to eliminate Soleimani, saying:

"Just as Israel has the right of self-defense, the United States has exactly the same right. Qassem Soleimani is responsible for the death of American citizens and many other innocent people. He was planning more such attacks.

"President Trump deserves all the credit for acting swiftly, forcefully and decisively. Israel stands with the United States in its just struggle for peace, security and self-defense."

Retired Lt. Col. Oliver North put it well when he said:

"The bottom line of it is Soleimani has been a purveyor of terrorism for the Iranians for better than a decade. More than any other individual since Osama Bin Laden . . . he's killed more Americans than anybody else since then."

Presidents Bush and Obama would have been more than justified in taking Soleimani out. Donald Trump did it!

What's Next?
It is more than likely that Iran will retaliate. They have been increasing their aggressive behavior for years now -- committing war crimes in Syria, attacking oil tankers, striking major Saudi Arabian oil facilities and even attacking Israel.

I don't think they are stupid enough to attack our homeland, but they have proxies everywhere -- even here. There could be cyberattacks or some kind of economic sabotage.

Speaking on Fox News this morning, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made it clear that the United States is not seeking war with Iran, but we are prepared for every possible outcome. Pompeo said:

"I think the Iranian leadership understands President Trump will take action. . . We have now demonstrated that. I hope the Iranian leadership will see that and see American resolve and that their decision will be to de-escalate and take actions consistent with what normal nations do.

"In the event that they do not and they go in the other direction, I know that President Trump and the entire United States government is prepared to respond appropriately."

It is time to pray, and thank God that we have a president who is firm and decisive for such a time as this.
-------------------
Gary Bauer (@GaryLBauer)  is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families

---

Tags: Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, Left-wing Insanity, Tehran, Terrorist Chief Dead, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Census Numbers Undercut 'Ascendant America' Theory

Michael Barone

by Michael Barone: From the first years of the one-fifth of this century already completed, we've been told that a new, ascendant America -- more nonwhite, more culturally liberal, more feminist -- was going to dominate our politics for years to come.

Those predictions have partially come true. Barack Obama was elected and reelected president in 2008 and 2012, respectively, and Democrats won majorities in House contests in 2006, 2008 and 2018.

But those are slimmer pickings than were promised. And President Donald Trump's victories in 2016 have made a mockery of the predictions. He wasn't ascendant America's choice. Like (but no more so than) other Republicans, he ran way behind among nonwhites. From millennials and Generation Z he evokes the response, "OK, boomer." Feminists feel queasy at the mention of his name.

Demographics, it turns out, don't automatically turn into destiny. Ascendant groups' triumphalism can coalesce those with opposite values into unaccustomed unity and enthusiasm. Ascendant leaders, not cautioned by sympathetic media, can concoct extreme policies (Green New Deal, anyone?) unsellable to most voters.

And perhaps ascendant groups, with their low birth rates, may not become as ascendant as demographers expected.

That's a conclusion you might draw from the Census Bureau's state population estimates for midyear 2019, released just one day before the year-end deadline. They're the best leading indicator we've got for the 2020 census, whose results will reapportion the House of Representatives and the Electoral College.

Reapportionment, it appears, would work to the advantage of Trump: The 30 states he carried in 2016 seem likely to gain at least three congressional seats and electoral votes.

One reason is that California, for the first time since it was admitted to the Union in 1850, is gaining population at a rate below the national average and is likely to lose a House seat. The nation's most populated state seems stalled at just below 40 million people, with net domestic outflow of 912,000 over the decade, only barely outbalancing international immigration.

Texas, the second most populated state, is growing far more robustly, from 25 million in 2010 to almost 29 million last year. That's a bigger percentage gain over nine years than any other state except big-family-size Utah. Florida, which passed New York to become number three in 2013, gained 14%. A decade ago, it trailed New York by half a million. Now, with 21 million, it's 2 million ahead.

These changes favor Republicans. Some upscale Texans trended Democratic in 2018, and perhaps some incoming Californians might import the left-wing politics whose results spurred their migration, as in Colorado and Arizona. But Texas' middle-income Latinos and high-education whites remain much more Republican than their California counterparts.

Florida, though attracting more international immigrants than California and more domestic in-migrants than Texas, is nevertheless trending Republican. Domestic newcomers tend to be Trump-friendly: Catholics fleeing the high-tax Northeast and small-town Midwesterner retirees fleeing the cold. Incoming immigrants and Puerto Ricans seem amenable to Republican policies, and Hispanics and blacks join in, making Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' job approval over 60%.

With Texas projected by Polidata Inc. to gain 3 electoral votes, Florida projected to gain 2 and California projected to lose 1, together they should outvote California 72 to 54 electoral votes, compared with 67-55 this year.

Working for Democrats is the perceptible migration of blacks from ailing northern cities like Chicago to Southern boom metros like Atlanta. But fragmentary poll results suggest some blacks, especially young middle-class men, may be moving Trumpward, perhaps recoiling from policies that have produced high crime and stagnant economies in the cities they chose to leave.

In the early 2010s, there was notable population growth in the central cities that have become almost unanimously Democratic. But that trend has now been reversed; even New York City, after six years of Mayor Bill de Blasio, is losing people.

That leaves Democrats, however ascendant they may feel, with the psephological disadvantage of having their votes heavily concentrated in low-growth metro areas while opposition voters are more evenly spread out over the faster-growing remainder of the country.

A party in that situation has two choices. One is to change the rules, but amending the Constitution is hard, and finagling to undercut the Electoral College likely won't work.

The other choice is to extend your appeal beyond your 80%-plus strongholds in central cities, university towns and suburbs favored by Ivy League graduates. Democrats had some success doing this in 2018. But their presidential candidates, seeking Democratic primary votes, so far seem less interested.

Relying exclusively on "ascendant America" is not a sure-to-lose strategy. Hillary Clinton, despite her disdain for "deplorables," nearly won. But as Donald Trump shrewdly discerned (or stumbled into discovering), it's not a sure winner, either.
-------------------
Michael Barone is a Senior Political Analyst for the Washington Examiner and a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel  and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics Shared by Rasmussen Reports.

---

Tags: Census Numbers, Undercut, 'Ascendant America' Theory To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Our Real Existential Crisis — Extinction

by Patrick Buchanan: The Death of the West is not a prediction of what is going to happen. It is a depiction of what is happening now. First World nations are dying.

If Western elites were asked to name the greatest crisis facing mankind, climate change would win in a walk.

Thus did Time magazine pass over every world leader to name a Swedish teenage climate activist, Greta Thunberg, its person of the year.

On New Year’s Day, the headline over yet another story in The Washington Post admonished us anew: “A Lost Decade for Climate Action: We Can’t Afford A Repeat, Scientists Warn.”

“By the final year of the decade,” said the Post, “the planet had surpassed its 2010 temperature record five times.

“Hurricanes devastated New Jersey and Puerto Rico, and floods damaged the Midwest and Bangladesh. Southern Africa was gripped by a deadly drought. Australia and the Amazon are ablaze.”

On it went, echoing the endless reports on the perils of climate change to the planet we all inhabit.

Yet, from the inaction of the carbon-emitting countries like India, China, Russia and the USA, the gravity with which Western elites view the crisis is not shared by the peoples for whom they profess to speak.

For many First World countries, there are more compelling concerns. High among them is population decline, and, if birth rates do not rise, the near-extinction of many Western peoples by this century’s end.

Consider. The number of births in Japan fell in 2019 to a level unseen since 1874, around 900,000. But there were 1.4 million deaths for a net loss of 512,000 Japanese. An even larger loss in Japan’s population is expected this year.

Japan’s population has been shrinking since 2007, when deaths first exceeded births by 18,000. And with 28% of its population over 65, and fewer births every passing year, Japan is aging, shrinking and dying — with no respite in sight.

Across Japan, writes The New York Times: “Whole villages are vanishing as young people choose not to have children or move to urban areas … The Government estimates that the population could shrink by about 16 million people — or nearly 13 percent — over the next 25 years.”

South Korea has an even lower birth rate, and its population is expected to start diminishing this year.

But it is Eastern Europe where the population crisis is most advanced.

At the end of the Cold War, Bulgaria had 9 million people. By 2017, that had fallen to 7.1 million. In 2050, Bulgaria’s population is estimated at 5.4 million — a loss of 40% to death and migration since Bulgaria won its freedom from the Soviet Empire.

By 2050, Ukraine and Poland are each projected to lose another 6 million people, and Hungary will lose 1.5 million.

Lithuania and Latvia have seen serious population losses since the end of the Cold War and are in the front rank of European nations losing people at the fastest rate.

U.N. demographers project Russia’s population may fall from 145 million today to 121 million by 2050. Such losses rival those that Russia suffered under Lenin, Stalin and World War II.

The Far East is home to some 6 million Russians who dwell on that vast tract that is so full of natural resources like timber, oil and gas.

“The population continues to decrease almost everywhere in the Far East,” lamented President Vladimir Putin at an investment conference in Vladivostok: “The inflow is increasing, but it does not cover the number of people leaving the region.”

In the Far East, Siberia and the Lake Baikal region, investors and workers from China are appearing in growing numbers.

The tribes of Europe, the peoples of almost every country of the Old Continent, are visibly aging, shrinking and dying. The population crisis of Europe is “existential,” says Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic.

Since this writer published “The Death of the West,” nothing has happened to alter my conclusion as to where the West was destined:

“The Death of the West is not a prediction of what is going to happen. It is a depiction of what is happening now. First World nations are dying. They face a mortal crisis, not because of something happening in the Third World, but because of what is not happening at home and in the homes of the First World. Western fertility rates have been falling for decades. Outside of Muslim Albania, no European nation is producing enough babies to replace its population. … In a score of countries the old are already dying off faster than the young are being born. … There is no sign of a turnaround. Now the absolute numbers of Europeans have begun to fall.”

We are talking here about what historians, a century hence, will call the Lost Tribes of Europe. And if a people has ceased to replace itself, and the national family is dying out, it is difficult to generate alarm over the slow sinking of the Maldives into the sea, the melting of the polar ice caps, or the fact that Greenland is getting greener every year.
--------------------
Patrick Buchanan (@PatrickBuchanan) is currently a blogger, conservative columnist, political analyst, chairman of The American Cause foundation and an editor of The American Conservative. He has been a senior adviser to three Presidents, a two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, and was the presidential nominee of the Reform Party in 2000.

---

Tags: Patrick Buchanan, conservative, commentary, Our Real Existential Crisis, Extinction To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Salvaging US Interests In IRAQ

by J. Kenneth Blackwell and David L. Phillips: The killing of Qasem Soleimani is a seismic event with huge ramifications across the Middle East and worldwide. It underscores the need for a new approach in Iraq and the region. To salvage something from its invasion and occupation of Iraq, the US should focus on the Kurds.

The Shiite-led Government of Iraq (GoI) has strongly protested the assassination of Qasem Soleimani. The Iraqi parliament will debate a resolution to terminate the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which provides a legal basis for the deployment of US troops on Iraqi soil.

Iraqi rage will intensify, putting US troops and personnel at-risk. The spasm of violence is a reality check: Iraq is a failed state under Iran’s control. Iraqis are only unified by their hatred of America. The Kurds are the only friends we have.

How did Iraq get to this point? America’s failure to stand with the Iraqi Kurds created a gap that Iran has filled.

The US brokered Iraq’s constitution in 2004. However, Baghdad refused to implement articles favorable to the Kurds. The Obama administration demurred when it should have pushed harder to uphold Kurdish interests. Baghdad’s failure, and America’s acquiescence, left Kurds little choice but to initiate a process putting Iraqi Kurdistan on the path to independence.

Though ninety-three percent voted to disassociate in September 2017, the US failed to support their national aspirations. It turned a blind eye when Iranian-backed militias, the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMUs), occupied the oil-rich region of Kirkuk and evicted the Kurdish governor. The current crisis arose when PMUs, the same Khataib Hezbollah militias who seized Kirkuk and stomped on the Kurdistan flag, attacked US bases in Iraq and Syria last week.

After repeated provocations, the US responded with air strikes that killed 24 militia members. Tensions intensified with the killing of Qasem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, head of Kataib Hezbollah.

The US has a big stake in Iraq, having sacrificed thousands of lives and spent trillions. In light of volatile conditions that exist today, how can Washington preserve its position and interests?

A direct line can be drawn between US policy towards Iraq and Iran’s aggression. Previous policies under successive administrations have marginalized the US and made Iran ascendant.

Qasem Soleimani was testing US resolve. In 2019, the Quds Force seized oil tankers in the Persian Gulf; shot down a US surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz; and bombed Abqaiq, a major Saudi oil processing plant.

Khataib Hezbollah’s recent aggression was intended to provoke a response. Qasem Soleimani sought to turn popular protests over Iran’s role in the country, during which more than 500 people were killed, into anti-American demonstrations. Turning their anger from Iran to the US, protesters chanted “death to America” and demanded that US forces leave the country. Rage and popular protests are likely to intensify after the killing of Soleimani and Muhandis.

America should reconsider its strategically flawed and morally defunct “one Iraq policy”. Recent events affirm America’s military superiority. At the same time, they underscore America’s irrelevance and diminished influence. In light of recent developments, the US should pivot and support Kurdish national aspirations.

In Iraq and other countries where Kurds reside, Kurds are critical to peace and stability. A regional approach, focusing on the Kurds, would secure US interests in Iraq and the region.

Candidate Trump pledged to withdraw from “endless wars” of the Middle East. He focused on bringing home US troops from Iraq and Syria. However, his plan was delayed by the rise of ISIS.

Kurdish valor helped defeat the caliphate. Iraqi Kurds helped liberate Mosul. In Syria, 11,000 Kurds died and 23,000 were wounded fighting ISIS at America’s behest. When President Trump announced the withdrawal of US forces, Iran responded by ratcheting-up operations against the US.

US influence is diminished without boots on-the-ground. Iran, Russia, and Turkey shaped a UN-sponsored constitutional committee to kick-start negotiations on ending Syria’s civil war. Kurdish political parties, whose armed forces gained control over more than 30 percent of Syria’s territory fighting ISIS, were excluded. Sustainable peace is impossible without the Kurds, rendering the committee an exercise in futility.

Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan also took advantage of US ambivalence, further polarizing US-Turkey relations. Erdogan views the Syrian Kurds as an extension of the PKK, an armed rebel group fighting for greater political and cultural rights for Kurds in Turkey, resulting in 40,000 deaths and millions displaced since the 1980s. The PKK wants US mediation, but Erdogan rejects the participation of third parties.

Erdogan uses the conflict to justify draconian policies towards the Kurds and other oppositionists. His course has marginalized America’s influence, undermined Turkey’s democracy, and directed Turkey into Russia’s embrace.

Blood knows no borders. Just as conflict is transnational, peacemaking requires a regional approach.

James Jeffrey serves as Trump’s Special Envoy to Syria. Though Jeffrey is skilled and experienced, he is working with one hand tied behind his back. Current US policy limits his ability to maneuver diplomatically. The killing of Soleimani and Muhandis will make his job even harder.

The Iraqi Parliament is on the verge of censuring the Trump administration and evicting US forces. As the US redeploys to Iraqi Kurdistan, it will need a legal basis for basing troops there. As Iraq becomes more violent, the US might need to recognize Iraqi Kurdistan and an independent and sovereign state.

To manage the intricacies of US policy towards the Kurds in Iraq and the region, President Trump should appoint a “Special Envoy for Kurdish Issues”. The envoy’s activities would be based on the recognition that Kurdish and US interests align. Instead of placating our adversaries, such as the Shiite-led government, the US should support its friends.
-------------------
J. Kenneth Blackwell (@kenblackwell) is the former award-winning United States Ambassador to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. He is a member of the Council On Foreign Relations. He is a contributing author to the ARRA News Service.

David L. Phillips (@DavidLPhillips4) is Director of the Program on Peace-building and Rights at Columbia University’s Institute for the Study of Human Rights. He served as a Senior Adviser working on Kurdish issues at the State Department during the Bush administration. His recent book is The Great Betrayal: How America Abandoned the Kurds and Lost the Middle East.

---

Tags: Ken Blackwell, David Phillips, Salvaging US Interests, IRAQ, Kurds To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Anti-Semitism Rears Its Ugly Head

Robert Norvell, Contributing Author: On the last night of Hanukkah a Jewish Rabbi in a suburban New York area was hosting a Hanukkah party. A machete wielding madman broke into house killing one man and injuring five others. Two were severely injured and their survival is still in doubt. The thug attempted to flee but was picked up two hours later by the police.

Governor Cuomo said this attack marked the 13th unprovoked assault against Jews in the greater New York City area in the last eight days. Clearly some group has declared open season on the Jews in New York City. Hate filled words have dire consequences. Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, who has about a million followers constantly disperses the most vile, virulent form of Jew
hatred I have ever heard. There seems to be no consequences for Louis Farrakhan or the Nation of Islam. The Nation of Islam blames the Jews for every bad thing that happens in the world.

It is time someone stood up for the Jews. Even though I am a Christian I have known many Jews over the last sixty years. The majority of them have been good , industrious people. But above all else the man I claim as my Savior, one Jesus of Nazareth, was a Jew. He was born Jewish, lived his life as a Jew, died a Jew and was resurrected as a Jew. Remember what starts with the Jews, never stays with the Jews. It always continues its hate filled progress to Christians ultimately.

So the act of protecting the Jewish people becomes ultimately an act of self-protection for Christians. Never again in history must anything like the Holocaust be allowed to gain traction on the world stage. The Jews have often been called "the canary in the coal mine." And right now the coal mine is filling with deadly toxic fumes.
--------------------
Robert Norvell is a contributing author to the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Robert Norvell, Anti-Semitism, Rears Its Ugly Head To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Big Hands . . .

. . . Trump will not let the Iraqi Embassy be another Benghazi and ordered Iranian General Soleimani killed at Baghdad airport.

Editorial cartoon by AF "Tony" Branco

---

Tags: editorial cartoon, AF Branco, Big Hands, President Trump, will not let, Iraqi Embassy, be another Benghazi, ordered Iranian General Soleimani killed, Baghdad airport To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Homelessness and the Courts

by Kerby Anderson, Contributing Author: Let’s start with an obvious statement: there are no easy answers for cities trying to deal with homelessness on their streets. But a recent court decision coupled with a decision by the Supreme Court to avoid the issue won’t help those cities in the western states.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down an attempt by Boise, Idaho to deal with people camping and sleeping on sidewalks. The court declared that giving a homeless person a ticket for sleeping on sidewalks or in parks was a violation of the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court decided to not review the lower courts decision.

At the very least, the high court should have commented on the bizarre argument that the Eighth Amendment “prohibits the imposition of criminal penalties for sitting, sleeping, or lying outside on public property for homeless individuals.” I doubt the framers had homelessness in mind when they added this amendment to the Bill of Rights.

The lawyers arguing to the city are concerned that this is the “creation of a de facto constitutional right to live on sidewalks and in parks” that will ultimately “cripple the ability of more than 1,600 municipalities in the Ninth Circuit to maintain the health and safety of their communities.”

Ben Shapiro expressed his concern that the ruling established being homeless as a “state” of being, sort of like an immutable characteristic. But it can be regulated, even if imposing a fine is probably not the best way to deal with homelessness. The ruling seems to suggest that “cities cannot do anything to effectively police those sleeping on the streets” and thus lead to the “spread of diseases, the degradation of public spaces, and an increase in street crime.”

The homeless problem is bad now, but this lower court decision and the high court non-decision will make the problem so much worse.
----------------
Kerby Anderson (@kerbyanderson) is a radio talk show host heard on numerous stations via the Point of View Network (@PointofViewRTS) and is endorsed by Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Kerby Anderson, Viewpoints, Point of View, Homelessness. the Courts To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Trade Dominates Economic Agenda – 2020 Won't Be All Impeachment & Elections

Richard Manning

by Richard Manning: Election year is here. But before we vote in November and after impeachment dominates the first few weeks of 2020, Congress and the administration will likely do battle over a number of issues to gain political favor.

One issue that is guaranteed to dominate Washington is trade. President Trump is the most international trade-oriented president since the Cold War and his intention of remaking the global trading agenda will become a reality at least partially in 2020.

The Senate will almost certainly move forward with the passage of the Trump rewrite of NAFTA, passing the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.

Transformative shifts in intellectual property rights protections, curtailing currency manipulation to gain trading favor, and moving dispute resolutions to the courts of the country of origin – restoring sovereignty to each of the three nations – are key elements of the deal. About $68.2 billion is expected to be added to the U.S. economy with 176,000 new jobs created, according to a study by the International Trade Commission. This is particularly good news for autoworkers, with the White House saying that 76,000 new auto jobs will be created.

It is also likely that Congress will be presented with and pass a new trade deal with the United Kingdom in the wake of their exit from the European Union on Jan. 31. Followed up with the already negotiated phase one of a deal with Japan, which may need congressional approval, and the possibility of a deal with the EU later in the year, trade is likely to dominate much of the D.C. calendar in 2020.

Ironically, the fast-track trade legislation pushed through Congress by those who backed the TransPacific Partnership means Trump faces a simple majority vote in both houses of Congress, with no filibuster in the Senate, as he finalizes a series of bilateral trade agreements cementing U.S. interests for decades to come.

Another certainty is that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will continue his policy of restoring balance to our nation’s judiciary. Already, in the first three years of the president’s administration, the Senate has confirmed 187 judges, more than one-fifth of the federal judiciary. And this won’t stop. There are 50 more federal judicial vacancies to be filled in 2020.

There will be much discussion of immigration, gun control and tax cuts as politicians jockey for advantage in advance of the election, but don't expect congressional action on these fronts.Infrastructure is always an election year bipartisan favorite. With many post-impeachment House Democrats looking for accomplishments as they careen toward a potentially hostile electorate, some form of infrastructure deal becomes possible in mid- to late spring. Whether it be a “just throw money at it” bill or the more orderly creation of a private infrastructure bank, it is possible that the current consensus that money does grow on trees will lead to an agreement on funding bridges, roads and other critical technologically and economically significant systems.

Congress may also address the dire state of our nation’s defined benefit pension plans, with a particular emphasis on private-sector union multi-employer pension funds, as well as provide additional support for the underfunded Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp., which backstops the private pension system.

Details are not final, with competing plans in both the House and Senate, but the just passed funding bill spent $6 billion to bail out pension funds covering United Mine Workers that were effectively put underwater by the Obama administration’s war on coal, sets the stage for the debate. This precedent puts pressure on Congress to implement legislation forcing structural reforms for all multi-employer pension plans, including increased transparency for funds’ internal operations, requirements that funds only invest in transparent enterprises based upon Sarbanes-Oxley standards and rules set by the Labor Department, and a focus on returns rather than political or social welfare agendas.

There will be much discussion of immigration, gun control and tax cuts as politicians jockey for advantage in advance of the election, but don't expect congressional action on these fronts. The one exception may be immigration, depending on how the Supreme Court rules on President Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy. Congress may choose to enter into this thicket, with any legislation that results likely to anger all sides of the debate.

On top of it all, the Trump team will be ramping up efforts to finalize regulations by mid-April that would protect changes he has made should Democrats win back the White House and gain full control of Congress in November. These actions would ensure that the administration's important regulatory reforms wouldn't be washed away using the same Congressional Review Act the GOP utilized to end more than a dozen Obama regulations adopted late in 2016.

While impeachment and the election will provide the caps for 2020, other issues could make this a generationally transformative year. And if there ends up being a Supreme Court vacancy, the confirmation fight in the Senate will make a WWE steel cage match look like an afternoon tea party.

Pay attention in 2020. There will be more than impeachment and the elections to watch.
---------------------
Richard Manning (@LimitGovt) is president of Americans for Limited Government. H/T FoxNews.

---

Tags: Richard Manning, Trade Dominates Economic Agenda, 2020 Won't Be All, Impeachment & Elections To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Served and Disserved, New York Style

by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: “Jacking up your prices on people trying to celebrate the holidays? Classy, @dominos,” tweeted former presidential aspirant and current New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.

“To the thousands who came to Times Square last night to ring in 2020,” continued Hizzoner’s New Year’s Day message from his official city Twitter account, “I’m sorry this corporate chain exploited you — stick it to them by patronizing one of our fantastic LOCAL pizzerias.”

Were you standing there in the Big Apple on New Year’s Eve getting “exploited”?

For the last 15 years, a Midtown Manhattan Domino’s franchise has been delivering hot pepperoni, cheese and onion pizzas for $30 each — “more than twice the regular $14.49 price of a large cheese pie” — to the “hungry tourists waiting in holding pens for the ball drop,” The New York Post reported.

“I have a lot of orders. I’m very busy,” remarked Ratan Banik, the Domino’s delivery man. The paper explained that he was “mobbed by starving tourists . . . many having camped out overnight.”

“He is our Santa,” offered one New Jersey man, who had not thought to bring any food with him into the city. “It’s absolutely worth it. It was hot. It seems like it just came out of the oven.

“If he comes back,” he added. “I will buy some more.”

“How is this different to a million other things? Airlines, Uber, property,” noted one of many tweets mocking the mayor’s. “It’s called supply and demand.”

If this be exploitation, make the most of it — with or without the extra toppings.

Just hold the snipes.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------
Paul Jacob (@Common_Sense_PJ ) is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacob is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Paul Jacob, Common Sense, Served and Disserved, New York Style To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

When Will American Jewry Wake Up?

Grafton Thomas

by Caroline Glick: Was the machete attack at Rabbi Chaim Rottenburg’s home in Monsey, NY last Saturday night wake-up call enough?

Are liberal American Jews ready to accept the truth about anti-Semitism in America?

Following the December 10 massacre at the kosher supermarket in Jersey City, Chris Gadsen, a local high school principal shared an op-ed calling for dialogue between the city’s Jewish and black communities on his Facebook page.

Joan Terrell-Paige, an elected member of the Jersey City school board responded angrily. She began her response to Gadsen’s post by vilifying the city’s Jews as “brutes” who oppressed blacks by buying apartments from them.

Then she accused “6 rabbis,” of “selling body parts.”

Then she accused Jews of planting “drugs and guns” in the black community.

In closing, Terrell-Paige paid homage to the shooters.

“Mr. Anderson and Ms. Graham went directly to the kosher supermarket. I believe they knew they would come out in body bags. What is the message they were sending? Are we brave enough to explore the answer to their message? Are we brave enough to stop the assault on the Black communities in America?”

Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop and New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy both demanded that Terrell Paige resign. The Board of Education was expected to censure her and call for her to resign at a meeting scheduled for December 19. That meeting was cancelled. So were subsequent meetings scheduled for December 23 and December 30. A fourth meeting was scheduled for January 2.

As the board dithered, Terrell-Paige began racking up support. On December 18, the Hudson County Democratic Organization’s Black Caucus issued a statement saying, “While we do not agree with the delivery of the statement made by Ms. Terrell-Paige, we believe that her statement has heightened awareness around issues that must be addressed and that should be a topic of a larger conversation by two communities that have already and must always continue to coexist harmoniously.”

On December 29, John Flora, a Democratic Congressional primary candidate said, “Rather than hastily demanding her resignation this was an ideal moment for our locally elected to sit down with Mrs. Terrell, clarify her statements, and be prepared to demonstrate empathy.”

Terrell-Paige’s supporters scheduled a public vigil on her behalf to take place an hour before the January 2 meeting.

There is a rolling pogrom going on in the New York metropolitan area against Orthodox Jews. It involves continuous harassment and attacks against Jews in the streets of New York punctuated by deadly assaults. “Mr. Anderson and Ms. Graham” carried out the first lethal assault. Last Saturday night Grafton Thomas carried out another particularly violent attack with his machete at Rabbi Rottenburg’s home in Monsey.

There are three types of active anti-Semitism playing out today in America. The first is white nationalist anti-Semitism. It is practiced by white individuals and groups ideologically aligned with the Nazis. We saw its handiwork in the massacre at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh and the deadly shooting at the Chabad house in at Powey, CA.

The second anti-Semitism is leftist anti-Semitism. Leftist anti-Semites get their ideological inspiration from the Soviet Union and the PLO/Hamas. Like the Soviets and Palestinian terrorists, they reject the existence of Jewish civilization. They deny the right of Jews to Jewish history, to the Jewish homeland, to Jewish nationalism and to Jewish peoplehood. They demonize and attack Jews who don’t won’t accept the status of second-class citizens denied their right to their own identity and heritage.

The third type of active anti-Semitism in the US today is black anti-Semitism. Black anti-Semitism became a salient form of Jew hatred in America in the wake of the 1967 Six Day War when Saudi Arabia began funding and proselytizing to black communities. Today the Nation of Islam, under the genocidally anti-Semitic Louis Farrakhan is arguably the most powerful and influential engine for propagating and legitimizing Jew hatred in America.

Over the past 15 years, black anti-Semitism began cohabitating with leftist anti-Semitism. The initiative to merge the two forms of Jew hatred came from leftist anti-Semites. Under the banner of “intersectionality,” they linked “Nazi” Israel to African American allegations of police brutality and institutional racism. Black Lives Matter’s adoption of a leftist anti-Semitic platform that rejects Israel’s right to exist speaks to the success of the left’s campaign. Reports that Thomas searched for “Zionist temples” before he barged into Rabbi Rottenburg’s home show the lethal consequence of their merger.

According to the New York Police Department, by last September, anti-Semitic attacks in New York City had increased 63 percent from 2018. The final 2019 numbers will certainly be even worse. The attacks in Brooklyn have been carried out by non-whites.

To fight the onslaught of bigotry being unleashed against its members, America’s overwhelmingly Democratic and deeply liberal Jewish community needs to recognize two hard truths.

First, liberal American Jews need to realize their local and national leaders have been lying to them. For years American Jewish leaders at the national and local levels have been peddling the claim that the ideological and political right poses the greatest threat to the American Jewish community. Not only does the rolling pogrom in New York put paid this lie, the raw data, collected since the start of the century shows this is incorrect.

Repeated surveys by the Anti-Defamation League show that African Americans are on average around twice as likely to be anti-Semitic as the general population.

Repeated Pew and Gallup surveys show that liberals and Democrats are increasingly anti-Israel and hostile to Jews and conservatives and Republicans are increasingly pro-Israel and hostile to anti-Semites.

Instead of accepting these facts, liberal Jews make excuses for leftist and black anti-Semites.

Almost every major American Jewish organization –from AIPAC to the Reform and Conservative movements clings to the “two-state” paradigm as an article of faith. This despite the fact that like the Palestinians, anti-Israel activists and groups reject Israel’s right to exist.

The apparent thinking is that the American Jewish community’s support for Palestinian statehood will convince leftist anti-Semites to accept that Jews have the right to support Israel’s existence. In other words, the Jewish community treats leftist anti-Semitism as a policy dispute rather than a bigotry whose goal is to oppress them. This denial has prevented the community from taking adequate action against leftist anti-Semitic aggression on US campuses.

Rather than demand an accounting of black politicians and communal leaders for black anti-Semitism, liberal Jewish leaders accuse the Jewish community of racism.

Last month, as Jewish blood was being spilled every day in Brooklyn, the Reform Movement held its annual convention in Chicago and voted to support reparations to African Americans for the crime of slavery.

One of the leaders of the Reform movement, Rabbi Jonah Pesner explained the decision in an op-ed in the Chicago Tribune. Pesner insisted that American Jews must take action, “against the racism still lingering in our congregations and communities.”

Several liberal Jewish writers claimed the Jersey City Jewish community itself brought on the attack on the kosher supermarket. Hassidic Jews had no business buying homes in black neighborhoods, they wrote.

Contrast the stunning forbearance liberal Jews extend to leftist and black anti-Semites to their intolerance for white nationalism. Every liberal rabbi can give detailed sermons about the dangers of white nationalists and insist that President Donald Trump is the greatest threat to American Jews. They angrily dismiss as irrelevant all mention Trump’s Jewish grandchildren, his record as the most pro-Israel president in history and the unprecedented measures he has implemented to fight anti-Semitism in American academia. He opposes open borders, so he hates Jews, they insist.

The second inconvenient truth the American Jewish community needs to get its head around is that the Democratic Party has become fully Corbyized. Like Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party today’s Democratic Party abets anti-Semites and anti-Semitism in America.

In 2018, running unopposed, Arthur Jones won the Republican primary in Illinois 3rd Congressional District. Jones was the sole candidate because the district is overwhelmingly Democrat. When it came out that Jones is a Nazi, not only did the Republican party denounce him. The state party called on Republicans in the 3rd district to vote for the Democratic candidate.

The Republican House leadership censured Iowa Congressman Steven King and removed him from all committees after he spoke favorably about white nationalists in a newspaper interview.

Whereas the GOP denounces and works against its anti-Semitic members, the Democratic party rewards and defends its anti-Semites. Terrell-Paige’s story is far from unique.

The Democratic House majority refused to censure Cong. Ilhan Omar after she made a series of anti-Semitic statements.

In August, the Democrats rallied against Israel in support of Omar and her fellow anti-Semite Cong. Rashida Tlaib. The two intended to lead a tour in Israel that month. Once Israeli authorities realized the purpose of the trip was to delegitimize Israel’s right to exist, in accordance with its immigration law, Israel denied them entry visas.

Rather than condemn their colleagues for working towards the annihilation of the world’s largest Jewish community, Democratic leaders condemned Israel for standing up to them.

One of the most powerful caucuses in the House is the Congressional Black Caucus. Its leading members publicly support Farrakhan despite his despite his role in propagating anti-Jewish bigotry in the black community.

In the 2016 presidential race, Trump faced near daily demands – which he met – to reject the endorsement of former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke and denounce him. The liberal Jewish establishment refused to accept Trump’s repeated renunciations of his support as genuine.

In the 2008 presidential race, then Senator Barack Obama was asked once to reject Farrakhan’s endorsement. He refused. 88 percent of American Jews voted for him, and declared him “the first Jewish president.”

New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio passed radical bail reform policies that give thugs get-out-of-jail-free cards. Accordingly, last Saturday a woman arrested after violently assaulting three Jewish women in Brooklyn was released from jail without bail. She was arrested again Sunday after attacking a fourth woman, and promptly released again.

DeBlasio blamed the Monsey attack on Trump.

As far as progressive Jewish activists are concerned, DeBlasio’s policies are anti-black. Last week they criticized DeBlasio’s announcement that he was augmenting police patrols in Jewish neighborhoods claiming, “This is what dividing vulnerable communities looks like.”

This sort of crazy talk is not cost free. It is dangerous. Inconvenient truths will not go away just because they are unpleasant.

It is a fact that leftist and black anti-Semites are just as great a threat, if not greater threats to the Jewish community than white nationalist anti-Semites.

It is a fact that the Republican Party rejects anti-Semitism in all its forms and expels anti-Semites found in its ranks, and the Democratic Party enables and advances leftist and black anti-Semites and anti-Semitism.

So long as the liberal Jewish establishment and its members refuse to accept these facts, the attacks against America’s Jews can be expected to increase in frequency and violence.
---------------------
Caroline Glick is the Senior Contributing Editor of The Jerusalem Post and the Director of the David Horowitz Freedom Center's Israel Security Project. For more information on Ms. Glick's work, visit carolineglick.com Article also shared on IsraelHayom.com.

---

Tags: Caroline Glick, Grafton Thomas, When Will, American Jewry, Wake Up? To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Trump-Hating Leftists Usher in New Year of Trump Hatred

David Limbaugh

by David Limbaugh: Have you ever wondered why the political left is so inconsolably angry these days? Why does it consider President Donald Trump to be such a threat and his supporters so contemptible?

This isn’t my imagination. While most people expressed their New Year’s greetings in positive terms, the celebrity left defaulted to its Trump-hating form. Every day is a new day to rage against Trump, so why should their New Year’s Day pronouncements be any different?

Breitbart assembled a list of celebrity tweets illustrating the point. Rob Reiner tweeted, “Wishing everyone a Happy New Year and a 2020 that doesn’t include an ignorant corrupt soulless liar occupying the People’s House.” Stephen King tweeted, “Of his lies we’ve had plenty … Kick his a– in 2020.” Rose O’Donnell couldn’t quite make it through a New Year’s tweet without denigrating Trump. “HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL,” she tweeted, adding the hashtag #2020removeHIM. Rosanna Arquette said: “Putin is not my president. happy new year.” In an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Linda Rondstadt likened Trump to Hitler and the Mexicans to “the New Jews.” And the examples go on and on.

What is wrong with these narcissistic malcontents? It’s not like things are terrible in America. Economically speaking, we couldn’t be doing much better. We’re certainly better off than we were during the Obama years — by leaps and bounds.

Trump is also sticking up for America again, rebuilding our defenses; taking decisive action when our people or soldiers are in harm’s way, as with his immediate response to the attack on our embassy in Iraq; pressuring other countries to contribute to our mutual defense pacts; and expressing his pride in this country — as opposed to trotting around the globe and apologizing for it.
So what’s not to like? His tweets? Fine, but do you really think that’s what is driving them mad?
How about his alleged abuses of power? Please. They’ve been pressing for impeachment since before “Russia collusion” became their favorite mantra and long before they could identify Ukraine on a map.

They don’t hate Trump for having acted outside his constitutional authority — because he hasn’t. That was Obama. They don’t hate him because they believe he is extremely partisan. And if they were to believe it, they would have no credibility, for few presidents have been more partisan than Barack Obama, despite the progressive mythical narrative to the contrary.

You might recall how Obama used lawless executive orders to implement policy that Congress declined to legislate, forced Obamacare down our throats and smugly told his Republican opponents, “I won the election,” and that he didn’t “want them to do a lot of talking.” And surely you won’t forget how he bulldozed his stimulus package through Congress with less than a handful of Senate Republican votes after meeting with congressional Republicans just one day before the Democrats had drafted the 1,073-page bill.

They revile Trump because they can tolerate only one viewpoint — their own. They resent that they can’t cram down their ideas in all sectors of our society, our culture and our government. It’s not enough that they have virtual monolithic control of the messages disseminating from Hollywood, academia and the mainstream media. They want total power everywhere, without any dissent. They are furious that red-state America won’t roll over and surrender its sovereignty to them so they can complete the fundamental transformation of America into a socialistic, authoritarian state, and finish converting its culture into a post-Christian utopia.

They are like agitated babies who’ve had their toys taken away and who militantly refuse to take a nap.

Trump is not just an annoying speed bump on their way to total societal and political domination but a force of nature to be reckoned with, wildly beyond their expectations. Having no respect for Trump or his ability, they wrongly assumed they could steamroll, marginalize or oust him and restore themselves to power.

They had no idea Trump would be so formidable an opponent. More importantly, they had no inkling that he represented something far greater than himself: a seemingly silent majority of everyday Americans who had had their fill of the left’s political and cultural tyranny.

Even though they’ve also directed their ire at Trump supporters — kicking them out of restaurants and other public places, and trying to suppress their liberties — they still seem to be operating under the illusion that if they can just remove Trump, they’ll easily recapture power.

Little do they realize that the more they mistreat Trump, the more they alienate his supporters — freedom-loving patriots from shore to shore. Or maybe their animus against him and us is so intense that they just can’t help themselves, and they don’t realistically consider the potential political fallout.

Or could it be that they are so cloistered in their elitist bubble that they still don’t realize the magnitude of support Trump has from tens of millions of people who will never give up on this nation as the world’s model for freedom and prosperity? The more they hate him, they more they abuse him, the greater our resolve to defend him — and America!
---------------------
David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is "Jesus is Risen: Paul and the Early Church." Follow him on Twitter& @davidlimbaugh and his website at davidlimbaugh.com.

---

Tags: David Limbaugh, Trump-Hating Leftists, Usher in New Year of Trump Hatred To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!