Monthly Archives: May 2025

How The Deep State Works Against President Trump

Posted on by
Reply

On Monday, Declassified with Julie Kelly posted an article that illustrates how the deep state works and also how at least to hold those who work against the Trump administration accountable.

The article reports:

If John Brennan is furious, good things are happening.

The former CIA director and Russiagate architect is “livid” about the firing last week of two longtime intelligence officers by President Trump’s top spy chief. “It’s appalling and outrageous and demonstrates why Tulsi Gabbard never should have been confirmed as director of national intelligence,” Brennan, his voice trembling with rage, said on MSNBC. “This is going to have real reverberations in the workforce.”

The firings involved people who were part of the politicization of the intelligence community. They were part of the ‘deep state.’

The article continues:

During their tenure, Brennan and Clapper, along with former FBI Director James Comey—last seen using beach rocks to threaten the president—weaponized the intel community to target Obama’s political enemies then worked with friendly news organizations to leak sensitive information to damage Trump.

History is repeating itself. Similar to Brennan’s bogus intelligence assessment claiming the Russians interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump win—a document that successfully sowed doubt over the legitimacy of Trump’s victory, derailed the first half of presidency, and prompted a criminal investigation into alleged Trump-Russia election collusion—the latest intel report is aimed at undermining the president’s Alien Enemies Act (AEA) proclamation.

Collins and Langan-Riekhof authored a memo stating:

“While Venezuela’s permissive environment enables TdA (Tren de Aragua) to operate, the Maduro regime probably does not have a policy of cooperating with the TdA and is not directing TdA movement to and operations in the United States,” the partially redacted document, released by Gabbard in response to a FOIA request, stated.

The goal of the memo was to undermine the deportation process of those gang members.

The article notes:

The memo on one hand condemned the Maduro regime for “lack of transparency” but simultaneously argued that the nonexistence of “top down directives” from Maduro officials to TdA leaders exonerates any connection between the two.

Further, the memo acknowledged that the unprecedented spike of illegal Venezuelans at the southern border during the Biden years “could include some TdA members.” The mass exodus from Venezuela—nearly 8 million residents have left since 2014 with at least 600,000 illegally entering the U.S. from 2021 to 2023—benefits Maduro as a result of “the logistical, financial, and political headaches that unregulated migrations has caused for the US government, its perceived principal adversary.”

But the memo nonetheless insisted “the Maduro regime probably is not systematically directing Venezuelan outflows.”

…Also in Brennan-like style, well placed leaks to Trump-hostile news organizations spawned the imaginary controversy; an early version of the NIC memo was disclosed to the media a few days after the president signed the AEA proclamation. “American intelligence agencies circulated findings last month that stand starkly at odds with Mr. Trump’s claims, according to officials familiar with the matter,” the New York Times reported on March 20. “The document…summarized the shared judgment of the nation’s spy agencies that the gang was not controlled by the Venezuelan government.”

The article notes that the leaks have a purpose:

That leak presumably is one of at least 11 unauthorized disclosures under investigation by Gabbard’s office. During an interview last week, Gabbard revealed that she has sent three criminal referrals related to leaks to the Department of Justice. They are, Gabbard said, are an attempt to “directly undermine the agenda and actions of President Trump.”

The leakers need to face serious consequences–not just a slap on the wrist.

Protecting Women’s Health

Posted on by
Reply

This is not an article to debate abortion. I believe abortion is wrong for a number of reasons, but that is not what this article is about. The link between Planned Parenthood and Margaret Sanger is troubling at best. The fact that the majority of abortion clinics are located in low-income neighborhoods is also troubling, but more troubling is the fact that the dangers of the abortion pill are being overlooked.

On Thursday, The Federalist reported:

More than 100 pro-life, pro-women, and pro-family organizations sent a letter to President Donald Trump’s top drug and health agencies asking them to “put the safety of women first” by reinstating the abortion pill safeguards stripped away by the Obama and Biden administrations.

“The danger this drug poses to women and girls is clear,” the letter states.

In the request to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Martin Makary and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the coalition of concerned advocates warned that data shows “chemical abortion is neither safe nor effective.”

“In short, the FDA’s purpose is to safeguard the health and safety of Americans. In the case of mifepristone, these bedrock principles—necessary not only for the trust of Americans, but also for the safety of women—have been undermined by political whims that obscured the growing evidence of mifepristone’s harm,” the letter continues.

The letter highlighted a new landmark study, which determined that mifepristone, a key part of the drug regimen used to complete more than half of the nation’s abortions, has a rate of life-threatening or serious complications that is at least 22 times higher than what the FDA and the pill’s manufacturer suggest.

Corporate media tried to blackout and undermine the study with smears that it is “bogus,” relies on “bad data,“ and amounts to “junk science” because it was not peer reviewed. The Washington Post even claimed that the discovery of mifepristone’s high injury rate is no big deal because it has a warning label.

Researchers Ryan Anderson and Jamie Bryan Hall told The Federalist they were careful to exclude certain data, including 72 percent of emergency room visit diagnoses, to avoid overstating the risks of the drug. Even with that added caution, they found “11 percent of women who have a chemical abortion suffer a serious adverse event.”

Obviously, pregnancy is a natural reaction to a certain activity. It is a natural function of a woman’s body–it is not a disease that needs to be cured, and it is not simply a lump of cells to be destroyed. When you use a drug to interfere with the body’s natural function, there are going to be consequences. When that drug kills something that is attached to the body, there may be complications.

It’s time that the Food and Drug Administration actually worked for the benefit of Americans rather than for the benefit of drug companies. We have seen the scandals with tobacco, Oxycontin, the Covid-19 vaccine, and now the abortion pill. The agency needs either to go away or to change its paradigm.

The View From The Lair

Posted on by
Reply

Karma sucks

Karma sucks. So does cancer. I commented on that condition back in January. So, when I saw that former Resident Brandon had prostate cancer, there was no surprise. He’s more than old enough for it. But then they said that it was a Stage 4 (same as mine,) a Gleason score of 9 (mine was an 8) and it had already metastasized to the bone my response was “BullSchiff!”

Some perhaps uncomfortable information and history follows; I will use my usual decorum to describe it.

My first experience with prostate cancer began in 1998, when my father was diagnosed. His diagnosis was almost by accident. As he was about to leave from his annual physical his Dr suggested he get a “finger wave”. (Men and women know about this. The sound of a latex glove snapping on a hand can bring some men to the point of trembling.) His PSA was normal, so why bother. That’s the thing about the prostate. It doesn’t take much to piss it off. A simple benign infection can cause an increased PSA (got the t-shirt.) But he did it anyway and the Dr discovered that his cancer had already broken the capsule. NOT good news. Surgery wasn’t an option (nor with mine) so radiation was prescribed. Some cancers don’t raise the PSA. His didn’t, at least until his metastasized.

Note to males over 50: every year – EVERY YEAR – get a finger wave and a PSA score.

In Resident Brandon’s case, someone screwed up. It takes a long time for prostate cancer to metastasize to the bone. Did the regime’s DEI hire policy dictate that the “appropriate” physicians (not the most qualified) perform all the necessary exams? As commander in chief his medical services are performed at Walter Reed Medical Center. What does this say about the care prescribed and delivered there?

We are each responsible for our own healthcare; we rely on professionals to provide guidance and intelligent directions. Granted, Brandon wasn’t sufficiently cognitive to do so. But what about “Dr.” Jill? One would think that she would be most aggressive in seeing that his medical needs were absolutely fulfilled with top notch treatments and diagnosis. I support my spouse; she supports me.

So, did karma bite Brandon in the butt? Did the regime’s penchant for DEI turn around like a napping DEI ATC hire? I have empathy for Brandon; we share a diagnosis. One major difference is that I was anticipating it and caught mine very early. His road will be a lot tougher. Surgery is unlikely, unless he’s already wearing diaper anyway. Once it gets to the bone, it’s harder to treat. Hormone therapy may slow it down, but I’d be shocked if it slows it down much.

While I have empathy for him, I have no sympathy. If it is indeed karma, well, tough. If it isn’t, he’s still a crook and a jerk.

Sometimes life sucks as well.

ciao,

The Snark

Lied To Again

Posted on by
Reply

Actually, we really can’t discern whether the media is continually lying or if they are simply ignorant of basic facts. It is odd, however, that the lies do have a political slant.

On Monday, Red State posted an article about Vice President J.D. Vance’s recent trip to the Vatican.

The article reports:

But the media was at it again, spinning away about the greeting. Check out this headline from The Daily Beast, painting the greeting as a “snub” on Sunday.

Well, not so fast.

The article continues:

Other outlets like The Daily Mail ran similar takes.

Now, if they met, it’s pretty hard to call that a snub, but that’s how they tried to spin it anyway. They seem not to notice it’s the Pope’s inauguration, so he has a lot going on and many leaders to meet. Of course, this is about stoking some illusion that the Pope hates Vance to make Vance look bad. But that’s ridiculous since that goes against the whole nature of being Pope. They don’t seem to get that their scenario would make the Pope look bad, that they’re inherently attacking the Pope without realizing it.

This isn’t the first time they’ve tried this and printed absolute nonsense about Vance. The Daily Beast previously accused him of violating a rule about taking pictures in the Sistine Chapel. After excoriating him in a story, buried deep down in the story was the fact that Vance had permission. He was with Vatican officials.

The article also notes:

He and the Pope even exchanged gifts. Vance gave him a Chicago Bears jersey with his name and number. He also gave the Pope – who is an Augustinian priest – two books by St. Augustine, the “City of God” and “On Christian Doctrine.”

Meanwhile, the Pope gave Vance a bronze sculpture that said in Italian, “Peace is a fragile flower.” He also gave him a picture book of the papal apartments, saying he might live in them, but he hasn’t decided yet.

I said in my prior story that Vance and Rubio (United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio) should work on communication with the Pope so he isn’t just getting media spin about the Trump administration, and it looks like they were on that during the visit.

It’s odd that people who don’t have a political agenda and who have actually met President Trump are surprised at how different he is from the person the media paints him as.

The Clues Were There

Posted on by
Reply

A lot is being said about former President Biden’s announcement that he has cancer. A number of members of the medical profession believe that the cancer has been there for a while, but the Democrats and the media chose not to share the information. As I pointed out yesterday, former President Biden admitted in 2022 that he had cancer. The admission of course was treated as a gaffe and ignored. However, a news article at Townhall reminds us that there were other clues.

The article reports a comment made by Frank Biden after former President Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential race:

In a statement to CBS News in July of 2024, Frank Biden said his brother’s health “absolutely” played a role in his decision to exit the race, and dropped a line that raised eyebrows at the time.

“Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we have left,” his statement to CBS continued. “He is a genuine hero, country over self, it sounds corny in our cynical political environment, but he nor I are cynical. The goal remains the same: defeat Trump and continue the work that Joe has done. My hope is that our party rallies around this heroic act.”

The Biden family response:

After that shocking statement, a “source close to the Biden family” said Biden’s brother was an alcoholic who’s not that close to him.

The Bidens will throw anyone under the bus who gets in the way of their narrative!

Despite the need for sympathy, there is also a need to find out who was running the country during the past four years. Former President Biden’s health issues are no excuse for not upholding the laws that govern our country and holding the people who broke those laws accountable. Let’s start with cabinet members who saw the infirmity, the cognitive decline, and the lack of cabinet meetings and did not discuss using the 25th Amendment.

Where Your Taxpayer Money Has Gone

Posted on by
Reply

On Sunday, Just the News posted an article a federal task force tasked with tracking COVID-19 assistance fraud.

The article reports:

In a new investigation, a federal committee tasked with tracking COVID-19 assistance fraud found tens of thousands of dishonest or erroneous Paycheck Protection Program applications.

The Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC) report, released this month, revealed more than 40,000 instances when applicants for more than $860 million in taxpayer-funded PPP loans “significantly misrepresented their incomes.”

The Small Business Administration, which distributed the PPP loans, allocated more than $1 trillion in taxpayer-funded pandemic assistance to more than 10 million small businesses.

A recent report from the Government Accountability Office showed that nearly 2 million potentially fraudulent SBA applications – including the 40,000 PPP applications – still require investigation, as The Center Square reported.

PRAC said it achieved its findings by comparing the reported incomes of sole proprietor PPP applicants with the reported incomes of applicants for Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) assistance grants using the same personally identifiable information.

Data analysts found “significant [income] misrepresentations…where the derived income for PPP applicants was at least 10 times greater than the income reported to HUD by housing assistance recipients.”

The article concludes:

Since the pandemic, when the federal government cumulatively spent $5 trillion in COVID-19 related aid, lawmakers and organizations have held oversight hearings into at least $200 billion lost to fraud, only $5 billion of which has been recovered.

Most of that fraud was preventable, according to PRAC and other watchdog groups.

“We hope that by sharing this potential fraud scheme with the public and the oversight community we can alert (1) Offices of Inspectors General (OIGs) to be on the lookout for similar cross-program schemes, (2) program implementers to build better internal controls and checks upfront to mitigate this risk, and (3) policymakers to consider issues related to cross-agency risks including income verification,” PRAC concluded.

I realize that in terms of the overall budget, $5 billion is a drop in the bucket. However, there seem to have been a number of ‘drops in the bucket’ that were fraudulent. It is very obvious that the government needs much better oversight on how it spends its money.

To add to the story, The Daily Haymaker reported on Monday that the The Southern Coalition for Social Justice may have received funds from the Covid-19 assistance programs that they were not entitled to during the time that North Carolina Superior Court Judge Allison Riggs served as the organization’s “chief counsel for voting rights” and “co-executive director for programs.” The Daily Haymaker is looking for an explanation of why the funds were received when the math indicates the organization was not entitled to them.

The Big Beautiful Bill Advances Slowly

Posted on by

On May 19th, NewsMax posted an article about the passage through the House Budget Committee last night on its way to the House Rules Committee. All of the members of Congress need to remember that if this bill is not passed, almost all Americans will see a major income tax increase next year.

The article reports:

House Speaker Mike Johnson took a “historical” active role in seeing that legislation passed the chamber’s Budget Committee, Rep. Jack Bergman, R-Mich., told Newsmax on Monday.

Johnson, Bergman, and other members of the committee worked late Sunday night to advance the chamber’s massive tax cut and border security package.

“I think as a as a historical note, I believe that the attendance of the speaker of the House at pre-meeting, last-minute, backroom negotiations was a first for a current speaker of the House to be attending a budget committee markup,” Bergman said on “Wake Up America.” “So that’s one historical data point.”

Bergman credited Johnson and committee Chair Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, with agreeing to “some compromises.”

“This is all about moving a logical, if not perfect … remember, we’re trying to create a more perfect union here, not a perfect union with our with our form of government … but to move that big bill forward, to get it into rules, make the necessary changes and … to get it voted on the House floor sooner rather than later to meet those timelines that we’ve agreed to get President [Donald] Trump’s agenda, especially one of the first fiscal base parts of that agenda in play here by around the 4th of July,” Bergman said.

The article concludes:

Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) said he voted “present” for the bill to advance “out of respect for the Republican Conference and the President,” conceding that it needs improvements. In a statement on X, he also objected to the bill’s provisions around green energy tax credits and Medicaid.

“Tonight, after a great deal of work and engagement over the weekend, the Budget Committee advanced a reconciliation bill that lays the foundation for much needed tax relief, border security, and important spending reductions and reforms,” he wrote. “Importantly the bill now will move Medicaid work requirements forward and reduces the availability of future subsidies under the green new scam.”

“But, the bill does not yet meet the moment – leaving almost half of the green new scam subsidies continuing. More, it fails to end the Medicaid money laundering scam and perverse funding structure that provides seven times more federal dollars for each dollar of state spending for the able-bodied relative to the vulnerable,” he added. “This all ultimately increases the likelihood of continuing deficits and non-Obamacare-expansion states like Texas expanding in the future. We can and must do better before we pass the final product.”

I met Representative Bergman when he was a Marine Corps General stationed in New Orleans. I am thrilled that he is a Congressman. He represents the integrity, ability, and intelligence that our Founding Fathers hoped would be found in our elected officials.

The Fallout From The Iberian Blackout

Posted on by

On Sunday, WattsUpWithThat posted an article about the future of energy transition from fossil fuels to green energy. It’s not looking good.

The article reports:

It’s no secret that the Republican’s “Big Beautiful Bill” plans to axe large swaths of mandates and billions of dollars in subsidies directed at achieving a so-called “energy transition.” If that budget axe falls, it will be the proverbial third strike that puts to rest the idea that the U.S., never mind the world, will abandon fossil fuels. The other two strikes already happened.

Strike two came last month with the Great Iberian blackout. Preliminary forensics make clear that over-enthusiastic deployment of unreliable solar and wind power was the fulcrum that put 55 million people in the dark for days. Few politicians will want to risk allowing something like that to happen again, anywhere. And, as the North American Electric Reliability Corporation keeps warning, blackout risks are rising here, and for the same reason. Reliability used to be the core feature of electric grid designs, before the rush to push an energy transition in service of climate goals.

And strike one came a few weeks prior to the Iberian calamity with the release of a new report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) titled Energy and AI. That report sought to answer the question about how to reliably meet the surprising jump in power demands expected in the coming decade’s boom in artificial intelligence (AI) data centers. Answering that also answers, even if not intentionally, the same question about meeting society’s future demands.

The article concludes:

This doesn’t mean Big Tech or the IEA are backing off climate pledges. Nor does it mean the climate debate is settled. Nor will we see any diminution in transition fervor from the climate-industrial complex. Likely that fervor heats up as the Trump Administration attempts to deliver on its promise to defund the panoply of climate-energy programs marbled throughout federal agencies.

What it does mean is that whatever one believes about the science of the climate, the fact is that mandates and subsidies can’t change the physics of energy systems. Systems that can deliver reliable power at the scales necessary for robust growth remain anchored in precisely the fuels the transitionists want to abandon.

Fossil fuels are not perfect (although natural gas is close), but they have been the backbone of the world’s economy for generations. It is possible that one day green energy can discover the technology to make it as reliable and inexpensive as fossil fuel, but that has not yet happened. The best way to spur on the green energy research is to get the governments out of it and let the inventors and private investors make a profit.

Questioning The Timing

Posted on by

One of the major news stories today is the announcement that former President Biden has prostate cancer. The fact that the cancer has spread to his bones has caused many in the medical profession to state that he has probably had prostate cancer for some time. Below is the 2022 video of President Biden stating that he has cancer. The comment is included in a Denver, Colorado, News 9 article of July 2022. My sympathies go out to the Biden family–everyone reading this probably has a friend or family member who has battled cancer. That said, the timing of this announcement is very odd.

The article reports:

During a speech on the effects of climate change Wednesday, President Joe Biden seemingly indicated that he has cancer, but the White House quickly clarified the president was referring to a previous diagnosis before his presidency.

The comment came during a speech in Somerset, Mass., when the president was discussing the health effects caused by emissions from oil refineries near his hometown in Delaware.

“That’s why I — and so damn many other people I grew up with — have cancer and why for the longest time Delaware had the highest cancer rate in the nation,” Biden said.

RNC Research, a Twitter account run by the Republican National Committee, quickly posted a video clip, tweeting, “Did Joe Biden just announce he has cancer?” The claim quickly gained traction among conservative figures on Twitter.

Andrew Bates, a White House deputy press secretary, responded by pointing to a tweet from Glenn Kessler, the editor and chief writer for the Washington Post’s Fact Checker. Kessler debunked the claim, pointing out Biden had minor skin cancers removed prior to his presidency, which was noted in a health report released last year. 

Oil refineries don’t cause skin cancer.

On May 19, Hot Air reported:

How do we know–and how does a doctor confidently assert–that this cancer diagnosis almost certainly can’t be recent? Simple: if you are a male and live long enough, the chances of getting prostate cancer are asymptotically close to 100%, so any competent doctor would test for this, and a White House doctor absolutely would test for this. Joe Biden was old when he entered the White House, and quite old when he left.

He was tested for cancer. And since prostate cancer–even “aggressive” prostate cancer–does not metastasize into the bones in months–it’s unlikely that the disease could be missed for so long.

Everybody is rightly focused on the cover-up because it is part of a pattern of lies. The White House certainly knew about Biden’s mental decline and lied. They knew about his spinal degeneration–it was so bad that they planned to put him in a wheelchair after the election, yet told everybody he was so fit he ran circles around his aides. And it is difficult to believe that they–at least Biden and the family–didn’t know and lie about his cancer.

Again, my sympathies to the Biden family. But not my respect.

It’s Only A Problem When President Trump Does It!

Posted on by

On Saturday, Breitbart posted an article about the airplane Qatar is giving to America to replace Air Force One. It seems that this was not a spur-of-the-moment decision by Qatar.

The article reports:

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) pointed out that talks regarding Qatar giving the United States a plane to temporarily replace Air Force One began under the Biden administration.

In an interview on CNN, Mullin pointed out that the U.S. needed a temporary replacement for Air Force One since President Donald Trump was “flying around on a 40-year-old plane.”

“Here’s what’s interesting to me, what the media isn’t telling you — what no one’s talking to you about, is the same 747 has been in negotiations for a year,” Mullin said. “The Biden administration is the one that started these conversations. It didn’t start underneath the Trump administration. Why? Because we need a back-up for Air Force One.”

“The President of the United States is flying around on a 40-year-old plane, and there is no back-up for it,” Mullin continued. “The back-up we had, the air frame started having structural issues. No one’s discussing that part.”

The article concludes:

Ali Al-Ansari, Qatar’s Media Attaché to the U.S., previously described reports that Qatar was gifting a plane to the U.S. during Trump’s visit to Qatar as “inaccurate” and said the “possible transfer” of a plane to the U.S. was “under consideration.”

“Reports that a jet is being gifted by Qatar to the United States government during the upcoming visit of President Trump are inaccurate,” Al-Ansari said in a statement. “The possible transfer of an aircraft for temporary use as Air Force One is currently under consideration between Qatar’s Ministry of Defense and the US Department of Defense, but the matter remains under review by the respective legal departments, and no decision has been made.”

As usual, the political left is creating much ado about nothing.

The Thinking Behind October 7th

Posted on by

On May 18th, Zero Hedge posted an article about what is considered the reason behind the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2024. I suspect there are many in Hamas who currently wish they could rethink that attack.

According to the article:

Newly uncovered internal Hamas documents confirm a longtime theory explaining the motives behind the Oct.7, 2023 terror attack which kicked off the bloody and grinding Gaza war, which still shows no signs of abating and has resulted in unprecedented death and destruction in the Gaza Strip.

The documents, published by The Wall Street Journal, demonstrate that Hamas leaders had a specific aim of preventing a potential peace agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia based on the US-backed Abraham Accords. This was speculated about soon after the horrific attacks that also kicked off the hostage crisis.

This is according to minutes from a high-level meeting which cite now slain Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and which were reportedly discovered by Israeli forces in Gaza tunnels. Sinwar was quoted in the internal papers, which are dated Oct. 2, 2023 – as saying, “There is no doubt that the Saudi-Zionist normalization agreement is progressing significantly.”

The article concludes:

And the prospect of Palestinian statehood resulting from some kind of Israel-Saudi normalization agreement based on Trump’s Abraham Accords (conceived during his first administration) – which US media reports previously hailed as ‘deal of the century’ – also clearly seems a pipe dream at this point.

In this regard at least, Sinyar’s ‘extraordinary act’ served its purpose, but the bloody aftermath is thousands of Israelis killed, many tens of thousands of Palestinians dead and wounded, and a region on fire.

So what would Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords mean and why is it important? The two negative players in the Middle East right now are Iran and Turkey. Turkey, unfortunately is a member of NATO, which complicates things. A majority of the Middle Eastern countries do not want Iran to get a nuclear bomb. They understand that even if the bomb is only used on Israel it will negatively impact them–radiation, infrastructure damage, etc. Iran is funding Hamas. If Iran is isolated, it may lose the ability to fund Hamas. Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords might be the domino that falls and paves the way for other countries to join. Iran would be isolated, and the money to Hamas would probably dry up. October 7th was an act of desperation. I don’t think Hamas got the results they wanted–Israel is not going to stop fighting this time.

Asking The Right Question

Posted on by

One of the cases before the Supreme Court this week dealt with whether or not district judges have the authority to make rulings that impact the entire nations. On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about a question asked by Justice Thomas.

The article reports:

In Thursday’s hearing, Thomas asked Sauer (U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer) — who represented the Trump administration — about the history of nationwide injunctions and when courts first started issuing such orders. The solicitor general answered by citing Thomas’ concurring opinion in Trump v. Hawaii, a 2018 case that resulted in SCOTUS reversing “a lower court’s decision to uphold a nationwide injunction on Trump’s travel ban,” according to The Federalist’s John Daniel Davidson.

In his concurrence in that case, Thomas noted how nationwide injunctions by lower courts “did not emerge until a century and a half after the founding.” He further observed that these injunctions “appear to be inconsistent with longstanding limits on equitable relief and the power of Article III courts.”

“These injunctions are beginning to take a toll on the federal court system — preventing legal questions from percolating through the federal courts, encouraging forum shopping, and making every case a national emergency for the courts and for the Executive Branch,” Thomas wrote.

In his response to Thomas, Sauer highlighted several examples of universal injunctions that he said began emerging in the early 1960s.

“So we survived until the 1960s without universal injunctions?” asked Thomas, to which Sauer replied, “That’s exactly correct.”

Sauer added, “In fact, those [injunctions] are very limited and very rare even in the 1960s. It really exploded in 2007 in our cert petition in Summers v. Earth Island Institute, we pointed out that the Ninth Circuit had started doing this in a whole bunch of cases involving environmental claims.”

The article concludes:

During one exchange with Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Sauer attempted to answer the Obama appointee’s inquiries regarding executive compliance with injunctions handed down by the judiciary. Instead of permitting Sauer to address her concerns, Sotomayor cut off the solicitor general, prompting Chief Justice John Roberts to interject and subtly suggest that the associate justice allow Sauer to answer.

“Can I hear the rest of his answer?” Roberts asked.

A decision in the case is not expected until the final weeks of the Supreme Court’s current term, which will end in late June-early July.

Nationwide injunctions are simply the latest tool in the effort to prevent President Trump from implementing his agenda. President Trump was elected. He needs to be allowed to run the country.

Good News

Posted on by

On Wednesday, NBC News reported that overdose deaths in America decreased 27 percent last year.

The article reports:

There were 30,000 fewer U.S. drug overdose deaths in 2024 than the year before — the largest one-year decline ever recorded.

An estimated 80,000 people died from overdoses last year, according to provisional Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data released Wednesday. That’s down 27% from the 110,000 in 2023.

The CDC has been collecting comparable data for 45 years. The previous largest one-year drop was 4% in 2018, according to the agency’s National Center for Health Statistics.

All but two states saw declines last year — with some of the biggest in Ohio, West Virginia and other states that have been hard-hit in the nation’s decades-long overdose epidemic.

Experts say more research needs to be done to understand what drove the reduction, but they mention several possible factors. Among the most cited:

    • Increased availability of the overdose-reversing drug naloxone.
    • Expanded addiction treatment.
    • Shifts in how people use drugs.
    • The growing impact of billions of dollars in opioid lawsuit settlement money.
    • The number of at-risk Americans is shrinking, after waves of deaths in older adults and a shift in teens and younger adults away from the drugs that cause most deaths.

The article notes that drug overdose deaths are still higher than they were before the COVID-19 pandemic.

The article notes:

Naloxone has become more widely available, in part because of the introduction of over-the-counter versions that don’t require prescriptions.

Meanwhile, drug manufacturers, distributors, pharmacy chains and other businesses have settled lawsuits with state and local governments over the painkillers that were a main driver of overdose deaths in the past. The deals over the last decade or so have promised about $50 billion over time, with most of it required to be used to fight addiction.

Hopefully the increased border security under the Trump administration will also help reduce the number of drug overdose deaths.

One Of Many Examples

Posted on by

America First Legal is a 501 nonprofit conservative public interest organization founded in 2021 by Stephen Miller. They have filed numerous lawsuits in an attempt to curb the activities of the “resistance” that is trying to stop the policies the voters asked for when they voted for President Trump. Unfortunately, the lawfare that has been used against President Trump is now being used to halt his agenda.

On Thursday, The Federalist reported:

In March, congressional Republicans formally called for the impeachment of Rhode Island Federal Judge John McConnell Jr. This week, America First Legal (AFL) filed a judicial complaint against him, asking Chief Judge David Barron of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to investigate McConnell.

The AFL complaint describes “apparent conflicts of interest and violations of judicial ethics requirements.” The Federalist has previously detailed some of those concerns.

McConnell presides over the New York v. Trump case in which 22 states and the District of Columbia complained that it was unconstitutional for the Trump administration’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to place a temporary pause on funding, grants, loans, and other financial assistance programs while OMB assessed the programs to make sure taxpayer money was not used to foster diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

They wanted the money unfettered, no questions asked, and McConnell sided with the states by ordering the administration to keep the money flowing.

McConnell didn’t mention that he is a long-time board member and leader at the $31 million nonprofit Crossroads Rhode Island, which gets over half its funding from federal money, largely filtered through state programs. It is a low-income housing developer that aims to address homelessness and dabbles in real estate.

…That is a conflict of interest, AFL says, and judges, by law, must avoid even the “appearance of impropriety.” But AFL argues that it goes beyond appearance for McConnell. Judges must also recuse themselves from a case when they have any interest that could be affected by their decisions.

Already in 2025, Crossroads has received $4.5 million from the state in money that likely came through the federal government.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. With a small amount of research, you can find many relatives of Congressmen and judges whose wives or family members sit on boards or organizations funded by USAID or other government entities. This is part of the corruption that fills the Washington swamp. It needs to stop.

Overlooked By The Media–But Very Important

Posted on by

Can you imagine being charged with breaking a law that you had no idea existed? Not knowing the law is not an excuse. Furthermore, there are some laws so obscure that most of us have broken them at one time or another. Many of these ‘laws’ are not actually laws–they are simply regulations put in place by unelected bureaucrats.

On Thursday, Issues & Insights posted an article about a crime committed in Grand Teton National Park last fall.

The article reports:

Not long after Michelino Sunseri, a professional mountain runner, finished a race across Grand Teton last fall, he found himself on the receiving end of a Justice Department criminal charge. His offense? Running on a closed trail, for which he could end up serving six months in jail.

We are not making this up.

Last Friday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order designed to prevent such gross abuses. It is one of the most important – and underappreciated – actions he’s taken.

The “crime” Sunseri committed wasn’t a federal law passed by Congress. It was a crime invented by the National Park Service – one of some 300,000 federal crimes (although nobody knows exactly how many there are) that unelected bureaucrats have conjured up when writing regulations.

The article notes:

In testimony before a House Judiciary subcommittee last week, GianCarlo Canaparo, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, listed some of the absurdist crimes on the books:

  • It is a crime to sell a tufted mattress unless you have burned nine cigarettes on the tufted part of it.
  • It is a crime to sell a package of bacon unless the packaging includes a transparent window that ‘shall be designed to reveal at least 70% of the length (longest dimension) of the representative slice, and this window shall be at least 11⁄2 inches wide.’
  • It is a crime to submit a design to the Federal Duck Stamp contest if your design does not primarily feature ‘eligible waterfowl.’
  • It is a crime to sell a toy marble across state lines unless it is marked with a warning that says ‘this toy is a marble.’

I can safely attest to the fact that I have never committed any of the above crimes.

The article concludes:

Trump points out another problem with this criminalization overload.

“Overregulation privileges large corporations, which can afford expensive legal teams to navigate complex regulatory schemes, while disadvantaging small businesses and individual Americans and stifling new market entrants.”

Incredibly, we could only find three news outlets that covered this executive order: Reuters, the Daily Signal, and Reason magazine.

Who cares about civil liberties when there’s a Trump tweet to freak out about?

We truly have a President who can identify with those of us who cannot afford a group of lawyers to defend our every move.

 

I Have Many Questions…

Posted on by

On Thursday, The U.K. Daily Mail posted an article about a drug bust on Nantucket Island. Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard are two islands off the coast of Massachusetts that are generally playgrounds for the rich and famous. See map below:

The article reports:

A suspected drug dealer caught up in Nantucket’s biggest ever coke bust has been defended by residents as ‘a person of high character working towards bettering himself.’ 

Locals came out in support of Francisco Fernandez Sanchez, 31, this week after police say they busted him with over 2.5 kg of cocaine alongside an array of drug paraphernalia and scales. 

Residents in the affluent town sent letters claiming Sanchez poses no threat to the community, despite prosecutors saying the seizure that led to his arrest was the largest cocaine bust in the history of Nantucket Island with an estimated street value over $257,000. 

I guess if you are selling drugs, you are at least financially bettering yourself. And he is here legally.

The article continues:

Ahead of a hearing on Tuesday to decide whether Sanchez would be released on bail as he prepares for trial, a number of his friends and family including residents of the liberal billionaires’ enclave submitted letters on his behalf, reports the Nantucket Current. 

The letters reportedly described Sanchez as a man of high character who was attempting to turn his life around. 

Sanchez’ attorney Patrick Callaghan also pleaded with the judge for his release, saying he was in the military in his native Dominican Republic before he moved to the US legally with a green card in 2018. 

Callaghan tried to claim his client was ‘not a danger to the community,’ despite the severity of the charges he faces.  

But Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Diane Freniere was not impressed with the arguments and interrupted Callaghan as he made his case with a blunt rebuttal. 

‘Cocaine kills people,’ she shot back at him – before setting Sanchez’s bail at $75,000 cash. 

Contrast this with the behavior of the people of Martha’s Vineyard when a group of illegal aliens showed up on their island in September 2022.

In September 2022, The U.K. Daily Mail reported:

  • The 50 migrants who were flown into the affluent island by Gov. Ron DeSantis are now being moved to a military base 32 miles away
  • It sparked a widespread cry of outrage from the liberal leaders of the small island in Massachusetts who branded the move ‘inhumane’ 
  • Gov. Charlie Baker announced the decision to transfer the illegal immigrants less than 48 hours after they touched down
  • DeSantis accused critics of his move to fly migrants to Martha’s Vineyard of ‘virtue signaling’, saying their concern for the welfare of the migrants was a ‘fraud’ 

One might wonder why a drug dealer would be so welcome on an exclusive island and a busload of innocent illegal aliens would not be welcome on a similar island nearby.

Getting Rid Of A Really Dumb Car Feature

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The New York Post posted an article about a common-sense decision by Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin.

The article reports:

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin hinted Monday that he’s preparing to roll back one car feature that every driver “hates.”

“Start/stop technology: where your car dies at every red light so companies get a climate participation trophy,” Zeldin tweeted Monday in a post that has since racked up more than 8 million views.

“EPA approved it, and everyone hates it, so we’re fixing it.”

The feature kills internal combustion engines at red lights and has been touted by proponents for being able to conserve fuel and cut down on pollution.

Critics have questioned whether the feature can wear down the car’s battery or engine more quickly.

The “off-cycle CO2 reducing” tech has its origins in a federal rule proposed under President Barack Obama in 2012 — but didn’t take effect until new fuel economy standards to reduce greenhouse gas emissions five years later.

Between 2012 and 2021, the number of vehicles produced with a stop-start feature due to the carbon credits surged from 1% to 45%.

Up to 65% of vehicles had the technology included in new models by 2023.

For those of us who grew up driving clunkers while in high school, this feature is nerve wracking. The carburetor in my 1954 Lincoln used to jam causing the engine to stall. This often happened at stop lights. When my husband’s car shuts off at stop lights, it brings back really bad memories. There were times when we shoved a board into the engine to unstick whatever it was that stuck! That’s what I think of every time we are stopped at a traffic light–I am ready to get the board out of the trunk and go to work!

A Chance For Peace In The Middle East

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Robert Spencer posted an article at PJ Media about President Trump’s meeting with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

The article reports:

On Wednesday morning, during his trip to Saudi Arabia, Trump met with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, who from 2017 until January of this year, was known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani. Al-Sharaa was the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the “Syrian Liberation Group,” a Sunni jihad group that had been linked to al-Qaeda and was working to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

In January 2025, HTS finally attained its goal. Assad fled to Russia. Al-Julani took control in Damascus and announced that he was establishing a regime that would respect the rights of all Syrians. He insisted that he had broken with al-Qaeda years before, and to signify that he was a new man, he shed his nom de guerre and reverted to his birth name. He trimmed his beard, took off his fatigues, and donned a suit.

…In many ways, Trump’s meeting with al-Sharaa is as momentous, and could be more momentous, than his first-term overtures to Kim Jong Un. The two meetings come from the same wellsprings: Trump is attempting to break longstanding logjams and end the status quo that the foreign policy establishment, both inside the U.S. and elsewhere, had come to take for granted.

…So Trump wants to make peace with old foes based on mutual economic interests. He is giving al-Sharaa a chance to demonstrate that he really is no longer a jihadi and wants to build a stable and prosperous Syria. It could happen. The global jihad, although it is ignored everywhere, continues nevertheless. It never goes away. Individuals and states, however, can and do put it aside for considerable periods in order to pursue other interests.

The article concludes:

Nevertheless, Trump’s attempt to create peace based on common interests and move beyond the present logjam is as welcome as it is audacious. Once again, Trump appears to be way ahead of everyone else, as he was when he established the Abraham Accords even as John Kerry was confidently telling the world that such a thing was impossible.

The establishment will howl at Trump’s meeting; that’s only to be expected. The president, meanwhile, is moving ahead with astonishing vision, immense confidence, and considerable imagination. The peace and stability of the Middle East, and of the entire world, are riding upon his success.

President Trump is essentially saying to Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, “Put up, or shut up.” I have no doubt that continuing on the path of murdering Syrians that oppose the regime or aligning with terrorist forces in the Middle East will have dire consequences for Syria. This is their chance to become a successful and prosperous country.

If you are unfamiliar with Robert Spencer, here is his background:

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 30 books, including many bestsellers, such as The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), The Truth About Muhammad, The History of Jihad, The Critical Qur’an, and Muhammad: A Critical Biography. His latest book is Antisemitism: History and Myth, and coming in Nov. 2025 is Holy Hell: Islam’s Abuse of Women and the Infidels Who Enable It. Spencer has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the FBI, the United States Central Command, United States Army Command and General Staff College, the U.S. Army’s Asymmetric Warfare Group, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), the Justice Department’s Anti-Terrorism Advisory Council and the U.S. intelligence community. He is a senior fellow with the Center for Security Policy.

I Love The Welcome Saudi Arabia Gave To President Trump

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Red State reported the following:

President Donald Trump rolled out his favorite songs, “Y.M.C.A.” and “God Bless the USA,” during his speech in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, and those in attendance loved it.

On Tuesday, Trump attended the Saudi-U.S. Investment Forum in Riyadh and spoke to a room full of Saudi business investors with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, in attendance. President Trump spoke about America’s plans for success under his administration and his vision for a peaceful and prosperous Middle East.

Trump opened his speech with Lee Greenwood’s famous patriotic song playing. As the entire song played, the president stood on the stage before he took to the podium.

And as the final line in the song, “God Bless the USA” played, those in attendance went crazy.

Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy said the audience, made up of prominent businessmen from Saudi Arabia and the U.S., “didn’t take their seats” during the entire song.

After his speech, the president was joined on stage by the Saudi Crown Prince as the Village People’s 1978 hit “Y.M.C.A.” played in the background. Those in the room gave the president a standing ovation.

There is a lot going on here. The Saudis were ostracized during the Biden administration. The Biden administration simply could not overlook the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Khashoggi was a prominent dissident and critic of the Saudi government. He is also alleged to have had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that during the Arab Spring was planning to bring down the House of Saud and takeover Saudi Arabia. The plan was to turn the countries in the Middle East that were ruled by dictators into countries run by the Muslim Brotherhood. For a short time, they were successful in Egypt. Considering the relationship between the Biden administration and the Obama administration (which supported the Arab Spring), the Biden administration’s attitude toward the Saudis was not surprising.

During President Trump’s visit, the Saudis also set up a mobile McDonald’s at a press center for covering the event in Riyadh, an apparent nod to the president’s love of the burger restaurant. (article posted at Breitbart)

What we saw in Saudi Arabia was the equivalent of the ostracized middle school student being asked to sit at the ‘cool’ kids’ table at lunch.

When You Put People In Leadership Who Don’t Belong There

Posted on by

The Democratic National Committee is in the process of removing David Hogg as its Vice-Chairman. He was elected on February 1, 2025. He has simply not worked out well in that position.

His past actions should have been a clue for the Democrats.

In April 2024, NewsMax reported:

The PAC started by gun activist David Hogg, whose stated mission is “electing young progressives,” instead burned through $1.4 million — representing nearly half the money raised — on travel, political consultants, and legal fees in 2023.

In fact, the Leaders We Deserve PAC spent less than $235,000 toward its mission of electing Gen Z candidates to office, according to a Breitbart report that scrutinized the organization’s FEC filings.

Hogg and his partner, Kevin Lata, raised more than $3 million in the first year of the PAC’s existence from a wide array of donors with a goal of electing more “youthful, audacious, and charismatic trailblazers.”

…However, according to Breitbart, disbursements went out to just four candidates, including one, Rep. Maxwell Frost, for whom Lata was campaign manager.

Further, Hogg and Lata disbursed nearly $125,000 to a transgender Democrat in Alabama whose opponent in October 2023 won the special election with 65% of the vote, Breitbart reported.

Meanwhile, Hogg paid himself $40,000 while Lata’s take was $50,000 for a few months’ work in 2023; the PAC launched late summer, according to the report.

Actually, he should fit in very well with some of the Democrat party leaders.

On May 13, Townhall reported:

We obviously have no dog in this fight, though some have noted the Soviet-style treatment David Hogg is getting at the Democratic National Committee. This party is a total mess, and the vote to put his ouster as vice chair on the fast track only added another chapter to the ongoing ‘Dems in disarray’ soap opera.

The credentials committee paved the way to remove Hogg, though they claim it’s not about politics. It is—it seems this was done to appease the Native American woman who lost to Hogg (via Semafor):

The DNC’s credentials committee will meet virtually on May 12 to consider the challenge from Kalyn Free, a Native American attorney and party activist who lost a vice chair spot to Hogg at the party’s Feb. 1 meeting.

In her complaint, shared with Semafor by a Democratic source, Free argued that she lost a “fatally flawed election that violated the DNC Charter and discriminated against three women of color candidates,” and asks for “two new vice chair elections.” In February, after several rounds of voting, the race came down to five candidates – Kenyatta, Hogg, Free, and two other women. Kenyatta and Hogg claimed the open spots.

Now you know the rest of the story. I am sure it has nothing to do with David Hogg threatening to primary any Democrat Congressman who did not agree with his attempts to ‘reform’ the party.

The End Of Nationwide Injunctions?

Posted on by

On Monday, Hot Air posted an article about a case the U.S. Supreme Court will be hearing on Thursday.

The article notes how the political opponents of President Trump have repeatedly used the courts to try to prevent him from implementing his agenda:

Since President Trump took office, federal district courts have issued 37 nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch.  That’s more than one a month.  By comparison, during President Obama’s first two years, district courts issued two nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch, both of which were vacated by the Ninth Circuit.  And according to the Department’s best estimates, courts issued only 27 nationwide injunctions­ in all of the 20th century.

Some say this proves that the Trump Administration is lawless.  Not surprisingly, I disagree.  And I would point out that the only case litigated on the merits in the Supreme Court—the so-called “travel ban” challenge—ended with President’s policy being upheld…

The Constitution empowers Congress to create lower federal courts, and in designing a system of 93 judicial districts and 12 regional circuits, Congress set clear geographic limits on lower-court jurisdiction. In our system, district-court rulings do not bind other judges, even other judges in the same district…

Nationwide injunctions not only allow district courts to wield unprecedented power, they also allow district courts to wield it asymmetrically. When a court denies a nationwide injunction, the decision does not affect other cases. But when a court grants a nationwide injunction, it renders all other litigation on the issue largely irrelevant. Think about what that means for the Government. When Congress passes a statute or the President implements a policy that is challenged in multiple courts, the Government has to run the table—we must win every case. The challengers, however, must find only one district judge—out of an available 600—willing to enter a nationwide injunction. One judge can, in effect, cancel the policy with the stroke of the pen.

The article reports:

And the era of nationwide injunctions could come to an end later this week when the Supreme Court hears a case on birthright citizenship. The case probably won’t decide whether birthright citizenship is legal under the 14th Amendment. What the case is really about is the nationwide injunctions different courts have used to block Trump’s executive order on the topic.

I firmly believe that one of the things President Trump is trying to do is to bring America back to the country our Founding Fathers created. We have wandered so far from our Constitution that the road back is going to be bumpy and clogged by people who are making too much money the way things currently are. It would be wonderful if President Trump could bring us closer to the system of government our Constitution created.

No, It’s Not Illegal

Posted on by

On May 14th, The Daily Caller posted an article including Attorney Alan Dershowitz’s comments on whether or not President Trump should accept the gift of an airplane from Saudi Arabia.

The article reports:

Noted attorney Alan Dershowitz on Tuesday detailed two reasons President Donald Trump would probably be able to keep a 747 reportedly being gifted to the United States.

Qatar offered Trump the $400 million Boeing 747-8 for modification into a VC-25 configuration to serve as Air Force One, with the jet being donated to Trump’s presidential library after his term in office ends. Dershowitz, on “The Dershow,” noted that the Constitution’s “emoluments clause,” something cited by some critics, actually would not prohibit the gift to the United States government.

“Okay, here’s what the Constitution says: No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States,” Dershowitz said. “In other words, we don’t have sirs and knights, or anything like that. So we can’t grant titles of nobility and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, that means the president, shall without the consent of Congress, and this is the key, without the consent of Congress, accept any present, emoluments, office or title of any kind whatever from any king, prince or foreign state. Now, obviously, Qatar has the king. Oh, I guess he’s the emir, doesn’t say emir, he’s the emir, I know, I met him three times, the emir of Qatar, I know he’s an emir and I guess he comes under the category of king, prince or foreign state.”

This is how Attorney Dershowitz applies the law:

“Now this means no person shall receive the gift,” Dershowitz said. “We know that gifts are given to governments all the time… when you go to the Oval Office, where the White House, you see all over the place, gifts that have been given by foreign governments to the White House, great portraits of Winston Churchill and other things that are gifts the British government or other governments have been given to the United States. But when the incumbent president or any officer leaves, he doesn’t take the gifts with him, he leaves them. There have been a couple of occasions where the presidents of taken a few gifts, for example, letters they take letters now letters could be worth a fortune… I think presidents have taken some of those, but mostly they go to the Library of Congress or to the Smithsonian or to the presidential libraries.”

“Now presidential libraries are not the property of the president himself or of the former president,” Dershowitz continued. “They are the property of the Smithsonian Institute, the archives. They are the property of the United States of America, and so, if the emir of Qatar or the Qatari state gives the president of the United States a $400 million dollar airplane, that is not a violation of the emoluments clause, it’s perfectly constitutional.”

Dershowitz said that even if Trump were to keep the plane for his personal use, which would possibly make the plane a gift and thus conflict with the constitutional provision, critics of the gift still faced an additional hurdle beside the legal merits when it came to bringing the case in court.

Please follow the link to the article for further details. The bottom line is that this is much ado about nothing–typical for the Democrats.

I’m Skeptical, But I Would Love To See This Work

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Hot Air reported:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is going to meet with the Syrian Foreign Minister on Thursday in Turkey.

President Trump will greet Ahmed Al-Sharaa in Riyadh tomorrow. 

My favorite quote from the article:

Trump will talk to anyone who sincerely wants to talk to him. It’s like his magic power.

Ahmed Al Sharaa has been serving as President of Syria since January of this year. He is from a Sunni Muslim family.

The article notes that he has not been an exemplary leader so far:

By the beginning of March, it was pretty clear a jihadi leader now using his given name – Ahmed Al Sharaa – in a $4000 suit was still a jihadi at heart. Al-Sharaa’s boys were having themselves the rampaging adventures of a lifetime, systematically exterminating Druze and Alawite communities all over northern Syria with impunity. Oh – and trying to find the five or six Jews left in the country.

We haven’t heard much out of the area since, except for reports that detail American and Israeli strikes on targets in the area. Most associated with the ongoing cat and mouse game the Houthis had been playing and the assorted Iranian militias supporting them, who operate freely all through the southern portion of Iraq, Yemen, and Syria, as President Trump noted during his speech in Saudi Arabia today.

I applaud President Trump providing an avenue for Al-Sharaa to reform, but I am skepticall. Any time you are dealing with an Islamist, you need to consider the Islamic concept of taqiyya. This is a concept in Islamic law that translates as “deceit or dissimulation,” particularly toward infidels. It is generally described as lying for the sake of Islam.

However, there may be some possible rewards for making nice to Syria.

To quote Shaun Maguire on X:

The article at Hot Air notes:

This also helps keep Turkey on the spot because, should Al-Sharaa start to see the fruits of cooperation with the US pay off and Syria begins to rise from the dead, he becomes a hero, and there’s nothing more these egotists love than being loved. He won’t let Erdogan interfere with that, whatever he owes him.

The other is the pressure from Saudi Arabia on Syria now. They facilitated this come to Trump moment. The crown prince would take it ill if the jihadi reappeared after making a public spectacle of the Saudis’ belief that he was worth cultivating and his country worth saving.

The Saudis do not take embarrassment lightly.

This is going to be interesting to watch. It would be wonderful to see the Middle East break out in peace.