Monthly Archives: August 2025

The Impact Of President Trump’s Energy Policies

Posted on by

On Saturday, Stephen Moore posted an article at Hot Air discussing the impact of President Trump’s energy policies.

The article notes:

Well, so much for the vaunted renewable energy “transition” to save the planet. This was always a fable. We get 80% of our energy from fossil fuels, and with Donald Trump now in the White House, that ratio is rising, not falling.

A Reuters headline from recent days tells the real story: “US crude production to hit record 13.41 million (barrels per day) in 2025 before falling.”

The data from the International Energy Agency tells the same story about clean natural gas: We’re producing more of it than ever before. Why shouldn’t we? The U.S. has greater access to clean, cheap, reliable and made-in-America natural gas than any other nation. Natural gas is far cheaper and less land-intensive than ugly wind and solar farms that industrialize America’s natural landscape beauty.

All told, American energy in the ground is a $50 trillion treasure chest right under our feet. The commercial value of this abundance is — nearly enough to pay off our entire national debt. We would be lunatic to leave it in the ground.

The rapid revival of America as an energy superpower under Trump should come as no surprise. This is continuation of a 15-year trend thanks to the fracking and horizontal drilling revolution that has nearly tripled U.S. annual production.

The principle of supply and demand applies to fossil fuels.

The article notes:

Crude was over $100 in 2022 and generally ranged between $70 and $85 for the rest of Biden’s term. At $100 a barrel, drillers will search for oil in your backyard. If it were not for Biden’s environmental regulations and the cancellation of vital energy infrastructure, such as the Keystone XL pipeline, we would have produced far more oil under Biden. Gas wouldn’t have gone up to $5 a gallon.

What’s impressive about the Trump oil production spike is that it’s happened even as the global spot price of oil has fallen. In other words, we’re getting the best of both worlds: made-in-America energy AND low prices at the pump. The Energy Information Administration reports forecasts that gas prices will keep falling to below $3 a gallon by next year. That is, unless you live in California, where gas still costs above $5 a gallon.

Let’s not forget the national security benefits from this pro-drilling strategy. More U.S. drilling means less profits for Iran, Russia and other enemies of freedom. It weakens Vladimir Putin’s hand and drives him to the negotiating table since the Russian economy is dependent on natural gas exports for survival.

As I have previously stated, when the crude oil price comes down to $55 a barrel, the Ukraine war will end. It won’t have anything to do with anyone’s negotiating skills–it will be the result of the economic situation in Russia caused by falling oil and gas prices.

What Happens When You Close The Border

Posted on by

On Friday, The Epoch Times posted an article about one consequence of closing the southern border of America to illegal entrants.

The article reports:

The Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration is playing a role in the sharpest decline in monthly remittances to Mexico in more than a decade, analysts say.

According to numbers released this month from the Bank of Mexico (Banxico), income from remittances abroad stood at $5.2 billion in June, a 16.2 percent decrease compared with June 2024.

That represents the largest drop in 13 years, according to a report from BBVA Research.

Remittances in 2024 represented approximately 3.4 percent of Mexico’s gross domestic product, according to the World Bank.

Remittances are transfers of money earned in the United States to such parties as relatives, friends, or business associates abroad. Ninety-nine percent of the remittances sent in the first half of 2025 were made through electronic funds transfers, according to the BBVA report.

The drop occurred after a decade of growth. Between 2013 and 2024, remittances to Mexico almost tripled to $64.7 billion from $23 billion, according to BBVA.

The Big Beautiful Bill includes a 1 percent remittance fee. However, there are easy ways to avoid this fee.

The article reports:

People can send money to their family members in Mexico without wiring it, Valdez said. She said people are finding other ways to deliver money, such as “getting together with the neighbors, getting together with people that are actually traveling and bringing cash.”

Some could also be taking advantage of a new system, the Bienestar card, Valdez said. The bank card system, set up by the Mexican government, can be used for remittances and is advertised as bypassing the 1 percent U.S. tax on remittances because it’s considered a bank-to-bank transfer that doesn’t involve cash.

Some Democrats have argued that the remittances help support communities in the countries they are sent to. However, it should be noted that the remittances can also support drug cartels, particularly in Mexico. These remittances may be one of the ways a family pays to have their child illegally smuggled into the United States.

Another Obama/Biden Scandal

Posted on by

There is an Obama scandal that has not been widely discussed. This is the scandal that is actually the most important one to every American.

On Friday, Issues & Insights reported:

Weren’t we assured that Barack Obama went “into and out of office with not a whiff of scandal”? Yes we were. Former Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen told us so, as did many others. But it wasn’t true. There are many, the most recent a claim that Obama, and then Joe Biden, pressured bank executives to deny services to conservatives. It’s a serious charge that, like the Russia hoax, makes Watergate look like a sandbox squabble.

Here’s what we’ve learned: According to Fox Business, major bank executives said “they were under pressure by the Obama and Biden administrations to deny services to individuals and businesses for political reasons.”

One executive said the “pressures were very, very real. When your regulator gives you a suggestion, it’s not a suggestion, it’s an order. The political stuff is very real, those pressures are real.”

This is known as “political debanking” and is “the involuntary termination of banking services to individuals and organizations based on their political or religious views,” says Todd J. Zywicki, a professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, who further “argues that access to financial services is a prerequisite for exercising constitutional rights.”

…Operation Choke Point was a creation of the Obama Justice Department. Its mission was “to ‘choke out’ companies the administration considers a ‘high risk’ or otherwise objectionable, despite the fact that they are legal businesses,” says a House Oversight Committee report. “The goal of the initiative is to deny these merchants access to the banking and payments networks that every business needs to survive.”

The whistleblowers told Fox that “ambiguity in federal laws was exploited by regulators under the Obama and Biden administrations in order to pursue political objectives. According to one executive, banks were pressured to deny services to certain industries as part of Operation Choke Point and Operation Choke Point 2.0,” which was “carried out by the prudential regulators to target and debank the digital asset ecosystem” during the Biden years.

I personally know someone who was in Washington, D.C. on January 6th. She attended the Trump speech, but did not go to the Capitol–she has stated that she saw Antifa people changing into Trump gear and decided to go back to her hotel. She used her Bank of America debit card to buy a hamburger. Bank of America shared any transactions made in Washington on that weekend with the government. As a result of that transaction, her business PayPal account was canceled. This is not acceptable behavior.

What Exactly Are You For?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article about the loss of Democrat party supporters and members.

The article reports:

…The New York Times’ Shane Goldmacher did a deep dive into the trends of partisan affiliation, partnering with data firm L2 to determine those ebbs and flows. (Full disclosure: L2 partnered with me on my book Going Red gratis and allowed me to use their powerful database.) If Goldmacher’s data is accurate, the census may be the least of Democrat worries.

They are in the middle of a bleed-out that may have no end in sight. They are losing ground in literally every corner of the country:

…In fact, for the first time since 2018, more new voters nationwide chose to be Republicans than Democrats last year.

All told, Democrats lost about 2.1 million registered voters between the 2020 and 2024 elections in the 30 states, along with Washington, D.C., that allow people to register with a political party. (In the remaining 20 states, voters do not register with a political party.) Republicans gained 2.4 million.

On Thursday, Victor Davis Hanson posted an article at American Greatness that might partially explain what is happening to the Democrats.

The article at American Greatness notes:

The Pavlovian Left goes berserk at the mere prospect of each new Trump initiative.

Its escalating reactive venom and hysteria are calibrated to the success of Trump’s latest policy.

Yet the new hard-left Democratic Party offers no counter-agenda to explain its furor.

Still less do Democrats attempt bipartisan efforts to craft shared legislation.

Take foreign policy.

Democrat senators trashed the recent Trump-Putin Alaskan summit as a failure. Then they became depressed when, just days later, an entourage of European leaders and President Zelensky of Ukraine suddenly flew to the White House.

The Euros praised Trump for offering some sort of negotiated pathway to peace after over three years of war and some 1.5 million dead, wounded, missing, and captured on both sides—on Europe’s doorstep.

So why did Democrats object to such negotiations by Trump?

Was the reason that no such thing occurred during the Biden administration, when Putin invaded Ukraine, after his earlier invasions during the Obama era?

What is the left’s alternate plan? The old Biden idea of supplying Ukraine with enough money and arms to keep fighting and dying, but with no path to either victory or a negotiated peace?

Would they prefer a fourth, fifth, or sixth year of war, or an additional one million casualties?

That is just one of many examples listed in the article. We know what the Democrats are against (anything President Trump is for), but what are their policies? Until Americans see solutions rather than griping from the Democrats, they will continue to lose support. We need action, not complaining.

Realizing The Value Of People Who Know How To Fix Things

Posted on by

On May 10, Trade School Secrets posted an article about a significant change in Pell Grants in the One Big Beautiful Bill.

The article reports:

For years, Pell Grants were locked inside the traditional college system.

No matter how outdated, expensive, or ineffective a 4-year degree became — they still got the funding.

Meanwhile, trade schools offering real skills in months instead of years?
Zero access to that same federal money.

Until now.

In a move that just changed the game, Congress approved the Bipartisan Workforce Pell Act, which expands Pell Grant eligibility to short-term workforce training programs. This means that students can now use Pell Grants for programs as short as 8 to 15 weeks, provided they meet certain quality and outcome standards.

Here’s what this means:

    • Students can now get up to $7,395 in free grant money (not a loan)
    • Trade school owners can now tap into millions in new funding streams
    • Programs as short as 8 to 15 weeks now qualify — no need for a 2-year degree
    • The biggest barrier to enrollment, cost is now eliminated for thousands of students

This isn’t theory. It’s policy.

And it’s going to send a tidal wave of enrollments through the doors of trade schools nationwide.

At a time when plumbers, electricians, auto mechanics, welders, and other skilled tradesmen and women are reaching retirement age, there are not enough young people trained or training in those professions to replace them. This will help solve that problem.

Policies Have Consequences

Posted on by

Our Founding Fathers envisioned each state as a laboratory. If a program or policy worked in one state, it would soon be adopted in other states. If it didn’t work, the policy would be dropped. We seem to have forgotten that principle, but businesses are using that idea to decide where to do business.

On Wednesday, Breitbart reported:

Marcus Lemonis, the CEO of Bed, Bath & Beyond, announced on X on Wednesday that his company would no longer open stores in California because the state made it “nearly impossible” for business to succeed.

Remember, Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California, wants to be President so that he can inflict his policies on the entire country.

Marcus Lemonis posted the following on X:

The article concludes:

Lemonis’s statement is the latest pushback by industry against California, which Gov. Gavin Newsom boasts is the world’s fourth-largest economy, but which also currently has the nation’s highest unemployment rate.

The goal of a business is to provide a product or service and to make a profit. If making a profit is not possible in one place, the business will move to another. This might explain why California is losing population and Texas is gaining population. California is a beautiful state with a wonderful climate, but its tax and economic policies make it an undesirable place to live for many Americans.

Who Benefits From Having The National Guard In Washington, D.C.?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Don Surber posted an article on Substack about the actual crime figures in Washington, D.C., and where the crime rate was highest.

These are some of the numbers the article cited:

  • In 2023, the homicide rate for black people in Washington DC was 88.2 per 100,000 people.
  • The homicide rate for non-black people in Washington DC was 6.1 per 100,000 people.

It’s very easy for a person in a non-black neighborhood to complain about the National Guard in Washington–they are not likely to have been impacted by the high crime rate.

The article includes some interesting information about the people who are protesting the presence of the National Guard:

Who are the protesters? From Newport Coast, CA, Tony Seruga ran the numbers:

GPS—there were 318 mobile devices present, including law enforcement and media. 92% have been present at 5 or more past DC protests.

67 appear to likely be federal government employees, with their mobile devices accessing both keycard required garages and federal buildings, including the Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, FBI and Department of the Treasury.

Additionally, 9 of these mobile devices accessed the White House via the Northwest Gate located on Pennsylvania Avenue NW, across from Lafayette Square, 3 or more times in the past 30 days.

Most are local residents of the DMV—with 86.7% of devices spending evenings in a home worth $850,000+ and 34% in homes worth over $2.5 million.

It appears that the people protesting are not the people who were impacted by the original problem. They need to go home, and the people in the neighborhoods that are now heavily patrolled need to be grateful for the help they are receiving. Even with a safer Washington, D.C., brought to you by President Trump, do you believe any of the residents will ever vote for a Republican?

Insanity In Loudoun County, Virginia

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Townhall posted an article about two teenage boys who complained about girls being in their high school locker room.

The article reports:

Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) is suspending two male high school students for complaining about a trans-identified girl using boys’ locker rooms.

LCPS began investigating the matter, which occurred at Stone Bridge High School, back in May. The Virginia school district has a policy allowing students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that correspond to their chosen gender identity.

The father of one of the boys told 7News in May that he was “concerned” about the matter. He stated that the district was investigating his son and another boy to find out whether they had committed sexual harassment by complaining about the female who was using the boys’ locker room.

“And other boys were uncomfortable [with a female in the boys’ locker room],” he told the news outlet. “There were other boys asking the same question. They [LCPS] created a very uncomfortable situation. They’re young, they’re 15 years old. They’re expressing their opinions, and now they’re being targeted for expressing those opinions.”

The female student had been using the boys’ locker room for an extended period of time. In March, she used her phone to record the two boys and their friends in the locker room. “I have a daughter that’s in high school as well, and if there was a male in there videotaping her in the locker room, I would have issues,” the father said.

First of all, cell phones need to be banned from high school locker rooms. High school students are not yet adults and sometimes do dumb things. Don’t tempt them.

The article concludes:

This is how far these people are willing to go to compel the rest of us to pretend that men can become women and vice versa. This action isn’t only about the two boys, but about anyone else who might speak out. This harsh response is intended to send a message: Shut up about gender ideology or we will ruin you.

This is part and parcel of how the authoritarian left approaches the issues. Since they know their views on gender are not popular, they know persuasion won’t work. So they have to resort to using the government to force their will on sane Americans. This is how these people function — and why they must never be in a position to control the government. What happened to these kids shows exactly why they cannot have power.

Any federal funding that goes to that school district needs to be cut.

It Is Being Reported That Elon Musk Has Changed His Mind

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The New York Post posted an article updating Elon Musk’s plans to create a third party. Although I often share his frustration with today’s two political parties, I am glad that he is moving away from that idea. It would be at least ten years before a new political party to become competitive, and I am hopeful that the current leadership in the Republican party is moving toward sanity making a new party unnecessary.

The article reports:

Elon Musk is reportedly putting the brakes on launching his new political party in order to maintain ties with prominent Republicans — especially Vice President JD Vance, whom the billionaire is eyeing to back in 2028.

Musk had vowed that his “America Party” would challenge the two-party system, but he told those close to him that he’d rather focus on his businesses than pull voters away from his Republican allies in Washington, the Wall Street Journal reported.

The Tesla CEO is particularly keen on maintaining ties with Vance, who, it has been widely speculated, will inherit the MAGA movement after President Trump completes his second term.

The article concludes:

Trump and Musk appear to have squashed their beef — at least for now — as Musk has refrained of late from criticizing the president or other Republican politicians.

Vance could massively benefit from Musk’s money and influence if he’s tapped to succeed Trump.

When reached for comment by the Journal, Vance’s team pointed to an interview from earlier this month with conservative outlet the Gateway Pundit in which the vice president said it would be bad for conservatives to break with MAGA and hoped Musk would “come back into the fold” by the midterm elections.

Musk, without commenting further on the Journal’s report, posted on X, “Nothing @WSJ says should ever be thought of as true.

Meanwhile, where are the spending cuts?

Actions Have Consequences

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Townhall posted an article about the initial results of President Trump sending National Guard troops into Washington, D.C. The early results are amazing.

The article reports:

President Trump’s crime crackdown in our nation’s crime-riddled capital city is starting to have an impact, according to new stats released by the city’s police union (which endorsed Trump’s move).  We’ll get to those numbers below, but first, a few thoughts: It has been striking to see many opponents of the ‘Trump takeover’ policy try to argue that there is no real crime crisis in DC, which has been the dishonest party line for years, at this point.  One can oppose Trump’s move as overreach, or at least harbor qualms about it, without resorting to alternate universe denialism.  The city is wracked with crime.  It’s a national embarrassment and disgrace.  In just the last few weeks, a former member of Trump’s DOGE team was brutally beaten by a pack of criminal ‘youths’ as he bravely attempted to prevent yet another carjacking, and a young Congressional intern was shot dead in an all-too-common ‘wrong place, wrong time’ murder.  

The following is a Twitter post by the DC Police Union:

President Trump has been in office for almost seven months. It’s amazing what good leadership can do.

The Early Decisions That Led To The War In Ukraine

Posted on by

The current war in Ukraine began in 2014 when Russia occupied and annexed Crimea from Ukraine. Things remained relatively quiet after that until 2022 when Russia launched its invasion into Ukraine. Ukraine was a part of the Soviet Union from 1922 until its independence in 1991. It’s a good idea to remember that Putin has had his eye on Ukraine for a long time–taking territory in Ukraine would mean that Russia has a warm-water port. That history needs to be considered when attempting to end the current war.

On Tuesday, PJ Media posted an article illustrating how three American Presidents laid the groundwork for this war.

The first President mentioned is Bill Clinton.

The article quotes a Newsweek article:

In April 2023, Newsweek reported:

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton has said he feels a “personal stake” in Ukraine’s war with Russia because of his role in persuading Kyiv to surrender nuclear weapons in the aftermath of the Cold War.

“I feel a personal stake because I got them [Ukraine] to agree to give up their nuclear weapons,” Clinton told Irish broadcaster RTÉ. “None of them believe that Russia would have pulled this stunt if Ukraine still had their weapons,” he said.

Ukraine retained a stockpile of nuclear weapons after the Soviet Union collapsed. In 1994, Ukraine gave up these nuclear weapons, although Kyiv did not have definitive control over Soviet nuclear weapons before signing up for non-proliferation.

The Second President mentioned is Barack Obama.

The article reports:

If your hats consist of tinfoil, have I got a doozy of a conspiracy for you: Imagine if President Trump was caught on a “hot” microphone telling the Russian president that he’d have “more flexibility” after the U.S. election… and then, two years later, did NOTHING when Russia invaded its neighbor.

Why, the liberal media would be outraged! They’d say it’s proof-positive that Trump was a Russian asset all along!

But that’s exactly what happened with President Obama.

This was in March of 2012 — the same year Obama chastised Mitt Romney for naming Russia as our #1 geopolitical threat

Then, two years later, the Russian military rolls into Crimea.

The third President mentioned is Joe Biden. When President Biden declared war on fossil fuels, the price of oil went up and the Russian economy flourished. At that point Russia could afford to invade Ukraine.

The article reports:

Mark Mazur, who left the Treasury Department in September, made a troubling admission last month: “We don’t want lower prices for fossil-fuel buyers. We prefer higher prices.”

All this was a godsend for Russia’s oil empire. European nations, including Germany, increased their dependence on cheap, reliable Russian petro. 

It directly funded the Russian War Machine.

Next was the disastrous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. The deterrence capacity of the American military flew straight out the window when the Taliban ran roughshod in Kabul, making mincemeat of our allies. 

It was an international disgrace.

The third and final error was sleepwalking the Ukrainians into an unwinnable war with its much-larger neighbor by dangling the gift of NATO membership. On Dec. 9, 2021, Reuters ran this story: “Biden assures Zelenskiy that NATO membership in Ukraine’s hands, Kyiv says.”

Ukraine joining NATO was always going to be a flashpoint for Russia. They didn’t want NATO forces or equipment on their border.

President Trump:  Just Say No! 

Posted on by

Author:  R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D.  

 Recently, President Trump raised the question about legalizing marijuana for recreational use by having the federal government reclassify the drug to a different category which would remove government sanctions. As of today, 24 states have already decriminalized marijuana for recreational use. Forty states allow use of marijuana for medical purposes, usually requiring a doctor’s prescription. By contrast, in the European Union, while 28 countries allow medical use, only four countries (Netherlands, Malta, Luxembourg, and most recently Germany) allow recreational use. Before making a decision to further expand access to marijuana, we should consider the pros and cons, as should be done when making any rational decision.

The first question that needs to be answered is why do people want to take marijuana in the first place. A previous national report revealed that approximately 45% of people have tried marijuana at some time in their lives and 15% are regular users. Leaving medical reasons aside, the most often cited reasons for using marijuana are curiosity/experimentation, peer acceptance, reducing stress, enhancing pleasurable activities, lowering sexual inhibitions, and altering depressed/anxious mood. The so-called marijuana high is attributable to the THC levels in the marijuana plant itself. Unfortunately, the level of THC has been increasing dramatically over the years due to selective plant development. For example, the typical THC level in the 1970s was about 4%; whereas now it is 30 % with some samples as high as 90%, making marijuana much more potent and impactful on brain function. Also, the higher the THC levels the greater the likelihood of addiction and related mental health problems.

Research has shown that marijuana use can lead not only to dependency and addiction, but to respiratory and heart problems. More negative health effects are likely to be reported if more people begin using this drug. The greatest concern however, is marijuana’s recognized role as a gateway drug to other substances that are not only more potent and addictive but are likely to remain illegal such as cocaine, meth, etc. The use of deadly fentanyl in these drugs by the cartels is already the leading cause of death in this country of people aged 18 to 35, which is likely to worsen if marijuana use expands.

One could argue, of course, that people should have the right to do what they want with their own bodies including taking mind altering drugs. The question, however, is what is the impact on society when increasing numbers of people are taking these drugs. As China found out during the epidemic of opium use in the 1800s, the results can be devastating to the society as a whole. As the Director of Mental Health Services in the N.C. Department of Correction for many years, I became acutely aware of the connection between drug use and criminal activity. Many drug users resisted rehabilitation and just resigned themselves to being drug addicts incapable of change. We clearly see this today in the expanding homeless population, who willingly live in primitive conditions as long as they can obtain drugs and get high.

All humans encounter stress, anxiety, depressive moods, and other reactions as a normal part of living. The healthy person develops ways of coping with these issues and frustrations and ultimately leads a productive life. Choosing drugs as a way of coping with life’s challenges is not only destructive to the individual but to society as well. Does relying on marijuana make a person more industrious, better able to solve interpersonal problems, more self-confident, more morally responsible or a better spouse or parent? Obviously not. We, as a society should encourage and instruct people in healthy ways of dealing with life’s challenges.

The bottom line is this. Legalizing marijuana will increase access to this increasingly potent drug and create more helpless drug addicts. We have enough people who abuse alcohol as a coping mechanism without adding easy access to an even more potent substance with more addictive potential. By the way, China has been increasing expanding its role in the growing of marijuana in this country. They would surely love to see the use of marijuana expand among our people. A recent article in the Epoch Times related that younger people are beginning to return to religion as a source of meaning in their lives. Let’s hope that this trend will continue since religion has traditionally provided guidance and support for people as they deal with the stresses of life.

So, President Trump, please do not go in the direction of easing access to marijuana, but rather take President Reagan’s advice and “Just say no!”

A Reality Check

Posted on by

On Monday, The Federalist posted an article about the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. The article reminds us that neither Russia or Ukraine can actually win the war decisively.

The article reports:

President Donald Trump’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday didn’t yield the ceasefire deal Trump was hoping for, but there was apparently enough progress made that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and top European leaders are meeting with Trump in Washington today to discuss the possibility of peace negotiations and a deal to end to the war for good.

What might such a deal look like? Simply put, it would consist of territorial concessions in exchange for security agreements. Ukraine would cede portions of Russian-occupied territory in Crimea and the eastern provinces in exchange for a security alliance with the United States and European powers. Trump himself has alluded to this, mentioning “land swaps” ahead of his meeting with Putin on Friday.

Russia’s main goal has always been a warm-water port. The land Russia has currently seized from Ukraine would provide that port. If Ukrainian President Zelensky would make territorial concessions to give Russia a warm-water port, the war would end. However, the corruption that has provided a lavish lifestyle to the ruling class in Ukraine would also end. That is probably one of the major sticking points in the negotiations.

The article concludes:

And here we come to heart of the difference between Biden and Trump’s view of the war, and of foreign policy broadly speaking. The establishment foreign policy experts that ran things during Biden’s term (and Obama’s) think the world operates according to theories and abstractions rather than solid realities like history and geography. They thought they could simply invoke something like sovereignty, without grappling with the possibility that sovereignty and territorial integrity, given Ukraine’s history and its untenable borders, might be mutually exclusive.

That mindset is representative of an entire class of policymakers in Washington who fail to grasp that the outcome of a war — any war — is far more likely to be decided by something as unmovable as a mountain range or a warm-water port than vague invocations of sovereignty. Likewise, a common language or a shared 1,000-year history between warring peoples are going to be more important factors than the bureaucratic minutiae of a multi-lateral security agreement drafted in Brussels.

After years of attrition warfare between Ukraine and Russia, bankrolled largely by western powers, the underlying factors in the conflict have not changed — and they never will. An adjustment of Ukraine’s borders, together with security guarantees from the U.S. and Europe, is actually in everyone’s best interests, not just Russia’s. Ukraine as it’s currently constituted is indefensible, as events have shown. Lasting peace will require grappling with the history of Ukraine’s borders and adjusting them to reflect solid realities — not some hazy platitudes about democracy and sovereignty. Those kind of abstractions are a big reason we’re in this mess, and rejecting them is the only way we’re going to get out of it.

It’s time that western nations stop funding this carnage.

Do We Really Need To Continue To Fund This

Posted on by

On Monday, The Washington Free Beacon reported that the funding for The U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) will need to be reauthorized by the United Nations at the end of August. After the total failure  of UNIFIL to avoid Hezbollah from arming southern Lebanon, I don’t think their mission should be reauthorized. The article notes that UNIFIL receives between $400 million and $500 million each year, with the United States shouldering roughly 30 percent of the burden.

The article reports:

Trump administration officials are closely assessing UNIFIL’s expenditures and activities before awarding fresh U.S. cash to the force, the sources told the Free Beacon. Those activities include a host of DEI initiatives UNIFIL has publicly promoted in recent months that run counter to President Donald Trump’s ongoing push to eradicate taxpayer spending on progressive ideological projects.

UNIFIL in July of this year, for instance, initiated a training session on “gender mainstreaming in military operations” alongside the agency’s “gender unit” after a request from the Lebanese Army.  But the agency’s focus on gender issues did not begin with that training session.

The agency employs a “Military Gender Advisor” who discussed hiding in a bunker in October 2024 when Israel retaliated against Hezbollah, the terrorist organization UNIFIL is meant to prevent from attacking Israel, in a videotaped interview. Its navy boasts a “Gender Task Force,” founded in 2022 “to boost women’s role in peacekeeping.” And UNIFIL maintains “gender-sensitive accommodations” at its bases, featuring its facilities online amid a 2023 push “for more diverse and efficient operations.”

UNIFIL member Major Rajinish Pandey said in a May 2023 video diary that his “job is to maintain gender diversity and conduct all civic activities planned in the area of responsibility.” In another May 2023 X post, UNIFIL touted Lt. Cmdr. Suzanne van Opstal, a “Military Gender Adviser at @UNIFIL_” whose job it was to emphasize “gender perspectives in military ops.” A similar post from March 2024 explained how “more gender-balanced, diverse and inclusive security institutions is vital to promoting peaceful and inclusive societies.”

Somehow their goals don’t mention keeping southern Lebanon free of Hezbollah weapons.

The article concludes:

“This campaign to renew UNIFIL is a last ditch effort by the French government and their supporters in the State Department ‘Deep State,'” a senior congressional staffer briefed on the efforts to renew UNIFIL’s mandate told the Free Beacon. “They’re trying to undo President Trump’s DOGE-ing of foreign assistance, his global campaign to dismantle wokeness and DEI, and his crackdown against Iranian terrorists.”

UNIFIL’s recent bid to integrate Chinese forces along Israel’s northern border has also driven opposition to renewing the agency’s mandate. Chen Chuandong, China’s ambassador to Lebanon, announced earlier this week he was “briefed by Major General Diodato Abagnara, Head of Mission and Commander of UNIFIL of its operation.” During that sit down, Chuandong “pledged China’s continued support” to the agency.

I really would like to get rid of the United Nations, but in the meantime, let’s stop funding its corruption.

The Quest For Honest Elections

Posted on by

On Monday, The Daily Caller reported the following:

President Donald Trump said in a Monday Truth Social post that he will lead the movement to get rid of mail-in ballots and “inaccurate” voting machines ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Trump wrote that he plans on signing an executive order on the matter to help bring “honesty” to the upcoming midterm elections. The president added that elections “can never be honest” if they include mail-in ballots.

Getting rid of mail-in ballots is not a new idea. In April 2020, The Wall Street Journal reminded us:

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” That quote isn’t from President Trump, who criticized mail-in voting this week after Wisconsin Democrats tried and failed to change an election at the last minute into an exclusively mail-in affair. It’s the conclusion of the bipartisan 2005 report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker III.

There are times when mail-in ballots are necessary, and allowances need to be make for those times–military personnel stationed away from their home states, people who are not physically able to make it to the voting places, etc. However, in some instances in recent elections, the number of mail-in ballots was greater than the number of eligible voters in an area. That should never happen.

It’s time to get back to elections we can trust.

Blocking An Important Investigation

Posted on by

On Sunday, Just the News reported that the Internal Revenue Service, under President Trump is opposing an investigation into the Clinton Foundation. The opposition is based on procedural and administrative law.

The article reports:

A U.S. Tax Court judge has tentatively scheduled a Dec. 1 trial allowing two whistleblowers to show they were wrongly denied an award for identifying alleged tax irregularities inside Bill and Hillary Clinton’s foundation, but the case is meeting resistance from an unexpected source: the Trump administration. 

The Internal Revenue Service under Trump filed a motion last week in the case brought by retired federal agent John Moynihan and private fraud expert Larry Doyle seeking to dismiss the case. Judge Alina I. Marshall set a deadline of September 15 for the petitioners to respond to that motion. The IRS also filed leave for an extension of time to file the Administrative Record with the court.

The agency argued that, as a matter of administrative and procedural law, the judge should not let the case proceed to trial because after an initial review, the IRS declined to look into the whistleblower complaint and, therefore, the plaintiffs don’t have standing to sue.

“In this case, the Whistleblower Office denied petitioners’ claims because the petitioners’ claims were never considered in an IRS action. Here, the Whistleblower Office forwarded petitioners’ claims to a classifier,” the IRS motion to dismiss argued last week “Following the classifiers’ preliminary review, the Classifier declined to forward petitioners’ claims to exam and recommended that it be forwarded to the CI [criminal investigation] division.

“The IRS did not proceed with any potential action when it investigated petitioners’ claims,” the IRS added.

The article notes:

The effort by the IRS to thwart the whistleblower case from going to trial was filed the same week Just the News reported that a bombshell memo recently uncovered by FBI Director Kash Patel shows the Obama Justice Department and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe roadblocked three separate probes into possible pay-to-play corruption allegations against the Clinton Foundation.

“Shut it down,” Obama Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates was quoted as saying in March 2016 in the memos.

You can read that memo here:

…Doyle told Just the News the latest twist is just another example of the resistance the government has displayed to investigating the Clinton Foundation over many years.

“Not surprising that the IRS would seek to dismiss our case in this fashion simply because that is the same tactic the IRS deployed in our initial case ongoing now almost 6 years in US Tax Court and growing more serious everyday,” he said.

At some point Americans are going to get totally fed up with the two-tiered justice system and the torches and pitchforks are going to come out.

Coming Very Late To The Party

Posted on by

As the pressure mounts on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to end the war in Gaza, the countries who are supporting the idea of a Palestinian State seem to be overlooking one thing–the activities of the people of Gaza on October 7, 2023.

On August 14th, The Jewish News Syndicate reported:

With the second anniversary of the Hamas-led massacre of Oct. 7 looming, António Guterres, U.N. secretary-general, listed the terror organization for the first time in the annual “Report of the Secretary-General on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence,” which also put Israel and Russia “on notice.”

“Hamas was listed on the basis of information verified by the United Nations in 2024, indicating reasonable grounds to believe that some hostages taken to Gaza were subjected to different forms of sexual violence during their time in captivity,” the United Nations stated, “and clear and convincing information that sexual violence also occurred during the attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, in at least six locations.”

Though the U.N. release states there is “reasonable” evidence of such violence against captives and “clear and convincing” evidence of such violence on Oct. 7, Guterres’s report states the reverse.

In the documentary film “Screams Before Silence,” the sexual violence of October 7th is reported. The evidence is shown. The testimonies are given. There is no reason for the United Nations to wait almost two years before condemning the behavior.

Where is the United Nations’ cry for the release of the hostages held by Hamas that are still alive?

One of the major players in the United Nations is the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. This is a group of 57 nations (48 are Muslim-majority countries) that is a very powerful voting bloc in the United Nations. Because of this voting bloc, no action will ever be taken against a Muslim country that violates human rights. This voting bloc is also working to have the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights include an end to free speech and a penalty for blasphemy. Under Sharia Law, blasphemy has a very loose definition that can be applied to anyone making an unfavorable observation about Islam.

Any country supporting the formation of a Palestinian State is asking for the formation of a terrorist state funded by nations that are supposedly against terrorism.

 

The Long-Term Hidden Impact Of Covid

Posted on by

The biggest impact of the Covid epidemic was the loss of trust in our government, the medical community, and the media. So much of what we were told about the virus and the vaccine turned out to be false. However, there are other less obvious consequences of the epidemic and the way it was handled.

The two-week shutdown probably did nothing to ‘flatten the curve.’ It did, however, flatten the economy and end the beginning of an economic boom. It also resulted in one of the largest transfers of wealth in America’s history. That transfer of wealth went from the lower-and-middle-income earners to the wealthy. Unfortunately, I suspect that there may be some people with nefarious intentions that will attempt to repeat that template in the future. However, in my opinion, the economic impact of Covid will not be as lasting as some of its sociological effects.

Before Covid, investing in office space was a relatively safe bet. Workers were in their offices almost every day, and there was a comradery among workers. School children were in their classrooms daily, learning social skills and forming friendships. Kindergarten children and elementary school children especially needed to be in school with their peers. Being out of school for almost a year in some cases impeded their social development and probably their language skills. After Covid, when the children returned to school they were masked, as were their teachers. The masks impeded their ability to read facial expressions and to understand fully what was being said to them. Not only were the preventative properties of the masks questionable, there was also the challenge of keeping a mask clean on a young child for an extended period of time. High School students were denied certain social milestones—class trips, proms, competitive sports, graduation ceremonies, and social interaction. The young adults who were in high school at that time (a generation that was already leaning toward texting rather than actual conversation) grew accustomed to socialization through electronics rather than in person. The comradery in schools and offices was lost.

Can we regain any of our losses? Yes. We have already begun. As office workers return to the office, the team spirit will again emerge. As companies realize the value of having people physically present in the office, socialization will begin again, and commercial real estate will rebound.

Our plans to combat Covid failed on many levels. However, they provide a clear blueprint of what not to do in the case of a future epidemic.

The Heart Of The Matter

Posted on by

On Friday, The Daily Signal posted an article listing three major discoveries in the investigation of the Russia Hoax.

The article lists the first of the three as ‘A Team Sport,’ reporting:

“I know that this activity is on a fast-track,” Rogers (National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers) wrote. Yet he expressed “concerns,” such as whether his team “had sufficient access to the underlying intelligence and sufficient time to review that intelligence.”

“I know that you agree that this is something we need to be 100% comfortable with before we present it to the President—we have one chance to get this right, and it is critical that we do so.”

…Clapper (then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper) responded by stating that “it is essential we … be on the same page, and are all supportive of the report—in the highest tradition of ‘that’s OUR story, and we’re stickin’ to it.’”

The article includes a screenshot of the email Director Rogers sent to DNI Clapper. As more information comes to light, I think we are going to see Mike Rogers as a hero in this mess.

The second discovery was the leaking of classified information in an attempt to indict President Trump.

The article notes:

According to a June 2023 FBI memo, Schiff approved leaking classified information to smear Trump.

The staffer told the FBI that “SCHIFF stated the group would leak classified information which was derogatory to President of the United States DONALD J. TRUMP. SCHIFF stated the information would be used to indict President TRUMP.”

One attendee of the meeting “stated this would be illegal and, upon hearing his concerns, unnamed members of the meeting reassured [him] that they would not be caught leaking classified information.”

There was no concern for the legality of what they were doing–only a concern for whether or not they would get caught.

The third item the stopping of an investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

The article reports:

On Wednesday, Just the News published another declassified memo from 2017, a timeline revealing how top-level intelligence officials directed the suppression of an investigation into the Clinton Foundation during the 2016 election. According to the timeline, analysts attempted to investigate claims of a Clinton Foundation pay-to-play corruption scheme in August 2015, based on the reporting in Peter Schweizer’s book “Clinton Cash,” published that May.

When agents inquired about the investigation, their superiors said other agents were already investigating the matter.

Yet superiors like former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates prevented an investigation, according to the timeline.

If nothing else, the article at The Daily Signal illustrates the reason we have to clean house in the intelligence agencies in Washington. I hope the Trump administration is up to the task.

What’s In A Name?

Posted on by

The word of the day is “gerrymandering.” It is a technique long used by the Democrat party to ensure that Republicans don’t get elected to Congress. Lately, the Republicans have figured out that they can play that game too.

On Thursday, the Tilting At Windmills website on Substack reported:

The term “gerrymandering” has become a big part of the recent news cycle. Mostly, it’s been a yawn for me. Both sides do some degree of gerrymandering, but it’s only a problem when the other side does it.

Texas, however, was engaging in a little bit of it that would oust Rep. Jasmine Crockett and help Republicans snag a few more seats in the midterms, where the president’s party typically loses a bit of ground.

And people lost their minds over it, acting like this has never happened anywhere else, and that it’s somehow the most horrible thing in the world despite the pile of examples of Democrats doing it.

Politico, however, went a slightly different direction in their headline for a story about the situation that reads, “Democrats try to separate their tactical use of redistricting from that of Republicans.”

That’s right, it’s not gerrymandering that Democrats do. It’s “tactical use of redistricting.”

And understand, the word “tactical” isn’t anywhere else in the piece, so that’s Politico’s choice of words there, not a quote from someone like JB Pritzker or some other Democrat trying to deflect.

No, that’s their covering fire.

On August 6th, John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted a chart showing the impact of gerrymandering:

The chart shows why gerrymandering is important and how it impacts Congress. Let’s end tactical use of redistricting!

Slowing Down A Major Part Of The Money Laundering In Washington

Posted on by

Some of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) spending cuts are actually happening.

On Friday, Yahoo News reported:

A federal appeals court on Wednesday lifted an injunction that required the U.S. State Department to continue making foreign aid payments, handing a victory to President Donald Trump.

In a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said a lower court erred by ordering the Trump administration to restore foreign assistance payments previously approved by Congress.

Trump imposed a 90-day pause on all foreign aid on January 20, the same day he was inaugurated for a second term in the White House. His executive order was followed by aggressive moves to gut USAID, the main U.S. foreign aid agency, including by placing much of its staff on leave and exploring bringing the formerly independent agency under the State Department.

Two nonprofit groups that receive federal funding, AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network, brought litigation alleging Trump’s funding freeze was unlawful.

U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, ordered the Trump administration to pay nearly $2 billion in outstanding aid to its humanitarian partners worldwide.

Writing for the two-judge majority, Circuit Judge Karen Henderson said the nonprofit groups “lack a cause of action to press their claims” and therefore failed to satisfy the requirements for an injunction.

The article concludes:

A spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget, the White House’s budget office, said the ruling stops “radical left dark money groups” from “maliciously interfering with the president’s ability to spend responsibly and to administer foreign aid in a lawful manner in alignment with his America First policies.”

The problem with foreign aid is that it does not always get to the people it was intended for or to the places it was supposed to go. In many cases, America has built palaces for dictators while the people in their country starved. In a country ruled by a tyrant, it is very difficult to get foreign aid money to the people who need it.

The Voice Of The Public Gets Results

Posted on by

On Thursday, I posted an article about the Toronto Film Festival refusing to show the movie “The Road Between Us: The Ultimate Rescue,” which documented the story of retired Israel Defense Forces General Noam Tibon, who set out to save his family and others during Hamas’ deadly attack, in which 1,200 people were killed and 251 were taken hostage. There was considerable backlash when the decision not to show the film was announced.

On August 14th, the following was posted on Twitter:

When people speak out, the truth has a chance to be heard.