Archive for the ‘Foreign Policy’ Category

After reading Tim Morrison’s op-ed, one wonders who’s making these sloppy accusations. My first instinct is to blame it on Democrats. That’s because they’ve been throwing out nasty rumors about President Trump since he took office.

According to Morrison’s op-ed, “It has been alleged by multiple officials of the Obama administration, including in The Post, that the president and his then-national security adviser, John Bolton, ‘dissolved the office’ at the White House in charge of pandemic preparedness. Because I led the very directorate assigned that mission, the counterproliferation and biodefense office, for a year and then handed it off to another official who still holds the post, I know the charge is specious.”

This fits the Democrats’ deceitful theme that President Trump is flying by the seat of his pants with this crisis. While I can’t give President Trump a 10 on his handling of the virus, there’s certainly plenty to give him credit for. Let’s start with his travel bans with China and Europe. The travel ban with China is especially important.

While Democrats were holding the trial for President Trump’s far-fetched impeachment, President Trump put the China travel ban in place. Joe Biden accused President Trump of being xenophobic.

Now, Tim Morrison has first-hand proof that this accusation is false. The part of the NSC that Joe Biden and other Democrats said was closed was false from the start. Morrison knows because he ran that office before handing it off to another person, who is still running that office. I don’t know of better proof than that. This is important:

As The Post reported in 2015, from the Clinton administration to the Obama administration’s second term, the NSC’s staff “had quadrupled in size, to nearly 400 people.” That is why Trump began streamlining the NSC staff in 2017.

Though Morrison didn’t say this, I suspect that the main reason for the downsizing the NSC is because that’s where major parts of the Swamp lived. It makes sense, therefore, that the Swamp hit the Trump administration for eliminating the NSC, which is a part of the Swamp’s operation. Videos like this are just part of the Democrats’ smear campaign:

At a time when we need people coming together, Democrats are engaging in smear campaigns. How pathetic.

Joe Biden tried to sell himself as a leader on Wednesday. Because large portions of Biden’s speech seemed plagiarized, conservatives wondered why Biden wasn’t scrutinized for the 2009-10 outbreak of the H1N1 Swine Flu. Before we get into the H1N1 statistics of 2009-10, let’s check the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus statistics website.

According to that website, US health officials have confirmed 2,174 coronavirus infections. That ranks the US eighth in the world. Of the 5,429 deaths worldwide attributed to coronavirus, just 41 are from the United States. That’s seventh in the world, far behind 3,075 in Hubei, China, 1,266 in all of Italy and 514 in Iran.

Early in his speech on the coronavirus, VP Biden said “We will lead by science. The World Health Organization has now officially declared COVID-19 a pandemic. Downplaying it, being overly dismissive or spreading misinformation is only going to hurt us…” Let’s focus on the “being overly dismissive” portion of that sentence for a moment.

This chart shows how much deadlier the 2009-10 H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic was than this virus:

In the US 2009-10 Swine Flu Pandemic, 60,000,000 people got infected. Over 12,000 people died. Coverage of the pandemic was virtually nonexistent. President Obama didn’t declare a national emergency until months after Swine Flu had been detected. Here’s the current top-of-the-page headlines on Drudge:

I’d say that someone’s a little freaked out. Six patients per bed? That might happen if we didn’t flatten the curve. Thankfully, President Trump restricted travel from China and Europe. If he hadn’t done that in January (while Democrats were trying him for impeachment), we would’ve had a much bigger explosion of COVID-19 cases.

Sleepy Joe said that shutting off travel is racist and xenophobic. He’s more worried about winning popularity contests than he’s worried about saving lives. Joe’s policy, as stated in his speech, is to work with other countries so we don’t get shut out from the family of nations.

President Trump’s policy is to prevent the loss of American lives to the greatest extent possible. Period. With President Trump, America First isn’t just about economics. His job, as he sees it and as Americans see it, it to put America first in all aspects of life without apologies.

David Gergen’s op-ed offers insight into a Biden administration:

For months, commentators have wondered whether there will be a return to normality after President Trump leaves office. In his address Thursday on the coronavirus pandemic, Joe Biden left no doubt that if elected, that’s exactly what he intends. His speech was for the most part well crafted, his ideas were reasonable, his words calm and reassuring, and he related well with working people and the vulnerable. In short, this was a classic presidential speech.

Biden’s speech was, for the most part, plagiarized from President Trump’s speech. (Old habits die hard. Think Neil Kinnock.) Does that mean that Gergen likes President Trump’s policies?

The MSM protected President Obama. The MSM constantly attack President Trump for making the right decisions. President Trump isn’t politically correct. He just makes terrific decisions. I prefer a leader that makes the right decisions frequently over a follower (Biden) who plays nice with others. Democrats want to be liked. Republicans strive to be right.

According to this article, the Chinese have threatened the US in a dangerous, unacceptable way. According to the article, “In an article in Xinhua, the state-run media agency that’s largely considered the mouthpiece of the party, Beijing bragged about its handling of COVID-19, a virus that originated in the city of Wuhan and has spread quickly around the world, killing nearly 5,000 people and infecting thousands more. The article also claimed that China could impose pharmaceutical export controls which would plunge America into ‘the mighty sea of coronavirus.'”

Mike Bloomberg and Joe Biden are China sympathizers. They’ve partnered to defeat President Trump. Considering Bloomberg’s and Biden’s China first policies, this morning’s news is unacceptable. This news is particularly worrisome considering how dismissive Joe Biden has been. This video is the height of dismissiveness:

President Trump took tons of criticism from Democrats for slapping tariffs on China. He was right in exposing the Chinese manufacturing dominance. If not for the efforts of President Trump, we wouldn’t have learned about the US’s reliance on China for our health care needs:

Though the United States is a global leader in research, much of the manufacturing of life-saving drugs has moved overseas. The last American manufacturing plant to make a key component in penicillin shuttered in 2004. Since then, Chinese pharmaceuticals companies have moved in and taken over, supplying between 80 percent and 90 percent of U.S. antibiotics, 70 percent of acetaminophen and about 40 percent of heparin, according to Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations.

This situation must be fixed immediately. Joe Biden has kissed China’s backside too often to stand up to China. It requires a president with a titanium spine, which President Trump has, to fix this situation. President Trump already has stood up to China. It’s a certainty that he’d stand up to them again. It’s virtually certain that Biden wouldn’t stand up to them.

Sen. Marco Rubio is aware of the problem:

Rubio said Beijing’s comments should concern all Americans and that China is keenly aware that in a moment of crisis “they can threaten to cut us off from our pharmaceutical supplies, they could trigger a domestic problem here that would make it difficult or us to confront them.” “It’s a tremendous amount of leverage,” Rubio said.

It’s time the US stood up to China once and for all. They need us much more than we need them. Let’s teach them that we’re totally willing to use leverage against them by pulling our manufacturing plants out of China. With China’s economy on the rocks, let’s see who blinks first. We’ve already seen who blinked first the last time during the Phase One trade talks.

Our health systems are superior to China’s. We have plenty of raw materials, manufacturing capacity and innovation, too. If China wants to get into a fight over this, let’s let them know in no uncertain terms that they’d better prepare to lose that fight.

What’s clear is that Bernie’s agenda should be rejected entirely. Despite his protestations, Bernie isn’t a Democrat Socialist. He’s a Marxist through and through. He isn’t just proposing socialist ideas, though that’s part of Bernie’s schtick. Bernie’s plan is to radically transform the USA into the former USSR. How do I know? Because he’s given us tons of hints as to who he is.

He honeymooned in the former Soviet Union. He thinks that Fidel Castro was a philanthropist because he started a literacy program. (I’m being sarcastic about that.) Bernie’s Democrats want to eliminate private wealth, then give it to the government. Bernie’s Democrats, starting with AOC + 3, want to determine how much money people are supposed to have. It’s amazing that Bernie’s ok with some people getting rich (think of himself) but thinking that others being wealthy is the nastiest type of greed imaginable.

Bernie wants to implement the Green New Deal. The GND won’t save the planet but it’s exactly what Putin wants. That’s because it tightens Russia’s grip on Europe by cutting off reliable supplies of natural gas to former Eastern Bloc nations and into Europe. Why doesn’t Bernie understand that Putin loves a timid US?

Bernie’s policies will make the U.S. poorer. Any policy based on the principle that the government does things better than the private sector is foolish. Trusting the government to provide consistent competence is like betting on the Chicago Cubs to win the World Series once a decade. Let’s get serious. One thing that is serious is the money he’s raising:

“The senator’s multi-generational, multiracial working class coalition keeps fueling his campaign for transformational change a few bucks at a time,” Sanders’ campaign manager Faiz Shakir said in a statement. He said that, of the more than 2 million donations received this month, more than 1.4 million were from voters in Super Tuesday states.

Let’s return to Bernie’s agenda. Getting rid of fossil fuels strengthens Putin and cripples the US economy. Why should we decide to impose such an unnecessary penalty on families? That’s downright foolish.

Whenever Democrats need to distract attention away from their vulnerable members for their questionable votes, people can count on Nancy Pelosi providing that distraction. When Pelosi ripped up her copy of President Trump’s SOTU Address, she did it to distract attention away from her vulnerable freshmen.

Her freshmen promised to fix health care. Freshman Democrats failed that test miserably. Democrat freshmen promised to lower prescription drug prices. Democrats failed on that, too. Democrat freshmen told voters that they didn’t Pelosi for Speaker. Some of those freshmen voted for Pelosi to be Speaker. Freshmen Democrats that didn’t vote for Pelosi for Speaker voted to initiate the impeachment inquiry. These freshmen Democrats voted for both articles of impeachment, too.

Now, Pelosi has written a dishonest op-ed that the Washington Post has published. In the op-ed, Pelosi wrote “President Trump abused the power of his office to pressure a foreign power to help him cheat in an American election.” It’s impossible to know whether President Trump pressured “a foreign power to help him cheat in an American election” since that election is 9+ months away. Is Pelosi clairvoyant? Or is she just lying again? I suspect it’s the latter.

Further, it’s virtually impossible for presidents to abuse their power in setting foreign policy. Since we’ve proven that President Trump didn’t “pressure a foreign power to help him cheat in an American election”, then the only matter on the table is setting US foreign policy. The first sentence in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution emphatically states that “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” This is important to note because of something Jeff Dunetz wrote in this post explaining why Lt. Col. Vindman was reassigned out of the NSC. (Make sure you read Jeff’s entire article. It’s the type of information you won’t get from CNN, MSDNC or other MSM outlets.) Here’s Lt. Col. Vindman’s opening statement to the HPSCI:

Jeff’s article highlights a briefing Sen. Ron Johnson had in Ukraine. Here’s what Jeff quoted from Johnson’s letter:

I had just finished making the point that supporting Ukraine was essential because it was ground zero in our geopolitical competition with Russia. I was surprised when Vindman responded to my point. He stated that it was the position of the NSC that our relationship with Ukraine should be kept separate from our geopolitical competition with Russia. My blunt response was, “How in the world is that even possible?

It’s clear that Lt. Col. Vindman thought that the NSC, not President Trump, was in charge of setting foreign policy. It’s apparent because of testimony he gave to the House Intel Committee:

Vindman testified that an “alternative narrative” pushed by the president’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, was “inconsistent with the consensus views of the” relevant federal agencies and was “undermining the consensus policy.”

Like Pelosi, Lt. Col. Vindman thinks that President Trump doesn’t set US foreign policy. The Constitution that Pelosi intermittently expresses praise for disagrees. The Lt. Col. Vindmans of the world serve the president to implement his foreign policy. But I digress.

I admit that I paid a ton of attention to Pelosi’s stunt. I don’t regret it, though, because there’s plenty of time to punish freshmen Democrats for voting “to initiate the impeachment inquiry and voting for both articles of impeachment.” We have 9+ months left to make the case for firing Pelosi’s Democrats. Let’s make the most of that time.

The only stories that the MSM is covering are impeachment, John Bolton’s kiss-and-tell manuscript and the coronavirus epidemic. Let’s explore a theory about Bolton’s kiss-and-tell manuscript. Let’s assume for the sake of just this article that Bolton is telling the truth. (Anything’s possible, right?)

It’s entirely possible that President Trump told him that at some point. We know that President Trump told Don McGahn to fire Mueller. We know that McGahn didn’t follow President Trump’s orders because Mueller didn’t get fired.

Imagine how upset Bolton must feel. First, President Trump publicly ignored his advice on meeting with North Korea. Next, President Trump didn’t follow through with tying military aid to investigating the Bidens. Finally, President Trump unceremoniously fired Bolton.

A man with Bolton’s pride can only take so much humiliation. Why shouldn’t we think that he’d try and lash out at President Trump? Why shouldn’t we think that this is just Bolton’s best shot at complicating President Trump’s life?

While Bolton’s book jumps off the shelf, Democrats continue playing their anti-American games. It’s obvious that Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Chuck Schumer care more about winning elections than they care about doing what’s right for this nation. If they cared about putting America first, they wouldn’t have pushed this evidence-free impeachment. Remember this?

The Mueller Report showed that there wasn’t any Russian collusion. Thus far, Democrats haven’t shown any proof that President Trump did anything illegal. They’ve offered speculation. They’ve insisted that they’ll have bombshell testimony if only Bolton would testify. That’s just additional speculation. It isn’t proof.

It’s time to put a wooden stake through this impeachment vampire’s heart. Impeachment is just the Democrats’ latest vehicle to kill the Trump administration. That’s what happens when Democrats put a higher priority on winning elections than on doing what’s right.

This weekend, John Bolton teamed with Sen. Schumer by saying that President Trump “told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens.”

This isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. The overwhelming evidence disproves Ambassador Bolton’s accusation. First, the transcript shows that aid wasn’t discussed during the call. Next, President Trump and President Zelenskiy talked about investigating Hunter Biden. Third, Lt. Col. Vindman testified that the transcript of the July 25th phone call was “essentially accurate.” Fourth, Ambassador Sondland admitted under cross-examination from Rep. Mike Turner that he just presumed that there was a quid pro quo:

It’s understandable that Ambassador Bolton would make this statement. He wants to sell lots of books. Selling out President Trump is a great way of generating that interest. It’s understandable why Sen. Schumer believes, at least publicly, that Bolton is telling the truth. He wants to force the calling of witnesses.

Mostly, Sen. Schumer wants to force some Republican senators into a difficult vote. He wants to pressure them as much as possible because he wants to be the majority leader. Also, he wants to keep 3 of his senators — Klobuchar, Sanders and Warren — off the campaign trail, especially Sanders. If people can’t see that the DNC is trying to rig the election against Sen. Sanders, then they’re blind as a bat.

The NYTimes article reads mostly like a gossip column, which is what Bolton’s book is likely to be. That isn’t unique to Mr. Bolton. Books written by DC insiders frequently are about gossip. It’s usually portrayed as giving readers an inside look into an administration.

Sen. Schumer knows that the transcript is the most accurate information on what President Trump’s policies were. Multiple people on the call said it’s accurate. Nowhere did President Trump connect lethal military supplies with investigations. Ambassador Sondland verified that there wasn’t a connection. At what point does this information reach a tipping point?

At what point should common sense and verified proof overtake gossip? At what point should we tell Mr. Bolton to leave the stage and tell him he should peddle his gossip elsewhere?

UPDATE: President Trump has weighed in on the Bolton manuscript:

Julian Zelizer’s dishonesty is disgustingly displayed in this article when he writes “Dershowitz was repeating a line of argument that we’ve heard before from Trump’s staunchest defenders. Presidential power is so total and so complete, the argument goes, that there is almost nothing that Trump could do to warrant impeachment.” That isn’t the argument that Professor Dershowitz is making. In fact, it isn’t even close.

In the Trump legal team’s initial filing, which I wrote about here, Pat Cipollone and Jay Sekulow noted that “the Supreme Court has recognized, the President’s constitutional authority to protect the confidentiality of Executive Branch information is at its apex in the field of foreign relations and national security.

The Trump legal team’s initial filing is 7 pages long. It doesn’t take much time to read through that filing, especially compared with reading through the 111 pages of word salad in the House Democrats’ initial filing. It’s difficult to picture Zelizer not reading through both filings. Perhaps he didn’t but, if he didn’t, then that’s sloppy journalism.

The argument that Professor Dershowitz is making is that impeachable offenses must be “Treason, Bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” In this interview, Professor Dershowitz gives insight into what his responsibility will be:

This is sloppy, too:

To be sure, Dershowitz’s outlook is rooted in a growing body of work that took hold in conservative circles since the 1980s about expansive executive power. A number of prominent right-wing legal practitioners and scholars, including Attorney General William Barr, subscribed to the notion that the powers of the president are bold, almost total. They rejected the direction of Watergate-era congressional reforms, such as the War Powers Act, that sought to constrain the president.

According to the Constitution, Congress has the affirmative responsibility of declaring war. The Constitution also gives the Senate the responsibility of ratifying treaties. Ratification requires “two thirds of the Senators present concur” with treaties negotiated by the President. The other responsibility that Congress has with regards to foreign policy is the power of the purse.

Congress doesn’t have the authority to prosecute wars or execute foreign policy. That’s the Executive Branch’s responsibility. Period. Full stop. Imagine how utterly dysfunctional foreign policy would be if we had 536 commanders-in-chief.

Conservatives have also supported President Trump by employing the “unitary executive” theory, arguing that the President has broad powers over the executive branch. This was the argument Barr used before becoming attorney general to defend Trump’s firing of former FBI Director James Comey.

The current administration has taken these arguments even further to justify the brazen actions of Trump with regards to Ukraine and the obstruction of Congress. Defenders such as Dershowitz have gone so far in their arguments that they have tried to essentially nullify any constitutional provisions that we have to make certain that presidents are held accountable.

Instead of a system of checks and balances, the logic of their claims imply the founders wanted a chief executive without restraint. This country was founded on the revolt against a monarchy — now Trump’s defenders are trying to argue for more of the same.

That final paragraph is intellectually sloppy. The men who debated, then wrote the Constitution, wanted a congress that essentially passed the budget and set naturalization laws. These men understood the importance of a single commander-in-chief for prosecuting wars and a chief executive officer who negotiated treaties. That doesn’t mean that Congress is voiceless in these decisions.

That being said, Congress shouldn’t use the power of the purse to stop a war without a very good reason that’s supported by virtually the entire nation. Once war is declared, it should be controlled by the Executive Branch barring historic corruption.

Last night’s Democrat presidential debate got stupid fast when the moderators changed the subject to Iran. Democrats didn’t attempt to abandon the DNC’s talking points. From there, things went downhill fast.

Amy Klobuchar and Joe Biden stood out but not in a good way. Sen. Klobuchar said “Because of the actions of Donald Trump, we are in a situation where Iran is starting to enrich uranium again in violation of the original agreement. What I would do is negotiate. I would bring people together just as president Obama did years ago. And I think that we can get this done. But you have to have a president that sees this as a number one goal. I would not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

First, it’s stupid to negotiate if the country you’re negotiating with isn’t feeling pain or is frightened of you. When John Kerry negotiated with Iran, Iran wasn’t worried about whether their people would overthrow the regime. The product was an agreement that was so weak that the Obama administration wouldn’t submit it as a treaty for ratification. The agreement was so terrible that most Democrats opposed it.

Next, President Trump’s taking out of Gen. Soleimani triggered an uprising against the Regime, with 5 straight nights of protests against the regime. With Iran’s economy collapsing, unemployment skyrocketing, inflation hitting 50% and students having lots of time to protest, there’s reason for Iran’s regime to worry about getting overthrown.

Third, Sen. Klobuchar should pay attention to events. Yesterday, Boris Johnson announced that the British, French and Germans had taken the first step in dragging Iran back into compliance with the JCPOA:

Britain, France and Germany on Tuesday formally accused Iran of breaking the 2015 agreement that limited its nuclear program, taking the first step toward re-imposing United Nations sanctions.

The European countries started the clock running on what could be some 60 days of negotiations with Iran about coming back into full compliance with the nuclear deal. Under the agreement, if they cannot resolve their dispute, that could revive United Nations sanctions on Iran that had been suspended under the deal, including an arms embargo.

Call me crazy but I’d argue that President Trump’s strategy is working beautifully. Biden sounded almost as incoherent:

“I was part of that deal. It was working,” he said. “It was being held tightly. There was no movement on the part of the Iranian government to get closer to a nuclear weapon. And look what’s happened. We’re now isolated,” he continued. “We’re in a situation where our allies in Europe are making a comparison between the United States and Iran saying both ought to stand down, making a moral equivalence. We have lost our standing in the region; we have lost the support of our allies.

“The next president has to be able to pull those folks back together, reestablish our alliances and insist that Iran go back into the agreement, which I believe with the pressure applied as we put on before we can get done. And quite frankly, I think he’s flat out lied about saying the reason he went after [Soleimani] was because our embassies were about to be bombed,” Biden added.

That’s breathtakingly uninformed, which is dangerous for us. Biden being this uninformed gives credence to his nickname of Sleepy Joe. We can’t afford a president who isn’t paying attention to the world around him.

It’s either that Biden is uninformed or he’s unwilling to admit that President Trump’s strategy is well thought out and working. This information about the British, French and Germans accusing Iran of breaking the JCPOA didn’t happen right before last night’s debate. It was announced during Tuesday morning’s BBC Breakfast Show. That should’ve been part of these candidates’ morning briefing.

In short, the Democrats’ presidential candidates couldn’t admit that a) President Trump’s strategy is working and b) US allies are joining us in increasing pressure on the Iranian regime. This is what the Democrats’ stupidity towards Iran looks like:

God help us if any of these idiots becomes our next commander-in-chief.

Let’s remember Democrat politicians and the Media Wing of the Democratic Party insisting that President Trump’s airstrike against Maj. Gen. Soleimani would provoke World War 3. Democrats like Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Schumer called the attack reckless, a rash decision and part of a pattern that proved President Trump wasn’t fit for office. The Democrat mouthpieces at CNN and MSNBC, along with John Kerry, insisted that Iran would strike back.

There was a missile strike a couple days after the US took out Maj. Gen. Soleimani, then the world’s most dangerous terrorist. Reportedly, 16 missiles were shot off from Iran, with 4 never making it out of Iran, another targeting Erbil and the rest falling short of the al-Asad military base. Since then, the Iranian military has been silent with the exception of taking out a civilian flight, killing 176 people.

What these politicians haven’t talked about is the fact talked about is the fact that President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign, composed mostly of crippling sanctions, is working. This article highlights what’s happening inside Iran:

Crippling sanctions imposed by the Trump administration have severed Iran’s access to international markets, decimating the economy, which is now contracting at an alarming 9.5 percent annual rate, the International Monetary Fund estimated. Oil exports were effectively zero in December, according to Oxford Economics, as the sanctions have prevented sales, even though smugglers have transported unknown volumes.

On Tuesday, pressure intensified as Britain, France and Germany served notice that they would formally trigger negotiations with Iran toward forcing it back into compliance with a 2015 nuclear deal, a step that could ultimately lead to the imposition of United Nations sanctions.

If France, Britain and Germany join with the US in the sanctions, that will hurt the mullahs even more. The maximum pressure strategy would bit into Iran’s already weakened economy. The worst part for Iran is that that’s just part of the mullahs’ problems. Here’s another pile of headaches for the regime:

Inflation is running near 40 percent, assailing consumers with sharply rising prices for food and other basic necessities. More than one in four young Iranians is jobless, with college graduates especially short of work, according to the World Bank.

The Iranian people aren’t stupid. They know that the government isn’t meeting their needs. The Iranian people can’t help but notice that they live in a nation of haves and have nots. That can’t last long. Iran’s situation will hit a tipping point, most likely sooner rather than later.