Wednesday, April 22, 2026

Trump extends Iran ceasefire, citing Tehran's internal rows over negotiations - Ben Whedon

 

by Ben Whedon

President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced he would extend the ceasefire with Iran to give the Tehran government time to coordinate a unified proposal.

 

President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced he would extend the ceasefire with Iran to give the Tehran government time to coordinate a unified proposal.

"Based on the fact that the Government of Iran is seriously fractured, not unexpectedly so and, upon the request of Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, of Pakistan, we have been asked to hold our Attack on the Country of Iran until such time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal," he posted on Truth Social.

 "I have therefore directed our Military to continue the Blockade and, in all other respects, remain ready and able, and will therefore extend the Ceasefire until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other," he added.

The ceasefire was set to expire on Wednesday evening and Trump previously said he was "highly unlikely" to extend the ceasefire, favoring a lasting agreement with the Iranian government to end the war.

Internal divisions between Islamic hardliners and reformist moderates, however, appear to have hindered the ability of the Iranian negotiating time to reach an agreement with the U.S. and it remains unclear whether additional time will see Tehran address those internal divisions.

Trump imposed a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz this month after the start of the ceasefire, hoping to pressure Tehran into an agreement.


Ben Whedon is the Chief Political Correspondent at Just the News. Follow him on X.

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/trump-extends-iran-ceasefire-due-fractured-iranian-leadership

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Despite official assurances, the 2020 election wasn’t the 'most secure' election in U.S. history - Steven Richards

 

by Steven Richards

Emerging evidence shows that the Intelligence Community raised concerns internally about the vulnerability of election systems and apparent Chinese efforts to obtain sensitive voter data. But previous administrations intentionally hid that from the American public.

 

After the 2020 election, many senior Intelligence Community officials insisted on the historical security of the 2020 election and downplayed concerns about vulnerabilities.

The emerging evidence suggests that, rather than the 2020 elections being the “most secure in American history,” intelligence analysts had serious concerns about the vulnerability of American election systems to foreign intrusions and even gathered evidence of foreign efforts to interfere. 

One of the lead government officials responsible for election security, Chris Krebs, the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, testified to the Senate after the election that he had approved an assessment that said “the 2020 election was the most secure in U.S. history.” Krebs anti-Trump actions have been addressed by the White House.

However, at the time of his testimony, the U.S. intelligence community had gathered significant intelligence of Chinese intrusions into multiple states’ voter rolls, developed raw reports about an alleged Chinese plot to manufacture fake driver’s licenses to facilitate fraudulent voting, and knew of similar Iranian hacks.

Just the News has reported extensively on the Intelligence Community’s internal concerns about the vulnerability of election systems and the alleged Chinese and Iranian efforts to obtain sensitive voter data: 

U.S. Intel secretly flagged major election vulnerabilities in January 2020

Months before the 2020 presidential election, U.S. intelligence issued a secret but stark warning that foreign adversaries had the capability to “compromise" America's voting infrastructure, according to a memo that was declassified this year by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. 

The National Intelligence Council's (NIC) concerns were so extensive that officials personally briefed President Donald Trump at the White House in February 2020, according to photos obtained by Just the News showing top CIA, FBI and Homeland Security officials joining with NIC analysts to inform the president.

Intelligence analysts were particularly concerned about the vulnerability of voter registration databases that later would be penetrated by China and Iran in separate hacking incidents. The January 2020 NIC assessment warned clearly that voter registration databases—along with poll books that keep a list of authorized voters—were among the most vulnerable to hacking and manipulation by foreign powers, Just the News reported this week

China hacked U.S. voter rolls in several states 

U.S. intelligence has known since 2020 that Beijing gained access to American voter data in several states in the lead up to that year’s election, but never shared that information with the American people or the Congress. 

“[Redacted] Chinese intelligence officials analyzed multiple U.S. states' [Redacted] election voter registration data, [Redacted] to conduct public opinion analysis on the 2020 US general election,” stated a once highly classified April 2020 National Intelligence Council memo entitled "Cyber Operations Enabling Expansive Authoritarianism." 

That memo, heavily redacted and quietly declassified by the Biden administration two years after it was written, escaped most public notice until Just the News reported on it last month.

Current and former U.S. officials told Just the News that U.S. intelligence agencies possess several raw reports dating to spring 2020 showing China gained access to American voter registration data spanning several states as well as a few finished intelligence products referring to such breaches, including at least one presidential daily briefing.  

U.S. intelligence has acknowledged at least two other foreign powers have breached American voter data: Russia and Iran, Just the News reported. 

Hidden intelligence pointed toward an alleged Chinese plot to manufacture photo IDs

Last June, FBI Director Kash Patel turned over an intelligence report to Congress which raised concerns that China had mass-produced fake U.S. driver's licenses to carry out a scheme to hijack the 2020 election with fake mail-in ballots for Democrat Joe Biden.

The newly declassified intelligence reports from August 2020 weren’t corroborated or fully investigated and instead were recalled from intelligence agencies at about the time that then-FBI Director Chris Wray testified there were no known plots of foreign interference ahead of the 2020 election, officials told Just the News.

Officials later told Just the News that the FBI located internal documents showing that it did not pursue that intelligence because the bureau feared that it would undercut then-FBI Director Christopher Wray’s assurances to Congress that foreign meddling did not pose a threat to the presidential race. Those documents were reportedly transmitted to Congress.  

Analysts downplayed election-related intelligence for political reasons

In January 2021, the Intelligence Community analytic ombudsman — tasked with ensuring objectivity in intelligence products — conducted a review of the spy community’s handling of Russian and Chinese meddling efforts during the 2020 election. He concluded that intelligence analysts downplayed China’s actions because they had disdain for the “vulgarian” Trump and did not want to support the policies and priorities of the Trump administration toward China with which they “personally disagree,” Just the News reported last month. 

Other Chinese efforts to influence the 2020 election were buried by intelligence community leaders and Iranian efforts to meddle in that election were also downplayed, Just the News previously reported.  

A confidential human source told FBI counter-intelligence in the summer of 2020 that China’s communist government was seeking to meddle in the impending election to help then-candidate Joe Biden, according to a raw intelligence report distributed to federal agencies that was reviewed and made public by Just the News last year. This report was soon recalled, with spy agencies told to delete the information before they had a chance to properly investigate its claims. 


Steven Richards

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/despite-official-assurances-2020-election-wasnt-most-secure-election-us-history

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump: Iran is losing $500 million daily due to Hormuz blockade - JNS Staff

 

by JNS Staff

U.S. president says Tehran is seeking the reopening of key oil route amid economic pressure.

 

Trump
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with members of the media before boarding Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House, April 16, 2026. Credit: Molly Riley/White House.

U.S. President Donald Trump said Iran is losing approximately $500 million per day due to restrictions on the Strait of Hormuz, claiming the Islamic Republic is seeking to reopen the strategic waterway as financial pressure mounts.

“Iran is collapsing financially! They want the Strait of Hormuz opened immediately- Starving for cash! Losing 500 Million Dollars a day. Military and Police complaining that they are not getting paid. SOS!!!” Trump posted on Truth Social on Wednesday.

“Iran doesn’t want the Strait of Hormuz closed, they want it open so they can make $500 Million Dollars a day,” Trump wrote in an earlier post, adding that Tehran is “starving for cash” and facing internal strain. “They only say they want it closed because I have it totally BLOCKADED (CLOSED!), so they merely want to “save face.” People approached me four days ago, saying, ‘Sir, Iran wants to open up the Strait, immediately.’ But if we do that, there can never be a Deal with Iran, unless we blow up the rest of their Country, their leaders included!”

The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints, through which a significant portion of global oil shipments pass, meaning disruptions can significantly affect global energy markets.

Trump announced an extension of the ceasefire with Iran on Tuesday.

“Based on the fact that the government of Iran is seriously fractured, not unexpectedly so and, upon the request of Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, of Pakistan, we have been asked to hold our attack on the country of Iran until such time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal,” Trump stated.

The president said he has directed the military to continue the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, and has extended the ceasefire “until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other.”

The United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes against Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure on Feb. 28. 


JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/news/u-s-news/trump-iran-is-losing-500-million-daily-due-to-hormuz-blockade

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Aoun appoints Hezbollah critic as Beirut’s envoy to Israel talks - JNS Staff

 

by JNS Staff

Simon Karam previously headed the Lebanese team in negotiations regarding the implementation of the 2024 truce. 


Lebanese President Joseph Aoun speaks during a press conference at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Nov. 30, 2025. Photo by Courtney Bonneau/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images.
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun speaks during a press conference at the Presidential Palace in the mountain town of Baabda, overlooking Beirut, Nov. 30, 2025. Photo by Courtney Bonneau/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images.

 

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on Monday named former Ambassador to the United States Simon Karam as Beirut’s envoy for the peace talks with Israel.

“The bilateral negotiations will be conducted on behalf of Lebanon by a delegation led by Ambassador Simon Karam, and no one will participate in this mission in his place or act as his substitute,” Aoun announced during a meeting at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, according to a statement from the Lebanese Presidency.

Karam, a Maronite Christian and critic of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorist group, previously headed the Lebanese team in talks regarding the implementation of the Nov. 27, 2024, ceasefire between Jerusalem and Beirut.

Aoun on Monday said that the latest negotiations would aim to “end hostilities, end the Israeli occupation of areas in the south and deploy the [Lebanese] army to the internationally recognized southern borders.” The president stressed that these talks should “enjoy the broadest possible national support to enable the negotiating team to achieve the desired objectives.”

Hezbollah began firing rockets, missiles and suicide drones at Israel on March 2, in retaliation for the Jewish state’s targeted killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Khamenei was killed in the opening strikes of the war.

In response to the terrorist organization’s violation of the U.S.-brokered Nov. 27, 2024, truce agreement, Jerusalem launched an aerial campaign against Hezbollah and ordered IDF troops to advance and take control of additional areas in Southern Lebanon to halt cross-border attacks.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on April 9 that the Lebanese government had requested direct negotiations with the Jewish state aimed at disarming Hezbollah.

After more than two hours of initial talks that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted in Washington, D.C., on April 14, Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter said that the most important outcome of the negotiations with his Lebanese counterpart was that Jerusalem and Beirut are “on the same side of the equation.”

“We are both united in liberating Lebanon from an occupation power dominated by Iran called Hezbollah,” said Leiter. “Lebanon is under their occupation, and we are suffering from their constant barrages of missiles and terror attacks trying to cross our border.”

Aoun stated after the April 14 meeting that he hoped the talks mark “the beginning of the end of the suffering of the Lebanese people.

“The only solution lies in the Lebanese army re-deploying up to the internationally recognized border, and so being solely responsible for the security of the area and the safety of its residents, without the partnership of any other party,” said Aoun.

Israeli and Lebanese officials last engaged in direct, U.S.-brokered negotiations following the 1982 First Lebanon War, culminating in the May 17 Agreement—the closest the two sides have come to a peace arrangement. The deal was never implemented and was formally canceled by Lebanon in 1984, though limited contacts occurred later in multilateral frameworks.

 

JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/news/israel-news/aoun-appoints-hezbollah-critic-as-beiruts-envoy-to-israel-talks

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Europe's Jew-Hate with a Vengeance - Nils A. Haug

 

by Nils A. Haug

Israel may stand pretty much alone against the haters of this world. Depending on the political climate at the time, it can be expected that international leaders will remain absent, even silent, for the most part when Israel's enemies once again attack it – as they surely will. As historic events reveal, Israel and Jewry at large cannot fully rely for protection on the West.

 

  • [M]any in the West who sympathize with Islamic terrorists were, within hours, trying to justify Hamas's atrocities by blaming Israel. The allegations against Israel were that it was denying supposed rights of an invented Palestinian people that "does not exist," as admitted by senior PLO official Zoheir Mohsen in 1977 in the Dutch daily newspaper Trouw. They nevertheless repeat spurious claims to the Jews' ancestral land, on which Jews have lived continuously for nearly 4,000 years, explicitly named "Judea," and to the failure by Israel to implement what -- according to the Palestinians themselves -- would be a "two-state solution" dedicated to taking whatever land they can get and using it as a base from which to conquer the rest.

  • There is invariably a grim consequence to constant vilification of minorities; the current slandering of Jews is no exception.

  • Israel may stand pretty much alone against the haters of this world. Depending on the political climate at the time, it can be expected that international leaders will remain absent, even silent, for the most part when Israel's enemies once again attack it – as they surely will. As historic events reveal, Israel and Jewry at large cannot fully rely for protection on the West.

  • "Many things will be forgiven," observed Israel's Prime Minister Golda Meir in 1973. "but one thing will not—weakness. The moment we are marked as weak—it is over."

On October 7, 2023, thousands of Hamas's jihadists invaded Israel and murdered some 1,200 people. Defenseless civilians were slaughtered, including elderly men and women, and babies in their cribs. Many in the West who sympathize with Islamic terrorists were, within hours, trying to justify Hamas's atrocities by blaming Israel. Pictured: Anti-Israel protesters in London on March 15, 2025. (Photo by Henry Nicholls/AFP via Getty Images)

On October 7, 2023, the moral corruption of Western politicians, journalists, radical feminists, and social commentators was exposed in all its fullness. On that morning, thousands of Hamas's jihadists invaded Israel and murdered some 1,200 people and wounded thousands more, with many victims being raped or tortured. Defenseless civilians were slaughtered, including elderly men and women, and babies in their cribs. Hamas terrorists kidnapped 251 others and dragged them to Gaza's terror tunnels as hostages; 85 of them did not survive.

Possibly motivated by Jew-hate cloaked in self-righteous neo-Marxist "social justice," many in the West who sympathize with Islamic terrorists were, within hours, trying to justify Hamas's atrocities by blaming Israel. The allegations against Israel were that it was denying supposed rights of an invented Palestinian people that "does not exist," as admitted by senior PLO official Zoheir Mohsen in 1977 in the Dutch daily newspaper Trouw. They nevertheless repeat spurious claims to the Jews' ancestral land, on which Jews have lived continuously for nearly 4,000 years, explicitly named "Judea," and to the failure by Israel to implement what -- according to the Palestinians themselves -- would be a "two-state solution" dedicated to taking whatever land they can get and using it as a base from which to conquer the rest.

Whatever the best political solution might be for the Palestinians, nothing can justify Hamas's October 7 atrocities, which then backfired into the deaths of many Palestinian civilians. Hamas's jihad that day seems to have been an attempt to start eliminating Israel, and instead may end up, thanks to US President Donald J. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, eliminating Hamas and its patron, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Much of the international media has inexplicably accused Israel of being responsible for deaths that were caused by Hamas's use of Gazan civilians as human shields. The irrationality of this evaluation by Islamist sympathizers might be explained as just the latest installment of the West's extensive romance with hating Jews. This hatred, even apart from its Islamic component, also is now directed against the state of Israel. It appears, therefore, that much of Europe and other nations have for decades remained fertile ground, albeit sometimes dormant, for a modern-day revival of orgiastic anti-Semitism.

Columnist Melanie Phillips noted on March 12 that Jews now have the dubious honor of being defamed by both sides of the political aisle, currently framing their grievances once again with updated, anti-Jewish blood libels:

"There's been growing concern in America over the increasingly mainstream belief that Israel drags it into foreign wars, a belief given rocket fuel by the war against Iran.

This belief not only ignores demonstrable reality—the thousands of Americans who have been killed by Iranian-backed terrorists or militias for almost half a century; the accelerated progress by Tehran towards nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles that could reach the United States; and the Iranian regime's implacable goal of destroying America (the 'Great Satan') as well as Israel (the 'Little Satan').

"It also channels the odious image of war-mongering Jews straight out of the ancient antisemitism playbook. It's an image reflecting the belief embedded in Western culture of the demonic, cunning Jews acting covertly in their own interests to put others in danger.

"This belief was formerly confined to cranks and nut jobs on the fringes of society. No longer. Mainstreamed by the Tucker Carlson faction, it's cutting a swath across the ranks of conservatively minded, mainly young Americans.

"Last week, Brian McGinnis, a veteran U.S. Marine, burst into a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington, D.C., and yelled: 'America does not want to send its sons and daughters to war for Israel!'"

As Jews increasingly are vilified and attacked around the world, it forces an analogy with similar events that occurred more than 80 years ago. Germany's persecution of Jews burst into overt mass violence the night of November 9, 1938 with Kristallnacht when Hitler's Nazis murdered nearly 100 Jews, destroyed thousands of synagogues and Jewish-owned businesses, and sent 30,000 Jews to concentration camps.

The current situation is not that much different – only a question of degree – to the events that preceded the Shoah (Holocaust), during Germany's Third Reich. Countless examples exist, but consider just the atrocities committed on October 7, 2023 at Kibbutz Be'eri and also recent attacks such as the pogrom in Amsterdam and the jihadist murders in Sydney. Author Jonathan Tobin remarked that the Amsterdam pogrom was the "the inevitable consequence of a sinister red-green anti-Zionist alliance of leftists and Islamists in Europe."

Similarly, there seems little difference between the endemic propaganda of hatred against Jews and Israel spouting today from the microphones of the red-green alliance, with their multitudes of supporters, and the pernicious program created by Nazi Germany's Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels, who successfully cultivated Jew-hate in the Third Reich. Then and now, both cohorts have substantially succeeded in deploying the populace's anger against Jews.

In the instance of Goebbels, his venom eventually led not only to the mass slaughter of Jews but also to many of those regarded by the Nazis as "subhuman" (Untermensch). Insofar as the red-green alliance is concerned, the cancellation of Jewish academics, the boycott of Jewish artists, authors and businesses, and attacks on Jews, their schools and their places of worship, appear as renewed attempts to erase the Jewish presence and breathtaking accomplishments from Western society.

In 1942, David Ben-Gurion, Israel's future first prime minister, stated:

[I]f the world war ends... the Jews will have nowhere to return. Not a memory will remain of their homes, shops, and property."

Professor Paul Socken wrote last month:

"The philosopher Emil Fackenheim, survivor of the Holocaust, said that there are three stages of antisemitism: You cannot live among us as Jews; You cannot live among us; You cannot live. It's the gradual, insidious, filthy slime of hostility that slowly overtakes nations in their moral amnesia and blames 'those Jews.'"

In various forms and to various degrees, this process is now seen in the West, and increasingly in the US (such as here, here and here.)

Insofar as the Islamist agenda of killing Jews (and then Christians) is concerned, one recalls Amin al-Husseini, who served as the British-appointed Grand Mufti of Jerusalem from 1921 to 1937. Husseini met with Adolf Hitler in Berlin in November 1942, with the purpose of enlisting Germany's help in eliminating Jews from the Holy Land.

"The Führer confirmed [to Husseini] that the 'struggle against a Jewish homeland in Palestine' would be part of the struggle against the Jews. Hitler stated that: he would 'continue the struggle until the complete destruction of Jewish-Communist European empire'; and when the German army was in proximity to the Arab world, Germany would issue "an assurance to the Arab world' that 'the hour of liberation was at hand.' It would then be al-Husayni's 'responsibility to unleash the Arab action that he has secretly prepared....' and that the only German 'goal at that time would be the annihilation of Jewry living in Arab space under the protection of British power.'"

That era's alliance of Islamists and Germany's National Socialists evokes a comparison to today's red-green coalition of a leftist-elite lobby and their Islamist partners.

It is evident that the West's leaders, by and large, have forgotten, never knew, or choose to ignore the horrific events of the Nazi-era -- events which directly led to the shooting, gassing and starving to death of some six million Jews. The combination of mass propaganda, false or compliant reporting by journalists, and a gullible populace inclined -- as many still are -- to believe the worst of allegations against Jews led to widespread participation in, or complacency in the face of, strategically planned attacks on Jewish communities. The result was the Holocaust. There is invariably a grim consequence to constant vilification of minorities; the current slandering of Jews is no exception.

Despite Germany's shameful historic treatment of Jews, many people today seem indifferent to those historic atrocities. In mid-April 2026, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz had the callousness, audacity, and insensitivity to criticize Prime Minister Netanyahu for what Merz alleged to be Israel's "de facto annexation of the West Bank" – Israel's rightful heartland of Judea and Samaria. Israel's Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, a resident of Samaria himself, replied:

"On the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day, the German Chancellor should bow his head and apologize a thousand times on behalf of Germany, rather than daring to preach morality to us on how to conduct ourselves against the Nazis of our generation—who murdered, raped, slaughtered, and burned women, the elderly, and children in the most horrific massacre perpetrated against the Jewish people since the terrible Holocaust. We will not accept instructions from hypocritical leaders in Europe, a continent that is once again losing its conscience and its ability to distinguish between good and evil.

"Mr. Chancellor, ​The days when Germans dictated to Jews where they were permitted or forbidden to live are over and shall not return. You will not force us into ghettos again, certainly not in our own land."

"A People which no longer remembers," the Russian dissident and author Alexander Solzhenitsyn stated in 1976, "has lost its history and its soul." At Harvard, he remarked that the "striking feature of the modern West was a 'decline in courage;" and, on another occasion:

"Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either—but right through every human heart—and through all human hearts. "

Clearly, the animus against Jews has never dissipated; once again the danger has become acute.

Hope is to be found in the extraordinary resilience of the Jewish people – a peaceful, vibrant, productive and creative people who base their core identity on the Torah, from which flow the principles of Judeo-Christian morality. The ethical underlay of Western civilization is founded upon such precepts.

Despite facing continual expulsions, persecution, and pogroms in foreign lands, the Jewish people endure somehow. Since the establishment of the modern State of Israel in 1948, Jews have their own homeland back at last. Primarily aliens in other lands for centuries, they longed for return to Jerusalem, their capital. For two thousand years, their prayer every year at Passover has been "Next year in Jerusalem."

They never lost hope; that hope was rewarded in 1948. Although facing enemies who resent them and the return to their ancestral land, they have overcome all threats to their existence -- and thrived. "Jews," said David Ben-Gurion, "are not sheep to be slaughtered, but a people who can hit back—as Jews did in the War of Independence." Their enemies are by now fully aware of this ability. The Jews are no longer helpless, no longer to be abused.

Even before they were rooted back into their promised land, their sanctuary, the gifted Jewish people, including Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud and Jonas Salk, among many others, have shown the world what they can do with freedom and opportunity. They transformed, in Israel, a tiny land of sand dunes, deserts and malarial swamps, into a prosperous, exciting, enormously successful technologically-advanced nation, with a military among the world's most powerful. Hugely, if grudgingly, respected but also, in some quarters, deeply resented and envied for their success, Israel's citizens are major innovators in fields including medicine, science, technology, agriculture, water conservation and desalination. It is no accident that the small number of Jews -- just 0.2% of the world's population -- constitute 22% of Nobel Prize winners: they are a brilliant people, to whom the world is deeply indebted.

Israel may stand pretty much alone against the haters of this world. Depending on the political climate at the time, it can be expected that international leaders will remain absent, even silent, for the most part when Israel's enemies once again attack it – as they surely will. As historic events reveal, Israel and Jewry at large cannot fully rely for protection on the West.

"What have you done to us, you freedom-loving peoples, you guardians of justice, defenders of the high principles of democracy and of the brotherhood of man?" asked Ben-Gurion in 1944, against the West's apathy and silence during the Holocaust.

"What have you allowed to be perpetrated against a defenceless people while you stood aside and let it bleed to death, without offering help or succour, without calling on the fiends to stop, in the language of retribution which alone they would understand?"

"Many things will be forgiven," observed Israel's Prime Minister Golda Meir in 1973. "but one thing will not—weakness. The moment we are marked as weak—it is over."

Did not the Hebrew prophet Isaiah predict such an outcome 2,700 years ago?

No weapon forged against you will prevail,
and you will refute every tongue that accuses you.
This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord,
and this is their vindication from me,
declares the Lord.

Isaiah's prophecy has proven true and trustworthy for nearly three millennia. Israel and the Jewish people thrive – and will continue to thrive.


Dr. Nils A. Haug is an author and columnist. A Lawyer by profession, he is member of the International Bar Association, the National Association of Scholars, the Academy of Philosophy and Letters. Among degrees in Philosophy, English Literature, and Law, Dr. Haug holds a M.A.in Jewish Studies (cum laude) and a Ph.D. in Apologetical Theology. He is author of 'Politics, Law, and Disorder in the Garden of Eden – the Quest for Identity'; and 'Enemies of the Innocent – Life, Truth, and Meaning in a Dark Age.' His work has been published by First Things Journal, The American Mind, Quadrant, Minding the Campus, Gatestone Institute, National Association of Scholars, Jewish Journal, James Wilson Institute (Anchoring Truths), Jewish News Syndicate, Tribune Juive, Document Danmark, Zwiedzaj Polske, Schlaglicht Israel, and others.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22467/europe-jew-hate

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Unmasked: Secret ‘Witness 2’ was anti-Trump intel officer pushing Russiagate, Ukraine impeachment - Jerry Dunleavy

 

by Jerry Dunleavy

"Witness 2" helped the Ukraine whistleblower in 2019. The witness was also tied to Peter Strzok and the 2016 intel assessment on alleged Russian meddling.

 

Since he left the National Security Agency and the National Security Council, Gavin Wilde has hit the podcast circuit and penned articles suggesting Donald Trump parroted Russian propaganda while reportedly lamenting “MAGA conspiracy theories.”

Just the News has confirmed that Wilde is the unnamed “Witness 2“ identified in the Ukraine impeachment documents released this month by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. The 2019 claims by Witness 2 were critical in helping the intelligence community watchdog push the whistleblower's complaint forward, and his Russiagate-linked biases were concealed from House investigators during the impeachment saga.

Wilde isn’t just your average spy agency retiree with an anti-Trump chip on his shoulder. He played critical roles inside the intelligence community in furthering the now discredited claims that Vladimir Putin helped Trump win the 2016 election, and he pushed claims that Trump later improperly tried to extort Ukraine’s president to investigate the Biden family.

After leaving government in 2021, Wilde wrote for the Council on Foreign Relations in 2022 that “during the 2016 and 2020 elections, Ukraine was a key theme of Russia’s interference activities. Numerous Kremlin operatives had ties to Ukraine or to past Russian interference in Ukraine […] Members of Congress and President Trump himself parroted these narratives.”

U.S. government sources familiar with the matter, who declined to be named, told Just the News that “Witness 2” was in fact Wilde, whose biography and public statements match the biographical details which Witness 2 had provided to investigators working for Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson in August 2019.

"Conspiracy theories" that turned out to be accurate

It was also reported by Rolling Stone in 2024 that Wilde “says he’s concerned that the MAGA conspiracy theories and the policies they inspire could have a chilling effect on American intelligence and foreign policy going forward.” 

While he was inserted into the Trump NSC in 2019, Wilde as “Witness 2” told investigators he had been assisting the alleged whistle-blower with making his disclosures, and also admitted to having a connection to Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who was fired in 2019 for his misbehavior while helping lead the discredited Russia collusion probe.

Witness 2 also disclosed that he had also worked on a controversial January 2017 intelligence community assessment (ICA) that claimed Vladimir Putin tried to help Trump beat Hillary Clinton in that year’s presidential race, a conclusion that the CIA now admits was based on faulty intelligence and faulty spy tradecraft. The 2017 assessment had also cited the discredited anti-Trump dossier written by British ex-spy Christopher Steele.

At the time, Witness 2 said he had been a member of the NSC since September 2018, and that his home agency was the National Security Agency. He was apparently working for the Directorate of Intelligence and for the European and Russian Affairs Directorate.

Wilde has listed this role on the NSC in numerous online biographies of his, including stating that he “coordinated whole-of-government efforts to counter Russian malign influence efforts — including counterintelligence, cybersecurity, and election security initiatives.” He also described himself as a “former NSA guy” during a 2024 panel, and has identified himself as an NSA alum in media interviews and online biographies.

Wilde's links to Strzok and the 2016 ICA were redacted from House investigators

Wilde allied with and assisted the CIA whistleblower — identified by lawmakers and media reports as Eric Ciaramella — during the Ukraine saga and spoke with Atkinson’s team on August 21, 2019.

“Witness 2” was also referenced nearly one hundred times in Atkinson’s recently-declassified October 4, 2019, session before the House Intelligence Committee. The declassified memos also recounted that “one of the jobs Witness 2 is engaged in is to secure the election in 2020.”

Witness 2 disclosed in 2019 that he had also worked on a controversial January 2017 intelligence community assessment that claimed Vladimir Putin tried to help Trump beat Hillary Clinton in that year’s presidential race, an assessment that the CIA now admits included flawed spy tradecraft. The assessment also cited the discredited anti-Trump dossier written by British ex-spy Christopher Steele.

The witness whose name remains redacted and who told investigators he had been assisting the alleged whistleblower with making his disclosures admitted to having a connection to Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who was fired in 2019 for his misbehavior while helping lead the discredited Russia collusion probe.

Wilde was first publicly named as the possible “Witness 2” by an online sleuth who goes by "Fool Nelson" who has focused on the Russiagate saga.

Wilde did not respond to requests for comment sent to him through the Carnegie Endowment, Defense Priorities, and the Alperovitch Institute, three organizations where Wilde is currently listed as working.

Witness 2’s potential biases — including his involvement with the ICA and, presumably, his prior affiliation with Strzok — were recorded in interview notes by the inspector general’s team in 2019, but were redacted and hidden from congressional investigators during the watchdog’s testimony.

Atkinson told House investigators in October 2019 that “on August 21st, 2019, the interviewers met in person with Witness 2” and that “we have produced a redacted version of that memorandum of investigative activity.”

Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, also remarked to the inspector general at the time that “in other words, Witness 2, you specifically asked for what are your biases — it is all redacted, of course." The intel watchdog had also redacted key details related to Ciaramella’s biases as well.

Witness 2’s claims were key to Atkinson’s decision to advance the whistle-blower complaint

Atkinson made it clear that Witness 2 was a key source of details used in Ciaramella’s whistleblower complaint, and the intel watchdog also revealed that it was Witness 2’s comments to Atkinson’s underlings which helped convince the inspector general to push the Ukraine whistle-blower complaint forward.

“Witness 2 was the main source of information contained in section 2 of the complainant's unclassified disclosure,” Atkinson told House investigators in October 2019.

The whistleblower complaint centered on a July 25, 2019, phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The call was the day after Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony on the findings of his investigation into whether the 2016 Trump campaign colluded with Russia.

Trump was impeached by the Democrat-led House in late 2019. The president was acquitted by the Senate in early 2020.

Witness 2 claimed a “moral and patriotic duty” to help Ukraine whistle-blower

Witness 2 told the inspector general interviewers that he was helping Ciaramella in 2019 due to his alleged feelings of patriotism and morality, according to declassified memos.

“Witness 2 is assisting Complainant in regard to the urgent concern because Witness 2 wants to be able to sleep at night, and [Redacted] wants to help Complainant sleep at night, by registering how concerning this whole thing was,” the interview memo said. The memo added that Witness 2 stated that he “feels a moral and patriotic duty to help Complainant due [sic] what is right” and said that he wanted to “sleep the sleep of the just.'’

“Witness 2 commented that what Complainant put together is a concerning set of circumstances. What was in the transcript, however, rubs Witness 2 the wrong way as both a citizen and as a voter. Witness 2 mentioned the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,” the memo added.

“Witness 2's impression of what President Trump said during the telephone call was out of the norm and was an affront. Witness 2 opined that ‘it was not okay’ to say what President Trump said during the call,” the interview memo said. “After reading the transcript of the call, Witness 2 had a strong feeling of deep disappointment. Witness 2 also had a feeling of dejection and helplessness.” Witness 2 called it “an affront to truth, justice and the American way.”

“Witness 2 made it clear that [redacted] would not have taken independent action on the information [redacted] read in the transcript for two reasons: first that [redacted] routinely deals with issues on a daily basis that are contrary to [redacted] personal beliefs; and second that [redacted] did not have the level of granular insight of details related to the Ukraine that Complainant had,” the memo said. “Witness 2 could not connect the same dots that Complainant did into the impact of what was said during the telephone call.”

The interview memo also said: “However politically or ethically distasteful the information was in the transcript, Witness 2 did not have one explicit thing to point to in order to bring forward. Witness 2 mentioned again the lack of granular detail that Complainant had to bring the urgent concern forward. Witness 2 would not have been able to get from ‘point A to Z’ the way Complainant did.”

Birds of a feather

Ciaramella and Wilde both currently work at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Wilde has written for and done podcast episodes with the anti-Trump Lawfare outlet, where Ciaramella is a contributing editor. Wilde has a “Contributor” page at Lawfare. Ciaramella, Wilde, and others co-authored a December 2023 article for the Center for New American Security on “Identifying Russian Vulnerabilities and How to Leverage Them.”

Ciaramella also wrote a June 2023 piece for the Carnegie Endowment on “Envisioning a Long-Term Security Arrangement for Ukraine” — where he thanked Wilde for his “insightful comments on a draft of this paper.”

“In the aftermath of Moscow’s wide-ranging attempts to influence the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election cycle, U.S. officials and media trained their focus on the immediate impacts to electoral infrastructure, on potential conspiracy by U.S. citizens, and on the methodology behind Russia’s active measures,” Wilde later wrote in a piece for the Atlantic Council in March 2022.

“The partisan fervor attending this focus — from the Robert Mueller investigation to the (first) impeachment trial of President Donald Trump — has obscured a common thread also woven throughout Moscow’s assaults on the U.S. political system over the past seven years: reversing Ukraine’s drift away from Russia following the 2014 Maidan Revolution and discrediting the movement’s backers in Kyiv and Washington,” Wilde wrote.

“The 2020 election cycle demonstrated that the time-tested ‘active measures’ tradecraft of the KGB era is still effective,” Wilde added.

Witness 2 admitted he never had access to Trump-Zelensky call transcript

Atkinson revealed that, despite Witness 2’s importance in allegedly buttressing Ciaramella’s claims, Witness 2 had not certifiably read the finalized transcript of the call between Trump and Zelensky. Then-Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., asked Atkinson in October 2019, “When you made your determination about the urgency of this matter, you didn't have the actual readout of the call, correct?”

“I did not have the actual transcript, that's correct,” Atkinson replied.

Welch continued, “Right. So you had information that was disclosed to you from the whistle-blower about what Witness 1 and Witness 2 had told him, correct?”

“That's correct. And we also had what Witness 2 told us about Witness 2's recollection of having read the call records,” Atkinson said. The watchdog later added that “Witness 2 had authorized access to the White House and to the White House records as part of Witness 2's official duties.”

Then-Rep. Devin Nunes, R. Calif., who is now the chair of the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, asked Atkinson, “So Witness 2 read the transcript [of the Trump-Zelensky call] that has now been declassified?”

The intelligence community watchdog admitted he wasn’t sure. “I do not know what written record Witness 2 read,” Atkinson said. “I don't know if Witness 2 read the same transcript that was — or same memorandum that was declassified by the White House.”

“Witness 2 reviewed the transcript [of the call between Trump and Zelenskyy] in order to have situational awareness of the circumstances surrounding the call, and the discussions of the call, as he was covering for the Director of Ukraine, hereafter referred to as (‘Alex’), while Alex was out of the office,” the recently-declassified memo said.

The “Alex” official is not directly identified in the declassified interview memo, but Alexander Vindman — who would become a major witness in the politically-motivated Ukraine impeachment effort in 2019 — was the Director for Ukraine and European Affairs on the NSC at the time.

Witness 2 said that he “read between the lines” to connect call to 2020 election

The interview memo from Witness 2 stated that he had assessed that Trump had made a “request for assistance” from Zelensky, and then later changed his assessment to it having been a “quid pro quo.” The memo also said that he had “read between the lines” to connect the Trump-Zelensky conversation to the then-upcoming 2020 election, even though he didn’t remember that election actually being mentioned.

The memo added: “Witness 2 had no recollection of an explicit reference to the 2020 Presidential elections, but it seemed implicit when Witness 2 ‘read between the lines’ of what was said. There was not an ‘if you want X, I need Y’ type of framework to what was said, but it was implicit.”

“In aggregate, after reading the transcript and learning the context related to Ukraine, President Trump's statements to President Zelenskyy seemed to be politically motivated solicitations,” the memo added. “Reading between the lines is an interpretation that someone has. Correct?” then-Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, now a member of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board, asked Atkinson.

“Reading between the lines was a phrase that Witness 2 used to describe how he came to infer from the President's statements that there was a solicitation […] from a foreign government for assistance in a U.S. election,” the watchdog replied.

Wenstrup replied, “Therefore, an interpretation. That's really what you're saying […] It's not factual, it is an interpretation. I think we can all agree with that.”

The inspector general added that “Witness 2 had no recollection of an explicit reference by President Trump to the 2020 Presidential elections, but that seemed implicit to Witness 2 when Witness 2, quote, ‘read between the lines,’ end quote, of what was said.”

The Ukraine whistleblower complaint itself did not actually use the term “quid pro quo” — but Democrats seeking to impeach Trump did. Trump repeatedly denied that there had been any quid pro quo, pointing to the transcript of the discussion and referring to it as a “perfect call.”

Witness 2’s involvement with 2016 ICA was hidden from Congress

In a section on “Potential for Biases or to Be Discredited”, it was also revealed that “Witness 2” had helped with the ICA on alleged Russian election meddling.

“If someone were to try to discredit information provided by Witness 2, they might focus on Witness 2 being the co-author of the 2017 ICA (Intelligence Community Assessment) on Russian Interference in the 2016 election,” the memo said, adding that “the ICA could have been, or could be looked at, as negative towards President Trump.”

The ICA was written at the direction of then-President Obama and largely overseen by since-fired FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The Senate Intelligence Committee wrongly concluded in April and August 2020 reports that British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s discredited anti-Trump dossier was not used in the body of the ICA and that the dossier claims were not used to underpin any of the ICA’s findings — a conclusion debunked by a House Intelligence Committee report declassified last year and by a CIA review released in 2025.

Wilde has spoken numerous times about his role in helping formulate the 2016 ICA on Russian meddling.

“Witness 2” worked with disgraced Russiagate figure Peter Strzok 

The memo said that “Witness 2 worked with Peter Strozk [sic], and Witness 2 knew how it would play out if [Redacted] said anything” as the intelligence community watchdog quoted him saying that “if I unilaterally try to make an issue out of it the only person impacted is me and not for the better.”

It is unclear when and how Witness 2 worked with Strzok — whether in 2016, related to the Trump-Russia investigation, or in separate circumstances — but one of Wilde’s online biographies states that he spent “several years as a linguist for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” Wilde speaks Russian, and Strzok spent many years working on Russia-related cases.

Strzok was a key player throughout the FBI’s deeply flawed Crossfire Hurricane investigation, and his text messages in 2016 repeatedly displayed an anti-Trump sentiment. Strzok was so central to Crossfire Hurricane that he wrote the memo which launched the investigation and says he personally came up with its name based on the lyrics from a Rolling Stones song. The “opening electronic communication” for Crossfire Hurricane was authored by Strzok and authorized by FBI official Joe Priestap at the end of July 2016.

Wilde spent years at the Defense Department, now at DC think tanks

Wilde is currently a non-resident fellow in the Technology and International Affairs Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, with the think tank saying that he “applies his expertise on Russia and information warfare to examine the strategic challenges posed by cyber and information operations, propaganda, and emerging technologies.”

He is also currently a non-resident fellow at the Defense Priorities think tank and is also currently listed as a teacher at the Alperovitch Institute for Cybersecurity Studies at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.

Wilde’s biography at Johns Hopkins says that he “previously assessed geopolitical risk for multinational corporations as a managing consultant at Krebs Stamos Group, a cybersecurity advisory.”

Christopher Krebs is a founding partner of the Krebs Stamos Group, and was the former head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Krebs, who had been the head of CISA until he was fired by Trump after the 2020 election, testified that the election was the most secure in U.S. history.”

Wilde has deleted the accounts he once had on Twitter/X and on the left-leaning social media site Mastodon. His bio for the former said “Geo-Techno-Info-Politics and [Russia] issues” and for the latter said “a [Russia]-hand on Geo-Info-Techno-Politics.” Wilde also deleted his Bluesky account.

Wilde’s online resume at the Latvian Institute of International Affairs states that, beyond his NSC role in 2018 and 2019, he was a “senior analyst” at the Defense Department from 2009 to 2021, where he “directed analysis to provide impactful insights to the U.S. intelligence, policymaking, diplomatic, and military communities.”

His resume also says he received a master’s degree in national security strategy from National Defense University in 2021, and that he had gotten a bachelor’s degree in Russian studies from the University of Utah in 2008, where he had spent his “final semester as a U.S. Department of State intern at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine.” 


Jerry Dunleavy

Source: https://justthenews.com/accountability/whistleblowers/ided-witness-2-helped-ukraine-whistleblower-worked-strzok-wrote-2016

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Federal court upholds Texas law requiring display of Ten Commandments in public school classrooms - Just the News Staff

 

by Just the News Staff

"This is one of the most important religious liberty victories for Texas in our glorious history," said Jonathan Saenz, president and attorney for Texas Values, which defended the law.

 

A Texas law requiring that public schools across the state must display the Ten Commandments was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Tuesday, according to Fox News

The ruling came after the Republican-led legislature passed the law in 2025.  

"This is one of the most important religious liberty victories for Texas in our glorious history," said Jonathan Saenz, president and attorney for Texas Values, which defended the law. "Texas continues to lead the nation in defending both religious liberty and constitutional truth."

"Today’s ruling confirms that our state can honor the moral heritage that undergirds our legal system without violating the First Amendment," he added. "This decision makes clear that acknowledging the historical foundations of our laws is not only permissible — it is fully consistent with the Constitution." 


Just the News Staff

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/education/federal-court-upholds-texas-law-requiring-display-ten-commandments-public

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Steve Hilton Can Win in November - Edward Ring

 

by Edward Ring

California’s donor class is misreading a volatile governor’s race, where Republican viability, Democratic fragmentation, and ideological fatigue are reshaping the field.

 

In less than two weeks, by law, a ballot must be in the mail and on its way to every registered voter in California. Some counties mail ballots before the May 4 deadline. This means that within days, voters in California will begin returning completed ballots, locking in their choice for who will be the next governor.

Meanwhile, in the state’s so-called “Jungle Primary,” where all voters, regardless of their party affiliation, select their choice from a single list of candidates, the race for the top two spots remains completely up for grabs. Eric Swalwell may be gone, but plenty of other Democrat candidates are still in the race. The latest poll on April 19 showed Tom Steyer at 16 percent, with Xavier Becerra and Katie Porter both at 10 percent, Matt Mahan at 4 percent, and Betty Yee at 2 percent. Kevin Wen, CEO of the polling organization Kreate Strategies, accurately summed up the result of frontrunner Swalwell’s dropping out, saying, “The field reflects redistribution without consolidation.” Fully 23 percent of California’s voters remain undecided.

If anything appears likely in the California governor’s race, it’s that Republican Steve Hilton will collect enough votes to finish in one of the top two spots, where he will oppose a Democrat on the November ballot. Having always run slightly ahead of Republican rival Chad Bianco, Hilton now polls at 18 percent, pulling away from Bianco, who is down to 14 percent. Trump’s recent endorsement of Hilton carries with it two messages. First, it was never realistic to expect the Democrat field to remain so split that two Republicans could earn the top two spots in the primary. Second, of the two Republican candidates, Hilton has the best chance of beating a Democrat in November.

These two factors were always true. Despite the Democrats’ failure to coalesce behind one candidate, the chances that they are going to permit multiple viable campaigns to split the vote so much that two Republicans could end up #1 and #2 in the primary outcome have always been about zero. Swalwell is the first casualty, but he won’t be the last. The danger was, and remains, the opposite. Steyer, with virtually unlimited funds and a formidable campaign staff, is going to probably buy his way to a top spot. If only one other Democrat were to pull away from the pack, and the Republican vote had remained equally split between Hilton and Bianco, Californians would be choosing between two Democrats in November to be their next governor.

One potential spoiler in the contest between Democrats is San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan. He is attracting million-dollarormore donations from wealthy individuals who could be reasonably stereotyped as business-friendly moderate Democrats. They include Sergey Brin, Rick Caruso, Reed Hastings, Steve Huffman, Michael Moritz, Neil Mehta, and others. These names are recognized by anyone familiar with California politics and business, and they run the gamut from left of center to right of center. And as for Mahan’s appeal? They believe it is impossible for a Republican to win in California. Period. That’s it. That is the only reason they support Mahan.

This is a self-defeating, self-fulfilling misconception. The reason a Republican like Steve Hilton is fighting an uphill battle to be competitive in November is because donors who have chosen Mahan as their preferred candidate have chosen Mahan as their preferred candidate. It is a tautology. It is only true because they’ve chosen to make it true. It is the political equivalent of the theory in quantum physics that the observer creates reality.

The political reality that California’s centrist billionaire donors are ignoring is blatantly obvious. The chances that they can propel Matt Mahan into a top two finish, when voting starts in less than two weeks, and Mahan is only polling at 4 percent, are lower, lower than the chances that Steve Hilton, who is almost certain to be on the ballot in November, can actually beat his Democrat opponent.

There is nothing about Matt Mahan that makes him an appealing practical choice apart from the fact that he is (1) not a Republican, and (2) not as bad as every other Democrat. This is a lousy reason to burn through tens of millions of dollars. Mahan is not going to get the nod from Democratic voters. And any rational pro-business donor, whether they’re right of center or left of center, ought to be disgusted with Mahan, who talks like a moderate, but—following the Spanberger strategy—will govern like a hack. Consider his record.

Matt Mahan’s tenure as San Jose’s mayor has seen him do nothing to replace the city’s homeless industrial complex, a corrupt ecosystem of grifters who have squandered billions on “permanent supportive housing” when congregate shelters that mandate sobriety and treatment are a far more effective and far less expensive solution. Mahan has done nothing to dismantle the inept transportation agencies that are doubling down on spending for intercity and light rail at a time when ridership is in terminal decline and new vehicle technologies are fast rendering these legacy projects obsolete. And Mahan has shown no ability to stand up to the city’s powerful public sector unions and has supported every proposed tax increase, even as the city fails to improve services at any level. Mahan even supports a national wealth tax, although he’s savvy enough to stay neutral on the proposed state wealth tax.

In short, Matt Mahan is both a fraud and a candidate with no hope of winning the primary. Steyer is going to buy one of the top two spots, and there are too many other determined Democrats in contention to give Mahan any chance of overtaking Steve Hilton for the other top spot.

What Mahan’s well heeled supporters lack is something completely out of character for people with such obvious competence. These are not risk averse individuals. These are people who have created billion dollar companies from scratch, people who can’t imagine failure. These are visionaries whose innovations are the reason California—despite all the havoc created by the very Democrats among whom they have deluded themselves into thinking Mahan is an exception—continues to change the world. So why can’t they see the virtues of a Republican like Steve Hilton?

There is not one issue on which Hilton has taken a position that is disagreeable to California’s business community. Moreover, there is a sea change occurring in California’s political culture that is being led by the fact that high tech entrepreneurs are broadening their scope. Their investments and their focus have moved from chips and software and social media to transforming industry. Early examples of this are Elon Musk with Tesla and SpaceX, along with Palmer Luckey with Anduril. These men are no longer techies; they are industrialists, and they are defining and ensuring American economic leadership in the 21st century. Culturally, they are the precise opposite of the hidebound bureaucrats, consultants, attorneys, and activist NGOs that have skimmed the wealth from and scammed the taxpayers of California for decades, tying positive development up in knots and making the state unaffordable in the process.

The people backing Matt Mahan ought to know better. Because these are people who are accustomed to moving from project concept to product launch in 18 months, not 18 years. From data centers to housing developments, California’s new generation of builders coming out of the tech industry are not going to accept timelines denominated in decades and project costs that are heavier on process compliance than direct construction expenses. They need a governor who will change the rules, vetoing more bad laws from the state legislature, and using the power of the governor’s office to replace members of oversight boards, fire heads of state agencies, and issue aggressive executive orders to cleanse and deregulate a bloated and destructive system.

California’s voters get the message. They are not only living the nightmare, they are also hearing it every day on the commercials that Tom Steyer is spending tens of millions on to saturate the airwaves and the internet. Affordability! Competition! End corruption! But Tom Steyer is also a fraud. If Steyer were not a fraud, he would be getting millions of dollars from California’s politically moderate billionaires, instead of Mahan. Tom Steyer epitomizes everything wrong with California. He is a fanatic whose idea of abundance requires destroying California’s energy industry, mandating only infill housing, and rationing water instead of investing in more water supply infrastructure. He is an oligarch who will see to it that this “abundance” strategy only involves huge, politically connected corporations. And yet he is promising anything and everything to California’s public sector unions, ensuring that whatever vitality is left in California’s economy will accrue to the public sector, further impoverishing California’s small businesses and low- and middle-income households.

Perhaps the only thing Mahan’s supporters have gotten right is that Mahan would do less harm than Steyer. That’s scant comfort to California’s millions of residents who deserve better.

Steve Hilton, on the other hand, is a moderate Republican with policy ideas that embrace an authentic abundance agenda. Making California affordable again requires deregulation so businesses can compete with each other on price and performance. At the same time, tax revenues need to reprioritize funding practical infrastructure, because these investments will decrease the cost of energy, water, and transportation for everyone. With these two objectives fulfilled—deregulation and practical infrastructure investment—fewer people are dependent on government, and the money then saved can be redirected to infrastructure or returned to the taxpayers.

This is the virtuous political and economic cycle that breaks California’s current spiraling descent into insolvency, failed institutions, and chaos. Steve Hilton understands this thoroughly. Matt Mahan does not.

Electing a Republican in California is not impossible. With effectively no donor support, in 2022, Republican candidate Brian Dahle captured 41 percent of the vote. Steve Hilton is a candidate with more charisma, bringing a moderate but forceful policy agenda. To win, he only needs to swing another 5 percent from blue to red. But to do that, he needs money.

Industrialists in the Silicon Valley should recognize by now that their interests coincide with every Californian who has ever made so much as a scratch in the ground, from the oil in Kern County to the vineyards in the Delta. Once this primary is in the books, and Hilton faces Steyer for governor, California’s politically moderate billionaires are invited to take a hard look at what they’re going to do next. 


Edward Ring

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/04/22/steve-hilton-can-win-in-november/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter