Saturday, July 2, 2022

Defunding Wuhan: Congress quietly bans federal funds from labs in China, Russia and Iran - John Solomon


​ by John Solomon

Vote is latest action to acknowledge that theory that COVID-19 leaked from Wuhan research lab — once censored as preposterous and by news organizations, social media giants — is viable enough for government to vote with its pocketbook.

While U.S. intelligence has been unable in two years to determine for sure if COVID-19 leaked from a Chinese lab, Congress has decided it no longer wants to take the risk of funding medical research at labs controlled by Beijing or other American adversaries.

With little fanfare and in bipartisan fashion, House appropriators quietly amended the 2023 federal budget for health and science agencies on Thursday to ban any funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which U.S. intelligence fears may have been the origin point for the coronavirus pandemic, and other labs like it.

"None of the funds made available by this Act may be made available to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or any other laboratory located in a country determined by the Secretary of State to be a foreign adversary, including China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran," reads the amendment approved by the House Appropriations Committee.

You can read the amendment here:

The vote is the latest official government action to acknowledge that the theory that COVID-19 leaked from the Wuhan research lab — once panned as preposterous and censored by news organizations and social media giants — is viable enough for the government to vote with its pocketbook.

After more than a year of ridicule, the lab leak theory was officially recognized by the Biden administration's intelligence apparatus as one of the two most viable explanations for the appearance of coronavirus, with the other being natural evolution.

The lab leak theory got even more credence last month when the World Health Organization, the United Nations body that first dismissed the lab leak theory, admitted there was "new evidence" supporting the theory that needed investigating.

WHO said on June 10 that  "key pieces of data" to explain how the pandemic began were still missing and that it must "remain open to any and all scientific evidence that becomes available in the future to allow for comprehensive testing of all reasonable hypotheses."

The announcement by WHO led House Republicans to cheer. "Americans were smeared as 'conspiracy theorists' for asking whether #COVID19 came from a lab leak," they tweeted. "Now, the WHO is asking the same questions."

The Appropriations Committee action on Thursday was praised by Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.), a member of the House Education and Labor Committee who sponsored the amendment over national security concerns and the fact that many foreign labs conduct abusive experiments on animals. 

"Our tax dollars should never go to countries that threaten our national security," she said. "We've seen how dangerous it is to fund research at the Wuhan Lab in China. I've been leading efforts to defund animal labs in China, Russia and other foreign adversaries and I'm proud that the House Appropriations Committee adopted an amendment supporting my efforts to prevent taxpayers' money from being sent to labs in these countries.”

Also applauding the action was the nonprofit group White Coat Waste Project, which earlier this year revealed that 32 animal labs in Russia and China were eligible to receive taxpayer dollars via the National Institutes of Health and that one in Russia was involved in a cruel experiment on cats.

"A majority of Americans agree that taxpayers shouldn't be forced to pay white coats in foreign labs to torture animals in dangerous and wasteful experiments," said the group's Senior Vice President Justin Goodman. "Having first exposed NIH funding for animal labs in China and Russia — including the notorious Wuhan Institute of Virology — we applaud Republicans and Democrats on the Appropriations Committee for their historic move to defund wasteful spending in dozens of animal testing labs run by our enemies."


John Solomon


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden Admin and EU Appease Mullahs, Iran Regime Employs More Terror Cells - Majid Rafizadeh


​ by Majid Rafizadeh

The Iranian regime is not going to change until it has all the world governed under one Islamist regime -- or until it is stopped.

  • Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian bragged that he had "long but positive meeting" with European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, and added that "What is important for Iran is to fully receive the economic benefits of the 2015 accord."

  • "The message for the Biden administration [regarding the attempted kidnapping of a US citizen last year], which has frequently proclaimed its intention to defend pro-democracy dissidents, is that Iran and other foreign dictatorships won't shrink from launching attacks inside the United States unless deterred....'" – The Washington Post, July 10, 2021.

  • The Iranian regime is not going to change until it has all the world governed under one Islamist regime -- or until it is stopped. This objective comes as a part of the theocratic establishment's core revolutionary principle: exporting its revolution to other countries.

  • "We shall export our revolution to the whole world. Until the cry 'There is no god but Allah' resounds over the whole world, there will be struggle." — The Islamic Republic of Iran's founding Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

The European Union is doing all it can to revive the nuclear deal and open the flow of funds to Iran, lift sanctions, and put the ruling mullahs on a legal path to becoming a nuclear state. Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian bragged that he had "long but positive meeting" with EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell on June 25, and added that "What is important for Iran is to fully receive the economic benefits of the 2015 accord." Pictured: Amirabdollahian (R) receives Borrell in Tehran on June 25, 2022. (Photo by Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)

The European Union is doing all it can to revive the nuclear deal and open the flow of funds to the Iranian regime, lift sanctions against Tehran, and put the ruling mullahs of the Islamic Republic on a legal path to becoming a nuclear state.

European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell recently travelled to the Islamic Republic, a "top state sponsor of terrorism" according to the State Department, in order to "reverse current tensions" and seal the nuclear deal. Apparently, Borrell succeeded at resuming the nuclear talks. Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian bragged that he had "long but positive meeting" with Borrell on June 25, and added that "What is important for Iran is to fully receive the economic benefits of the 2015 accord".

Intriguingly, Borrell's visit to Iran came after Turkey detained eight members of an Iranian cell who were planning to assassinate Israelis. "The hitmen in the assassination team," stated Turkey's private IHA news agency, "who settled in two separate rooms on the second and fourth floors of a hotel in Beyoglu, were [detained] with a large number of weapons and ammunition."

We're not only talking about the murder of innocent Israeli tourists," Israel's then Foreign Minister Yair Lapid warned, "but also a clear violation of Turkish sovereignty by Iranian terror."

If the Iranian regime had succeeded at its terrorist plot in Turkey, imagine how many innocent Israeli civilians would have been killed. However, not a word of condemnation has been issued by the Biden administration or the European Union. Iran's regime looks as if it is going to be rewarded with its nuclear deal.

The EU and the Biden administration do not even seem to care about their own citizens, who would likely be a target for an emboldened and empowered Iran. An Iranian diplomat, Assadollah Assadi, was last year sentenced to 20 years in prison in Belgium, for his role in a 2018 terrorist plot. Assadi delivered explosive material to his accomplices with the aim of bombing an Iranian opposition rally in Paris. Had the plot not been discovered at the last minute, hundreds of people could have been killed, including international dignitaries and many European parliamentarians.

Tehran's assassination attempts and terror plots can be found in other European countries as well. Another agent of the Iranian regime, for instance, Mohammed Davoudzadeh Loloei, in 2020 was sentenced to prison by a Danish court for being an accessory to the attempted murder of one or more opponents of the Iranian regime.

On American soil, less than a year ago, the Iranian regime was caught plotting to kidnap a US citizen in Brooklyn, New York. Even The Washington Post pointed out that the attempted abduction should be a serious warning to the Biden administration:

"The message for the Biden administration, which has frequently proclaimed its intention to defend pro-democracy dissidents, is that Iran and other foreign dictatorships won't shrink from launching attacks inside the United States unless deterred....'"

The Iranian regime is not going to change until it has all the world governed under one Islamist regime -- or until it is stopped. This objective comes as a part of the theocratic establishment's core revolutionary principle: exporting its revolution to other countries. As the Islamic Republic's founding Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, famously stated:

"We shall export our revolution to the whole world. Until the cry 'There is no god but Allah' resounds over the whole world, there will be struggle."

The regime's key mission was also incorporated in its constitution, which states:

"The Constitution provides the necessary basis for ensuring the continuation of the Revolution at home and abroad. In particular, in the development of international relations, the Constitution will strive with other Islamic and popular movements to prepare the way for the formation of a single world community."

It is shameful that while the Iranian regime is carrying out terrorist plots to kill innocent people in other countries, the Biden administration and the EU continue to appease the ruling mullahs and reward the predatory regime of Iran for its malign behavior at home and abroad with riches, legitimacy, missiles and the ultimate gift: the nuclear deal, with which it can keep threatening its neighbors and destabilizing the world.


Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US Foreign Policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Is Dobbs the First Case to Take Rights Away from Americans? - Alan M. Dershowitz


​ by Alan M. Dershowitz

In a democracy with a complex system of separation of powers, checks and balances and federalism, there will always be some back and forth with regard to rights.

  • Tribe's blanket statement that never in history have Americans gone to bed with fewer rights than when they woke up is not only wrong historically and constitutionally, but also extremely insensitive to African Americans, Native Americans, the mentally ill, Japanese Americans and other marginalized groups that have been denied the most basic rights over the years.

  • The truth, which Tribe denies in the interest of his partisan narrative, is that the pendulum of rights has swung widely throughout our history. Even if Martin Luther King Jr. was correct when he said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice," that arc has not always pointed in the direction of rights -- or justice. In a democracy with a complex system of separation of powers, checks and balances and federalism, there will always be some back and forth with regard to rights.

  • Tribe seems to take for granted that his preferred rights are an ever-expanding given.

  • Falsehoods will not set us free. Only hard work, based on truth, will push the arc toward justice.

Whatever one may think of Dobbs v. Mississippi, the Supreme Court decision overruling Roe v. Wade, some critics have overstated its uniqueness in taking from Americans their preexisting rights. Pictured: The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, DC, on June 30, 2022. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Whatever one may think of Dobbs v. Mississippi, the Supreme Court decision overruling Roe v. Wade, some critics have overstated its uniqueness in taking from Americans their preexisting rights. Professor Laurence Tribe badly misinformed his readers when he said the following:

"Friday was a singular day in our history: the first day in living memory that Americans went to bed with fewer inalienable rights than they had when they woke up. Not just in living memory. Ever."

Tragically, there have been dozens of cases throughout our history in which Americans had their most fundamental rights taken away.

The Alien and Sedition laws took away the right to criticize elected officials, which was granted just a few years earlier by the First Amendment. The Dred Scott case denied Black Americans the right of citizenship, and even personhood. Several cases, during that same period, denied Native Americans their fundamental rights. Buck v. Bell authorized the sterilization of allegedly unfit citizens, thus taking away their reproductive rights. In Korematsu v. US, more than 100,000 American citizens of Japanese ethnicity were denied the right to be free. In several cases during the McCarthy period, Americans were denied the right to belong to the Communist Party. In Bowers v. Hardwick, gay and lesbian Americans were denied the right to sexual freedom. Capital defendants were denied the right to life when the Supreme Court essentially reversed its decision outlawing capital punishment. At the beginning of the 20th century, many Americans were denied the right to be united with their families when racist immigration laws were enacted, limiting the number of ethnic minorities that were permitted to become citizens.

In addition to those rights, most of which today are recognized, many Americans over the years were denied rights which they deemed fundamental, such as the right to pray in schools, the right of Mormons to practice polygamy, property rights under the early New Deal, and the right to travel freely and not wear masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 severely limited the rights of defendants to habeas corpus. And now, many Americans, including Tribe himself, would severely curtail what many Americans believe is their Second Amendment right to "keep and bear Arms."

Tribe's blanket statement that never in history have Americans gone to bed with fewer rights than when they woke up is not only wrong historically and constitutionally, but also extremely insensitive to African Americans, Native Americans, the mentally ill, Japanese Americans and other marginalized groups that have been denied the most basic rights over the years.

The truth, which Tribe denies in the interest of his partisan narrative, is that the pendulum of rights has swung widely throughout our history. Even if Martin Luther King Jr. was correct when he said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice," that arc has not always pointed in the direction of rights -- or justice. In a democracy with a complex system of separation of powers, checks and balances and federalism, there will always be some back and forth with regard to rights. As Roger Baldwin, the founder of the American Civil Liberties Union, put it: "The struggle for liberty never stays won." So, too, with the eternal struggle for rights. Tribe seems to take for granted that his preferred rights are an ever-expanding given.

He is wrong. We must not assume that rights, once recognized, will never be taken away. We must persist in struggling to preserve them, through the courts, legislatures, executives, constitutional amendments, public opinion and other lawful means.

No one benefits from false and ideologically driven history of the kind that Tribe and his ilk try to sell in reaction to this wrongful decision. Falsehoods will not set us free. Only hard work, based on truth, will push the arc toward justice.


Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of The Price of Principles: Why Integrity Is Worth Its Consequences. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute, and is also the host of "The Dershow," podcast.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Smart Democrats understand the big reasons behind the Supreme Court’s decisions - Andrea Widburg


​ by Andrea Widburg

While most Democrats reflexively start screaming and threatening violence, those who are willing to do some self-reflection understand what really happened.

Following the Supreme Court’s recent rulings about guns, abortion, public prayer, and limits on the administrative state’s ability to craft legislation, most Democrats have turned to hysteria, threats, and revolting racism. They blame conservatives entirely for what’s happening in America. More thoughtful leftists, however, have looked inward and discovered what really happened: They went too far.

A gay man who goes by the name of “TinFoil” explicitly articulated this sense that the left pushed too hard and far. He understands why Clarence Thomas used Dobbs’ rejection of “substantive due process” to suggest that Obergefell (gay marriage) is also on the chopping block. (Because the text is a bit hard to read, I’ve transcribed it and you can find it at the end of this post.)



The gist is that most gays and lesbians just wanted the right to get married and to live normal lives. However, the activists kept pushing and pushing. They tried to destroy bakers who didn’t cater to them, they aggressively pushed Pride month, they silenced people in workplaces, and then they went after the children with transgenderism, drag queens, and teachers pushing porn.

As far as TinFoil is concerned, these pedophiles (his word for them) have tarred all lesbians and gays, leading to the pushback we’re seeing now. He announces that he and those who feel as he does aren’t going to take it anymore. They’re going to be part of the pushback so that they, like everyone else in America, can embrace quiet, adult (not pedophilic) normalcy.

The tweet resonated with people, garnering almost 24,000 likes and almost 8,700 retweets. Twitchy rounded up some of the positive responses, which came from both gays and straights.

Image: Self-reflection by drobotdean.

Naomi Wolf, the one-time Al Gore advisor, has the same message. In 1995, Naomi admitted that abortion is the death of a child but rationalized that, in terms of women’s needs, it was still for the greater good. She also warned that the abortion movement would be harmed if it persisted in the lie that the fetus is “a clump of cells” and insisted on pushing abortion later and later into a pregnancy.

So, while Naomi is still a pro-choice leftist, she’s smart and intellectually honest. For that reason, she sees the Dobbs decision that reversed Roe v. Wade as an inevitable response to the overreach in which the pro-choice movement engaged:

I believe that the Dobbs decision was an almost inevitable reaction to devastating overreach by the organized pro-choice movement, especially in the last twenty years.

After reviewing her stance in 1995, Naomi continued:

I also warned that such mechanistic, amoral language and such increasingly monstrous policies would eventually also create a political scenario that in time was certain to lose: these policies would eventually lose us the reasonable middle: the majority of the country that supports abortion rights in the first trimester but that withdraws its support progressively as pregnancies progress.


Pro-choice activists were not content to defend the right to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester, which are the limits on readily available abortion throughout Western Europe (where, notably, there is almost no anti-choice activism).

The organized feminist left were not content to use the language or policies that polls supported, of seeking a country in which abortion would be “safe, legal and rare.”

Rather, they pushed, in state after state, to enshrine that “right” up until very the day of a baby’s birth.

At what point does a “right” become a murder?

It’s a very long essay but the point is simple: If the hard-core left had accepted the first-trimester system originally set up in Roe v. Wade, the issue might well have died out. I don’t know if she’s right about that because, for those who oppose abortion, an abortion in the first minute of a pregnancy is as bad as an abortion in the last minute. She is correct, though, that by turning itself into a death cult, the abortion movement pulled the pendulum so hard to the left that a swing back in the other direction was inevitable.

The left would do well to heed both TinFoil and Naomi Wolf both of whom recognize that, if a party lets its activist base take over the party, ordinary people will be repulsed. It’s one thing to believe in live and let live when it comes to gays or first trimester abortions (again, not defending; just saying). It’s another thing entirely for people to find themselves unwittingly allied with pedophiles and Moloch worshippers.

These extreme behaviors are the kind of things that drive cultural change— including voting for Trump, who promised conservative Supreme Court justices who would return to originalism, ending a decades-long trend of rewriting the Constitution to meet the leftist base’s increasingly disturbing demands.

TinFoil’s message:

Oh you’re angry because of the reversal of Roe Vs Wade. Okay. You’re angry because you think they will come for gay marriage next and gay relations. Okay. Let’s see whose fault is that per say? Any guesses? We’re looking right at the issue now... YOU.

All we gay, bi, lesbians and even some sane transgender people wanted was to be able to live our lives as normal people and blend in with the rest of the community with our partners. We got that back in 2015 and we were good with it. In fact, we were closing the fight after that.

However, for you it wasn’t enough. You sent your minions to a Christian Baker who just wanted to bake cakes and follow his belief in God. You didn’t want to go to the next store, you chose him so you could attack his beliefs You did so so many times over I am surprised he’s still in business.

It wasn’t enough. You begin pushing Pride month where corporations would virtue signal by putting Pride labels on their logos. You pushed it in every tv station across America while they had to sit there and deal with the crap for an entire month. Yet the birth of our nation, July 4, only gets one day. Our veterans who fought for our freedom in this country only get one day.

It wasn’t enough. You pushed your ways into workplaces and demanded that anyone who disagrees with lgbt needs to be silenced and fired just for voicing their opinion. All for equality.

It wasn’t enough. You then forced your ways into the schools silencing and shaming any opposition. If anyone said anything, even us gay people, we were all silenced, shamed and even attacked at our workplace by getting us fired.

It wasn’t enough. You pushed your way through convincing society that children under the age of 18 were transgender at the drop of the hat. They needed access to hormone blockers, and surgery! If people disagreed, they were bigots, transphobes, haters, EVIL!

It wasn’t enough. We now have trans people who transitioned at an early age and are now regretting decisions that have forever mutilated their bodies and their lives destroyed. Yet when they speak up they were silenced too and called transphobes.

It wasn’t enough. Now you have transgender activists calling out gay men that if they don’t want to accept trans men as men that they’re homophobic even though by definition being gay means attracted to the same sex, not gender. You called us homophobic, transphobic and attempted to silence us.

It wasn’t enough. We now have drag queens reading to kids in libraries doing very sexual, erotic dances exposing themselves. Yet you want to call that teaching equality. If anyone spoke up against it again you call us transphobe, homophobe, and nazis.

It wasn’t enough. Now we have teachers pushing LGBT ideology along with pornographic books and teaching about wild sex positions while calling it LGBT sex education. When we called it out you called us nazis, bigots, homophobes. Now we have more Pride events with full nudity and very explicit actions being done in front of children We have sex kink being brought into the mix in front of children. We have parents bringing their kids to Pride exposing them to this stuff. When we called it out you screamed the same names, transphobe, homophobe, nazi and then some. We see what you are trying to do. You’re normalizing pedophilia.

However, myself and many other sane LGBT peeps are calling you a$$holes out. We’re not going to let you do it. You destroyed equality for us, so we’re going to make your lives miserable. You’re not going to touch kids, you’re not going to keep this going. It’s ending now. We will call you out, expose you all to the world. When you start feeling that anger and hate flow toward you, calling us homophobe, transphobe, it is no longer going to work. You played your card too long and it ends. You only have yourself to blame because it wasn’t enough for you.

It won’t be enough for us until every single one of you are brought to some sort of justice. You’re pedophiles. You are the monsters in the shadow wanting to get close to any kid around. You want to pervert them so you can normalize grooming them. Nope. Not any more

Get ready because we’re coming for you. And we’re bringing hell with us just for you. There is no more discussion, no more reasoning, no more anything. YOU brought this on you all because it wasn’t enough.

Sincerely, The LGBT community who just wanted equality!!


 Andrea Widburg


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Abortion Midterms May Abort the Democrats - Daniel Greenfield


​ by Daniel Greenfield

Taking money from rich white people to kill poor black babies isn’t a winning issue.


After the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, Democrats lost no time in insisting, all evidence to the contrary, that abortion would swing the midterm elections for them.

Georgia shows why abortion might abort their party instead.

Stacey Abrams, after months of dodging and refusing to be pinned down on her abortion views, finally came out and said that, “my intention is going to be to pass legislation that says a woman has the right to an abortion. And that right continues until a physician determines the fetus is viable outside of the body, except in the case of protecting the woman’s life or health.”

After all the ducking and weaving, Abrams effectively supports full abortion until the third trimester. That’s a radical position, but still more moderate than the current Dem one.

As recently as 2006, Biden had said, "I do not view abortion as a choice and a right. I think it's always a tragedy." Now, Biden called the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling a “tragic error”.

Support for abortion until the moment of birth has become routine among party leaders, but Abrams herself apparently did not support abortion until she first ran for office in 2006.

"I was very much on the side of anti-abortion, through much of my upbringing. I grew up in Mississippi, in a very religious family, in a religious community," Stacey Abrams told CNN.

In 2014, historically black protestants in Georgia were split on the question of abortion. That split, like Abrams’ religious background, has all but disappeared.

"With the protections of Roe gone, the midterm elections in Georgia have become a referendum on reproductive freedom," Nikema Williams, the Georgia Democratic Party chair, declared.

But there's little evidence that the public cares. Georgia voters were split on abortion in 2019.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, the last pro-life Democrat, survived a challenge from the abortion lobby in Texas even though Jessica Cisneros, the leftist running against him, outraised him by a million dollars and was backed by Bernie Sanders, AOC, and Elizabeth Warren, along with NARAL, Planned Parenthood's PAC, and EMILY's List. Making abortion into a litmus test backfired.

A recent Axios poll found that first-generation Latino immigrants are the most skeptical on abortion with only 41% supporting legal abortion. And only 29% of Latinos who speak Spanish at home agreed. These numbers are a warning that what plays well at D.C. marches doesn’t necessarily work with sizable chunks of the increasingly fragmented Democrat-Left coalition.

2006, when Biden still played at being pro-life and Stacey Abrams decided to let her abortion flag fly. was a key year in the fatal Democratic pivot away from even the pretense of moderation on abortion. Senator Bob Casey Jr, who ran as a pro-life candidate in 2006, and insisted that he was "pro-life" and claimed to oppose Roe despite voting with Planned Parenthood most of the time, now announced that he would vote to turn Roe v. Wade into law.

Some called this "the end of the pro-life Democrat", but Casey just redefined pro-life to mean pro-abortion. “I think it’s clear to most people that the description of pro-life Democrat is accurate," the Senate Democrat from Pennsylvania put it, by which he now meant trying "to reduce both the number of abortions and the number of unwanted pregnancies".

Bill Clinton’s call that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare” had been displaced by a 2020 presidential field of radical candidates who almost universally supported government funding of abortion by repealing the Hyde Amendment and having Medicaid cover abortions. Nine of the presidential candidates, including Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, wanted to force states to get federal preclearance for abortion laws.

After a generation of playing it safe, Democrats are all in on abortion radicalism.

Warren and AOC proposed abortion clinics in national parks. There have been suggestions to set up more abortion clinics on Indian tribal lands and by declaring a public health emergency.

Schumer’s Senate abortion bill would have legalized late term abortion until birth, but the show vote couldn't even get to 50 votes.

"Republicans in Congress — not one of whom voted for this bill — have chosen to stand in the way of Americans’ rights," Biden insisted afterward. "To protect the right to choose, voters need to elect more pro-choice senators this November, and return a pro-choice majority to the House."

There’s no sign of that happening.

Only 15% of likely voters see abortion as a top priority. And few think of it as something to be proud of. Democrats have embraced abortion as an assertion of feminism. Pro-abortion protesters kick around bibles, taunt pro-life protesters by praising the devil, and smear blood on themselves. That may play well on campus, but it just further alienates elements of the Democrat coalition.

Democrats want to make 2022 into an abortion referendum, but they may not like the results.

Kamala Harris has added to her extensive portfolio by becoming the point woman for the White House abortion response. "The rights of all Americans are at risk. This is the time to fight for women and our country with everything we have,” she declared.

The mingled stench of radicalism and electoral desperation isn’t hard to smell here.

With a bad economy and uncontrollable inflation, Democrats want 2022 to be about anything else, especially social and cultural issues intended to rally their base in the midterms. But abortion isn’t and has never been a winning strategy. And that’s even when people can afford to drive.

Or buy food to feed their families.

The dirty little political secret about abortion is that support for it rises sharply by income and also falls by income. Support for abortion is highest among those earning over $100,000 a year and lowest among those who make only $30,000. And yet, abortion rates are also highest among poor women. That’s not a paradox, it’s political eugenics. And that’s what it always was.

Planned Parenthood’s tarnished saint, Margaret Sanger, explicitly focused her murderous efforts on poor women from immigrant groups that were in disavor at the time, Italians and Jews. Her alliance with eugenicists has been the abortion industry’s most awkward and worst kept secret.

Sanger’s radical sainthood has been revoked and the abortion lobby is eager to dress up its movemement with black women, like Stacey Abrams, who recanted their pro-life upbringing.

Abortion is big business, economically and politically, fueling a surge of donations from wealthy blue state women who support abortion and want poor women to be the ones to kill their children. Democrats have turned abortion into a culture war issue partly to profit from that cash.

But abortion also alienates many of the minorities who are its natural eugenic targets.

The Democrats want the midterms to be about the vital importance of taking money from rich white people to kill poor black babies. That may not be the winning strategy they think it is.

Especially in Georgia.


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Source: Taking money from rich white people to kill poor black babies isn’t a winning issue.

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Terror-Linked Muslim Umbrella Group Brings Hundreds to DC to Lobby Congress - Joe Kaufman


​ by Joe Kaufman

US Council of Muslim Organizations delegates included individual who joked about threatening to blow up school.


Armed with an extremist agenda, hundreds of Islamists from around the nation representing the US Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) descended upon the US Capitol building, from June 13-14, to lobby members of Congress. USCMO has major terrorist ties, and some of the individuals acting as the organization’s delegates are just as radical. One, Syed Ammar Ahmed, an official from the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), once even joked about threatening to blow up a school. Unless he/she thinks their fanatical talking points are valid, why would any sitting Congressman wish to give this group of zealots any of his/her time?

USCMO was founded, in March 2014, to provide mainstream American Islamist groups a bigger voice and influence in politics. These groups include: the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), the South Asian terror-related ICNA, the Muslim Brotherhood-associated Muslim American Society (MAS), and more. The groups sponsoring this year’s event, ‘The 7th Annual Muslim Advocacy Day on Capitol Hill,’ included ICNA and Islamic Relief (IR), an organization that has been banned by a number of nations due to its many ties to terrorist financing.

Sitting on the board of USCMO are Mazen Mokhtar, the former admin for the now-defunct al-Qaeda recruitment/financing site, who has referred to suicide bombings as “an effective method of attacking the enemy”; Siraj Wahhaj, a Brooklyn imam who was named a party to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and who has been linked to the bomb maker of the attack, Clement Rodney Hampton-El; and AMP Executive Director Osama Abuirshaid, who threatened, in January 2020, “Palestinians, if they don’t take what they want willingly, they will take it forcefully… [W]e’re going to liberate our land… whether they like it or they don’t like it.”

Some of those representing USCMO as delegates at Muslim Advocacy Day seem to be just as radical as the USCMO leadership, itself. One delegate, who was photographed posing with others outside the office of US Representative Carlos Gimenez, was the Government Affairs Coordinator at ICNA’s social services division, ICNA Relief USA, and Hugo Chavez fanboy, Syed Ammar Ahmed. In February 2010, following a debate he participated in at a school, Ahmed commented, “I hate white people,” called himself a “terrorist,” and at the suggestion of an acquaintance, joked that he “should have threatened to blow up the school.”

Another was CAIR-California CEO and apologist for al-Qaeda operatives held in Guantanamo Bay, Hussam Ayloush. This past May, Ayloush called for Israel’s destruction, writing, “It is our moral responsibility and focus to make sure that the racist apartheid structure is dismantled…” He clicked ‘like’ for a photo posted on his Facebook page containing the message, “We pray for the near dissolution of the Zionist state.” He wrote that Palestinians have a “legal right to resist” (i.e. commit terrorist acts) against Israelis. He posted that “American Jews” who support Israel are “animals” and said that relocating Jews to Israel was part of a conspiratorial “Zionist plan.”

Yet another delegate was CAIR-San Francisco Executive Director Zahraa Billoo. In September 2019, Women’s March, a left wing activist group, removed Billoo from its board for anti-Semitic remarks about Israel. In December 2008, she posted on her blog that she considered starting a website to recruit volunteers to attack Israel. In March 2008, she labeled US troops “scum.” In September 2007, she wrote, “Apartheid Israel is not a country” and questioned if anyone had the right to be upset at those calling for its destruction. In January 2007, she wrote that she had thoughts of committing suicide, after she noticed a pro-Israel poster on a San Francisco train.

The terrorist-friendly agenda items (“legislative measures”) USCMO delegates were told to lobby members of Congress about easily reflect the terrorist relations of the individuals and groups that make up USCMO. One issue dealt with the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention (TVTP) grant program, which provides funding to governmental and non-governmental entities, with the goal of preventing and countering violence. Because the program is seen by USCMO and its affiliates as primarily targeting Islamic militants, the delegates were instructed to lobby in favor of resolutions that would severely weaken it.

A second issue dealt with lobbying for citizenship for evacuees from Afghanistan. It has been reported that a number of Afghans evacuated, during and after the Biden Administration’s 2021 pullout, had “potentially significant security concerns.” Other reports reveal that several Afghans applying for asylum in the US have associations with the Taliban. However, USCMO, whose member organizations officially assist in the resettlement of aforesaid refugees – a conflict of interest – instructed its delegates to lobby members of Congress to “allow the tens of thousands of Afghan evacuees to apply to become lawful permanent residents one year after arrival.”

A third issue concerned the subject of ‘Islamophobia,’ a term often used to silence critics of Islamist terror. USCMO delegates were instructed to urge members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to adopt the International Combating Islamophobia Act, legislation that was introduced by USCMO ally Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and, according to USCMO, “would establish a special envoy office… to monitor and combat international Islamophobia.” Given its very nature, the act would be used to stifle speech and protect groups, like USCMO, who would wish harm upon our nation and effectively label any criticism of radical Islam as “hate speech.”

USCMO is a conglomerate of various Muslim extremist outfits, and its Islamist agenda is a dangerous one. All freedom loving Americans should be deeply concerned that USCMO, each year, is sending hundreds of its followers and affiliates to roam the halls of Congress and to agitate for their insidious, anti-democratic, pro-sharia initiatives, initiatives that threaten to undermine America and by extension Western civilization.

USCMO’s 7th Annual Muslim Advocacy Day should be its last.

Beila Rabinowitz, Director of Militant Islam Monitor, contributed to this report.


Joe Kaufman is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the Chairman of the Joe Kaufman Security Initiative. He was the 2014, 2016 and 2018 Republican Nominee for U.S. House of Representatives (Florida-CD23).


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Will the Antifa 11 Face Justice in San Diego? - Daniel Greenfield


​ by Daniel Greenfield

“Antifa is known to use force, fear, and violence.”


While Jan 6 dominates the media from cable news to the press headlines, far from Washington D.C. the violence of Jan 9 recently led to the first conspiracy indictment of Antifa rioters.

The violent clashes at a Pro-Trump rally in San Diego on Jan 9, 2021 were more of what Americans had been forced to accept as the new normal over the last six years.

Just more of those “mostly peaceful protests”.

The fighting near Crystal Pier at Pacific Beach saw police officers being hit with rocks and glass bottles. Store windows were broken and five police officers suffered injuries in the violence.

The previous year had seen worse, but this time something was about to change.

The confrontation between Black Lives Matter and Antifa, and Trump supporters and police proved to be a catalyst for deploying a new legal strategy against the social justice riots. 

In December, Antifa members were indicted on a variety of assault charges and even animal cruelty, but also, and much more importantly, on conspiracy to riot. The conspiracy charges for the first time treated Antifa as a criminal conspiracy, rather than acting as if the individual rioters had all randomly assembled to riot as previous cases against the violent leftist group had done.

Antifa and other leftist 'brands' have often functioned as phantom organizations with no obvious form of association beyond online coordination. That makes it difficult to accuse leftist rioters of a conspiracy. However the indictment focused on their 'likes' for a post calling for "direct action".

Direct action is a euphemism for political violence.

Antifa "is known to use force, fear, and violence to further their own interests and to suppress the interests of others. This tactic is referred to as 'Direct Action' and is known to mean acts of violence such as assault, battery, assault with deadly weapons, arson, and vandalism," the indictment stated.

The criminal complaint against 11 alleged Antifa members describes the leftists attacking their victims "using impact weapons" and "mace or closed fists or feet, or blunt force objects".

One Antifa thug is accused of a "a confrontation with an unnamed victim as he tried to walk his dog down the boardwalk" while another sprayed an “unnamed victim and his dog with mace."

That's one of the 68 acts listed in the complaint.

Among the 24 counts, it claims that Luis Francisco Mora used "tear gas and a tear gas weapon against a peace officer."

The wheels of justice grind slowly but in June a grand jury finally indicted the Antifa 11 on 29 felony counts after 13 days of testimony.

San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan issued a press release announcing that the acts of violence included "throwing a wooden lawn chair at a victim and striking her".

The indictment is a triumph for Stephan who had spent well over a year pursuing her case.

DA Stephan had come under attack from the Left during her previous election for attacking her pro-crime opponent Genevieve Jones-Wright for receiving over $400,000 from a pro-crime PAC backed by George Soros. Jones-Wright has defended police defunding and wanted to let the homeless urinate in public. The Soros pro-crime candidate had called for eliminating bail, declared her support for "prison abolition" and urged that we "should be closing a prison a year".

Had the Soros-funded candidate, who has used the hateful slogan Black Lives Matter, won, it's unlikely that she would be prosecuting Antifa and BLM violence. And indeed, responding to the Antifa prosecution, Jones-Wright condemned it as "harming our communities with zero pushback/accountability. Shameful!" She did not clarify if she considered Antifa to be part of her “community” that was being harmed by the conspiracy charges against the leftist thugs.

But there are serious questions being raised about the complicity of the San Diego Public Defender’s office with Antifa and the wider circle of leftist radicals and backers of the movement.

One of the men indicted is Jesse Cannon, who, according to Andy Ngo, a journalist who has extensively covered Antifa, is also a rapper who goes by 420 NOiZE and has been a fixture at previous leftist confrontations. Cannon's involvement has potentially more explosive implications because, allegedly, his girlfriend, Leah Madbak is, like Jones-Wright, a San Diego public defender.

San Diego County deputy district attorney Will Hopkins alleged that Madbak had “administrative privileges for several Antifa based social media accounts” and that the pair had “posted police reports and intentionally disseminated potentially harmful information in an attempt to dox their targets.”

The investigation found “gigabytes of data that the Antifa cells" had allegedly ”collected on their targets" including witnesses, victims, and cops.

Under these circumstances it is all the more remarkable that the case has gotten this far.

While it’s still early, the progress of the case has already exposed how the city’s public defender’s office appears to operate as an outpost of leftist insurrectionists. And it points to larger connections between the rioters and the pro-crime legal movement that is enabling them.

The systematic leftist violence of 2020, wrongly described as “mostly peaceful protests”, has gone largely unpunished. But in San Diego, there’s hope that the Antifa 11 may face justice.

And that pioneering approach to holding Antifa accountable may prove pivotal for America well beyond the precincts of Pacific Beach.


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Natural Law and the Abortion Debate - William Kilpatrick


​ by William Kilpatrick

Don’t confuse natural law with doing what comes naturally.


When debating the heated moral issues of the day, such as abortion, same-sex marriage and transgender ideology, people of faith often invoke the natural law to show that their position is backed not only by religion but also by reason.

But natural law is not a simple concept.  It can sometimes be confusing.  For example, natural law is often said to be based on “self-evident” truths, but many of these truths are not immediately self-evident.  The Declaration of Independence states that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”

Yet it’s difficult to establish the equality of all men by simple observation.  Some are tall and some are short, some are healthy and some are sick, some are born into wealth and some into poverty. But even those who fall into ill-health and poverty continue to believe that they are on some level equal to others.  Jews and Christians believe that this equality comes from the fact that we are made in the image of God.  And notice that even Jefferson, who was more of a deist than a theist, manages to bring the “Creator” in to buttress his declaration of self-evident equality. 

Another difficulty with natural law theory is that it maintains that the path to virtue can be found by following the law of our nature, while at the same time urging us to overcome our nature and even do battle with it.

The confusion arises from the fact that we often conflate “natural” with “doing what comes naturally.”  In fact, natural law often requires humans to suppress what seem like natural impulses and instincts.  And this is particularly true in the sexual realm.

This conflict between the natural law and natural impulses provides another instance of the mutually reinforcing relationship between natural law and revealed law. Although natural law is based on reason, the reasonableness of natural law can more easily be grasped by reference to religion.  Simple observation will tell us that there is something wrong with human nature –that we can’t simply follow our impulses.  But religion—and I’m speaking specifically of Biblical religion—tells us why.

In his “Letter to the Romans,” which is largely a treatise on different kinds of law, Saint Paul speaks of two laws that pull him in different directions:

So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand.  For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members.” (Rom 7:21-23)

What accounts for this torn nature?  Christians attribute it to the fall of man which is described on page 3 of Genesis.

In Genesis, Adam and Eve are described as living in a state of innocence and, accordingly, though they “were both naked,” they “were not ashamed.”

Then they were tempted by the serpent and succumbed to the temptation, and immediately “the eyes of both were opened and they knew that they were naked and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons” (Genesis 3: 7).

In their state of original innocence, Adam and Eve could do whatever came naturally (i.e., walking around in the nude), but after yielding to the serpent’s temptation, they could no longer trust their natural instincts, so they initiated the new custom of wearing clothes—a custom that is still practiced to this very day.  Although nudists ague that it is perfectly natural, most of us feel that walking down the street au natural is not consistent with our nature.

So, from Paul’s point of view, human nature is fallen nature.  But it’s not so badly fallen that we can no longer tell right from wrong.  For one thing, all men have a natural knowledge of God: “For what can be known about God is plain to them because God has shown it to them” (Rom 1:19)

Paul’s argument is what is commonly called the argument from design:

Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made (Rom 1:20). 

We can deduce the existence of God from the design in nature. Moreover, as Paul points out in subsequent verses, the design we see in our own bodies strongly suggests that we are made for certain types of sexual behavior and not others (Romans 1:  26-27).

Not everyone, however, subscribes to a belief in fallen human nature.  Rather, some believe that human nature is essentially good.  Consequently, they maintain, we can trust our nature and follow wherever our natural instincts and passions lead.  We ought, in other words, be free to do whatever we desire to do.   As mythologist Joseph Campbell once advised, we should follow our bliss.

People who believe thusly may still believe in God, but they do not conceive of him as a law giver; rather they think of him as a grandfather God who wants us to do whatever we think will make us happy.  They’re sure that God couldn’t possibly be asking us to deny ourselves.

In this view, we still live in a state of original innocence.  And if some people do bad things, it’s not their fault—it’s the fault of their parents or of society. The idea is pleasing to many, but when put into practice, the results are rarely pleasant. For example, people who take this view tend to think that the way to solve the problem of crime is to defund the police and give more funding to social workers and mental health professionals.

We are already seeing the results of the “defund the police movement.” Predictably, it has led to fewer police and more crime.  Natural law philosophers call it “the law of natural consequences.”  But you don’t have to be a professor to understand it.  People who live in high-crime areas knew from the start that “defund the police” wouldn’t work.  It was only the elites who lived well-protected in urban and suburban bubbles who thought the theory held promise.

Earlier, I said that natural law can be confusing. The reasoning of natural law theorists is sometimes difficult to follow. On the other hand, some natural law principles are quite clear and straightforward. This is the case with the most contested moral issue of the day—abortion.

It’s evident to most people that it’s wrong to kill an innocent human being. Even abortion advocates—many of them, at least-- don’t deny that.  Instead, they argue that the baby in the womb is not yet human, that it’s only a clump of cells, and that you only become fully human when you can walk and talk and contribute to the gross national product.

Another tactic is to suggest, in effect, that the baby is not really innocent; rather it is a parasite attempting to colonize a woman’s body without her consent. In the parallel world of abortion fanatics, any argument will do.

Some even argue that abortions are okay in the first 15-20 weeks of a pregnancy because the fetus feels no pain.  Aside from being inaccurate, the argument is inane.  The implication is that killing another person is permissible as long as it’s done painlessly.  (“Here, grandpa, just take 3 more of these pills and pretty soon you’ll be asleep.  By the way, where do you keep your will?”).

The weakness of these arguments is suggested by the strength of the anger with which abortion rights are defended. Increasingly, abortion advocates are threatening violence against those who would deny them their “rights.” There have already been dozens of violent attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers, and dozens more seem likely.

This is not surprising. Abortion is a violent act, and the more the pro-abortion movement is resisted, the more violent it will become.

 And the more unnatural. It used to be that advocates for abortion admitted that it was a regrettable decision—something that should be kept “rare.” But more and more, the left presents abortion as a positive—something to be celebrated. Women are even encouraged to “shout out your abortion”—as though the death of a child was some kind of heroic achievement.

You don’t need a natural law theorist to tell you that this is unnatural. It represents a complete revolt against the natural order of things—in this case, a mother’s natural desire to provide love and protection for her child.

There used to be a joke about a radical imam who threatened to kill anyone who claimed that Islam is not a religion of peace. It would be funny except that such threats are sometimes made and carried out in defense of Islam. The lesson for us? Many abortion activists and their political supporters are now issuing thinly veiled death threats to those who oppose their agenda. It would be a mistake not to take them seriously.


William Kilpatrick is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.  His books include Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West (Ignatius Press), What Catholics Need to Know About Islam (Sophia Press), and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Jihad.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Is America ready for a Jewish NYS governor? - Cindy Grosz


​ by Cindy Grosz

Zeldin’s battle is hard, not impossible. He can get voters from Independent and Democratic parties if he sticks to his Jewish roots


Lee  Zeldin and Cindy Grosz
Lee Zeldin and Cindy Grosz                                                                              Courtesy

In a year of increasing anti-Semitism, an administration in Washington DC that stands against Israel and a country where power is in the hands of a 32- year-old social media image of a fake past, red lipstick and a victim of “extreme traumatizing” like many in her generation of entitled adults, is the United States ready for a Jewish Governor from the Republican Party from a deep blue state?

Only time will tell, on Election Day in November.

I am trying to keep personal feelings aside and actually share facts because I have known Lee Zeldin, his family and his biggest supporters for years. Many of them have been in my home carefully strategizing winning campaigns.

This primary choice was hard. We had three good men I am friends with in a battle. When I went to vote, the poll watcher, GOP staffer and Zeldin supporter asked me, “You’re voting for Lee, right?” I responded, “It’s like picking one of my cats.” I do believe your vote is private in America, even if nothing else is. I don’t take that privilege for granted. Neither should you.

Publicly, I can share this:

Zeldin, upon his swearing into Congress, introduced himself to the major Jewish organization leaders and told them they have a voice for them. He proved it too many times to count. Some highlights:

  • Fighting the original Iran Nuclear Deal
  • Attending the Opening of the Jerusalem Embassy
  • Co-Chair; House Republican Israel Caucus
  • Outspoken against BDS

Not Another Pataki

New York in 2022 is not the New York that elected George Pataki. The biggest win on New York’s primary night will not make the headlines it should. Progressive AOC backed Jumaane Williams came in second, and ahead of “common sense moderate” Tom Suozzi in the Democratic primary for Governor. Kathy Hochul won with over 100,000 votes more than ALL the republican voters combined. As the summer is expected to see more republican voters move to “red” states, the road to victory seems impossible, even with crime, food shortages and war.

This makes Lee’s work tougher. As the progressives join to back Hochul, targets against Jews and Israel seem eminent.

Jews To The Rescue

If any leadership can take claim to helping Zeldin win his primary, it’s the Nassau County GOP team. Chairman Joe Cairo has an award-winning strategy; work with the Jews!

Within the past two years, Bruce Blakeman, Mazi Philip and Ari Brown were elected. To watch an Ethiopian Jew sworn into office at Chabad and then stand in Albany eating Glatt kosher food and hearing an Assemblyman quote Torah at his swearing in is not only winning for Jews, but winning for everyone. More community activists are stepping up to volunteer as committee members and club leaders. Chairman Cairo is embracing them.

It’s not perfect, but it’s a step in the right direction.

Across New York, there are other chairmen that aren’t so welcoming to us. And, they aren’t winning like us. (Nassau resident)

We also have to address the issues tied to grassroots groups who have outspoken members denying the Holocaust and support other countries that harbor Nazi sympathizers.

I would be remiss not to tell the constituents in Michael Lawler’s congressional district to support him. Every single issue our community questions, I contact him immediately and he responds even quicker.

Zeldin’s Winning Strategy

Zeldin’s battle is hard, but not impossible. He can win over voters from the Independent and Democratic parties if he sticks to his Jewish roots. Zeldin needs to stick to family, faith and freedom, something he actually practices and has believed in since his youth.

It’s in our Talmud, Jewish law, and it was what Schindler’s Jews engraved in the ring they gave him as he fled the Nazis: “Whoever saves a single life is considered by scripture to have saved the whole world.’

Lee Zeldin, you can be our modern day David, our Moses and our survivors of the Shoah who built Israel. You have New York in your hands. May you win with Mazel, Bracha and Simcha.


Cindy Grosz is The Jewess Patriot, Talk Radio’s Premiere Jewish Activist syndicated through Real Talk Radio and the Black and White Network. The show streams through iHeart, Spotify and Deezer and out of Israel through Jewish Podcasts. She is the chair of Jewish Vote GOP and a Jewish advisor for many 2022 candidates. See her on the ZOA website. She can be reached through


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Thursday, June 30, 2022

Tucker Carlson exposes the totalitarian Biden regime - Rajan Laad


​ by Rajan Laad

Is this the world's leading democracy or a tinpot third-world dictatorship?

Since its inauguration, the Biden administration has displayed its absolute contempt for freedom and democracy.

Some examples:

The January 6 probe's sole function is to prevent President Trump from running in 2024. Parents who opposed the teaching of Critical Race Theory to young children were branded as domestic terrorists.  The Disinformation Governance Board's function is to intimidate citizens from freely expressing themselves. Biden recently called Trump supporters "the most extreme political organization that's existed in recent American history."  

The Democrat government-ordered vaccine and mask mandates encroached upon freedom of choice and lockdowns that restricted the movement of citizens.  

But beyond these overarching anti-Democratic acts, the Biden administration has also baselessly targeted specific political opponents.

Tucker Carlson reminded his viewers of political opponents who have been targeted since Biden’s inauguration in his monologue yesterday. 

The following is the gist of what Carlson referred to:

On Jan. 27, 2021, days after Biden's inauguration, the Justice Department arrested Douglass Mackey, known online as Ricky Vaughn for creating Internet memes that made fun of Hillary Clinton. 

On Feb. 3, 2021, the FBI raided the homes of Russell Taylor and Alan Hostetter for organized a lawful political rally on January 6 for which they had a permit.

On April 28, 2021, the FBI seized the cell phones and computers belonging to Trump’s former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, despite not charging him. This was a violation of client-attorney privilege 

On June 24, 2021, the FBI raided the home of a Giuliani associate, George Dixon who was working on a documentary about Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and their shady business dealings in Ukraine. 

On Jan. 19, 2021, Infowars's Owen Shroyer was arrested and charged because he told the crowd on January 6, "Today we march for the Capitol because on this historic January 6, 2021, we have to let our congressmen and women know, and we have to let Mike Pence know, that they stole the election." 

On Nov. 6, 2021, the FBI raided the homes of journalists who work for Project Veritas and the organization's founder, James O'Keefe. They reported on a diary written by Joe Biden's daughter, Ashley, in which she revealed, that Biden behaved inappropriately with her which made her a sex addict later in life.

On Nov. 15, 2021, the Justice Department arrested one of the most prominent critics of Biden and former Trump advisor Steve Bannon for refusing to cooperate with the January 6 probe.

On Nov. 16, 2021, the FBI raided the home of Sherrona Bishop, a former campaign manager for Congresswoman Lauren Boebert of Colorado. The FBI confiscated Bishop's cell phone but never charged her with a crime. 

Also on Nov. 16, 2021, the FBI raided the home of Mesa County Republican Clerk Tina Peters. Peters had questions about the legitimacy of the last election.

On June 3, Peter Navarro, a trade aide to Donald Trump, was arrested at Washington National Airport, put in leg irons, and sent to jail. Navarro had sued the January 6 Committee, he claimed executive privilege in his communications with the president.

On June 9 of this year, the FBI arrested a leading Republican candidate for governor of Michigan Ryan Kelley. Kelley had participated in the January 6 protests.

On June 22, the FBI seized the phone of former Trump attorney John Eastman in a parking lot. Eastman wasn’t even presented with a warrant.

On June 23, the FBI searched the home of former Trump DOJ official Jeff Clark. The search came one day before the January 6 Committee held a televised hearing claiming Clark had a role in attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

The Biden administration has also targeted the January 6 protestors. Some of the protestors were placed in solitary confinement for prolonged periods of time. Such was the torment that one among them committed suicide.

The criminalizing of political opponents only occurs in third-world dictatorships where the despot wants to leave no stone unturned in his monopoly on power and the narrative. All opposition is outlawed. Questioning journalists, members of the opposition party, protestors, activists, and even artists are targeted.

These are not the kind of occurrences expected in one of the world's leading democracies.

The goal behind these arrests, confiscations, and raids is to outlaw political opposition and association with political opponents.  

The targeting is also supposed to function as a deterrent. 

Most people just don't want the hassle of being arrested in public or having their devices confiscated so they stay away from Trump or the GOP and keep their ideas to themselves. 

If Trump wins in 2024, there may be several talented individuals, perhaps in the private sector, who could serve in Trump's cabinet present fresh ideas, or even run for president themselves later and work toward the betterment of the nation. But they look at the various witch hunts and choose to stay away because they do not want any suffering or the destruction of their reputation. The result is progress is halted and Washington's stale and inept ideas prevail.

This is how the power grab succeeds. 

In addition to the overt targeting of opponents. The Democrats also want to make elections irrelevant. They infiltrate election infrastructure. They also amended electoral laws to enable fraud. They use big tech and suppress stories critical of Democrats and concoct stories about their opponents. The list of assaults on Democracy is relentless. It is ironic that they even call themselves Democrats.

They leave the border open and allow an uncontrolled influx of illegal aliens. They even attempted to give voting rights to non-citizens in local elections. The attempt failed, perhaps they will try again or resort to fast-track citizenship for illegal migrants, hoping to increase their vote base. 

Unabashedly working alongside the Democrats in this power grab is the news media.

Once upon a time, a few papers and TV channels had a monopoly over the news. They could push whatever narrative they desired and consumers really had very little choice.

Those days are over. The consumer now has numerous news sources to draw from. The facts can no longer be suppressed. However, the undesired side effect of the news boom is consumers have volatile short-term memories.

They may remember minute details about a news broadcast when the Berlin Wall came down, but they may not recall any details about an explosive news story from the previous day.

This volatile memory often enables the powerful to incrementally commit violations. Each violation may seem insignificant on its own, but put together we see a trend.

When the state of affairs descends into chaos, the opposition has a function to beat the drums of warning to inform the citizens. 

In addition to high inflation, surging gas prices, and the open border this authoritarian power grab should be a leading campaign issue.

Tucker meticulously detailing the political opponents that the Biden administration unfairly and systematically targeted is an eminent journalistic effort. 

Tucker Carlson is among the few who speak truth to power, irrespective of party.

If only there were more such as him!


Rajan Laad


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter