Saturday, October 15, 2022

Saudi claim that Biden asked to delay oil cuts by one month raises election influence concerns - Nicholas Ballasy


by Nicholas Ballasy

Former President Donald Trump was impeached ahead of the 2020 general election for his phone conversation with the Ukrainian president about then-presidential candidate Joe Biden's son Hunter's business dealings in Ukraine.

The government of Saudi Arabia released an official statement saying that the Biden administration asked them to delay their planned oil production cuts for one month, which raises questions of a possible attempt to influence the 2022 midterm elections.

In the statement Thursday, Saudia Arabia said, "the Government of the Kingdom clarified through its continuous consultation with the US Administration that all economic analyses indicate that postponing the OPEC+ decision for a month, according to what has been suggested, would have had negative economic consequences." 

The Saudi statement prompted Wisconsin Republican Rep. Tom Tiffany to request that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi open a "formal investigation" into the situation, arguing that it was an "attempt to coordinate with a foreign government to influence the U.S. election" if the request did indeed occur.

White House national security spokesman John Kirby responded to the Saudi statement but didn't confirm or deny that the request to delay the production cut was made.

"The Saudi Foreign Ministry can try to spin or deflect, but the facts are simple," he said. "In recent weeks, the Saudis conveyed to us — privately and publicly — their intention to reduce oil production, which they knew would increase Russian revenues and blunt the effectiveness of sanctions."

President Biden has said he is rethinking the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia after the decision to cut oil production.

"I am in the process, when the House and Senate comes back, there's going to be some consequences for what they've done with Russia," Biden said.

Some Democrats in Congress have suggested ways to respond to the Saudi decision, including removing missile defense systems from Saudi Arabia and U.S. troops from the United Arab Emirates.

Former President Donald Trump was impeached in December 2019 for his phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about then-presidential candidate Joe Biden's son Hunter's business dealings in Ukraine.

"There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great," Trump said during the call, according to the transcript.

At the time, Democrats argued that he had solicited assistance from a foreign government to influence the 2020 presidential election. Trump was ultimately acquitted in the Senate.

Tiffany said in his letter to Pelosi that the White House should "release the transcript of any calls between President Biden, Vice President Harris, any cabinet official or other senior administration official and representatives of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia regarding oil production that took place in the last 30 days."

Nicholas Ballasy


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

China’s Xi Jinping grabs more power, pushing Asia closer to war - Gordon G. Chang


by Gordon G. Chang

Consensus is 20th National Congress will give Xi essentially unchecked power to take back Taiwan  


A messianic ruler, already considered the world’s most influential figure, is about to get absolute power over the planet’s most-populous state. 

What happens next will be remembered for generations. Chances are, Chinese President Xi Jinping will lead China into war.  

The drama begins at the Communist Party’s 20th National Congress, which starts Sunday. At the Congress’s first plenum, which convenes immediately after the Congress ends, the members of the new Politburo Standing Committee will be revealed as they walk from behind a curtain. Everyone expects Xi to lead the pack as ruler for the next five years. Moreover, most think he will be able to exercise essentially unrestrained power during this term. 


What will Xi do with such power? Among other things, he wants to redraw the map of the world, with force if necessary. During his decade-long tenure as supremo, China has stepped up efforts to take territory from neighbors, especially India, Taiwan, Japan and the Philippines. 

The USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) and USS Nimitz (CVN 68) Carrier Strike Groups steam in formation, in the South China Sea, Monday, July 6, 2020. (US NAVY)

The USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) and USS Nimitz (CVN 68) Carrier Strike Groups steam in formation, in the South China Sea, Monday, July 6, 2020. (US NAVY) (Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jason Tarleton/U.S. Navy via AP)

His ambitions extend far beyond China’s neighborhood, however. Xi is a revolutionary. He speaks in benign-sounding phrases, such as "a community of shared future for mankind."  

His words, however, cloak breathtaking ambition. As subordinates make clear, Xi has been promoting the imperial-era notion that Chinese rulers not only had the Mandate of Heaven over tianxia — "All Under Heaven" — but they also had an obligation to rule the world. 

"The Chinese have always held that the world is united and all under heaven are one family," Xi Jinping declared in his 2017 New Year’s Message. 

But why stop with Planet Earth? In 2018, Chinese officials talked about the moon and Mars as sovereign Chinese territory.

At the moment, Taiwan is particularly in Xi’s crosshairs. In March, the Chinese central government, in its Work Report to the National People’s Congress, declared it was committed to "resolving the Taiwan question in the new era." This is the first time since Xi came to power, in late 2012, that this once-a-year document included a timeframe for annexing the island republic.  

"New era" is one of Xi’s favorite phrases. He started using it in November of last year and has partially explained its meaning in prior statements. "We should not allow this problem to be passed down from one generation to the next," he said in 2019. Many interpret "new era" as his tenure at the top of the Chinese political system. In short, Xi believes he will be the one to incorporate Taiwan into the People’s Republic of China. In any event, he has made its taking a test of his legitimacy. 

And he has been making preparations to absorb Taiwan. There is, of course, the fastest military buildup since the Second World War, but particularly chilling are his efforts to mobilize the civilian population.  

For instance, he sponsored amendments to the National Defense Law, which were effective the first of last year. The changes, which contemplate the mass mobilization of society, transferred powers from a civilian organ, the central government’s State Council, to a military one, the Communist Party’s Central Military Commission. Xi heads the CMC, as it is called.  

Taiwan's Foreign Minister Joseph Wu, left, speaks with U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as she prepares to leave in Taipei, Taiwan, Wednesday, Aug. 3, 2022. Pelosi left Taiwan after a visit that heightened tensions with China, saying Wednesday that she and other members of Congress in her delegation showed they will not abandon their commitment to the self-governing island.

Taiwan's Foreign Minister Joseph Wu, left, speaks with U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as she prepares to leave in Taipei, Taiwan, Wednesday, Aug. 3, 2022. Pelosi left Taiwan after a visit that heightened tensions with China, saying Wednesday that she and other members of Congress in her delegation showed they will not abandon their commitment to the self-governing island. ((Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs via AP))

The amended National Defense Law "embodies the concept that everyone should be involved in national defense," reports the Party’s Global Times, summarizing the words of an unnamed CMC official. "All national organizations, armed forces, political parties, civil groups, enterprises, social organizations, and other organizations should support and take part in the development of national defense, fulfill national defense duties, and carry out national defense missions according to the law."  

Xi is doing more than amending laws. Communist Party cadres are ordering privately owned factories to stop making products for the civilian sector so they can turn out items for the military. In fact, the party is now operating factories once owned by entrepreneurs who have fled, not wanting to be part of the war machine. 

"I think this really gives the green light for him to dispatch the military on any pretext that he feels is necessary to defend his power," Charles Burton of the Ottawa-based Macdonald-Laurier Institute told John Batchelor, the CBS radio host, referring to Xi Jinping and the National Defense Law amendments.  

If Xi emerges from the first plenum with essentially unchecked power — a safe bet according to the consensus view — there is no telling what he will do. For many, a full-scale invasion of, say, Taiwan, is unthinkable, but Russia’s grab for Ukraine at the beginning of this year was also unthinkable. The aggressive Russian President Vladimir Putin then, like Xi now, was the one man in a one-man political system. 

So, watch out. Xi Jinping has told us what he will do; he is making the preparations to do it, and after the first plenum he will have the power to accomplish his dangerous aims. 



Gordon G. Chang is the author of several books including "The Coming Collapse of China." Follow him on Twitter @GordonGChang.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden Administration Repeating Obama's Mistake: Is Biden Being a "Russian Stooge"? - Majid Rafizadeh


by Majid Rafizadeh

So far, sadly, instead of standing with the people of Iran heroically confronting a regime that chants "Death to America", Biden tsk-tsks, says he is "gravely concerned," but effectively says nothing. He still wants a deal with the mullahs that will quickly bring Iran to nuclear weapons capability

  • "While the majority of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Parliament chants 'Death to America' & supports the Khamenei loyal police for their barbaric actions the leader of the free world (Joe Biden) is silent. Why?" — Iranian Americans for Liberty, Twitter, October 2, 2022.

  • Nika Shakarami, a 17-year-old girl, was one of the many women who was arrested for burning her hijab. According to the forensic doctor, she was repeatedly raped, beaten and her dead body was delivered to her family with smashed nose and broken skull.

  • In August 2015, Obama delivered another speech justifying his [Iran] deal, also immediately exposed as a lie: "After two years of negotiations, we have achieved a detailed arrangement that permanently prohibits Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It cuts off all of Iran's pathways to a bomb. It contains the most comprehensive inspection and verification regime ever negotiated to monitor a nuclear program."

  • However, as the "sunset clauses" quickly revealed, there was nothing "permanent" about it. Iran was to have all the nuclear weapons it wanted in a few short years, along with ballistic missiles to deliver them.

  • Obama's billions which were reported as part of a plan to turn Iran in to a "friend," did the opposite. Iran took the billions, enriched even more uranium, hid what it was doing even further from inspectors, took over Lebanon, and began a war in Yemen.

  • So far, sadly, instead of standing with the people of Iran heroically confronting a regime that chants "Death to America", Biden tsk-tsks, says he is "gravely concerned," but effectively says nothing. He still wants a deal with the mullahs that will quickly bring Iran to nuclear weapons capability, reward Iran's aggression with a trillion dollars, enable it to oppress women and kill more of its innocent citizens, and empower it to help Russia with even more military equipment to crush Ukraine.

  • Is Biden -- whose family received $3.5 million from the widow of the mayor of Moscow; who, on day one, effectively crippled US oil and gas exploration and exports, thereby, as the price of oil and natural gas suddenly shot up, funding Putin's war on Ukraine, and who gave Putin the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to blackmail Europe in winter -- once again just being a "Russian stooge"?

US President Joe Biden still wants a deal with the Iranian regime that will quickly bring Iran to nuclear weapons capability, reward Iran's aggression with a trillion dollars, and empower it to help Russia with even more military equipment to crush Ukraine. Pictured: Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi hold a meeting in Tehran on July 19, 2022. (Photo by Sergei Savostyanov/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images)

While the Iranian regime is arresting, wounding, torturing and killing protesters, all the Biden administration appears to be concerned with is trying to revive a nuclear deal that will soon give Iran unlimited nuclear weapons capability; lift sanctions against the expansionist regime of Iran thereby pumping billions of dollars into its treasury for further adventurism; build nuclear weapons; provide Russia with still more deadly military equipment; and empower the mullahs even further to oppress and murder their innocent, fed-up civilian population for the "crime" of women showing too much hair. Their mothers must be very proud of them.

In a further blow to the Iranian people heroically confronting the brutal regime of Iran, the Biden administration is reportedly releasing $7 billion to the ruling mullahs. Iranian Americans for Liberty wrote in a tweet:

"While the majority of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Parliament chants "Death to America" & supports the Khamenei loyal police for their barbaric actions - the leader of the free world (Joe Biden) is silent. Why? "

The Iranian regime has cut off access to the Internet, and security forces continue to fire rifles and tear gas at the protesters, resulting in at least 185 people killed and hundreds of wounded.

Twenty-one human rights groups, including the Center for Human Rights in Iran, signed and sent a letter on October 6, 2022, to the offices of U.S. President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and the U.S. Representative to the UN Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, stating:

"The death of 22-year-old Mahsa (Jina) Amini in state custody in Iran on September 13 has set in motion massive nationwide protests and strikes in at least 103 cities and towns across all 31 of Iran's provinces, with scores of protesters killed and many more injured.

"Thousands of people have been arrested, including journalists, activists and artists. A number of recent detainees are facing grave custodial abuse and torture. On September 30, Islamic Republic security forces cracked down violently on protesters in Zahedan in Sistan and Baluchestan Province in southeastern Iran, killing dozens of Baluch-Iranians. On October 2, students at the prestigious Sharif University were under siege for hours, with security forces shooting at them and detaining them en masse. On October 4, it was reported that 16-year-old protester Nika Shakarami was killed by Iranian state security forces and forcibly disappeared. Many more deaths, injuries and arrests may be obscured by the government's internet black out."

Nika Shakarami, a 17-year-old girl, was one of the many women who was arrested for burning her hijab. According to the forensic doctor, she was repeatedly raped, beaten and her dead body was delivered to her family with smashed nose and broken skull.

Just the same, amidst Iran's bloody protests, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre pointed out that the "JCPOA [Obama's nuclear deal] is the best way for us". This obsession with reaching a deal with the mullahs and lifting sanctions against them, all while turning a blind eye on all their crimes and human rights violations, existed during the Obama administration as well.

Middle East scholar Walid Phares wrote in a tweet:

"The collaboration between the #IranLobby in the #Biden Adm & the #IranRegme has culminated through an underground deal, where billions will be transferred to the regime and the latter would release hostages kept in detention for that purpose, while the people of Iran is uprising."

During the 2009 nationwide uprisings in Iran, the Obama Administration policy was silence in the face of the Iranian regime's bloodshed, human rights violations, and crackdowns that killed and wounded peaceful protesters. In July 2015, Obama justified his deal by incorrectly claiming:

"The bottom line is this. This nuclear deal meets the national security interest of the United States and our allies. It prevents the most serious threat, Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon."

In August 2015, Obama delivered another speech justifying his deal, also immediately exposed as a lie:

"After two years of negotiations, we have achieved a detailed arrangement that permanently prohibits Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It cuts off all of Iran's pathways to a bomb. It contains the most comprehensive inspection and verification regime ever negotiated to monitor a nuclear program."

However, as the "sunset clauses" quickly revealed, there was nothing "permanent" about it. Iran was to have all the nuclear weapons it wanted in a few short years, along with ballistic missiles to deliver them.

Obama's billions which were reported as part of a plan to turn Iran in to a "friend," did the opposite. Iran took the billions, enriched even more uranium, hid what it was doing even further from inspectors, took over Lebanon, and began a war in Yemen.

As Mitt Romney said in 2012:

"[W]hen millions of Iranians took to the streets in June of 2009, when they demanded freedom from a cruel regime that threatens the world, when they cried out, 'Are you with us, or are you with them?' – the American president was silent".

The 21 human rights groups told the Biden administration in the October 6, 2022 letter that the Iranian people need the support of the United States and called on President Biden to:

  • Forcefully and publicly to condemn, at the highest levels, the Iranian government for violence against women and civil society activists; call on the authorities to end the internet blackout, call off the violent crackdown, allow for peaceful protests, and release all wrongfully detained individuals;
  • Lead, in concert with democratic allies at the United Nations in Geneva, diplomatic efforts to establish an urgent special session immediately after the conclusion of UNHRC's 51st regular session to bring governments into a debate addressing Iran's current violent crackdown and its ongoing human rights crisis;
  • Lead, in concert with democratic allies, the establishment of an independent, impartial investigative mechanism at the UNHRC that investigates crimes committed against the Iranian people by their government and documented over decades by UN human rights mechanisms.

So far, sadly, instead of standing with the people of Iran heroically confronting a regime that chants "Death to America", Biden tsk-tsks, says he is "gravely concerned," but effectively says nothing. He still wants a deal with the mullahs that will quickly bring Iran to nuclear weapons capability, reward Iran's aggression with a trillion dollars, enable it to oppress women and kill more of its innocent citizens, and empower it to help Russia with even more military equipment to crush Ukraine.

Is Biden -- whose family received $3.5 million from the widow of the mayor of Moscow; who, on day one, effectively crippled US oil and gas exploration and exports, thereby, as the price of oil and natural gas suddenly shot up, funding Putin's war on Ukraine, and who gave Putin the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to blackmail Europe in winter -- once again just being a "Russian stooge"?

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

How to Lose Friends and Influence Over People - Mohammed Khalid Alyahya


by Mohammed Khalid Alyahya

Hat tip: Dr. Jean-Charles Bensoussan 

A decade of Obama-Biden foreign policy has broken the Middle East and America’s security order


Royal Court of Saudi Arabia/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Americans have a reputation, with others and in their own national literature, for being careless and breaking things. Often this is because they are so admirably creative, dynamic, and unattached to the past. But for the last two decades, the epicenter of American carelessness has been the Middle East, an area of the world that seems to encourage fantasies among all Westerners, yet where real-world margins for error are small. The result has been a series of disasters for the peoples of the region and for American prestige. This week brought what looks like another unforced error in policymaking, fed by hubris, fantasy, airy talk, and a refusal to acknowledge reality.

On Tuesday, White House national security spokesman John Kirby announced that President Joe Biden will be reevaluating America’s relationship with Saudi Arabia after OPEC+ announced the previous week that it would cut oil production. Kirby’s announcement followed a statement by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., claiming that Saudi Arabia is helping to “underwrite Putin’s war” through OPEC+. “As Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,” Menendez said, “I will not green-light any cooperation with Riyadh until the Kingdom reassesses its position with respect to the war in Ukraine.”

As a Saudi who loves the United States, and believes deeply that our two countries need each other, the only word that comes to mind regarding the contemporary “reevaluation” of our relations is: obscene.

It was the Obama administration that decided to give Vladimir Putin a foothold in the eastern Mediterranean, which it sold to the American people as a way to “deescalate” the civil war in Syria. As the United States romanced Putin, offering him Crimea and warm water ports in Syria in exchange for pulling Iran’s irons out of the fire over the past decade, U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Israel have had no choice but to cope. Last month, while Russian-operated Iranian drones and missiles were pounding Kyiv, Riyadh used its diplomatic leverage to obtain the release of American and British POWs from Putin.

America saddled us with the reality of a neighboring country controlled by Iranian troops and the Russian air force. Worse, as part of its Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Obama administration sent tens of billions of dollars flowing into Iranian coffers—money that was used to demolish Iraq, crush Syria, create chaos in Lebanon, and threaten Saudi territory from Yemen. Iranian rocket and drone strikes on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia are now routine. In response to the barrage of missiles on Saudi infrastructure last year, the Biden administration withdrew U.S. missile defense batteries from Saudi territory.

Having watched Russian forces support or directly commit atrocities against innocent civilians and facilitate the use of chemical weapons for seven years in Syria, the Saudi government was quick to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Unlike many in the West, who expected a short, parade-ground war, the Saudis understood full well what Putin was capable of. So did the Israelis.

Yet even as countries that had survived two decades of American experiments in our backyards came together to achieve extraordinary degrees of political and economic normalization, it was never at America’s expense. We have always sought to honor America’s role in our defense and as a regional peacemaker, and as a place where many of us have lived and gone to school. That’s why it was so painful and alarming for us when the Biden team came into office in January 2021 promising to “recalibrate our relationship with Saudi Arabia,” and to “sideline the crown prince in order to increase pressure on the royal family to find a steadier replacement,” and to “make [the Saudis] pay the price, and make them in fact the pariah that they are.” That’s not how friends talk.

The United States now claims it will have to “reevaluate” its relationship with Saudi Arabia again, apparently because OPEC+ declined the president’s requests over the last few months to aid his reelection prospects, which are being impaired by skyrocketing energy prices. As someone who loves Americans and has many dear friends there, I take no pleasure whatsoever in the energy inflation impacting so many of their livelihoods. But the unstable situation in the Middle East, which America continues to exacerbate by licensing and funding Iranian terror, does not allow Saudi Arabia such a wide margin of error that it can make decisions that affect the stability of the global energy market for the sake of one party’s success in America’s midterm elections.

In addition to the rhetorical, diplomatic, and security damage the Obama-Biden era has imposed on Saudi Arabia (and Israel), the Biden administration has also chosen to wage war on carbon-based sources of energy with little realistic thought about how an energy transition should be managed. The “Green New Deal” is not just a silly fantasy promoted by unserious congresspeople who don’t understand how the world or American economies work. It was and is a strategy aimed at handing power over both fossil fuels and clean energy technologies to the Russians and the Chinese.

There is also the matter of the administration’s hypocrisy. It is one thing to advocate for the elimination of fossil fuels and the expulsion of Putin’s Russia from global energy markets; it is quite another thing to do so while continuing to purchase Russian energy yourself. In April of 2022, over a month after the war started and after Western sanctions had already been passed, the United States imported more Russian oil than any month on record. Last week, the Financial Times reported that “EU countries have paid more than 100 billion euros to Russia for fossil fuels since the invasion of Ukraine.” All during this period, the administration has publicly berated Saudi Arabia, Israel, and other U.S. allies in the Gulf for not doing enough against Russia. This performance is not convincing to anyone: not to Saudis, Israelis, Emiratis, Indians, Russians, or Ukrainians. Judging by certain opinion polls, it is not convincing to many Americans, either.

Over the last 80 years, the Saudis have never known a world without a strong relationship with the United States. In exchange for the defense architecture that America built to protect itself and its allies, and the weapons and defense systems that America sells, Saudi Arabia has held up its end of the bargain by collaborating on global oil markets, providing a large and eager market for the U.S. defense industry, loaning out bases for the U.S. military, and cooperating on regional intelligence matters important to both countries. There were some very difficult times, of course, in the years leading up to and including the global war on terror. But since then, Saudi society and governance has only moved further in the direction that Americans have been advocating for generations. It was out of a sense of self-preservation, but also goodwill, that the Saudi government pleaded with the Americans not to go ahead with the invasion of Iraq, which it knew would be a disaster.

In exchange, the United States has either inadvertently (Bush) or deliberately (Obama) facilitated the regional ambitions of Iran, the existential enemy of Saudi Arabia and Israel. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, and Yemen are now in flames. The Obama administration likewise tried hard to cooperate with enemies of Jerusalem and Riyadh in Egypt (the Muslim Brotherhood) and Gaza (Hamas).

Far from helping Putin, America’s regional partners have been watching in horror as the Biden administration has sought to make this whole situation worse by continuing to bless Russia’s lucrative collaboration in Iran’s nuclear program and relying on Russian negotiators for the revived nuclear deal, even as Iran sends drones to Russia that have been used to kill soldiers from NATO countries. It was the Biden administration, moreover, which began the war in Ukraine by advising Volodymyr Zelensky not to fight and to leave the country; while the Ukrainians were demonstrating their heroic courage against Russian expansionism to the world, the White House and State Department were evacuating American diplomats and telling others to do the same. This made a profound impact on U.S. allies around the world.

The majority of both elite and ordinary Saudis share my affection for America and Americans, and wish neither Democrats nor Republicans ill. We need each other now, as we have ever since 1945, when Franklin Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz began the relationship that shaped so many of the years since. But if a party, any party, in power in the United States not only explicitly threatens Saudi Arabia, but makes good on many of its threats, Riyadh does not have much of a choice in how to react. Like any other country on the planet, it must protect its own people and its own national interests.

American allies in the region are witnessing the unraveling of a post-Soviet world order that they helped America build. As the White House doubles down on regional and global policies that are hastening that unraveling, stakeholders the world over are rightly reassessing their own security interests as America’s partners.

Mohammed Khalid Alyahya is a fellow at the Middle East Initiative of Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute’s Center for Middle East Peace and Security. He is the former Editor-in-Chief of Al Arabiya English.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

John Durham unmistakably puts FBI on trial alongside its Russian collusion informant - John Solomon


by John Solomon

With probing questions and relentless redirects, prosecutor exposes FBI for omissions, deletions, peculiar lack of curiosity and a $1 million bounty to pursue Trump.

Igor Danchenko is the named defendant at this week's trial, charged with lying as an informant in the now discredited Russia collusion investigation. But with probing questions and searing redirects, Special Counsel John Durham has turned the Russian researcher's trial in the U.S. District courtroom in Alexandria, Va., into an expose of stunning FBI failures and omissions in its now-infamous pursuit of Donald Trump for crimes that turned out to be nonexistent.

While the Hillary Clinton-spawned Russian collusion narrative has been the subject of a half dozen exhaustive investigations in the House, Senate and Justice Department, Durham has managed to use his third and widely assumed last trial to drop bombshell after bombshell that other inquiries failed to uncover. Even the most versed in the case have been stunned.

The effort began during pretrial motions.

Danchenko, the primary source for the now-debunked Steele dossier, was someone who had both lied to FBI agents and had troubling ties to Russian intelligence. But Durham revealed he was inexplicably hired by the bureau, despite that record, to be a paid confidential human source for three years.

Durham followed that with a stunner on day 1 of the trial, getting FBI senior analyst Brian Auten to reveal that the FBI had been unable to confirm a single fact in the Steele dossier by mid-October 2016 but nonetheless grabbed some of its most sensational claims about Trump and stuck them into a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant marked "verified" that authorized spying on the Trump campaign and former adviser Carter Page.

"On October 21, 2016, did you have any information to corroborate that information?" Durham asked, referring to the Carter Page FISA application submitted on that date.

"No," Auten replied. 

The bureau was so desperate to find corroboration to justify Steele's allegations that it offered up to $1 million to former British MI6 agent Christopher Steele, a paid researcher for Hillary Clinton's campaign, if he could corroborate his dossier. Steele did not, Auten told the jury.

That revelation even shocked former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, who conducted the first exhaustive probe that debunked the dossier and exposed FBI wrongdoing. Nunes told Just the News on Thursday he was never told about the $1 million payment despite subpoenaing the FBI.

"I hate to say this, but like a new shoe drops every day," Nunes told the John Solomon Reports podcast in referring to Durham's work. "And it's like every day we find out something new. And I mean, look, I don't know how you describe this $1 million payment or potential payment to Steele as anything other than what it is. It was a bounty program to get Donald Trump."

Kevin Brock, retired FBI chief of intelligence, told Just the News that the $1 million dangle was completely out of the norm for the bureau.

"The Crossfire Hurricane investigative team, managed by James Comey's headquarters executives, offered a truly outrageous sum of money to Christopher Steele as an 'incentive' to corroborate his own information," Brock said. "Paying money to incentivize a source risks a corrupt outcome. Paying a lot of money risks a lot of corruption. Incentive payments are not normal FBI policy.  

"The FBI has specific required procedures for corroborating or vetting a source, especially when that source's information is going to be used in any kind of affidavit. Having a source corroborate his own information is not one of those procedures. That's the job of the investigator."

But Brock said Auten's admission that the bureau submitted evidence to the FISA court that wasn't at all corroborated was even more damning under the bureau's own rules.

"If uncorroborated information is going to be used like this, FBI policy explicitly requires the swearing agent to clearly state that it is not known if the information is accurate or not," he said. "This wasn't done, and it can't be considered a mere oversight. Too many eyes all the way up the chain were laid on this affidavit. We're left with the disappointing conclusion that it was omitted on purpose."

Such revelations have even changed the minds of experts like former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy who, while critical, have tried to give the FBI the benefit of the doubt that its failures in the probe were mistakes but not corrupt behavior. Durham has now delivered "utter proof the FBI framed Trump and shielded Hunter Biden," McCarthy declared this week.

"The trial is highlighting the FBI's shocking malfeasance in the Trump-Russia 'collusion' probe," he wrote in a New York Post column this week.

The revelations of FBI failures kept coming. On day 3 of the trial, Durham used a redirect Q&A to press FBI Special Agent Kevin Helson regarding bringing on Danchenko as a confidential human source.

Durham noted that when Helson was writing a report to bring Danchenko on as a source, he had reported that there was no derogatory information about Danchenko, which wasn't accurate, since there had been a previous espionage case against him that was closed.

When Durham asked if Helson ever corrected that report, the FBI agent answered, "No."

On Wednesday, Durham got Auten to reveal he has been recommended for suspension for his role in the FBI's failure to tell the FISA court the whole truth during the probe code-named Crossfire Hurricane. Durham grilled Auten for failing to do the sort of digging an FBI analyst is assumed to do in a high-profile counterintelligence case.

"While working on Crossfire Hurricane, you were questioned as a witness in the Mueller investigation — you were in the middle of it," he said. "Did you guys even bother to pull phone records? Travel records? You did none of these things."

"Any particular reason why experienced FBI personnel could not request phone records?" Durham asked. "Ever run that number down to see phone records?"

Auten said he couldn't recall.

Durham took a mocking tone at one point on why the FBI did not challenge more aggressively the claims from Danchenko that Russian businessman Sergei Millian was a source of dirt against Trump, something that proved untrue.

"Millian was a vocal Trump supporter," Durham noted. "Would you find it peculiar that someone who was an avid Trump supporter would provide negative information about the Trump campaign? That is very peculiar, right? Almost unbelievable, wouldn't you say?"

Auten quietly agreed.

Durham signaled his intention to treat the FBI team with suspicion in one of his last pretrial motions, declaring that in "any investigation of potential collusion between the Russian Government and a political campaign, it is appropriate and necessary for the FBI to consider whether information it receives via foreign nationals may be a product of Russian intelligence efforts or disinformation."

In the end, the FBI did not seriously consider that possibility, even after the CIA warned of such possibilities and revealed Hillary Clinton's team was behind the planting of the narrative during the height of the 2016 election.

Brock said Durham has used the trial to tell a story of the FBI’s egregious failures.

“The FBI has been traditionally successful because of a simple formula: uncover facts that lead to evidence that determines an outcome,” the former FBI executive said. “Crossfire Hurricane was a debacle because it started with a desired outcome and tried to create facts to fit that outcome.  Durham is methodically revealing just how desperate the politically biased Crossfire Hurricane team was.”

Nunes said the evidence Durham has now put into the public realm raises serious questions about why FBI personnel have not been prosecuted except, for one single lawyer who altered evidence submitted to the court.

“It's just so confusing to me as to why these FBI and DOJ characters and some of the Clinton cabal have not been brought up on a conspiracy charge because clearly they were conspiring to defraud the United States government to lie and mislead Congress,” he said.

John Solomon


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Lapid's Two State Solution - Alex Rose


by Alex Rose

What he should have done was quote an expert historian to prove Jewish indigenous rights to Israel, but he may not believe in them.


PM Lapid before taking off to New York for UN General Assembly
PM Lapid before taking off to New York for UN General Assembly Avi Ohayon/GPO

"They want an Israeli politics without traditional Judaism" [Yoram Hazony]

"Rabbis call on Lapid to resign as prime minister", [Israel National News 28/09/2022]

"If we want a Jewish state, Lapid is not the answer" by MK Simcha Rothman[Israel National News 28/09/2022

There are homo sapiens who above all believe in themselves. Typically, they are sure of themselves, full of arrogance, irrational, ignore protocol, ignore established procedures or laws and display certainty in their actions.

The actions of the interim prime minister of Israel conform to the above, giving rise to the very question, "Who's Against a Two-State Solution?" As far back as July 20, 2010, it was raised by Ephraim Karsh in Jewish Ideas Daily and then repeated in The Tikvah Fund. Apparently, President Barack Obama had used the words, "Two states, living side by side in peace and security" as the solution to the century-long conflict between Jews and Palestinian Arabs in the Middle East.

Karsh's paper commences around April 1920 when the newly formed League of Nations appointed Britain as the mandatory power in Palestine, who were committed via the Balfour Declaration to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine.

Because they were repeatedly confronted by violent Arab opposition despite appeasement, on March 1921, and in order to reward the Hashemites for their help in WWI, they severed the vast and sparsely populated territory east of the Jordan River [Transjordan] from the prospective Jewish national home and made Abdullah, the emir of Mecca, its effective ruler.

This action, which some historians regarded as a betrayal, resulted in 2 British White Papers in 1922 and 1930 respectively, which limited Jewish immigration to Palestine and imposed harsh restrictions on land sales to Jews.

Notwithstanding this major concession, the violence continued, resulting in a great reward to the Arabs on July, 1937 when a British commission of enquiry, headed by Lord Peel, recommended repudiating the terms of the mandate altogether. Instead the infamous two-state "solution" was born, the partitioning of what was left of the Palestine promised to Jews, this after lopping off Jordan, into an Arab state [85%] and a Jewish state, a miserly 15%. The commission had the nerve to say that "Half a loaf is better than none" as if each party received 50%.

But to no avail. Surprisingly, the Zionist leadership gave the plan its half-hearted support while Arab governments and the Arab leadership in Palestine [with the sole exception of Abdullah] dismissed it out of hand. Given Churchill's favorable acknowledgement of Israel's position, the Jewish positive response was less than comprehensible. Ben Gurion, however, was desperate for a place that would welcome Holocaust survivors and needed a state at any price.

Churchill had said, "It is manifestly right that the Jews , who are scattered all over the world should have a national centre and a national home, where some of them may be reunited, and where else but in Palestine, with which for 3,000 years they have been intimately and profoundly associated?" And no such verbiage about the Arabs or Palestinian Arabs!!

Further the same happened in November 1947, when shortly prior to the expiration of the British mandate, the UN General Assembly voted to partition 'Palestine'. However, on this occasion there was no acceptance of it by the Arab nations, who rejected it outright, while the Arab violence backfired.

Neither Egypt nor Jordan permitted Palestinian Arab self-determination - because they did not see the Arabs living in Palestine as a people - in the parts of Palestine they occupied during the 1948 war. Jordan annexed the 'West Bank' in April 1950, while Egypt kept the Gaza Strip under oppressive military rule. Following the conquest of these territories by Israel during the Six Day war, their political future would be determined on the basis of UN Resolution 242.

The PLO was established in 1964 due to the initiative of Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser. During October 1974, the Arab League designated it as the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people,," a new designation, following which PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat became the 1st non-state leader ever to address the UN General Assembly.

In1993, Israel's Labor Government signed the "Oslo Accords" providing for Palestinian Arab self-rule in two out of three areas of the 'West Bank' (96% of the Palestinian Arabs live in those two areas of Judea and Samaria and the rest were free to move there instead of staying in Area C where all the Jjewish population of the 'West Bank' lives) and the entire Gaza Strip for a transitional period not to exceed 5 years. During this period, the parties were committed to negotiate a permanent settlement.

At the American convened peace summit in Camp David on July, 2000, then Israeli PM Ehud Barak, of his own volition, offered Arafat a complete end to the Israeli presence, ceding virtually the entire territory of the 'West Bank' and the Gaza Strip including a breathtaking concession with respect to Jerusalem The response? War, at a level of local violence unmatched in scope and intensity since the attempt to abort the creation of a Jewish state in 1948.

In a televised speech on May15,2005, Abbas described the establishment of Israel as an unprecedented historic injustice and vowed his unwavering resolve never to accept it

Two and a half years later, at a US sponsored peace conference in Annapolis, he rejected then PM's Ehud Olmert's proposal of a Palestinian Arab state in 97% of the 'West Bank' and the entire Gaza Strip. He also categorically dismissed the request to recognize Israel as a Jewish state alongside the proposed Palestinian Arab state. Instead, he demanded a full implementation of the "right of return," suicide for Israel as it includes the millions born after the War of Independence.

Ephraim Karsh asks the question, "But is there in fact a fundamental distinction between Hamas and Fatah when it comes to a two-state solution?" and answers "Neither faction formally accepts Israel's right to exist; both are formally committed to its eventual destruction." Professor Ephraim Karsh's conclusion is a reflection of his deep intellect.

"For the lesson of history remains: so long as things on the Arab side are permitted, or encouraged, to remain as they are, there will be no two-state solution, and therefore no solution at all."

In Yoram Hazony's January 1997 masterpiece, "The Zionist Idea And its Enemies", we do find a solution.

With the signing of the Oslo -PLO agreements in 1993, Israel was suddenly inundated by cultural artifacts intended to flaunt a new openness. But in the wake of the Nov. 4, 1995 assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a fanatic from the religious community who had no support group, all the fantasizing about a fraternal and entertaining cultural war had quickly dissolved.

This left the entire Jewish people suddenly finding themselves staring into the immediate future. It was as if the war with Arafat had been replaced by another very real war.

"With few exceptions, the Left intelligentsia, both in Israel and abroad, took the assassination as the ultimate proof of everything it had long believed on the subject of those tribal, law-breaking , anti-intellectual, violent theocrats - traditional Jews."

Amir, the Left said, was 'a boy next door - from a stable, religious family', 'just your average religious right-wing hard liner; the product of the best religious- Zionist schools in Israel.' He 'came out of the mainstream religious Right, and carried the same banners, shouted the same slogans, believed the same doctrines as most other Orthodox Jews in Israel'. "By dint of simple arithmetic, 'if a boy next door' like Amir was capable of such craven, fratricidal bloodletting, then so was practically any traditional Jew.

Hazony then proceeds with a review of Theodor Herzl's outlook, as the man opposed to how Leftists perceived him. Many of the intellectual and political figures were advocating separating traditional Judaism from the Jewish state, imagining that to be what Herzl sought. However, while Herzl was no preacher of secularism, Jews could still benefit from his ideas on the place of religion in the Jewish state. It was precisely his unique understanding of what constituted real national power that led him to regard the strengthening of Jewish tradition as a proper and essential interest of the state.

Hazony explains further ideas from Herzl's "The Jewish State" published in February,1896; his theory that the true core of national strength is the idea of the nation in the minds of the people. He believed, contrary to conventional beliefs, that nations are built from the mental achievements of peoples.

Herzl's 3rd asset of the mind was the Jewish religion. This he considered to have been indispensable in nurturing the national idea in the past - 'Next year in Jerusalem', which he considered would continue to be essential in the future - 'We recognize our historic identity only by the faith of our fathers.'

The contemporary state of affairs in Israel on the Left is sadly reflected in the past words of Amos Oz. "The dividing wall ---passes between those [in Israel] who aspire to Iranian- style theocracy, and the state of Israel - between them and all of us. "

And those of Ze'ev Chafets."To survive, democratic Israel must knock the fundamentalist rabbis off their pedestals and lock up their violent disciples. This means cutting off public funds to schools and youth organizations that indoctrinate children in anti-democratic ideals." And there are others.

Hazony concludes with a quote from a Religious Zionist leader, "We have settled in the heart of the land, but we have not even tried to settle in the hearts of the people." Hazony recognizes it as precisely the same point that Herzl tried to teach in the brief period he led the Zionist movement.

During 1939, Mojli Amin representing the Arab Defense Committee for Palestine is on file making the following recommendation:

"I hereby propose that all the Arabs of Palestine will leave and be divided up amongst the neighboring Arab Countries. In exchange for this, all the Jews living in Arab countries will leave and come to Palestine." The latter mostly accepted, but the former declined in response to their leaders.

On January 1951, Israel's 1st prime minster, David Ben-Gurion, is quoted as telling members of his party, Mapai, "These Arabs should not stay here, just as American Jews should not stay in America.-----I think everything must be done so that an Arab lives in an Arab state."

In The Political Chronicle of January, 1997,we learn that Golda Meir was strongly opposed to partition. She was in favor of transfer as the Arabs had vast territories in which the Arabs of Palestine could settle.

According to the International Times of 09/08/2014,as reported by Jack Moore, Egypt's Sisi offered Abbas creation of a Palestinian Arab State in the Sinai Peninsula. He allegedly said to Abbas in the meeting:"You are now 80 years old, if you don't accept this proposal, your successor will." Elsewhere the report was denied despite it making perfect sense to both Egypt and Israel.

What did Yair Lapid mean by his foregoing statement? Did he mean 2 states in an undivided Jerusalem or Jerusalem undivided as an Israel state with the Palestinian Arab state established elsewhere? If the former, he would find a majority in Israel would not accept this. If the latter, no Palestinian Arab or Arab leader would accept it.

What he should have done was to make use of an expert historian to proof positive Jewish indigenous rights to the Land of Israel, After all, during Temple Times , we learn of the Jews and the Romans. Subsequently the Greeks. The words, "Palestinians" and Arabs" don't appear until many centuries later.

To begin with, he could share the words of Lloyd George, who was outraged by the claim that Arabs had been treated unfairly in Palestine---":

"No race has done better out of the fidelity with which the Allies redeemed their promises to the oppressed races than the Arabs. Owing to the tremendous sacrifices of the Allied Nations, and more particularly of Britain and her Empire, the Arabs have already won independence in Iraq, Arabia, Syria, and Trans-jordania, although most of the Arab races fought throughout the War for the Turkish oppressors---[In particular ] the Palestinian Arabs for Turkish rule."[ A Mandate for Israel by Douglas J. Feith].

Perhaps the greatest lesson for Lapid is demonstrated by history - Appeasement mostly does not work and it certainly does not win.


Alex Rose,, was born in South Africa in 1935 and lived there until leaving for the US in 1977, where he spent 26 years. He is an engineering consultant. For 18 years he worked for Westinghouse until age 60, whereupon he became self-employed. He was formerly on the Executive of Americans for a Safe Israel and a founding member of CAMERA, New York [Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in Americaת one of the largest media monitoring organizations concerned with accuracy and balanced reporting on Israel. In 2003, he and his wife made Aliyah and reside in Ashkelon.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Crisis On The Southern Border: Only The Tip of Biden’s Immigration Iceberg - Michael Cutler


by Michael Cutler

Catastrophe on the horizon.


It is commonsense that after a major flood disaster recovery begins with cleaning up the mess.  Because of the policies of the Biden administration America has been flooded with unprecedented numbers of illegal aliens- yet no attention is being given to the need or the means to clean up the mess created by this human tsunami that undermines national security, public safety and public health.

The crisis on the southern border has grown so huge that it can no longer be ignored by the mainstream media.  Records continue to be set and then broken as ever more aliens from countries around the world head for that dangerous border encouraged by the policies of the Biden Administration as carried out by the Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas.

However, Biden’s destruction of immigration law enforcement is hardly limited to the dangerous Mexican border, however neither the media nor politicians will even mention these other elements of the immigration system that are part and parcel of Biden’s “immigration iceberg.” by the media or by our political leaders from either party perhaps because they are among the Profiteers of Biden Administration’s Open Borders Policy or reaccepting massive campaign contribution (bribes?) from those profiteers.

So, while the media and the politicians, including most Republicans, remain focused on the 2,000 mile disastrous U.S./Mexican border, they blithely ignore 98% of America’s borders as well as the need for meaningful interior enforcement of our immigration laws.

(The United States actually has more than 100,000 miles of border when you consider that the U.S. Canadian border is about 4,000 miles long and the United States also has about 95,000 miles of coastline.)

Additionally, the United States has well over 100 International airports located in virtually all 50 states and smugglers frequently land their airplanes on makeshift  landing strips within the United States.

Illegal aliens and contraband are flooding into the United States in a wide variety of means and locations that completely bypass the Southern border.

Consider these two recent Justice Department (DOJ) pres releases about the U.S./Canadian border:

On July 29, 2022 the Department of Justice issued a press release, Quebec Man Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy to Import and Distribute Fentanyl that began with these paragraphs:

Jason Joey Berry, 39, of Montreal, Canada, pleaded guilty today to conspiracy to distribute fentanyl and import it into the United States, resulting in serious bodily injury and death. The criminal conspiracy involved distributing fentanyl and other similar substances from Canada and China into the United States, resulting in 15 overdoses, four of which were fatal.

According to court documents, Berry arranged the distribution of fentanyl and fentanyl analogues to the United States and elsewhere while incarcerated in a Canadian prison. Berry led the conspiracy in Canada with another inmate, Daniel Vivas Ceron, 41, who pleaded guilty in July 2019 to continuing criminal enterprise, conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and controlled substance analogues resulting in serious bodily injury and death, and money laundering. This investigation started in North Dakota on Jan. 3, 2015, with the overdose death in Grand Forks, North Dakota, of Bailey Henke.

After listing the pedigrees on more than a dozen coconspirators in this case, the DOJ press release noted:

This case was investigated by Homeland Security Investigations, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, Grand Forks Narcotics Task Force, IRS Criminal Investigation, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Portland Police Bureau – Narcotics and Organized Crime Division, Oregon/Idaho HIDTA Interdiction Task Force, Oregon State Police, and the Grand Forks Police Department. The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs provided valuable assistance.

Now consider this DOJ press release that was also issued on July 29, 2022, Leading ISIS Media Figure and Foreign Fighter Sentenced to Life Imprisonment.

The subtitle of that press release, provides a bit more critical information:

MohammedK halifa Executed Two Syrian Soldiers on Behalf of ISIS and served as the English-Speaking Narrator on Exceptionally Violent ISIS Propaganda Videos.

Here is how this DOJ press release began:

A Saudi-born Canadian citizen was sentenced today to life imprisonment for conspiring to provide material support to the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), a designated foreign terrorist organization, resulting in death.

According to court documents, Mohammed Khalifa, aka Abu Ridwan Al-Kanadi and Abu Muthanna Al-Muhajir, 39, served in prominent roles within ISIS starting in 2013 and continuing until his capture by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in January 2019, following a firefight between ISIS fighters and the SDF. In addition to serving as a fighter and personally executing two Syrian soldiers on behalf of ISIS, Khalifa served as a lead translator in ISIS’s propaganda production and the English-speaking narrator on multiple violent ISIS videos.

When was the last time you heard anyone talk about the Canadian border or report on smuggling along that 4,000 mile border?

Furthermore, cleaning up the mess created by the massive flood of aliens requires effective interior enforcement of our immigration laws- this mission is vested in ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), yet  even Republican politicians such as Senator Ted Cruz and Congressman Pat Fallon, who profess to oppose the open borders policies of the Biden administration have neglected to call for more ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents while calling for the hiring of massive numbers of Border Patrol agents  to secure the southern border. without even mentioning the northern border or other means by which aliens and contraband such as fentanyl and other dangerous drugs enter the United States each and every day.

The Border Patrol’s primary mission is the interdiction of aliens and contraband being smuggled into the United State to evade the inspections process conducted at ports of entry.

These Republicans all ignore what should be obvious- while it is vital to prevent more flooding, in the aftermath of a flood, the focus should be on cleaning up the mess as well as on securing all methods of entry that enable illegal aliens and contraband to flow into the United States and not just the Mexican border.

To this point, on August 8, 2022 CNS News reported, Texas Republican: ‘I Want to Hire 87,000 New Border Patrol Agents’.

Rep. Fallon, in point of fact, is the Texas Republican referenced in the title of that report that began with this excerpt:

( – “I don’t want to hire 87,000 new IRS agents, I want to hire 87,000 new Border Patrol agents,” Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas) told the Fox Business network on Monday morning.

Cruz, on the other hand made headlines last year when the Boston Globe reported, Senator Ted Cruz wants to create immigration ports of entry in Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

Biden’s insane policies have enabled millions of aliens to enter the United States under the guise of seeking political asylum when, in reality, the great majority of them will not qualify for asylum and will almost invariably evade immigration law enforcement, aided and abetted by “Sanctuary Policies” promulgated in states and cities across the United States.

This overwhelms the system by which applications for immigration benefits, including political asylum.  Consequently the overwhelmed adjudications officers are not able to properly screen these applications.  Fraud will go undetected and, as I wrote in my article. However, as I noted in my recent article, NYC Mayor Adams’ Immigration Theater of the Absurd:

Most of these illegal aliens are not political refugees but are simply fleeing poverty and crime in their home countries.  Political asylum is only granted to aliens who can prove Credible Fear that because of their race, religion, ethnicity, political ideology or other such factors face persecution, or worse in their home countries.  Once again Adams has opted to use language to obfuscate the truth about illegal immigration and provide illegal aliens with a level of legitimacy to which they are not truly entitled.

This is the equivalent of describing a homeless person with no job and no means of support as “An aspiring millionaire” because he/she purchased a lottery ticket!

Reportedly hundreds of thousands of other illegal aliens have managed to evade the Border Patrol as that beleaguered agency has become overwhelmed by the human tsunami of aliens presenting themselves to the Border Patrol to make their claims for asylum.  The identities of these so-called “got-aways” is unknown as are the reasons that they entered surreptitiously, likely because they are fugitives, criminals or terrorists.

Although some of the aliens stopped by the Border Patrol are listed in the terror watch list- most terrorists are not on any lists.  It only took 19 terrorists on September 11, 2001 and to kill more people than were lost to the Japanese Fleet at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 and the death count from the attacks of 9/11 counts to climb as more victims die because of their exposure to toxins that were released when the World Trade Canter was reduced to a mountain of rubble.

It must be presumed that the great majority of these aliens who have been dispersed across our nation will not show up for hearings when they will be required to do so.  ICE agents will be needed to find them- but in this game of “hide and seek” there are precious few ICE agents (only about 6,000 for the entire country) and because they are also charged with enforcing laws that have no relevance to immigration, far fewer will be available to seek millions of illegal aliens.  ICE agent are also supposed to conduct investigations into employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens, participate in multi-agency task forces such as the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and the Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) where I spent the final ten years of my 30 year career.

Finally, ICE agents are supposed to conduct investigations into immigration fraud.

In point of fact, the very first time I appeared before a Congressional hearing was on May 20, 1997 that was predicated on two terror attacks carried out in the United States in 1993 at the CIA and the First World Trade Center bombing.  The topic of that hearing that was conducted by the House Immigration Subcommittee, was Visa Fraud And Immigration Benefits Application Fraud.

Indeed, the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony, identified immigration fraud and visa fraud as the key methods of entry and embedding exploited by international terrorists, and not just the 19 terrorists who so savagely attacked the United States on September 11, 2001.

I addressed the nexus between immigration fraud and national security and terrorism in my article, Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill.

Nevertheless, as I wrote in an article last year, Biden Administration Plans To Protect Immigration Fraudsters.

The last words for my commentary today will be provided by a section of the United States Constitution, specifically, Article IV, Section 4 which states:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Michael Cutler had a 30-year career with the INS, where he served as a Senior Special Agent. He is a regular contributor to Frontpage.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Jan. 6 panel boomerang: Final hearing undercuts two key Democrat talking points - John Solomon


by John Solomon

Video played during the final committee hearing showed Pelosi firmly in charge of a security apparatus she claimed didn't report to her.


When House Democrats' Jan. 6 committee convened its investigative hearings, members proclaimed there was no need to investigate House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's role because she wasn't involved in Capitol security and their end goal was to find the truth no matter where it led.

"We must confront the truth with candor, resolve, and determination," Chairman Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, declared on opening day of the public hearings.

Some Republicans, such as House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (N.Y.) and Rep. Rodney Davis (Ill.), House Administration Committee ranking member, have argued that Pelosi could have ordered enhanced security for the Capitol complex ahead of the planned Jan. 6, 2021 "Stop the Steal" rally but did not.

"On January 6th, the Speaker, a target of an assassination attempt that day, was no more in charge of Capitol security than Mitch McConnell was," a spokesperson for Pelosi told "This is a clear attempt to whitewash what happened on January 6th and divert blame. The Speaker believes security officials should make security decisions."

On Thursday, with what the committee proclaimed was their final public hearing, they managed to undercut both those talking points.

First, they belatedly decided to subpoena the central character in their Jan. 6 narrative, Donald Trump, an act that comes as the committee plans no further hearings and will sunset after the Christmas holidays. The compressed timeline makes it difficult to get the former president's full side of his story should he decide to testify.

Trump seized in the delay in a statement Thursday night.

“Why didn’t the Unselect Committee ask me to testify months ago? Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting?,” he asked. “Because the Committee is a total “BUST” that has only served to further divide our Country which, by the way, is doing very badly - A laughing stock all over the World?”

Second, the committee showed compelling video of Pelosi commanding the security apparatus of the U.S. Capitol complex as it was under siege by rioters, directing resources, calling the Pentagon and soliciting police from neighboring Virginia. The footage clearly contradicts Pelosi's earlier claim that she has nothing to do with Capitol security.

"I have no power over the Capitol Police," she said in February 2022. "Does anybody not know that?"

Indiana Rep. Jim Banks, chairman of the Republican Study Committee, wrote on Twitter that he thinks the video of Pelosi that was shown at Thursday's hearing amounted to a "scam."

Politifact, the fact-checking website, concluded that Pelosi does in fact have some shared responsibility for security with the Senate majority leader, because they each supervise their respective sergeant-at-arms.

"Capitol security is provided by the sergeants-at-arms, who are the chief law enforcement officers for the House and Senate, in coordination with the Capitol Police, a federal law enforcement agency," Politifact reported. "The House sergeant-at-arms reports to the speaker of the House, or Pelosi at the time of the attack. The Senate sergeant-at-arms reports to the Senate majority leader; in the days leading up to and including Jan. 6, that was Kentucky Republican Mitch McConnell." 

Best selling author and television host Bill O’Reilly said the committee’s work has been so partisan that it won’t have impact on Americans today or history in the future.

Here’s a quote from Bill O’Reilly from my TV show on the legacy of the January 6 committee 

“As far as history is concerned, it's nothing. Nobody will remember it,” O’Reilly told Just the News. “It was obviously put into place to try to come up with something to embarrass Donald Trump or ruin Donald Trump. It has failed.”


John Solomon


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter