https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/farewell/
GOODY TWO SHOES IS GOING TO “THE DISPATCH” A “TRUMP SKEPTIC” MAGAZINE RSK
NR was the first national platform to publish my work, and now — thousands of posts and more than a million words later — I say goodbye. On Monday, I’ll join my good friends Jonah Goldberg and Stephen Hayes at The Dispatch, their new media venture. In true writerly fashion, I sign off even as I’m behind on a print deadline.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/the-endgame-in-syria/
Americans are getting the retreat they voted for.
“The slaughter going on in Syria is not a consequence of American presence. It’s a consequence of a withdrawal and a betrayal by this president of American allies and American values.”
—Pete Buttigieg, October 15
Mr. Mayor has a point. For 75 years, from Fulda Gap to the 38th parallel, the American soldier has been the last line of defense against violence, chaos, and oppression. From Kosovo to Anbar, he has kept a lid on cauldrons of bloodlust. Remove him, and the poison boils over.
That is what happened when Congress reduced aid to South Vietnam in 1975. It is what followed U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in 2011. It is happening now in northeast Syria, and it will happen again when Americans leave Afghanistan. Our forces depart; our allies collapse; our adversaries take command.
The pattern was established well before Donald Trump took office. It will persist after he departs. There is nothing so consistent as American ambivalence toward our superpower status. Most great powers covet hegemony. We hate it. The costs are too high, the demands too stressful.
“For every exercise of the great power’s prerogative, there has been an equally strong recoiling from the use of power,” wrote Robert Kagan in A Twilight Struggle (1996). “While the United States cannot escape behaving as the hegemonic great power, it is also a great power with a democratic conscience, a strong anti-imperialist streak, and an unwillingness to adopt the role of policeman anywhere for more than a brief time.”
It has consequences that threaten liberty.
We have a serious governance problem.
Our system is based on separation of powers, because liberty depends on preventing any component of the state from accumulating too much authority — that’s how tyrants are born. For the system to work, the components have to be able to check each other: The federal and state governments must respect their separate spheres, and the branches of the federal government must be able to rein in a branch that oversteps its authority.
The steady federal encroachment on state authority has created an imbalance that probably cannot be rolled back. I want to focus on the collapse of inter-branch checks in the federal government.
This was the issue I dealt with in Faithless Execution. The thesis was that the Framers feared an agglomeration of power in the presidency they were creating, so they endowed Congress with significant checks on the executive. The ultimate one was impeachment. But this was supposed to be reserved for truly abominable misconduct. Though Madison concluded that impeachment was “indispensable” in light of the damage a rogue president could do, it also came with its own set of problems. Not least, impeachment might give Congress too much power over the executive. It might be invoked out of partisan mischief, rather than serious maladministration. Consequently, impeachment was made to be really hard to do.
The Framers were sophisticated men, who saw themselves as both students and victims of executive power run amok (as about two minutes’ perusal of the Declaration of Independence elucidates). They understood that governance would involve tussles between the political branches and episodes of overreach — whether out of incompetence, malevolence, or urgency — for which the extraordinary impeachment remedy would be gross overkill. Routine disputes involving the propensities of both the legislature and the executive to act outside their authorities would be handled by lesser remedies. Congress, most importantly, was given the power of the purse and significant power over executive agencies (to create them, to limit their authority, and, in the Senate’s case, to approve their leaders).
My argument in Faithless Execution was that this system has broken down, with no repairs on the horizon. The Framers naturally thought congressional control of the executive budget would obviate the need to resort to impeachment. Lawmakers could defund dubious executive initiatives and withhold funds necessary to carry out the president’s priorities; this would pressure the executive branch to comply with statutes as well as congressional demands for information and policy modification. The ultimate question of a president’s fitness would be left to the sovereign — the American people, exercising the franchise.
https://nypost.com/2019/10/19/trump-didnt-sell-out-the-kurds-by-pulling-out-of-syria/
“The Kurds are paying a heavy price in this battle — not because of a US betrayal — but because they remain stateless and thus powerless. By targeting Erdogan financially, legally and undermining his legitimacy, President Trump has done more to help the Kurds than his critics with their crocodile tears. And for now, he is winning.”
Critics blasted Trump for allowing Turkey to invade Kurdish-ruled northern Syria, but Kurdish fighters are more realistic about US military support.
The national media blasted President Trump’s withdrawal of 50 US military advisors from the Syrian border with Turkey as a “sellout,” a “betrayal” and a “huge strategic blunder.”
Let’s be clear: None of them truly care about the Kurds. Otherwise, they would have been sending correspondents and camera crews to Rojava, as the Kurds call northern Syria, on a regular basis.
Let’s also be clear about the goals of Turkish president Tayyip Recep Erdogan. While he attempted to stylize his military invasion of Rojava as a counterterrorism operation, few international observers bought into it. Why? Because there have been no terror attacks against Turkey from Syrian territory since the Syrian Kurds established their self-governing entity in 2012. None.
Erdogan is not even remotely interested in fighting ISIS, or in taking responsibility for the estimated 12,000 ISIS fighters currently in Kurdish custody at the al-Hol refugee camp. What actually happens to those ISIS prisoners, and the fate of Christian and Yazidi minorities, will be key measures of the agreement hammered out by Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with Erdogan on Thursday.
The humanitarian disaster that unfolded this past week helped to paint Erdogan as notorious a mass murderer as Saddam Hussein. And it was to Erdogan’s legacy that the president appealed in his private, and now public, letter to the Turkish president as the crisis unfolded.
Erdogan’s real goal with this invasion was to smash Kurdish self-government, and those 50 US advisors were the last thing in his way.
https://stream.org/what-trump-has-wrought-in-syria/
https://www.iraqichristianrelief.org/
Juliana Taimoorazy is a fellow of The Philos Project, and the Founder of the Iraqi Christian Relief Council. She started the nonprofit organization to help foster awareness about the plight of the Iraqi Christians, and to raise funds to deliver food and medicine to Iraq.
**
I’m guardedly optimistic that President Trump’s withdrawal and this agreement might result in stability. And that this will not be a green light for Islamist ethnic cleansing. The Syrian Democratic Forces, however, see this as their forced surrender. They have announced that they won’t abandon their positions to Turkey. They will simply cease fighting over the small areas Turkey has already conquered. But they will hold the rest of the land they have come to possess. They count on help from the legal government of Syria and its Russian allies. That would mean folding the SDF into the regular Syrian Arab Army, and granting the region Russian air protection.
Turkey doesn’t want to have dogfights with Russian planes. Or to face the heavy equipment Assad’s army commands. Therefore, its land-grab in Syria will prove limited. Its plans to expel Kurds will probably fail. Turkish President Erdogan has alienated world opinion by his actions and threats. (For instance, he warned he might shove 3.6 million Syrian migrants into Europe.) He can’t count on NATO support if war flares up with Russia. Erdogan has asked Russia’s Vladimir Putin for a face to face summit. I don’t expect Putin to cave to Erdogan’s demands for a chunk of Syrian territory. Although there has been an agreement reached by the U.S. and Turkey, the fighting on the ground continues.
So I think the U.S. Congress should move ahead with its sanctions bill targeting Turkey. President Trump should sign it. Aggressors should pay a price when they create 100,000 refugees with wanton attacks on neighboring countries. I have followed the abusive and aggressive actions of Kurdish nationalists in Iraq and Syria toward Assyrians, Chaldeans and Syriacs. So I don’t consider the Kurds a long-term safe option for Syrian Christians either. The legal government of Syria must regain some control of that region. It must include Syrian Christians and the Kurdish Sunni Muslims in negotiation and political talks. Otherwise keeping the peace won’t be worthwhile for them.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2019/10/16/ever-wonder-about-the
How is 97 percent of Congress able to get re-elected each year even though only 17 percent of the American people believe our representatives are doing a good job?
It’s called an incumbent protection system. Taxpayers have a right to know how it works.
Recently, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com, mashed up the federal checkbook with the congressional campaign donor database (source: OpenSecrets.org). We found powerful members of Congress soliciting campaign donations from federal contractors based in their districts.
We followed the money and found a culture of conflict-of-interest. The confluence of federal money, campaign cash, private employment, investments, prestigious committee appointments, political power, nepotism, and other conflicts are a fact pattern.
Furthermore, members of Congress own investment stock in, are employed by, and receive retirement pensions from federal contractors to whom they direct billions of taxpayer dollars.
Moreover, members sponsor legislation that affects these contractors. The contractor’s lobbyists then advocate for the legislation that helps the member and the contractor. Oftentimes, the contractor’s lobbyist also donates campaign cash to the member.
Here are five case examples detailing the conflict-of-interest among five powerful members of Congress:
www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/10/democrats_seek_to_drown_trump_in_drama.html
Democrats Seek to Drown Trump in Drama Fletch Daniels
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-fights-in-court-to-depos
JUDICIAL WATCH FIGHTS IN COURT TO DEPOSE HILLARY CLINTON
https://spectator.us/does-anyone-job-chelsea-clinton/
For a long time now, those of us who have the misfortune to have working eyes and ears have become deeply familiar with the activities of one family. This family is (still) taken very seriously by some very serious people, in spite of the fact that vast numbers of us would rather eat chlorine-flavored ice cream than ever hear from them again.
Like some sort of deathless voodoo incantation, the name of this family echoes around the world. It echoes in high-altitude frosted glass conference rooms filled with international bores. It echoes in the frazzled minds of readers of the legacy press. It echoes in the dreams of lanyard wearers in the Open Society Foundation or The Aspen Institute for Whatever Dumb Idea is Flavor of The Month, who dribble at the thought of chaperoning them to a power brunch.
This week the beleaguered, embattled and still quite handsome island kingdom of Britain was given a shot of the Clintons in its bruised arm. Apparently having nothing better to do, Chelsea and Hillary guest edited the women’s magazine Stylist.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15040/angela-merkel-zionism-prize
German Interior Ministry statistics claim that 90% of the anti-Semitic hate crimes reported in Germany in 2018 were committed by “far right” persons. The EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA), however, found that only 13% of the attacks were attributed to those with a “right-wing political view.”
Germany provides millions of euros annually to organizations that promote anti-Israel BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) and “lawfare” campaigns, anti-Zionism, antisemitism, and violence, according to NGO Monitor.
“Why is Merkel being awarded the Theodor Herzl Award? Because her representative at the United Nations abstains in anti-Israel resolutions — and thereby de facto supports them? The same official who equates Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli civilians with Israel’s demolition of the homes of Palestinian terrorists? For not relocating the German embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, as the United States did, and also warning other countries against taking such a step? For all this, she gets the Theodor Herzl Award?” — Henryk Broder, German Political Commentator, Die Achse des Guten.
“And that is just the beginning. There is a great possibility that thanks to today’s politics Germany will become Judenrein [free of Jews]. Wir schaffen das (We can do it).” — Dr. Rafael Korenzecher, Publisher, Jüdische Rundschau.
A decision by the World Jewish Congress (WJC) to honor German Chancellor Angela Merkel with its prestigious Theodor Herzl Award for Zionism has sparked anger and bewilderment among Jewish leaders in the United States and Europe.
The WJC, founded in August 1936 in Geneva, Switzerland, to confront the rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi persecution of Jews in Europe, bestows its annual award to individuals who act to promote the goals of the late Theodor Herzl, the founder of the modern Zionist movement, “for the creation of a safer and more tolerant world for Jews.”
Critics say that Merkel, because her domestic and foreign policies have in recent years made the world less safe for Jews, is uniquely undeserving of the award. These policies include:
German government failure to combat rising anti-Semitism. A total of 1,799 anti-Semitic hate crimes — five per day, on average — were reported in Germany during 2018, according to the German Interior Ministry. This represents a 40% increase over 2013, when 1,275 such crimes were recorded. The actual number of anti-Semitic hate crimes in Germany is likely much higher. A survey produced by the Vienna-based European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) found that 80% of Jews who said they were a victim of anti-Semitism did not report the crimes. Almost half of Jews living in Germany said they do not feel safe in the country and were considering emigrating, according to the FRA.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-finds-more-to-deplore-11571432889
Hillary Clinton insulting Trump voters is old news. But in a new interview the former secretary of State suggests that the deplorable population of the United States may be much larger than she previously claimed.
For readers too young to remember the presidential election of 2016, a standard applause line for Mrs. Clinton when speaking to crowds of wealthy coastal donors involved expressing her disapproval of millions of her fellow Americans. Here’s part of the transcript from one such event published by Time magazine in September of 2016:
You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?
[Laughter/applause]
The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.
Since then, Mrs. Clinton has at times expressed regret for such remarks and at other times hurled still more insults when describing people who chose not to vote for her. But until this week she seemed concerned mainly with accusing Republicans of moral failings.
In a new podcast interview with former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, Mrs. Clinton says she was surprised to find out in 2016 how many sexists there were in both parties. And Mrs. Clinton, who continues throughout the interview to cling to the discredited theory that Russian interference is partly responsible for her 2016 loss, claims that one of the Democrats now running for President will actually be used by both Republicans and Russians to swing the election.
Top Stories @ Fox News