The Trump administration is set to honor World War II hero Ship’s Cook Third Class Doris Miller during a Martin Luther King Jr. Day ceremony at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, by naming a future Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier after Miller.
The decision was made by Thomas B. Modly, who was <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/">appointed</a> by President Donald Trump to Undersecretary of the Navy in 2017 and took over as Acting Secretary of the Navy last year after Trump fired Richard Spencer from the role in November.
In a statement, the U.S. Navy <a href="https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=111881">wrote</a>:
<blockquote>This will be the second ship named in honor of Miller, and the first aircraft carrier ever named for an African American. This will also be the first aircraft carrier to be named in honor of a Sailor for actions while serving in the enlisted ranks.
&#8230;
On Dec. 7, 1941, Miller was collecting laundry on the battleship West Virginia (BB-48), when the attack from Japanese forces commenced. When the alarm for general quarters sounded he headed for his battle station, an anti-aircraft battery magazine, only to discover that torpedo damage had wrecked it. Miller was ordered to the ship’s bridge to aid the mortally wounded commanding officer, and subsequently manned a .50 caliber Browning anti-aircraft machine gun until he ran out of ammunition. Miller then helped move many other injured Sailors as the ship was ordered abandoned due to her own fires and flaming oil floating down from the destroyed Arizona (BB-33). West Virginia lost 150 of its 1,500 person crew.
Miller’s actions during the attack earned him a commendation from then Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox, and the Navy Cross, which was presented to him personally by Adm. Chester Nimitz, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet at the time.</blockquote>
“In selecting this name, we honor the contributions of all our enlisted ranks, past and present, men and women, of every race, religion, and background,” Modly said. “Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. observed, ‘Everybody can be great &#8211; because anybody can serve’. No one understands the importance and true meaning of service than those who have volunteered to put the needs of others above themselves.”
Modly continued, “Doris Miller stood for everything that is good about our nation, and his story deserves to be remembered and repeated wherever our people continue the watch today.”
Miller, who died in 1943, <a href="https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/biographies-list/bios-m/miller-doris.html">described</a> firing the weapon, which he had not been trained to do, by saying, &#8220;It wasn&#8217;t hard. I just pulled the trigger and she worked fine. I had watched the others with these guns. I guess I fired her for about fifteen minutes. I think I got one of those Jap planes. They were diving pretty close to us.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
In a historic moment just in time for Martin Luther King Jr. Day, <a href="https://twitter.com/SECNAV?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SECNAV</a> announces that the newest <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/USNavy?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#USNavy</a> aircraft carrier will be named USS Doris Miller <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CVN81?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CVN81</a>. Miller was the first African American to receive the Navy Cross. 
Full story: <a href="https://t.co/PTHsPudfLO">https://t.co/PTHsPudfLO</a> <a href="https://t.co/BPGGp3HGER">pic.twitter.com/BPGGp3HGER</a>
&mdash; U.S. Navy (@USNavy) <a href="https://twitter.com/USNavy/status/1218905809880522754?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 19, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Navy&#8217;s new Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers are the largest and most powerful naval vessels in the world.
&#8220;The Gerald R. Ford-class is the future aircraft carrier replacement class for Enterprise and Nimitz-class aircraft carriers,&#8221; the Navy <a href="https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&amp;tid=200&amp;ct=4">said</a> in a statement. &#8220;The lead ship, Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), was commissioned in 2017. The Gerald R. Ford-class will be the premier forward asset for crisis response and early decisive striking power in a major combat operation. Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers and carrier strike groups will provide the core capabilities of forward presence, deterrence, sea control, power projection, maritime security and humanitarian assistance. The class brings improved warfighting capability, quality of life improvements for our Sailors and reduced total ownership costs.&#8221;

Dorie Miller Receiving Navy Cross

Trump Administration Honors Black World War II Hero In A Big Way

African American

Trump Administration

World War II

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi&#8217;s appearance on ABC News&#8217; &#8220;This Week&#8221; Sunday has sparked strong criticism after she was asked if she supports the growing uprising in Iran against the country&#8217;s oppressive regime following its showdown with President Trump.
After initially lying about the cause of the horrific crash of a Ukrainian passenger jet that took the lives of all 176 people on board, Iran finally <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-iran-admits-it-shot-down-passenger-plane-killing-176-people">admitted</a> late last week what the world suspected: they shot down the Ukrainian 737, claiming that the plane was accidentally targeted when it turned toward an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) military base the night the regime launched missiles at two Iraqi bases where U.S. troops were stationed.
Iran&#8217;s admission — which came after three days of Iran&#8217;s leaders accusing America of “propagating fallacies” about the crash as part of a “psychological operation” against the country — added more fuel to a growing uprising against the terror-sponsoring regime, Iranians taking to the streets, photos and video <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-iranian-protesters-refuse-to-walk-on-u-s-israel-flags-attack-soleimani-posters">showing</a> protesters &#8220;attacking images of former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani while also refusing to walk on American and Israeli flags.&#8221; Over the weekend, the Iranian government <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/iran-opens-fire-on-demonstrators-protesters-chant-our-enemy-is-here-they-lie-to-us-that-its-america">responded</a> by firing “tear gas, rubber bullets and eventually live ammunition to disperse demonstrators.”
Amid the reports, former Bill Clinton adviser George Stephanopoulous asked Pelosi on Sunday if she supports the Iranian protesters and thinks it would be a &#8220;good thing&#8221; if the theocratic regime were overthrown. The Democratic leader responded by initially refusing to give a straight answer. Instead, the California Democrat questioned the unity of the protests and downplayed the role Iran&#8217;s tragic downing of the passenger jet has played in the growing movement.
&#8220;We&#8217;re seeing now demonstrations in the streets of Iran against the regime,&#8221; Stephanopoulos said. &#8220;Do you support those protesters? And would it be a good thing if they brought the regime down?&#8221;
&#8220;Well, the protesters are protesting, as I understand it, this brand of protesters, about the fact that that plane went down. And many students were on that plane,&#8221; she said. &#8220;These are largely students in the street.&#8221;
&#8220;I think the Iranians should have not had commercial flights going off there,&#8221; she said, in an obvious assertion before being interrupted by Stephanopoulos.
&#8220;They&#8217;re calling out the regime for lying. They&#8217;re saying &#8216;Death to Khamenei,&#8217; as well,&#8221; he stressed, referencing Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
&#8220;Well whatever it is,&#8221; said Pelosi, dismissively. &#8220;But the fact is this: There were protesters in the street before against the regime. After the taking out of Soleimani, there were protesters in the street joined together, as you know, against us. It wasn&#8217;t good.&#8221;
Having tried to make Trump the bad guy in the situation, Pelosi acknowledged Iran&#8217;s fault in shooting down the passenger plane. &#8220;Taking down this plan is a terrible, terrible tragedy,&#8221; she said, &#8220;and they should be held accountable for letting commercial flights go at a time that was so dangerous.&#8221;
The Democratic leader then emphasized what was apparently her key point. &#8220;But there are different reasons why people are in the street,&#8221; she said.
Pelosi&#8217;s problematic response to Stephanopoulous&#8217;s straightforward question — which appeared to be motivated by the speaker&#8217;s focus on making sure the Trump administration doesn&#8217;t get any credit for the Iranian people turning against the terror-sponsoring regime — earned the attention of RNC Research, which posted a clip of the exchange. &#8220;Pelosi dismisses protests in Iran against regime, &#8216;different reasons why people are in the street,'&#8221; RNC Research captioned the video.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Pelosi dismisses protests in Iran against regime, &quot;different reasons why people are in the street&quot;<a href="https://t.co/weKuQ6fSlO">https://t.co/weKuQ6fSlO</a> <a href="https://t.co/q9YwCUZrQ9">pic.twitter.com/q9YwCUZrQ9</a>
&mdash; RNC Research (@RNCResearch) <a href="https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1216378286592360453?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 12, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The clip has since made the rounds online, with many others, particularly on the right, similarly <a href="https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2020/01/13/nancy-pelosis-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-2020-gets-worse-following-her-iranprotests2020-comments-on-this-week/">blasting</a> the speaker for her response.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-highlights-blowback-to-pelosis-iran-protest-comments-sums-up-dems-media-strategy">Trump Highlights Blowback To Pelosi’s Iran Protest Comments, Sums Up Dems, Media Strategy</a>

Nancy Pelosi

WATCH: Pelosi Asked ‘Would It Be A Good Thing’ If Iranian Protesters Brought Down Regime After Showdown With Trump; Gets Ripped For Response

Ali Khamenei

Donald Trump

Iran

Following President Donald Trump’s decisive, defensive strike on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-the-just-and-proper-strike-of-mastermind-iranian-jihadist-qassem-soleimani">arch-terrorist</a> Qassem Soleimani of Iran&#8217;s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force (QF), Democrats immediately claimed that the U.S. was on the warpath with Iran.
They didn’t ask for the president’s justification in taking out a man who was responsible for the murder of over 600 U.S. service members in Iraq via roadside IEDs; instead, they immediately labeled the strike “disproportionate” and an “act of war.” They claimed the Trump administration was actively attempting to start a war with Iran, and in taking out the head of the QF (a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization), the administration had done just that.
However, Democrats&#8217; certainty was quickly dashed when the Iranian “retaliation” proved to be symbolic and merely face-saving. There was no aggressive response that would indicate the start of war. Instead, the Iranians effectively bombed the sand, targeting bases in Iraq that had been given prior warning of the strike.
Iran’s response proved not that the mullahs wanted to escalate, but that they understood the cost of a potential full-scale war with the United States. Their feckless strike made it clear that <a href="https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/296604/iran-and-america-are-suddenly-both-naked">Trump’s message was heard and received</a>: You do not mess with the United States. Trump reiterated this message in his address to the nation following the Iranian airstrikes, saying, “we have sent a strong message to terrorists, if you value your own life, you will not threaten the lives of our people.”
The truth is that Trump wasn’t trying to start a war with Iran; he was trying to keep us out of a war with Iran while <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/03/trumps-strike-on-soleimani-is-about-america-first-not-reckless-interventionism/">nonetheless asserting American deterrence</a>. Democrats fail to see this because they are seemingly incapable of admitting Trump ever does anything right.
The Obama-Biden doctrine of foreign policy, appeasing our enemies at all costs — and if that doesn’t’ work, also send them pallets of cash — is what got us into the situation into the first place. The Obama administration would set “red lines,” and then regularly allow our enemies to cross those lines without any form of retaliation. And this wasn’t a one-time thing; repeated aggression would go virtually unchecked, other than perhaps a stern finger-wagging speech and a “promise” for retaliation in the future.
Real “red lines” only work if your enemy knows that if they cross that line, there is a high likelihood of retaliation. The Iranians hadn’t seen a real red line in so long that they were shocked when they were actually held to one.
Iran would be aggressive. Obama would allow it. Iran would be aggressive again. Obama would send them pallets of cash. Iran was aggressive under Trump, but Trump eventually drew his own red line. Iran was plotting future aggression that would cross that line. Trump saw a clear and present danger to U.S. troops and personnel, so he launched a decisive, defensive strike.
It’s a lot simpler than what many on the Left would lead you to believe.
President Trump’s red line is clear: You do not lay a hand on Americans. Period.
His willingness to hold to the red lines he sets, coupled with a multitude of comments emphasizing the U.S. doesn’t seek war, is how Trump kept the United States out of a war with Iran. Because sometimes, the enemy doesn’t respect you until you give them a reason to do so. President Trump gave the mullahs just such a reason.
&nbsp;
Ryan Fournier is founder and co-chairman of <a href="https://www.tpaction.com">Turning Point Action</a>.

Trump press conference Iran

FOURNIER: How President Trump Kept Us Out Of A War With Iran

Foreign Policy

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps

Middle East

Qassem Soleimani

The Trump administration announced on Friday a series of new devastating sanctions against Iran which U.S. officials said would cut off billions of dollars from the Islamist terrorist regime.
The sanctions were announced by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo during a press briefing at the White House and come in response to Iran&#8217;s latest attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq.
&#8220;First, the President is issuing an executive order authorizing the imposition of additional sanctions against any individual owning, operating, trading with, or assisting sectors of the Iranian economy, including construction, manufacturing, textiles, and mining,&#8221; Mnuchin began. &#8220;And let me be clear: These will be both primary and secondary sanctions. The EO also allows us to designate other sectors in the future as Secretary Pompeo and me think is appropriate.&#8221;
&#8220;Second, we are announcing 17 specific sanctions against Iran&#8217;s largest steel and iron manufacturers, three Seychelles-based entities, and a vessel involved in the transfer of products,&#8221; Mnuchin said. &#8220;As a result of these actions, we will cut off billions of dollars of support to the Iranian regime, and we will continue our enforcement of other entities.&#8221;
&#8220;Third, we are taking action against eight senior Iranian officials who advanced the regime&#8217;s destabilizing activity and were involved in Tuesday&#8217;s ballistic missile strike,&#8221; Mnuchin concluded. &#8220;Today&#8217;s sanctions are part of our commitment to stop the Iranian regime&#8217;s global terrorist activities. The President has been very clear: We will continue to apply economic sanctions until Iran stops its terrorist activities and commit that it will never have nuclear weapons.&#8221;
Pompeo said that the new sanctions, in addition to cutting off vital resources to the regime, specifically target &#8220;the heart of the Islamic Republic&#8217;s inner security apparatus.&#8221;
&#8220;These sanctions targets include the secretary of the Supreme National Council and the commander of the Basij Forces; that&#8217;s the regime&#8217;s brute squad, which has, in the last few months, killed approximately 1,500 Iranians who were simply demanding freedom,&#8221; Pompeo said. &#8220;Our action targets other senior leaders close to the ayatollah. They&#8217;ve carried out his terrorist plots in destabilizing campaigns across the Middle East and around the world. They&#8217;ve employed soldiers across the region&#8217;s battlefields. They&#8217;ve trained militias in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere in the arts of domestic repression.&#8221;
&#8220;The goal of our campaign is to deny the regime the resources to conduct its destructive foreign policy. We want Iran to simply behave like a normal nation. We believe the sanctions that we impose today further that strategic objective,&#8221; Pompeo continued. &#8220;Our campaign is composed of diplomatic, economic components that have deprived the regime of billions in revenue the regime has used to fuel death and destruction across the Middle East and all across the world.&#8221;
Pompeo noted that while the Obama administration opened up revenue streams for Iran, which included giving Iran money that former Secretary of State John Kerry <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/index.html">admitted</a> would be used for terrorism, the Trump administration has imposed crushing sanctions on the world&#8217;s leading state sponsor of terrorism.
&#8220;But under our administration, oil revenues are down by 80% and Iran cannot access roughly 90 percent of its foreign currency reserves,&#8221; Pompeo said. &#8220;And not even two weeks ago, President Rouhani of Iran admitted that our sanctions have cost Iran over $200 billion in lost foreign income and investment. As long as Iran&#8217;s outlaw ways continue, we will continue to impose sanctions.&#8221;

Trump

Trump Administration Launches Crushing New Sanctions Against Iran

Radical Islamic Terror

During a press conference on Wednesday, far-left Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) claimed conflict with Iran and the Trump administration is making her feel &#8220;ill&#8221; and triggering her &#8220;PTSD.&#8221; 
“I feel ill a little bit because of everything that is taking place and I think every time I hear of conversations around war, I find myself being stricken with PTSD,” Omar said.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/IlhanMN?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@IlhanMN</a> says she has PTSD and the talk of conflict w/ Iran is making her uneasy <a href="https://t.co/jzjUfKjEUY">pic.twitter.com/jzjUfKjEUY</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1215011792860135424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Notably, in the same presser, Omar was spotted giggling as Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) was discussing U.S. casualties from the Iraq War, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-ilhan-omar-laughs-while-colleague-talks-about-u-s-casualties-in-iraq?itm_source=parsely-api">The Daily Wire</a> reported Wednesday.
“I’m very glad to say that I was part of the 132 and also the vote for Barbara Lee’s amendment, but I think that the point of that is that that is the same war that we’re dealing with today,” Rep. Jackson Lee said. “We never solved any problems with AUMF, we left four thousand plus, maybe even forty four hundred dead, and over sixty thousand who came back injured in some form and the war never ended.”
&#8220;As [Jackson] Lee spoke, Omar could be seen standing behind her laughing while talking to her Democrat colleagues,&#8221; noted The Daily Wire.
“I recall the language in AUMF, it deals with hostilities in Iraq,” Jackson Lee continued. “It doesn’t deal with an incident or a dislike or someone in a car coming in from the airport. That is the danger of not acting and I do think with our leadership, meaning the leadership CPC, that will come together around specific answers.”
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Absolutely disgusting.
Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar laughs and jokes around as her colleague Democrat Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee discusses U.S. casualties in Iraq. <a href="https://t.co/5hfxbUnc3o">pic.twitter.com/5hfxbUnc3o</a>
&mdash; Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) <a href="https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1215009404799606787?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The commentary from Omar, a fierce Trump critic and frequently alleged anti-Semite, sparked a reaction online.
Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN), who served in Afghanistan as a member of the U.S. Navy Reserve, called her comments &#8220;a disgrace and offensive&#8221; to veterans.
&#8220;Rep. Ilhan Omar complained she’s &#8216;stricken with PTSD&#8217; because of recent events in the Middle East,&#8221; wrote Rep. Banks. &#8220;This is a disgrace and offensive to our nation’s veterans who really do have PTSD after putting their life on the line to keep America safe.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Rep. Ilhan Omar complained she’s “stricken with PTSD” because of recent events in the Middle East.
This is a disgrace and offensive to our nation’s veterans who really do have PTSD after putting their life on the line to keep America safe. <a href="https://t.co/twhZDuUDu0">pic.twitter.com/twhZDuUDu0</a>
&mdash; Jim Banks (@RepJimBanks) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepJimBanks/status/1215034549765312512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Omar, who fled Somalia with her family at age ten and was subsequently a refugee in Kenya, responded to Banks: &#8220;Hi Jim, I survived war as a child and deal with post-traumatic stress disorder — much like many who have served or lived through war. It’s shameful that you as a member of Congress would erase the PTSD of survivors.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Hi Jim,
I survived war as a child and deal with post-traumatic stress disorder—much like many who have served or lived through war.
It’s shameful that you as a member of Congress would erase the PTSD of survivors. <a href="https://t.co/QdDBKDSOCS">pic.twitter.com/QdDBKDSOCS</a>
&mdash; Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) <a href="https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1215054586383425544?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Rep. Banks followed up his post with a clip of Omar&#8217;s laughter.
&#8220;No [Ilhan Omar] — you can’t change the subject. Your words and actions at today’s press conference reveal your feelings toward our soldiers serving abroad and the video speaks for itself,&#8221; he captioned the video.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
No <a href="https://twitter.com/IlhanMN?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@IlhanMN</a> &#8211; you can’t change the subject. 
Your words and actions at today’s press conference reveal your feelings toward our soldiers serving abroad and the video speaks for itself. 👇 <a href="https://t.co/T2OREUaIm6">https://t.co/T2OREUaIm6</a>
&mdash; Jim Banks (@RepJimBanks) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepJimBanks/status/1215067392201691137?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;[Ilhan Omar] claim[ing] PTSD in a direct spit in the face of those in the military who actually suffer from it. She&#8217;s an open anti-[S]emite, said &#8216;some people did something,&#8217; on 9/11 and shows a general hatred for the country. There is no way she should be near the House of Reps,&#8221; remarked radio show host Joe Pagliarulo (a.k.a. &#8220;Joe Pags&#8221;).
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/IlhanMN?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@IlhanMN</a> claims PTSD in a direct spit in the face of those in the military who actually suffer from it. She&#39;s an open anti-semite, said &quot;some people did something,&quot; on 9/11 and shows a general hatred for the country. There is no way she should be near the House of Reps.
&mdash; Joe Pags Pagliarulo (@JoeTalkShow) <a href="https://twitter.com/JoeTalkShow/status/1215146059309166593?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;I have PTSD *giggles* haha dead soldiers *giggles* don’t criticize me or you’ll trigger flashbacks you monster *giggles*,&#8221; posted Human Events&#8217; Ian Miles Cheong.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I have PTSD *giggles* haha dead soldiers *giggles* don’t criticize me or you’ll trigger flashbacks you monster *giggles*
&mdash; Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) <a href="https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1215267285805387777?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Call the medic! [Ihan Omar] says she feels &#8216;ill a little bit&#8217; with all this talk of conflict with Iran,&#8221; mocked Fox News host Laura Ingraham. &#8220;Well, I’m sure her dismissive talk of al Qaeda and 9/11 made a lot of Americans feel way more ill (and angry).&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Call the medic! <a href="https://twitter.com/IlhanMN?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@IlhanMN</a> says she feels “ill a little bit” with all this talk of conflict with Iran. Well, I’m sure her dismissive talk of al Qaeda and 9/11 made a lot of Americans feel way more ill (and angry). <a href="https://t.co/JGaKAeonCt">https://t.co/JGaKAeonCt</a>
&mdash; Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) <a href="https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/1215017500968202241?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<div id="tweet-rich-content-label" class="css-1dbjc4n r-156q2ks" aria-labelledby="quote-tweet-label">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Close but this lame actor <a href="https://twitter.com/IlhanMN?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@IlhanMN</a> said she was “strickened (sic) with PTSD” (within minutes of laughing on camera behind <a href="https://twitter.com/JacksonLeeTX18?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JacksonLeeTX18</a>). <a href="https://t.co/cAoOjowbbo">https://t.co/cAoOjowbbo</a>
&mdash; Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) <a href="https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/1215238793059557377?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div>
</div>

Rep. Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar Says Trump Admin Triggering Her ‘PTSD,’ Internet Explodes

Ilhan Omar

PTSD

In March 2003, then-President George W. Bush let a multinational land invasion of Iraq. At the time, ethnically diverse Iraq — one of the sundry Middle East states haphazardly crafted by clueless Europeans in the World War I-era Sykes-Picot Agreement — was run by thuggish Ba&#8217;athist strongman Saddam Hussein. Within weeks, Baghdad was held by U.S.-aligned forces. Less than a year later, Hussein was captured.
But that was deemed woefully insufficient by Bush-era foreign policy hands. Operating under the intellectually hubristic and universal values-ridden guise of a White House &#8220;<a href="https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/freedomagenda/">Freedom Agenda</a>,&#8221; Bush-era foreign policy was not content to engage in Israel Defense Forces-style one-off <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/a-holistic-approach-to-the-middle-east-and-our-national-security/">&#8220;strike and maneuver&#8221;</a> tactical hits against threatening jihadist outfits. Rather, the Bush administration, in tandem with its concurrent nation-building project in the third-world sharia backwater hellhole of Afghanistan, sought a more enduring physical presence in order to help birth a Madisonian republic in the war-torn, ethnically fractious Iraqi desert.
The rest — with the exception of an Obama-era full troop withdrawal between the end of 2011 and our troops&#8217; return in 2014 to fight the ascendant Islamic State Sunni death cult — is, as they say, history. In the year 2020, the U.S. retains a substantial physical military presence in Iraq.
Following the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-the-just-and-proper-strike-of-mastermind-iranian-jihadist-qassem-soleimani">just and proper strike</a> last week of Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force terrorist mastermind Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad, it is now time for our U.S. troops in Iraq to <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/01/07/offing-soleimani-gives-trump-an-excellent-chance-to-exit-iraq/">come home</a>.
There is simply no longer any compelling strategic reason for the U.S. to retain a troop presence in Iraq, which is increasingly dominated by pro-Iran Shi&#8217;ite militias whose fealty is to no one other than the Quds Force and its mullah overlords. The day has long passed where true American influence in Iraq has been anything other than symbolic; the nation is, at this point, hardly distinguishable from its <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bryen-irans-imperial-overreach">&#8220;Shi&#8217;ite Crescent&#8221;</a> fellow nations of Syria and Lebanon in its status as an Iranian satrapy. It was only a matter of days ago when Iraqi security officials seemed, at best, ambivalent about Soleimani loyalist Shi&#8217;ite radicals storming the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.
The true threat in the region to the United States, as it <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bryen-the-dispatch-of-soleimani-and-the-escalation-of-the-war">has been ever since</a> the Islamic Revolution of 1979, is the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-iranian-revolution-forty-years-old-stand-josh-hammer">inherently jihadist</a> regime in Tehran. Non-state Sunni jihadist actors, no matter the alphabet soup under which they organize, utterly pale in comparison. The threat of Sunni Islamist infiltration can largely be stanched by severely limiting entry visas from problematic Islamic nations, massively ramping up immigration <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-border-wall-nice-interior-enforcement-nicer-josh-hammer">interior enforcement</a>, and engaging in occasional ad hoc drone strikes based from the U.S.&#8217;s already-manifold bases across the region. The strike that killed Soleimani, after all, was launched from Al Udeid Air Base in (deeply problematic <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-terror-funding-qatar-once-again-proves-it-is-not-americas-friend">&#8220;ally&#8221;</a>) Qatar.
The issue with leaving large-scale numbers of U.S. military assets, from a hardened realist perspective, is that it is <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/death-iranian-gen-soleimani-long-overdue-justice/">actually counterproductive</a> to our over-arching goal of deterring the Iranian menace. As Daniel Horowitz quite <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/death-iranian-gen-soleimani-long-overdue-justice/">presciently warned</a> even before last night&#8217;s missile launches from Iran into Iraq, &#8220;[c]ontinuing to leave so many assets in Iraq itself will just make us vulnerable to Iran’s attacks and counterattacks in the future.&#8221; And a higher-level goal such as deterring Iran necessarily takes hierarchical primacy over a tactic such as deploying troops to Iraq. As famed Prussian military strategist Carl von Clausewitz <a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/19042/should-israel-invade-gaza">once said</a>: First decide on one’s policy, then one’s strategy, and only then one’s tactics.
In taking out Soleimani, the Ayatollah Khameini&#8217;s most trusted servant, the Trump administration clearly communicated to the Tehran mullocracy that America will always zealously guard and defend our national interests, as we carefully demarcate and define them. We no longer need to be involved in the dreadful and feckless task of nation-building. As Lee Smith compellingly <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/01/07/offing-soleimani-gives-trump-an-excellent-chance-to-exit-iraq/">writes</a> today at the New York Post, &#8220;Trump carved out his own exit strategy&#8221; via the Soleimani strike.
Let&#8217;s bring our troops in Iraq home. It will only help, not hinder, our continued efforts to defiantly stand athwart Iran&#8217;s aspirational regional hegemony.

US troops in tank in Baghdad

HAMMER: The Time Is Right For Our Troops In Iraq To Come Home

Al Qaeda

George W. Bush

Iraq

Iraq War

Islamic State (ISIS)

Obama Administration

This week, President Donald Trump launched a global round of teeth gnashing when he ordered the killing of the greatest terrorist leader in the modern Middle East, Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani. Soleimani was unquestionably responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans in Iraq and thousands of others throughout the Middle East — mostly Muslim. His global terror network ran from South America to Europe to Africa to Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iraq. Soleimani was an unparalleled organizer and a pitiless murderer. His death was richly earned.
But for many in the media and on the domestic and international left, Trump&#8217;s action was precipitously &#8220;provocative.&#8221; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Soleimani&#8217;s killing — which came directly after a Soleimani-approved terror assault on America&#8217;s embassy in Baghdad and amidst reported further plans for escalated terror against American targets — &#8220;disproportionate.&#8221; Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., suggested that Trump, not the Iranians, had &#8220;escalated&#8221; the situation. Former Vice President Joe Biden said that Trump had &#8220;just tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox.&#8221;
This reaction has been magnified by the media, many of whom have been speculating about the possibility of all-out war between the United States and Iran. Think pieces have been written about whether the United States will reactivate the draft (spoiler alert: No, we won&#8217;t). Musings have filled the newspapers about the supposed conflagration prompted not by Iranian evil but by Trumpian reactivity.
All of this smacks less of legitimate concern about what comes next than it does of sheer panic that Trump has overturned a decade of American and European appeasement of the Iranian regime. Ben Rhodes, former President Obama&#8217;s deputy national security adviser, architect of the Iran deal and an overt liar who told the American public that Iran was on its way to moderation if only the United States would loosen economic restrictions on the terror state, has placed blame for volatility squarely before Trump. Susan Rice, Obama&#8217;s national security adviser during the Iran deal and another overt liar who told the American public that Islamic terror against our Benghazi embassy was rooted in anger over a YouTube video, soberly informed Americans that &#8220;Americans would be wise to brace for war.&#8221; Biden suggested that in throwing out the Iran deal, Trump had paved the way for war — and, oh, by the way, the Iran deal was &#8220;airtight.&#8221;
This is a deliberate misreading of history designed to absolve the Obama administration of its Iran policy debacle. The administration pursued a policy of strengthening Iran economically — and did so while openly acknowledging that Iran would use that newly gained economic strength to pursue terrorism and ballistic missile testing. In speaking of the sanctions relief given to Iran, then-Secretary of State John Kerry explained in January 2016, &#8220;I think that some of it will end up in the hands of the IRGC or other entities, some of which are labeled terrorists.&#8221;
That&#8217;s precisely what happened. In March 2016, then-U.S. Central Command nominee Army Gen. Joseph Votel said that Iran had become &#8220;more aggressive&#8221; since the advent of the nuclear deal. Indeed, Iran has built up Hezbollah in Lebanon, propped up Bashar Assad in Syria, increased its presence in Iraq and bolstered its war in Yemen. In the past few months, Iran and its proxies have attacked shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, Saudi oil facilities, an American drone and an American embassy, among other targets. All of this occurred while the Trump administration did little or nothing in response.
Then Trump ordered the killing of Soleimani. Suddenly, we have been informed by dishonest Democrats and their media allies, Iran has gone rogue.
Nonsense. Iran has been rogue for decades. The Iran deal was simply an attempt to whistle past the graveyard with the terror regime — to pay it off long enough so that President Barack Obama could declare the problem handled. This was, after all, the Obama strategy in Crimea and Syria: Declare a red line; run away from it; pretend that pusillanimous inaction is bravery and deterrence provocation.
Trump thought differently. Now Iran has come face to face with the prospect that actions have consequences — and those consequences don&#8217;t involve pallets of cash being shipped over to fund terror organizations that span the globe.

John Kerry meets Javad Zarif

SHAPIRO: Trump’s Iran Policy Isn’t the Problem. Barack Obama’s Was.

Nuclear Weapons

On Thursday, in the most audacious and brave move of his presidency, President Trump ordered the killing of Iran’s top terrorist, Qassem Soleimani — a man who was also the top general of the country. Commentators have compared Iran’s loss of Soleimani to the loss of the Defense Secretary, head of the CIA, and the head of the FBI simultaneously. Soleimani was the man closest to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and some speculated that he would succeed Khamenei at some point. Now, he’s been reduced to pulp.
His death makes the world a significantly better and safer place. <a href="https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-will-avenge-Soleimanis-death-the-question-is-where-and-when-612988?utm_source=Yaakov+Katz&amp;utm_campaign=c7b11d8eaa-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_01_03_01_23&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_term=0_0c089b8575-c7b11d8eaa-16250949" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-will-avenge-Soleimanis-death-the-question-is-where-and-when-612988?utm_source%3DYaakov%2BKatz%26utm_campaign%3Dc7b11d8eaa-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_01_03_01_23%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_term%3D0_0c089b8575-c7b11d8eaa-16250949&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1578158287834000&amp;usg=AFQjCNH1D_DuXBO-ujVVthiipFuzm09yjQ">Soleimani was responsible</a> for the killing of hundreds of American troops in Iraq (by State Department estimates, 17 percent of all Americans killed in Iraq were <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/state-dept-iranian-general-killed-in-u-s-strike-responsible-for-17-of-american-deaths-in-iraq" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.dailywire.com/news/state-dept-iranian-general-killed-in-u-s-strike-responsible-for-17-of-american-deaths-in-iraq&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1578158287834000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGmC57GTvuTsNn_ygF-xs1VGMkVjw">Soleimani’s handiwork</a>), the arming of Hezbollah in Lebanon with tens of thousands of rockets, the Houthi terrorism in Yemen, the building of Islamic Jihad, and a bevy of terror plots all around the world, including the latest assault on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. Speculation that this represents an “act of war” is utterly baseless — Soleimani is a terrorist who was killed while abroad, in Iraq, planning further acts of terrorism.
Suggestions that the Trump administration is responsible for “escalation” with Iran — after months of Iranian aggression in international waters and in foreign countries, after downing an American drone and attacking an American embassy — are absurd and morally disgusting. When <a href="https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1213096517063589890" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1213096517063589890&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1578158287834000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHFQOr4M0VzRKspGSxP6JLskfuzFw">Nancy Pelosi tweets</a> that it is “disproportionate” to kill a terror leader planning action against Americans and our assets and allies, she’s not just reflecting moral confusion — she’s evidencing moral foolishness of the highest order.
There is a lot to be nervous about here. Is the Soleimani killing part of a broader American strategy with regard to Iran, or a supposed one-off? Has the U.S. hardened its assets on the ground in the Middle East in preparation for Iranian retaliation? Are America’s allies ready for the surge in terrorism that will surely follow, given the Iranian government’s need to show strength in the face of this devastating loss?
With all of that said, it’s obvious that President Trump was attempting to restore a deterrence against Iran that had been completely disintegrated by the Obama administration. History didn’t begin with Trump, and Iranian aggression didn’t start with the end of the Iran nuclear deal. Far from it. Iran has become more powerful and aggressive thanks to the overt planning of the Obama administration.
President Obama’s preferred strategy with Iran was wishful thinking and bribery. The Obama administration openly lied to the American people, claiming that there was a “moderate” faction inside the Iranian government that would be elevated through signing them checks and ushering them into the world economy. That was utter nonsense, as national security aide Ben Rhodes later admitted. The Obama administration engaged in the worst sort of appeasement, guaranteeing billions of dollars in economic growth to a regime dedicated to the destruction of American interests around the world and hell-bent on regional domination.
When Trump entered office, after years of increased Iranian aggression in the region, he pulled out of the bribery arrangement. Iran increased its aggression, including targeting American interests and allies directly. Trump ignored that or responded minimally for years. Then the Iranians attacked an American embassy. That was the final straw, and Soleimani was on the chopping block.
The fact that the Trump administration was unwilling to pay off the world’s worst terror regime, that the terror regime never stopped pursuing terrorism, and that the Trump administration responded — all of that Trump administration action is not only perfectly reasonable, but perfectly moral.
Now the question is what comes next.
Action always comes with risks. The easy move in foreign policy is always to bank on the status quo. After all, you never have to face the downside risk of responsibility by doing nothing. But long-term concerns must be weighed, too. Leaving Osama bin Laden alone for a decade didn’t hurt the Clinton administration much. But it certainly hurt America.
When it comes to international conflict, failing to establish deterrence comes with long-range risks, including the growing power of an aggressive Iranian regime moving steadily toward nuclear weapons and destabilizing or threatening every American ally in the region, as well as Americans abroad. It is true that America can be drawn into wars we don’t want by gradual escalation of conflict (Vietnam, e.g.) — but it’s also true that America can be drawn into far more dangerous conflicts by allowing dangerous enemies to grow, metastasize, and strengthen (Germany, Japan, Soviet Union).
Foreign policy is always a risk-reward and short-term vs. long-term gain calculation. But the world is a better place without Soleimani in it — and it’s simply mythmaking to suggest that Iran was benign until Soleimani’s head was removed from his shoulders.

SHAPIRO: Trump Taking Out Soleimani Just Made The World A Better, Safer Place

On Tuesday, pro-Iran terrorists gathered by the hundreds to launch an assault on the American embassy in Baghdad, Iraq. They did so in response to American attacks on Kata’ib Hizbollah, an Iranian-backed terror outlet with significant reach in Iraq and Syria. After American Marines arrived via helicopter on Wednesday, and with the terrorist group leadership telling its minions to pull away from the embassy, the siege came to an end — and Iraq’s embattled prime minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, committed to considering legislation that would push American troops to leave the country.
President Trump responded to the attacks strongly, not only deploying additional forces to defend the embassy, but declaring that there would be no second Benghazi — a reference to the disastrous 2012 incident in Libya in which terrorists stormed the U.S. embassy there and murdered the American ambassador, among others. The Obama White House subsequently blamed the terror attacks on a little-known YouTube video.
Many in the media, naturally, played the Baghdad assault as a negative referendum on Trump’s Iran policy. Many of the same members of the media who defended Obama’s Libyan war and then justified the Benghazi abomination now suggest that Trump was too harsh on the Iranians, and hurt their feelings — and that’s what has led to Iran’s increasing militancy.
But this ignores reality and history: Iran was responsible for the deaths of thousands of troops in Iraq over the past 15 years, has been the world’s leading terror sponsor for decades, and has harassed and attacked American interests ever since the Iranian Revolution of 1979. What’s more, Iran was massively emboldened in its regional aggression by Obama administration-era appeasement — it turns out that signing checks to the Iranians and opening their export markets to foreign dollars allowed Iran to expand its regional ambitions to Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, the Gaza Strip, and Iraq in new and powerful ways.
Iran has lashed out in increasingly violent ways recently because their leadership hopes that violence will sway the United States to pull out, or to return to the appeasement strategy — or hopes that possibly, they can swing public opinion against Trump by prompting conflict, thus bringing a surrender-minded Democrat to the White House.
So, what happens next?
Trump has two real options. First, he could continue to take a hardline stand, ensuring that American assets in the region are protected and retaliating against Iranian militias. This seems like Trump’s preferred stand at the moment — that’s why Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has stated there will be no troop drawdown or embassy evacuation. In order to make this standard work, Trump will have to stick to the lines he draws, which means no more calling back bombers in mid-air after deploying them to strike Iranian targets.
Second, Trump could withdraw. There are some on the Right who presumably would like to see Trump pull out of the Middle East at the first available opportunity. That philosophy is driven by a tendency toward isolationism, the belief that the United States ought to redeploy out of the area unless directly threatened. This strategy has been historically popular with the American people, but does create greater threats down the road — vacuums don’t stay vacuums for long, and Russia, Iran, and China are eager to fill any gap left by the United States to their own benefit.
The great danger for Trump lies in vacillating between these two positions. Vacillation is seen as weakness by the Iranian regime, which is why the Iranian leadership has already declared Trump’s threats empty. Obama demonstrated to the world that his threats were empty, and America’s enemies took advantage. The more credible Trump’s threats, the less often he’ll have to enforce them — and the less grand the response will have to be. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure in foreign policy, and an ounce of deterrence is worth a pound of reactivity. Trump seems to get that. So does his team. That’s why Baghdad won’t be Benghazi.

U.S. Embassy Baghdad

SHAPIRO: Why Baghdad Won’t Be Benghazi

Benghazi

Amid an ongoing trade war with the Trump administration, China&#8217;s Ministry of Finance made a significant announcement this week that prompted some proud retweets from the president.
&#8220;China will lower import tariffs on over 850 products from January 1,&#8221; reported Reuters in a post Trump promoted Sunday evening.
&#8220;China says it will cut import tariffs for goods including frozen pork, pharmaceuticals, paper products and some high-tech components starting from Jan. 1, according to a statement from the Ministry of Finance,&#8221; Bloomberg Economics reported Sunday evening in another post tweeted out by Trump.
&#8220;U.S. president Donald Trump says a &#8216;breakthrough&#8217; has been achieved in trade talks with China and he expects a deal to be signed &#8216;very shortly,'&#8221; reported Sky News in another Trump retweet.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
BREAKING: China says it will cut import tariffs for goods including frozen pork, pharmaceuticals, paper products and some high-tech components starting from Jan. 1, according to a statement from the Ministry of Finance <a href="https://t.co/D0cIcHVda1">https://t.co/D0cIcHVda1</a> <a href="https://t.co/ODlcciZjuV">pic.twitter.com/ODlcciZjuV</a>
&mdash; Bloomberg Economics (@economics) <a href="https://twitter.com/economics/status/1208923079734439936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
U.S. president Donald Trump says a &quot;breakthrough&quot; has been achieved in trade talks with China and he expects a deal to be signed &quot;very shortly&quot;
&mdash; Sky News Breaking (@SkyNewsBreak) <a href="https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1208520592569372680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 21, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
China will lower import tariffs on over 850 products from January 1 <a href="https://t.co/rOyxOnY9QF">https://t.co/rOyxOnY9QF</a> <a href="https://t.co/8xmiyGmiW6">pic.twitter.com/8xmiyGmiW6</a>
&mdash; Reuters (@Reuters) <a href="https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1208925331446489089?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-imports-idUSKBN1YR02Z?taid=5e001b1130ffb60001e67417&amp;utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&amp;utm_medium=trueAnthem&amp;utm_source=twitter">Reuters</a> report highlighted by Trump provides some of the big takeaways from China&#8217;s announcement, which comes amid cooling tensions in the U.S.-China trade war after the two countries announced a &#8220;Phase 1 agreement that would reduce some U.S. tariffs in exchange for more Chinese purchases of American farm products and other goods&#8221;:
<blockquote>Next year, China will implement temporary import tariffs, which are lower than the most-favored-nation tariffs, on more than 850 products, the finance ministry said on Monday. That compared with 706 products that were taxed at temporary rates in 2019.
The tariff changes were made to “increase imports of products facing a relative domestic shortage, or foreign specialty goods for everyday consumption,” the ministry said in a statement on its website.</blockquote>
<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-23/china-to-cut-tariffs-on-goods-including-pork-tech-items?utm_content=economics&amp;utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&amp;cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&amp;cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-economics">Bloomberg</a> calculates the total value of the <a href="http://gss.mof.gov.cn/gzdt/zhengcefabu/201912/P020191220564315355326.pdf">list of 859 product types</a> for which China is reducing tariffs to be worth &#8220;some $389 billion, or about 18% of China’s total imports of $2.14 trillion.&#8221;
&#8220;China cut import tariffs on a wide range of goods including food and parts for manufacturing smart-phones, continuing Beijing’s drive to spur domestic demand and demonstrating its desire to open its economy as it pursues a trade deal with President Donald Trump,&#8221; Bloomberg reports.
Among the products that will enjoy lower tariffs this year is frozen pork, which Bloomberg notes is intended to help China alleviate shortages after an outbreak of African swine fever.
Bloomberg notes that the reduction of tariffs on the hundreds of products is not directly related to China&#8217;s trade war with the U.S., but &#8220;it suggests the government is willing to embrace commerce more,&#8221; particularly because of its slowing economic  growth.
With its growth predicted to drop to 6% or less next year, China is demonstrating to the world that it is willing to embrace &#8220;freer trade,&#8221; economist Gary Ng told Bloomberg. &#8220;The move in lowering import tariffs reflects that the government wants to reaffirm its stance to the world on freer trade amid the trade war,” said Ng. “Domestically, lowering import tariffs are helpful in reducing business and consumer costs.&#8221;
China&#8217;s announcement comes less than a week after Trump enjoyed another economic win. Within hours of being impeached by the Democrats on entirely partisan lines, apart from a few Democrats joining Republicans in opposition, the House overwhelmingly passed the new Trump-promoted United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) by a vote of 385-41.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-trump-gets-massive-post-impeachment-victory-as-usmca-passes-house">Trump Gets Massive Post-Impeachment Victory As USMCA Passes House</a>

Amid Trump Trade War, China Lowers Import Tariffs On Over 850 Products

China

President Trump’s recent executive order is a significant step forward in combating the anti-Semitism faced by vulnerable Jewish students on college campuses across America. Unfortunately, this act of good policy does not come without detractors.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act already prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in institutions receiving federal funds. However, the Civil Rights Act is almost never enforced against one of the most prevalent types of bigotry, even as statistics show anti-Semitic incidents are to record levels on university campuses. A flaw in the classification of victims of these incidents has, until now, thwarted efforts by university administrators to eradicate the threat: A failure to recognize that Judaism is not just a religion. The new executive order sets the record straight — in no uncertain terms.
The fact that Judaism is a religion is widely accepted; but the concept of the Jewish people as a nation has been challenged by those who seek to establish a semantic distinction that would enable them to continue discriminating against Jews with impunity. The Bible is certainly clear on this matter: At the time of the Exodus from Egypt, the Jewish nation was born, with its religious character being introduced shortly thereafter. Thousands of years later, this multifaceted identity remains strong among the Jewish people.
There are Jews who do not identify with their Jewishness as a matter of religious faith or adherence, yet they self-identify as Jews nevertheless.  That is because Jewishness is an identity that transcends religious belief. This dynamic defines the identity and experience of many Jews who continue to relate through celebrating communal aspects of Jewish holidays/traditions, supporting Israel as the Jewish national homeland, working toward a vision of the world based on “social justice,” or even enjoying special Jewish lifecycle events and foods.
In her website “<a href="http://www.jewfaq.org/judaism.htm">Judaism 101</a>,” Tracey Rich explores the question:
<blockquote>“What is Judaism? What does it mean to be a Jew? Most people, both Jewish and gentile, would instinctively say that Judaism is a religion. And yet, there are militant atheists who insist that they are Jews! Is Judaism a race?  If you were to say so, most Jews would think you were an anti-Semite! So what is Judaism? &#8230; The most traditional Jews and the most liberal Jews and everyone in between would agree that these secular people are still Jews, regardless of their disbelief. Clearly, then, there is more to being Jewish than just a religion.”</blockquote>
It seems that many Jews in America have been led to believe that if Title VI protections under federal law are applied to those who support Jewish self-determination, then ultimately American Jews will thereby be accused of harboring dual loyalty to Israel. The dual loyalty canard has a well-known history in America, including its recent invocation by figures such as Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN). It is indeed a legitimate sensitivity. However, with that in mind, it is important to understand that the executive order does not actually reclassify Jews as a nationality. Rather, what it does is clarify that those who persecute Jews are oftentimes actually targeting Jewish peoplehood — characteristics that extend beyond their status as a religious group. This is merely a statement of the obvious.
We applaud President Trump’s executive order for affirmatively seeking to combat the rising tide of anti-Semitic crime and discrimination head-on. We are confident that its full implementation will be a meaningful step in identifying and eradicating this “oldest hatred” on university campuses.
&nbsp;
Ron Machol is the COO of Zachor Legal Institute, an organization using the law to oppose antisemitism. Joseph Sabag is Executive Director of IAC for Action.

Trump yarmulke White House

MACHOL & SABAG: Trump’s Executive Order Rightly Recognizes That Jews Are More Than Just A Religious Group

Anti-Semitism

Israel

Judaism

During Wednesday’s lengthy debate over the impeachment of President Donald Trump, Representative Al Green (D-TX), who has been at the forefront of calls for impeachment since Trump&#8217;s inauguration in 2017, made yet another case for impeaching the president before the House floor — albeit this time, with the blessing of congressional Democrats.  
But while presenting his case, Green stood in front of a notoriously misleading prop: A large version of the child-separation photo that went viral last summer, featuring a lonely two-year-old Honduran girl crying next to U.S. Border Patrol agents. 
“We cannot allow any person to be beyond justice in this country. In the name of democracy, on behalf of the republic, and for the sake of the many who are suffering,” declared Green, while gesturing to the photo, which is adorned with the words “IMPEACH NOW” in bright-red capital letters. “I will vote to impeach and I encourage my colleagues to do so as well.”
As The Daily Wire<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/father-says-girl-never-separated-border-mom-paid-ryan-saavedra"> reported</a> last year, the little girl in the photo quite literally became the poster child for the Trump administration’s “family separation policy” — a policy that actually had been enacted years before Trump assumed office. 
However, after Time Magazine put the girl on its front cover alongside the caption “Welcome To America,” the Border Patrol agents involved in the photo went to CBS News and revealed that the child was never actually separated from her mother. 
&#8220;They&#8217;re using it to symbolize a policy and that was not the case in this picture,&#8221; Border Patrol agent Carlos Ruiz told <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/border-patrol-agent-involved-dramatic-photo-girl-crying-at-border-speaks-out/">CBS News</a>. &#8220;It took less than two minutes. As soon as the search was finished, she immediately picked the girl up, and the girl immediately stopped crying.&#8221;  
The news agency confirmed that the mother and daughter had not been separated, and the Border Patrol agents emphasized that the agency treats people “as humanely and as best as we possibly can.” 
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/06/18/i-wanted-to-stop-her-crying-the-image-of-a-migrant-child-that-broke-a-photographers-heart/">The Washington Post</a>, which had published the photo under a headline that referenced how the little girl “broke” the “photographer’s heart,” issued a correction to the piece several days later after speaking with the girl’s father and correctly noted that she was never separated from her mother.
Time Magazine itself was forced to issue a correction over an article about the photo, saying “the original version of this story misstated what happened,” and that “the girl was not carried away screaming by U.S. Border Patrol agents,” the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/06/22/the-crying-honduran-girl-on-the-cover-of-time-was-not-separated-from-her-mother-father-says/">Post</a> reports, in a different article explaining the matter. Nonetheless, Time Magazine maintained that placing the little girl on the cover of the magazine was appropriate. 
“The June 12 photograph of the two-year-old Honduran girl became the most visible symbol of the ongoing immigration debate in America for a reason,” reads Time Magazine’s statement justifying the cover. “Under the policy enforced by the administration, prior to its reversal this week, those who crossed the border illegally were criminally prosecuted, which in turn resulted in the separation of children and parents. Our coverage and our reporting captures the stakes of this moment.”

TRUMP IMPEACHMENT

Al Green Brings Notoriously Misleading Child-Separation Photo To Make Case For Impeachment

Impeachment

Time Magazine

U.S. House of Representatives

&#8220;It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.&#8221; – James Madison, <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed62.asp">The Federalist No. 62</a>
&nbsp;
In the year 2019, nine years after the constitutionalist and populist Tea Party wave midterm election of 2010, how many Republicans in Congress actually agree with James Madison?
While all the eyes of political media this week remain fixated upon the dueling melodramas of expected House impeachment later today and the next Democratic Party presidential primary debate tomorrow evening, Congress is gearing up to pass yet another year-end <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-congress-decides-18-year-olds-are-too-young-to-buy-tobacco-heres-a-bunch-of-things-they-still-arent-too-young-to-do">budget betrayal</a>. To be sure, we already knew that fiscal conservatism was dead and that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-fiscal-conservatism-dead-republicans-killed-josh-hammer">Republicans themselves killed it</a>. But it seems that Republicans&#8217; insatiable desire for fiscal profligacy will not be quenched until they can also spit upon fiscal conservatism&#8217;s proverbial corpse.
Daniel Horowitz of Blaze Media has a <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/trump-signs-omnibus-bills-hell-lose-last-legislative-leverage/">devastating breakdown</a> of the nature of the latest boondoggle — a boondoggle rearing its ugly head, lest we forget, less than two years after President Donald Trump himself <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/trump-signing-omnibus-spending-bill-859148">vowed</a> to &#8220;never sign a bill like this again.&#8221; Over 2,400 pages of legislation. Nearly one and a half trillion dollars of additional spending. Increased funding for the EPA, but no increased funding for ICE. MS-13 trafficking and amnesty loopholes galore. More backdoor <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/citizenship-4000-liberian-illegal-aliens-snuck-3430-page-defense-bill/">amnesty</a> for Liberian nationals. Incentivizing illegal aliens to attempt to enter the federal workforce. Re-authorization of the corporate welfare- and crony capitalism-abetting Export-Import Bank. Raising the national tobacco purchasing age to 21. Tens of millions of dollars toward &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/congress-spending-boondoggle-includes-millions-of-dollars-for-federal-agencies-to-research-gun-violence">gun violence research</a>.&#8221; Zero attention paid to the neo-Confederate nationwide plague of sanctuary city lawlessness. Zero attention paid to the fact that murderous transnational criminal cartels still effectively control large swaths of our southern border. Zero attention paid to our nationwide crisis of revanchist and power-hungry <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-how-much-longer-are-you-josh-hammer">judicial supremacism</a>.
And so forth. It&#8217;s enough to make one wonder why we elect Republicans into office, in the first instance. Is there anyone on the Republican side of the aisle who still cares about <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-who-will-stand-for-the-forgotten-american">the forgotten American</a>?
Over the past few years, there has been an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-the-problem-with-common-good-conservatism">ongoing</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-government-exists-to-establish-justice-not-promote-liberty">roiling</a> dialogue over the intellectual meaning and political future of American conservatism. It is undoubtedly an important and healthy discussion for us conservatives to air out among ourselves. My <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-path-forward-conservative-movement-josh-hammer">own take</a> is that there will be no going back to the pre-Trump &#8220;<a href="https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/03/against-the-dead-consensus">dead consensus</a>,&#8221; with the only open question being the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-national-conservatism-conference-josh-hammer">proper path</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-on-chick-fil-a-political-tribalism-and-the-need-for-national-solidarity">forward</a>.
But as every card-carrying conservative knows, &#8220;Republican&#8221; and &#8220;conservative&#8221; are hardly synonymous terms. And while the debate over what it means to be a conservative rages on, it is an <a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1207086692416577538">entirely distinct question</a> to ask what exactly it is that contemporary elected Republicans claim to actually stand for. After all, it certainly does not seem to be fiscal restraint. It certainly does not seem to be cultural traditionalism. It certainly does not seem to be national sovereignty.
Instead, the least common denominator that unifies seemingly all elected Republicans, in the year 2019, seems to be a shared hatred of the Left — or &#8220;triggering the libs,&#8221; as my colleague Michael Knowles <a href="https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles/status/1207092532695318529">aptly phrased it</a> yesterday. Indeed, there is actually some historical precedent for this: The <a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1207091426791743488">sole unifying factor</a> among all three &#8220;legs&#8221; of the traditional post-William F. Buckley Jr./Reagan-era conservative &#8220;stool&#8221; — fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, and national security hawkishness — was opposition to the existential threat of Soviet-era communism.
The modern, post-Kavanagh fiasco Left is indeed a vicious and malicious political foe. The Left&#8217;s reckless radicalization and trend toward full-on totalitarian socialism is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-here-are-three-reasons-why-i-plan-vote-josh-hammer">one of the three factors</a> that fortifies my confidence in voting for Donald Trump next November. But surely it is not too much to ask Republicans to actually stand for something beyond mere hatred of the dreaded enemy.
Or is it?

GOP elephant

HAMMER: What Exactly Do Republicans Claim To Stand For?

Congress

Conservatism

Republican Party

Succinctly put, President Trump last week made one of the most positive moves to combat anti-Semitism ever seen from a world leader. But the media, always anxious to paint the president’s every action as wrong and even anti-Semitic, are acting true to form. In this case, media outlets such as The New York Times are doing tremendous harm to Jewish students on campus — and to simple fairness, to boot.
The president&#8217;s executive order should be uncontroversial. It simply declares that the administration will treat anti-Semitic hatred similarly to discrimination against other minority groups under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. It states that “individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices.”
Instead, the Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/10/us/politics/trump-antisemitism-executive-order.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/10/us/politics/trump-antisemitism-executive-order.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1576640644853000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEwvLMe8EnZgRBrkwEUYUDBc3GvZQ">led</a> with the false notion that the executive order “will effectively interpret Judaism as a race or nationality,” rather than solely as a religion. As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/menken-secular-jews-claim-they-dont-exist-to-spite-the-president" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.dailywire.com/news/menken-secular-jews-claim-they-dont-exist-to-spite-the-president&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1576640644853000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEf7vEbO6-jBEVVyyBQKDjMY1OWDw">I wrote previously</a>, left-wing Jews immediately deemed this a “re-classification” of Jews that would lead back to concentration camps. Others claimed this serviced the trope of Jewish “disloyalty,” as if being Jewish would make someone less American.
The executive order was not, as critics wailed, “anti-Semitism of the highest order.” This reaction, however, was insanity of the highest order.
The basis for Jews being considered a distinct people is not the Nazis, but the Bible. The Book of Exodus teaches that God took the Jews from Egypt to be His nation, and references to the Nation of Israel abound from there onwards.
But this is all a moot point, because the executive order contains no such reference to redefining Jews or Judaism as a national origin. It merely borrows language from the bipartisan Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2019, which had stalled in Congress. This is why so many Jewish members of Congress, such as Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Reps. Max Rose (D-NY) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), approved of this order. By Wednesday, even left-wing sources such as Vox’s <a href="https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/1204792506040422406" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/1204792506040422406&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1576640644854000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHbyRww0Mc2uNU9HtLAfLFaR6D-Xg">Ian Millhiser</a> and Israel’s Haaretzwere <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-trump-to-sign-executive-order-on-anti-semitism-in-college-campuses-treating-jeiwshn-1.8255875" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-trump-to-sign-executive-order-on-anti-semitism-in-college-campuses-treating-jeiwshn-1.8255875&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1576640644854000&amp;usg=AFQjCNG7WbQVIK05BOZyJSUtIbMhTfeImA">calling</a> out the Times for its rush to judgment
But the Times was unimpressed. It returned days later with a new reason why students should “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/15/us/trump-anti-semitism-order-college-students.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/15/us/trump-anti-semitism-order-college-students.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1576640644854000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHluHUehq6KhvShpVGmoYOuF-NavQ">fear</a>” Trump’s executive order: It might squelch free speech and thus “backfire for Jews.” 
This executive order is as timely and necessary as it should be uncontroversial. On Tuesday, two murderers with links to the black nationalist and anti-Semitic “Hebrew Israelite” cult opened fire at a kosher market in Jersey City, New Jersey, killing four — <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/11/nyregion/jersey-city-shooting.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/11/nyregion/jersey-city-shooting.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1576640644854000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEmaFyxybO1dXb-g3lqd0FssRuR3A">including</a> a veteran police officer and a 24-year-old rabbinical student. 
To be sure, hate speech is protected like any other form of speech, and no executive order can stifle it. Nonetheless, a student organization should not receive university funding to create an unsafe environment for others.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), true to form, rushed to attribute the Jersey City killings to “white supremacy” and deleted her erroneous tweet <a href="https://unitedwithisrael.org/tlaib-blames-white-supremacy-for-nj-shooting-deletes-tweet/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://unitedwithisrael.org/tlaib-blames-white-supremacy-for-nj-shooting-deletes-tweet/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1576640644854000&amp;usg=AFQjCNE3bbi52gl0AppzsOY_r1HYjFuI6A">a little too late</a>. She is anxious that Americans perceive Jew-hatred as a neo-Nazi trait, in order to cover for its most salient and pernicious current form: The storm of anti-Semitic rhetoric within our colleges and universities posing as mere “criticism of Israel.”
The executive order directs federal agencies to consider the definition of anti-Semitism provided by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) when identifying evidence of discrimination. Contrary to the Times’ quote from a Jewish leftist, the IHRA definition specifically states that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country” is not anti-Semitic. But modern examples of anti-Semitism include “justifying the killing or harming of Jews,” “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination,” and calling the state of Israel “a racist endeavor.”
And that, of course, is the problem: The so-called “pro-Palestinian” movement does all three of these on an ongoing basis. Its map of “Palestine” is not that of the British, the Ottoman Turks, or even the Romans, but rather that of modern-day Israel. It calls Israel racist and advocates for its destruction — all while attempting to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/germany-takes-stronger-stance-against-anti-josh-hammer">replicate the Nazi boycott</a> under the name “Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions.” The movement in general, and the Students for Justice in Palestine on-campus organization in particular, regularly holds events honoring murderers of Jews.
It is no surprise, then, that these bigots are protesting the executive order. Indeed, under the new rules, anti-Semitic hatred cloaked as “anti-Israel advocacy” will be no more acceptable than preaching white supremacy. That is how it should be. Anyone has the right to voice hatred and bigotry — but not with taxpayer funding.
Unlike leftist Jews with little real attachment to Judaism, the Orthodox Jewish community firmly adheres to our ancient faith — and Orthodox Jews are much more likely to experience anti-Semitism. A recent survey by Ami Magazine found that 92.5% of Orthodox Jews believed that President Trump and the Republicans were more dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism, compared to 1.5% who gave the nod to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the Democrats. That is a stark contrast.
After this executive order, it is likely that the president’s support will trend even higher. History has taught us that anti-Semitism, like all forms of racism, must be nipped in the bud before it metastasizes into a societal epidemic. President Trump is working to stop the irrational hatred of Jews from spreading, but the media are too consumed with their own irrational hatred of the president to care.
&nbsp;
Rabbi Yaakov Menken is the Managing Director of the <a href="https://coalitionforjewishvalues.org">Coalition for Jewish Values</a>, the largest Rabbinic public policy organization in America.

New York Times Headquarters in New York City

MENKEN: When Fake News Harms the Jews

Black Nationalism

Crime

Fake News

Media

Media Bias

New York Times

Students for Justice in Palestine

As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/traditional-rabbi-group-blasts-house-democrats-over-false-and-misleading-letter-on-israeli-settlements">reported</a> last month, 106 House Democrats sent a <a href="https://andylevin.house.gov/sites/andylevin.house.gov/files/112119%20Letter%20to%20SecState%20on%20Israeli%20settlements%20FINAL.pdf">scathing letter</a> to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that expressed &#8220;strong disagreement&#8221; with the Trump administration&#8217;s recently promulgated <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-trump-administration-announces-major-policy-shift-toward-israel-no-longer-views-israels-west-bank-settlements-as-violation-of-international-law">legal assertion</a> that so-called Israeli &#8220;settlements&#8221; in the biblical Jewish homeland of Judea and Samaria do not per se violate international law.
The House Democrats&#8217; hysterical letter accused Pompeo of &#8220;ignoring international law&#8221; and &#8220;undermin[ing] America&#8217;s moral standing.&#8221; The congressmen continued: &#8220;If the U.S. unilaterally abandons international and human rights law, we can only expect a more chaotic and brutal twenty-first century for Americans and our allies, including the Israeli people.&#8221;
Conservative Zionists quickly and assertively pushed back against the tendentious missive. The <a href="http://coalitionforjewishvalues.org/">Coalition for Jewish Values</a> (CJV), which identifies as &#8220;the largest rabbinic public policy organization in America,&#8221; wrote its own <a href="https://coalitionforjewishvalues.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/191126-Letter-to-Rep-Levin.pdf">powerful letter</a> that deconstructed the House Democrats&#8217; misleading claims. Frequent Daily Wire contributor and CJV Managing Director <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/author/rabbi-yaakov-menken">Rabbi Yaakov Menken</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/traditional-rabbi-group-blasts-house-democrats-over-false-and-misleading-letter-on-israeli-settlements">told The Daily Wire</a> at the time: &#8220;Word to the wise: If you claim to be pro-Israel, and sign a letter regarding Israel along with Reps. Omar, Tlaib, and Ocasio-Cortez, you’re fooling no one but yourself. It’s amazing to see congressmen telling the administration to ignore Acts of Congress. All the more so when those Acts prevent U.S. tax dollars from being spent to encourage terrorism.&#8221;
Now, as <a href="https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Pompeo-slams-Democrats-settlement-fixation-calls-claims-foolish-611116">reported</a> by The Jerusalem Post, Pompeo has powerfully responded himself to the House Democrats&#8217; letter. Pompeo excoriated the Democrats&#8217; letter as &#8220;foolish,&#8221; and he hit the anti-Israel presidency of Barack Obama in no uncertain terms: &#8220;The Obama-Kerry departure from America’s historic support of Israel has done nothing to make peace more attainable.&#8221;
&#8220;While I appreciate your interest in this important issue, I couldn’t disagree more with those two foolish positions,&#8221; Pompeo continued. &#8220;While you are free to fixate on settlements as a barrier to peace, you are simply wrong in referring to that view as being subject to bipartisan agreement.&#8221;
Pompeo then blasted &#8220;the erroneous positions of international law that have gained favor in the past decades&#8221;:
<blockquote>&#8220;We approach the issue pragmatically and diplomatically. But we eschew the erroneous positions of international law that have gained favor in the past decade. … The State Departments’ recent determination that the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se illegal is an important step in the peace process, and we are confident that it creates the right platform for further progress.&#8221;</blockquote>
The full copy of Pompeo&#8217;s letter can be viewed at <a href="https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Pompeo-slams-Democrats-settlement-fixation-calls-claims-foolish-611116">the Post</a>, which also quotes U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman as expressing strong agreement with Pompeo&#8217;s letter: &#8220;In his response to the 106 congressmen, Secretary Pompeo lays to rest the criticism that the [Trump a]dministration’s determination with regard to Israeli settlements was contrary to law or inconsistent with bipartisan policy. Indeed, the administration’s decision, in reversing [S]ecretary Kerry’s unfortunate statement in support of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334, restores the United States to its historic and appropriate role in mediating the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.&#8221;
In a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-the-trump-administration-is-absolutely-correct-to-call-israeli-settlements-legal">Daily Wire op-ed</a> last month, I wrote approvingly of the Trump administration&#8217;s recently announced position with respect to Israeli &#8220;settlements.&#8221;

Secretary Of State Pompeo Holds At Press Briefing On Iran At The State Department

Pompeo Blasts House Democrats For ‘Foolish’ Stance On Israeli ‘Settlements’

Democratic Party

Mike Pompeo

Palestinians

State Department

Let&#8217;s state the obvious: The U.S. taxpayer funds far too much in the way of foreign military and civilian aid. And though foreign aid constitutes a <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/how-does-us-spend-its-foreign-aid">small percentage</a> (sometimes as low of <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-slash-federal-costs-boost-military-spending-article-1.2985016">1%</a>) of the federal budget, it consistently ranks as one of the <a href="https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/03/11/foreign-aid">least popular</a> things that the federal government funds.
This widespread sentiment is justified, on the merits. It is possible that there is no more quintessential &#8220;Drain the Swamp&#8221; issue than the notion that we should be far more judicious in how we dole out taxpayer-funded foreign aid to venal and restive foreign countries. Indeed, there is actually a compelling argument that we ought to cut off foreign aid for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-the-pro-israel-case-against-u-s-military-aid-to-israel">everyone</a>. But we should at least start cutting off aid somewhere, and there is no better place to start than the Hezbollah-overrun Levantite state of Lebanon, which U.S. taxpayers subsidize to the tune of <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/lebanon-is-gone">$250 million</a> per year.
This is not exactly a new battle for fiscal and anti-Islamist conservatives — or really, anyone who opposes the U.S. taxpayer funding of an erstwhile sovereign nation that that has been thoroughly taken over by a transnational <a href="https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/">criminal</a> and <a href="https://www.counterextremism.com/threat/hezbollah">jihadist</a> outfit. As <a href="https://www.fdd.org/team/tony-badran/">Tony Badran</a>, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, has painstakingly demonstrated for <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/lebanon-hezbollah-and-irans-emerging-client-state-11568847112">years</a> <a href="https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2017/07/26/lebanon-is-another-name-for-hezbollah/">now</a>, there is no longer a tenable distinction between &#8220;Lebanon&#8221; and &#8220;Hezbollah.&#8221; Militarily and politically, they are one and the same — and they have been for <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/why-are-we-funding-hezbollah/">years</a>.
Bear in mind that Hezbollah currently maintains scores of Iranian-funded, <a href="https://www.idf.il/en/minisites/hezbollah/hezbollahs-precision-guided-missile-project/">precision-guided missiles</a> currently stationed in southern Lebanon and aimed straight at the hearts of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Israel&#8217;s next war — and it is a matter of when, not if — with Hezbollah is going to be a <a href="http://www.thetower.org/article/the-new-hezbollah-israels-next-war-will-be-a-godawful-mess/">long, bloody mess</a>. And foreign aid to Israel aside, the U.S. taxpayer presently also funds the horrifically wrong side of that inevitable war.
Recently, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bryen-missing-the-point-of-the-latest-middle-east-protests">grassroots anti-government uprisings</a> in Lebanon have given U.S. policymakers ample room to pause and reflect upon why taxpayers are still funding an Iranian satrapy on the Mediterranean with a military and government that are both dominated by a leading transnational jihadist organization. &#8220;[M]ilitary aid to Lebanon has been a bipartisan failure for more than a decade, and reconsidering it is overdue,&#8221; Badran <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/lebanon-is-gone">wrote</a> in the Washington Examiner last week. He elaborated:
<blockquote>Sending money to a failed state run by a terrorist group is absurd on its face, which is why advocates of the policy must continuously adjust their talking points. They cannot run with the argument that the aid works against Hezbollah’s military buildup and political dominance in the country, as the aid has done nothing of the sort in the 12 years since it began. In fact, Hezbollah’s power has grown exponentially during that period. &#8230;
The reality is that Hezbollah took over Lebanon years ago. For the past seven years, as Hezbollah prosecuted its war in Syria, Lebanese forces coordinated closely with it and protected the group’s rear and logistical routes. During battles in eastern Lebanon against Syrian militants in 2017, the Lebanese military deployed jointly with Hezbollah and provided it with fire support, using U.S.-supplied munitions and systems. &#8230;
Hezbollah’s power is manifest in Lebanon’s political order as well. Hezbollah’s coalition currently holds the majority in parliament. The executive branch of the government, to which the Lebanese military answers, has been dominated by Hezbollah and its allies.</blockquote>
Again, why on Earth are U.S. taxpayer dollars flowing into this failed and terrorist-overrun nation? Free Lebanese civilians are flocking to the streets of Beirut to decry their Hezbollah-dominated political order. Why would we ever take affirmative steps to boost that jihadist-overrun political order?
A high-ranking Trump administration official spoke with The Daily Wire and described the behind-the-scene machinations that have engulfed various wings of the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development over recent weeks. While there are some clear-headed minds on this issue within the decision-making echelons of the bureaucracy, the overwhelming State Department consensus has remained in favor of maintaining the perverse status quo. And of course, as far as distinctly military aid is concerned, the sclerotic Pentagon apparatus fears nothing more than it fears the nefarious bogeyman of &#8220;<a href="https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2018/07/23/jim-mattis-warns-congress-not-to-block-turkey-from-f-35-program/">supply chain disruption</a>.&#8221;
To that end, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo took the unusual step yesterday of <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-12/pompeo-intervenes-to-release-115-million-in-aid-for-lebanon">personally intervening</a> to release about $115 million in non-military, civilian aid that had been held up for about a month. The Bloomberg <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-12/pompeo-intervenes-to-release-115-million-in-aid-for-lebanon">piece</a> that broke the story is also unusually personal, singling out by name some who had been closely involved in embargoing the funding: USAID Deputy Administrator Bonnie Glick and Deputy National Security Adviser Victoria Coates. The piece also smears purported &#8220;hard-liners&#8221; in Congress — by which it all but assuredly means Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), for whom Coates just coincidentally happens to be a former national security underling — for having the temerity to question whether U.S. taxpayer dollars should freely flow to a jihadist-dominated &#8220;state&#8221; entity.
As Badran <a href="https://twitter.com/AcrossTheBay/status/1205286530417332224">tweeted</a>, the anonymous Deep Staters upon whom Bloomberg relied to tar Glick and Coates by name are cowards, pure and simple. The Bloomberg piece stinks of an <a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1205312074286587907">orchestrated hit job</a> by State Department apparatchiks against would-be reformers, centered around Cruz&#8217;s broader D.C. orbit, who are trying to defund a de facto terrorist state. The fact that such a no-brainer issue as this is ginning up such intra-executive branch squabbling is, quite frankly, nuts.
Indeed, Pompeo&#8217;s unilateral decision to continue the aid flowing into Hezbollah&#8217;s coffers is naive and woefully misguided, at best — and downright shameful, at worst. The continuation of any and all foreign aid to Lebanon, as long as Hezbollah retains any influence over the country, ought to be wholly and unequivocally halted. It is absolutely bonkers to use U.S. taxpayer dollars to prop up a Hezbollah-overrun Iranian satrapy with scores of precision-guided missiles aimed straight into the heart of Israel. To that end, Cruz&#8217;s &#8220;Stop Sending American Taxpayer Money to Governments Controlled By Terrorists Act,&#8221; which the Bloomberg piece references, &#8220;would block assistance to any Lebanese government that’s unduly influenced by Hezbollah.&#8221; Good.
But it is a travesty that legislation is needed, in the first instance. And a GOP congressional aide closely involved in the fight over Lebanon assistance, speaking to The Daily Wire, was blistering in his criticism of the fact that we are now at this unfortunate crossroads: &#8220;The Deep State is in full-blown panic mode. They&#8217;re leaking the names of individual staffers to reporters, which in Washington is nuclear war. You can understand why. There has never been a serious challenge to their policy of sending billions of dollars to Lebanon, but in recent weeks there have been two serious challenges from inside the administration and now this Cruz bill that will force them to explain why they&#8217;re sending American taxpayer funds to a Hezbollah-controlled government.&#8221;
The Trump administration had the opportunity here to do the right thing. Indeed, it still has the opportunity to do the right thing, going forward: Defund every single penny of U.S. foreign aid to Lebanon unless and until we can authoritatively verify that Hezbollah no longer maintains military or political influence in the nation. And, for goodness&#8217; sake, do it yesterday.

Israel Lebanon map

HAMMER: Defund Lebanon. And Do It Yesterday.

Department of Defense

Lebanon

Radical Islam

The Left, increasingly, does not care about anti-Semitism.
That’s been true for a while— just look at the British Labour Party’s embrace of anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn (today, the UK Guardian openly editorialized, “The pain and hurt within the Jewish community, and the damage to Labour, are undeniable and shaming. Yet Labour remains indispensable to progressive politics.”), or the Democratic Party’s defense of Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. But the Left has been able to cover for its own anti-Semitism problem by focusing in on the rise of white supremacist violence, connecting that violence with President Trump.
Here’s a quick rule of thumb: If you only want to have a conversation about anti-Semitism when you can blame anti-Semitism on your political opponents, you don’t care about anti-Semitism.
And that’s precisely what we’ve seen over the past 24 hours.
On Tuesday, two shooters targeted a kosher supermarket in Jersey City; six people died, including the shooters, three civilians, and a police officer. The shooters were apparently affiliated with the Black Hebrew Israelites, a fringe black supremacist group claiming that Jews aren’t actually the true Jews — that the actual Jews are black Americans. Members of this group have been involved in violent incidents in the past, of course.
The identity of the shooters meant that the media Left was eager to ignore the case. And indeed, within 24 hours, it was no longer trending on Twitter. No broad discussions of left-wing tolerance for anti-Semitism, particularly in minority communities, ensued. New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio had the temerity to tweet, “This tragically confirms that a growing pattern of violent anti-Semitism has now turned into a crisis for our nation. And now this threat has reached the doorstep of New York City.” Now, broadly speaking, violence against Jews in New York City has been spiking in the past few years — none of that violence attributable to white supremacists. But we already know why De Blasio has been able to ignore that violence – <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/31/nyregion/jewish-bias-safety-nyc.html">The New York Times</a> told us as much back in November 2018:
<blockquote>If anti-Semitism bypasses consideration as a serious problem in New York, it is to some extent because it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy. In fact, it is the varied backgrounds of people who commit hate crimes in the city that make combating and talking about anti-Semitism in New York much harder. &#8230; [B]ias stemming from longstanding ethnic tensions in the city presents complexities that many liberals have chosen simply to ignore. …</blockquote>
Now, juxtapose the treatment of an actual anti-Semitic attack by two black perpetrators affiliated with a black supremacist group with the media and Twitter Left’s treatment of Donald Trump’s executive order (EO) targeting anti-Semitism on college campuses. Trump’s EO is merely an extension of longstanding bipartisan policy that suggests that Jews ought to be protected on college campuses by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But Trump was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/menken-secular-jews-claim-they-dont-exist-to-spite-the-president">raked over the coals</a> thanks to idiotic New York Times reporting, which suggested that Trump would characterize Jews as a “race or nationality” under the Civil Rights Act. That’s not what the EO did. But even if the EO had labeled Jews a “nationality,” that would have been perfectly in line with Jewish law and tradition. Jews are not merely a religious group. They are in fact a group with shared ancestry, a shared culture, and a shared history. You can join the group by converting, but while religious and philosophic Judaism is a key component of Jewish identity — and the most key component when it comes to standing to speak on Jewish issues, generally — Jewishness isn’t just religion.
Nonetheless, the blue-checkmarked crew went insane, suggesting that Trump’s EO — which, again, was directly aimed at fighting anti-Semitism — was ackshually anti-Semitic. Suffice it to say, the Venn diagram of those concerned about an anti-Semitic terror attack in Jersey City and those concerned about Trump’s EO had nearly no crossover. In fact, many of the people supposedly concerned about anti-Semitism in Trump’s EO are proponents of the actively anti-Semitic boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.
Anti-Semitism isn’t a game. You don’t get to cite it when convenient and ignore it when convenient. Those who do exacerbate the problem. Unfortunately, these days, that phenomenon is increasingly common on the political Left.

Jersey City shooting

SHAPIRO: The Left’s Grotesque Politicization Of Anti-Semitism

Leftism

Progressivism

With the news of President Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/menken-secular-jews-claim-they-dont-exist-to-spite-the-president">signing</a> an executive order affirming the fact that Judaism can, in fact, be seen as a nationality (as opposed to a religion), left-wing groups and pundits — both Jewish and non-Jewish — have declared that this action is anti-Semitic. These groups seem to despise the notion of a Jewish nation.
In his 2018 book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Judaism-Zionism-Israel-Yotav-Eliach/dp/091415334X/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=yotav+eliach&amp;qid=1576080910&amp;sr=8-1">“Judaism, Zionism, and the Land of Israel”</a>, Rabbi Yotav Eliach begins the history of the Jewish people in Israel with the definition of a nation and how Judaism fits into that definition. That premise is pivotal when discussing the conflicts of the Middle East, as it cuts against the left-wing and Arabist arguments that the Jews are a colonial interloper in Palestinian-Arab land. Zionism is, itself, Jewish nationalism. Those who classify themselves as “anti-Zionist” are anti-Jewish nationalism at their core, so this executive order embodies everything against which they have fought.
Rabbi Eliach writes that “Judaism operates on three levels”: Religious, social, and nationalistic. The religious level includes “lifecycle rituals, prayers, holidays, religious garb, and the Sabbath.” The social level includes personal modesty, behavior, and diet, unrelated to a specific religious ritual. The nationalistic level “is the basis for a constitution for running a Jewish State.” This includes criminal law, property law, liability law, business law, family law, rules regarding social welfare, governance, and military law. Studying the Torah (the Five Books of Moses) alone will show you that Judaism is more than a religion.
So what is the definition of “nation?” Rabbi Eliach quotes Professor Bela Kiraly of Brooklyn College, who taught “the definition of a nation is a group with a common language (preferably distinct); a common culture (preferably distinct), and a common land of origin — a location on Earth where a particular group developed its language and culture, and where this culture and language were dominant.” Judaism easily fits these three qualifications.
The common language of the Jews is Hebrew, which has been used for over 3,000 years. Hebrew letters, the same alphabet that is used today, can be found on the Dead Sea scrolls, which date back 2,100 years. The Jewish people managed to maintain this language after they lost their independence and were spread into the global Diaspora. This is why prayer books throughout history have all been written in the same Hebrew.
The Jewish people also have a common, and unique, culture. As stated, there is a Jewish constitution, which has laws that separated the Jewish people from other cultures at the time of the writing of the Torah. There is also a unique Jewish calendar (still used to this day), specific clothing that Jews — specifically Jewish men — must wear, schools that Jewish children attend, food that Jews are allowed to eat, a different day of rest, and a specific place Jews pray toward: Jerusalem.
Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Land of Israel, is the direction every observant Jew faces when he prays three times a day. In Europe and America, Jews face east. In Asia, they face west. There are libraries that are filled with the historic connection that Jews have with the Land of Israel. The specific borders are described in the Torah. It was conquered by the prophet Joshua, the successor to Moses. It existed without a centralized monarchy for 300 years until Saul was made King. Saul was succeeded by David, who expanded the territory and shored up the defenses of the land. His son, Solomon, built the First Temple. There was Jewish sovereignty for 687 years until the Babylonians conquered the land. That is almost three times longer than the United States of America has been a nation. And that’s just the beginning.
The Babylonian Empire was conquered by the Persian Empire, who gave the Jewish people autonomy of the land — albeit without their own monarch. The Second Temple was built and the Jews still had their own court system, calendar, and language. The Persians were conquered by the Greeks, who eventually attempted to force the Jewish people to adopt Greek language, religion and culture. The Jews revolted, and won their independence in the year 165 B.C.E. (before the common era).
These events barely scratch the surface of the history of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, which has maintained a continuous Jewish population through today. “The Jewish relationship with [The Land of Israel] is not theoretical”, writes Rabbi Eliach, “it is a historical relationship that goes back over 3,000 years. That is one of the reasons archaeology is so important in modern Israel. The more one digs, the more one finds a Jewish past.”
So when Slate <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/12/trump-executive-order-judaism-religion-anti-semitism-palestine-bds-boycott-movement.html">headlines</a> “President Donald Trump to Sign Executive Order Redefining Judaism as Ethnicity or Nationality,” The Guardian <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/10/trump-executive-order-antisemitism-israel">says</a> “Executive order could redefine Judaism as a race or nationality, which critics argue is itself antisemitic,” or Newsweek <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/antisemitism-trump-jews-nationality-white-house-tropes-1476620">writes</a> “President Donald Trump plans to sign an executive order defining Judaism as a nationality rather than just a religion,” they are being historically ignorant. President Trump cannot redefine Judaism as a nation, because Judaism is already, by definition, a nation.
The Jewish nation, despite being the subject of more hardships than any other nation in the history of the world, has managed to survive precisely because it is a nation more so than it is a religion. Only a nation, with a common language, culture and land, could outlast every other nation that has sought to conquer and destroy the Jewish people. President Trump is merely recognizing that fact — and protecting Jews on American campuses while doing so.
 
Moshe Hill is a political analyst, columnist, and student of Rabbi Eliach at Rambam Mesivta. You can like Moshe Hill on Facebook at <a href="https://facebook.com/aHillwithaView">facebook.com/aHillwithaView</a> and follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/themohill">@theMoHil</a>.

Star of David

HILL: The Jewish Nation

Nationalism

Federal prosecutors revealed on Tuesday that authorities have charged Genaro Garcia Luna, the former Secretary of Public Security in Mexico from 2006 to 2012, for his involvement in an alleged drug trafficking conspiracy with Mexico&#8217;s largest and most powerful drug cartel and for making false statements.
&#8220;According to the indictment and other court filings by the government, from 2001 to 2012, while occupying high-ranking law enforcement positions in the Mexican government, Garcia Luna received millions of dollars in bribes from the Sinaloa Cartel in exchange for providing protection for its drug trafficking activities,&#8221; the Department of Justice said in a statement. &#8220;From 2001 to 2005, Garcia Luna led Mexico’s Federal Investigation Agency, and from 2006 to 2012, he served as Mexico’s Secretary of Public Security, controlling Mexico’s Federal Police Force.&#8221;
&#8220;In exchange for the payment of bribes, the Sinaloa Cartel obtained safe passage for its drug shipments, sensitive law enforcement information about investigations into the Cartel, and information about rival drug cartels, thereby facilitating the importation of multi‑ton quantities of cocaine and other drugs into the United States,&#8221; the DOJ continued. &#8220;On two occasions, the Cartel personally delivered bribe payments to Garcia Luna in briefcases containing between three and five million dollars.  According to financial records obtained by the government, by the time Garcia Luna relocated to the United States in 2012, he had amassed a personal fortune of millions of dollars.&#8221;
The case, which is being prosecuted in the Eastern District of New York, also alleges that Garcia Luna also committed a crime by trying to hide his history of alleged criminal activity with the Sinaloa cartel when he submitted an application for naturalization in 2018.
Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, announced the charges, saying, “Garcia Luna stands accused of taking millions of dollars in bribes from ‘El Chapo’ Guzman’s Sinaloa Cartel while he controlled Mexico’s Federal Police Force and was responsible for ensuring public safety in Mexico. Today’s arrest demonstrates our resolve to bring to justice those who help cartels inflict devastating harm on the United States and Mexico, regardless of the positions they held while committing their crimes.”
The news comes as President Donald Trump recently announced that the United States had secured a new deal to go after the Mexican drug cartels in conjunction with the Mexican government.
“All necessary work has been completed to declare Mexican Cartels terrorist organizations,” Trump tweeted late last week. “Statutorily we are ready to do so. However, at the request of a man who I like and respect, and has worked so well with us, President Andres Manuel [López Obrador] we will temporarily hold off this designation and step up our joint efforts to deal decisively with these vicious and ever-growing organizations!”
The announcement from the president came after he had stated in a recent interview that he planned on designating the drug cartels as terrorist organizations.
Multiple government agencies recognized the Sinaloa cartel as the most dominant drug cartel in Mexico, which the DEA <a href="https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2018-11/DIR-032-18%202018%20NDTA%20final%20low%20resolution.pdf">noted</a> in its 2018 National Drug Threat Assessment.

Genaro Garcia Luna

Former Top Mexican Official Arrested For Drug-Trafficking Conspiracy With Top Cartel, DOJ Says

Drug Cartels

Mexico

Since 2014, the U.S. government, under both Presidents Obama and Trump, has given two branches of Islamic Relief, a global Islamist charity tied closely to the Muslim Brotherhood, over $2 million of U.S. taxpayers’ money.
Most recently, in October, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) <a href="https://www.usaspending.gov/#/award/ASST_NON_720FDA19GR00239_7200">handed over</a> $356,000 to Islamic Relief Worldwide, the radical franchise’s parent organization.
Is the extent of Islamic Relief’s extremist ties small enough that a well-meaning bureaucrat might simply be oblivious? Or is this an appalling dereliction of duty that means taxpayers’ money is now subsidizing terrorist acts?
In fact, it is difficult to be unaware of Islamic Relief, the largest Islamic charity in the Western world, which annually raises hundreds of millions of dollars in donations and grants. The charity and its officials are rarely out of the news. In 2012, Islamic Relief co-founder Essam El-Haddad became the senior foreign policy advisor to Egypt’s short-lived Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohamed Morsi. In the wake of the collapse of the Morsi regime, Haddad was <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Detention/Opinions/Session85/A_HRC_WGAD_2019_42_AdvanceEditedVersion.pdf">jailed</a> by an Egyptian court for “financing terrorism through the exploitation of global charities such as Islamic Relief.”
But it is not just the Egyptian government that has pointed to the involvement of Islamic Relief with extremism and terror. Although governments all over the world have previously worked with Islamic Relief, many have now begun to defund, designate, and otherwise disassociate themselves. The U.S., compared to the rest of the world, is far behind in recognizing the serious problems presented by this Islamist charity.
For example, the German government have openly stated that Islamic Relief <a href="https://www.meforum.org/islamist-watch/58245/german-government-islamic-relief-has-significant">has &#8220;significant ties&#8221; to the Muslim Brotherhood,</a> with a Swedish government report <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20170304101145/https:/www.msb.se/Upload/Kunskapsbank/Studier/Muslimska_Brodraskapet_i_Sverige_DNR_2107-1287.pdf">reaching</a> similar conclusions. In April, Italy’s Regional Council of Lombardy passed a resolution <a href="https://www.meforum.org/islamist-watch/58123/italian-lawmakers-censure-islamic-relief-over">denouncing</a> Islamic Relief for hosting radical preachers.
European discontent is downstream from a lot of other, more serious governmental allegations. Israel has <a href="http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/181938">designated</a> Islamic Relief as a terror financing organization for funding Hamas. The United Arab Emirates, a majority-Muslim country, has done the <a href="http://wam.ae/en/details/1395272478814">same thing</a>. A government-sponsored commission in Tunisia, another majority-Muslim country, <a href="https://www.meforum.org/57777/islamic-relief-qatar-tunisian-terror">accused</a> Islamic Relief of financing jihadists across the Libyan border.
Additionally, in the United Kingdom, the location of Islamic Relief’s headquarters, the Charity Commission has <a href="https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/regulator-contacts-three-islamic-charities-yasir-qadhi-tours/governance/article/1430267">raised the issue</a> of hate speech from Islamic Relief preachers. Majority-Muslim Bangladesh has similar concerns, <a href="https://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2017/10/11/bangladesh-bans-three-ngos-from-providing-aid-for-rohingya-refugees">banning</a> Islamic Relief from working with Rohingya Muslim refugees because of concerns that Islamic Relief was seeking to radicalize vulnerable Rohingya refugees.
Increasing recognition of Islamic Relief’s extremism is beginning to affect its income sources. <a href="https://www.islamic-relief.org/annual-reports/">According</a> to data in its own annual reports, Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW) has experienced a steady decline in the amount of monies received from European governments — from over $7 million in 2011 to just under $1 million in 2018. In recent years, IRW has reported no grants at all from the British, Spanish, and Swedish governments, and noticeably less from the European Union and the United Nations.
Given European worries, it is all the more baffling, then, that Islamic Relief’s U.S. branch continues to receive increasingly generous funds from the U.S. government. According to <a href="https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/IslamicReliefWorld-AnnualReportandFinancialStatements-2018%20%281%29.pdf">their 2018 report</a>, the U.S. branch is by far Islamic Relief’s most profitable branch, reporting over $145 million of revenue in 2017 and contributing 16.5% of IRW&#8217;s total income.
The charity enjoys significant political support. The <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/partnerships/partnerships">Department of Agriculture</a> and the <a href="https://www.fema.gov/news-release/2017/09/18/volunteers-play-integral-role-disaster-relief-and-recovery-efforts">Federal Emergency Management Agency</a> both list Islamic Relief as a partner. In 2018, Acting Assistant Attorney General John Gore agreed to be the <a href="https://www.justice.gov/crt/speech/remarks-acting-assistant-attorney-general-john-gore-islamic-relief-capitol-hill-ramadan">guest of honor</a> at an Islamic Relief reception on Capitol Hill. And so forth.
Meanwhile, <a href="https://relieflab.irusa.org/congress-joins-islamic-relief-usa-for-post-ramadan-eid-celebration/">numerous</a> members of Congress attended Islamic Relief’s reception on Capitol Hill. Notoriously, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ilhan-omar-has-more-anti-semitism-on-her-schedule">headlined</a> a fundraiser for Islamic Relief. When criticized for appearing next to an especially noxious anti-Semite who worked for the charity (but subsequently left in the wake of the Middle East Forum’s investigation into his extremism), Omar made up <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ilhan-omar-offers-absurd-excuse-for-anti-semitic-scheduling">implausible excuses</a> but continued with the event nonetheless.
It seems Americans and their government are far less aware of the danger posed by Islamic Relief than are many of their counterparts in the rest of the world. This is surprising, given that, as a report by the Middle East Forum revealed last year, Islamic Relief has been under <a href="https://www.meforum.org/MiddleEastForum/media/MEFLibrary/pdf/Islamic-Relief-Dossier-v3.pdf">federal investigation</a> in recent years, although few details are known.
Some members of Congress are beginning to raise the alarm. Several have <a href="https://www.meforum.org/7281/mef-reveals-islamic-relief-under-investigation">written a letter</a> to the Trump administration about Islamic Relief. Curiously, it has gone unanswered. Islamic Relief’s activities also <a href="https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO06/20180711/108532/HHRG-115-GO06-Transcript-20180711.pdf">caught the attention</a> of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee at a public hearing last year, where this record of terror finance and extremism was brought out into the open.
Yet despite these important steps, Islamic Relief continues to operate in the United States with little scrutiny. Americans bristle at the notion that they are supposed to follow the crowd, believing themselves to stand alone and make judgments independent of foreign pressure. Oftentimes, that’s an admirable trait. But not when it comes to ignoring evidence of terror finance and extremism that is so conspicuous and severe that even allied majority-Muslim countries are warning us of the danger.
The Trump administration must answer critics of the government’s continued partnership with Islamic Relief, end all public funding for the charity, and fully investigate its ties to terror finance and hostile foreign governments such as Turkey and Qatar. By doing so, the administration would importantly restart the crackdown on charity-cloaked terror finance abandoned by the Obama administration, reassert America’s leadership in the struggle against radical Islam, and give non-Islamist Muslims an opportunity to replace theocrats dressed as charity workers.
&nbsp;
Cliff Smith is director of the <a href="https://www.meforum.org">Middle East Forum</a>’s Washington Project; Sam Westrop is director of the Middle East Forum’s Islamist Watch project.

Morocco mosque

SMITH & WESTROP: Trump Administration Continues To Enable And Fund Troubled Islamic Organization

Charity

Menu