Just How Many Times Can Joe Biden Be Wrong? (Part II, Some Other Voices)

Gerard Baker, in the October 1, 2024 Wall Street Journal, made this observation:  "Israel has in 12 months done nothing less than redraw the balance of global security, not just in the region, but in the wider world."  But today's leaders in the Western world do not understand.  And, like Biden, they are fearful.  Baker:  "In Europe, they have gone even further, as usual, rewarding Hamas and Hezbollah by nominally recognizing a nonexistent Palestinian state and prosecuting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on bogus war-crime charges."  

In an Op-Ed in the September 17, 2024 WSJ, Walter Russell Mead discussed a report issued by the Commission on the National Defense Strategy.  The report was written by eight "experts" appointed by both parties from the House and Senate Armed Services committees.  With unanimous opinion, the Commission wrote that the US currently faces the "most serious and most challenging" threats since 1945, including a real risk of "near-term major war."  Said the Commission:  "...the U.S. military lacks both the capabilities and the capacity required to be confident it can deter and prevail in combat."  

Mead does not lay all the blame on Biden, stating that there has been a generation of failed leadership.  Mead:  "Even more appalling than the report is the general indifference with which it has been received," citing Mitch McConnell as an exception.  But the WSJ title of their September 23, 2024 editorial observed:  "How Freedom Faded on Biden's Watch."  After citing numerous foreign policy failures by the Biden-Harris Administration, they conclude with this:  "All of this and more adds up to the worst decline in world order, and the largest decline in U.S. influence, since the 1930's."

But does our President even have a clue?  The WSJ:  "Yet Mr. Biden continues to speak and act as if he's presided over an era of spreading peace and prosperity."  Additionally, Biden "has proposed a cut in real defense spending each year of his Presidency, which may be his greatest abdication."    The Journal:  "The first task will be restoring U.S. deterrence, which will require more hard power and political will."  And that, my dear readers, will require a U.S. leader who does not fear the threat, and if necessary, the use of military power.

I am well aware that there is a segment of the Republican Party that wants nothing to do with "foreign" wars.  A fair number are even isolationists.  I am not of that mind.  But I am of the mind that believes in peace through strength.  Peace does not come about through weakness and trying to appease the evil actors in the world.  Such weakness and appeasement only increases the likelihood of war.  The other issue is whether we side with our allies, or defer to our enemies.  Biden's actions have mostly sided with our ally Israel, but his words have deferred to Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran.  

"Mr. Biden has undermined the U.S. ability to deter adversaries because he fears any escalation, ceding the advantage to Iran, Russia and China.  Israel can't afford such indulgence.  It's survival is at stake."  (From the 9/30/24 editorial in the WSJ.)  

At the very beginning of my blog, in 2009, I wrote a post called "Iranian Nukes."  (It was written on 9/26/09 and posted on 11/26/09 - the date my daughters set up the blog for me.)  That post was followed shortly thereafter with "Iranian Nukes, Part II," posted 2/21/10.  Then, on 3/11/2012, I posted "What To Do About Iran?"  That post gives the opinions of multiple commentators.  As you can see, the issue of how to deal with the nuclear program of the religious fanatics who rule Iran has been going on for quite some time.  

When George W. Bush was president, I advocated for a joint strike force of the U.S., France, the U.K. and Israel, conducting an aerial assault on Iran's then much less developed nuclear facilities.  I felt that such a unified force would send a message to Russia and China to stay out of it.  But, while many U.S. presidents have said they would not allow Iran to get nukes, the reality has been quite different.  

Which is why I agree with the 10/3/2024 editorial in the WSJ:  "If Mr. Biden won't take this opportunity to destroy Iran's nuclear program, the least he can do is not stop Israel from doing the job for its own self-preservation."  After all, says the Journal:  "Israel has made its biggest military and strategic gains when it has ignored such U.S. advice" to stand down.  Amen to that.   

Just How Many Times Can Joe Biden Be Wrong? (Part I, A Look At Some History)

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates famously said that "I think he's (Biden) been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades."  Let's take a look at a few past examples, before we get to today.

Recall his January, 2022 press conference, during which he suggested that a "minor incursion" by Russia into Ukraine might be acceptable.  Was that supposed to give comfort to the Ukrainian people, or any of our European allies.  Anyway, big surprise.  The next month - February, 2022 - Russia invaded Ukraine.  I trust I need not remind everyone of the disastrous withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, because Biden was determined to exit before 9/1/2021.  

In 2020 he criticized Saudi Arabia and sided with Yemen/the Houthis in their war.  After becoming President, Biden took the Houthis off the list of terror organizations, after which they promptly attacked Western shipping in the Red Sea.  Yes, he eventually put the Houthis back on the terror list, but after much damage had already been done.  And the Houthis continue to act with impunity.   

Remember the Abraham Accords?  I guess Biden did not, as he has been unable to expand on it.  However, he did restore funding to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, as well as to UNRWA in Gaza, a UN organization that has been shown to work hand in glove with Hamas.  What did Biden ask in return for this largesse?  You know, maybe commit to stop killing Jews.  Nope.  No such thing.  But Trump did all that - cut off funding to the PA and UNRWA, as long as they participated in, or assisted in, the killing of Jews.

But let's talk about Iran.  It was bad enough that Biden refused to enforce the sanctions on Iran.  This allowed Iran to sell oil (mostly to China) and make billions of dollars.  He even gave them six billion dollars.  Guess where Iran spent their billions?  Supplying Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.  Biden basically begged Iran to reenter the nuclear deal, which Trump realized was nothing other than a path to get nukes for Iran.  

So what about now?  What about after Iran attacked Israel for the second time in six months, with the latest attack resulting in over 180 ballistic missiles being fired at Israel by Iran.  Let's think about the current situation.  Iran's proxy in Gaza - Hamas - has been significantly degraded by Israel.  Iran's strongest proxy - Hezbollah in Lebanon - has also been significantly weakened.  Almost all of Iran's missiles fired at Israel were shot down, by Israel's multi-layered anti-ballistic missile system and with the help of the US.  The political head of Hamas, Haniyeh, has been taken out - when he was a guest in Tehran no less.  The head of Hezbollah, Nasrallah, has been taken out.  (Hezbollah, recall, was responsible for the deaths of 241 US Marines in Lebanon in 1983.)  

So, with Hamas and Hezbollah weakened, with Iran unsuccessful with their missile attack, what does Biden counsel the Israelis?  Might this be the time to take out Iran's developing nuke program?  Maybe even bring about regime change in Iran?  Not a chance.  Not when Biden fears our enemies more than they fear him.  Hence, his policy is one of appeasement.  Which does not work, and has never worked.  When Trump was in the White House, our enemies feared him.  Which would explain why Russia and Hamas did not try anything during his four years in office.  

Anyway, Biden made sure to get the leaders of the G7 on board when he was at the gathering of the UNGA.  What was the consensus pushed by Biden?  Israel should not attack any of Iran's nuclear sites.  And probably not their oil fields either.  Just as Russia got the message in early 2022 (see the top of this post), Iran has undoubtedly gotten the message now - you are free to develop nuclear weapons.  Would Iran use nukes against Israel?  The Ayatollahs have repeatedly said they want to destroy Israel.  Would Iran possibly attack the US - who they refer to as the Great Satan?  One thing is certain - it would be far more dangerous for Israel to attack Iran once it has nuclear weapons.  Yet that seems to be what Biden wants.  Biden's fear of a wider war makes that war all the more likely.    

Let's Talk Turkey - I Need To Talk About Some People, Part III

It's unclear if Tucker Carlson does not like Israel, and/or he does not like Jews, of if he is just another antisemite.  I previously discussed Carlson's problems with Jews in my 12/31/23 post "Year End Reflections, Part VI (My Beef With Tucker Carlson).  Now, we have another story about Carlson, reflecting very poor judgment at best, or antisemitism at the worst. 

Recently, Carlson conducted an interview with Darryl Cooper, an individual he referred to as "the best and most honest popular historian working in the United States today."  Carlson:  "I want people to know who you are and I want you to be widely recognized as the most important historian in the United States."  Really?

According to this "historian" (as reported in an editorial in the 9/11/24 WSJ), the Nazis had "launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with the millions and millions of prisoners of war, of local political prisoners...they went in with no plan for that and just threw these people into camps."  

And then what happened?  "Millions of people ended up dead there."  They just ended up dead?  Anybody know how that happened?  I do.  It's called the Holocaust!  One of the most well documented events in history.  And the Jews did not just end up dead.  They were murdered - brutally slaughtered - by the Nazis.  This very impressive historian also blames Churchill, not Hitler, for WWII.  Trump and Vance need to stay away from Carlson.  Far away.

And what about Jeremy Mayer?  Okay, I did not know who he is either, until I read a recent Op-Ed of his in the USA Today.  Turns out that he is a professor at the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University, in Arlington, Virginia.  In discussing the recent explosions of pagers and walkie talkies in Lebanon, the Professor tells us that 37 people were killed, including 2 children, and that thousands were wounded.  

Although Israel has not claimed credit, Mayer tells us that the operation "almost certainly originated in Tel Aviv."  That was the first clue as to his political leanings.  He did not say originated in Jerusalem, the capital city of Israel, because many on the Left do not accept Jerusalem as Israel's capital.  (Yes, I know, Israel's military headquarters are in Tel Aviv, but I'd bet the professor was not thinking that.)

Professor Mayer goes on to question both the "morality and legality" of sabotaging pagers, because of the high risk of collateral damage.  And, he asserts that some of the pagers did not go to Hezbollah fighters but to medical staff and others.  Mayer:  "As an American, I financially support Israel with my tax dollars.  If they are murdering Lebanese children, then to some extent, I did that."

And there it is - Israel is murdering children.  In a recent post, I expressed my displeasure with many on the Left saying that, of course, Israel has a right to defend itself.  There should be no need to say that.  It's obvious.  What these people are really saying is that Israel has a right to defend itself - as long as they don't kill anybody.  As usual, sympathy lies with Israel only when Jews are dead.  Not when they fight back. 

Here is my favorite part of his Op-Ed, after saying that a war between Hezbollah forces and the Lebanese army would end within one week, with Hezbollah as the victor.  "The long term hope for Israel in its relationship with Lebanon has to be that Hezbollah is eventually brought under control of the political authorities in Beirut, and that a coalition of Sunni, Druze, Christian and moderate Shiite leaders makes peace with Israel."  "That is the dream..."  The "hope" and the "dream."  Could there be any better proof of my oft stated truism that liberals let their beliefs (as reflected in his hopes and dreams) dictate their reality, whereas conservatives let reality dictate their beliefs.           

Let's Talk Turkey - I Need To Talk About Some People, Part II

President Biden has said that Trump is "dangerous."  He has said that Trump leads "an extremist movement that does not share the basic beliefs of our democracy."  I share those basic beliefs of our democracy.  But it has been my opinion that the reason for the extreme hostility between the two sides is that the Democrats are no longer the party of classical liberalism.  Rather, they are leftists.  And leftists everywhere oppose Western democracy.  

VP Kamala Harris has said that "Trump is a danger to our troops, our security, and our democracy."  She also said that Trump was behind "the worst attack on democracy since the Civil War."  Trump was not indicted for "insurrection."  He said the protesters on January 6 should march "peacefully and patriotically" over to the Capitol.  As I have said before, I did not approve of everything Trump said that day.  But Harris clearly has a different understanding of the threats to American democracy from my understanding.  

David Plouffe was Obama's first campaign manager.  Here's Plouffe:  "It is not enough to beat Trump.  He must be destroyed thoroughly.  His kind must not be allowed to rise again."  "Destroyed thoroughly."  Wow!  Not sure I want to ask him what he thinks should happen to Trump.  

Hillary Clinton wasted no time.  Only one day after the second assassination attempt on Trump, she called him a "danger to our country and the world."  How's that exactly?  The magazine The Economist agreed, saying "Donald Trump poses the greatest danger to the world in 2024."  This is all rather curious.  Trump started no wars.  Russia did not invade Ukraine, as they did with both Obama and Biden in office.  Hamas did not attack Israel, as they did with Obama and Biden in office.  Trump brought us the Abraham Accords.  But Trump is more dangerous than Putin, Xi, the Ayatollahs and various others?  I get it.  Some on the Left call Trump "Hitler."  So, as ridiculous as that comparison is, it's not a stretch for those who believe in that comparison to say that Trump is the biggest danger to the world.  

I would be remiss if I did not mention a critique of my 8/4/24 post ("I don't view the Dems with the same fear as I do Trump").  In that post, which started as an email to friend who is also a reader of the blog, I also said "As Rome is burning all around us, you will vote for the most radical presidential candidate in history, someone who just may help bring about the end of Israel, and the end of America as you and I have known it."  There was no risk of that email inducing my friend, whom I have known for 70 years, to cause harm to VP Harris.  I suppose the question is whether I should have removed that sentence when I put the email online as a blog post.  I'll allow my readers to opine on that, should they choose.  For now, I accept the criticism, and I shall think about if different phrasing would have made the same point in a less inflammatory manner.

Speaking of Hillary Clinton.  She is apparently concerned with "Americans who are engaged in this kind of propaganda (referring to the Russians indicted by Mueller), and whether they should be civilly, or even in some cases criminally, charged is something that would be a better deterrence, because the Russians are unlikely, except in a very few cases, to ever stand trial in the United States."  Can you believe it?  She wants to criminally charge Americans for their speech?  As I said at the beginning of this post, the Left has no appreciation for the values of Western democracies.  But they very much do care about power, in order to gain ever greater control over our lives.

But lets think about it for a moment.  Can Clinton be prosecuted for pushing the phony Russian collusion story?  Can many in the media be prosecuted for the same thing?  Can Clinton be prosecuted for saying that Trump was an illegitimate president?  Can we prosecute the 51 then current and former intelligence officials who told us that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation - when, in fact, it was Biden's actual laptop?  Based on Clinton's approach, why can't they all be prosecuted?  

Let's Talk Turkey - I Need To Talk About Some People, Part I

First, I want to talk about "anonymous," and specifically his/her comment on my September 8, 2024 post, "Odds & Ends."  Here is the criticism of me:  "And because of some loud mouthed stupid students you are going to vote for Trump who is a convicted felon who only cares about himself and give away our country!!"  I have to assume that the "loud mouthed stupid students" the writer refers to are the pro-Hamas crowds on college campuses.  Does this writer really believe that those students constitute the full extent of the growing antisemitism, Jew hatred and Israel hatred?  Can you believe it?

Let's see.  Protests on college campuses around the country.  Professors and administrators siding with these Jew haters.  Protests on the streets in other countries around the world.  Elected officials in Congress and in localities across the country (virtually all Democrats) who speak against Israel and on behalf of Hamas.  Don't get me started on the UN.  Israel at war since October 7, 2023.  80,000 to 100,000 Israelis displaced from their homes in the North and the South.  Over 100 hostages still being held by Hamas.  

Iran funding Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis - thanks to Biden.  Yes, Biden!  Trump had sanctions on Iran.  Biden lifted those sanctions, allowing Iran to make billions from the sale of oil.  Biden released funds to Iran.  The question is not why would I vote for Trump.  Rather, the question is why any Jew would ever vote for these Democrats who are funding Iran with money used to kill their fellow Jews.  The writer of the ridiculous comment suggested I move to Russia.  I suggest that he/she moves to Gaza.  And let me ask:  is there another country being so demonized that there are calls from around the world for its destruction?  No, only Israel has calls for its destruction.

The writer also calls Trump a convicted felon.  I'm sure he/she means a "wrongly" convicted felon.  Not only was the prosecution purely political in nature.  What did Trump allegedly do?  He is said to have mischaracterized so-called "hush money" payments as legal expenses.  When Hillary Clinton was determined by the FEC to have mischaracterized payments for the phony Steele dossier as legal expenses, her campaign was fined $113,000.  She was not prosecuted.  But the double-standard political prosecution is only half the story.

The other half is that the Federal government determines violations of federal election laws, not some local Democrat DA hack.  The question is - why didn't Attorney General Garland step in to prevent this prosecution from going forward, and preserve what we lawyers refer to as "federal preemption."  When Congress passes a law, if it is determined that the law occupies the field, then federal supremacy over state law applies.  And, lo and behold, the Federal Election Campaign Act does indeed say that the federal law's provisions "supersede and preempt any provision of state law with respect to election to Federal office."

So why didn't AG Garland step in and seek an injunction against Manhattan DA Bragg?  Recall that Obama's AG, Eric Holder, had no hesitation in seeking to block Arizona from enforcing federal immigration law.  All Arizona wanted to do was enforce federal immigration law.  But Holder said they can't do that.  The Supreme Court ended up agreeing with Holder, for the most part.  Did anyone really expect Merrick Garland to protect federal supremacy of the law when there was a chance to get Trump?  This conviction will have to be overturned on appeal.

Speaking of Merrick Garland...we have now had a second assassination attempt on president Trump.  A mere two months apart.  July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania, and September 15 at the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, only 5 minutes from Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach.  Garland told the country that "we are grateful he (Trump) is safe."  Excuse me if I do not believe that for one second.  Garland said they will "spare no resource," and "tirelessly work together" with federal and state and local law enforcement in order to do a thorough investigation of this latest attempt on Trump's life.  Sure.  

Let me understand this.  The Democrats tried to keep Trump off the ballot is several states.  That failed, as the Supreme Court nixed that by a 9-0 vote.  They have tried to imprison Trump for the rest of his life.  So far, at least, that has not been successful either.  They clearly do not want to risk losing to him at the ballot box.  So what's left?  Could it be assassination?  

 

"Harris, Gaza and the Voters She Leaves Behind"

Such was the headline of an Op-Ed in the Sunday, September 1, 2024, New York Times.  A mere six days before the 11 month anniversary of the worst attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust.  It is safe to assume that when an Op-Ed appears in the NY Times, the paper agrees with the contents.  This particular Op-Ed was written by Hala Alyan, who describes herself as a Palestinian American.  Ms. Alyan tells us that she was "raised on stories of the nakba (Arabic for catastrophe, and used to describe the founding of Israel), land theft, a boy burned alive, a young American woman mangled by an Israeli bulldozer (see Rachel Corrie), the searing image of a man trying to protect his son from flying bullets."  She then adds:  "Palestinian Americans and their allies are bringing a context to this election."  

Unfortunately, she gives no context to the events she described.  And one, the nakba, can explain everything that has happened between and the Arabs since Israel's founding in 1948.  It can explain all the attacks on Israel. the intifadas, the suicide bombers, the nonstop rockets and missiles sent into Israel.  The nakba.  The refusal to accept the existence of the State of Israel.  76 years later still living in denial. 

Ms. Alyan expressed her appreciation for Kamala Harris at the DNC, when Harris spoke of Palestinians right to "freedom" and "self-determination," and saying "the scale of suffering is heartbreaking."  But she wanted more.  She wanted Harris to give a "direct naming of who is killing and starving Palestinians."  She wanted Harris to name the perpetrator.  If she did not, allow me:  Hamas!  Along with every Arab who refuses to accept the existence, on a tiny strip of land, of the one Jewish country in the world.  Those are your perpetrators, Ms. Alyan.

However, in her Op-Ed, Ms. Alyan never mentions Hamas.  She never mentions October 7.  She does manage to throw in the usual falsehoods, such as Israel being an apartheid state, and Israel committing genocide.  And she speaks favorably of those who voted "uncommitted" during the Democratic primary, hoping to send a message to party leaders to reverse course on their support for Israel.  Ms. Alyan not only seeks to have a ceasefire, she wants sanctions placed on Israel, and she wants an arms embargo.

I would love to ask Ms. Alyan if she would like to see the United States supply arms to Hamas.  The same Hamas that our country has defined as a terrorist organization.  I would like to ask her why she did not mention the October 7 massacre.  And, if she didn't care about the brutal murder of so many innocents, including children, and the rape and mutilation of women.  I would like to ask her why she did not mention Hamas.  Does she think Hamas bears any responsibility for the events that occurred on October 7 and thereafter?  

As she continues to refer to the "nakba," does that mean Ms. Alyan does not believe Israel has the right to exist?  I'd like to ask her.  Does she support all the wars against Israel?  Does she want to see the Jewish people eliminated?  What does she stand for?  I'd like to ask her.  If she was to ask me my opinion on the killing of innocents in Gaza, I would refer her to my 11/26/23 post about an Op-Ed written by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof.  Mr. Kristof repeatedly asked "how many dead Gazan children are too many?"  

My reply was:  "Here is the answer, Mr. Kristof - one is too many.  But that cannot deter Israel from doing what it must to defeat Hamas.  Were it otherwise, Israel would have to sit back and just accept attack after attack after attack."  

Ms. Alyan writes:  "Ultimately, nobody is owed constituents.  Nobody is owed votes.  They must be earned."  Her conclusion:  "A democratic system that doesn't represent the wishes of its constituents is either malfunctioning or misnamed."  If that is truly what Ms. Alyan believes, then she does not understand what a democracy is.  I'd like her to explain how her policy towards Israel would represent  Jewish American constituents, and the majority of Americans, who believe the United States should support Israel.  It appears that. for Ms. Alyan. the United States can only be called a democracy, when and if it supports Hamas.

I have so many questions for Ms. Alyan.  Does she think that Hamas, as the governing body of Gaza, operates as a democracy?  Does she support the taking of hostages, including babies?  Does she support Hamas using the people of Gaza as human shields, placing their weapons and arms in people's homes, in hospitals and in mosques?  And, of course, I'd like to ask her what she thinks about the harassment of Jewish students in this country?  And, what place does she see for the Jewish people in America, and in the world?   

Odds & Ends

(Note.  Over the years I have written various posts about "Odds and Ends."  When it's a busy news cycle, there are many things to cover, but I can't write 7 different posts.  So, I put all the issues together in a single post, with a short commentary on each.)

A brief remark about the third comment written on the post titled "Never Mind."  (One of the 8/25/24 posts.)  The commentator says I am willing to give my country away and allow Trump to be a dictator on day one.  The reference is clearly to an interview Trump gave to Sean Hannity.  When Trump made that remark, Hannity asked him to explain.  Hannity knew Trump made a poor choice of words with "dictator", and that the Democrat Party-Mainstream Media Complex would lie about it, just as they had done with Charlottesville.  So Hannity asked Trump to explain what he meant.  "I want to close the border, and I want to drill, drill, drill...After that, I'm not a dictator."  Except, that is not being a dictator at all.  Those are policy decisions.  Closing the wide-open border that the Biden-Harris administration has allowed.  And reversing the non-stop attacks on the oil and gas industry.  An industry that has fostered our modern civilization.  Unfortunately, a poor choice of words by Trump has allowed the DP-MSMC to run with it, and those such as the commentator on the blog buy into it.

Tim Walz was at a State Fair in St. Paul, Minnesota the other day.  Someone (a reporter?) could be heard asking him:  "What's your reaction to the six hostages being found dead in Gaza?"  Walz then waved goodbye as he said "All right, thanks everybody," and walked away.  Newsweek suggested that perhaps Walz did not hear the question.  Of course, Trump would never get any such benefit of the doubt.  My guess is, he feared saying anything that might interfere with the messaging of the Harris campaign, trying to play both sides in the Israel-Hamas war.  And trying not to offend the Arab Muslim population in Minnesota.  Walz later issued a statement condemning Hamas as a "brutal terrorist organization."  Fine, but why couldn't he just say that in front of all the people at the fair, instead of releasing a statement that probably few saw.  

Having watched the video, I don't buy Newsweek's explanation for one second.  Plus, here is what Walz said when speaking to WCMU radio in Michigan, also with a large Arab Muslim population.  Speaking about the protesters, Walz said:  "Those folks who are speaking out loudly are speaking out for all the right reasons.  It's a humanitarian crisis.  It can't stand the way it is."  All the right reasons?  Such as calling for the end of Israel with "From the river to the sea Palestine will be free."  Such as claiming Israel is committing genocide?  Such as saying Zionists are...fill in the blank...racists, Nazis, genocide supporters.

I don't know about you, but I'm getting tired of Democrats saying Israel has the right to defend itself, as if that is somehow an issue.  Of course Israel has the right to defend itself.  Why must that pointed out about the sole Jewish country in the world?  Why not just say:  "Hamas started this war, with a brutal massacre of 1200 people, which was the worst attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust.  Hamas needs to be eliminated...permanently!"

This was a shocker.  Lifelong Democrat, 86 year-old Alan Dershowitz, announced that he has left the party and become an independent.  Most telling was his explanation:  "I was disgusted at the Democratic National Convention.  Absolutely disgusted."  Why?  "It was the most anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-Zionist convention I've experienced."  While he likely will not be voting for Harris, he has not said that he will for Trump.  Nevertheless, I would love it if my fellow Jews would wake up to the fact of what the Democrat party has become.

The Democrats keep calling for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.  And I understand that many in Israel are asking for the same thing, in order to get the hostages home.  So let's think about it for a minute.  I have heard some pro-Israel commentators say there was already a ceasefire before October 7, when Hamas started this latest war.  That's simply not accurate.  During this period of a ceasefire/peace, Hamas has continually fired rockets into Israel.  Hamas has fired nearly 20,000 rockets into Israel since 2005, when Israel vacated Gaza.  That's no ceasefire!  Now, Hamas has promised to conduct another operation like the one on October 7 over and over and over again.  So, my only question to those calling for this ceasefire, is:  "What is your plan for when Hamas rearms and carries out the repeated attacks again and again, and takes more hostages?"  What is the plan?

Here is another shocker.  After the SCOTUS decision regarding presidential immunity, special counsel Jack Smith refiled the same charges against Trump.  Trump asked US District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan to delay further proceedings until 2025 - after the election, and after his inauguration should he win.  She refused, agreeing to the timeline suggested by Smith for the filing of motions regarding immunity and other issues.  This timeline - before the election - gives Smith an opportunity to air whatever dirty laundry he has about Trump, in his continued efforts at election interference.  But here is what Judge Chutkan had to say:  "The electoral process...is not relevant here.  This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule."  Excuse me?  It only happens every 4 years, when the country gets to decide who they want to hold the highest office office in the land, and the most important office in the world.  How is that not far more important than the any case before the court?  Oh, that's right.  Judge Chutkan presides over the election interference case.  I think the voting public is well aware of all the claims on both sides.  Why not step back and let the voters decide?  Besides, I thought Justice Department policy was to avoid this type of situation, which clearly has the appearance of election interference.  But, like everything else when it comes to Trump, the usual rules do not apply.

The executive director (Ilya Bratman) of the Hillel at Baruch College, held a welcome dinner for incoming students at the Mr. Broadway kosher deli in midtown Manhattan.  Baruch College is part of CUNY - the City University of New York.  There are an estimated 800 different chapters of Hillel at colleges and universities throughout North America.  Hillel provides not only a meeting place for Jewish students on campus, but religious services and learning as well.  No doubt on some of the more leftwing campuses, they support "social action."  At the welcome dinner, the Jewish students were harassed by pro-Hamas protesters, their faces covered by keffiyehs.  Here is some of what the students heard.  "Where's Hersh, you ugly ass bitch?  Go bring them home."  (Hersh Goldberg-Polin was the American among the six recently murdered hostages.)  The students also reported hearing:  "You ain't going home tonight," "All Zionists are terrorists," and "Ilya Bratman you can't hide, you're committing genocide."  Apparently sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Students for Justice in Palestine, the SJP wants CUNY to cut all ties with Hillel International.  How nice that these are the people the Democrats are trying to placate in order to get their votes.  And for those on the Left, voting with people who want to kill all the Jews, is somehow better than voting for Trump.