President Joe Biden is pushing for massive federal spending that can benefit many companies.
Henry Kissinger said President Joe Biden should uphold the “brilliant” realignment in Middle Eastern politics achieved under the Trump administration during a Tuesday event.
Kissinger praised the Trump administration’s diplomatic corps for its strategy of pitting major Sunni Muslim countries in the Middle East against Iran. The strategy, Kissinger said, served to isolate Tehran and opened the door to a new approach to Middle Eastern foreign policy that advances American interests.
“I think that one of the great successes of the previous administration was that they had lined up, that they had achieved two things in the Middle East,” Kissinger said. “One, to separate the Palestinian problem from all of the other problems so that it did not become a veto over everything else—and secondly, of lining up the Sunni states in actual or potential combination against the Shiite states, which is Iran, that was developing a capacity to threaten them. I think that this was a brilliant concept. We were just at the beginning of it.”
Kissinger, who was secretary of state under the Nixon and Ford administrations, made the remarks during the first seminar of a new monthly series from the Richard Nixon Foundation focused on national security and foreign policy. Former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, former national security adviser Robert O’Brien, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R., Wis.), and former deputy national security adviser Matt Pottinger also participated in the seminar.
Kissinger pointed to Washington’s pressure on countries in the Middle East to pivot away from Iran as the major achievement of the Trump administration. The Abraham Accords, which were brokered in August 2020, brought Israel together with Muslim-majority countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in an implicit rebuke to Tehran.
The Trump administration also confronted Iran directly through a “maximum pressure” campaign and “snapback” sanctions in an effort to slow the Iranian economy and halt the Iranian nuclear program.
Kissinger exhorted the Biden administration to keep the course on this new-look policy in the Middle East.
“We should not give up the pressures that exist on Iran until we know where they are heading,” Kissinger said. “If we break out the Iranian issue from the overall Middle Eastern issue, we run the risk of losing the two achievements, namely of separating the Palestinian issue, which removes it as a veto over everything else, and the Sunni cooperation with Israel, which is unique in its openness.”
The Biden administration has shown little interest in heeding Kissinger’s advice. Biden has elevated several Obama-era diplomats who argued for the Iran deal to senior positions, such as climate czar John Kerry, Iran envoy Robert Malley, and nominee for undersecretary of defense Colin Kahl. Even with strong bipartisan opposition from Congress, the White House has said it still hopes to reengage in nuclear talks with Iran in the coming months.
In February, Biden also spurned Saudi Arabia by halting arms deals with the country. Biden also removed the Iran-backed Houthi militias in Yemen from terror watchlists, a move met with strong opposition from Republicans. Days later, Houthi militants bombed an airport in Saudi Arabia.
The post Kissinger: Biden Must Uphold Trump Admin’s ‘Brilliant’ Success in the Middle East appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.
On Thursday, President Joe Biden approved targeted airstrikes against Iranian-backed militia groups in Syria.
Briefing Congress days after the attack on Saturday, Biden laid out his political and legal justifications for the administration’s decision.
“I directed this military action consistent with my responsibility to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad and in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct United States foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive,” Biden wrote in a letter to the speaker of the House and president pro tempore of the Senate.
“The United States took this action pursuant to the United States’ inherent right of self-defense as reflected in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.”
The airstrikes, which killed at least 22 people, also received support from high-ranking officials in the Department of Defense, NBC News reported.
“We’re confident in the target we went after we know what we hit. We’re confident that target was being used by the same Shia militia that conducted the strikes,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said, according to Fox News.
The retaliatory airstrike followed recent attacks by Iranian-backed militia groups in Iraq. One U.S. contractor had been killed in a rocket attack that hit a U.S.-led coalition base in the Iraqi city of Erbil.
The airstrikes “were authorized in response to recent attacks against American and coalition personnel in Iraq, and to ongoing threats to those personnel,” Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said in a statement.
Officials in the administration contend that the air assault was well within the bounds of the president’s constitutional powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
“I would tell you that the president acted well within his constitutional authorities under Article II as commander in chief of the United States to protect American service members involved in operations. Clearly, there’s a constitutional authority here,” Kirby told NBC on Friday.
Despite the justification, the administration’s assault has made odd bedfellows in Washington, with key figures reaching across the aisle to support or oppose the move. While some have criticized Biden’s interpretation of the executive war powers, others have denounced the attacks as simply bad foreign policy.
Speaking for the libertarian anti-interventionist faction in Congress, Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky denounced the strike, tweeting, “@POTUS dragging the US into Syria’s civil war is a huge mistake. I strongly condemn this foolish military adventurism.”
@POTUS dragging the US into Syria’s civil war is a huge mistake. I strongly condemn this foolish military adventurism.
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) February 26, 2021
“I condemn meddling in Syria’s civil war. I also condemn attacking a sovereign nation without authority. What authority does @POTUS have to strike Syria?”
I condemn meddling in Syria’s civil war. I also condemn attacking a sovereign nation without authority.
What authority does @POTUS have to strike Syria?
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) February 26, 2021
Prominent Democratic senators also questioned the administration’s decision to order the attack. Their criticism was pointed at Biden’s failure to consult Congress.
“The American people deserve to hear the Administration’s rationale for these strikes and its legal justification for acting without coming to Congress,” Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said in a statement.
“Offensive military action without congressional approval is not constitutional absent extraordinary circumstances. Congress must be fully briefed on this matter expeditiously.”
Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut voiced similar concerns with the administration’s claim that the president had the inherent authority to issue the attack.
“Retaliatory strikes not necessary to prevent an imminent threat” must obtain congressional authorization, Murphy said, according to The Associated Press.
Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he had “called for the administration to respond to the recent attacks on U.S. and coalition targets.”
“I commend them for doing just that,” he said.
“Responses like this are a necessary deterrent and remind Iran, its proxies, and our adversaries around the world that attacks on U.S. interests will not be tolerated.”
“Responses like this are a necessary deterrent and remind #Iran, its proxies, and our adversaries around the world that attacks on U.S. interests will not be tolerated. I thank @POTUS and our service members for protecting Americans overseas.” (2/2)
— House Foreign Affairs GOP (@HouseForeignGOP) February 26, 2021
Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina applauded Biden’s decision to order the attack last week, at least indirectly accepting the administration’s self-defense argument.
“Iranian backed militias have launched three attacks against Americans in the last two weeks. The strikes ordered by @potus against these militias tonight were targeted, proportional and necessary,” Rubio wrote on Twitter.
Iranian backed militias have launched three attacks against Americans in the last two weeks.
The strikes ordered by @potus against these militias tonight were targeted, proportional and necessary.
— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) February 26, 2021
Graham offered a similar opinion in support of the retaliatory strike.
“Appreciate Biden Administration striking Iranian-backed militia groups in Syria who’ve been pushing attacks against American forces in Iraq and other locations,” Graham tweeted. “It is imperative that our enemies know that attacking Americans comes at a cost.”
Appreciate Biden Administration striking Iranian-backed militia groups in Syria who’ve been pushing attacks against American forces in Iraq and other locations. It is imperative that our enemies know that attacking Americans comes at a cost. https://t.co/praCcDIpVI
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) February 26, 2021
Biden is the third president to order attacks in Syria without obtaining congressional approval, according to New York magazine.
His predecessors relied heavily on the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, which launched the “War on Terror,” to expand the scope of presidential war powers and increase American military involvement in the Middle East.
The administration’s airstrikes follow a long line of past attacks ordered under former presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama. Experts in constitutional theory have debated whether such attacks are constitutional or serve any political benefit.
Constitutional law professor Garrett Epps, writing in The Atlantic after Trump ordered an airstrike on enemy combatants in Syria, claimed that these types of interventionist actions are unwise, troublesome and constitutionally invalid.
“Trump did not have the authority to order any kind of strike on Syria. Congressional authorization was needed before any use of force against Syria; Friday’s attack was unconstitutional,” Epps wrote.
“The Constitution still requires congressional authorization for an attack on another country. The requirement is not a formality. It is in the Constitution for a reason. Congress’s failure to assert its prerogatives is … a matter of life or death for a self-governing republic.”
In an interview with Vox following a series of airstrikes in 2018, Stephen Vladeck, a constitutional law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, noted that a policy of inherent executive authority is unconstitutional but clouded by legal ambiguity.
“If we expanded Article II to allow the president to use force without Congress any time it furthered some international norm, that would open up a whole host of problems down the road,” Vladeck said.
“Congress is acquiescing because they’re satisfied with the practical results. But from a separation of powers perspective, that’s very dangerous. Congress has a vital role to play in the operation of our government, and it’s not playing it.”
“The short answer is that we really need a Congress that cares more about its institutional relationship to the president than it does about the partisan politics of the moment.”
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
The post Prominent Dems break with Biden after Syria bombing, raising constitutional questions appeared first on WND.
Former President Donald Trump gave a powerful speech at the 2021 Conservative Political Action Conference. He asserted his leadership over the conservative movement and demanded an end to Big Tech censorship.
“The time has come to break up Big Tech monopolies and restore fair competition,” Trump proclaimed Feb. 28 at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Trump suggested multiple solutions, the first of which was the “repeal” of “Section 230 Liability Protection.” Trump went on to suggest that “if the federal government refuses to act, then every state in the union where we have the votes, which is a lot of them, Big Tech giants, like Twitter, Google and Facebook, should be punished with major sanctions whenever they silence conservative voices.”
Trump also mentioned the new initiatives to stop Big Tech censorship put forward by Florida and Texas as proof of concept: “Governor Ron Desantis of Florida, and in Texas, and in other states, are doing this. If they do what they’re doing, Florida — and that legislation will pass — and Texas and others will have tremendous power to do what’s right and what’s fair.”
Trump made clear that there would be dire consequences if the problem of Big Tech censorship was not solved: “If Republicans can be censored for speaking the truth and calling out corruption, we will not have democracy, and we will have only left-wing tyranny.” He took time to remember how America, up until recently, was famous for its capacity to allow open debate: “In the past, we would debate,” he recounted. “Who knows who wins? You know, people go, they vote, [and then] they see what happens. But they would have an idea. They would disagree. The public would hear it. The debate and discourse would take place. And then somebody would make a decision. You would win. You would lose. The public would make up its mind.”
But Trump observed that in 2021: “now there is no debate because they refuse to allow our side to even speak or be heard. They don’t want debate, because we have easy victories in a debate, very easy victories. It’s called common sense. It’s called other things, but it’s called common sense. So they don’t want to debate.”
Trump’s shoutout to proposed legislation in Florida and Texas was a major hit with the audience, and for good reason.
DeSantis (R-FL) had declared during a Feb. 2 press conference that “Floridians should have the privacy of their data and personal information protected, their ability to access and participate in online platforms protected, and their ability to participate in elections free from interference from Big Tech protected.” Under the anti-censorship rule DeSantis wishes to pass, “technology companies that de-platform a candidate during an election will face a daily fine of $100,000 until the candidate’s access to the platform is restored,” The Epoch Times summarized. DeSantis further suggested that “If a technology company promotes a candidate for office against another, the value of that free promotion must be recorded as a political campaign contribution enforced by the Florida Elections Commission.”
As Trump also mentioned , Texas Republicans have introduced legislation to protect free speech as well. “What we would like to do is to give any Texan who’s being discriminated against the option to bring an action,” State Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-TX) explained in an interview. “We think that will get Facebook’s attention, get Twitter’s attention, and cause them to start treating Texans fairly.”
Conservatives are under attack. Contact your local representative and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form and help us hold Big Tech accountable.
President Biden will have the opportunity to force profound changes on the American corporate sector on Tuesday morning, when his picks to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will participate in confirmation hearings before the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.
By Mary Margaret Olohan
Daily Caller News Foundation
Viral video footage shows a California teachers union president who led school closures dropping his daughter off at a private school.
Footage posted by the group Guerilla Momz shows Berkeley Federation of Teachers President Matt Meyer dropping his two-year-old daughter off at a private preschool. Meyer’s daughter’s face is blurred out.
“Meet Matt Meyer. White man with dreads and president of the local teachers’ union,” the group tweeted Saturday. “He’s been saying it is unsafe for *your kid* to be back at school, all the while dropping his kid off at private school.”
The video was filmed by Berkeley area parents who did not give their names out of fear of retaliation, according to KQED.
“We’d heard for a while that he sent his kid to private preschool and we’ve been hearing him make crazy claims at the school board meetings — it was ‘too dangerous’ for schools to open because kids wouldn’t wear masks. Meanwhile, his kid is wearing a mask at school,” Guerilla Momz said in a written statement, according to KQED.
Meet Matt Meyer. White man with dreads and president of the local teachers’ union. He’s been saying it is unsafe for *your kid* to be back at school, all the while dropping his kid off at private school:https://t.co/BAIR5xH8LY#OpenSchoolsNow
— guerillaMomz (@GuerillaMomz) February 28, 2021
Meyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation. In a statement to Fox News, the Berkeley Federation of Teachers president said the video violated his child’s privacy and was “very inappropriate,” adding that there are “no public options for kids her age.”
“There are major differences in running a small preschool and a 10,000 student public school district in terms of size, facilities, public health guidance and services that legally have to be provided,” Meyer told Fox. “We all want a safe return to school. The Berkeley Federation of Teachers is excited that Berkeley Unified will be reopening soon with a plan, supported by our members and the district, to get our students back in classrooms starting later this month.”
BREAKING: @BerkeleyUnified union pres. Matt Meyer who has led efforts keeping Berkeley schools closed nearly a year because it’s “unsafe” caught dropping daughter off at private in-person school. Why is it safe for him but not the rest of BUSD families??? Credit @GuerillaMomz
— Reopen California Schools (@ReopenCASchools) February 28, 2021
The Berkeley Unified School District and the Berkeley Federation of Teachers came to an agreement earlier in February that they would reopen public schools in March and April depending on how quickly staff members got vaccinated. The school reopening plan would stagger returning grades and require on site testing for staff every two weeks.
High-risk teachers or teachers who live with someone who is high risk can continue to work remotely, according to the agreement.
The video sparked a backlash among parents who want their children to return to in-person learning as soon as possible.
“I am a physician,” Dr. Shelene Stine, who works at Highland Hospital treating COVID patients and has three-year-old twins who attend the same school as Meyer’s daughter, told KQED.
Stine also has a five-year-old in a Berkeley Unified School District school.
“It is definitively the scientific agreement that it is possible to deliver safe in-person education. It’s infuriating to know Matt Meyer says kids can’t wear masks when kids in his preschool wear them all day long.”
This story originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected]
The post Teachers-union boss who led school closures caught dropping daughter off at private school appeared first on WND.
France’s former president, Nicolas Sarkozy, was on Monday sentenced by the Paris judicial court to a three-year jail term after being found guilty of corruption and influence peddling in a case dating back to 2014, according to French news channel BFMTV. The three-year sentence includes just one year of imprisonment — two years have been […]
It’s not just about penalizing the former president. It’s about protecting democracy—in the US and around the world.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.