1
Politics & Religion / Re: Administrative Agencies, bureaucracy, regs in action: 4th Branch of the US Govt.
« on: November 20, 2024, 02:21:31 PM »
Trust me-- he is worth the call. If he can't help you, he will tell you.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
3
Politics & Religion / Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media/social media
« on: November 20, 2024, 01:45:17 PM »
4
Politics & Religion / Where to now for US National Defense?
« on: November 20, 2024, 01:44:29 PM »5
Politics & Religion / Re: 2028
« on: November 20, 2024, 01:34:34 PM »
Too late for it to be taken seriously, but he will play the card anyway.
6
Politics & Religion / Re: Administrative Agencies, bureaucracy, regs in action: 4th Branch of the US Govt.
« on: November 20, 2024, 01:33:01 PM »
Cindy and I just met today with Blake Rhodes 910-916-8626 about exactly that. We were EXTREMELY impressed with him! Definitely recommend you give him a call. Brownie points for us if you mention our name.
7
Politics & Religion / Patriot Post
« on: November 20, 2024, 01:29:10 PM »https://patriotpost.us/alexander/112180?mailing_id=8816...
Trump Day 1: Demolish the Demos' Rigged Midterm Election Strategy
There is an irrefutable correlation between the states Harris/Walz won and voter ID requirements.
Mark Alexander
"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections." —John Adams (1797)
Two weeks after the biggest comeback in presidential history, I am still amazed that Donald Trump and JD Vance pulled it off. And they did so with expanding margins among unexpected voter constituencies.
But all the elation and relief aside, on Monday, January 20, 2025, day one of the next Trump administration, Republicans must disable the Democrats' corrupt election strategy ahead of the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 Vance presidential campaign.
Trump and Congress must singularly focus on defusing this threat.
Demos rigged the election process in 2020, and they believed their three-part strategy would set up a sure win for the Harris/Walz ticket this year.
First, they used their deep state assets to set up Trump for a plethora of lawfare prosecutions.
Second, over the last four years, they have orchestrated a massive effort to suppress conservative speech by collaborating with their Leftmedia publicists and social media platforms in order to keep a chokehold on public opinion.
Third, they have perfected their bulk-mail ballot fraud strategy, promoting the counting of millions of unauthenticated ballots cast by mail and in person in states that do not require voter ID. That strategy accounted for the Biden/Harris 2020 win by a popular vote margin of more than seven million votes, and they assumed it would get Harris and Walz across the finish line again.
It is this third issue that Republicans must address first because there is a direct and irrefutable correlation between the states Harris/Walz won and voter ID requirements.
Demos had good reason to assume their 2020 fraud would work again: Of the votes cast then, 43% (66 million ballots) were by mail — and a majority of those were in states where authentication of the person receiving and casting the ballot was not required. More than 58% of Biden/Harris ballots, almost 47 million votes, were cast by mail.
Got that?
Demos believe their bulk-mail ballot fraud strategy, devoid of voter ID requirements, will enable them to perpetuate permanent majority control of the executive and legislative branches — and, ultimately, state governments nationwide. If left unchecked, this systemic election corruption will become virtually impossible to undo. That is to say, Republicans must use their majority tenure this coming year to stop this strategy. Or else.
Fortunately, the Demos' fraud strategy had a BIG problem: The Harris/Walz ticket was weak and uninspiring.
That ticket was an extension of the abysmal Biden/Harris record of domestic and foreign policy failures. It could not compete with the reality of Trump's record of domestic and foreign policy successes.
And they could not cultivate trust beyond their base that Harris was not Biden 2.0. Kamala Harris has a long and prolific record of lying, as does her sidekick Tim Walz, particularly regarding his stolen valor record.
Thus, the triad of corrupt Demo machinations could not overcome the Biden/Harris/Walz liabilities. Consequently, there were seven million fewer Demo ballots cast in 2024 than were cast in 2020.
The result was that Trump and Vance won the Electoral College 312 to 226, with, as of this writing, 76,792,000 to 74,238,000 votes. Thanks to a good GOP ground game (finally) and early voting, the Trump/Vance ticket got almost 2.6 million more votes this year than Trump/Pence received in 2020 — and won six more Electoral College votes than Biden/Harris in 2020 (312 to 306).
The Trump/Vance victory is a testament, first and foremost, to a groundswell of grassroots American Patriots who supported them. You know, those voters broad-brushed as "bitter, deplorable, racist, misogynist, fascist, garbage"!
That being said, despite all the proclamations to the contrary, the Trump/Vance win was not a "landslide victory" supporting a "clear mandate." This was no Ronald Reagan 1984 landslide reelection, in which he won 49 states and a record 525 electoral votes.
In fact, today, the Trump/Vance popular vote total dropped below the 50% mark.
Here's why defusing the Demos' bulk-mail ballot fraud strategy first thing is so important.
Looking at the maps in the image above, here is what you need to know.
Of all the states Harris won, only two, New Hampshire and Rhode Island, require a photo ID to vote. Several states she won require or make optional a non-photo ID.
But get this: More than 60 million of the 161 million registered voters in the U.S. in 2024 live in states that require NO voter identification/authentication — zero, none — to ensure who is actually casting that ballot. Almost all of those voters are, of course, in Democrat-controlled states.
Look at those maps again — because short of legislative correction, Democrats are poised to retake the House and Senate in 2026, and running a younger and more charismatic ticket in 2028 will make them difficult to beat. That is the hard reality.
Since 2020, some states have strengthened their election integrity requirements, including mandating voter IDs.
Moreover, in July of this year, as a first step toward federal election integrity, the House successfully passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act to ensure only U.S. citizens vote in federal elections, with five Democrats voting with Republicans. Apparently, there are five House Democrats who still possess a modicum of integrity.
Of course, the Biden/Harris administration issued a strong condemnation of the SAVE Act because Democrats know that, as aforementioned, the perpetuation of their political party control depends on opposing any and all voter ID requirements.
Biden continues to claim, as he has for years, that requiring a voter ID is an "attempt to repress minority voting." His corrupt attorney general, Merrick Garland, likewise declared this year, "That is why we are challenging efforts by states and jurisdictions to implement discriminatory, burdensome, and unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot, including those related to mail-in voting, the use of drop boxes, and voter ID requirements."
Democrats label any measure to authenticate who is voting as "racist," "voter intimidation," and "voter suppression" while mislabeling their systemic voter fraud proposals as "voter rights."
However, combined with Biden's bulk voter registration mandate, the Demos' bulk-mail ballot fraud is a slam dunk with qualified candidates.
Trump will have to be careful with overreach, but I believe if he manages the next two years well, Republicans can rally a broader swath of America to the conservative side of the ledger and pave the path for a larger Vance victory in 2028.
Republicans must make demolishing the Demos' ballot fraud strategy a high priority now.
8
Politics & Religion / Patriot Post
« on: November 20, 2024, 01:28:11 PM »https://patriotpost.us/alexander/112180?mailing_id=8816...
Trump Day 1: Demolish the Demos' Rigged Midterm Election Strategy
There is an irrefutable correlation between the states Harris/Walz won and voter ID requirements.
Mark Alexander
"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections." —John Adams (1797)
Two weeks after the biggest comeback in presidential history, I am still amazed that Donald Trump and JD Vance pulled it off. And they did so with expanding margins among unexpected voter constituencies.
But all the elation and relief aside, on Monday, January 20, 2025, day one of the next Trump administration, Republicans must disable the Democrats' corrupt election strategy ahead of the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 Vance presidential campaign.
Trump and Congress must singularly focus on defusing this threat.
Demos rigged the election process in 2020, and they believed their three-part strategy would set up a sure win for the Harris/Walz ticket this year.
First, they used their deep state assets to set up Trump for a plethora of lawfare prosecutions.
Second, over the last four years, they have orchestrated a massive effort to suppress conservative speech by collaborating with their Leftmedia publicists and social media platforms in order to keep a chokehold on public opinion.
Third, they have perfected their bulk-mail ballot fraud strategy, promoting the counting of millions of unauthenticated ballots cast by mail and in person in states that do not require voter ID. That strategy accounted for the Biden/Harris 2020 win by a popular vote margin of more than seven million votes, and they assumed it would get Harris and Walz across the finish line again.
It is this third issue that Republicans must address first because there is a direct and irrefutable correlation between the states Harris/Walz won and voter ID requirements.
Demos had good reason to assume their 2020 fraud would work again: Of the votes cast then, 43% (66 million ballots) were by mail — and a majority of those were in states where authentication of the person receiving and casting the ballot was not required. More than 58% of Biden/Harris ballots, almost 47 million votes, were cast by mail.
Got that?
Demos believe their bulk-mail ballot fraud strategy, devoid of voter ID requirements, will enable them to perpetuate permanent majority control of the executive and legislative branches — and, ultimately, state governments nationwide. If left unchecked, this systemic election corruption will become virtually impossible to undo. That is to say, Republicans must use their majority tenure this coming year to stop this strategy. Or else.
Fortunately, the Demos' fraud strategy had a BIG problem: The Harris/Walz ticket was weak and uninspiring.
That ticket was an extension of the abysmal Biden/Harris record of domestic and foreign policy failures. It could not compete with the reality of Trump's record of domestic and foreign policy successes.
And they could not cultivate trust beyond their base that Harris was not Biden 2.0. Kamala Harris has a long and prolific record of lying, as does her sidekick Tim Walz, particularly regarding his stolen valor record.
Thus, the triad of corrupt Demo machinations could not overcome the Biden/Harris/Walz liabilities. Consequently, there were seven million fewer Demo ballots cast in 2024 than were cast in 2020.
The result was that Trump and Vance won the Electoral College 312 to 226, with, as of this writing, 76,792,000 to 74,238,000 votes. Thanks to a good GOP ground game (finally) and early voting, the Trump/Vance ticket got almost 2.6 million more votes this year than Trump/Pence received in 2020 — and won six more Electoral College votes than Biden/Harris in 2020 (312 to 306).
The Trump/Vance victory is a testament, first and foremost, to a groundswell of grassroots American Patriots who supported them. You know, those voters broad-brushed as "bitter, deplorable, racist, misogynist, fascist, garbage"!
That being said, despite all the proclamations to the contrary, the Trump/Vance win was not a "landslide victory" supporting a "clear mandate." This was no Ronald Reagan 1984 landslide reelection, in which he won 49 states and a record 525 electoral votes.
In fact, today, the Trump/Vance popular vote total dropped below the 50% mark.
Here's why defusing the Demos' bulk-mail ballot fraud strategy first thing is so important.
Looking at the maps in the image above, here is what you need to know.
Of all the states Harris won, only two, New Hampshire and Rhode Island, require a photo ID to vote. Several states she won require or make optional a non-photo ID.
But get this: More than 60 million of the 161 million registered voters in the U.S. in 2024 live in states that require NO voter identification/authentication — zero, none — to ensure who is actually casting that ballot. Almost all of those voters are, of course, in Democrat-controlled states.
Look at those maps again — because short of legislative correction, Democrats are poised to retake the House and Senate in 2026, and running a younger and more charismatic ticket in 2028 will make them difficult to beat. That is the hard reality.
Since 2020, some states have strengthened their election integrity requirements, including mandating voter IDs.
Moreover, in July of this year, as a first step toward federal election integrity, the House successfully passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act to ensure only U.S. citizens vote in federal elections, with five Democrats voting with Republicans. Apparently, there are five House Democrats who still possess a modicum of integrity.
Of course, the Biden/Harris administration issued a strong condemnation of the SAVE Act because Democrats know that, as aforementioned, the perpetuation of their political party control depends on opposing any and all voter ID requirements.
Biden continues to claim, as he has for years, that requiring a voter ID is an "attempt to repress minority voting." His corrupt attorney general, Merrick Garland, likewise declared this year, "That is why we are challenging efforts by states and jurisdictions to implement discriminatory, burdensome, and unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot, including those related to mail-in voting, the use of drop boxes, and voter ID requirements."
Democrats label any measure to authenticate who is voting as "racist," "voter intimidation," and "voter suppression" while mislabeling their systemic voter fraud proposals as "voter rights."
However, combined with Biden's bulk voter registration mandate, the Demos' bulk-mail ballot fraud is a slam dunk with qualified candidates.
Trump will have to be careful with overreach, but I believe if he manages the next two years well, Republicans can rally a broader swath of America to the conservative side of the ledger and pave the path for a larger Vance victory in 2028.
Republicans must make demolishing the Demos' ballot fraud strategy a high priority now.
16
Politics & Religion / Re: Asymmetric, Next Gen, Low Intensity Warfare, Deniable Acts & Related Sabotage
« on: November 19, 2024, 06:12:11 PM »
FK.
17
Politics & Religion / Re: Homeland Security, Border, sabotage of energy, transportation, environment
« on: November 19, 2024, 06:03:27 PM »
In the Clinton thread we have quite a bit about what Billary did to us in the uranium sphere.
21
Politics & Religion / Re: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process
« on: November 19, 2024, 01:44:19 PM »
Great chart, and big picture timely with the DOGE Twins coming on stream!
22
Politics & Religion / Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media/social media
« on: November 19, 2024, 01:26:04 PM »
Green light to go for it.
23
Politics & Religion / Re: 2028
« on: November 19, 2024, 01:24:04 PM »
Demonstrably late to the party though.
24
Politics & Religion / Re: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris
« on: November 19, 2024, 01:22:45 PM »
Quelle surprise!
I gather that an addtional billion plus was spent by independent deep money backers as well.
I gather that an addtional billion plus was spent by independent deep money backers as well.
27
Science, Culture, & Humanities / Tulsi Gabbord confirms US biolabs in Ukraine
« on: November 19, 2024, 01:18:31 PM »
Yet another conspiracy theory proves true.
What could go wrong?!?
https://x.com/i/web/status/1858484173461201184
What could go wrong?!?
https://x.com/i/web/status/1858484173461201184
28
Politics & Religion / Re: Trump Adminstration 2.0
« on: November 19, 2024, 07:32:11 AM »
As for the shirtless fotos, he has been playing the role of a Ken doll for FOX since he arrived. Witness the highlights in his hair, gradually added over time. Gutfield had the some fotos of PH a few nights ago, with hearts floating across the screen, the women guests giggling, and Gutfield saying "That settles it. I'm gay."
Apparently he is something of a horn dog-- witness the various marriages, his lawyer saying there was an NDA etc.
Tatts like that are a big statement. The chattering class will chatter. Flinching now would be an error.
Apparently he is something of a horn dog-- witness the various marriages, his lawyer saying there was an NDA etc.
Tatts like that are a big statement. The chattering class will chatter. Flinching now would be an error.
29
Politics & Religion / Re: 100 Things Biden has gotten wrong
« on: November 19, 2024, 07:26:57 AM »
Two things not to like about them-- their face.
30
Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the left
« on: November 19, 2024, 07:25:51 AM »
Very chummy with Hillary, with whom he co-served.
31
Politics & Religion / Re: Asymmetric, Next Gen, Low Intensity Warfare, Deniable Acts & Related Sabotage
« on: November 19, 2024, 07:23:27 AM »
Given the nations with connections to the severed cables, Occam's Razor says it was Russia. Perhaps in response to Biden's approval of the US missiles into Kursk.
34
Politics & Religion / NC election board sued over NC Supreme Court contest
« on: November 19, 2024, 05:30:08 AM »37
Politics & Religion / Biden scrambling to sent billions to chipmakers
« on: November 19, 2024, 05:22:45 AM »38
Politics & Religion / Re: Russian and Chinese Leaders (Putin, Xi, Oligarchs, etc) other countries too
« on: November 19, 2024, 05:21:41 AM »
Another defenestration. 
40
Politics & Religion / Potent points from WSJ re Tulsi
« on: November 18, 2024, 07:05:47 PM »
Tulsi Gabbard vs. Trump’s First Term
As Director of National Intelligence would she underestimate security threats to dodge hard policy choices?
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Nov. 18, 2024 5:31 pm ET
Tulsi Gabbard speaks at Madison Square Garden, New York, Oct. 27. Photo: Alex Brandon/Associated Press
Matt Gaetz and Pete Hegseth have received more attention as presidential nominees, but one choice who also deserves Senate scrutiny is former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard. Mr. Trump’s pick for Director of National Intelligence, or DNI, is on record as opposing the security decisions that made his first-term foreign policy a success.
***
The DNI oversees 18 spy agencies and coordinates the intelligence the President and his policy advisers receive. Strong Trump nominees like John Ratcliffe, at the CIA, can corral their agencies and keep them out of politics. But the DNI influences what the President sees each day, how that information is framed, and what the U.S. knows about security threats around the world. This is a job for an honest broker without pronounced policy biases.
Ms. Gabbard, a Democrat until 2022, shares Mr. Trump’s skepticism toward U.S. military involvement abroad. But she stands out as a troubling choice to manage intelligence because her views on the use of force and U.S. foreign policy mark her to the left of even dovish voices in the Democratic Party.
Mr. Trump is proud of his strong Iran policy, which worked. Yet Ms. Gabbard argued for years that Mr. Trump’s first-term policies would start a war. The opposite was true. Her preferred Obama-Biden policy led to the current Middle East war, and Iran accelerated its nuclear program after President Biden’s election.
Watch Ms. Gabbard’s 2019 video “Trump’s Path to War With Iran.” She begins the same way Kamala Harris would: “First, he tore up the Iran nuclear agreement.” For that, and the maximum-pressure sanctions that followed, she calls President Trump a warmonger. But as Mr. Trump often said in this past campaign, those policies had Iran “on its knees.” They also led to the Abraham Accords.
Mr. Trump wants Saudi Arabia in those accords. In 2019 Ms. Gabbard said Mr. Trump had turned the U.S. into the Saudis’ “prostitute.” She pushed to end support for the Saudis in Yemen. President Biden did that, and the Houthis have since shut down most commercial shipping in the Red Sea.
In 2020 Ms. Gabbard assailed Mr. Trump’s strike on Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s terror chief. She said the strike “undermined our national security” and had “no justification whatsoever.” She tried to limit Mr. Trump’s war powers against Iran. In 2018 she tried to cut from the annual defense bill a strategy to counter Iran’s influence. That would also push us toward war, she argued.
She had one note on Iran—Obama-style appeasement was the only way to avoid war—and she was wrong. Given those views, how would she analyze and present new, if uncertain, evidence that Iran is advancing toward a nuclear weapon if she thought it might lead to war?
In May 2018 Ms. Gabbard wrote, “Israel needs to stop using live ammunition in its response to unarmed protesters in Gaza.” Later that week Hamas admitted most of the dead were its members. It had sent them to breach the Gaza border in an operation presaging the Oct. 7 attack. Ms. Gabbard maligned Israel for daring to prevent it.
Most shamefully, Ms. Gabbard went to Syria in 2017 for a photo-op with dictator Bashar al-Assad while he was massacring his own people. She said she was “skeptical” that he was behind the chemical-weapons attack even as photos of the child victims moved President Trump.
Ms. Gabbard has been wrong about the rest of the world too. She opposed Mr. Trump’s wise decision to leave the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces missile treaty with Russia amid clear evidence that Vladimir Putin was violating the pact. She said Mr. Trump’s decision “heightens the danger of a nuclear holocaust.”
Mere hours after Russia invaded Ukraine, Ms. Gabbard blamed NATO: “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO.” In 2019 she warned that Mr. Trump’s China trade policies could “escalate into a hot war.”
***
U.S. intelligence agencies have sometimes overestimated threats, as we learned about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction after the 2003 Iraq war. But the U.S. has also underestimated emerging risks numerous times and the result was sometimes catastrophe. See Pearl Harbor, or the prelude to 9/11. The U.S. also missed Iran’s nuclear advances of the past 20 years that were exposed by Israeli espionage but surprised the CIA.
The DNI isn’t the ultimate decision-maker, and perhaps Ms. Gabbard will drop her glib Bernie Sanders-style patter once she has responsibility, but she hasn’t renounced those views as far as we have seen. The world today is far more dangerous than it was in Mr. Trump’s first term. He will need honest assessments of the threats, and not an intelligence chief animated above all by fear that any U.S. action other than appeasement will result in World War III.
Ms. Gabbard has given no indication across her long political career that she is the right person for that vital duty.
As Director of National Intelligence would she underestimate security threats to dodge hard policy choices?
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Nov. 18, 2024 5:31 pm ET
Tulsi Gabbard speaks at Madison Square Garden, New York, Oct. 27. Photo: Alex Brandon/Associated Press
Matt Gaetz and Pete Hegseth have received more attention as presidential nominees, but one choice who also deserves Senate scrutiny is former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard. Mr. Trump’s pick for Director of National Intelligence, or DNI, is on record as opposing the security decisions that made his first-term foreign policy a success.
***
The DNI oversees 18 spy agencies and coordinates the intelligence the President and his policy advisers receive. Strong Trump nominees like John Ratcliffe, at the CIA, can corral their agencies and keep them out of politics. But the DNI influences what the President sees each day, how that information is framed, and what the U.S. knows about security threats around the world. This is a job for an honest broker without pronounced policy biases.
Ms. Gabbard, a Democrat until 2022, shares Mr. Trump’s skepticism toward U.S. military involvement abroad. But she stands out as a troubling choice to manage intelligence because her views on the use of force and U.S. foreign policy mark her to the left of even dovish voices in the Democratic Party.
Mr. Trump is proud of his strong Iran policy, which worked. Yet Ms. Gabbard argued for years that Mr. Trump’s first-term policies would start a war. The opposite was true. Her preferred Obama-Biden policy led to the current Middle East war, and Iran accelerated its nuclear program after President Biden’s election.
Watch Ms. Gabbard’s 2019 video “Trump’s Path to War With Iran.” She begins the same way Kamala Harris would: “First, he tore up the Iran nuclear agreement.” For that, and the maximum-pressure sanctions that followed, she calls President Trump a warmonger. But as Mr. Trump often said in this past campaign, those policies had Iran “on its knees.” They also led to the Abraham Accords.
Mr. Trump wants Saudi Arabia in those accords. In 2019 Ms. Gabbard said Mr. Trump had turned the U.S. into the Saudis’ “prostitute.” She pushed to end support for the Saudis in Yemen. President Biden did that, and the Houthis have since shut down most commercial shipping in the Red Sea.
In 2020 Ms. Gabbard assailed Mr. Trump’s strike on Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s terror chief. She said the strike “undermined our national security” and had “no justification whatsoever.” She tried to limit Mr. Trump’s war powers against Iran. In 2018 she tried to cut from the annual defense bill a strategy to counter Iran’s influence. That would also push us toward war, she argued.
She had one note on Iran—Obama-style appeasement was the only way to avoid war—and she was wrong. Given those views, how would she analyze and present new, if uncertain, evidence that Iran is advancing toward a nuclear weapon if she thought it might lead to war?
In May 2018 Ms. Gabbard wrote, “Israel needs to stop using live ammunition in its response to unarmed protesters in Gaza.” Later that week Hamas admitted most of the dead were its members. It had sent them to breach the Gaza border in an operation presaging the Oct. 7 attack. Ms. Gabbard maligned Israel for daring to prevent it.
Most shamefully, Ms. Gabbard went to Syria in 2017 for a photo-op with dictator Bashar al-Assad while he was massacring his own people. She said she was “skeptical” that he was behind the chemical-weapons attack even as photos of the child victims moved President Trump.
Ms. Gabbard has been wrong about the rest of the world too. She opposed Mr. Trump’s wise decision to leave the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces missile treaty with Russia amid clear evidence that Vladimir Putin was violating the pact. She said Mr. Trump’s decision “heightens the danger of a nuclear holocaust.”
Mere hours after Russia invaded Ukraine, Ms. Gabbard blamed NATO: “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO.” In 2019 she warned that Mr. Trump’s China trade policies could “escalate into a hot war.”
***
U.S. intelligence agencies have sometimes overestimated threats, as we learned about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction after the 2003 Iraq war. But the U.S. has also underestimated emerging risks numerous times and the result was sometimes catastrophe. See Pearl Harbor, or the prelude to 9/11. The U.S. also missed Iran’s nuclear advances of the past 20 years that were exposed by Israeli espionage but surprised the CIA.
The DNI isn’t the ultimate decision-maker, and perhaps Ms. Gabbard will drop her glib Bernie Sanders-style patter once she has responsibility, but she hasn’t renounced those views as far as we have seen. The world today is far more dangerous than it was in Mr. Trump’s first term. He will need honest assessments of the threats, and not an intelligence chief animated above all by fear that any U.S. action other than appeasement will result in World War III.
Ms. Gabbard has given no indication across her long political career that she is the right person for that vital duty.
41
Politics & Religion / Re: DOGE: Elon & Vivek
« on: November 18, 2024, 06:38:19 PM »
Perhaps he is assuming the Congress will agree?
42
Politics & Religion / GPF: It is hard to quite the USMCA
« on: November 18, 2024, 06:37:15 PM »
second
November 18, 2024
View On Website
Open as PDF
It’s Hard to Quit the USMCA
Calls from Canada to go bilateral are more tactic than true position.
By: Allison Fedirka
Danielle Smith, the premier of Canada's province of Alberta, urged the federal Canadian government on Nov. 17 to adopt separate bilateral free trade agreements – one with the U.S., one with Mexico – as an alternative to the USMCA, the descendent of NAFTA that now governs trade among the three countries. Separately, the premier of the province of Ontario recently suggested likewise that Canada and the U.S. consider a possible return to a bilateral trade pact. Neither is a likely outcome, but the comments may have a lot to say about Canada’s strategy on the U.S. going forward.
To be sure, it’s not taboo to want to review the USMCA; the agreement regularly calls for it. The first review is scheduled for July 2026, at which time the signatories can propose, debate and, if needed, enact revisions. All three must agree on any changes, as well as on the extension of the agreement for another 16 years. If they don’t, it expires. (Notably, the terms of review are extremely vague, and it’s generally understood that any disagreement would prompt extended negotiations that could last up to the treaty’s expiration date.)
Nor is Canada’s desire to go bilateral entirely unfounded; it had a bilateral deal in place with the U.S. from 1989 to 1994, and though NAFTA superseded that agreement, it’s important that there already exists a foundational framework between the two that could, in theory, be revived. More concretely, though, there is something to be said about symmetry. Smith noted that the trade balance between the U.S. and Canada differs vastly from that of the U.S. and Mexico. Trade between the U.S. and Canada totaled just over $700 billion in 2023, while total trade between Mexico and Canada totaled just $55 billion, according to Statistics Canada. Meanwhile, U.S.-Mexico trade came to nearly $800 billion in 2023, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The bureau’s data also shows Canada’s trade surplus with the U.S. was $64 billion, while Mexico’s trade surplus was $153 billion.
Smith also said the types of goods exchanged created different dependencies and problem areas. Mexico’s ties with China, for example, pose a threat to the trilateral agreement, according to the two Canadian premiers, particularly when it comes to the automotive industry. They argue that China uses Mexico as an entry point for Chinese goods, parts and other materials to make their way into U.S. and Canadian markets. Like Mexico, Canada’s automotive sector is deeply integrated with the United States’. Unlike Mexico, however, Canada has clearly shown a willingness to establish electric vehicle supply chains with Japan, rather than China, clamping down on Chinese researchers in the country, promoting alternative systems for accessing critical minerals and, potentially, banning Chinese software and hardware in vehicles. Canada’s alignment with the U.S. in this regard owes as much to security as it does to economics.
The economic disruption that leaving the USMCA would entail would likely be unbearable for everyone involved, so it’s best to treat the premiers’ comments with some skepticism. Still, Ontario and Alberta are significant contributors to Canada's gross domestic product – about 44 percent and 17.5 percent, respectively – so Ottawa can’t entirely ignore them. The most important thing here is timing. U.S. President-elect Donald Trump is expected to unleash more tariffs and renew a trade war with China, so the comments from Canada make two things clear: First, Canada will prioritize its economic relationship with the U.S. over its relationship with Mexico, and second, it will use its stance on trade with China to improve its negotiating position with both the U.S. and Mexico.
November 18, 2024
View On Website
Open as PDF
It’s Hard to Quit the USMCA
Calls from Canada to go bilateral are more tactic than true position.
By: Allison Fedirka
Danielle Smith, the premier of Canada's province of Alberta, urged the federal Canadian government on Nov. 17 to adopt separate bilateral free trade agreements – one with the U.S., one with Mexico – as an alternative to the USMCA, the descendent of NAFTA that now governs trade among the three countries. Separately, the premier of the province of Ontario recently suggested likewise that Canada and the U.S. consider a possible return to a bilateral trade pact. Neither is a likely outcome, but the comments may have a lot to say about Canada’s strategy on the U.S. going forward.
To be sure, it’s not taboo to want to review the USMCA; the agreement regularly calls for it. The first review is scheduled for July 2026, at which time the signatories can propose, debate and, if needed, enact revisions. All three must agree on any changes, as well as on the extension of the agreement for another 16 years. If they don’t, it expires. (Notably, the terms of review are extremely vague, and it’s generally understood that any disagreement would prompt extended negotiations that could last up to the treaty’s expiration date.)
Nor is Canada’s desire to go bilateral entirely unfounded; it had a bilateral deal in place with the U.S. from 1989 to 1994, and though NAFTA superseded that agreement, it’s important that there already exists a foundational framework between the two that could, in theory, be revived. More concretely, though, there is something to be said about symmetry. Smith noted that the trade balance between the U.S. and Canada differs vastly from that of the U.S. and Mexico. Trade between the U.S. and Canada totaled just over $700 billion in 2023, while total trade between Mexico and Canada totaled just $55 billion, according to Statistics Canada. Meanwhile, U.S.-Mexico trade came to nearly $800 billion in 2023, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The bureau’s data also shows Canada’s trade surplus with the U.S. was $64 billion, while Mexico’s trade surplus was $153 billion.
Smith also said the types of goods exchanged created different dependencies and problem areas. Mexico’s ties with China, for example, pose a threat to the trilateral agreement, according to the two Canadian premiers, particularly when it comes to the automotive industry. They argue that China uses Mexico as an entry point for Chinese goods, parts and other materials to make their way into U.S. and Canadian markets. Like Mexico, Canada’s automotive sector is deeply integrated with the United States’. Unlike Mexico, however, Canada has clearly shown a willingness to establish electric vehicle supply chains with Japan, rather than China, clamping down on Chinese researchers in the country, promoting alternative systems for accessing critical minerals and, potentially, banning Chinese software and hardware in vehicles. Canada’s alignment with the U.S. in this regard owes as much to security as it does to economics.
The economic disruption that leaving the USMCA would entail would likely be unbearable for everyone involved, so it’s best to treat the premiers’ comments with some skepticism. Still, Ontario and Alberta are significant contributors to Canada's gross domestic product – about 44 percent and 17.5 percent, respectively – so Ottawa can’t entirely ignore them. The most important thing here is timing. U.S. President-elect Donald Trump is expected to unleash more tariffs and renew a trade war with China, so the comments from Canada make two things clear: First, Canada will prioritize its economic relationship with the U.S. over its relationship with Mexico, and second, it will use its stance on trade with China to improve its negotiating position with both the U.S. and Mexico.
44
Politics & Religion / FO: Philippines-US mil-info sharing ag
« on: November 18, 2024, 09:43:56 AM »The U.S. and Philippines signed a military information sharing agreement that will allow their armed forces to share classified information. (Fundamentally, this makes the Philippines capable of using the Typhon mid-range missile system to its fullest extent and turns the islands into an information hub for the South China Sea. This will greatly increase the U.S.’ defense architecture in the Pacific. – J.V.)
===============
GPF:
Closer defense ties. The Philippines and the United States on Monday signed an agreement to share classified military intelligence and discussed setting up a coordination center to facilitate military collaboration. Earlier, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin met with his Australian and Japanese counterparts to announce plans to jointly adopt autonomous and advanced military technologies and further integrate Japanese troops and weapons systems into AUKUS, a trilateral security arrangement involving Australia, Britain and the United States. They also launched a trilateral defense consultation process and announced plans for Japan’s Amphibious Rapid Deployment Brigade to scale up its participation in exercises in northern Australia.
45
Politics & Religion / FO: ATACMS authorization implications
« on: November 18, 2024, 09:42:21 AM »(7) U.S. AND ALLIES AUTHORIZE MISSILE STRIKES INTO RUSSIA: The Biden administration, France, and the U.K. authorized Ukraine to use their missile systems, like the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), to strike Russian territory in response to North Korean troops being active in Kursk.
Direct U.S. satellite involvement is required for the ATACMS missiles to strike in Russia, Russian President Vladimir Putin told his state media in mid-September.
Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the authorization is a “qualitatively new round of escalation of tensions and a qualitatively new situation in terms of the involvement of the United States in this conflict.”
Why It Matters: President-elect Trump is likely to reverse this decision as soon as he takes office since he intends to end the war. Because of this Putin is likely to respond aggressively inside of Ukraine (potentially targeting systems en route to Ukraine but not delivered) but is unlikely to strike the U.S. homeland or order the presumed targeting satellites disabled as both would hinder peace talks in January. – J.V.
46
Politics & Religion / FO: Jordanians released-- WTF?!?
« on: November 18, 2024, 09:38:22 AM »The Department of Justice dismissed all charges against two Jordanians who were arrested after illegally entering Quantico Marine Corps Base in May. House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green claims the Biden Administration has not responded to requests for information about the incident. “We are aware that one of these men entered through the Southwest border, claimed asylum, and was released into the interior just a month prior to the incident,” Green said, “The circumstances surrounding this event remain concerning, and I urge the Biden-Harris administration to respond.”
47
Politics & Religion / FO
« on: November 18, 2024, 09:36:30 AM »(3) DEMOCRATS’ NEW ANTI-TRUMP STRATEGY TAKING SHAPE: Democrat-aligned legal advocacy groups, including Democracy Forward, are planning legal challenges to Trump administration regulations and executive actions, beginning on the first day of Donald Trump’s presidency.
Democratic strategists Arkadi Gerney and Sarah Knight circulated a private memo in January, urging top Democratic Party donors to heavily invest in transforming Democrat-controlled states into Democrat power centers and coordinating policy across state lines.
Democrat-aligned group Two Plus Two Coalition said it plans to “target the hidden sources of disinformation and expose them for what they are,” and will target pro-Trump public figures, including Rupert Murdoch and Elon Musk.
Two Plus Two Coalition senior advisor Rick Wilson said the group will function as an opposition research firm with “a military-grade intelligence gathering operation.”
Why It Matters: The Democrat strategy to resist the Trump administration is now focused on building state power, using pressure campaigns, and lawfare against the Trump administration. The Democrat strategy will also likely include “stay behind” federal employees, who will take action inside the administration to slow or block Trump’s agenda. – R.C.
48
Politics & Religion / FO: Vivek
« on: November 18, 2024, 09:32:43 AM »Vivek Ramaswamy said federal contractors should expect “massive cuts” when the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) begins working in 2025, promising “some agencies to be deleted outright.”
49
Politics & Religion / FO
« on: November 18, 2024, 09:32:07 AM »Trump transition advisor Mauricio Claver-Carone proposed a plan to levy 60% tariffs on goods shipped through Latin American ports built through partnerships with China. Tariffs are “a shot across the bow” to any country partnering with China on maritime infrastructure, Claver-Carone said.
=================
(6) CHINA PLANS TO RESTRICT MORE KEY METAL EXPORTS: China’s Ministry of Commerce released plans to increase export controls on “dual use technologies and items,” including tungsten, graphite, magnesium, and aluminum alloys, beginning on the first of December.
“We know it is going to be tougher between Donald Trump and China,” and China wants to increase domestic “sophisticated manufacturing,” Swedish bank SEB Group chief commodities analyst Bjarne Schieldrop said.
Why It Matters: China is making preparations for an expanded trade war when President-elect Trump takes office in January 2025. Analysts say China is also eliminating export subsidies to hold onto stocks of key manufacturing inputs, with the intention of ramping up finished manufacturing in China. According to analysts, China’s goal is to protect Chinese industry from disruptions if a trade war with the U.S. does accelerate. – R.C.