▶️ JB SHURK: TRUMP CRACKS CHINA’S FORTUNE COOKIE
⭐️ HelloKitty’sGotAHairTrigger
JB SHURK: TRUMP CRACKS CHINA’S FORTUNE COOKIE
ddd
t’s easy to forget that ten years ago, candidate Donald Trump was the only national politician who took China’s growing geopolitical power seriously. He talked about China so frequently and pronounced those two syllables so deliberately — Chi-na — that comedians and voters alike enjoyed doing imitations of the MAGA-man taking America’s geopolitical adversary to task.
On the stump, Trump called both Republicans and Democrats “stupid” for how they had permitted the Chinese Communist Party to devour American assets. He would list beautiful American buildings and historic American real estate that the Chinese had acquired since President Bill Clinton and both parties in Congress decided to ignore China’s past bad behavior (including the ’89 massacre of pro-democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square) and welcome it into the world’s premier economic clubs. He pointed to two decades of multinational trade “deals” which had resulted in the closures of industrial and manufacturing plants across the United States; as once-American companies shifted operations to China and took advantage of the communists’ disregard for workers’ safety or subsistence wages. He argued China’s currency manipulation, organized theft of American trade secrets, and sidestepping of environmental and human rights treaties ensured that American wealth flowed in one direction: directly into the pockets of the CCP.
Trump couldn’t believe American politicians could be so reckless, or worse, consciously willing to sabotage American economic interests for a traitor’s paycheck from Chinese-run lobbyists. He excoriated national companies for betraying Americans while profiting from slave labor on the other side of the world. His campaign for president was simultaneously a campaign against this percolating notion in the West that the twenty-first century belonged to China.
Remember how common it was a decade ago to hear pundits proclaim with certainty that this was “China’s century?” The Brits handed Hong Kong to China’s communists in ’97 (with false assurances from the CCP that the former British colony’s democratic traditions would be respected for at least fifty years). President Clinton successfully maneuvered China into the World Trade Organization on his way out of office. As the new millennium began, businesses in the United States shifted manufacturing operations to China, and it seemed as if everything being sold in America now had a “made in China” label. The managers of Wall Street’s big firms and the presidents of London’s big banks all opened fortune cookies promising big fortunes in China.
European globalists such as the World Economic Forum’s Klaus Schwab found the CCP’s totalitarian surveillance state an ideal model for the rest of the world to emulate. China’s billion-plus population and abundant supplies of critical natural resources led Western think tanks to conclude that there was no stopping China’s future global domination. As Hollywood partnered up with China’s communists to produce blockbuster movies, a message consistently made its way to the screen: China would soon lead the world and dominate the future.
Have you noticed that sometime between Donald Trump’s famous trip down Trump Tower’s golden escalator in 2015 to announce his presidential ambitions and his return to office last year (after surviving Deep State sabotage, lawfare, and assassination attempts) most of the “really smart” pundits have stopped talking about this being “China’s century” with so much certainty? The shift in “punditry” didn’t happen overnight. During President Trump’s first term, if you recall, all the “smartest foreign policy people” told television viewers that Chinese President Xi Jinping would use “flattery” and “pragmatic fawning” to appeal to Trump’s “narcissism” while outsmarting him every step of the way with regard to crucial trade imbalances between the two countries. Xi invited Trump to China’s Forbidden City in 2017, a rare honor for a foreign guest. The no-longer-relevant scribblers at Time covered the historic event with this headline: “President Trump Meets the World’s Most Powerful Man in Beijing.”
Entirely dismissive of President Trump’s negotiating skills during his first term in office, Time’s editors advised the billionaire businessman to arrive with hat in hand and “ask nicely.” Time further declared, “China’s ascendancy is stark and only set to grow.” Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative “will boost Beijing’s influence beyond its borders just as Trump’s questioning of bedrock principles such as free trade, and toadying to authoritarian regimes, is diminishing Washington’s.” Here’s Time’s final kicker (which I love): “Trump might talk tough, but don’t expect Xi to tremble.”
Boy those geniuses at Time sure framed the Trump-Xi dynamic accurately, didn’t they? Fast-forward to today, and everywhere you look, two things seem crystal clear: Trump is on the attack, and China is backpedaling. Do leftwing “journalists” still believe President Trump is all bark, no bite?
Sundance over at The Last Refuge put together a succinct list of Trump’s MAGA kung fu:
“First blow: the Trump tariffs hit Beijing hardest. Second blow: the Beijing tentacle on the Panama Canal is severed. Third blow: global tariff threats changed the risk dynamic for southeast Asia countries who acted as transnational shippers for China. Fourth blow: cheap sanctioned oil from Venezuela was cut-off. Now, the fifth blow: cheap, sanctioned Iranian oil is disrupted.”
Nearly 20% of Beijing’s oil comes from Iran and Venezuela; and both countries gave Xi a premium discount in exchange for promises of Chinese technology and security. China was purchasing more than 80% of Iran’s shipped oil.
What happens when the oil stops flowing to China? Alarm bells go off. China has immediately halted domestic refiners from exporting diesel and gasoline. First Trump takes China’s supply of oil coming from Venezuela. Then Trump takes China’s supply of oil coming from Iran. At the same time, Trump reasserts the supremacy of the petrodollar on world oil markets, just as China was successfully negotiating purchases in Yuan. While taking out narco-terrorist dictator Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela and Islamic terrorist dictator Ali Khamenei in Iran, Trump simultaneously defends the dollar from Chinese attack.
▶️ 9 Minutes 46 Seconds
Newsmax host Carl Higbie did an excellent job the other night explaining in nine short minutes all the different ways President Trump is making America’s position stronger and China’s position weaker in the world. While China funds domestic protests inside the United States to frustrate Trump’s policy initiatives, the president pursues rare earth elements in Greenland (to end any long-term dependency on China), severs Chinese influence in South and Central America, and re-establishes American dominance over oil supplies in the Middle East. Higbie takes a hard look at members of Congress, Western allies, and even NATO and concludes that President Trump is singlehandedly “containing” China while everyone else is “asleep at the wheel.”
President Trump refuses to give communist China control over the world’s future. In speech after speech, he tells listeners that both the twenty-first and twenty-second centuries will be “American centuries.” Every economic and foreign policy decision Trump makes considers that policy’s impact on the war already being waged between China and the United States for global supremacy.
There’s a well-known but apocryphal Chinese curse: “May you live in interesting times.” President Trump should send truckloads of fortune cookies to President Xi containing that wish. On the flip side where the lucky numbers usually go, he should print this in red: 45-47, MAGA, KAG. ✪
▶️ DON SURBER: THE DEMOCRATS GO TO WAR AGAINST TRUMP
⭐️ Jorline
DON SURBER: THE DEMOCRATS GO TO WAR AGAINST TRUMP
lll
he Democrats’ knee-jerk reaction to Operation Epic Fury is another step toward irrelevancy by the Party Of Obama. The party ran out of good ideas when Clinton left office. He left Dubya a balanced budget. Now the party embraces every bad idea that comes along. Reparations for Oprah! Spaying and neutering teens suffering sexual dysphoria! Open borders!
In Trump’s first year back in office, Democrats have denounced his every single action as commander-in-chief. Even the Army’s parade to celebrate its 250th anniversary drew plenty of whine from the Democrat vineyard, falsely labeling it a birthday parade for Donald John Trump. Planning for the anniversary celebration began under Biden when he still thought he’d be re-elected.
Trump began his second term as commander-in-chief by deploying the 10,000 soldiers to the Mexican border. Jack Reed, top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the deployment was “dangerous and an inappropriate use of the U.S. military to carry out his immigration enforcement campaign.” Reed called the soldiers a “de facto border police.”
In response, War Consigliere Pete Hegseth awarded Mexican Border Defense Medals which replicated the 1918 Mexican Border Defense Medal issued to soldiers in General Blackjack Pershing’s expedition to Mexico in 1916-1917.
When Operation Midnight Hammer destroyed Iran’s nuclear labs, Democrats condemned him. AOC’s word salad said, “The President’s disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.”
Next, the commander-in-chief sent the National Guard in to clean up the grime in DC and to protect federal law enforcement officers who cleaned up the crime.
Senator Gary Peters said, “This is just a very expensive publicity stunt and very dangerous for our country, particularly if you want to try to normalize having people in military uniforms in our cities.”
Homicides—which were on the decline in DC in 2025—fell even further once the Guard arrived. That was good news in the largely black Wards 7 and 8 where half the homicides usually occur.
Then came Operation Southern Spear, which turned the Caribbean into a shooting gallery of drug smugglers in speed boats.
Senator Reed said, “The U.S. military [is not] empowered to hunt down suspected criminals and kill them without trial.”
Senator Dick Blumenthal said, “It’s a criminal offense—war crimes or murder are criminal offenses. Hegseth doesn’t have the immunity that the President of the United States does.”
Senator Tammy Duckworth said, “This type of attack does not help America’s fight against narco-terrorism, against drug traffickers.” The military raid of Venezuela and arrest of Maduro took 88 seconds. Americans cheered. Democrats booed.
Senator Tim Kaine said, “President Trump’s unauthorized military attack on Venezuela to arrest Maduro—however terrible he is—is a sickening return to a day when the United States asserted the right to dominate the internal political affairs of all nations in the Western Hemisphere.”
Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib said, “Trump’s illegal and unprovoked bombing of Venezuela and kidnapping of its president are grave violations of international law and the U.S. Constitution. These are the actions of a rogue state.”
Now the military is bombing Iran. Democrats claim the commander-in-chief acted illegally. However, Trump met the conditions of the War Powers Act of 1973.
In a world where the media spares Democrats scrutiny, Democrat lies pile high. Democrats now claim the sinking of an Iranian warship headed toward Diego Garcia in international waters violates some international law that Congress never ratified. The public knows better. The public also knows that once again, Democrats side with the enemy, not America.
Earlier, after killing Khamenei and company, Chuck Schumer, Amy’s idiot cousin, said, “Donald Trump has just launched America into a full-scale conflict against one of our most fervent adversaries without a plan, without an endgame, and without authorization from Congress, or even a debate in full view of the American people.“
“Our resolution affirms what the Constitution already says: the President cannot send U.S. forces to fight a war in Iran without congressional approval. Let me be clear, I will not shed a tear for Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, who was killed in the initial rounds of but this is a war of choice, not necessity.”
The resolution failed in the Senate 47-53 with John Fetterman casting a meaningless vote against it. He has yet to side with Republicans when his vote matters.
This week, an American submarine torpedoed and sunk the INA Dena, which was headed toward Diego Garcia. Some claim the Iranian warship was unarmed. Well, it is now—given a torpedo courtesy of the red, white, and blue.
The Democrat reaction is always the same and getting pretty boring by now. Anything the commander-in-chief does is illegal, dangerous, unconstitutional and eventually, grounds for impeachment.
Even with the media never challenging the Democrats, the public increasingly is skeptical. The boy Democrats have cried wolf too many times. Maybe they are inoculating the public from alarm when Democrats seize power again and ignore law, reason and the Constitution.
But as far as swaying public opinion goes, Democrats are waging Operation Epic Failure.
Meanwhile, Donald J. Trump tweeted, “While everyone is waiting and prepared for us to attack Syria, maybe we should knock the hell out of Iran and their nuclear capabilities?” That was 13 years ago. ✪
▶️ HOW A US TECH BILLIONAIRE BUILT A CCP PROPAGANDA MACHINE
⭐️ warpmine
HOW A US TECH BILLIONAIRE BUILT A CCP PROPAGANDA MACHINE
kkk
When American tech billionaire Neville Roy Singham sold his consulting firm Thought Works for $785 million in 2017, he didn’t retire to a beach. He moved to Shanghai, set up shop inside a Chinese propaganda firm, and began building what congressional investigators now call “the most sophisticated dark money operation” funding radical activism in the United States.
Seven years later, Singham’s fingerprints are everywhere. The anti-ICE protests that shut down Minneapolis in January 2026, the pro-Palestinian campus occupations that paralyzed universities in 2024, the pro-Maduro demonstrations that materialized in Times Square within 12 hours of U.S. military action in Venezuela. All of them trace back to the same Shanghai office and the same network of American nonprofits enjoying tax-exempt status while allegedly operating as unregistered foreign agents
✪ The Man Behind The Money
Neville Roy Singham, now 71, has been on the FBI’s radar since 1974, when agents investigated his ties to “groups engaged in activities inimical to U.S. interests,” according to a September 2025 letter from House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith. (Source: House Ways and Means letter to The People’s Forum, Sept 4, 2025, available at http://waysandmeans.house.gov )
By the early 2000s, Singham had transformed his early Maoist sympathies into a lucrative career. He founded ThoughtWorks and built it into a global IT consultancy serving Fortune 1000 companies. However, even during his business success, Singham maintained some curious connections. From 2001 to 2008, he worked as a strategic technical consultant for Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant that’s currently under espionage investigations in Canada and the United States. (Source: Network Contagion Research Institute “Contagious Disruption” report, May 2024, page 11)
After selling ThoughtWorks in 2017, Singham married Jodie Evans, founder of the anti-war group Code Pink, and relocated to Shanghai. Today he shares office space and staff with Shanghai Maku Cultural Communication Company, a Chinese propaganda firm whose stated mission is to “educate foreigners about the miracles that China has created on the world stage.” (Source: Sen. Grassley letter to DOJ/FBI, April 16, 2025, available@ http://grassley.senate.gov )
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley noted in an April 2025 letter to the Department of Justice Singham has been spotted at Chinese Communist Party workshops focused on “promoting the party internationally.” Multiple observers note that he lives and works in Shanghai with little interference, a level of operational freedom they interpret as implicit CCP approval of his activities.
✪ The Shell Game: How The Money Moves
Singham’s genius lies not in the amount of money he’s spent (an estimated $250 million worldwide since 2017, according to a New York Times investigation) but in how cleverly he moves it. (Source: New York Times, “How a U.S. Tech Mogul Used Nonprofits to Sow Chinese Propaganda,” Aug 5, 2023)
The network operates through a labyrinth of shell companies and donor-advised funds designed to obscure where donations actually come from while maximizing tax benefits.
At the top sits the Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund, a donor-advised fund that allows Singham to claim immediate tax deductions while anonymizing the ultimate recipients. Money flows from there to the Justice & Education Fund (JEF), a Delaware-based nonprofit with no physical footprint. Its address is literally a UPS store mailbox in Illinois. (Source: Business Today India, “Who is Neville Roy Singham,” Aug 7, 2023)
In 2019 alone, JEF distributed $8.33 million to the United Community Fund (UCF), another pass-through entity, which then sent $3 million to the People’s Forum in New York City and $700,000 to the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research. (Source: NCRI “Contagious Disruption” report, May 2024, page 26)
This structure is deliberate. By routing donations through multiple 501(c)(3) organizations, Singham avoided paying taxes on his $785 million windfall while funding organizations that congressional investigators say operate as de facto foreign agents. CNBC TV18 reported in August 2023 that the scheme involved “at least $275 million in donations from American nonprofits, potentially allowing Singham to claim tax deductions for his contributions.”
The contrast with Russian influence operations is stark. RT and Sputnik are registered as foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), banned from major social media platforms, and subject to intense scrutiny. Singham’s network? Zero FARA registrations, 1 million YouTube subscribers for his propaganda outlet BreakThrough News, and full tax-exempt status protecting the entire operation under the First Amendment.
✪ The Core: Five Organizations, One Mission
At the heart of Singham’s American network sit five organizations which function as a coordinated protest-and-propaganda machine. The People’s
Forum, a Manhattan-based “community center,” serves as physical infrastructure and coordination hub. It has received over $20 million from Singham since 2017, a figure the organization itself acknowledged in September 2021 when it praised Singham on social media as “our Marxist comrade.” (Source: People’s Forum social media post, Sept 2021, cited in House Ways & Means letter)
The Forum’s executive director, Manolo De Los Santos, appears regularly on CGTN (Chinese state television) praising China’s political system. (Source: Sen. Grassley letter, April 16, 2025) In a January 2025 speech at a New York event, he called for Israel’s destruction as “the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism.” (Source: Video posted to X by @benryanwriter, Jan 15, 2025)
Code Pink, the anti-war organization founded by Singham’s wife Jodie Evans, receives over $1.4 million annually from Singham-linked entities. That’s roughly 25% of its total budget. (Source: Christopher Fountain blog analysis, Feb 28, 2026, citing IRS 990 data)
The group organizes regular trips to Cuba, where Evans has met with Raul Castro’s daughter Mariela, and promotes “Red China trips” recruiting Americans for CCP propaganda tours. Senator Grassley concluded in April 2025 that “evidence suggests Code Pink has been funded and influenced by Mr. Singham and the communist Chinese government, both of which are foreign principals.”
The Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) provides ground-level organizing and street muscle. This group led the January 2026 “statewide shutdown” in Minneapolis that paralyzed the city for a week, and it coordinated the nationwide “National Shutdown” targeting Immigration and Customs Enforcement on January 30, 2026. (Source: Fox News, “CCP-connected millionaire allegedly bankrolls Minneapolis agitator groups,” Jan 30, 2026)
When PSL protesters get arrested (a frequent occurrence), they’re referred to bail funds including the NSM Community Fund and Juntos Commissary Fund in Philadelphia. According to a Gateway Pundit investigation, these bail funds “draw from the same liberal foundation networks” backing Singham’s operations. (Source: Gateway Pundit, “Protest Groups Keep Rotating Causes,” Feb 2026)
The protesters post bail, return to the streets, and the cycle repeats.
BreakThrough News serves as the propaganda arm, publishing pro-CCP and pro-authoritarian content to over 1 million YouTube subscribers. The outlet’s coordination capabilities were on full display during the January 3-4, 2026 U.S. military operation in Venezuela.
At 1:35 AM, as American special forces landed, BreakThrough published the first videos attacking the operation as “illegal bombing.” Ten minutes later, Manolo De Los Santos echoed the talking points on social media. At 2:29 AM, the ANSWER Coalition (another Singham-funded group) issued a protest alert. Within 12 hours, hundreds of demonstrators filled Times Square in a pro-Maduro rally organized by the People’s Forum. (Source: Pravda EN, “How the PLA’s PSYOP system mobilized Maduro’s supporters in 6 hours,” Jan 4, 2026)
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research provides intellectual legitimacy, publishing Marxist analysis and anti-Western scholarship. Led by historian Vijay Prashad, the institute sits on a $14 million endowment that was “mostly funneled through Goldman Sachs’ anonymized philanthropy fund,” according to Yahoo News. (Source: Yahoo News, “U.S Tech Mogul Bankrolls Pro-Russia, Pro-China News Network,” May 29, 2023)
Singham chairs the advisory board and has co-authored research with Prashad, including a November 2025 study on World War II that was presented at a Shanghai forum. (Source: Brasil de Fato, “Vijay Prashad challenges Western narratives,” Nov 13, 2025)
✪ The Global Tentacles
Singham’s network extends far beyond American borders. In India, he funneled at least $5 million to NewsClick, an independent news site that the New York Times found “sprinkled its coverage with Chinese government talking points.” Indian authorities raided NewsClick offices in 2023 and summoned its editor, Prakash Karat, for questioning about the Singham money trail. (Source: Indian Express, “How a US tech baron helped push Chinese propaganda worldwide,” Aug 8, 2023)
In South Africa, Singham funds the Nkrumah School, the Socialist Revolutionary Workers Party, and the news startup New Frame. That last outlet’s editor resigned in 2022 citing what he called its “soft coverage” of China and Russia. (Source: NYT investigation, Aug 5, 2023)
In Brazil, he backs Brasil de Fato newspaper and Centro Popular de Mídias, a media hub that doubles as part of his pass-through funding network.
The International People’s Assembly, another Singham-funded global coordination body, ties these disparate organizations together under the banner of “building working class internationalism.” The result is a network spanning five continents, capable of coordinated messaging and mobilization across time zones and languages.
✪ Congressional Investigations Expose The Network
Multiple congressional committees have methodically documented Singham’s funding operation through a series of investigations beginning in early 2025. Their work has brought unprecedented public scrutiny to a network that operated in relative obscurity for years.
In April 2025, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley urged the Department of Justice and FBI to investigate whether Singham-funded organizations violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) by failing to register as foreign agents. His detailed letter to Attorney General Bondi and FBI Director Patel laid out evidence of CCP connections and called for enforcement action.
Two months later, the House Oversight Committee issued a subpoena to Neville Singham demanding documents about his funding network. Though Singham has not complied, the committee’s June 2025 investigation exposed his role in funding groups behind civil unrest across multiple cities. (Source: House Oversight press release, “Oversight Republicans Investigate Funding Behind Los Angeles Riots,” June 13, 2025)
In September 2025, House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith escalated the investigation with a letter to the People’s Forum which laid out the case in stark terms. “This organization has acted as a foreign agent of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and has received millions of dollars in funding from a known CCP ally, Neville Roy Singham, while enjoying the benefits of tax-exempt status,” Smith wrote.
The Ways and Means investigation demanded comprehensive documentation: all communications between the People’s Forum and Singham, all records of foreign contacts, a complete donor list, and details of all grant recipients outside the United States. By February 2026, the committee expanded its probe to BreakThrough News, holding hearings on foreign influence in tax-exempt organizations. (Source: The National Desk, “House Ways and Means panel holds hearing on foreign influence in nonprofits,” Feb 2026)
These congressional investigations have accomplished what years of independent journalism could not: forcing the network into public view, documenting the money trail through official channels, and creating a legislative record that exposes the gaps in current law. The investigations revealed that despite clear evidence of foreign government coordination, not a single organization in Singham’s network has registered under FARA as of March 2026.
The challenge now falls to executive branch agencies. The People’s Forum still operates tax-exempt in Manhattan. Code Pink still organizes protests and China trips. Break Through News still publishes to its million subscribers. PSL still mobilizes street demonstrations. Congressional investigators have built the case. Enforcement depends on the IRS revoking tax-exempt status and the Department of Justice prosecuting FARA violations.
The contrast with Russian influence operations remains stark. When the U.S. government identified RT and Sputnik as Kremlin propaganda outlets, they were forced to register as foreign agents, banned from social media, and subjected to intense public scrutiny. Singham’s operation continues to enjoy legal protection, tax benefits, and the veneer of domestic legitimacy. The question is no longer whether congressional investigators have documented the problem. It’s whether executive agencies will act on the evidence Congress has provided.
✪ Why It Matters
The Singham network represents a fundamental challenge to American counter-influence efforts. Traditional foreign propaganda is overt. Russian state media wears its affiliation openly. Chinese state media like CGTN and Xinhua register as foreign agents. However, Singham’s model exploits a gap in U.S. law. An American billionaire funds American nonprofits which just happen to advance CCP interests.
The organizations claim First Amendment protections. They’re not taking orders from Beijing, they argue. They’re simply funded by a private American citizen who happens to live in Shanghai, share an office with a Chinese propaganda firm, attend CCP workshops, and fund groups that consistently advance Chinese foreign policy objectives. The funding is “philanthropic,” routed through established donor-advised funds and tax-exempt non profits. The activities are “activism,” protected speech criticizing U.S. Government policies.
Meanwhile, American taxpayers subsidize the operation through Singham’s tax deductions. These same organizations mobilize protesters within hours of U.S. military operations, coordinate messaging with Chinese state media, and build infrastructure for anti-American activism that congressional investigators warn poses national security risks.
Representative Jason Smith put it bluntly in his September 2025 letter: “Tax-exempt status is a privilege, not a right.” Congress has documented the case and referred it to the appropriate enforcement agencies. The IRS has authority to revoke tax-exempt status. The Department of Justice can prosecute FARA violations. Whether those agencies act on the extensive evidence congressional investigators have compiled will determine whether Singham’s network continues operating with American taxpayer subsidies.
Neville Roy Singham sold his company for $785 million, moved to Shanghai, and built an empire. Congressional investigators have answered one question: where the money comes from and where it goes. The remaining question is whether the Executive Branch will enforce existing law. ✪
▶️ IS AMERICA STILL A COUNTRY FOR AMERICANS?
IS AMERICA STILL A COUNTRY FOR AMERICANS?
ddd
itizenship is not a technicality. It is not a loophole. It is not a prize slipped across a hospital bassinet because geography happened to cooperate. Citizenship is the highest legal bond between an individual and a sovereign nation.
If that bond means anything, it must mean allegiance. That is the principle at the center of President Donald J. Trump’s Executive Order 14160, signed on Jan. 20, 2025, titled Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.
The order directs federal agencies not to recognize automatic citizenship for certain children born in the United States after Feb. 19, 2025. When the mother was unlawfully present, or present only temporarily, and the father was neither a citizen nor a lawful permanent resident, the child becomes ineligible for citizenship.
Its rationale is straightforward. The Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to those born in the U.S. and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” That final clause is not ornamental language. It is a constitutional requirement.
Opponents moved quickly. Lawsuits were filed almost immediately. Federal district courts issued preliminary injunctions, including a nationwide block from a Maryland judge on February 5th, halting enforcement before the policy could take effect. For a time, it appeared that the familiar pattern would repeat itself, executive action frozen by sweeping lower court orders.
Then the Supreme Court intervened in a critical procedural dispute. On June 27, in Trump v. CASA, the Court ruled 6 to 3 to limit the use of universal injunctions by lower courts, finding no broad historical basis for them in most cases. The justices did not resolve the merits of the birthright citizenship order, but they did something profoundly important. They reaffirmed that nationwide policy questions belong before the Supreme Court itself, not in the hands of a single district judge.
That set the stage for the main event. On Dec. 5, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Trump v. Barbara, agreeing to hear the constitutional challenge to Executive Order 14160 during its ongoing term, with oral arguments scheduled for April 1, 2026.
The Court deserves enormous credit for taking the case. The country cannot function indefinitely on assumptions about citizenship that were never fully tested against the constitutional text.
The most powerful defense of the order appears in an amicus brief filed Jan. 27, 2026, in support of the petitioners in Supreme Court case No. 25-365. That brief does not rely on rhetoric. It relies on history, statutory development, Supreme Court precedent, and the framers’ own explanations.
Its core argument is simple, yet powerful. The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has always meant complete political allegiance, not mere physical presence. English common law shaped that understanding. In Calvin’s Case in 1608, Lord Coke explained that subject status depended on ligeantia, meaning allegiance and obedience to the sovereign, not simply being born within territorial boundaries. Allegiance was reciprocal. Protection flowed from loyalty. That concept carried into American law.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 declared citizens to be those born in the U.S. and not subject to any foreign power. Senator Jacob Howard later explained that the Fourteenth Amendment’s jurisdiction language would exclude foreigners, aliens, and the families of ambassadors. Senator Lyman Trumbull defined jurisdiction as complete jurisdiction, meaning not owing allegiance to anybody else.
These statements were not casual observations. They were explanations of what the Amendment was designed to accomplish.
The post ratification record reinforces the same principle. In the Slaughter House Cases in 1872, the Supreme Court observed that the jurisdiction clause excludes children of ministers and citizens of foreign states born within the U.S. In Elk v. Wilkins in 1884, the Court held that birth within the U.S. was not enough where complete allegiance was lacking. Citizenship required full political subjection, not partial or divided loyalty.
Opponents point to United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898. However, that case involved parents who were lawful permanent residents domiciled in the U.S. with the government’s consent. The Court emphasized lawful residence and the sovereign’s permission. It did not address children born to parents present in violation of federal law. Extending Wong Kim Ark to that context assumes what must be proven.
Modern courts have read Wong Kim Ark carefully. In Tuaua v. United States, the D.C. Circuit stressed the importance of complete political jurisdiction and direct allegiance. The amicus brief argues that collapsing the distinction between lawful, consent-based presence and unlawful presence erases the constitutional requirement of allegiance.
The practical stakes are real. Jennifer Pak reported that official Chinese estimates placed annual birth tourism numbers in the U.S. at approximately 50,000. Salvatore Babones has estimated figures as high as 100,000 per year. Peter Schweizer has argued that over a decade the number of children born through such practices could range between 750,000 and 1.5 million. China Daily has openly advertised automatic citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment as an incentive for expectant mothers.
These numbers underscore a hard truth. If citizenship attaches automatically without regard to allegiance or lawful status, the incentive structure changes. The Constitution becomes a magnet rather than a covenant. The amicus brief contends that the Framers anticipated this danger and wrote the jurisdiction clause to prevent it.
Textual analysis strengthens that case.
The Fourteenth Amendment speaks of being “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” not merely “within the jurisdiction.” That distinction appears elsewhere in the amendment. The difference in phrasing suggests a difference in scope. Total political allegiance is not the same as temporary subjection to local laws.
The brief synthesizes English common law, the drafting history of 1866, early Supreme Court decisions, and modern precedent. It concludes that children born to those who remain under the political allegiance of another sovereign and who entered or stayed unlawfully are not fully subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. in the constitutional sense.
That conclusion is not radical. It is anchored in text and history. It respects Congress’s role in naturalization. It restores meaning to words too long treated as surplus.
If the Supreme Court upholds Executive Order 14160, thereby clarifying the Fourteenth Amendment, the decision will resonate far beyond immigration policy. It will affirm that citizenship is defined by constitutional principle, not by gaming the system. It will elevate the value of American citizenship by tying it unmistakably to allegiance and consent. It will limit the ability of foreign interests and unlawful entrants to manufacture status through geography alone.
Most importantly, it will return control over America herself to the proper American people and their Constitution. In an era when sovereignty is often treated as an inconvenience, such a ruling would declare that the bond of citizenship still matters, still carries weight, and still demands loyalty. That is not exclusion. That is self-government.
If citizenship can be claimed without allegiance, then sovereignty becomes a suggestion and the Constitution a relic. This case forces a choice between sentiment and structure, between drift and definition. The amicus brief proves that the Fourteenth Amendment demands loyalty, not opportunism.
Should the Court affirm that truth, it will not merely decide a policy dispute. It will decide whether U.S. citizenship is sacredly reserved for Americans themselves, or formalized as a valuable commodity for alien birth tourists. ✪
▶️ YES, WE VOTED FOR THIS
YES, WE VOTED FOR THIS
jjj
o, you voted for Donald Trump and were outraged by the annihilation of the terror regime in Iran? 1) you may not be very bright, like MTG , or 2) you may live in a fantasy world like Tucker and believe the Ayatollah was good and his enemies, like Israel, are bad. Or perhaps, 3) you just were not paying attention to what Donald Trump said and did during his first term in office.
Remember how he campaigned in 2016 against “nation building, boots on the ground,” and “forever wars?” Yet he also made it clear he would utterly destroy ISIS and other terror groups that threaten the world. And of course he did it, killing off the budding caliphate and its leaders in Syria and Iraq; using a combination of the Iraqi army, Kurdish militia, and American firepower. Over and done with.
President Trump now wants to do the same thing with Iran; to wipe out the most evil regime on the planet. The regime that’s been killing Americans since the 1980s, which has supported Al-Qaeda since the 1990s, (which by the way, also puts them squarely on the 9/11 AUMF list of belligerents) supplied the constant Hezb’allah and Hamas missile attacks on Israel, and then the Houthi missile attacks on the U.S. Navy. And, of course, has been working for years to assassinate President Trump himself.
But he broke his promise of no “regime change,” MTG and Tucker protest!
Only, that’s not what he did nor how he would define the term. Unlike say, George W Bush and the people around him, he has very little confidence in what any outside power can do to alter the internal dynamics of a large nation or society. he understands trying to just install a new set of rulers won’t work.
Instead, President Trump seeks to remove the worst leadership elements from a country and allow the better, or at least the “not as bad” ones, to emerge organically. That’s what he has done in Venezuela and what he wants to do in Iran.
Since those countries are totally dependent on oil exports, the U.S. can simply take control of any tankers leaving their ports, as well as the sale of their oil. If the people in charge don’t cooperate with President Trump, no oil money. Checkmate.
In the weeks ahead, Israel and the U.S. will continue to destroy the Iranian regime’s military infrastructure. It may even be possible that armed groups like the Iranian Kurds, who fought with us against ISIS, are now able to grab control of large sections of the country. That would hasten the end of the old regime, allowing the people themselves to bring about true “regime change.”
With the old regime brazenly attacking the Gulf States, I would also look for the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and others to move up their timetables on sponsoring Iranian factions they think might emerge on top of a post-ayatollah struggle.
However, whatever happens, President Trump is going to emerge victorious. Just like other successful foreign policy Presidents, (Eisenhower, Reagan) he doesn’t accept the D.C. Establishment’s self-imposed restrictions on military strategy.
In the 1960s, JFK, LBJ, and Nixon progressively narrowed the field of action in Indochina as to where we might fight and what we might bomb to such an extent that defeat was all but certain. The Democrats and the fair weather MAGA crowd would like to see something similar today.
However, President Trump is playing a different game, and a lot of us, including 94 million Iranians, are glad he does. We voted for this. ✪
▶️ BLUE STATE FAILURES ARE DESTROYING FEDERALISM
BLUE STATE FAILURES ARE DESTROYING FEDERALISM
sss
personal note to Democrats: If you hate Donald Trump and really believe that he yearns to rule as an authoritarian, stop voting for dismal failures like Karen Bass and Gavin Newsom. They’re creating power vacuums with enormous zones of unchecked failure, and those vacuums are being filled.
The examples are everywhere, but start here: In Los Angeles, a long-running animal abuse crisis has been going unaddressed, and is getting steadily worse. An animal rescue activist named Joey Tuccio documents the problem as he tries to solve it, posting an endless flood of videos of caged and wounded dogs dying in homeless encampments.
Skid Row is a disaster, for both people and for animals, and I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Homeless drug addicts breed pit bulls in encampments as a street business, and do it about as carefully as you’d expect in a place called Skid Row. Tuccio finds dogs being bred with untreated broken bones, being tossed into the gutter to bleed to death, starving to death, and on and on. It’s a parade of horrors in a place of endless degradation.
▶️ 43 Seconds
One of Tuccio’s recurring themes is that he can’t get local officials to do anything. Los Angeles has animal control officers, and they sometimes drop in on Skid Row. Then they shrug and leave. The city, Tuccio argues, would rather not know about it.
However, someone has finally taken action. Last year, the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles announced the formation of an animal abuse task force: “Acting United States Attorney Bill Essayli today announced the creation of a federal animal abuse task force aimed at prosecuting violations of the federal Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture (PACT) Act signed into law by President Trump in 2019.”
That task force is now making arrests. This week, federal prosecutors charged a 53-year-old man in the suburban community of Hacienda Heights with many felonies after they allegedly caught him breeding pit bulls for dog fights. Federal agents serving a search warrant found “an emaciated pit bull that was bleeding and chained to a cable in the yard; a second pit bull with scars in a bloody caged area; five dog treadmills; a rope with a scale for weighing dogs; and a skin stapler and syringes.” The FBI’s Los Angeles office posted on social media about its role in the arrests.
This is great news, and it’s also completely insane. It means that someone is finally bothering to address an obvious, serious, and long-neglected problem. But it also means that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is searching for “dog treadmills,” doing the role of local animal control officers, because blue states do everything poorly. A problem that cries out for simple local action is being done by the central government. Washington, D.C., is in charge of making sure that dogs in Los Angeles aren’t mistreated.
The American constitutional order assigns limited power to the Federal Government, assigning it — in the now mostly discarded theory — to military, diplomatic, and interstate matters. States are supposed to have independent sovereignty, entirely performing their own internal regulation. And now the FBI is driving around Los Angeles, looking for evidence that people are hurting dogs in their backyard. The retreat of state and local government from basic state and local governance in favor of endless symbol-performance about trans rights and Orange Man Bad lawsuits …
… has created a demand for responsible authority that, in practice, centralizes power. Federal authority is growing into spaces abandoned by the people who are supposed to be doing neglected work.
The FBI also recently spent a bunch of its time searching the offices of the Los Angeles Unified School District, apparently looking for evidence of corruption, as a useless school board fails to keep its house in order. And Federal agents have swarmed into Minneapolis to hunt for fraud in government-funded daycare and medical transportation programs.
A bunch of problems that should be finding easy solutions at the state and local level are slipping toward federal intervention because they aren’t being addressed at the state and local level. MacArthur Park in Los Angeles has been a completely out-in-the-open drug market for years, by the way, with gang activity and constant overdoses, some fatal, near playgrounds for children. Once again, you’ll never guess who just made a bunch of arrests there.
Animals shouldn’t be abused in Los Angeles, and the FBI very much shouldn’t be the agency that prevents it. But here we are. The blue model of government is that state and local officials give you free money and celebrate you as you trans your kids, but they’re not at all tuned in to problems like keeping the city from burning or paving the streets. They’re too busy virtue-signaling and distributing cash to their client groups. The vacuum of blue state failure is a political disaster, and it’s rapidly getting worse.
This is an invitation to centralized power, and mere competence and stewardship would withdraw that invitation. Blue states and cities that don’t get their own houses in order lead us down an unfortunate and extremely obvious path. Federalism requires state and local government to work. ✪
▶️ POTENTIAL IRANIAN TERRORISTS ARE ALREADY ON US SOIL
POTENTIAL IRANIAN TERRORISTS ARE ALREADY ON US SOIL
mmm
S counterterrorism agencies are on high alert for potential retaliation after the American Government joined Israel in launching a coordinated operation named Epic Fury against Iran over last weekend. It’s no secret that Iranian terrorists are here in the U.S. Democrats’ open border policies made their infiltration much easier.
Already, at least three Americans have died and more than a dozen were injured after a 53-year-old gunman, reportedly clothed in an Iranian flag T-shirt and “Property of Allah” sweatshirt, opened fire at an Austin bar the day after the strikes commenced. While it’s unclear if this act of terrorism is linked to a larger revenge campaign led by Iran or only a lone wolf sympathizer attack, the consensus is that there is now a heightened threat of Islamic violence against Americans on their own soil.
It’s no secret that Iranian terrorists are here in the U.S. and have been for nearly 50 years. For decades now, Iran worked to embed its Hezbollah operatives in America and nearby Latin American countries such as Nicaragua. These sleeper cells, often operated by a covert wing of Hezbollah dubbed “Unit 910,” are designed to coordinate and carry out “assassinations and attacks” when activated.
Iranian intelligence services have also demonstrated a recent presence in the U.S. Several of the country’s foreign intelligence operatives were indicted in New York in 2021 for allegedly plotting to kidnap a “U.S. journalist and human rights activist.”
Fears Islamic radicals were solidifying their hold in the hometowns of Americans only increased when Democrats and the Biden Administration opened the floodgates for millions of foreigners, including Iranians, to illegally enter and stay in the U.S. This drastic lapse in national security came just one year after Iran vowed revenge against President Donald Trump and Americans for the January 2020 assassination of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani.
Between the 2021 and 2024 fiscal years, U.S. Customs and Border Protection apprehended 1,504 Iranian nationals. Nearly half of them, 729, were ultimately released into the U.S. Tens of thousands of suspected terrorists also took advantage of the Democrats’ catch-and-release regime to wheedle their way into the states.
Some Iranians could have slipped into the U.S. as some of the estimated 1.7 million gotaways who evaded Border Patrol after finding their way through the southern border, many of whom took flights to countries south of the border and then traveled north. Others were smuggled across the U.S.-Canada border with “fraudulent or altered passports.” Though under Biden, they didn’t really have to sneak around.
Despite originating from one of the 24 nations designated as “national security concern[s]” due to Islamic terrorism affiliations, Iranians were affirmatively authorized entry to America as “special interest aliens” (SIAs) under the Biden Administration’s CBP One app expansions.
There is little evidence that those who entered and stayed in the states as SIAs underwent the “rigorous security vetting”promised by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Records obtained by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation, for example, showed Biden’s Department of Homeland Security approved entry for 99.7 percent of the foreigners who applied for it through CBP One between January and September 2023.
CIS’s then-Senior National Security Fellow Todd Bensman wrote in 2023:
“Because these approved entrances have remained unknown to the American public, the Biden administration has not been questioned about whether it conducted enhanced security screening for these migrants (as was the practice with those caught crossing illegally) before affirming them for parole through ports.”
Despite the threats posed by the record-breaking influx of illegal border crossings under Biden, Democrats are scheming to stall DHS funding unless Republicans agree to kneecap Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol’s ability to arrest and deport illegal aliens. ✪
▶️ VDH: TRUMP SENDING A MESSAGE TO IRAN, CHINA & BEYOND
VDH: TRUMP SENDING A MESSAGE TO IRAN, CHINA & BEYOND
ooo
e’ve seen President Donald Trump’s punitive & preemptive actions, in his first term and now in his second as well. And there’s a general pattern here, a Trump way of war, we could call it.
One thing that’s central to all of his action is they’re geostrategic. Pressuring the Panamanians to divorce themselves from China. Making sure the Venezuelan oil does not go to Russia or China by changing the government and kidnapping, capturing, Nicolas Maduro.
Things like that suggest the current Iranian operation has targeted China, but it’s a major supplier of Chinese oil. China’s one of the biggest, if not the biggest, supplier of consumer goods, material goods to Iran. It supplies weaponry to Iran, and Iran has become a client more of China now than Russia. And it may be lost to China as Venezuela was, and maybe Panama was.
You’re starting to see a pattern. These are wars of reckoning. People say, “Well, why are we attacking Iran?” and Trump’s way of reasoning, he’s settling up old scores. Panama was getting away with murder through a previous administration, maybe including his own, by stationing or allowing the Chinese to have strategic locations on the Panama Canal.
It was time to say, “No more.” Maduro was getting away with literally murder. Sending drugs, working with the cartels into the United States, sending hardened criminals into the United States as well, illegal aliens. And it was time to say, “You’re not going to cause a Castroite Latin American Communist Revolution. We’re going to stop it.”
And it was past time in Trump’s way of thinking. All of these wars are in that way. Same thing with Iran. They have killed more Americans, as we all have been told, than any other terrorist clique or operation. Going back even before the Iran-Iraq war, before our incursions in the Gulf War.
At the very beginning that government was birthed on the idea of taking American hostages and then subsequently blowing up our embassy, blowing up Marine barracks, involvement in Khobar Towers, using proxies like Hezbollah to hijack planes, assassinate Americans.
It was time, in other words, to even up the score. These take place during negotiations. Notice that Trump was negotiating with Iranians during the summer hit on their nuclear facilities. He was negotiating with them in this current war. He was negotiating with the Venezuelans, and that is his characteristic.
He’s saying to these different entities, “I want a peaceful solution.” And even if he didn’t want a peaceful solution, the idea that he is negotiating lessens the criticism that they are preemptive, or preventative, optional wars. In other words, he can say, “Well, I wanted to make peace, but the negotiations broke down.”
Notice their top-down attacks. They go after Qasem Soleimani in the first term, or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, or they go after Maduro or they go after Ali Khamenei. The idea is, everybody in the world should be on notice. That the people themselves are not culpable. They are Shanghai-coerced by these terrible leaders. And I, Donald Trump, will get rid of the leaders and start with the top rather than the bottom or the people.
And that’s a very successful strategy. Of course, there’s no nation-building. Donald Trump ran against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The MAGA base says, “We don’t want forever—optional—wars, especially in the Middle East.” So, there is no pretense that there’s going to be a gender studies program on Iran, or there’s going to be George Floyd murals, or there’s going to be a Pride flag over the U.S. Embassy in Iran.
There’s no cultural imperialism. No desire to say we were going to make democracies all over the Middle East. We’re not going to do that, and therefore, we’re not going to have boots on the ground. We’re not going to have ground troops unless emergencies.
There’s a weird exit strategy too that Donald Trump has in all of these. He determines when the war starts and when it ends. I don’t know if he’s going to be successful in all these cases, but he takes out the Iranian nuclear facilities, and everybody says we’re going to be in an endless tit-for-tat struggle now in the summer of 2025.
And what happens? He allows Iran a performative art hit on an American base in Qatar, and then he says, I want to make Iran great again. And that’s the end of it. After the death of Soleimani, the same thing.
Already, prematurely, perhaps, he’s already talking about negotiations with Iran. And what that does is it sort of dampens the criticism of him. Just as he went to war in the midst of negotiations, he doesn’t say, “Well, negotiations will not work.” Maybe they will. And we can end this, but the war will start and end when he sees as favorable terms to the United States.
An eighth aspect of the Trump way of war: There’s no effort to go to the United Nations. No United Nations, no International Criminal Court, no EU consultation. NATO, we consult with them in matters European, but nobody talked about NATO.
The idea is that there’s very little trust that these platforms that are multilateral have the wherewithal or the ability or the desire to take prompt, decisive action. And they will only clog up the process if you consult them, and you hinge your decision making on a foreign entity.
Nine, there are showcases for U.S. arms. Have you noticed that? Everybody’s talking about the greatest, biggest, strongest warship in the history of civilization, the Gerald R. Ford. New Ford-class carrier, 105,000 tons of displacement, $13 billion, maybe 4,500-manned warship. Very impressive. We’re talking about our new kamikaze, one-way drones that we haven’t seen before.
You’ve seen the maps that the Pentagon has released that have been replicated by the news outlets. They show Iran in the middle. And then there’s American assets all the way in the Indian Ocean. They’re in the Red Sea, they’re in the Mediterranean Sea, they’re in the Gulf of Oman, they’re in the Straits of Hormuz, they’re in the Persian Gulf. And they’re all focused, fixated on Iran.
It’s surrounded. And they want that to be known that only the United States has this type of weaponry and this reach and these resources.
And finally, there’s no, I don’t know how to put it, but he’s not hiding U.S. self-interest. Of course, he talks about it’ll be much better for the greater Middle East, but we wouldn’t have gone to war if it hadn’t been for U.S. interest.
And what is U.S. interest? We’re sick and tired of the Iranians attacking our allies, but more importantly, as the biggest killer of Americans. We don’t want them to hijack planes anymore. We don’t want them to stage assassination attempts in New York or in Washington against either dissidents or foreign entities like the Saudi ambassador.
We don’t like them to capture hostages and torture them. We don’t like them sending lethal arms to kill Americans as they did during the Iraq war. We don’t want them to kidnap people in foreign countries or in Iran and hold them as hostages. We’re just sick of it. And it’s in our interest, in Trump’s way of war, to end it.
Will all of this work? I don’t know. It’s very hard to say, “I’m going to decide when a war starts, and I’m going to decide when a war ends, and we’re not going to have ground troops, and we’re going to go across the world and settle scores.”
And yet, as we’ve seen before, the Trump way of war worked to get Soleimani, the Gen. Qasem Soleimani, the architect of the Iranian terror state. Mr. Al-Baghdadi, who was taken out and ISIS was bombed, proverbially, into rubble. A clear end. A clear beginning, a clear end.
The Wagner Group. What were we going to do with them. This was a Russian entity. We killed more of them than any moment in the Cold War. I think 200 Russians were killed by Americans, and it followed the same script that I just outlined.
We saw the same script during the first Iranian incursion in summer, and now we’re seeing it again. It’s a very strange idea. War doesn’t change because human nature is immutable.
So we know the rules of war, but the actual practice of it, that is not the struggle between humans and political entities to use the force of arms to persuade someone of your own political, cultural, religious material agenda. That’s immutable.
However, how do you do it? What are the tactics? What is the strategy? What is the weaponry? Have change, and no one has changed them more than Donald Trump. ✪
▶️ EUROPE & THE UK BETRAY AMERICA IN OPERATION EPIC FURY
EUROPE & THE UK BETRAY AMERICA IN OPERATION EPIC FURY
lll
oes being an European “ally” of America even mean anything anymore? That’s a valid question after several NATO nations not only initially denied the use of their military bases during Operation Epic Fury, the ongoing offensive against Iran, but also offered tacit support for the Islamic regime.
Perhaps the most public betrayal came from Spain, whose left-wing prime minister claimed the United States was violating “international law.”
Given Spain’s history over the last century or so, it wasn’t exactly surprising that they’d take the side of Islamic fascists over the country that pays for their defense. The Western European country once again fell woefully short of its NATO spending requirements in 2025 while continuing to expand its welfare state, a dynamic that has been allowed to exist for far too long.
You’d expect better from the United Kingdom, though. Well, at least up until fairly recently. After all, the Brits are supposedly America’s closest, most reliable ally. Yet, in a stunning move, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer denied the use of his country’s military bases for logistical support. Further, he refused to mobilize any forces for defensive operations in the weeks before Iran’s missile and drone barrages began.
That proved disastrous, with several Gulf allies lambasting Starmer for hanging them out to dry, even as hundreds of thousands of British nationals were coming under attack.
This time the NSC agreed that the basing request be granted. Downing Street’s official line is that the situation changed when Iran began firing missiles at hotels and other civilian sites in Dubai and Bahrain. An attack on the Bahraini capital Manama narrowly missed killing British military personnel stationed there. But it is also the case that Starmer and his ministers were shocked by the undiluted fury of their Middle East allies that more had not been done to protect them. Jordan was “fucking furious,” a former minister with friends in Amman says. “The Emiratis, Kuwaitis, and even the Canadians are all asking, ‘What the fuck are you doing? Whose side are you on?’” The Emiratis pointed out that Britain was failing to help protect the 240,000 British citizens living in Dubai and Abu Dhabi.
As the above excerpt notes, the British NSC did eventually reverse its decision, though it all appears to be too little, too late. Iran’s missile and drone launches have already been reduced to a trickle by American and Israeli airpower. It’s what happened before that, though, that is truly disturbing.
According to newly revealed details about the British NSC’s deliberations, the initial requests for base usage and the deployment of defensive assets (two destroyers, in this case) were denied for political reasons. Even when Starmer finally got in line, his fellow Labour members were more concerned with spiting Trump than stopping Iranian ballistic missiles.
Starmer was supported by John Healey, the Defense Secretary, but “Reeves and Miliband made it quite difficult for the Prime Minister.” The discussion came down to the legality and whether “a positive relationship with the United States of America was a good thing right now for the party. And many people concluded that it was not.” When asked what role the Labour defeat in the Gorton and Denton by-election played, because the Green party mobilized Muslim voters, a close aide of Starmer says: “Zero.”
However, security sources are clear that Miliband, in particular, took a “petulant, pacifist, legalistic and very political” approach, questioning why the UK should support the US. “He fundamentally doesn’t like Trump, and he doesn’t like this Iran thing,” one says. As Labour leader in 2013, Miliband thwarted attempts by David Cameron to bomb Syria after the Assad regime used chemical weapons; many in Westminster regard this as a shameful episode. “He probably thinks it was a success,” the source adds.
At the center of the UK’s obsession with “international law” over protecting its own people and helping its long-time allies is Richard Hermer, the country’s far-left attorney general.
Ministers, officials and military officers all regard Hermer as an impediment to Britain’s national security – both because of his doctrinaire approach to international law and because he reinforces Starmer’s legalistic instincts. “Bring back Suella!” says a member of the National Security Secretariat – a reference to the former attorney general Suella Braverman, who asserted parliamentary sovereignty over international treaties.
“Every senior minister receives legal advice,” says the former defense secretary Ben Wallace. “It is advice, it is not direction. However, under this government, Lord Hermer has become the power in the land where his advice becomes the rule.” A former mandarin adds: “There’s a lot of frustration in the professional national security gang because they feel that Hermer is essentially running the entire policy.”
I’m going to be frank. The United States can not have a “closest ally” that can’t even be counted on to provide defensive support from ballistic missiles because they are too busy arguing over the finer points of something as irrelevant as “international law.” At no point did the Trump Administration ask Starmer to participate in the offensive attacks on Iran. All that was requested was help in suppressing the Islamic regime’s attacks on civilians. That the UK didn’t immediately oblige and instead spent days playing politics, even as the missiles fell, is a damning indictment of a once special relationship.
Never mind that the Brits have allowed their once world-leading navy to waste away into a mostly dry-docked, ineffectual fleet. To the extent that they could evenlaunch defensive assets, such as destroyers with anti-ballistic missile systems, that ability remains severely restricted.
This isn’t complicated, in my view. If you’re a NATO nation that suckles at the teat of the American taxpayer for your defense needs while you blow all your money on social programs, there should be an expectation that you do the bare minimum when we ask for assistance. If that’s not going to happen, then it’s time to start reassessing some of these alliances. ✪
▶️ ◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️ ✪✪✪ DONATE ✪✪✪ ◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️
▶️ DONATE VIA PAYPAL (DEBIT & CREDIT CARD)
ALL PayPal Transactions Are Encrypted For Card Holder Privacy & Security
▶️ DONATE VIA ZELLE (DIRECT BANK CASH TRANSFER)
ZELLE is the perfect online alternative to PayPal. It’s an incredibly simple, secure, easy, fast and FREE way to send or receive money to recipients directly from your online banking account without a middleman. Best of all, there are NO fees.
ZELLE is a service provided by your bank and is already built in to your online banking account. You only need to activate it first before using. If you’ve already activated ZELLE in your online bank or credit union account, you can donate to The New Americanist by using our ZELLE address:
vip@thenewamericanist.com
To activate your ZELLE, follow these easy instructions (a simple two minute process):
▶️ DONATE VIA SNAIL MAIL
▶️ CLICK HERE TO VIEW
▶️ 1 Hour 46 Minutes 54 Seconds
▶️ 42 Minutes 15 Seconds
▶️ 8 Minutes 6 Seconds
▶️ 6 Minutes
▶️ 8 Minutes 56 Seconds
▶️ 14 Minutes 14 Seconds
▶️ 14 Minutes 7 Seconds
▶️ 2 Hours 23 Minutes 6 Seconds
▶️ 11 Minutes28 Seconds
▶️ 11 Minutes 50 Seconds
▶️ 9 Minutes 4 Seconds
▶️ 12 Minutes 59 Seconds
▶️ 8 Minutes 3 Seconds
▶️ 47 Minutes 45 Seconds
▶️ 18 Minutes 41 Seconds
▶️ 19 Minutes 27 Seconds
⭐️ 19 Minutes 33 Seconds
▶️ 50 Minutes 4 Seconds
▶️ 15 Minutes 23 Seconds
▶️ 15 Minutes49 Seconds
▶️ 11 Minutes 45 Seconds
▶️ 14 Minutes 26 Seconds
▶️ 18 Minutes 37 Seconds
▶️ 16 Minutes 40 Seconds
▶️ 6 Minutes 39 Seconds
▶️ 8 Minutes 18 Seconds
▶️ 27 Minutes 30 Seconds
