Are the Pro-Palestine Protesters Winning?

Are the Pro-Palestine Protesters Winning?

While conservatives revel in schadenfreude, the Biden administration’s Israel policies inch towards that of the campus radicals.

For President Joe Biden and his administration, the conflict in Gaza is already a two-front war. 

The first front is in Gaza itself: Israel seems intent on escalating its war against Hamas in Gaza by invading Rafah. The consternation caused by Israel’s moves against Rafah has sparked further concerns that a northern front against Hezbollah in Lebanon could open up in full. But that’s not the second front that is causing concern in the Biden administration. That would be the domestic front: Pro-Palestine encampments on college campuses and protest votes in crucial primaries are causing the Biden administration to reconsider its Gaza war strategy.

Protests and encampments at major universities throughout the country have dominated headlines and social-media discourse in recent weeks. At the start, right-of-center outlets have covered these campus movements with mockery and scorn. It’s mostly deserved: Man-on-the-street interviews with college students camping out on university quads prove they haven’t got a clue what the conflict is about or what’s really going on; Columbia students took over a university hall only to ask for the university to provide them with food and water; social media videos boast about the “beautiful” graffiti defacing great architecture.

The same outlets salivated when the police started giving the students their comeuppance and ravenously cheered for more. So-called “frat boys” became heroes when they protected the American flag and showed up to mock the protesters. Click-driven media laughed all the way to the bank.

But are the protesters winning? Since the war broke out, this magazine has suggested that the Biden administration’s approach to the Gaza war is not foreign policy statecraft, but rather an extension of domestic, intra-left dynamics. Things in the Biden administration seem to be turning the students’ way.

The Biden administration has placed holds on shipments of U.S. weapons to Israel, marking the first time since October 7, 2023 that the U.S. has stalled military shipments to Israel. The shipments include two kinds of Boeing-made precision bombs: Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) and Small Diameter Bombs. By holding off on the sales, the Biden administration is reiterating its opposition to further Israeli offensives against Rafah.

As it stands now, the Biden administration has stopped short of preventing the sale outright. Nevertheless, the Biden administration’s current trajectory suggests that a cessation of future military aid or arms sales could be in jeopardy.

On Friday, news broke that Biden’s State Department has prepared a report for Congress that is highly critical of Israel’s tactics in the Gaza war. The report, according to Axios, is the product of a months-long process at the State Department to meet obligations set forth in a presidential memorandum Biden issued in February. The contents of the communique has reportedly brought forth some of the most contentious debates that Secretary of State Antony Blinken has encountered in his tenure leading the department. Department offices such as the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor as well as USAID reportedly argued that Israel was in violation of its agreement with the U.S. and Biden administration national security directives. Meanwhile, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Jack Lew and U.S. Gaza humanitarian envoy David Satterfield have been telling Blinken that Israel is holding up its end of the bargain by not violating international law. The same divides that have been playing out in the Democratic party across the country also exist within the executive branch.

If the State Department report concluded that Israel violated international humanitarian law or prevented the dispensation of U.S.-backed humanitarian aid, then U.S. statutes could lead to the suspension of further aid to Israel. Despite a report from Amnesty International that claimed Israel used U.S. weapons against Palestinian civilians, however, the State Department dispatch, though highly critical of Israel, is expected not to go so far as to suggest Israel is using U.S. weapons in an improper manner.

Nevertheless, Biden has quickly gone from one of Israel’s most vocal supporters to a harsh critic. Is Biden suddenly hip and with the kids, or is the tail wagging the dog?

The post Are the Pro-Palestine Protesters Winning? appeared first on The American Conservative.

What’s the Matter With Germany?

What’s the Matter With Germany?

Are we experiencing the last days of Germany’s rule by the transatlanticist center?

A scandal has shaken Germany and threatens to split apart the ruling coalition of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats (SPD), the Green Party, and the free-market liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP).

The crisis had its roots in the government’s decision in the spring of 2023 to proceed with the shut down of Germany’s last remaining nuclear power plants—amid a historic energy crisis in the former industrial powerhouse of Europe, which is now experiencing deindustrialization at breakneck speed.

The ostensible reason was that the shutdown had long been planned and mandated by law. The Minister of the Economy and Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck of the Greens claimed that the shutdown was irreversible because experts had told him that on short notice an extension of the plants’ lifespan was impossible. But that was a lie. Investigative reporting by the German news magazine Cicero revealed in April that experts from the Ministry of the Economy had concluded that the nuclear plants could continue to operate for several additional years without a problem.

The revelations were a public relations nightmare for the already massively unpopular “traffic light” coalition, named after the official colors of the three parties. The SPD was long a party of industrial workers, who are now turning their backs on it in droves. As a result, the SPD is polling at paltry levels not seen since the days when it emerged from illegality under the reign of Otto von Bismarck. And the FDP may become entirely irrelevant and fail to reach the 5 percent of votes needed to win seats in the national parliament—all because of policies largely pushed by the Greens.

But, so far, the eco-party continues to perform comparatively well in the polls. The Greens may, in fact, remain in power even if the SPD and FDP go down in defeat in the next elections. It is likely that the Greens will simply swap coalition partners and join with the Christian Democrats (CDU), a party that for decades slammed the Greens as leftist radicals and with whom collaboration was seemingly out of the question. But now it is only a question of when, not if, the CDU and Greens will cooperate on the national level. It’s a natural match.

The Greens emerged out of a combination of the environmentalist and peace movements of the 1970s. After their official founding in 1980, their members were often found leading radical protests, for example, against the stationing of American Pershing II missiles in Western Europe or the expansion of nuclear power.

In those days, the Greens were split between two camps: the so-called “fundamentalists” and the “realists,” the latter of whom sought to reorient the party toward a more pragmatic course that would make it an acceptable coalition partner in Germany’s parliamentary system. Power beckoned.

The realists won, and, in 1998, after the party first joined ruling coalitions on various state levels, the Greens at last reached their long-term goal—national power, as the junior partner in the SPD-Green coalition of Chancellor Gerhard Schröder.

Immediately, the Greens were faced by a crisis that threatened to rip them apart. The Schröder administration joined in the NATO attacks against Yugoslavia in 1999, Germany’s first active participation in a war since the reign of Adolf Hitler. This was no easy sell for an officially pacifist party like the Greens who saw their party conventions erupt in mutual recriminations, culminating in an attack on the then Foreign Minister and Vice Chancellor Joschka Fischer whose eardrum burst after an activist threw a bag of red paint at him.

Fischer was the party’s chief realist and defended German participation in the NATO campaign on the grounds that another Holocaust was imminent in the Balkans unless the alliance bombed the government of Slobodan Milošević into submission. Fischer perfectly embodied the spirit of western triumphalism: In the 1990s, the foreign policy of many western states was reoriented from the defense posture imposed on them by the realities of the Cold War toward an offensive interventionism that claimed to defend progressive values and human rights. Germany’s current Foreign Minister, the Green Party member Annalena Baerbock, announced in a speech in 2022 that she was pursuing a “feminist foreign policy,” “an approach,” she said, “which permeates our entire foreign and security policy.”

This is why the Greens’ base did end up staying loyal to them and, in fact, grew precipitously in the last decade to make the former fringe party one of Germany’s largest. Like the Democrats in America, the Greens have become the party of the academic middle-class, centered especially in big cities. The values of this class are decidedly cosmopolitan and post-materialist: concerns about record electricity prices leave its members unfazed. In fact, they’ll gladly pay a premium on their bills if it means feeding more renewables like wind and solar into the grid.

This also explains why the Greens only ever stayed true to one principle, after they had gladly shed their anti-militaristic image: an opposition to nuclear power, which had to be pushed through come what may. Its representatives seem noticeably unconcerned about the impending loss of the country’s energy-intensive industries.

On foreign policy, the Greens have become even more hawkish than in the days of Joschka Fischer, who at least vocally opposed the invasion of Iraq under George W. Bush. At the time, Germany stood on the side of France and Russia, but Fischer’s successor Baerbock today believes that “we are fighting a war against Russia.” As the Green Party candidate for chancellor in the 2021 federal election, Baerbock still ran on the slogan “No weapons and armaments into war zones.”

The Greens’ about-face from its former pacifist days is thus complete. Recently, Sergej Sumlenny, the former head of the Ukrainian bureau of the Green Party-aligned Heinrich Böll Foundation, tweeted his approval of the neo-Nazi “Right Sector” and its role in the 2014 Maidan protests. Without such shock troops, he argues, the current pro-western protests in the caucasus republic of Georgia are doomed to fail “like Belarusian protests in 2020.”

The reference to the failed color revolution in Belarus is ominous. After all, there, western powers pursued a similar strategy as they do now in Georgia, building up public discontent against their governments through direct financial aid to pro-western NGOs. At the time, the former chairman of the Böll Foundation, the Green Party politician Ralf Fücks, complained that the European Union wasn’t putting enough pressure on the Lukashenko government to call a snap election that was meant to see him swept away by a wave of pro-western sentiment. The plan was to sever Belarus’s ties to Russia and integrate it into the EU.

The Greens hope for a similar fate for Ukraine and are far more radical in their support for the Zelensky regime than even their coalition partner of Chancellor Scholz’s Social Democrats. When in March of this year a recording of a conversation between German generals was leaked, in which the officers were discussing ways to destroy the Crimean Bridge using German-built Taurus cruise missiles, Scholz categorically rejected the plot. His fellow party member and leader of the SPD’s parliamentary group Rolf Mützenich soon afterward demanded in a widely noted speech that there should be considerations of “freezing and later also ending the war.”

The statements by Scholz and Mützenich appeared like a major pivot by the governing SPD and the party momentarily experienced a minor boost in the polls.

But the Greens were furious. Anton Hofreiter, a prominent member of the Greens whose long unkempt hair still recalls the party’s hippie origins, denounced Mützenich’s call for peace as an invitation of further aggression by Russia. In fact, while a clear majority of Germans opposed Taurus deliveries to Ukraine, the Greens were the only party whose supporters favored sending the missiles by a majority, according to polls.

The crisis of the traffic light coalition came to a head when the Christian Democrats introduced a resolution in the parliament that called for the Taurus shipments. The resolution went down by a wide margin, with the Greens and the FDP voting to oppose it as well, but just so as not to antagonize the SPD and bring about the premature fall of the government. In a joint statement, however, thirteen Green Party members of parliament endorsed a strategy “to strengthen Ukraine in those capabilities that enable attacks on military targets such as ammunition depots, supply routes, and command posts far behind the front lines.”

This was the biggest step to date that the urbanite eco-party has taken toward the Christian Democrats, who have yearned for a return to power after Angela Merkel retired as chancellor in 2021.

Today, the CDU is led by Merkel’s long-time rival Friedrich Merz. At their recent convention, the party reelected the former board member of BlackRock Germany as its chair with 90% support. Merz nominally seeks to move the CDU to the right by pushing a tougher line on migration and wants to mandate what he calls a German Leitkultur (guiding culture) that all legal migrants should adapt to.

But what sounds like a return of the party to its conservative roots is counteracted by the fact that Merz has categorically excluded any collaboration with the populist right-wing party Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany, or AfD) against whom Merz has erected a so-called Brandmauer (fire wall). Neither do CDU leaders appear open to a coalition with another new conservative party project, the Werteunion (Values Union), a right-wing split from the CDU that is somewhat more moderate than the AfD. In any event, the Values Union doesn’t register much in the polls yet.

This leaves only parties to the CDU’s left as possible partners, and Merz has not excluded the Greens as a possible choice, even though he called the Greens the “main opponent” of the center-right just last year. But that may have been pure political calculus to score points against unpopular measures by the “traffic light” coalition. In February, Merz argued in a party-internal communiqué that a coalition with the Greens could not be excluded if the CDU wants to return to power. 

In Germany’s parliamentary system, a single party has almost never achieved a majority of seats on its own. Usually a combination of two or more parties form a ruling coalition. Often, their leaders go back on promises never to collaborate with their opponents, like in 2017 when the SPD’s candidate for chancellor Martin Schulz categorically excluded that the Social Democrats would form a coalition with the CDU only to give in a few days later and enter into one after all. Germans value stability above all and the polls backed up Schulz’s decision despite the fact that he flagrantly broke his word.

Informal contacts between the CDU and Greens have been fostered for decades and on the state level, the two parties have collaborated many times before. Merz also holds one of the Greens’ co-chairs, the Iranian-born Omid Nouripour, in high regard. Both are committed transatlanticists and both have served as board members of the influential think tank Atlantik-Brücke, which was founded in 1952 to help tie the West German Federal Republic to the United States during the Cold War.

The Atlantik-Brücke has been repeatedly criticized by mainstream journalists in Germany for circumventing the democratic process in shaping elite opinion on foreign policy because membership and participation in its conferences is granted by invitation only. Some historians believe that the think tank helped to reorient the foreign policy of the Social Democrats toward a pro-NATO stance in the 1960s.

Merz’s rightward move might therefore be mostly for show. Although he supports the return to nuclear power generation in Germany, it is doubtful whether he would sacrifice his ascendancy to the office of chancellor for that one reason alone. After all, by 2011, the Christian Democrats had fallen under the spell of anti-nuclear ideology too and were instrumental in pushing through Germany’s phase-out of the technology.

And Merz rules over a CDU that under Merkel moved dramatically to the left, both on migration and polarizing cultural issues like same-sex marriage. After Merkel had given her implicit blessing to it in 2017, a third of the CDU’s members of parliament voted for its legalization. Like with the Republicans in the US, no one can imagine that the CDU would move to abolish same-sex marriage after it has become an accomplished fact.

In fact, one of the conservatives’ most vocal opponents of a coalition with the Greens, Bavaria’s minister president and leader of the CDU’s sister party Christian Social Union, Markus Söder, prominently endorsed LGBT ideology of which the Greens are the biggest supporters in Germany. This happened in 2021 when the Hungarian soccer national team played a Euro Cup game in the Bavarian capital Munich. German players sought to protest Victor Orbán’s anti-LGBT legislation but were forbidden from doing so by the tournament’s organizers who wanted to keep the match unpolitical for the billions of people around the world who watch the sport. The prohibition awoke the righteous indignation of modern cosmopolitan Germans and Söder let himself be photographed in a rainbow-color N95 mask, tweeting his “clear commitment against exclusion and for freedom and tolerance.”

Klares Bekenntnis gegen Ausgrenzung und für Freiheit und Toleranz. Auch an der Staatskanzlei wird heute Abend eine Regenbogenfahne gehisst. Jetzt Daumen drücken für unsere Nationalmannschaft @DFB_Team. #regenbogen 🌈 #GERHUN #euro2020 pic.twitter.com/0WSdS8pntq

— Markus Söder (@Markus_Soeder) June 23, 2021

This is the face of modern German conservatism. No one really doubts that the CDU/CSU would unhesitatingly welcome the Greens into their arms if opportunity beckoned.

How this marriage between the Christian Democrats and the Greens might eventually unfold was plausibly described by the AfD politician Maximilian Krah in a recent podcast interview. Krah, who has previously spoken to The American Conservative, predicted that the CDU “will destroy itself”:

Starting in 2025 it will enter into a coalition with the Greens. Many, many people who are disappointed with the “traffic light” coalition will vote for the CDU in 2025. They will say: “The AfD, well, can you entrust them with the country? Still too young and maybe too radical. Let’s elect Merz. He looks so nicely like the Federal Republic of old.” And then Mr Merz will govern with the Greens. And the policies of the CDU and Greens will essentially be the same as that of the “traffic light” coalition. And then in 2029 we will experience that many people will say, “things will probably only work out with the AfD.”

Are we thus experiencing the last days of Germany’s rule by the transatlanticist center, the last gasp before an inevitable swing to the populist right?

The post What’s the Matter With Germany? appeared first on The American Conservative.

REPORT: Biden Campaign and Democrat Officials Preparing for Protesters and Chaos at Chicago Convention

The 2024 Democrat National Convention in Chicago may end up being a chaotic freak show. Dem officials and the Biden campaign know that they may end up dealing with mobs of angry leftist protesters and they’re already taking steps to deal with it.

What they really fear is a repeat of the 1968 convention, which was a disaster.

One approach they are considering is a hybrid convention that is partially virtual so that they can hide the ugliness from the TV audience.

Politico reports:

The DNC Is Preparing for the Worst in Chicago — Without the Help of the City’s Mayor

President Joe Biden’s top advisers are all too aware the ghosts of 1968 may haunt their convention here, but they’re grappling with a pair of more urgent and thoroughly modern-day challenges as summer nears: How far can they go in reprising their virtual 2020 convention to mitigate the threat of disruption inside the arena, and how will they navigate a rookie mayor who unabashedly sympathizes with protesters?

Trumpeting the success of their Covid-era convention four years ago, some in Biden’s orbit are aggressively pushing to make the 2024 conclave a hybrid production. That would mean in-person speeches from the president, party luminaries and rising stars to draw television attention alongside a mix of pre-recorded testimonials and videos from other parts of the country.

The goal: drive maximum viewership on television and the internet while minimizing live programming and openings for protest in Chicago’s United Center. This would mean moving party business, such as rules and platform votes, off the floor and denying would-be demonstrators a chance to seize on contentious debates.

Who had 1968 on their DNC bingo card this year?

The DNC Is Preparing for the Worst in Chicago — Without the Help of the City’s Mayor – POLITICO https://t.co/Kc1XDqvB1q

— CalRadioHost (@cal_host) May 10, 2024

The Democrats helped to create this monster and now they can’t control it.

Hiding from your own voting base. But the campaign is doing super otherwise.

— Big Fish (@BigFish3000) May 10, 2024

More important than that, they need a very controlled environment to present Biden.

It’s 50/50 he’d crap his pants. https://t.co/6ULX13Xvz3

— Mark Noonan (@Mark_E_Noonan) May 10, 2024

“We’re going to do the DNC but we’re afraid of our own voter base.”

And Biden still thinks he’s going to win https://t.co/GWpOZC8pfO

— Michael Edwards (@MEdwardsVA) May 10, 2024

Things could get out of control very quickly.

The post REPORT: Biden Campaign and Democrat Officials Preparing for Protesters and Chaos at Chicago Convention appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

James Carville Freaks Out Over Failure of Democrat Attacks on Trump: ‘It’s Not Working!’ (VIDEO)

Democrat strategist and former Bill Clinton staffer James Carville is not doing well. He is extremely frustrated and angry that none of the attacks Democrats have tried to smear Trump are working.

Carville understands polling, and the numbers are making him crazy. He notes that Trump is ‘more ahead than he’s ever been.’

He also seems very frustrated that the public doesn’t care about January 6th. He is having a total meltdown.

Transcript via Real Clear Politics:

JAMES CARVILLE: Trump’s more ahead than he’s ever been, more — fewer people think January 6 was any kind of what it was, an assault on the temple of democracy, our Constitution, whatever you want to say.

It’s going the wrong way. It’s not working. Everything that we’re throwing is spaghetti at a wall, and none of it is sticking, me included. It’s hard starting your 80th year, and like everyone else I have an opinion of myself. And the opinion I’ve come to is I don’t matter.

It doesn’t matter. You can prepare and you can be on TV, you can write pieces, you can have a YouTube channel, you can have a podcast and nothing, nothing!

We’ve got to try to think of something different because what we’re doing in really really not working.

Watch the video below, this is glorious:

James Carville is frustrated that Trump is ‘more ahead than he’s ever been’, and that Democrat tactics are ‘not working’:
“It’s going the wrong way. It’s not working.Everything we’re that throwing is spaghetti at a wall, and none of it is sticking, me included.
We gotta try to… pic.twitter.com/OAMsDA37Ng

— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) May 10, 2024

Has anyone ever seen him this frustrated and upset? Is it possible that he has seen internal polling and that it’s completely dreadful? He certainly doesn’t seem confident about the way things are going.

The post James Carville Freaks Out Over Failure of Democrat Attacks on Trump: ‘It’s Not Working!’ (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Victor Reacts: Charges Dropped Against Hundreds of Illegals (VIDEO)

Charges against hundreds of illegal aliens have been dropped by a Democratic judge thanks to the magic of a “bureaucracy filing error.”

The Gateway Pundit reports:

On March 21, 2024, hundreds of illegal aliens from Africa, Central America, Colombia, and Venezuela made a mad rush for the border in El Paso, Texas after they were pushed south of the concertina wire in the middle of the night by the National Guard.

The illegals breached the concertina wire, tore down the fencing, overwhelmed National Guard members, and made a mad rush into the United States.

On Thursday FOX News reported that the 211 illegal aliens who were charged with rioting and destruction of property had their charges dropped by County Court Judge Ruben Morales.

Judge Ruben Morales is a Democrat judge from El Paso County.

FOX News reported: “Griff Jenkins: Fox News confirms El Paso County Court Judge Ruben Morales dismissed 211 cases against migrants charged with rioting at the border on March 21, seen in that video by the New York Post attempting to push their way into the US. Now Judge Morales says he lacked jurisdiction because the district attorney’s office failed to provide a required conferring transfer order to move the misdemeanor cases from district court to county court. But district Attorney Bill Hicks said just moments ago he felt the process was done appropriately and he intends to appeal the judge’s order dismissing the cases.”

Isn’t it interesting how Democrat judges will find magical “bureaucratic filing errors” when it helps hundreds of illegal aliens, yet conservatives have the book thrown at them for looking the wrong way.

 

The post Victor Reacts: Charges Dropped Against Hundreds of Illegals (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

TRUMP SUPPORTERS Line up to See President Trump 24 Hours Before Wildwood, New Jersey Rally – Venue Can Hold Up to 40,000 (VIDEO)

Trump supporters line up on Friday to see President Trump speak on Saturday in Wildwood, NJ.

This is an amazing video.

Trump supporters lined up in Wildwood, New Jersey as early as Wednesday to see President Donald Trump speak on Saturday.

The beach venue on Saturday can hold up to 40,000 people.

Trump is scheduled to speak at 5 PM to thousands of New Jersey supporters.

Wildwood, NJ is already TURNED UP for President Donald J. Trump tomorrow! pic.twitter.com/p7pHLRggB9

— RealBenGeller (@RealBenGeller) May 11, 2024

The hotels are booked in the area.

BREAKING: People have been lined up for days on the Wildwood boardwalk in New Jersey ahead of Trump’s rally.

Motels and Hotels are completely booked and hanging Trump flags on their railings.

This could be one of the biggest Trump rallies ever.

pic.twitter.com/R5iBVn3CA6

— Ian Jaeger (@IanJaeger29) May 11, 2024

The Mayor of Wildwood says there is room for 45,000 people at the venue.

The mayor of Wildwood, NJ said there’s room for 45,000 people for Trump’s rally tomorrow

Thousands more will be filling the boardwalk and beach

It’s going to be WILD pic.twitter.com/WQ1Nrhau3M

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) May 11, 2024

The post TRUMP SUPPORTERS Line up to See President Trump 24 Hours Before Wildwood, New Jersey Rally – Venue Can Hold Up to 40,000 (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Attorney for Stephen Bannon Issues Statement Following Court of Appeals Decision

David Schoen, legal representative for Stephen K. Bannon, released a detailed statement today in response to a decision by the Court of Appeals. The court ruled that it does not possess the authority to overturn a precedent set by a 1961 Court of Appeals panel concerning the interpretation of “willfully” in the Contempt of Congress statute. This decision pertains to Bannon’s ongoing legal struggles following his non-compliance with a congressional subpoena.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported the Biden Regime is one step closer to jailing former Trump aide and conservative firebrand Steve Bannon.

Steven Bannon is also the host of the most pro-MAGA podcast “The War Room.”

A federal appeals court on Friday upheld Bannon’s conviction for contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena related to the sham January 6 investigation.

Bannon does not need to report to prison right away. He has seven days to request an en banc review (a decision from the court’s entire slate of judges) or to petition the US Supreme Court.

After deliberating for three hours, a DC jury in July 2022 found Steven Bannon guilty of two counts of contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas to the controversial and completely biased January 6 Select Committee.

A federal judge previously denied Steve Bannon’s request for a new trial and dismissal in the contempt of Congress case.

Bannon refused to provide documents to the January 6 Committee because President Trump asserted executive privilege.

Bannon argued, “Based on long-standing U.S. Department of Justice authority, you should not appear for deposition or provide documents.”

Former Gorsuch clerk and regular guest on Bannon’s “War Room” Mike Davis said, “Today’s ruling by the DC Circuit on Steve Bannon’s claim of executive privilege is both shameful and predictable, as the DC courts are filled with partisans and cowards.”

Here is the complete and unaltered statement from David Schoen, concerning the Court of Appeals’ decision on Friday:

The Court of Appeals panel held today that it does not have the authority to overrule the 1961 panel of the Court that issued the decision in the Licavoli case on the definition of the word “willfully” as used in the Contempt of Congress statute.  Mr. Bannon will now seek redress before the full Court of Appeals, which has the authority to overrule Licavoli.

The Court of Appeals panel held today that it does not have the authority to overrule the 1961 panel of the Court that issued the decision in the Licavoli case on the definition of the word “willfully” as used in the Contempt of Congress statute. Mr. Bannon will now seek redress before the full Court of Appeals, which has the authority to overrule Licavoli.

There are many fundamentally important constitutional issues at stake in this case. Today’s decision is wrong as a matter of law and it reflects a very dangerous view of the threshold for criminal liability for any defendant in our country and for future political abuses of the congressional hearing process.

The Department of Justice argued before the Court that this panel did not have the authority to overrule the Licavoli panel’s decision – only the full Court sitting en banc can do that. The DOJ should support a petition for rehearing en banc to have the full court review this important issue of law.

As the trial court judge wrote earlier in this case. The Court’s definition in Licavoli is ” not consistent with modern case law surrounding the use of that term, let alone the traditional definition of the word.” The full Court of Appeals should make that clear and correct the Licavoli panel’s error.

When Steve Bannon’s lawyer, Robert Costello, received a subpoena for Mr. Bannon to testify before the January 6 committee and he received a direction from President Trump that the he was invoking Executive Privilege with respect to the subpoena, Mr. Costello did two things:

1. He advised Mr. Bannon in no uncertain terms that he was not permitted as a matter of law to in any way respond to the subpoena – that executive privilege had been raised and that it was not his privilege to waive; and

2. Mr. Costello wrote to the committee and told them that Mr. Bannon would fully comply with the subpoena if the the committee worked out any privilege issues with President Trump or they took the matter before a court and the court ordered Mr. Bannon to comply. Mr. Bannon was charged with “willfully making default” in response to a congressional subpoena.

In America, we do not criminally prosecute, let alone convict and send to prison people who not only don’t believe their conduct to be wrongful or in violation of the law, but, as in this case, people who follow the advice of their lawyers who tell them that the law does not permit them to comply with a congressional subpoena when Executive Privilege has been invoked. President Trump expressly confirmed to the trial court in writing that he had indeed invoked Executive Privilege with respect to the subpoena Mr. Bannon received.

A. For decades and, as reaffirmed in the last few years in decisions from the United States Supreme Court, a clear jurisprudential principle has been that “willfully” for purposes of criminal culpability requires a defendant to have acted in a manner he or she knew was wrong and violated the law. The Court of Appeals panel that issued this decision today found that it was bound by a 1961 decision called Licavoli which held that in the context of the congressional contempt statute “willfully” doesn’t require a belief that the conduct is wrong; rather all that matters is whether a subpoena was issued and the recipient complied with it. Licavoli did not involve executive privilege.

B. Long-standing constitutional principles, exhaustively recognized and identified by the Department of Justice for decades in binding opinions, make clear that any such definition when executive privilege has been invoked, violates the fundamental doctrine of separation of powers. It is the President’s or a former President’s prerogative to determine when and over what to invoke executive privilege and only a court, not a committee issuing the subpoena, can be the arbiter of whether executive privilege applies and how far its breadth extends.

Mr. Costello asked the committee to let a judge decide; they had no interest. The committee only wanted the political mileage it thought it would get for pursuing contempt.

It is unconscionable to hold a private citizen criminally liable for responding to a subpoena in the manner his lawyer told him is the only manner the law permits and especially when a constitutional principle like executive privilege is involved. The panel today held that it is bound by the 1961 Licavoli decision, notwithstanding the construction given to the word “willfully” in the criminal law context, which for decades clearly has required some determination that the defendant believed his conduct was wrong.

C. The trial judge in this case expressly wrote that the Licavoli definition cannot be reconciled with either the traditional or the modern definition of “willfully” but that his hands were tied by the precedent which he could not overrule. Similarly, this panel held, as the prosecution had argued, that it does not have the authority to overrule the Licavoli panel and is bound by it. That is why all parties should agree that the full Court of Appeals should hear this case sitting en banc.

D. The government convinced the trial court to bar Mr. Bannon from putting before the jury any evidence as to why he responded as he did to the committee subpoena. Interestingly, even in Licavoli, the jury was permitted to hear the Defendant’s story. The jury in Mr. Bannon’s case was prohibited from hearing that he followed his lawyer’s orders and what those orders were. He was barred from putting on any defense, while the prosecution was permitted to argue to the jury that Mr. Bannon simply ignored the subpoena because he thought he was above the law. They knew he had not ignored it and they knew his lawyer had told him the law didn’t permit him to comply; but the jury never knew either.

E. It also troubling that the Court endorsed the holding in this case that Mr. Bannon could not raise challenges to the multiple violations of the Rules of the House of Representatives from the formation of the 1/6 Committee through its decision to hold Mr. Bannon in contempt.

Every American subpoenaed to testify before Congress ought to be able to depend on a fair hearing before a fairly constituted body. Speaker Pelosi violated the House Rules and protocol and the trust of the American people when she formed the 1/6 committee as she did.

This was promised as an “investigative” committee into the events of 1/6; but she appointed as its Chair, Rep. Benny Thompson who filed a lawsuit alleging that he was personally injured by the events he was supposed to be investigating and placing blame for those events before any investigation even began.

The committee was filled with political partisans who regularly held press conferences announcing their opinions again without conducting any investigation. House Rules were unabashedly violated in the subpoena process all with impunity. The violations struck at the very heart of the integrity of the process as recent findings in the House have exposed; but this court has said it won’t consider any of these violation in connection with Mr. Bannon’s subpoena. The DOJ asked the court to decline to consider the violations and the court agreed. We believe a full review would have well served the country.

There are additional issues of constitutional dimension that were raised on appeal that we will also ask the En Banc Court to consider based on their direct conflict with other authority from this Court and the United States Supreme Court. That is the next step.

The post Attorney for Stephen Bannon Issues Statement Following Court of Appeals Decision appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

UPDATE: Barron Trump Regretfully Declines Invitation To Be a Delegate at Republican National Convention Due to “Prior Commitments”

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Donald Trump’s youngest son, Barron, was selected by the Republican Party of Florida as one of the state’s at-large delegates.

In response to the news, President Trump shared in a video, “To me, it’s very cute because he’s a very young guy, and he’s graduating from high school this year.”

Now, it’s been reported that Barron has “regretfully declined” the offer to serve as a delegate for Florida due to prior commitments.

In a statement to the press, Melania Trump’s Office wrote, “While Barron is honored to have been chosen as a delegate by the Florida Republican Party, he regretfully declines to participate due to prior commitments.”

Barron Trump declines to serve as Florida delegate at RNC https://t.co/tJUbGKhzZ0

— Fox News (@FoxNews) May 10, 2024

Per The Hill:

Barron Trump, the youngest son of former President Trump, has declined the offer to serve as a delegate for Florida at this summer’s Republican National Convention (RNC).

“While Barron is honored to have been chosen as a delegate by the Florida Republican Party, he regretfully declines to participate due to prior commitments,” former first lady Melania Trump’s office said in a statement.

The Florida GOP earlier this week said Barron Trump, who is 18, would join three of the former president’s other children — Eric, Tiffany and Donald Trump Jr. — as delegates, with Eric Trump serving as the state’s delegation chair.

It would have marked Barron Trump’s first foray into politics in the public spotlight. The Republican convention will take place in Milwaukee, Wis., in mid-July.

Barron, who turned 18 last month, is set to graduate from high school on May 17th.

In the first week of April, The Gateway Pundit reported Judge Juan Merchan, the judge overseeing Trump’s “Hush Money” trial, refused to rule on whether Trump could be excused from the trial on May 17th for Barron’s graduation.

Merchan has since had a change of mind and has now granted Trump permission to attend Barron’s graduation.

READ:

Trump-Hating Tyrannical Judge Gives President Trump ‘Permission’ to Attend Son Barron’s High School Graduation

The post UPDATE: Barron Trump Regretfully Declines Invitation To Be a Delegate at Republican National Convention Due to “Prior Commitments” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

THEY’RE PANICKING: California AG Prepares ‘Onslaught’ of Lawsuits to Stop Trump’s Second Term Agenda

California Attorney General Rob Bonta is preparing a litany of lawsuits in preparation for President Donald Trump’s possible return to the White House.

According to a report from the Los Angeles Times, Bonta is seeking to emulate the work of his predecessor, Xavier Becerra, who left his role in Congress to run for Attorney General and to sue the Trump administration in a bid to uphold his agenda.

The report states:

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said he and his staff have been reviewing former President Trump’s second-term agenda in detail to prepare a potential onslaught of environmental, immigration and civil rights lawsuits in the event Trump defeats President Biden.

…

Bonta, a Democrat who is mulling a run for governor, said he has been reviewing the work of his predecessor, Xavier Becerra, who filed more than 100 suits against Trump policies before leaving the office to become Biden’s secretary of Health and Human Services. Bonta and his deputies are also looking closely at a document drafted by the Heritage Foundation, a Trump-aligned think tank, known as “Project 2025,” that offers a blueprint for Trump’s second-term policy goals.

…

Asked for comment on Bonta’s plans, Anna Kelly, a spokesperson for the Republican National Committee, said, “California liberals will try anything to spread their failed, fringe-left agenda far and wide, but they won’t stop President Trump from making America great again.”

With polls increasingly indicating that Trump is the favorite to win, leftists are panicking about the prospect of his implementing a more radical second-term agenda.

In a wide-ranging interview with TIME magazine last month, Trump outlined his planned agenda, which includes a mass deportation campaign of illegal aliens, gutting the deep state, and pardoning those involved in the January 6th protests.

The article, written from a Democratic perspective, states:

What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world.

To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding.

He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.

This week, it was also reported that Trump would be open to sending covert assassination squads to Mexico in order to take out the leaders of major drug cartels responsible for flooding America with drugs, crime and illegal immigration.

The post THEY’RE PANICKING: California AG Prepares ‘Onslaught’ of Lawsuits to Stop Trump’s Second Term Agenda appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Gaza Pier Situation is tenuous and a possible set up for Beirut Barracks 2.0

As the American domestic scene is distracted by the sudden appearance of the Palestinian “protesters” (née Antifers, née violent Transgenders, née Trust Fund malcontents), the Gaza Pier building exercise has been out of the spotlight.  The real question should be, after at least 15 years of about a $1 Billion Dollars of year of funding donated directly to the UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) – why has a modern port not already been made in Gaza?  For some reason $1 Billion Dollars a year was not enough to at least have a simple seaport and pier.

The Biden Team made a policy decision to generate and deploy U.S. Army and U.S. Navy resources to create such a pier.  The whole endeavor was announced simultaneously with the release of the Fiscal Year 2025 budget submission to Congress which eliminated more aircraft and ships than were lost at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.  Every line item of resources relevant to the Gaza Pier building went downward, which meant for every floating modular causeway section used, there were no replacements bought, and the likelihood of these sections being recovered and re-used is low.  The pier building project was just completed and has now received its first hostile fire from Hamas.

Where is the mini-Iron Dome to cover the pier and American military?

The on-going operation to marshal the American flotilla, unload and build the floating modular causeway system (72 feet by 270 feet long), excavate and dump backfill to create the earthen pier to connect with the floating section has now received fire from terrorist elements.  On April 24, the site of the pier building exercise came under fire and received two incoming mortar rounds.  No injuries were reported, and assembly and construction continued.  The Biden Team has insisted that no American Boots will be placed on the ground.  It is hard to believe that during JLOTS (Joint Logistics Over The Shore) Operations no U.S. Military personnel will step onto the beach, which defies the meaning of the JLOTS acronym.  There seems to be some creative wordsmithing going on.

In a military operation like this, establishing security is usually the first step.  So where is the necessary equipment to detect and shoot down the mortar rounds?  The Army has the Centurion system which has worked pretty effectively to protect the American base camps across the Middle East.  Why this system was not immediately deployed and set up to protect the U.S. Forces is unclear.  Even if the Biden Team is serious about “No Boots” on the ground, a Centurion System or two should have been set up on sections of the floating causeway.

Key U.S. Military ship supporting pier construction breaks down

Approximately four smaller and two medium Army ships have been committed to Gaza along with three large Navy vessels.  One of the Navy vessels, the USNS, 2nd Lt. John P. Bobo had an engine fire and limped home to the U.S. on its remaining engine for repairs.  The ship is named for a Marine Corps Medal of Honor Winner, killed in Vietnam in 1967.

The USNS Bobo is a very large transport ship, almost as long as a Nimitz Class Aircraft Carrier and weights in at 55,000 tons fully loaded.  It was built during the Reagan buildup in the 1980s to provide a large ship that can roll on/roll off wheeled cargo.  The USNS Bobo was constructed in the General Dynamics Quincy Shipbuilding Shipyard, Quincy, Massachusetts – a historic and mighty shipyard that no longer exists.  Although pushing 40 years old, the ship has relatively low mileage and usage, but the breakdown indicates maintenance issues and was not a good start to the Gaza pier building effort.  Ships do breakdown, but when they do, they can be out of service for a long time as they wait for limited drydock space and spare parts that may not exist anymore due to their age.  The loss of even one ship affects operations worldwide as other missions are decremented to support the higher priority missions.

Israeli siege constricting the Raffah Redoubt – what’s next?

The pier has just completed its initial construction phase and commercial vessels should shortly begin shuttling aid from close by Cyprus.  The Pentagon says the pier has cost $320 million.  Sabrina Singh, Pentagon spokeswoman, told reporters the cost is a rough estimate for the project.  Pentagon cost accounting is bad (I’m being generous) – they’ve failed audit six years in a row, so the $320 million dollar is likely a swag that some poor Joint Staff Action Officer threw at the DOD Press Office when they needed an answer in five minutes.  Meanwhile the Israeli’s are bringing the Raffah siege to its final phases as they pursue Hamas.

The Biden Team seems to be slow walking ammunition to the Israelis – possibly because another Rob Malley like, collaborator has been found in the Biden Team at the highest levels.  His name is Maher Bitar and he is now Senior Director for Intelligence on the National Security Council.  Maher has a long track record of extremist behavior, including amazingly working at the corrupt UNRWA.  Israel is very close to finishing off Hamas and will, despite the interference of the Biden Team.  This war has to be put in context and is part of the worldwide orchestrated Chinese campaign to topple America, so even when Hamas falls, there will be a next phase of battle in the Middle East Theater of Operations and the Gaza Pier is a vulnerable target for terrorists seeking to attack Americans.

The post The Gaza Pier Situation is tenuous and a possible set up for Beirut Barracks 2.0 appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.