Month: May 2025

In an utterly shameful move, Providence, Rhode Island, plans to raise a Palestinian flag over City Hall on Friday — a decision that spits in the face of American values and Christian principles.

This isn’t just a foreign flag; it’s a symbol bandied by Hamas, a terrorist group that has spilled innocent blood, including that of Americans and Israelis, in its vile jihadist campaign.

The Providence City Council announced the event on X, scheduling the flag-raising for noon, complete with remarks from elected officials and community members on the City Hall steps.

You’re invited to a Palestinian flag raising at City Hall this Friday, May 16! Elected officials and community members will deliver remarks on the steps out front at 12 pm. Join us! pic.twitter.com/SeggPQvS1b

— Providence City Council (@pvdcitycouncil) May 14, 2025

What should be flying high are the Stars and Stripes and the Rhode Island state flag — symbols of unity, freedom, and faith in God — rather than a banner tied to violence and division.

One X user nailed it in response to council’s post: “This is really disgusting. I’m sure it also violates some statute. The only time another flag should be put up there is if you’re conquered.”

This is really disgusting. I’m sure it also violates some statute.
The only time another flag should be put up there is if you’re conquered.

— Philthyvt (@Philthyvt) May 14, 2025

No government building should ever hoist a foreign flag, especially not one associated with a terrorist organization like Hamas, which has been designated as such by the U.S. government since 1997.

Another X user captured the outrage perfectly: “So you’re having a flag raising event, but not with an American flag. Not with a Rhode Island flag. It’s with a Palestinian flag. The same flag that Hamas waves.”

So you’re having a flag raising event, but not with an American flag.
Not with a Rhode Island flag.
It’s with a Palestinian flag.
The same flag that Hamas waves.

If only you guys cared about America, Americans, and especially your constituents as much as you care about some…

— Leftism (@LeftismForU) May 14, 2025

They continued, “If only you guys cared about America, Americans, and especially your constituents as much as you care about some non-existent country alleged to be thousands of miles away which a designated terrorist organization is fighting for.”

Mayor Brett Smiley, in a pathetic attempt to dodge responsibility, told WJAR-TV he had no real say in it.

“If it was up to me I wouldn’t have flown this flag,” he said. “It came in from a constituent via the city council and I had no grounds to deny it.”

What a cowardly cop-out.

The city doubled down on that cowardice, telling WLNE-TV that this celebration was just like any other multicultural celebration.

The Providence Young Republicans, meanwhile, “strongly condemned” the move and said that it was “inappropriate and deeply disappointing” — which is putting it rather mildly.

Here’s the thing: This isn’t about “raising awareness” for Gaza, as some supporters may try to claim. It’s about pandering to radical leftists who prioritize anti-American sentiment over the safety and unity of our nation.

Hamas has killed countless Israelis and wounded many more, to say nothing of the atrocities committed on Oct. 7, 2023. And it should go without saying that the group has killed Americans, too.

For a city like Providence to elevate their flag is a slap in the face to every American who cherishes our heritage.

(Imagine if someone in Providence has a family member lost to Hamas. My goodness.)

The City Council’s decision to already display a Palestinian flag in the City Hall chambers shows they’ve been flirting with this anti-American agenda for a while, and now they’re doubling down.

This move undermines the very principles of liberty and justice that our nation was founded on, principles rooted in faith and a commitment to stand against evil.

True conservatives and Christians should be appalled — Providence is signaling to the world that it values terrorist sympathizers over the citizens of Rhode Island.

It’s time for patriots to speak out, demand the flag not be flown, and hold Smiley and the City Council accountable for this disgraceful act of betrayal.

If they want to raise a flag, at least make it something American, for crying out loud.

Providence should be ashamed — its leaders have chosen to honor chaos over country, and they’ll answer to their constituents and to a higher power for this abomination.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post ‘Disgusting’: State Capital to Fly Palestinian Flag Over City Hall appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Pedro Sanchez

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez ignited an international firestorm on Wednesday after publicly calling Israel a “genocidal state” during a heated parliamentary session, marking the first time the socialist leader used such language, despite his government’s long-standing alignment with anti-Israel rhetoric.

The remarks came in response to Gabriel Rufián, a leftist Catalan MP, who accused Sánchez of hypocrisy for maintaining trade ties with Israel amid its ongoing military campaign in Gaza. Sánchez, pushing back sharply, stated:

“I want to make one thing clear here, Mr. Rufián. We do not do business with a genocidal state, we do not.”

❝We do not do business with a genocidal state, we do not❞

After being accused of maintaining trade ties with Israel despite the Gaza war Spanish Prime Minister described Israel as a ‘genocidal state’ and said Spain ‘does not do business with such a country’… pic.twitter.com/raEnKz1KQ5

— Anadolu English (@anadoluagency) May 15, 2025

The statement, echoing the language of Sánchez’s far-left coalition partner, the Sumar party, represented a new level of official condemnation. Until now, the prime minister had refrained from personally using the term, even as Spain formally joined South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alleging genocide by Israel.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry condemned Sánchez’s statement and swiftly summoned the Spanish ambassador, Ana Salomon, to its Jerusalem office for a formal reprimand. The Ministry accused Sánchez of spreading inflammatory and unfounded accusations, saying his words distort the reality of the ongoing conflict and ignore the suffering of Israeli victims.

Elsewhere in Europe, similar rhetoric emerged. Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema, addressing the city council, referenced the term “genocidal violence” and cited Holocaust scholars critical of Israel’s actions. Her remarks were also met with swift pushback. Israeli Ambassador to the Netherlands Modi Ephraim said he was “deeply dismayed,” calling her speech a distortion of both historical memory and present-day realities.

Sánchez’s sudden use of the term may reflect mounting internal pressure from the Sumar party and other far-left factions in his government. Sumar leader Yolanda Díaz, who also serves as Spain’s second deputy prime minister, has repeatedly referred to Israel as genocidal and has demanded a total freeze on Spanish-Israeli trade.

In April, Spain quietly canceled a $7 million munitions contract with an Israeli defense company—an apparent concession to Díaz’s demands. The move followed months of criticism from Sumar and grassroots leftist groups accusing Sánchez of failing to align Spain’s foreign policy with his government’s stated human rights principles.

Spain, along with Ireland, has taken an increasingly hardline stance against Israel within the European Union. Last year, Madrid formally recognized the State of Palestine, joining over 140 countries globally, and just weeks later announced its intent to support the ICJ case against Israel.

While EU policy remains broadly supportive of Israel’s right to self-defense, a visible rift is emerging between pro-Israel states like Germany and centrist blocs, and governments such as Spain’s, which are moving toward more aggressive condemnation.

However, critics warn that such rhetoric risks alienating Jewish communities at home and abroad, and may inflame antisemitic sentiment. Elías Levy Benarroch, editor-in-chief of Enfoque Judío, accused Sánchez of becoming “a chief promoter of an antisemitic narrative that is taking root in Spain.”

Despite the strong words, there is no evidence yet that Spain’s statements will shift overall EU policy. Trade continues between Israel and most European partners, and key NATO states have not echoed Sánchez’s rhetoric.

Still, with growing divisions inside the EU and continued domestic pressure on left-wing governments to sever ties with Israel, Sánchez’s statement could signal a new phase in Europe’s diplomatic stance on the Middle East—one driven less by consensus and more by ideological alignment.

For now, Spain insists it is standing on principle. Whether that position leads to real diplomatic fallout—or further isolates the country within the Western alliance—remains to be seen.

The post Spain’s Prime Minister Labels Israel a “Genocidal State,” Escalates Diplomatic Tensions appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Disgraced former FBI Director James Comey has deleted his entire Instagram account after a firestorm erupted over a cryptic post that many patriots believe was a blatant call to assassinate President Donald J. Trump, the 47th President of the United States.

The now-infamous post, featuring seashells arranged to form the numbers “8647,” has sparked outrage across the nation, with top Trump allies and lawmakers demanding immediate action against the disgraced ex-FBI chief.

The controversy exploded Thursday when Comey, a known Trump critic who was unceremoniously fired by the President in 2017, posted a photo captioned, “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.”

But Americans weren’t fooled by his feigned innocence.

The numbers “8647” carry a sinister meaning: “86,” a slang term widely understood to mean “to get rid of” or even “to kill,” paired with “47,” a clear reference to President Trump’s current term.

Donald Trump Jr. responded on X, stating, “Just James Comey casually calling for my dad to be murdered.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem echoed these concerns, asserting that Comey “just called for the assassination of Trump” and confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service are investigating the matter.

FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed that the bureau is working with the Secret Service to investigate the direct threat against the president, who has already survived two assassination attempts during his 2024 campaign.

As the outrage grew, Comey scrambled to cover his tracks, deleting his Instagram account entirely after initially posting a weak excuse claiming he “didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence.”

In a follow-up post—before his account vanished—he insisted, “I assumed they were a political message. It never occurred to me, but I oppose violence of any kind.”

Now, Comey has gone radio silent.

When searching for Comey’s Instagram account, it either says “User not found” or “This profile is not available” on mobile devices, and “Sorry, this page isn’t available” on desktop computers.

Screenshot: @comey / Instagram

It’s no surprise to see the former FBI chief — who played a central role in the Russia collusion hoax, the Clinton email cover-up, and the political weaponization of America’s top law enforcement agency — trying to hide from accountability yet again.

Is this the behavior of an innocent man—or someone with something to hide?

The post Disgraced Former FBI Director James Comey Deletes Entire Instagram Account Amid Backlash Over ‘8647’ Assassination Post appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The liberal ‘sanctuary city’ of Denver, Colorado is experiencing an outbreak of law and order, following the deportation of criminal illegal immigrants by ICE. Who knew such a thing could happen?

Homicides in Denver and other Colorado cities are down by a whopping 60 percent. Are liberals still going to argue against the policy of deporting people in the country illegally? Are they still going to try to defend members of MS-13 and other gangs?

It’s almost like enforcing laws works out well for law abiding citizens. Almost.

FOX 31 in Denver reports:

Newly released report says homicides dropped nearly 60% in Denver in 2025

Homicides are down nearly 60% in Denver so far this year, according to the newly released report by the Major Cities Chiefs Association.

It’s a significant drop from last year and one of the biggest declines in violent crime rates in the country.

“Violent crime is just about reducing in every city, but we were the city in which it had declined the most,” said Denver Police Chief Ron Thomas.

Thomas says he is proud to have that distinction, and it speaks to the hard work of his officers.

“We’ve been able to see these significant reductions in crime without over policing communities,” said Thomas. “It’s one of the things we have understood was important and we need to be responsive, but we need to make sure we’re investing as much as we’re enforcing.”

Independent journalist Sara Carter commented:

This marked decrease in violence comes after intensified immigration enforcement under the Trump administration, which had made the Denver metropolitan area a key focus for removals of criminal migrants. ICE has acted swiftly, arresting 538 illegal aliens across multiple cities, including Denver. Shortly thereafter, the agency expanded its efforts in Colorado, zeroing in on members of Tren de Aragua.

Breitbart News reports that despite these federal initiatives, local Democratic leaders resisted cooperation with ICE. Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and Colorado Governor Jared Polis were among those who worked to oppose the administration’s actions, which prompted the Trump administration to initiate legal action against Denver and state officials for obstructing federal immigration enforcement.

These are the kind of results that Democrats and the media don’t want the public to see. They don’t want people to know that we don’t have to live with rampant crime and that Trump’s policies work.

The post IMAGINE THAT: Homicides Are Down 60 Percent in Denver Following ICE Deportations appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Pentagon is pushing the British military to focus more of its attention and resources in the Euro-Atlantic, not in East Asia, the Financial Times reported recently. The policy’s purported architect is U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby, who has been a strong supporter of America’s European allies increasing their military spending and doing more for their own defense, especially in light of the Ukraine War and increased concern regarding Russian aggression.

This policy marks a sharp break from the Biden administration, which sought to link America’s Indo-Pacific and NATO allies under the presumption that an enhanced European military presence in Asia would help counter Chinese belligerence in the region. Reacting to the FT’s reporting, Ely Ratner, the Biden administration’s top Pentagon official for the Indo-Pacific region, suggested that Europe staying actively engaged in Asia would be “good for deterrence and good for Taiwan’s defense and resilience” and is “something to be encouraged.” 

But Colby is correct in both his analysis of the situation and the prescriptions recommended. On the whole, America’s allies in Europe currently do not have the resources necessary to undertake meaningful deployments outside of their principal theater. Furthermore, when they do undertake such operations, they are not contributing to regional deterrence in any significant manner and, instead, are exacerbating an already tenuous regional equilibrium. 

Since President Barack Obama declared a pivot to Asia in the early 2010s, Europeans have been fearful that increased U.S. engagement in East Asia would be at their expense, given their underinvestment in defense and overreliance on America’s strategic leadership. By attempting to step up their own engagement in the Indo-Pacific and increase confrontational rhetoric and trade policies toward China, the Europeans are seeking to ensure continued U.S. support by demonstrating that they can help the U.S. counter its “pacing threat.”

This European motivation to enhance military engagement in Asia has aligned with a growing sense of urgency among U.S. regional allies to counter and deter China’s aggressive maritime behavior—notably Japan and the Philippines, who have been facing tense maritime disputes with China. This was demonstrated clearly at last month’s meeting between Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Condemning China’s “destabilizing activities” across Indo-Pacific waters, the two leaders vowed to elevate regional security cooperation, including joint military maneuvers. Similarly, the Philippines has also sought to expand maritime security cooperation with European actors, reaching an agreement in August 2024 with Germany to conduct joint training.  

As a result of these trends, throughout the Biden administration European states dramatically increased their military engagement in the Indo-Pacific to demonstrate their commitment to international law, freedom of navigation, and the so-called “rules-based international order.” In 2021, the UK sent a warship through the Taiwan Strait for the first time in over a decade, citing “enduring security interests” in the region. In 2024, two German ships sailed through the Strait for the first time in over two decades. That same year, the French conducted their own such journey after the Dutch and U.S. navies conducted joint operations in the South China Sea. 

European leaders should rethink such activities. The supposition that expanding joint military cooperation and activities between Europe and Asia would strengthen the rules-based international order and collective deterrence against China reflects misguided assumptions about deterrence and a counterproductive approach to ensuring established rules and norms prevail. 

Deterrence requires the combination of sufficient military capabilities and political will. While the optics of more European vessels conducting joint maneuvers in the South China Sea, the East China Sea, and the Taiwan Strait alongside the U.S. and Asian partners may appear to improve deterrence against China, the reality is that at present Europeans hardly have the necessary resources to manage the Russian threat on their own, let alone to viably contribute to deterrence against China, a global superpower, in a far-flung, largely maritime-based theater. Moreover, if European states were not willing to intervene militarily on their own continent in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it is presumable that those same states would be even more reluctant to intervene in a potential military conflict in faraway Asia.

Therefore, the symbolic presence of European vessels in Asian waters would actually do little, if anything, to help deter Chinese aggression. Such actions could arguably increase peacetime tensions and instability in Asia by creating more pretexts for China’s escalatory maritime activities. For instance, in June 2024, a Dutch naval patrol in the East China Sea was confronted by Chinese fighter jets, leading to a diplomatic spat between Beijing and Amsterdam. Thus far, China has shown no signs of moderating its assertive maritime posture in regional seas, despite significantly elevated naval cooperation between the U.S. and its Asia-Pacific allies in recent years. The involvement of European navies, most of which possess limited power projection capabilities, is unlikely to change this dynamic.

Ultimately, the policy of interlinking the European and Asian security theaters is illogical and counterproductive. The reality is that neither NATO states nor U.S. Asian allies have the luxury of investing their capabilities and resources into the others’ military theater. Nor would doing so help strengthen regional deterrence. 

As we wrote last year, Washington’s allies in Europe and Asia should prioritize conflict resolution and deterrence in their respective regions without needlessly interlinking the two. Given the increased concern across Europe about Russia’s military intentions, it would be far more helpful to the United States and the Europeans themselves if they put their resources where their mouth is and undertake the serious investments and reforms necessary for Europe to stand on its own two feet. This would eventually help allow the United States to commit the resources it requires for preserving deterrence in Asia. European military reforms and investment will also ensure that NATO’s European member states are valuable allies and can contribute to the collective defense. This is exactly what Vice President J.D. Vance spoke about in April when he said, “It’s not in Europe’s interest, and it’s not in America’s interest, for Europe to be a permanent security vassal of the United States.”

The Europeans, with sustained American intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support, are capable of ensuring their security while continuing to invest in their own defense industrial base and integrated force development. But this will require that European states maintain their focus on the Euro-Atlantic region and entrust their American ally and Asian partners with ensuring security in the Pacific.

The post Elbridge Colby is Right: Europe Should Focus on Europe appeared first on The American Conservative.

The conservative radio legend Mark Levin recently insinuated that President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, might be anti-Semitic.

Witkoff is Jewish.

Describing the “neocon element” in an interview with Breitbart, Witkoff said, “In their minds, anything that is of a military nature to be a solution to that problem, they have a bias towards that. They give no consideration whatsoever on what the consequences are on that.”

Witkoff then added, “The neocon element believes that war is the only way to solve things.”

Levin, who is also Jewish and a longtime advocate of neoconservative foreign policy, said of Witkoff’s remarks, “lol. The envoy talks like the fifth column isolationists. Nobody believes war is the only way. We wait with great interest to see the deal you’re negotiating with the warmonger Iranian terrorist regime.”

Levin would then add in a repost of Witkoff’s remarks, “By the way, neocon is a pejorative for Jew. Unbelievable.”

The Community Notes feature of X rightly gave Levin’s accusation proper context, “Neocon,’ short for ‘Neo-conservative,’ is a term for a political philosophy focused on active foreign policy to spread liberal democracy. While many Neocons have been Jewish, nowhere near all have been.”

Calling someone, particularly someone who is Jewish, an antisemite because they prefer diplomacy to war is little different than Democrats who call Donald Trump a “white supremacist” based on, well, nothing really at all.

The point is that “white supremacists” are bad, and therefore Trump is bad. For so many on the left, no further logic or reasoning is required.

In this century and the last, neoconservatives have often accused anyone who opposed their hawkish agenda of being antisemitic. Whether or not these realist or restrainer figures were actually malicious towards Jews was always beside the point. The point is antisemites are bad, therefore anyone who opposes the neocons’ wars are bad.

There are genuine antisemites who are also antiwar, just as there are genuine white supremacists who support Trump. But just conflating all of this to use as a junky verbal battering ram is not only untrue but dishonest.

If this sounds dumb or simplistic, that’s because it is. But this was characteristic of the overall pre-Trump conservative environment that Levin came of age in and that shaped him, with the Bush-Cheney administration at the apex of the era.

Putting Witkoff’s own Jewishness aside, there is literally nothing in what he said that could fairly qualify as antisemitism. Levin was simply using the same old smear tactic borrowed from the left that neoconservatives have long relied on, often successfully.

But even a conservative voice as powerful as Levin has not made a dent on Witkoff or Trump’s larger MAGA movement. Witkoff is respected on the right and if he has something to say about the “neocon element” and the problems they cause, conservatives are going to listen.

Which is probably part of what drives Levin mad. This would not necessarily have been the case even a decade ago. Neoconservatives have long seen themselves as gatekeepers. The neocon David Frum would write after Rand Paul won his first Republican Senate primary, “Is it that the GOP has lost its antibodies against a candidate like Rand Paul?”

That was in 2010. Trump has just begun his second term. Has the American right entered a new era?

Tucker Carlson wondered the same in a recent interview with libertarian activist and comedian Dave Smith.

“If Mark Levin is calling the Trump administration antisemitic, Steve Witkoff, we’re at the end of something and the beginning of something new,” Carlson observed.

He continued, “I almost called Mark when I saw it because I really, I know him, but I really love Steve Witkoff and I think his decency. I don’t agree with him and everything at all, but his decency is just palpable. I mean, it just comes through his concern for people. His reasonableness is just so obvious. And the effects of what he’s done have been so great. Great for America, great for the world.”

“So I almost. I was so offended,” Carlson said, giving Levin the benefit of the doubt. “And then I thought, I’m not going to solve anything by calling Mark Levin and scolding him. Probably scream at me, but. But I did think, like, he’s not stupid.”

He continued, “If you’re calling Steve Witkoff an antisemite on Twitter, like, you know, you’re losing. Right? Is that what that is?”

Dave Smith did not disagree.

Carlson would add, “So you have Mark Levin calling Steve Witkoff an anti-Semite. We’ve reached peak crazy, I mean, I think Witkoff is Jewish, right?” 

“Peak crazy” is one way to put it.

But for Levin or any other neoconservative who still stubbornly insists on equating the use of the term “neocon” with antisemitism, it got worse for them on Tuesday.

Donald Trump said in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, “The so-called nation builders wrecked far more nations than they built, and the interventionists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand themselves.”

The president continued, “The gleaming marvels of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi were not created by the so-called ‘nation builders,’ neocons, or liberal nonprofits like those who spent trillions and trillions of dollars failing to develop Baghdad, so many other cities.”

Dave Smith could not contain himself.

“The other day Mark Levin responded to Steve Witkoff by saying ‘neocon is a pejorative for Jew’ essentially calling him an antisemite,” Smith posted on X. “Today, Donald Trump blasted neocons in his speech in Saudi Arabia. So, is Trump a woke right antisemite too?”

“I bet these cowards won’t dare,” he added.

For decades, the same people who helped craft and promote some of the worst foreign policy mistakes in American history, who still assume no responsibility and have faced zero accountability for their mistakes, and who, at one time, wore the badge of neoconservatism as an honor, decided that now that their term is so sullied, anyone who uses it must be a bigot. 

“Isolationists” is another barb they have loved. “Unpatriotic conservatives” was another they invented. Straight up calling war critics “traitors” has happened. Yet blanket and usually baseless accusations of antisemitism against anyone who questions U.S. foreign policy has long been the favorite weapon of neoconservatives, and perhaps most effective.

But is this over? Antiwar sentiment now flourishes on the right. Did the president just declare war on the neocons? Is what Trump said something we can discuss openly, now?

Mark Levin, is Donald Trump “antisemitic”?

The post Are Neocons Losing ‘Antisemite’ As a Blanket Smear? appeared first on The American Conservative.

President Donald Trump, along with much of his administration, is clearly frustrated with the slow pace of peace talks to end the Russo–Ukrainian War. Trump has, at various times, castigated both Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky for refusing to truly seek peace. Trump’s frustration has been matched by Vice President J.D. Vance, who has personally argued with Zelenskyy and recently said that Russia was “asking for too much.” Likewise, Secretary of State Marco Rubio spearheaded the idea that the Trump administration could walk away from mediating between the two sides.

But since that time, Trump has sought to organize a meeting between Zelensky and Putin in Istanbul, and has even floated going there himself to oversee the talks, in a last-ditch effort to secure peace between two sides the administration seems to believe do not want it.

The Trump administration’s desire for peace is understandable—but so is their belief that both sides are not seeking it. While some of the Russian government’s demands, such as the recognition of Crimea as Russian territory, are reasonable, others are complete non-starters. Among these is the amorphous “denazification” of Ukraine, which seems akin to demanding some sort of constitutional regime change in Kiev, something the United States likely would not sanction and which would not be accepted by Ukraine’s population. Likewise, Putin’s actions—such as bombing definitively civilian areas and, as Trump has discussed in private, killing children—do not indicate he is interested in finding peace.

Unfortunately, this should not be a surprise. Russia is winning the war. Some voices in the West have tried to argue otherwise, or at least have tried to portray the war as a stalemate. While this was once true, it is no longer: Russia is slowly, but consistently, taking more land in Ukraine, inch by inch. Short of a miracle for the Ukrainian armed forces, there is no feasible way that most of the occupied territories, particularly the Donbas and Crimea, will ever leave Russia’s control.

This, among other facts, is something the Ukrainian side has stubbornly refused to accept, which has also caused annoyance with Kiev in the Trump administration. Claiming that all of Ukraine’s land would be reconquered was once an understandable attempt at raising morale, but it has now become an albatross for peace talks. Crimea and the majority of the Donbas have been fully integrated into the Russian Federation. But Zelensky’s peace plans have completely ignored this reality. His 10-point “peace formula,” which he marketed for years, included the restoration of all of Ukraine’s conquered territories and Russia agreeing to be held accountable by international courts—two utter impossibilities.

Zelensky’s newest plan, from earlier this year, was a response to the Trump administration’s aforementioned framework. While it dropped demands to get back all of Ukraine’s territory—though without accepting Russian control—it once again included an American-backed security guarantee. This was particularly galling, as practically every major foreign policy official in the Trump administration, including Trump himself, had repeatedly shut down the possibility of an American-backed security guarantee.

Part of the Ukrainian government’s intransigence comes from political necessity. Zelensky has put himself in an impossible situation: Accepting the loss of about 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory would effectively end his political career and, after years of promising total victory, could engender some sort of revolution in the capital. It will almost certainly create a stab-in-the-back narrative dominating the years to come, which could induce further political chaos in the country. Nor is Europe in a position to come to Ukraine’s aid if demanded by a security guarantee. The most Ukraine will get is the recently signed minerals deal, which Zelensky, correctly, has deemed not to be a true security guarantee. Yet Trump is not responsible for Zelensky having put himself in such a difficult political position, and is certainly not responsible for his political future in Kiev.

Zelensky did heed Trump’s demand to meet with Putin in Turkey, although Putin did not. But even if Putin had, it is unlikely either side would have agreed to an end. Neither has reason to do so: Ukraine is not losing at a fast enough pace to jolt the Ukrainian establishment into seeking peace, and Russia is not winning at a slow enough pace to make them desire a quick end to the war. If Ukraine squints, they can still see a way to get back more land. If Russia squints, they can still see a way to burst through Ukraine’s defenses. Until one (or both) sides can no longer see such eventualities, neither will truly want peace.

And while this moment most probably will eventually come, there is no way of knowing how or when; it could take months or years. And already, the war has been a huge distraction, eating up much of the energy and momentum of the first few months of the administration. This is likely what caused Rubio to make his initial threat of walking away.

But the administration has yet to follow through on that threat, as the minerals deal signing and the constant updates about the pace of peace negotiations demonstrates. Peace may seem tantalizingly close, which could be a reason why the administration, though it has threatened to swear off playing a mediating role, is still keeping its foot half in the negotiating room. But it is abundantly clear that neither side is interested in truly ending the war. As a result, it’s time to walk away entirely so long as Russia and Ukraine remain unable to compromise and articulate a mutually acceptable vision for a settlement.

The post It’s Time for America to Walk Away Completely From Ukraine–Russia appeared first on The American Conservative.

James Comey

Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi issued a weak statement on James Comey’s assassination threat against President Trump.

“We vigorously investigate anything that can be taken as a potential threat against our protectees. We are aware of the social media posts by the former FBI Director & we take rhetoric like this very seriously. Beyond that, we do not comment on protective intelligence matters,” Secret Service spox Anthony Guglielmi said on X.

We vigorously investigate anything that can be taken as a potential threat against our protectees. We are aware of the social media posts by the former FBI Director & we take rhetoric like this very seriously. Beyond that, we do not comment on protective intelligence matters. pic.twitter.com/uhYSB7GYvt

— Anthony Guglielmi (@SecretSvcSpox) May 16, 2025

Protectees? James Comey – THE FORMER FBI DIRECTOR – threatened the sitting President of the United States.

James Comey created a media firestorm after he posted a cryptic message to his Instagram account on Thursday spelled out in seashells: “86 47”

“Cool shell formation on my beach walk,” Comey said in his caption.

Comey Trump assassination social media post

James Comey deleted the assassination threat and updated with an obvious lie.

“I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message. I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down,” Comey said on Instagram.

Comey implied he did not assemble the shell formation. He is claiming that he just happened to stumble across the assassination message while he was on his beach walk.

Comey assassination post comment

ODNI Tulsi Gabbard on Thursday evening called for former FBI Director James Comey to be put behind bars.

The FBI and DHS are investigating Comey over his social media post.

“We are aware of the recent social media post by former FBI Director James Comey, directed at President Trump. We are in communication with the Secret Service and Director Curran. Primary jurisdiction is with SS on these matters and we, the FBI, will provide all necessary support,” Kash Patel said on Thursday evening.

We are aware of the recent social media post by former FBI Director James Comey, directed at President Trump. We are in communication with the Secret Service and Director Curran. Primary jurisdiction is with SS on these matters and we, the FBI, will provide all necessary support.

— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) May 15, 2025

A former Secret Service Agent told RealClearPolitics reporter Susan Crabtree that Comey has likely already received a visit from Secret Service.

The agent said: “Look, here’s the deal, they’re sending agents out, and they’re gonna talk to him, and he’s not gonna have a choice. He’s gonna have to talk to them, because this stuff about, well, I, you know, I found this on the beach. I didn’t know what it meant. None of that makes sense.”

“These threat investigations are immediate,” he said. “There’s no delay in these types of investigations, they are going to see to speak to him as soon as possible.”

.@Charles__Marino , a former Secret Service agent and national security expert, tells me James Comey is “gonna have a very, very, very long night.”

From his experience in the USSS, Marino predicts the Washington field offices for the USSS and the FBI have already been…

— Susan Crabtree (@susancrabtree) May 16, 2025

The post Secret Service Issues Statement on Comey’s Trump Assassination Post appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Sometimes it seems like CNN’s Scott Jennings really enjoys his work at the liberal network. He makes ‘owning the libs’ look like an art form.

This week, he managed to get a Democrat operative to admit that the New York case against Trump was nothing more than the organized ‘resistance’ and lawfare campaign against Trump.

Anyone with a functioning brain knew this was the case but you will rarely hear a dedicated liberal admit it.

RedState has details:

During CNN’s “The Arena with Kasie Hunt,” Hunt spoke to Lis Smith, former communications advisor to Pete Buttigieg, and Jennings about the Democratic base being “mad” at party leaders in Washington, D.C. after Sen. Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) “fold” on the continuing resolution (CR), preventing a government shutdown.

She agreed with Jennings, saying that “Democrats are learning … that Democrats can not only be the party of resistance.”

“Like we resisted so hard between 2017 and 2024,” Smith said. “We impeached the guy [Trump]. Like, we prosecuted him. Convicted him of 34 felony counts. And guess what, he still got elected. I don’t know how much harder we can resist right now.”

Jennings did sort of look like the cat who swallowed the canary and said, “Wait, are you admitting that the case against Trump in New York was part of the organized Democratic party resistance?”

Smith smiled, laughed, and replied, “It was a Democratic prosecutor.”

Here’s the clip:

I can’t believe it. They finally admitted it on live TV:

The prosecution of President Trump was an organized effort by the Democratic Party “resistance.”

Lawfare is real. The justice system was weaponized against President Trump. pic.twitter.com/uvMKTHcA53

— Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) May 15, 2025

Jennings shared the clip, saying “I can’t believe it. They finally admitted it on live TV.”

I can’t believe it. They finally admitted it on live TV:

The prosecution of President Trump was an organized effort by the Democratic Party “resistance.”

Lawfare is real. The justice system was weaponized against President Trump. pic.twitter.com/uvMKTHcA53

— Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) May 15, 2025

We all knew this was true from the beginning. They knew it too, but it’s fun to hear one of them finally say it out loud.

The post CNN’s Scott Jennings Gets Democrat to Admit NY Case Against Trump Was Just Part of the Organized ‘Resistance’ (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

ODNI Tulsi Gabbard on Thursday evening called for former FBI Director James Comey to be put behind bars.

James Comey posted a cryptic message to his Instagram account on Thursday spelled out in seashells: “86 47”

“Cool shell formation on my beach walk,” Comey said in his caption.

Comey Trump assassination social media post

Comey deleted the post after major backlash, and he updated with an unbelievable comment.

“I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message. I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down,” Comey said on Instagram.

So Comey expects the public to believe that he, a former FBI Director, did not know the meaning of “86.”

James Comey is also implying he did not assemble the shell formation. He is claiming that he just happened to stumble across the assassination message while he was on his beach walk.

Comey assassination post comment

Comey’s call for the assassination of Trump comes after two close calls in the last year.

President Trump was shot in the ear on July 13 during a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.

A month later, Ryan Routh stuck the muzzle of his rifle through the fencing at Trump’s Palm Beach golf course while the president was playing a round of golf with his good friend Steve Witkoff.

Tulsi Gabbard said Comey must be held accountable for his call to assassinate President Trump.

“James Comey, in my view, should be held accountable and put behind bars for this,” Tulsi Gabbard told Jesse Watters.

I’m very concerned for the president’s life,” Tulsi said. “We’ve already seen assassination attempts. I’m very concerned for his life.”

WATCH:

DNI Tulsi Gabbard calls for James Comey to be put behind bars pic.twitter.com/Houy8WdFC9

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) May 16, 2025

The FBI, DHS and Secret Service are now investigating former FBI Director James Comey over his Trump assassination social media post.

“We are aware of the recent social media post by former FBI Director James Comey, directed at President Trump. We are in communication with the Secret Service and Director Curran. Primary jurisdiction is with SS on these matters and we, the FBI, will provide all necessary support,” Kash Patel said on Thursday evening.

We are aware of the recent social media post by former FBI Director James Comey, directed at President Trump. We are in communication with the Secret Service and Director Curran. Primary jurisdiction is with SS on these matters and we, the FBI, will provide all necessary support.

— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) May 15, 2025

The post ODNI Tulsi Gabbard Calls For James Comey to be Put Behind Bars Over Trump Assassination Post (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.