Trump Administration slashes refugees to lowest level in years.

 

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau meets South African refugees. Politico. 

The Trump administration is slashing new refugee admissions to the lowest level in years, with only 7500 being accepted next year. Politico. Priority will be giving to Afrikaners from South Africa who face discrimination from their government, along with other victims of discrimination. This would be a dramatic reversal compared to Biden, who allowed 100,000 refugees in a year, and even less than Trump's first term that allowed 11,000 in. Trump said that Biden was abusing the refugee program and that it was being reformed. 

My Comment:

This is long overdue. The refugee system had long been abused to allow people in that were anything but. Instead of taking people from actual warzones, like Ukraine/Russia, we were taking economic migrants from countries like Haiti and many from Central and South America. Those folks might have had hard lives at home, but they were hardly refugees. 

The focus now seems to be Afrikaners and I agree they are in serious trouble in South Africa. The media likes to downplay how badly they are treated and how the whole area seems like it is in pre-genocide mode. The media hates the idea that a white group of people could be a victim so they downplay what is happening there. 

There's another advantage in taking the Afrikaners and that's that they will be likely to contribute to America. Many of our more recent refugees are just sitting on the dole and not actually helping the economy by working. I think these folks will do so, just like former waves of actual refugees like the ones that came from Vietnam or the first wave or two from Cuba. Generally speaking, folks that are actually fleeing from violence or threats are going to be a lot more grateful for being rescued over some economic migrant who just wants government benefits. 

Indeed, I think we should consider sending at least some of these refugees from the Biden area home. Syria and Iraq are good examples. They aren't exactly safe now, but the wars that devastated both countries have ended. At least some of them should be allowed to go back. 

As for refugees in general, I think it's clear that America has taken more than their fair share. We really don't need to take anymore at this point, and honestly the only reason we are taking these South Africans is because nobody else will. We don't necessary owe the Afrikaners anything but if anyone qualifies as a refugee it's them.  

Massive police raid in Rio De Janeiro leaves at least 120 people dead

 

Corpses line the streets in the aftermath of the raid. Reuters. 

A massive police raid in Rio De Janeiro has left at least 120 people dead. Reuters. The raid targeted the Comando Vermelho cartel and was planned over two months. The operation was more of a battle than a police action with the gang members being herded into a hillside before being attacked. The total casualties are in dispute with police saying 120 people died in the battle while local public defenders say the toll is 132. There are reports that some of the gang members were tortured and/or executed. Brazil has been criticized for the behavior of their police forces before and will likely draw dramatically more in the wake of this battle. 

My Comment:

I've got mixed feelings about this. I have zero sympathy for these gangsters. From what I understand, the Comando Vermelho cartel (Red Command), are a major cocaine cartel. As a Cartel, they do normal cartel things, like murder, kidnapping, extortion and generally rule the areas they control with an iron fist. Well, they used to, this will be a huge blow to them. Not only did they lose more than 100 men to violence, they also had another 100 arrested by police. This will be a huge blow for them and may break their back in Rio De Janeiro. 

But this raid barely qualifies as a raid. Indeed, this is a battle, the police funneled the gangsters into a hillside kill zone in a classic ambush. They had no real chance to win this battle and the fact that only 4 police were killed (assuming reports are accurate) at a cost of more 100 of their own means this battle was more of a rout. 

Aggressive actions against drug cartels are nothing new. The Mexican Drug war is a good example, though most of the fighting was between drug cartels, the government and police battled the Cartels as well. And there is, of course, Americas new operations against drug smugglers at sea. The fact that police were using military tactics aren't super new globally. 

What is new is the fact that the police didn't seem to act any better than the gang they were targeting. If the reports of people being tortured or executed are true then this wasn't even a battle, it was a massacre. Though these people were scumbags, executing defenseless prisoners is a serious crime. And torture is also entirely unacceptable. 

It's also just stupid. If criminals know that they are going to be executed and tortured and not allowed to surrender, why surrender? Much better to keep fighting to the death in that case, which means more deaths on both sides. There's a reason why perfidy is a war crime after all. 

It's also disturbing that this is happening under Lula. President Lula is a far left lunatic who came into power the same way Joe Biden did, a contested election that appeared to be fraudulent. He used legitimate protests against a poorly run election as an excuse to jail his political opponent, former president Jair Bolsonaro. Though Lula wasn't involved in this raid, as it was a local governor that ordered the operation from Bolsonaro's party, it does make me concerned that he will be inspired by this raid. 

So could this be the start of something bigger? It's very possible. I don't know how much of the Red Command is left but I am guessing they will want revenge. It could end up being a small scale war. And there is no reason to believe that this will be the only raid targeting the cartels... 

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson argues that Joe Biden's pardons are invalid.

 

Mike Johnson and Joe Biden. Fox News/Getty. 

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has argued that Joe Biden's pardons are invalid due to autopen usage. Fox News. Johnson said that entire categories of federal criminals were given pardons or commutations, but said Biden wasn't even aware of it. The comments come after a 100 page congressional report was released. Johnson said that the pardons could be in legal jeopardy and said that it couldn't be tolerated when a "checked out" president is having his decisions made for him. Biden, for his part, has said that he made all decisions on pardons and said the accusations are baseless. 

My Comment:

This seems like political theater for me. I have little doubt that Joe Biden issued pardons that he didn't have the full details of. I also think it's likely that some of the pardons that were delivered via autopen were not actually authorized. The problem is what can be done about it?

My guess? Not much. I don't think there is any precedence for removing a pardon once invoked. This would even be true if the pardon was fraudulent on its face. If some criminal was released by a staffer and Biden had nothing to do with it, even then, I don't think anything can be done. There just isn't anything in the constitution or case law that says fake pardons can be revoked. 

With that being said, I do think the issue was a serious one. I legitimately don't think that Biden himself was in full control of the presidency and it's absolutely not clear if he was in charge. It's very possible, probable even, that these pardons were absolutely not released by him. 

So why even bring it up? I am hoping this means that these presidential aides will be investigated and charged for fraud. If there is even a chance that this is true then people absolutely need to go to jail. Staffers issuing pardons for an enfeebled president is not something that should ever be allowed to happen again. 

I think some of it is some fairly cynical political maneuvering though. Biden being an invalid is helpful for Republicans in 2026 and reminding the voters of that is a good move politically. And I do feel this is a real scandal, when you get down to it a lot of what the Biden administration did may not have been done by Biden himself and that's a huge problem

But I fear it may backfire. It reminds me of the Jeffrey Epstein own-goal earlier in the year. Pam Bondi and Trump promised huge file releases and when what they had underwhelmed it backfired on them pretty badly. The same thing could happen here, there might be enough for a perp-walk or two, but the chances of success are pretty low. 

My real concern is Biden himself. The man is 82, feeble and well in to dotage. And he is currently fighting an aggressive form of cancer that may leave him dead sooner rather than later. Admitting that gives me no pleasure and I think that's a real risk of investigating Biden. Republicans aren't as vicious as Democrats, we generally don't cheer when folks get hurt and this kind of investigation on Biden when he may indeed be dying seems like a huge risk. 

Population growth is flatlining leading to major economic concerns...

 

The Evancho family quoted in the article. NPR.

Population growth has flatlined in many countries today, which will lead to economic problems down the line. NPR. Since the 1970's the average size of a family has decreased by half, with the effect especially profound in Western developed countries. In 70% of the 15th most wealthy countries, the fertility rate is not at replacement, meaning more people are dying than being born. The birth rate in the United States is 1.6, well short of the 2.1 needed to grow the population. The lack of new people will make filling jobs more difficult and paying for senior citizens almost impossible. The situation is even worse in East Asia as China, Japan and South Korea are facing demographic collapse. Some countries are moving to fix the demographic problems by incentivizing births, but those programs are often ineffective. 

My Comment:

This is one of humanity's biggest problem. The most valuable and capable people on earth are refusing to have kids, for the most part. Or, failing that, they have one or two at most. This is how Idiocracy started and it's a real problem, despite the fact that the movie was supposed to be a parody. 

There has been a lot of propaganda about having a large family being "selfish" and I think that argument is stupid. Having kids is pretty much the whole point, but the problem of overpopulation is mostly a foreign problem. Yes, the 1.5 billion people in India are causing environmental problem, but having three kids instead of two in the United States isn't going to change that at all. 

The fact is that most of our government services have been created with the idea that the population would continue to grow. Things like social security and Medicare need a population of young workers that can pay into the system and if those young people don't exist the whole thing will fall apart, to the point where the systems will likely collapse. 

So why is this happening and how do we fix it? Well, for one, the economy isn't doing as well as it should be. Folks have jobs but those jobs don't pay enough to pay for kids. Much of it is due to the insane cost of childcare, which often means that the wife pays for childcare with her salary and the husband pays for everything else. Kids aren't quite expensive as they seem and a lot of the costs are optional (like getting them the newest gadgets or enrolling them in every sport), but they are a major cost. It's not like in the third world or historically where kids could be put to work and be put in charge of younger kids, which can offset the costs they produce. 

Costs are part of the issue, but the absolutely broken state of dating in the west is crucial as well. Online dating and the lack of "third places" (the other two being home and work) has done a number on anyone in their 30's, 20's or even their 40's, to the point where it's extremely hard to find someone to have kids with in the first place. Modern internet dating is a humiliating process for both men and women and everyone is at the mercy of an algorithm that cares more about extracting money from people than actually getting them together. 

MeToo is also a huge problem as it completely torpedoed male-female relations. Men are legitimately afraid of women now, at least the ones that actually care about what women think. Actual abusers don't care at all, but most men I have spoken too are so afraid of being falsely accused that they won't participate in dating anymore (though at my age, most of them have gotten married years ago, like the last guys getting on the chopper out of Vietnam). These fears are probably overblown but it's very clear that MeToo did a lot of damage.

And not just to men. Women too have been sold a bill of goods and it's damaged relations on that end too. Women now greatly overestimate the number of actual abusers and are more likely to take men's actions in the worst possible way. Their view of the world is false, most sexual abusers are easily avoidable and most women have little to fear from a man who is just asking them out on a date, though, to be fair, the risk is never zero. 

Another factor I think is the breakdown of extended families. When folks all lived in villages together there was never a shortage of grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins to take care of the kids and help out new parents with whatever issues they have. But today? Grandma and Grandpa are in another city, if they are even still alive because folks are having kids late, folks already don't have brothers and sisters and there just isn't anyone else to help. Given how folks have to move now to find jobs, there just isn't the support network there anymore. 

So how do we fix this? I know there are government programs, like the Trump accounts here in the United States, but I don't think that solves the fundamental problems we see above. There might be a few edge cases where it could help, but how does a government program fix dating? Or fix the modern family? I just don't think it will have enough of an effect. 

But something has to be done because if it isn't Western governments will continue to try to solve the problem with the same thing they have been doing, allowing in a massive number of immigrants. Some immigration could be useful, if it was high skilled people from other western countries, but I fear it will be those 1.5 billion Indians that will be used instead. Given how absolutely ruined India is as a country, it won't bode well for the United States or any country that chooses that option. 

Kamala Harris hints she may run for President again...

 

Kamala Harris. Politico/Getty.

Kamala Harris has hinted that she may run for President again. Politico. Harris said in an interview with the BBC that she was not done with politics and that "service was in (her) bones". She was asked directly if she would run, but she hedged, saying "possibly" and saying that she hasn't decided yet. Harris dismissed polling saying she would have an outside shot to win the primaries and general election by saying that if she listened to the polls she would not have had any success in her career. Harris also took a shot at Joe Biden, saying she should have encouraged him not to run due to his lack of stamina compared to President Trump. 

My Comment:

Harris would be the least qualified candidate in an already poor field for the Democrats in 2028. The idea that she is even considering running is pretty much a joke. I can't see her winning a primary race, even against poor candidates like Gavin Newsom (who has run California into the ground) or Pete Buttigieg (who was the worst Transportation Secretary in American history). She's just not qualified for the job. 

And she proves it too with this interview. She said that she should have told Joe Biden to drop out of the 2024 race but didn't do so and for once, I agree with her. It was clear before Biden even took office that he was no longer mentally fit enough to president. She should have been pushing for Biden to resign the second he took office. 

Instead, she stayed silent until now. This shows she does not have the judgement to be President and that she will put the party in front of her personal ambitions. Asking Biden to step down would have been the right thing to do but the Democrats would have crucified her for it. She did the politically expedient thing, not the right thing, and folks should remember that. 

So why is she even entertaining a run? I am guessing it's ego. She's not blaming herself for running a bad campaign, she's blaming Biden for not dropping out. She hasn't learned a thing about why America didn't want her and is arrogant enough to think that if she had a full campaign cycle that she could somehow con America into voting for her. The fact that Trump won't be running in 2028 is another factor that might falsely convince her that she's got a shot. 

And like I said, it's not like the Democrats have much else. Besides her., only Gavin Newsom has a shot (Pete Buttigieg won't be the candidate because black voters hate him). Newsom is going to be eaten alive, both in the primaries, and the general election if he makes it that far. Even Kamala Harris can rightly point out that he has run California into the ground to the point where folks are fleeing the state. 

Harris also has the advantage of being a mixed race woman, things that the Democrats obsess over. She might just be able to play the race card to win the primaries. Doing so did not work for her during the election of course, but she can use it during the primaries to great effect. 

Regardless, I think this is mostly nonsense. Some of it is to sell her book, but I think she's actually trying to protect her legacy. I don't think Harris is a hugely smart person by the standards of presidential candidates (though I don't think she's an idiot), but I am guessing she knows she doesn't have a chance to win in 2028. But I do think she wants folks to remember her the way she's framing it. She didn't lose against Trump because she was a bad candidate or Trump ran a masterful campaign. She lost because of Biden, a White Male, didn't do the "right thing" and drop out so she could be coronated. 

Trump Administration frustration with Israel boils over after the Knesset votes for annexation of the West Bank.

 

Vice President JD Vance in Israel. Politico/Getty.

The Trump administration has become frustrated with Israel and has publicly criticized them for a vote to annex the West Bank. Politico. Actions by Israel have threatened the Gaza war cease fire, most notably a few strikes in response to an attack and the vote to annex the West Bank. The Trump administration said the strike, which killed as many as 40 people, was an overreaction and was disproportionate to the attack on two Israeli soldiers. The vote to annex the West Bank frustrated Trump so much that he threatened to pull all support from Israel and JD Vance said he was personally insulted by the move. Netanyahu faces a difficult balancing act. He blamed opposition parties for the vote and said it was meant to sow discord as VP Vance and Secretary of State Rubio are visiting, but he will need support from those parties if he wants to remain in power next year. However, he also can't risk angering President Trump as Trump is very popular in Israel, especially after negotiating the peace deal and release of hostages. 

My Comment:

A fairly disturbing development out of Israel. I am not surprised that the Trump administration is angry with Israel, as I share their frustration. The hardliners in the Knesset are playing an extremely dangerous game and one that risk not only reigniting the war but also losing the support of the most pro-Israel president in American history. 

Indeed, the article points out that Trump could make or break Benjamin Netanyahu in next years elections. Trump is extremely popular in Israel, even before he brokered the peace deal. Now, his approval rating is in the upper 70's and he is extremely well liked among Netanyahu's conservative base. Should Trump choose to not support Netanyahu, I can't imagine him winning next year. 

The annexation threat is the real problem. The strikes were not a good idea and were not really proportionate to what happened, but it's a minor incident in the big scheme of things. The annexation threat though? It's something that could derail the entire peace process. 

And the biggest problem is that it's the West Bank. The West Bank was not an issue during the Gaza war. There wasn't much in the way of conflict even during the darkest days of the war, and notably, the West Bank did not enter the war when Hamas launched the October 7th terror attack. To escalate against them now is absurd.

It's a terrible message to send to the folks of the West Bank. They rejected the kind of violence that Hamas embraced. You would think they would be rewarded for that, not punished. But instead they risk being annexed by Israel, something that might make them rethink the no-violence thing... 

Netanyahu is basically under siege from the hardliners in his coalition. They didn't want the war to end and do want to annex the West Bank, even though I don't think it's going to happen. I think that Netanyahu is right, this was an attempt to sew chaos when JD Vance and Marco Rubio were in the country. And it absolutely accomplished that. 

Will this have longer term affects? I am guessing not. Netanyahu did seem to try and make nice with the Trump administration and they seem to be pretty satisfied at this point. But I do wonder if this will be in the back of Trump's mind when he decides to endorse or not endorse Netanyahu next year. Certainly, both he, JD Vance and Marco Rubio were upset with him and it's not the first time this has happened. 

Walmart has halted job offers for H-1B visa holders.

 

File photo of a California Walmart. BBC/Reuters.

Walmart has halted job offers for H-1B visa holders after reforms to the program. BBC. President Trump increased the filing fee to $100,000 per application and Walmart made the decision in response. Walmart is America's largest retail employer and had approved 2000 H-1B visa holders in 2025 alone. The move won't affect visa holders that are already employed at Walmart. India dominates the source of H-1B visas, with more than 70% of them hailing from India. 

My Comment:

I am glad that Walmart is making this move but why on earth were they ever hiring H-1B visa holders in the first place? Walmart is America's biggest employer, so why weren't they hiring American citizens? I can't imagine there are that many jobs at Walmart that requires hiring from the world's pool of workers. Indeed, I would think that Walmart, being such a huge employer, could find people within their organization to promote, instead of hiring from India. 

This is exactly what I wanted to see through when Trump modified the H-1B system. I'd prefer if we ended it entirely, and have a moratorium on immigration from countries like India entirely, but this is a good first step. Like I said, I don't believe that Walmart, or most of these other companies, don't have talent available in America to fill these positions, they just don't want to because H-1B's are cheaper. 

Raising the fee made that statement no longer true. $100,000 is a very high initial cost for someone that might not work out in the end. Though you might save some money hiring an H-1B at a lower salary, that initial hit makes it a lot harder to stomach. If it's a big hit to a company as big as Walmart it's going to have major knock off effects on smaller companies that are doing the same thing. 

I do wonder if political considerations were at play here as well. Nobody in America, outside of the Indians that take advantage of the programs, and the big businesses that want to drive down wages, likes this program and almost everyone wants it to either be majorly reformed or ended entirely. Though there hasn't been major protest movements against the program, I would not be surprised if one arrives soon, the program is that unpopular. 

Will there be other dominos that fall too? I hope so. Like I have said, I don't believe that there really is a worker shortage in America. I think the big tech companies will continue to hire these people, but I am thinking the days of retail outlets like Walmart doing this are probably over, at least in the short term. 

Brazen daylight theft of crown jewels from the Louvre, in major humiliation for France.

 

The scene of the crime where the criminals gained access to the museum. BBC/EPA.

A brazen theft of crown jewels from the Louvre has humiliated France. BBC. The thieves parked a ladder hoist up into the museum and were able to use power tools to secure the jewels. One piece, a crown worn by Napoleon III's wife, was recovered after the thieves made their escape on scooters. Security did not stop the thieves and many of the thefts occurred in areas where there were no surveillance cameras. The jewels are likely to be lost even if the thieves are caught as they are likely to be broken down. The precious metals will likely be melted down while the jewels will be recut to hide their origin. The jewels that have been stolen have been described as priceless and are a major part of France's cultural heritage. The loss of such treasures and the ease that the theft will be a major humiliation to France. 

My Comment:

From what I understand the thieves pulled the classic "wear a safety vest and nobody will question you". These guys were in and out in a few minutes and they got away clean. It was a near-perfect heist and if it hadn't been for the fact they dropped one of the treasures it would have been. 

These jewels are likely lost forever. The thieves are probably already done with breaking them up and melting down the gold. Cutting the jewels will take longer but the idea that any of these jewels will be recovered intact. It's possible some of them could be recovered, but they won't be in the form they once were and they could no longer be considered France's crown jewels. 

The thieves will likely be caught eventually. I am guessing this is the biggest "redball" case in all of France right now. The entire investigative resources of France will likely be used to track these thieves down. Given there were multiple suspects and the high pressure that the investigative forces will use, I am guessing someone will talk. 

Regardless, it's hard to understate just how humiliating this is to France. These crown jewels are what remains of their legacy in terms of what has survived the 1792 revolution. To see these items stolen, and likely destroyed, is a major humiliation. The fact that they are almost certainly not going to recover these jewels intact means that cultural legacy is going to be destroyed. 

It comes at a very vulnerable moment for France. France has been an absolute mess since snap elections in 2024, where Emmanuel Macron's party lost their majority and they have had a revolving door at the government since then. Macron himself is very unpopular and is seen as a lame duck.

This is going to make things much worse. Folks are going to see this as another major sign of France's decline, and it's hard to argue otherwise. France has been a mess politically for years and is nowhere near the world power it once was. It also raises the question of how this was allowed to happen, and it just seems like it was incompetence all around. Supposedly security did not react to the theft as it was happening. If you can't even protect your most valuable cultural artifacts, how can you protect anything else? How can you run a country that way? It would be like if someone walked into the National Archives and walked out with the constitution, how could anyone take you seriously after that? 

Hunting stand found near Palm Beach Airport had a line of sight where President Trump boards and departs from

 

The hunting stand found near the airport. NBC News/Secret Service photo.

A hunting stand near Palm Beach International Airport had a line of sight where President Trump boards and departs from Air Force One, raising major security concerns. NBC News. The stand was found across the street where private planes, along with Air Force One, taxi and unload. Air Force One doesn't always park there but was doing so during construction. The stand had been there for a considerable time and there was no one present when the stand was discovered during a routine security check before President Trump arrived there on Friday to visit Mar-A-Lago. President Trump faced multiple assassination attempts and the incident comes after the assassination of Charlie Kirk last month. 

My Comment:

Given the location of this stand, there is approximately zero chance of this being a legitimate hunting stand. If the images I am seeing of the location of this stand is correct, it's next to an Army Reserve center and north of a government research lab. It's a small stand of trees in an otherwise extremely urban area, and I doubt there are any deer to hunt there. It did appear to have a clear line of sight to Palm Beach International. I really can't think of any other reason for this stand to be up in this tree outside of something disturbing. I mean, maybe someone wanted to watch planes taking off and landing, but there is a public park across the canal and street that would serve that purpose fine. This wasn't a plane watcher. 

This stand was about 200 yards, give or take, from where Trump would have been exiting Air Force One. That's not a difficult shot for someone with a scoped rifle, and even with iron sights it would have been doable. Anyone with even moderate training and/or range time could have made a shot at the President if this has not been discovered. 

And it's not like this is a spur of the moment thing. You don't put a tree stand in this area for any benign reason. This is something that takes a bit of effort to set up. I'm not a hunter so I have never used a tree stand, but it does take some time put into place and it's more effort that someone is likely to make. This was someone working with some kind of plan.

The real question is why the plan wasn't put into motion? From what I understand Trump hasn't been to Mar-A-Lago that much this year, at least compared to his first term, and he usually doesn't visit it during the summer. And until very recently, construction was in place that meant that this tarmac wasn't being used. The reason this stand was discovered is because they were starting to use the tarmac again. I am guessing that whoever set up the stand abandoned it after it was clear that Trump wasn't going to be a viable target from the perch for months.

It is a relief that the Secret Service was able to find this. The threat to Trump was real and unlike the Butler assassination attempt, they crossed their "t's". They had missed an obvious sniper perch during the Butler speech, but this time they managed to catch it. Perhaps cleaning house had a positive effect?

Now we have a manhunt on our hands. Whoever made this perch probably has an active plan to attack President Trump and it needs to be stopped as soon as possible. Given the obvious competence in picking the spot, I do worry that this guy is pretty smart and if he isn't caught soon, he might try an attack. Hopefully there is some kind of evidence from the site that can be used to track this person down. Given that the stand was there I am guessing they should have at least some evidence there. 

What really concerns me is that he knows he is burned and will attempt an attack. Perhaps not on President Trump, given his location was burned and the plan appeared to have been abandoned months ago. But I am concerned that he could target someone with considerably less protection than Trump, like a local politician or media figure that lives in the Miami area. I am hoping that this person is caught very quickly before they can put any further plans into place... 

President Trump says he will meet with President Putin of Russia for talks on Ukraine.

 

President Trump and President Putin during their Alaska meeting. BBC/Reuters.

President Donald Trump says he will meet with President Vladimir Putin of Russia for talks on Ukraine after a "productive phone call". BBC. The two men will meet in Budapest, but no date for the meeting has been announced yet. The move comes as Trump is due to meet with President Zelensky of Ukraine. Trump said that they had talked quite about post-war economic ties between Russia and the United States. Trump seemed to back away from threats to give Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, saying that American needed the weapons themselves. Trump met with Putin in August though no major breakthrough happened after the meeting. 

My Comment:

Looks like Trump the diplomat is at it again. After his success with the Gaza war, Trump wants to crack the hardest nut yet, ending the war in Ukraine. Given that the issue fell on the backburner after the August meeting, it was pretty inevitable after the Gaza situation was dealt with that this war would be next on the menu. 

It also explains the saber rattling we have seen from Trump lately. I don't think, for example, that there was ever any serious attempt or intention to give Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, given that US forces would have to operate them and Russia would very likely see that as a casus belli for an actual nuclear war. But the saber rattling did have the effect of getting Putin to agree to a new meeting. 

The problem is that the Ukraine war is going to be an extremely difficult one to end, as I have been saying since it broke out. I've also said that Russia has little incentive to actually end a war that they are winning. They have been fairly active in the battlefield and their strategy of attrition is working. Ukraine is low on weapons, supplies and, most importantly, manpower. 

Zelensky, for his part, is going to be difficult to convince as well. I always say that he would be threatened by hardliners in his own government and if the war were to end he would be very quickly voted out of office. There is also the fact that even though Ukraine's defeat is inevitable, it would take quite some time to get there and Zelensky is probably hoping out for some kind of miracle that could draw NATO into the war. That's not likely to happen, but Zelensky doesn't care. 

But that doesn't mean that diplomacy is pointless. Putin could still be convinced that he's won enough and that any further warfare won't be worth the costs while at the same time getting a good trade deal with Trump. And Zelensky could realize that a negotiated settlement would be the best thing for his people. It's very possible that some deal could be made. 

Is it likely? Probably not. I am guessing that if something happens at this meeting, it could be a partial cease fire. My guess is something like declaring a cease fire on the energy war, which would benefit both sides, could be agreed to. Both sides have been hitting each other's infrastructure very hard and it's causing extreme damage. Ukraine is getting the worst of it, and given that it's getting very close to winter, they are going to want to keep the lights and heat on. I think that would be an easy thing to get an agreement on. 

The interesting thing about Trump's announcement is the talk about post-war trade. I am guessing that was the carrot to go along with the stick. Opening up Russia again would be an economic boon to both countries and even if all that is done is ending sanctions it would be a major incentive for Russia to cooperate. Russia has become largely independent economically, and is surviving the war well, but after opening up, they could easily rebuild what they have lost after the war. 

President Trump authorizes CIA action in Venezuela and may authorize air strikes.

 

President Trump and FBI Director Kash Patel. New York Post/AP.

President Trump has authorized CIA action in Venezuela and may also authorize air strikes. New York Post. Trump has launched airstrikes at drug smuggler boats in the ocean but has not targeted any strikes into Venezuela itself. He said the action was justified due to Venezuela's actions pertaining to illegal immigration and drug smuggling. Trump did not confirm if President Maduro was a target, saying it would be "stupid to answer that" but said that Venezuela is going to face increasing pressure. A flight of B-52's was deployed to the area as an intimidation tactic. 

My Comment:

It's crazy to me that news articles about this issue do not mention Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan former prison gang turned narco-terrorist group. These are the true target of these attacks, both at land and at sea, and it's very strange that they don't get mentioned in any of the articles I have read about this topic. 

I think Trump's explanation of why he's doing this is valid. Tren de Aragua have been pretty terrible in their actions. Everyone remembers the apartment complex in Colorado where they took over and blackmailed the residents there. They are highly involved in drug smuggling and sending illegal immigrants to the United States. 

And the Maduro government? They have close ties to them. They profit from the drug deals that these groups do and they helped facilitate the illegal immigration of these groups into the United States. That does justify these strikes and any further actions in my mind. There is no justification for a government trying to smuggle people into a country so they can more easily smuggle drugs and illegal immigrants into the country. 

The one question I do have is why Tren de Aragua instead of the Mexican Drug Cartels? The Cartels are a much larger threat then Tren de Aragua and they just put bounties on our ICE agents. I understand that politically it would be very hard to justify the same kind of actions against the Cartels, given that Mexico is a partner, if not an ally, But I would prefer we deal with the bigger threat. 

I do fear that this could lead to an attempt at regime change against the Maduro government. I am no fan of course, but I do think that doing so could end the same way every single other time we have tried to do so in the past 25 years or so. I can't think of a single time where it really worked out, with the possible exception of Iraq, but it took decades of bloody warfare for that to happen. 

Still, it's not like the Maduro government deserves to be in power. The fact that they are socialist alone should disqualify them from keeping power, but the fact that they won't even allow folks to vote them out is a big problem. If that was it, it wouldn't really be our problem, but they also send us drugs and immigrants and we shouldn't have to tolerate that. 

I will say that would be the difference between this conflict, which I kind of support, and the conflict with Russian in Ukraine, which I absolutely did not. Russia doesn't do the kinds of things to us that Venezuela does. They are sending us drugs or gang members to extort people and commit crimes. They aren't being particularly nice to Ukraine, but that's not our problem. 

Finally, I do have to say that escalating the fight against the drug cartels does go counter to Trump's desire to be seen as a peace keeper. To be fair, he's ended a half dozen wars, so he absolutely should get credit for that, but starting a new war, even though he's got a valid casus belli, is going to go cross purpose to getting his Nobel Peace Prize. 

The Supreme Court heard a major voting rights case that could eliminate many Democratic and toss-up congressional districts.

 

The US Supreme Court. ABC News/AFP/Getty.

The Supreme Court heard a major voting rights case that could eliminate many Democratic and toss-up congressional districts and allow Republicans to easily keep the house in 2026. ABC News. In 2022 a court ruled that Louisiana's congressional districts violated the rights of black voters in the case, forcing a redraw that created a 2nd Democratic district in the state. The Supreme Court heard arguments about the case that say that using race as a major factor in drawing the district violates the 14th amendment. Section 2 of the Voter Rights Act prevents "cracking", diluting black voters and "packing" which concentrates them, both for political gain. It is unclear how the court will rule. The court could make a narrow ruling which would say that race can still be used as a factor but the Louisiana case made it too large of a factor. Or they could have a broad ruling which would force elimination of race-based districts. The first option is predicted to be more likely but even that could be critical for the Republicans keeping the house. 

My Comment:

2026 is looking like it will be a wipe-out for the Democrats unless something radical changes. There is already efforts to redistrict in many red states, and that alone should be enough for Republicans to beat the Democrats given the conditions today. Obviously, we don't know what will happen in 2026, there could be an economic issue or a new war or something, that could change how popular the Republicans are, but if something like that doesn't happen, the Democrats are going to have a massively uphill battle. 

Right now the house in controlled 220-215, so they would need to gain three seats to take away a Republican majority. But there are several states that are redistricting including Texas (up to five new GOP seats), Florida (+3 seats), Ohio (+3) and North Carolina (+3) and that could be an easy 10 to 15 seats just there. And more states could follow suit. Though California and New York could do the same thing, they don't have anywhere near the seats to gain.

If there is a narrow ruling that forces a redrawing of Louisiana, it's very likely that the 2nd Democratic district in the state could go away, and even the 1st one could get eliminated as well. That's another two congressional seats and that means the Democrats would be in extreme trouble. This is the most likely outcome.

A wide ruling though? That would wipe the Democrats out for quite some time, they would not have a chance of winning the House for the foreseeable future. Such a ruling would force a huge number of redistricting gerrymanders and it would eliminate a lot of otherwise safe seats in Red States and might even force redrawing maps in blue states like California. 

What should the outcome of this case be? I think the idea that congressional districts being allowed to consider race is obviously prejudiced and a violation of the 14th amendment. All laws in America should be colorblind and it shouldn't matter at all who lives in a district, just that everyone has a chance to vote. Is that the likely outcome? Probably not. But I would appreciate if we move in that direction. 

All remaining Hamas hostages released as Trump signs peace declaration in Egypt.

 

President Donald Trump. BBC/Getty.

All remaining living Hamas hostages have been released as Trump signs a peace declaration in Egypt. BBC. Israel released roughly 1000 prisoners in exchange for the last 20 remaining living hostages that Hamas took during the October 7th attack. Trump signed a peace declaration in Egypt along with 20 other world leaders, and received the Order of the Nile from Egyptian President al-Sisi. President Trump said that the 2nd phase of negotiations are ongoing. Trump had also visited Israel earlier in the day and received praise there as well. Trump said that the cease-fire would hold and his next challenge would be ending the Russia-Ukraine war. 

My Comment:

Even if the peace deal does fall apart, Trump deserves a huge amount of credit for ending the hostage situation in the Gaza stip. The last 20 living hostages are now back home after two years of captivity. There are still some bodies that have to be returned, but supposedly that will take longer as many of them have been lost by Hamas. 

I do think that the cease-fire will hold, at least in the short term. The war may flare up in a few years, but for now I think the fighting will be done. Well, not all the fighting. From what I understand there is a bit of violence in Gaza right now as various factions are using the lull in fighting to settle old scores and position themselves for the post-war era. 

So why will it hold? I am guessing on the Israeli side Netanyahu is under immense pressure to keep the war ended, and not just from President Trump. His own people were growing tired of the war, outside of a few hardliners. But with Trump's pressure and real desire for peace, I can't see Netanyahu restarting the war at this point, barring some kind of attack from Gaza.

As for Hamas, I can't see them restarting the war anytime soon either. Much of their leadership is dead and most of their fighters are as well. They have no real base to recruit from and no real weapons or support left. They are going to lose power in Gaza and I can't see them ever regaining the power they had before October 7th. 

I do think, even if the cease-fire doesn't hold long term, that Trump has proven to be one of our best foreign policy presidents. All he does is end wars. I can't even count how many wars he has ended during his 2nd term. There was India-Pakistan, the Red Sea war against the Houthis in Yemen, the Congo war, the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, the Israel-Iran conflict and now Israel-Hamas. And I might even be forgetting one or two. That's a legacy of peace that most people could even dream of. 

Will Trump get any credit for it? To be fair, he's getting praise internationally, just about everyone in the Middle East seems pleased with this deal. Domestically, he's gotten a bit of praise from the Democrats, most notably from Senator Fetterman and former President Biden. But much of the Democratic Party is downplaying or ignoring the accomplishment, let alone the members of his base. Indeed, some of them have gone full nonsense about the agreement, saying that Trump had nothing to do with it, which is just deranged. 

The reaction from the pro-Hamas protesters has been completely absent as well. That tells me two things, they never really cared about Gaza in the first place, they just hated Trump and Israel. And that they honestly don't know how to react to the news. The far-left is going to far-left, I guess. 

Finally, Trump's next goal is ending the Russia-Ukraine war and that one is going to be a lot more difficult. I always said that the Israel-Gaza conflict was going to be comparatively easy to solve due to the fact that Hamas was largely defeated on the battlefield. That's not the case in the Ukraine conflict. Ukraine is certainly on the backfoot, and will lose the war eventually, but their army is still big enough to draw out the conflict for more than a year, if they make good decisions. If Trump somehow does manage to end the war quickly he will go down as one of the most important diplomats in American history, bar none. 

Afghanistan attacks Pakistan border region.

 

Afghan troops patrolling near the Pakistani border in abandoned US Humvees. BBC/AFP.

Afghanistan has attacked the Pakistan border region in retaliation for an airstrike. BBC. Pakistan and Afghanistan have differing claims on casualties but both acknowledge that the attacks occurred. Pakistan bombed a market in Kabul last week, claiming it was a hotbed of terrorist activity. Pakistan has long accused the Taliban of harboring the Pakistani Taliban, also known as the TPP, which have launched several attacks against Pakistan. The Afghan Taliban, which now rules the country, has always denied connections to the TPP. The move comes as Afghanistan has attempted to reform their image and reopen ties with other countries, finding success at normalizing relations with Pakistan's historic enemy, India. 

My Comment:

Interesting situation on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Both sides are claiming they beat back the other side in this border raid. Without a neutral third party, it's pretty impossible to tell which side got the worse of this conflict, and I would believe either side. Both the Taliban and Pakistan are well equipped and are battle hardened.  

It is frustrating to see the Taliban using US equipment in this conflict, regardless of your opinion of it. There is zero reason that we left behind all the weapons, vehicles and equipment for the Taliban to use against their enemies. They never should have been allowed to keep all of this stuff and it should have either been recovered or destroyed during our withdrawal. 

As for who is in the right here, I don't think either side is blameless. I do think that the Taliban is probably tolerating, if not actively helping, the TPP. The Taliban tolerates the TPP But I also don't understand how bombing markets in Kabul and other parts of Afghanistan is going to help and doing so is pretty obviously an act of war. Supposedly a few high ranking TPP militants were killed in this attack, so it's not like the Pakistani forces were totally off base, but they did cause some collateral damage. 

I am assuming that this will be the end of it for now. This was a tit-for-tat attack and it's something that the Taliban and Pakistan have done before, since the Taliban took over. There have been airstrikes and border skirmishes before and they never erupted into a full scale war. Indeed, the previous skirmishes have been exactly the same as these attacks now, so this really isn't unprecedented. 

And it's not like either side is really for war. Pakistan has serious economic issues and is threatened by India, so they have a major incentive to avoid a major conflict. The Taliban have major issues of their own, not the least of which is that they have no real allies and are international pariahs. They also have their own problem with terrorists, as ISIS-K remains a major force in Afghanistan. Indeed, that's a major reason why they tolerate the TPP in the first place. 

The Elephant in the room is, of course, India. These strikes occurred while a major Afghan diplomat  Acting Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi was visiting India and a major normalization of relations between India and Afghanistan. India still hasn't recognized the Taliban but they are re-opening their embassy and providing them additional assistance. This has obviously infuriated Pakistan and may be a major reason why they launched the airstrikes in the first place. 

New York Attorney General Letitia James indicted for bank fraud.

 

New York Attorney General Letitia James. New York Post/Reuters.

New York Attorney General Letitia James indicted for federal bank fraud charges. New York Post. James stands accused of lying about a property she bought in Virginia. She told the bank that she was not going to use the property for rentals but tax records show income from the residence, proving that she was lying to her loan officer. If convicted on both counts she could face 60 years in prison. James said the charges were retribution for bringing charges against Donald Trump. 

My Comment:

The irony here is pretty obvious. James was the one that charged Trump for similar actions and she managed to win the case, even though the case was partially overturned on appeal. But unlike Trump, this kind of crime actually is prosecuted regularly. From what I understand 2000 cases a year are brought for this kind of bank fraud. 

It's actually a serious charge that could lead to 30 years per charge. It's not something you would think of when you hear about it as bank fraud isn't that commonly discussed and I think a lot of people get away with it. But it is considered fraud to lie about what your property is going to be used for. 

In this case, James pretty clearly lied about what she was going to use the property for. She claimed that she was going to use it as a 2nd home but instead she used it as a rental property. Had the bank known that she would have gotten a lot worse loan rate, because rental property loans have dramatically more risk than properties used as a secondary residence. This cost her lender money, supposedly roughly $19,000 in interest payments. 

Indeed, this case seems completely open and shut. Unless there is some exculpatory evidence that comes out at trial, I can't see how she would ever get off in this case. The only thing I can think off is maybe jury nullification? If she got a sympathetic jury that likes her and hates Trump, I could see that as a possibility. But I really can't see many juries that would simply ignore an open and shut case like this just because of politics. 

James is saying that this case is retaliatory and though she is probably right that the case might not have brought under Kamala Harris if she had become president, that says more about Harris than the case itself. It is true that Trump was pushing for this case, but even then, an appeals court would be extremely unlikely to overturn the case when the evidence is this strong. Like I said, the evidence is pretty convincing and I am guessing that an unbiased justice department would have filed these charges regardless. 

I do think that the case is a political message as well. James brought some pretty ridiculous charges against Trump, a case with no victim and no complainant. She did this while being guilty of an actual federal crime. The message is that if you bring these kinds of ridiculous charges against Republicans, when they are in power they will put you under the microscope. And, if you are the kind of person that is willing to bring false charges against someone else, it's likely they will find things. 

Finally, as an aside, I have to say the most depressing thing about this is the fact that James was able to buy a three bedroom house in Norfolk Virginia for $137,000. I'm no expert in home prices in the area, but the fact that she was able to sell it for roughly $220,000 is just completely black pilling. James made out like a bandit, but folks like me, who couldn't afford the cheaper cost back in 2020 but could now, got totally screwed... 

Hamas has accepted Trump brokered peace deal along with Israel, potentially ending the Gaza War.

 

Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump. Fox News/Getty.

Hamas has accepted a Trump brokered peace deal along with Israel, potentially bringing an end to the Gaza War. Fox News. Trump said on Truth Social that Hamas had accepted the deal and that all hostages would be released by Hamas. In return Israel would pull out of the Gaza Strip in a phased withdrawal. Hamas would also lay down their arms and give up power in the Gaza Strip for an international coalition. The deal is expected to be signed on Thursday. The full details of the agreement has not been released. The living hostages will be released by 72 hours but the bodies of the dead hostages will take longer as Hamas no longer has control of all of them, due to them being buried in ruble in the fighting. Roughly 2000 Hamas and Gazan prisoners would be released as well. 

My Comment:

Time will tell if this cease-fire and peace deal holds, but as of now it looks likely that it will. Hamas pretty much has no choice, they are done as a fighting force and extending the war any further would just cause the ones that are left to die. It's an easy decision for them to make and as long as they and Israel agree, the war should end, and fairly quickly too. 

To be fair, even if the deal falls apart, it will probably be after all the hostages are released. That's the casus belli for Israel and starting the war again after that would probably cost them America's support. Both Hamas and Israel are under intense pressure from Trump, and other powers in the region, to keep to this deal. The only question I have is if both sides are made of rational actors. Hamas have proven that they aren't, much of the time, and Israel has their hardliners too. 

Even if the only thing that happens is the phase 1 release where the hostages are let go, it would be a massive win for President Trump. Not only would he silence the anti-Israel parts of the right (short of the truly nuts ones like Candace Owens), it would be removing the issue as a motivating factor for both the Democratic Party and the far left. If the war starts again after the hostages are released, he would take a hit, but it would still be a major win for him to hold his hat on. 

It would also fully cement Trump's legacy as a peacemaker. You can say what you want about  Donald Trump but it is clear that he does care about making peace. Ending the war in Gaza would be the biggest feather in his cap and it would be a huge victory for him. And he could rightly claim that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, even though there is no chance that he will get it. 

I do wonder how the far left is going to react to this news, if the peace holds. They have been demanding a cease fire since the war began and now they are getting one, but it's because of Trump's diplomatic actions. 

My guess is that it won't do too much. The far left hates Trump and Hates Israel and I never thought that they actually cared about the people of Gaza. I am guessing that if the peace deal holds, they will still hate both even though Trump gave them what they wanted. They will probably say that because the deal doesn't result in statehood for Palestine, it's not good enough, even though it will end the war. 

As for Trump, if he pulls this off, he will only have the Russia-Ukraine war to deal with, and I still say that would be the toughest nut to crack by far. Hamas took this deal because they were on the verge of antihalation and they had no realistic chance to fight, let alone win, against Israel. 

That's not the case in Ukraine. Though I have argued that Ukraine will absolutely lose the war, they still control a lot of territory and have just enough military power that the war will have to continue. And there is always the reality that Zelensky would be killed if he tries to actually make peace. 

If Trump were to pull it off he would be the biggest peacemaker in modern history. Indeed, even if he can't crack the Ukraine-Russia nut, ending the Gaza war alone would be enough to call him that. The man likes to end wars, what can you say? 

Illegal border crossings on the US-Mexico border at the lowest level in 50 years.

 

An image of a border patrol vehicle on the Mexican side of the border. BBC/Getty.

Illegal border crossings on the US-Mexico border are at the lowest level in 50 years. BBC. In

Fiscal Year 2025 the Border Patrol stopped 238,000 illegal immigrants. More than half of those were during the final four months of Joe Biden's term. Since Donald Trump took office, there have been around 9000 immigrants stopped each month. Trump has been a hardliner on illegal immigration and made several executive orders that promoted border security and the removal of illegal immigrants. 

My Comment:

This is a pretty good example of how illegal immigration was a choice. Biden allowed in millions of illegal immigrants and claimed there wasn't a thing that he could do. Other than a bill that would have created amnesty for these millions of illegal immigrants. 

However, the second Trump was in office, he was able to fix the issue. Trump's executive orders simply ended the flood. Folks realized that they wouldn't get in so they stopped coming. It was a huge victory and one that shows that we don't actually have to accept millions of border crossings every single year. We don't need to accept all these unvetted and dangerous people that take American jobs and raise housing prices for every single American. 

I do worry that Trump is a victim of his own success. By absolutely fixing the illegal immigration issue, at least at the border, he doesn't have the issue to motivate the base in the 2026 midterms. I think this was a major factor in the 2020 election, I never understood why Trump didn't keep hammering in on the issue like he did in the 2016 election. 

Of course, fixing the border isn't the only factor for illegal immigration. Millions of them are still here and need to be deported. And there are always folks that come into the country legally, but then overstay their visas and they need to be dealt with as well. But at least the faucet has been turned off. 

Securing the border was always the easy part though. Getting rid of the illegal immigrants is a lot tougher. ICE has been doing work getting rid of folks and at least a million people have self-deported, if I recall correctly. But 11 million folks were let in by Joe Biden, to say nothing of the millions of folks that came in before his term. We have a long way to go before we finally fix the illegal immigration problem and the border was only one aspect of it. 

I do think Trump's competence in this area will damage Democrats in the future. Nobody is going to believe the kind of gaslighting they attempted during Biden's term. If the Democrats somehow get into power again and open the gates, they won't be able to say there is nothing they can do when it's obvious they can... 

Democrat Attorney General candidate for Virginia hit with a scandal involving texts that threatened violence against Republicans.

 

A screen cap of a Jay Jones political advertisement. National Review.

The Democratic candidate for the position of Attorney General of Virginia has been hit with a major scandal after texts where he threatened violence against Republicans resurfaced. National Review. Jay Jones sent the texts back in 2022 before he was a politician to a Republican House Delegate, Carrie Coyner. The texts, which came in the aftermath of the death of Democrat Joe Johnson, decried the fact that Johnson was getting bipartisan support. Jones also said that if he was in a room with Republican House Speaker Todd Gilbert, Pol Pot and Hitler, he would shoot Gilbert twice. Coyner called Jones to get him to clarify his remarks but he doubled down, saying that he wished Jennifer Gilbert's children would die and that Todd and Jennifer Gilbert were "breeding little fascists".  The texts are old, but are an example of an October surprise for the 2025 race. Jones has faced bipartisan condemnation for his words and has apologized for him, but has not so far dropped out of the race as Republican critics are demanding. 

My Comment:

You would have thought that the Democrats would have vetted their candidates as this political scandal should have been caught. I guess not, and this scandal may very well flip what was an extremely tight race for Virginia's Attorney General race into a Republican hold. It could even lead to the Republicans keeping the Virginia Governor's mansion, though that race has a more definite Democratic Lead. 

It comes at a time when most folks are extremely concerned about violence coming from the Democratic Party. After the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the last thing the Democrats need is one of their candidates calling for political violence against a Republican. 

But it's the comments about the Gilbert's children which is really over the line. I'm not exactly sure how old their children are, but even if they were adults it's absurd to want to see someone's children killed for political reasons. His reasoning is insane, he thought that if they did die it might change the minds of the Gilberts politically. Even if that did happen, it's an obscene thing to wish for and it's one that I think will greatly damage Jay Jones and his election campaign. 

It's also not something you can really dismiss as dark humor. Folks have been making the "Hitler, Pol Pot, and some other guy" joke for ages and if that was all this was, I'd say it was mostly a non-story. But you can't really dismiss this in the same way as only the most edgy people make jokes about kids dying and even then, folks do it on anonymous message boards, not with their names attached to it. Given that Jones said this to a member of Virginia's congress, and doubled down on it when pressed, it's almost certainly fair to say that he does indeed want Republican children to die. 

That's not something the voters should forgive in this or any political climate. And again, it shocks me that the Democrats put him up as their candidate. Either they didn't vet him and this scandal blindsided them, which is the charitable reading, or they knew about it and didn't' care. Which has some pretty bad implications for the state of the Virginia Democrats. I would hope that they simply didn't vet him, the Democrats have failed at doing so in the past in Virginia, most notably with the Ralph Northam blackface scandal. 

What is more disturbing is that the Democrats aren't calling for Jones to drop out. Given that the election is this November, I understand why, a slim chance of Jones winning despite the scandal is better than a zero chance of him winning if he drops out. But that's such a blatant realpolitik reasoning that I don't think the voters will forgive them for that. Like I said, Jones had a decent chance of losing the race regardless, this wasn't his only scandal, but the Democrats should have just raised the white flag on this one. 

Either way, this seems like another example of just how deranged the Democrats have gotten. I shouldn't be surprised by this after the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Far too many folks on the left celebrated that assassination and wish for further violence. But even given that context, I am shocked that Jones said what he said and hasn't been kicked out of the race yet. 

Terror attack in Manchester as man uses car and knife to kill two and wound three.

 

Armed police at the scene of the attack. BBC/PA Media.

A terror attack in Manchester has left two people dead and three wounded. BBC. The suspect was a 35 year old naturalized citizen of the UK who was originally from Syria named Jihad Al-Shamie. He attacked a Jewish synagogue, first ramming people with a car then stabbing people. The Rabbi at the synagogue is being hailed as a hero for quickly closing the door and locking the killer out before he could stab more people. Police arrived and shot and killed the attacker, who was wearing a fake suicide vest. The suspect was not known to police and was allowed into the UK as a child. The UK government is describing the attack as antisemitic terrorism. Three other people were arrested in connection with the attack. One of the wounded people may have been injured by police during the incident. 

My Comment:

Yet another Islamic attack in the UK, this time targeting Jews. This attack was not particularly sophisticated and it could have been a lot worse if it wasn't for the actions of the Rabbi, who very wisely closed the door to the Synagogue. 

There is video of the aftermath of this attack, which I won't post here, due to the uncensored violence. It was surreal. Some guy was filming the incident as the police were yelling at everyone to get back because they thought there was a bomb. The cops then shoot the attacker dead. The video then pans over to a presumably dead Jewish man that nobody is helping. The whole thing was bizarre. 

There seems to be little doubt of the motivation for this attack. This is Islamic terrorism, through and through. The suspect was a Muslim and even the UK government said he targeted Jews just because they were Jews. He wanted to kill them and in two cases he succeeded. 

Though antisemitism is on the rise, I don't think this attack is really related to that. This wasn't a leftist angry about Gaza, this was a bog standard terror attack. Though the war in Gaza may have angered the attacker, I am guessing most of the motivation was religious in nature. 

It does seem like this was a small terror cell, with the other arrests. Though I kind of think that though this was a cell, it wasn't an organized one that was actively getting support from a larger terror organization like ISIS or al-Qaeda. Instead, I am guessing the other people arrested were friends and/or family that knew what the attacker was going to do and either did nothing to stop him or encouraged and supported it. 

This attack does serve as a major reminder that Islamic terrorism never really went away. Though left wing violence has been fairly common lately, Islamic terrorism is still out there, especially in Europe. Honestly, given the Gaza War I am surprised we aren't seeing more of it. But I think dealing with ISIS and al-Qaeda probably did help things. But I am fully expecting more small scale attacks like this in the future. 

FBI rejects partnership with the Anti-Defamation League.

 

FBI Director Kash Patel. Fox News/Getty.

The FBI has rejected a partnership with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Fox News. FBI Director Kash Patel cited the organizations close ties with former Director James Comey, who went as far as to say the FBI was "in love" with the organization. Patel was critical of the ADL saying they had spied on Americans. The ADL was in the news recently for labeling Charlie Kirk's organization, Turning Point USA, as an extremist organization. This designation was used by the FBI to investigate the organization during the Biden administration. Kirk was assassinated last month. 

My Comment:

The ADL has been a thorn in the side of any to the left of Bernie Sanders for a long time. Though, to be fair, they have been fairly critical of pro-Hamas folks on the left now too. They made a ton of enemies and it is surprising it took this long for the FBI to cut them off. 

Obviously labeling TPUSA a hate group had a lot to do with this. Doing so was an obvious mistake, even before Charlie Kirk's death by a left wing nutjob. TPUSA was hardly a hate group. They were a get out the vote organization and one that liked to hold debates with members of the general public. They had many beliefs the ADL disagreed with but that hardly justified calling them a terror group. 

With Kirk's death it was no longer politically possible for anyone on the right to support the ADL after they labeled Kirk essentially a terrorist. Kirk died as a hero for free speech and folks are absolutely not going to be in the mood to listen to an organization that labeled him a terrorist. It's honestly surprising that it took three weeks, but apparently people didn't really notice it until Elon Musk brought it to everyone's attentions. 

The ADL is a bad organization even if you ignore the Charlie Kirk stuff. Ironically, the ADL was found guilty of defamation themselves in the case Quigley v Anti-Defamation League. In that case the ADL used illegally wiretapped communications to imply that the other party in the lawsuit were antisemitic. They lost the case and had to pay more than $10 million in damages. This was not the only case where they were found to be spying on people either. 

They have also been caught lying about things many times. The TPUSA is not the only example of an otherwise unoffensive group being called antisemitic by the ADL. Folks have been deemed antisemitic on both the left and the right just for being critical of Israel. 

And it's not just the right that has major problems with the ADL. They have called many leftists antisemites, though in their case it's probably more realistic. They have also made a lot of enemies in the Muslim and Black communities for similar reasons. I just get the feeling that everyone is tired of them. 

My biggest concern is that their guidelines, which were used by the FBI, were complete nonsense. And folks were getting investigated by the FBI because of this. It wasn't just TPUSA, it was basically every group on the right that was falsely labeled like this. It's long overdue that we stopped listening to them.