Month: November 2024

From the Caribbean to the Mediterranean to the Pacific, the naval forces of Russia and China have challenged the once-dominant position of the United States.

On July 18, U.S.  Army Gen. Laura J. Richardson, in a speech at the Aspen Institute, warned that Russian warships have been making port visits to Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua, and 22 nations in the U.S. Southern Command’s area of responsibility has signed on to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the commander of Southcom told attendees of the Aspen Security Forum.

 Army Gen. Laura J. Richardson said the nations that have signed on to the Chinese initiative don’t see the investments the U.S. has been making in their countries. “All they see are the Chinese cranes,” she said. “These projects are in the billions of dollars. … They are big-time projects.” Richardson said it would be OK with her if those investments were for doing good in the hemisphere. “But it makes me a little suspicious when it’s in the critical infrastructure.” Critical infrastructure, she said, includes deep-water ports, cybersecurity, energy and space. “I worry about the dual use nature of that. These are state-owned enterprises by a communist government. I worry about the flipping of that to a military application,” Richardson said, referring to China. 

Regarding the Russian port visits, Richardson said U.S. vessels have been shadowing those vessels to ensure the safety and security of the United States. Also, the Russians continue to make high-level government visits to Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua with their foreign affairs minister and the head of the Russian legislative body, she said, adding that the U.S. could be doing more in its own government exchanges.

“I really believe that economic security and national security go hand in hand here in this hemisphere, and we have got to work both of them together very, very quickly,” she said. 

In the Mediterranean,  according to the Bulgarian Military A fleet, including the missile cruiser Varyag and the frigate Marshal Shaposhnikov, has successfully navigated the Suez Canal, transitioning from the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea, as confirmed by the Pacific Fleet [PF] on Wednesday.  

The authoritative GIS Reports   notes that “In the crucial Indo-Pacific, the tide has changed dramatically against America. the balance of naval power in the Western Pacific has been altered in favor of the Chinese Navy. For instance, the U.S. Navy went from having a 76-warship advantage over China in 2005 to having a 39-combatant deficiency in 2023, based on similar ship and submarine comparisons. That is a swing of 115 naval platforms in 23 years. This is a strategic trend that will continue uninterrupted for at least the next decade.”

Rep. Mike Rogers has previously pointed out that The Biden Administration’s 30-year ship-building plan reduces the Navy’s ability to protect its aircraft-carrier strike groups and eliminate enemy minefields, reduces the Marine Corps’ ability to conduct forcible-entry missions, and reduces by almost 10 percent the Navy’s capacity to launch missiles. Public estimates indicate that China will eventually develop a global force of submarines capable of launching ballistic missiles, posing an obvious risk to the U.S.  China’s surface-combatant forces already greatly exceed that of the U.S.

Photo: Vessels attached to a flotilla with the navy under the PLA Southern Theater Command sail toward the designated area during a comprehensive combat training exercise in late June, 2024. (eng.chinamil.com.cn/Photo by Huang Jiacheng and Wang Jian)

Recently, The New York Times published what can only be described as a “hit piece” against the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice John Roberts. As described in The New York Post, “[i]n an ugly escalation of the left’s war on the Supreme Court, The New York Times…falsely charg[ed] [Roberts] with ‘deploying his authority to steer rulings that benefited’ Donald Trump in ‘a momentous trio of Jan. 6-related cases.'”  

The opinions at issue were the decision to strike down the Colorado Attorney General’s decision to keep the former President off the ballot in that state due to his allegedly “insurrectionist activities”; the Presidential Immunity decision, Trump v. United States  ; and the reversal of the sentences of numerous “January 6th” defendants, based upon the overcharging of these defendants by prosecutors with the Justice Department.

What was most disturbing to The Post Editorial Board was the fact that “the story relied in part on leaks of confidential court documents – which means court staff, and possibly one of the justices, are actively helping the progressive attack on the institution.” (Emphasis in original.)

According to The Post, “Roberts had made his view of the root issues

crystal-clear in a confidential February memo to his colleagues – a memo that, per [The Times] ‘several people from the court’ later discussed with the reporters.”

The Post describes the problem succulently; “Such leaking is a far larger violation of high-court ethics than any of the lefty complaints of recent years: How can the court even function if the justices can’t communicate frankly with each other?” (Emphasis in original.)

How indeed?

In May of 2022, we discussed the “leak” of the draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson,  the decision which reversed Roe v. Wade.  At that time, we noted that Chief Justice John Roberts appointed the Court’s Marshal, Gail Curley, to investigate the leak.  We stated that “[t]here are only so many employees of the US Supreme Court who could have access to a draft opinion.  Thus, it shouldn’t be too hard for Marshal Curley to figure out who ‘let the cat out of the bag.’” 

Apparently, the task of figuring out which one of a limited pool of suspects was the guilty party was beyond the skills of Marshal Curley.  In January of 2023, she basically gave up the search, for all intents and purposes.

Her report, dated January 19, 2023, stated that her office used an “investigative team consist[ing] of seasoned attorneys and trained federal investigators with substantial experience conducting criminal, administrative and cyber investigation.”  Yet, despite this wealth of talent, “investigators have been unable to determine…the identity of the person(s) who disclosed the draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. or how the draft opinion was provided to Politico.”

The investigators were able to determine that “[i]t is unlikely that the public disclosure was caused by a hack of the Court’s IT systems. The Court’s IT department did not find any indications of a hack…[t]he investigators have likewise not uncovered any evidence that an employee with elevated IT access privileges accessed or moved the draft opinion.”  However, during the investigators interviews with Court employees,  “[s]ome individuals admitted to investigators that they told their spouse or partner about the draft Dobbs opinion and the vote count, in violation of the Court’s confidentiality rules. Several personnel told investigators they had shared confidential details about their work more generally with their spouses and some indicated they thought it permissible to provide such information to their spouses. Some personnel handled the Dobbs draft in ways that deviated from their standard process for handling draft opinions.” 

Despite these admissions of wrongdoing and ethical breeches, the investigators concluded that “it is not possible to determine the identity of any individual who may have disclosed the document or how the draft opinion ended up with Politico. No one confessed to publicly disclosing the document and none of the available forensic and other evidence provided a basis for identifying any individual as the source of the document.”

Seems impossible that such an extensive and sophisticated investigation into so few people under suspicion would turn up empty.  Unless, of course, the Court didn’t really want to know who leaked the draft opinion, a decision which has now led to the disclosure of Roberts’ confidential memo regarding his views on the issues presented by Trump v. United States. 

“The leak was no mere misguided attempt at protest,” the Justices wrote at the time they released the report. “It was a grave assault on the judicial process…It is no exaggeration to say that the integrity of judicial proceedings depends on the inviolability of internal deliberations.” Yet, according to University of Virginia Law Professor Douglas Laycock, “I don’t think we can assume the leaker is an employee.  It could be a justice.  They would take a big reputational hit if they got caught, but they would not lose their job.”

The report from Marshal Curley describes her investigation into Court employees, not Supreme Court Justices.  Strangely, though, the Report quotes the US Code of Conduct for Judges, which states that “A judge should not make public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court.”

At the time, do you believe that Chief Justice Roberts really wanted to know if one of his Associate Justices had leaked the draft of the Dobbs decision? What would he do with such information?  What impact would that revelation have on the integrity of the Court?

Now, this failure to seriously pursue the culprit and bring them to justice has led to additional violations of the Court’s confidentiality.

Reportedly, the investigation into the leak of the Dobbs draft decision is on-going.  But we all know that short of a confession from the guilty party, or someone coming forward with new information, whoever provided Politico with a draft the of the Dobbs v. Jackson opinion will never be caught.

Further, almost two years after Marshal Curley’s Report was issued, the failure to expose the person who leaked the draft opinion has become a major headache for the Supreme Court.  Since no one was caught or disciplined for leaking the draft of the Dobbs decision, someone has felt free to leak a confidential memo prepared by Chief Justice Roberts.

These leaks also strongly contribute to the continuing disrespect shown to the US Supreme Court and its Justices by Democrats, who clearly benefit from and capitalize on these unethical and potentially illegal disclosures of confidential Court documents.

Judge John Wilson’s (ret.) article concludes tomorrow

Photo: Pixabay

The undersecretary of the U.S. Air Force, Melissa Dalton, warns that “With two nuclear-armed peer competitors — Russia and China — and with both advancing their nuclear capability, the U.S. now, more than ever, must move at full speed to modernize its nuclear deterrence capability. That effort is not just for U.S. national security, but as well for partners who depend on the U.S.”

She stressed that the threat from aggressive, unfriendly nuclear armed nations is unprecedented.  “We face for the first time in our nation’s history, two strategic competitors that are nuclear states with large and growing nuclear arsenals. When we look at the [People’s Republic of China] and its breathtaking modernization over the last two decades, we see today they have over 500 operational nuclear warheads, far exceeding prior projections.” 

Some suspect that China’s nuclear force may even be larger than commonly believed. According to recent Pentagon report, “Over the next decade, the PRC will continue to rapidly modernize, diversify, and expand its nuclear forces. Compared to the PLA’s nuclear modernization efforts a decade ago, current efforts dwarf previous attempts in both scale and complexity. The PRC is expanding the number of its land-, sea-, and air-based nuclear delivery platforms while investing in and constructing the infrastructure necessary to support further expansion of its nuclear forces.

The Undersecretary noted that in coming years, the U.S. expects China’s warheads to exceed 1,000. Russia, the worlds preeminent nuclear power, also remains a challenge. 

“We see Russia brandishing its nuclear weapons in the context of the Ukraine conflict and also possessing novel nuclear capabilities that are designed to challenge our escalation calculus.The stakes are incredibly high.” 

Dalton noted that During the Cold War, the U.S. maintained top-notch nuclear deterrence, and the domestic defense industry stood ready to provide whatever was needed. But since the fall of the Soviet Union, and with the U.S. focused on other parts of the world for the past 20-plus years, the U.S. must now up its game. 

“We mortgaged our nuclear modernization for 30 years. We had the post-Cold War peace dividend… But the fact is, the bills are now way past due, and in that time, our competitors went to school on us, and they caught up.” 

With U.S. defense underpinned by its nuclear deterrent, modernization of that capability is a top priority for the Department of Defense, she stressed.

Air Force Gen. Anthony Cotton, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, said that while two-thirds of the nuclear triad, the ground systems and the aircraft-based systems belong to the Air Force — the submarine systems belong to the Navy — modernization is not just an Air Force effort or even just a Navy effort. 

“It is imperative that we understand that it’s not a Department [of Defense] imperative that we maintain the nuclear security and nuclear triad,” he said. “It is a national imperative. It’s national policy that the foundation of what we hold dear, the framework of that is nuclear deterrence. And to add to that, and I’ve seen this in the last 19 months of being in command, our allies and partners are counting on us more than ever.”

Last year, Senator John Kennedy (R-La) warned that “Today, we no longer face just one threat.  Russia still maintains the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, but China’s nuclear stockpile is growing rapidly.  North Korea continues to threaten our allies with its collection of nuclear weapons.  And, thanks to the disastrous Iran nuclear deal, Iran is marching ever closer to developing nuclear weapons of its own. The United States must now counter nuclear superpowers in both China and Russia while also deterring the itchy trigger fingers of unstable dictators like Kim Jong Un and the Ayatollah in Iran.  We should be innovating and preparing our nuclear arsenal for this new global dynamic, but instead, our nuclear stockpile remains stuck in the Cold War. Simply put: America’s nuclear stockpile is old and shrinking.  And while modernizing our nuclear arsenal should be a top priority, our effort to restart nuclear weapon production has been riddled with delays and poor planning.  And we don’t have time to waste.”

Photo: A Titan II missile on display inside the missile silo at Missile Site 8 in Green Valley, Ariz. (DoD)

There is a stark contrast in foreign affairs between the Biden-Harris record of a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Putin invasion of Ukraine, China’s assault on the Philippine exclusive economic zone, and the widening Middle East catastrophe.    The Trump White House archives provides a lengthy list of foreign policy results. “President Trump restored American sovereignty at home and American leadership abroad, partnering with strong and responsible nations to promote security, prosperity, and peace. Instead of sending American troops to fight in endless wars or giving cash to terrorists in countries like Iran, the United States under President Trump used bold, creative diplomacy to secure peace deals with our allies across the world. With the same “peace through strength” foreign policy that President Reagan once used to win the Cold War, President Trump rebuilt American deterrence power to hold our adversaries accountable. Perhaps most important, the Trump Administration reversed Washington’s decades-long, bipartisan refusal to confront China over its unfair trade practices, intellectual property theft, and more.

Specifically, the Trump Administration:

“Secured a $400 billion increase in defense spending from NATO allies by 2024, as the number of members meeting their minimum financial obligations more than doubled

Credited by Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg for strengthening NATO

Worked to reform and streamline the United Nations and reduced spending by $1.3 billion

Allies, including Japan and the Republic of Korea, committed to increase burden-sharing

Protected our Second Amendment rights by announcing that the United States will never ratify the UN Arms Trade Treaty

Returned 56 hostages and detainees from more than 24 countries

Worked to advance a free and open Indo-Pacific region, promoting new investments and expanding American partnerships

Advanced peace through strength

Withdrew from the one-sided Iran Nuclear Deal and imposed crippling sanctions on the Iranian regime

Conducted vigorous enforcement on all sanctions to bring Iran’s oil exports to zero and deny the regime its principal source of revenue

First president to meet with a leader of North Korea and the first sitting president to cross the demilitarized zone into North Korea

Maintained a maximum pressure campaign and enforced tough sanctions on North Korea while negotiating denuclearization, the release of American hostages, and the return of the remains of American heroes

Brokered economic normalization between Serbia and Kosovo, bolstering peace in the Balkans

Signed the Hong Kong Autonomy Act and ended the United States’ preferential treatment with Hong Kong to hold China accountable for its infringement on the autonomy of Hong Kong

Led allied efforts to defeat the Chinese Communist Party’s efforts to control the international telecommunications system

Recognized Jerusalem as the true capital of Israel and quickly moved the American Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem

Acknowledged Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights and declared that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are not inconsistent with international law

Removed the United States from the United Nations Human Rights Council due to the group’s blatant anti-Israel bias

Brokered historic peace agreements between Israel and Arab-Muslim countries, including the United Arab Emirates, the Kingdom of Bahrain, and Sudan

Brokered a deal for Kosovo to normalize ties and establish diplomatic relations with Israel

Announced that Serbia would move its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem

First American president to address an assembly of leaders from more than 50 Muslim nations, reaching an agreement to fight terrorism in all its forms

Established the Etidal Center to combat terrorism in the Middle East in conjunction with the Saudi Arabian government

Announced the Vision for Peace Political Plan—a two-state solution that resolves the risks of Palestinian statehood to Israel’s security, marking the first time Israel has agreed to a map and a Palestinian state

Released an economic plan to empower the Palestinian people and enhance Palestinian governance through historic private investment

Reversed the previous administration’s Cuba policy, canceling the sellout deal with the Communist Castro dictatorship

Pledged not to lift sanctions until all political prisoners are freed, freedoms of assembly and expression are respected, all political parties are legalized, and free elections are scheduled

Enacted a new policy aimed at preventing American dollars from funding the Cuban regime, including stricter travel restrictions and restrictions on the importation of Cuban alcohol and tobacco

Implemented a cap on remittances to Cuba

Enabled Americans to file lawsuits against persons and entities that traffic in property confiscated by the Cuban regime

First world leader to recognize Juan Guaido as the Interim President of Venezuela and led a diplomatic coalition against the Socialist Dictator of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro

Blocked all property of the Venezuelan government in the jurisdiction of the United States

Cut off the financial resources of the Maduro regime and sanctioned key sectors of the Venezuelan economy exploited by the regime

Brought criminal charges against Nicolas Maduro for his narco-terrorism

Imposed stiff sanctions on the Ortega regime in Nicaragua

Photo: Trump site

Election day is not an end, it is a beginning. What will the victor do for the next four years?

The 2024 election is unusual, in that it is a battle, in many ways, of one incumbent against the other. There is a fairly clear picture of what both candidates will do if they win.

It can reasonably be expected that both will follow the paths they established during their tenure in office. Speaking of his vice president, Biden stated that “…as vice president, there wasn’t a single thing   that I did that she couldn’t do. And so I was able to delegate [to] her responsibility on everything from foreign policy to domestic policy.”

The White House website concurs. “As President of the Senate, Vice President Harris set a new record for the most tie-breaking votes cast by a Vice President in history – surpassing a record that had stood for nearly 200 years. And her votes have been consequential. This includes casting the decisive vote to secure passage of the landmark Inflation Reduction Act, the largest investment ever in tackling the climate crisis. She also presided over the unprecedented vote to confirm the first Black woman, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, to the Supreme Court while working alongside President Biden to achieve historic representation of women and people of color among nominees at all levels of the federal government.”

Vice President Harris was, indeed, the crucial tie-breaking vote on the inflation reduction act. The House Oversight Committee notes that “Instead of lowering prices, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) hiked taxes on businesses, mandates price controls on drugs, devoted $80 billion to hire 87,000 new Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agents to target middle class Americans, and earmarked $300 billion to advance Democrats’ radical climate agenda. The IRA’s drug pricing scheme means higher prices, fewer cures, and less access to care for American patients.

“Joel White, President of the Council for Affordable Health Coverage, discussed how the IRA will result in fewer cures during his opening testimony. “All of the experts – CBO, the CMS Actuary, and private academics – agree that the IRA will result in fewer therapies. They simply disagree on the extent of the damage.”

“President Biden is willing to sacrifice our economic security to pursue his radical Green New Deal.

“President Biden and Democrats have used the IRA to disguise radical Green New Deal policies that put China over the U.S.

“New estimates project the actual cost of the IRA green energy will be double the projected amount.

“Preston Brashers, PhD, and Senior Policy Analyst of Tax Policy at the Heritage Foundation said during his opening testimony, “The IRA is much more fiscally irresponsible than it appeared on paper. It uses gimmicky and questionable pay-fors and expirations, and some of the provisions are proving much more costly than forecasters expected – especially the bevy of tax credits for green energy, electric vehicles, carbon sequestration, and other things ostensibly connected to the climate agenda.”

In stark contrast, inflation was comparatively tamed during the Trump years. Yahoo Finance reports that “ Trump oversaw a period of relatively low inflation, and Biden’s term so far has largely been defined by rapidly rising prices and the most painful inflation since the early 1980s.” On foreign affairs, the Biden-Harris record is worrisome.  The House Oversight Committee also reports that “Meaghan Mobbs, Director of the Center for American Safety and Security: “The core duty of any government is to protect its people. Yet, over the last four years, the world has only grown more dangerous. Under the current administration, we have witnessed the largest attack on a European nation in 85 years and the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. Our enemies no longer view the United States as a nation ready to act with strength and resolve when confronted. Instead, they witnessed an administration more focused on diplomatic gestures and conciliatory measures, often at the expense of American security.

The article concludes tomorrow

Photo: White House web site

HOW THE BIDEN-HARRIS ADMINISTRATION USES THE NATION’S IMMIGRATION COURTS TO ADVANCE AN OPEN-BORDERS AGENDA

The New York Analysis Presents the Executive Summary of the Interim Staff Report of the Committee on the Judiciary and Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement

For almost four years, Americans have watched as President Joe Biden and border czar Vice President Kamala Harris have abandoned the southwest border and welcomed nearly 8 million illegal aliens into the United States. The Biden-Harris Administration’s open-borders policies not only have undermined national security and endangered communities across the U.S., but they also have decimated the nation’s immigration courts.

Since President Biden and Vice President Harris took office, the immigration court case backlog has skyrocketed, with more than 3.7 million new cases since the beginning of fiscal year 2021.2 In just the first three quarters of fiscal year 2024, there were more than 1.5 million new cases filed with the nation’s immigration courts. The majority of those cases are based on claims that ultimately will prove unsuccessful. Of the asylum cases that were adjudicated in fiscal year 2023, only 14 percent resulted in an asylum grant, with the remaining cases denied, abandoned, dismissed, terminated, withdrawn, or administratively closed.

The Biden-Harris Administration has used the immigration court backlog as an excuse to allow even more aliens to remain in the country. Instead of actually adjudicating illegal aliens’ cases based on the merits of aliens’ claims for relief—such as whether an alien has a valid and successful asylum claim—immigration judges under the Biden-Harris Administration have been tasked with rubberstamping case dismissals, case closures, and case terminations, all of which allow illegal aliens to remain in the United States without immigration consequences. This sort of quiet amnesty has become a staple of the Biden-Harris Administration’s immigration courts.

Since 2023, the Committee on the Judiciary and its Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement have conducted oversight of the Biden-Harris border crisis, including its effect on the nation’s immigration courts. This oversight has revealed how the

Biden-Harris Administration has used administrative maneuvering in immigration court proceedings to allow nearly 1 million illegal aliens to remain in the U.S. indefinitely.

For example:

• Under the Biden-Harris Administration, more than 700,000 illegal aliens have had their

cases dismissed, terminated, or administratively closed, allowing those aliens to stay in

the country indefinitely without facing immigration consequences.

• For asylum decisions, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which

houses the nation’s immigration courts, reported 109,089 cases as “not adjudicated” in

fiscal year 2023, meaning that those cases were deemed “completed” but were largely

terminated or dismissed and not adjudicated on the merits of the underlying claim.

• Through the first nine months of fiscal year 2024, the number of non-adjudicated asylum

cases already eclipsed the 2023 record, with 109,568 asylum cases not adjudicated.

By comparison, only 12,960 total asylum cases were reported as “not adjudicated” from

fiscal year 2017 through fiscal year 2020 combined

• The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) failed to file the necessary documentation

to begin immigration court removal proceedings in roughly 200,000 additional cases,

meaning that the overwhelming majority of those aliens can also remain in the U.S.

indefinitely.

• An immigration court official admitted to the Committee and Subcommittee that

decisions by the Biden-Harris DHS, such as DHS attorneys not appearing at scheduled

hearings and DHS failing to file proper paperwork with the courts, waste the immigration courts’ time and resources and decrease efficiency. … the [Biden-Harris Administration has used the] nation’s immigration courts to advance an open-borders agenda. Through administrative maneuvering at both the Justice Department and DHS, the Biden-Harris Administration has already ensured that nearly 1 million illegal aliens can remain in the United States without the possibility of deportation—and that trend shows no sign of stopping…