Tuesday, February 25, 2025

Politics Is Full of Hypocrites and Attention Seekers


Remember that guy who became a meme more than a decade ago screaming in a YouTube video for people to “LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!”? The “cry” for privacy, ironically, went viral in the personification of the “Streisand Effect” – when the attempt to get people not to look at something causes more people to look than otherwise would have. With the exception of Hollywood, politics is full of people desperate to have their privacy respected…just ask their publicists.

Some people lead lives of example – something to aspire or look up to – while others lead lives that can best be described as cautionary tales. 

Whatever side of that divide you fall (and most people spend time on both sides, living their lives largely on the line in the middle), attention is always given to those who scream the loudest and act the dumbest. The hypocrites who are shameless in how they conduct themselves as they claim they only wish to be left alone.

Personally, I can feel badly for someone going through a family trauma (note that word, not simply bad publicity due to their own actions), but lose a lot of it when their publicist asks for privacy on their behalf. I mean, you have a publicist, so you’re looking for attention. I’m thinking specifically about someone like Dave Grohl, leader of the Foo Fighters, who fathered a kid out of wedlock with some side piece. He released a statement acknowledging what he’d apparently been caught doing, then used his kids to try to cover his ass. “We are grateful for your consideration toward all the children involved, as we move forward together,” it read.

Dude, you screwed around on your kids’ mom and made a new one, how considerate were you? 

Using your kids as a shield is a Hamas move; pathetic in every way. The best way to avoid embarrassment is to avoid doing things that will cause embarrassment in the first place.

Then there are the political attention seekers; those desperate for anything that will turn heads in their direction. This didn’t used to be a problem, as Congressional leadership kept members from embarrassing the party and punished those who did. Where accomplishment used to be rewarded, now attention is. Just look at the phony-haired, caterpillar fake eyelash-wearing Jasmine Crockett, who has zero accomplishments in the House, but is celebrated by the left for her willingness to make a complete ass of herself on television. Who takes her seriously? No one. But she makes for good MSNBC!

I wrote in my book a few years ago that the line between “famous” and “infamous” had been obliterated – people used to want good attention, now they’re just desperate for any kind of attention, no matter how they get it. A functioning society needs there to be a difference between the attention a person gets for accomplishing something positive and the attention a “social media influencer” gets for stripping naked and smearing feces all over themselves in a mall somewhere. 

We don’t have that anymore – clicks are clicks and followers are followers, regardless of why they happen.

You should not know the names Tim or Sarah McBride, the “trans” Congressman from Delaware, unless you’re from Delaware. McBride has literally accomplished nothing in Congress. Personally, I don’t care about whether he’s called “Tim” or “Sarah,” but as the father of daughters, I don’t want a man in the bathroom with my kids. 

McBride was anointed a victim, which is an accomplishment to the left, because female Members of Congress didn’t want him in their bathroom. It’s their bathroom, they can decide (and did). 

Now, the unaccomplished McBride is a “celebrity” with the left, and this Congressman for all of 10 minutes is being used to raise money from dopey leftists. “When I arrived on Capitol Hill this year, I showed up ready to work for the people of Delaware -- NOT to talk about what bathroom I use or personal insults from the other side,” the email reads. “Republicans are trying to use trans people as pawns in their anti-worker agenda. And I refuse to be a pawn. I refuse to give them that power. I refuse to let them get away with it. That’s because while some folks on the other side of the aisle seek to divide us, I ran for Congress to focus on what brings us together."

He ran to bring people together how exactly? Is calling everyone who won’t pretend he can get pregnant a “transphobe” somehow unifying? Did I miss a memo?

Leave him alone, respect his privacy…and celebrate his diversity. It can’t be all those things. Personally, I’m happy to do the first two, and refuse the third. But it’s the third the left actually demands, the first two are just cover from criticism. 

I’m gonna pass on all of it. 

I don’t care how someone dresses, I care how they vote in Congress. McBride is awful because how he dresses dictates how he votes.

People can live their lives however they like, as long as who they do it with is of age and willing. They have to explain their actions to God, I don’t. But I draw the line at people trying to force me to care.

I’m not interested in how you’re a victim, whether you’re a Member of Congress or some “influencer” impregnated by Elon Musk releasing statements about how you wish to be left alone in between photoshoots for news stories about how you only wish for privacy.

Hypocrisy knows no political party and hypocrites have always been with us, we just didn’t used to celebrate them. We’re all worse off for that having changed.



X22, And we Know, and more- Feb 25

 



Unmasking Comedian Zelensky's Deception and His True Role in the War on the Global Stage


When Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky quickly became a global symbol of resistance.

Celebrated as a heroic leader standing up against a powerful foe, he appeared on television screens worldwide, calling for support and unity in the face of the Russian threat.

However, beneath this image of a brave wartime leader lies a far more complex and troubling reality.

Zelensky's rise to power and subsequent actions indicate that he is not merely the victim of an unjust invasion but a figurehead influenced by external forces.

As President Trump pointed out in his controversial remarks, the reality is that Zelensky's actions and alliances tell a different story — one that portrays him more as a puppet of the West than a true statesman.

Volodymyr Zelensky’s backstory is distinctive. Before entering politics, he was an actor and comedian, starring in the popular Ukrainian TV show "Servant of the People," where he played a high school teacher who unexpectedly became Ukraine's president.

Although it was a fictional premise, the show resonated with many Ukrainians, reflecting their dissatisfaction with the political establishment and their desire for change. What began as a clever satirical narrative soon transformed into a tragic reality: Zelensky, known for portraying the president on television, became the actual president of Ukraine.

Zelensky’s election in 2019 was fueled by his connection to the T.V. show and the "Servant of the People" political party.

Much like his acting career, this party was influenced by the media. While Zelensky presented himself as an outsider committed to reforming the corrupt political system, his ascent to power was not organic. His campaign was meticulously orchestrated by political consultants and Western interests, making his transition from comedian to president more about foreign influence than democratic choice.

Zelensky’s presidency is closely tied to the history of Western interference in Ukraine.

In 2014, after the removal of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych, the United States played a crucial role in destabilizing Ukraine’s government. The infamous leaked conversation between U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, in which Nuland discussed who should form the new Ukrainian government, highlighted the extent of U.S. involvement.

Essentially, the West orchestrated a coup that ousted Yanukovych, whom they viewed as too neutral, especially concerning Ukraine’s relationships with the European Union.

This intervention ultimately established the groundwork for Zelensky’s rise to power. While his administration claims independence, U.S. foreign policy has significantly influenced Ukraine since 2014. As the leader of a pro-Western Ukraine, Zelensky is not simply a product of the popular vote, but also of strategic geopolitical maneuvering by powerful external actors.

One of the most striking contradictions of Zelensky’s presidency is his alliance with far-left groups in Ukraine, particularly the Azov Battalion. Despite being a Jewish president, Zelensky's government has relied on groups with neo-Nazi ties to combat Russian forces in eastern Ukraine.

The Azov Battalion is notorious for its use of neo-Nazi symbols, such as the Wolfsangel and Sonnenrad, yet Zelensky's government has continued to collaborate with them. This alliance raises serious questions about his commitment to the democratic values he claims to uphold.

Zelensky’s connections to such groups represent a broader issue in Ukrainian politics: the merging of far-right extremism with governmental authority. While Zelensky presents himself as a champion of democracy, his associations with these groups reveal his administration’s corrupt and morally compromised nature. It is not surprising that Zelensky’s government has been labeled among the most corrupt in Europe, with links to neo-Nazi factions further eroding his credibility as a leader of the free world.

While Zelensky's image as a democratic leader has been central to his global appeal, his actions suggest otherwise. In November 2023, he announced the suspension of Ukraine’s elections, citing the ongoing war and Ukraine's constitution.

This decision, though framed as a necessary wartime measure, reveals a concerning trend of consolidating power.

According to Ukraine’s constitution, presidential and parliamentary elections are prohibited during martial law; nonetheless, Zelensky's five-year term expired in March 2024, and he has made it clear that he will not hold elections.

Zelensky's suppression of opposition voices further signals his authoritarian tendencies. He has shut down political parties that challenge his government, censored critical media outlets, and even threatened journalists with conscription. In one of the most tragic examples of his intolerance for dissent, Ukrainian journalist Gonzalo Lira, a Chilean-American who criticized Zelensky's handling of the war, was arrested, tortured, and ultimately died in custody in January 2024.

The Ukrainian government, under Zelensky’s leadership, has demonstrated a complete disregard for freedom of speech and human rights.

These actions evoke authoritarian regimes that suppress opposition and silence the press under the guise of national unity or security. Zelensky’s refusal to permit elections, coupled with his persecution of journalists and political opponents, portrays a leader more focused on retaining power than on upholding the democratic values he professes to support.

Zelensky's stance on NATO has also contributed to escalating the conflict with Russia. While NATO’s expansion eastward in defiance of promises made to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 has been a significant point of tension, Zelensky’s aspirations for Ukraine to join NATO have exacerbated the situation. NATO’s consistent encroachment on Russia's borders, coupled with Zelensky's insistence on aligning Ukraine with the West, has placed Ukraine in the crosshairs of Russian military aggression.

From Russia’s perspective, the desire for a neutral Ukraine is understandable.

The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis showed the United States' willingness to verge on war to prevent Soviet missiles from being stationed just 90 miles from its shores.

However, Zelensky and Western leaders have overlooked Russia’s concerns about NATO’s expansion and the threat it poses to Russian security. Instead, Zelensky continues to advocate for closer ties with NATO, despite the risks to his country.

While many in the West have criticized those suggesting dialogue with Russia, President Trump has advocated for a more pragmatic approach. Trump’s understanding of Russia’s desire for a neutral Ukraine is a crucial perspective in the pursuit of peace. However, Zelensky has chosen to continue an endless war, perpetuating suffering and destruction while ignoring the possibility of a peaceful resolution.

Trump’s call for diplomacy with Russia isn't about siding with Putin, as many critics claim, but about finding a resolution to an unwinnable war. Zelensky’s refusal to negotiate, despite the rising toll of human life and destruction, underscores his role in prolonging the conflict. If the world hopes to see peace in Ukraine, Zelensky’s leadership must be reconsidered, and his war-driven agenda should be scrutinized.

The global narrative surrounding Zelensky as a hero fighting for democracy warrants examination. His rise as a television comedian, his connections to extremist groups, his authoritarian tendencies, and his role in prolonging the war all indicate a leader far removed from the idealized image presented in the media. Zelensky is not a man of the people; he is a product of geopolitical manipulation, a puppet utilized by the West to advance its interests.

The world must look beyond Zelensky's façade as a martyr and recognize him for what he truly represents: a leader swayed by external influences whose actions have contributed to ongoing conflict, suffering, and oppression. Achieving peace in Ukraine will require more than just the withdrawal of Russian forces; it will also necessitate Zelensky's removal and a reevaluation of the factors that have fueled this devastating war.  



Conrad Black writes - Leftist Political Theater Is Back At GOP Town Hall Meetings In Trump 2.0

 If it all seems familiar, if you suspect you’ve seen this movie before, it’s because it is and you have.

he liberal spin machine that is the accomplice media want you to know that constituents in congressional districts represented by Republicans are “angry” and “outraged.” 

The “hostile audiences” the House members are encountering reportedly are in response to President Trump, Elon Musk, and the Department of Government Efficiency’s efforts to give the morbidly obese federal government bureaucracy a daily Ozempic injection. Constituents in congressional districts won handily by Republicans are mad as hell about DOGE finding criminal abuses of tax dollars and they’re not going to take it anymore, the corporate media talking points want you to believe. 

If it all seems familiar, if you suspect you’ve seen this movie before, it’s because it is and you have. It’s early early 2017 again, and the Trump-hating resistance movement is up to its old tricks. The leftist network is working overtime again to gin up indignation against Trump and MAGA Republicans, recruiting protesters for “raucous” demonstrations lapped up and mass marketed by the Pravda press. 

“Protesters in cities across the US rally against Trump’s policies, Project 2025 and Elon Musk,” the Associated Press trumpeted earlier this month. 

“Harrisonburg protesters condemn Trump, seek solidarity and more effective action,” Virginia TV station WHSV dutifully reported following a gathering of leftist activists over the weekend. 

“Protesters rally against Trump: Attendees angered by Musk’s influence, Democrats’ inaction,”  a Smoky Mountain News headline proclaimed.  

As important as showing how “unpopular” Trump and his agenda are, the left’s psyop sequel for Trump 2.0 is to make sure Democrats — stunned by the losses they suffered in November thanks to unpopular leftist policies — wake up and smell the protests.  

‘Public Displays of Unrest’

Left-wing Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall on Saturday told his readers that he was putting together a list of town halls “where GOP members of Congress got rocked by constituents this past week while they were on break.”

“There are so many now that I can’t really write a whole post about each one,” Marshall gleefully wrote. “But I wanted to ask if you could send me links if there are examples where your member of Congress or Senator had a similar experience so I can add it to the list.” 

He noted about a half dozen such examples, including a town hall session in Roswell, Ga., That’s where, according to CNN and myriad corporate media outlets, Rep. Rich McCormick faced boos and “public displays of unrest” for defending the Trump administration’s sacking of hundreds of federal workers because Democrats apparently believe only private sector employees are subject to layoffs.  

“Tyranny is rising in the White House, and a man has declared himself our king. So, I would like to know rather, the people would like to know, what you, congressman, and your fellow congressmen are going to do to rein in the megalomaniac in the White House?” one person asked the congressman, CNN reported. The question, according to the Trump-hating cable news outlet, resulted “in loud cheers and a standing ovation from several people in the room.”

Just who were the critics of the congressman? CNN doesn’t say. Were they the sweeping majority of constituents who voted for a man who won another term representing the deep red 7th Congressional District by about 30 percentage points over his Dem opponent?

McCormick attempted to reason with what was an unreasonable crowd, just as some Republicans attempted to do when leftists organized similar public displays of opposition — much of it staged — in Trump’s first presidential term.

“I came here to have a discussion. I think a lot of you didn’t come here in good faith to have a discussion. You came here to yell at me and to boo me,” McCormick complained. 

‘Join the Mission’

The Georgia congressman is right. The activists came to be part of a leftist-led show to create a narrative at odds with reality. A new Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll found 72 percent of registered voters support what DOGE is all about — an agency devoted to tackling government waste. That overwhelming majority includes nearly nine in 10 Republicans, two thirds of independents and about 60 percent of Democrats. 

At the same time, a majority of voters (52%) approve of the job Trump has done in the first month-plus. Republican Party approval has remained steady while support for the Democratic Party has slipped to an abysmal 36 percent. 

“Two-thirds of voters agree Democrats should wait and see what Trump is doing before opposing, and say Dems should join the mission to cut government waste,” the poll states. 

‘Force Them to Answer for Their Complicity’

The song remains the same for the left and its media partners. Groups such as Indivisible have again been busy rounding up activists to star in town hall shows for hungry cameras and smartphones. Launched in 2016 to oppose Trump, Indivisible literally wrote the book on “Resisting the Trump Agenda.” Ahead of last week’s congressional recess, the left-wing organization posted its Musk or Us Toolkit. It’s a resource guide for rallying the usual suspects to occupy the offices and constituent events of House Republicans who, according to Indivisible, “are  complicit in Trump and Musk’s power grab — and they think they can dodge accountability.” It is, of course, interesting that Democrats are in fact the ones attempting to dodge DOGE’s efforts to hold federal agencies and agents accountable for criminal waste, fraud and abuse. 

The plan, as it was during the first Trump administration, is to force Republican lawmakers “on the record, expose their corruption, and make them pay a political price.” And Indivisible offers a “few ideas” to get leftist activists started “— but get creative!” Among the guidance, the took kit advises protesters to coordinate with local media to “cover your visit,” and it encourages confrontation, and lying — lots of lying. 

“These questions are designed to corner them, force them to answer for their complicity and make them squirm. You can use this website created by House Democrats to pull district-specific data on how Republicans’ economic plans would impact constituents,” the tool kit urges. Activists, according to the guidance, should show up at town halls and “ask tough questions.” What they mean by “tough” is loaded questions filled with political spin, half truths and outright lies. 

Sample questions to Republican lawmakers include: 

“Your budget slashes Medicaid and food assistance but gives Elon Musk a tax break. Why?” 

“Why does Musk have more control over taxpayer money than voters?”

“Why is your budget attacking immigrants instead of holding billionaires accountable?”

The tool kit encourages “street theater,” including having a protester wear a “Musk mask” and hold a House Republican “like a puppet.” 

And Indivisible has a plan for making sure congressional Democrats do the left thing, voting against “any budget that includes extremist cuts, poison pill riders, or lacks safeguards against Musk’s power grab.” 

“We want to lift up the Democrats who are standing strong—and remind them we’ve got their backs,” the toolkit explains. 

‘It was Obvious Who They Were’

Much has changed since the first Trump administration. Trump learned some valuable lessons in his first term, specifically how to deal with the deep state, the swamp, and an incredibly corrupt corporate media. Some Republicans have, too. 

Rep. Glenn Grothman encountered confrontational constituent theater at his district town halls last week. While the Wisconsin Republican congressman acknowledged that most of the people in attendance were from his 6th Congressional District, he said it’s the same opposition activist showing up. 

“I think it would be like every member of the Winnebago County Democratic Party turning out in a show of force. These are not people that all of a sudden have changed their minds about something. It was obvious who they were,” Grothman told The Federalist in an interview. 

Washington Post columnist Philip Bump used the “hostile audience” in attendance at Grothman’s Oshkosh-area town hall last week to construct his narrative that “the right is doing a good job convincing the right that Trump is doing a good job. But only the right.” Noting Grothman decisively won his sixth term in a solidly red congressional district, Bump opined that the representative “probably wasn’t expecting that he’d be booed.”

“The ensuing conversation with his constituents was not much friendlier than his initial reception,” the columnist wrote. “Wisconsinites challenged Grothman’s claims about the month-old administration of President Donald Trump and, particularly, criticized Trump adviser Elon Musk’s efforts to oust thousands of federal employees from their positions. Wisconsin Public Radio reports that Grothman’s defenses often met with hostility from the crowd.”

The crowd booed and hissed and screamed at the congressman when he defended Trump and Musk, video of the event shows. At one point audience members chanted, “Do your job!” Multiple corporate news outlets were on hand to cover every contentious second — as planned. 

‘A Political Stunt’

Grothman said he wasn’t all that surprised, and the unfriendly reception from the crowd didn’t bother him. He’s seen it all before. The same political show hounded him and others at town halls during Trump’s first term. Grothman told a reporter from NBC 26 that he’s going to give Musk and DOGE his own ideas on how to cut spending. 

“I enjoy meeting with these people,” he told The Federalist. “It’s amazing how misinformed they are.” 

Grothman isn’t backing down. Neither are the other House Republican targeted by left-wing activists at recent town halls. 

“It’s easy to be critical, but the people voted for change in November, and that’s exactly what they’re getting,” Rep. Jay Obernolte, a California Republican who faced town hall chants of “No King!” told Politico. 

“It’s unfortunate that the other party’s chosen to turn this into a political stunt,” he added. 

https://thefederalist.com/2025/02/25/leftist-political-theater-is-back-at-gop-town-hall-meetings-in-trump-2-0/

If Trump Wants Canada, Here’s How He Gets It


President Trump offered Canadians the deal of a lifetime — to join the U.S. and be welcomed as equals, as full citizens with all the rights that status entails. Canadian business would have tariff-free access to the world’s largest market. Individual Canadians would instantly be better off by replacing the weak Canadian dollar with the greenback, by getting lower taxes, lower gas costs, lower housing costs, better health care, better everything.

President Trump hasn’t made so generous an offer to anyone else. Yet instead of feeling honored, and responding in a spirit of generosity, most Canadians reacted peevishly and belligerently.

Under the cumbersome Canadian constitution, it is virtually impossible for Canada to join the U.S. in one go. But Trump can acquire Canada piecemeal — and faster than anyone ever imagined — by making the following deals with two provinces instead.

First, Trump should simultaneously invite the rich conservative province of Alberta and the poor liberal province of Newfoundland & Labrador to join the U.S. Since Canada’s Supreme Court already ruled that provinces can leave Canada via a clear referendum, the people of these two provinces would quickly snap up the dream deals that Trump can offer them, especially since so many of them love Americans and have long resented being exploited by Canada’s central provinces.

Newfoundland with its vast resources and strategic Atlantic location near Greenland would become the fourth largest U.S. state — only Alaska, California, and Texas have larger land masses.

Newfoundland, after all, generously hosted , when dozens of planes crossing the Atlantic were diverted to Newfoundland. During World War II, when Newfoundland had autonomous status as a British colony, it hosted American military bases, leading to post-war trade relations and close personal ties through the thousands of marriages between Newfoundland lasses and American servicemen.

Fear that Newfoundland would join an economic union with the U.S., which would harm Canadian fishing interests, led to an anti-American campaign. Even then, it took and connivance on the part of the U.K. and Canada before Newfoundlanders reluctantly agreed to join Canada in 1949.

Unlike liberal Newfoundland, which would be a poor blue state if it joined the U.S., conservative Alberta, which has the world’s , would be a rich red state. Alberta is so rich that it massively subsidizes the rest of Canada, yet it is also denigrated and resented by many Canadians because its wealth is based on energy resources. Canada has for years punished Alberta by blocking its ability to build energy pipelines and develop its natural resources.

Pressure today from central Canada on Alberta to bear the brunt of retaliating against U.S. tariffs by stopping its energy exports — the lifeblood of Albertans — has led to intense resentment and a revival of Alberta’s latent independence movement.

Alberta and Newfoundland are both primed for an exuberant offer from Trump, making them ready joiners. By simultaneously inviting a red and blue state to join the Union, Trump would be taking a page from President Eisenhower’s playbook, when he invited both Alaska and Hawaii to become states, thus eliminating domestic political opposition by maintaining parity between Republican and Democratic senators.

Once it becomes clear that Alberta is leaving Canada, opposition in the rest of Canada to joining the U.S. will quickly collapse. Quebec, whose separatists lost its 1995 referendum by just 1%, remains in Canada only because it is heavily subsidized by Alberta. With an end to Alberta’s subsidies, Quebec will end its stay inside Canada, anguishing only between becoming independent and taking a deal with the U.S.

The rest of Canada’s provinces — which would become geographically separated from one another by provinces that became states — would suffer no small amount of anguish. They would soon come to understand the need to seek a home under America’s embrace.

All this can be accomplished at warp speed — Alberta’s decision to leave could be evident by Christmas. By July 4, 2026 — the 250th anniversary of America’s Declaration of Independence — other provinces would realize the futility of making a go of it in a Canadian rump state.

President Trump could then seal the deal and fulfill America’s Manifest Destiny — the two-century-long dream of America spanning the continent, from the Gulf of America in the South to the Arctic Ocean in the North.  Trump would leave office with the satisfaction of more than doubling America’s land mass and making America greater than it has ever been.



Election Lands Germany at a Crossroads at Which We All Have Arrived

 The Leader of the AfD remarks that America can have a docile Germany and pay most of its defense bills — or leave Germany to pay its own bills but live with no guarantee that Germany will do what America wants.

The German elections confirmed that Germany, traditionally the most powerful country in Europe at least potentially, since Bismarck founded the German Empire in 1871, has arrived at a crossroads, bringing Europe and the Western Alliance with it.

The chancellor-elect, Friedrich Merz, has won a great personal victory, as he was defeated for the leadership of the Christian Democratic Union by Angela Merkel 20 years ago, and retired from politics throughout her four ultimately unsuccessful terms as federal German Chancellor. Herr Merz’s successful return at the age of 69 is a vindication of his more conservative, less environmentally alarmist, more Alliance-minded, views.

For 40 years Herr Merz’s chief political inspiration has been President Reagan. Germany has followed Italy and the United States and to some extent France in a move to the right, and in Germany, this is particularly emphasized by the dramatic success of the Alternative for Germany, an unambiguously conservative movement that appears to have gained 20 percent of the popular vote but is still ostensibly ring-fenced by the other parties as a pariah with racist or even Nazi overtones.

Germany, along with Italy, Hungary, and probably soon France, are re-examining postwar Europe’s heavy indulgence, for notorious historic reasons, of the working and agrarian classes: Economic growth and meritocratic advancement have been capped by an income redistribution and social safety network that placate the historically turbulent masses of Europe at the expense of economic growth.

The great German economy is stagnant and is wheezing under the weight of the Merkel and Scholz governments’ appeasement of the climate change militants, represented in the political arena by Germany’s powerful Green Party, fourth after the Christian Democrats, Alternative, and Social Democratic parties. On top of ideological matters, human rights have been raised as an issue in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, particularly by Vice President Vance in Europe last week.

That’s when he questioned whether the ineffectuality of the principal European nations toward illegal immigration and the practices of arresting and charging people and overturning elections in some countries over peaceful dissent from official policy were compatible with the democratic principles on which the Western Alliance was found and conducted to victory in the Cold War. This has left much of Germany and other Western European countries bristling at the supposed American impudence over dictating what constitutes an acceptable level of personal and collective liberty. It is a reasonable question.                                               

Another crossroads where the entire West must consider options is in the composition and direction of the Western Alliance. Francis Fukuyama, who appears to be still convalescing from his premature proclamation of the end of history nearly 35 years ago, has just written that President Trump has shamefully betrayed the cause of human freedom and shattered the Western Alliance as a result of being mesmerized by President Putin.

Mr. Fukuyama’s reflections are almost as ludicrous as those of the former national Intelligence director, James Clapper, eight years ago that Trump was an intelligence asset of the Kremlin, whose interventions had won the 2016 presidential election for him. Mr. Clapper was discredited partisan dishonoring a supposedly nonpolitical agency; Mr. Fukuyama has been a generally serious political and social commentator.

President Trump made it clear in his first term that the United States was not prepared to pay the defense bills for Germany opposite Russia while Germany made itself an energy vassal of Russia by becoming completely dependent on Russian natural gas. The incoming chancellor has promised that Germany will pay its full share for its defense.

The incoming chancellor appears likely to roll back some of Frau Merkel’s more extreme and self-punitive energy measures, but he bridles at the impeachment of the quality of German and of much European democracy and appears to believe that Mr. Trump is prepared to give Putin more of Ukraine than he has been able to win on the battlefield, though there is no evidence of this.

During the Cold War, German neutralists were a constant contender in German politics and produced the argument that the United States should do most of the burden-sharing in defense of the West because Western Europe and Germany in particular did most of the risk-sharing, being on the edge of the Soviet bloc. This, of course, was specious, but up to a point the United States had put up with it in order to maintain its containment strategy and lead the West to a bloodless victory in the Cold War and Germany itself to reunification.

Germany owes its swift election as a full ally of its former wartime enemies to the statesmanship of President Eisenhower, and its reunification to the statesmanship of President Reagan. Prime Minister Thatcher, President Mitterand, and General Secretary Gorbachev all opposed a united Germany.

The overreaction to Mr. Trump’s recognition, unique among current Western leaders, that along with preventing a Russian reabsorption of Ukraine, our principal objective in the Ukraine war is to bring it to a swift and sufficiently satisfactory conclusion that we can induce Russia to take its distance from the potentially fatal embrace of Communist China.

Under the Merkel regime, of which incoming Chancellor Merz and Mr. Trump both substantially disapproved, it was an open question whether Russia or Germany would be a more reliable and useful ally for the United States.

It should be possible to sort all this out, get a peace in Ukraine that gives Mr. Putin enough to avoid complete humiliation, with Ukraine’s security guaranteed by the principal Western European countries who, if tested, would be able to invoke the North Atlantic Treaty’s Article V to gain American support, while the United States leads rebuilding efforts in Ukraine in exchange for exportation to it of strategic minerals. This was President Zelensky’s idea.

In Germany the burning question is whether a two-party grand coalition will be possible. If on the final results, the only parties to meet the 5 percent threshold necessary for representation in the Bundestag are the Christian Democrats, Alternative for Germany, SPD, Greens, and the Link (effectively communists from the old East Germany), then such a coalition will be possible between the CDU and either the SPD or the Alternative.

A coalition with the outgoing SPD would seriously limit the new chancellor’s ability to implement a conservative program. A real effort should be made to see if the Alternative for Germany is sufficiently housetrained to be a coalition partner. The two parties have agreed on the great issue of immigration, and the most insightful comment of the German leaders on the Alliance has come from Alternative’s co-leader, Alice Weidel.

Ms. Weidel remarked that the United States can have a docile Germany and pay most of its defense bills, or leave Germany to pay its own defense bills but live without the assurance that Germany will do what the United States tells it to do. This, too, is a choice that will have to be made at the crossroads where we have all arrived.

https://www.nysun.com/article/election-lands-germany-at-a-crossroads-at-which-we-all-have-arrived

21 Tech Experts Resign From DOGE After Refusing To ‘Dismantle Critical Public Services’

 ‘We will not lend our expertise to carry out or legitimize DOGE’s actions,’ the workers said in a mass resignation letter.

Does this signal cracks in DOGE ?

A cadre of nearly two dozen civil service workers have resigned from their positions at the Department of Government Efficiency saying that they refuse to allow their technical know-how to be used to “dismantle critical public services.”

A total of 21 engineers, data scientists, and product managers made their declaration in a joint resignation letter made public on Tuesday.

“We swore to serve the American people and uphold our oath to the Constitution across presidential administrations,” reads the letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press. “However, it has become clear that we can no longer honor those commitments.”

The resignation is just the latest setback for a tech-driven purge of federal workers and comes amid a multitude of legal challenges filed in court against the efforts of DOGE.

The legal woes come as federal agencies, including many run by Trump cabinet picks, pushed back against his hack-and-slash tactics, urging their employees not to respond to a recent email that asked them to justify their jobs by drafting bullet points on what work they had accomplished in the past week.

Also on Tuesday, Press Secretary Leavitt, responded to a question about the reports of agency heads not being made aware in advance of the email being sent out to workers.

“Nobody was caught off guard,” she said, prompting  a follow-up for a CNN reporter.

“A few departments said they were caught off guard,” Jeff Zeneny said. “The FBI was. The DOJ was…”

“Did anonymous sources say that or did the cabinet secretaries say that,” she responded before claiming that the reports were leaked by “career bureaucrats” and that “everybody was working as one team.”

Mr. Musk initially took to X over the weekend to say that not responding to the email by a deadline of midnight on Monday would be considered a tendered resignation.

Despite the backlash, he has doubled down on his stance with another ultimatum on Tuesday just after the original midnight deadline had passed.

“Subject to the discretion of the President, they will be given another chance,” he said in a post on X.

“Failure to respond a second time will result in termination.”

The workers, all of whom previously held roles at tech companies like Google and Amazon before joining the previous iteration of DOGE, the United States Digital Service, also claimed in their resignations that Mr. Musk has enlisted political ideologues that lack the skills of experience needed to reduce the size of the federal government.

The day after Mr. Trump’s inauguration, the nonpartisan staffers were called to a series of interviews with unidentified people wearing White House visitors’ badges in which they were grilled about their political ideology.

“Several of these interviewers refused to identify themselves, asked questions about political loyalty, attempted to pit colleagues against each other, and demonstrated limited technical ability,” the staffers wrote in their letter. “This process created significant security risks.”

Forty staffers were already laid off earlier this month making it difficult for the remaining 65 staffers to administer and safeguard its own technological footprint before a third of them quit on Tuesday.

“We will not use our skills as technologists to compromise core government systems, jeopardize Americans’ sensitive data, or dismantle critical public services,” they wrote. “We will not lend our expertise to carry out or legitimize DOGE’s actions.”

The White House has dismissed the impact the mass resignation would have on DOGE’s operations.

“Anyone who thinks protests, lawsuits, and lawfare will deter President Trump must have been sleeping under a rock for the past several years,” Secretary Leavitt said. 

“President Trump will not be deterred from delivering on the promises he made to make our federal government more efficient and more accountable to the hardworking American taxpayers.”