Monday, August 18, 2025

East to Alaska


On Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin flew to Alaska to meet with President Trump in an effort to resolve the long-running war with Ukraine. (Too many geographically handicapped people believed SNL’s skit deriding Sarah Palin, asserting that she had said she could see Russia from her home, and they were surprised to learn how short an eastward trip from Russia is to the United States.)

For a long time, corporate media have largely framed the war as one of an innocent party viciously attacked by a big neighbor, one that is worthy of unending military and financial support. As Trump has signaled, he’s had enough and wants Ukraine’s neighbors, whose interest is greater than ours, to step up, and several Western European leaders have mouthed support. In advance of the summit, , most of which are not well-publicized elsewhere, one of the most pertinent of which is that support for the war has dropped substantially in Ukraine:

“More than three years into the war, Ukrainians’ support for continuing to fight until victory has hit a new low. In Gallup’s most recent poll of Ukraine -- conducted in early July -- 69% say they favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible, compared with 24% who support continuing to fight until victory.

This marks a nearly complete reversal from public opinion in 2022, when 73% favored Ukraine fighting until victory and 22% preferred that Ukraine seek a negotiated end as soon as possible. Yet, Zelensky continues doing whatever he can to sabotage the Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska and to behave as if Ukraine's army still has some hope of winning a war they are clearly losing.”

He adds that Europe is in no realistic position to enforce any ceasefire which might be agreed upon:

A European military contingent is, theoretically, supposed to enforce a ceasefire, the other demand made by Zelensky and his European allies. The idea behind this is a sort of plan (one hesitates to call it that, but it is what it is) to get a cheap ceasefire deal, send in troops, and then restart the war against Russia.

In fact, Europe has no means to follow through on this -- having neither the troops nor the cash to back up Zelensky’s intransigent position.

Now consider this: if Trump and Putin start to work out a relationship, Europe will be on the outside looking in mainly because they have taken an extreme Zelensky position on Ukraine. Trump is a trade maven. He will promote any deal with Russia by touting investment and technology sharing. Where does that leave the Germans or Italians or anyone else in Europe?

Even more likely, US interest in the NATO alliance will continue to disintegrate. Why back Europe if Europe is undermining US strategic interests? If key European allies continue to try and undermine any Ukraine deal, Washington will see it as harming US national security. You cannot keep backing Zelensky and expect otherwise.

Zelensky, for his part, defies democratic norms. Not only does he not follow public opinion, but he sees to it that he keeps martial law in place, refuses to have elections, and jails or exiles his opponents. During the worst of times for the British in World War II, with the loss of most of Europe, the retreat from Dunkirk, the Blitz on London, Britain never declared martial law, nor did they jail opposition politicians (other than some Nazis), attack minorities or close down churches they didn't like.

Zelensky won't change direction. He will continue to try and undermine US-Russian negotiations. But Europe needs to rethink its support for a Zelensky-led Ukraine. It is digging a deep hole for its future. 

Aside from all this, we do have ample evidence that Ukraine under Zelensky is completely corrupt, a money-laundering machine through which billions of dollars were washed and ended up in the pockets of the Left and cronies. Hardly a sympathetic victim worthy of our wasting more arms and money to defend.

Unfortunately for Zelensky’s grand plan, Trump saw through it, and both he and Putin rejected a ceasefire, preferring an end to the war altogether.

 President Trump outlined the next steps:

A great and very successful day in Alaska! The meeting with President Vladimir Putin of Russia went very well, as did a late night phone call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine, and various European Leaders, including the highly respected Secretary General of NATO. It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up. President Zelenskyy will be coming to D.C., the Oval Office, on Monday afternoon. If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin. Potentially, millions of people’s lives will be saved. Thank you for your attention to this matter!   

Monday, Zelensky will fly to the U.S. and will be presented with the outline of the Trump-Putin plan:

It is too bad we do not have a detailed readout on the actual conversation at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. Trump's use of provocative symbols, F-35s and a flyover involving a B-2 stealth bomber, and the lack of the usual protocols (no honor guard and no national anthems), hardly was conducive to a diplomatic encounter of heads of state. Moreover, the use of a military base, explained as a "security measure," was inappropriate, but the Russians, anxious to state their case to Mr. Trump, intent on showing deep respect for the United States, accepted the venue and the conditions, even the escort of Mr. Putin's Presidential aircraft by US fighter jets.

The bottom line is, at least for now, US policy has shifted. The US and Trump no longer support a ceasefire but want to settle the Ukraine war through negotiations. How long that will take, and even if it is possible, remains to be seen. Meanwhile the war continues and, for the most part, Russia will continue pushing to take Pokrovsk and to expand the contact line further to the west. Ukraine, already stretched and now with uncertainties on military supplies, is facing a crisis. 

(Trump’s provocative setting has echoes of Putin’s. In a meeting with Angela Merkel, who is terrified of dogs, he brought his own pooch in to her obvious discomfort.)

Hans Mahncke has an idea (which I share) about what took place in Alaska

Here’s what likely happened at the Alaska Summit. The broad outlines of a Ukraine peace agreement were already in place -- otherwise Trump wouldn’t have agreed to a summit at all. Yesterday was about confirming that everyone’s on the same page and committed to moving forward. Trump’s new insistence on going straight to a full peace agreement, not just a cease fire, is another sign of that. On Monday, little Zelensky will be told what the deal is. He might throw another tantrum, in which case he and his European friends will eventually find out the hard way that it won’t end well for them. Or he might come to his senses, accept reality, and take the deal, in which case things will move very quickly. 

Mahncke views Zelensky’s latest tweet about how well his war is going as akin to a Hitler-in-the-bunker statement.

Whether or not you agree, my view is that reality wins in the end, and Trump’s view, unlike Zelensky’s or Britain’s or Germany’s or France’s, is one that accords with it.



Grassley releases data showing Biden admin placed over 10K migrant children with unvetted sponsors

The Trump administration provided Grassley with the information as part of his oversight investigation and requests, which were largely ignored or stonewalled by the previous administration.

By Misty Severi   |   18 Aug. 2025

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley on Monday released new data from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which confirmed his concern that the Biden administration placed over 10,000 migrant children with unvetted sponsors.

The Trump administration provided Grassley with the information as part of his oversight investigation and requests, which were largely ignored or stonewalled by the previous administration. 

The data found that HHS' Office of Refugee Resettlement from January 2021 through January 2025 placed 11,488 unaccompanied migrant children with unvetted sponsors who were not their parents or legal guardians. During that same period, the department also declined to conduct home studies for over 79,000 migrant children under the age of 12, including in homes where a study was recommended.

"My oversight continues to expose disturbing evidence that the Biden-Harris administration turned a blind eye to tens of thousands of kids who needed proper supervision and care," Grassley said in a statement. "It’s appalling to prioritize speed and optics over the safety and wellbeing of children. I appreciate the Trump administration’s efforts to undo the damage caused by the last administration’s failed border policies, and I’ll continue my oversight of the issue to ensure abuse like this never happens again.”

The Trump administration has since moved to reform the unaccompanied minor program, including launching an interagency initiative and investigation in February into the suspected fraud and trafficking of the program.

Misty Severi is a news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage. 

X22, And we Know, and more- August 18

 



Why Trump Is The Man Who Can End The Ukraine War


After the disappointment of an overhyped Alaska summit between Trump and Putin on Friday, you can witness the “I told you so” knives coming out, because President Trump didn’t instantly deliver a ceasefire. It justified his detractors, who had insisted that Trump is a fraud in the Wizard of OZ style, i.e., a flawed little man behind the curtain. To them, I say, wait for the second act.

I can virtually guarantee you that whatever you think you know about him is likely wrong. Why can I say that with authority? Having evaluated many of the challenges he has faced since 2015, I’ve come to realize something: he’s neither an ideologue nor an open book. He has a youthfully flexible mind and will try new approaches to fit into his fundamental moral and intellectual ethos. He frequently surprises his detractors.

Here’s what we do know about President Trump:

  • He’ll do anything in his power not to be boxed into a corner
  • He hates waste, whether it be economic or human
  • He’s astute and doesn’t tend to make the same mistake twice
  • Winning is more than an end result; it is a state of mind for him
  • He loves his family and keeps them close to keep himself grounded
  • Trump has a highly developed ability to see the strengths and weaknesses of his opponents and use that to craft deals. He also frequently walks away from a deal, a skill many dealmakers don’t possess.
  • Most of all, President Trump sees himself as a builder of monuments, be it golf courses, hotels, or, in his present role, rebuilding the United States of America.

Like all human beings, Trump has weaknesses. Thus, he does not take losing well, abhors being put into a position of weakness, and has a solid streak of vanity/ego that, at times, can be manipulated. However, he has demonstrably been able to put his weaknesses aside during a negotiation or fight. Ask Letitia James, the Attorney General of NY, what it’s like to fight Trump! I’m sure she would never say it, but she’s got to wonder, might even marvel at how he survived the full weight of the New York legal system and now finds herself the pursued!

The President frequently exhibits an enormous breadth of knowledge, coupled with an ability to find common ground for complicated deals that would seem unbridgeable. His tenacity, coupled with his moral compass (Yes, Donald Trump has a strong moral compass), allows him to persevere even in the face of seemingly impossible situations and to find solutions that at times combine what you might think were unrelated ideas and topics that only he can connect to strike a deal.

Donald Trump is the Art of the Deal in real life. He has an uncanny ability that frequently sees him catching lightning in a bottle. And, he does so, over and over again, to the chagrin of his opponents.

The next most overlooked aspect of Trump is his ability to tolerate pain. He frequently welcomes pain, which he sees as part of the process, ultimately overcoming it through force of will that his opponents can’t muster.

His reputation for being a bit crazy and unpredictable is carefully curated. It frequently puts off his opponents, who have no experience dealing with a personality like his.

I have friends who think his way of operating is put on or a character defect, without realizing how powerful his approach is in practice. Trump always focuses on objectives, frequently bringing the same tenacity to both small and large issues, which often confuses people. Yet, this may be the key to understanding how Trump thinks and acts.

The Left has zero understanding of how Trump functions. They believe that their well-used (and previously successful) tactics, which include pressure, shaming, gaslighting, and the lie, will continue to win for them. Boy, have they been wrong.

Now, Trump faces his most formidable enemy: Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. A man not unlike himself in many respects. There are a few defining differences between the two men, though:

  1. Putin cultivates the belief that he is loved, respected, and invincible. He is not. More than one Russian leader has been taken down and removed from power, and,not by a random assassin either. Putin’s enemies, like his predecessors, are close to him, people with much to lose and who aren’t buying the poppycock he sells his own people about how well they are doing in Ukraine.
  2. Putin’s ambition is empire building, while Trump’s is arresting our country’s decline and then returning it to its former greatness, which he believes is intrinsically linked to the free world’s success, even its very continuation.
  3. Putin seeks to dominate people and territory (both his own and elsewhere), while Trump seeks personal responsibility and a limited government that stays out of our citizens’ way. Quite the contrast; don’t you think?

I’d be lying if I knew what Round Two would look like. What I can objectively say is that Putin displayed his cards on Friday. With a contingent of over 500 accompanying him, mostly business people, I could feel the pressure Putin is feeling relative to his economy. Why did he bring them along? Both sides likely knew this was an opening round, with no business deals to be struck that day.

Russia’s economy is dangerously leveraged. Trump’s secondary sanctions could be all it would take to destabilize what’s left of his economy. Oil sales are the only reason this war has continued. Strangle that, and Putin’s greatest enemies will be the people who accompanied him the other day.

People will support a dictator who promises victory and then delivers it, as long as they keep the money rolling in. Russia is perilously close to having a reversal of fortune on that front. The military front is already a disaster from any reasonable analysis of land conquered vs the loss of personnel and material.

Things can change very fast in war. Keep watching that balloon deflate. (Russia’s economy and war-fighting ability) If that metaphorical balloon deflates, Putin’s least worry is losing the war; his very life backs his gambit.

God Bless America!



Nobody Knows What’s Real


There’s no better example of how little faith Americans have that government officials will tell the truth than the public’s blasΓ© reaction to UFO announcements.  In the last ten years, The New York Times has run stories about secret Pentagon programs tasked with retrieving alien craft.  Members of Congress have held hearings on “mysterious orbs” and invited government witnesses to testify about black budget projects supposedly reverse-engineering alien technology.  Secretary of State Rubio and director of National Intelligence Gabbard have both suggested that the UFO issue is serious.  Yet eight billion people around the world collectively shrug.

Can you imagine what the public reaction would have been like had national newspapers and prominent officials released similar details in the 1950s?  With the 1947 Roswell Incident still fresh in Americans’ minds, government confirmation of UFOs would have been the most important story in the world.  Every article written and television report broadcast would have been framed around the alien/UFO phenomenon.  

For eighty years, UFO-hunters have been fighting for government declassifications and official disclosure of alien contact.  Now that videos of strange sightings have been released and congressional hearings have been convened to investigate the matter, Americans don’t seem to care.  Representatives Tim Burchett and Anna Paulina Luna have said explicitly that extraterrestrial visitors are real, and their statements disappear in a blizzard of news stories discussing the “Aryan micro-aggressions” of Sydney Sweeney’s jeans.

Nobody believes what government officials say.  Nobody believes what journalists say.  In our world today, fantastic stories come and go, and nobody knows if they’re real. 

CIA director William Casey reportedly told other principals gathered in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in early 1981, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”  Whether Casey was being frighteningly blunt or darkly humorous,  I don’t know.  Yet we certainly know that the CIA and FBI have been running mass propaganda programs on the American people for as long as either agency has existed.

What military schools now teach as examples of “hybrid” or “information warfare” has long been part of the U.S. government’s arsenal of psychological weapons used against American citizens.  I wish this fact were more shocking to people.  Information warfare is just as effective and deadly as conventional warfare.  

As bad as Allied losses were at Normandy, they would have been much worse had Eisenhower and Patton not tricked Hitler into concentrating his forces away from the locus of the invasion.  All of the so-called “color revolutions” of the last fifteen years in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East relied heavily upon anonymous (and likely espionage agency–created) social media accounts to inflame tensions, sow chaos, and encourage rioting.  The Russia Collusion Hoax and the unbridled COVID hysteria (during which governments rushed to close schools and businesses and censor online speech before basic facts could even be established) are textbook examples of information warfare that upended entire societies without ever firing a shot.

When we acknowledge that government institutions have knowingly and willfully targeted the American people with disinformation campaigns meant to achieve strategic objectives, we are acknowledging that these institutions have made war against us exactly as military planners would wage war against foreign enemies.  That is a sobering, terrifying, and unforgivable betrayal of the U.S. Constitution.  

Surely the federal government’s information war against the American people is just as newsworthy as the possibility of extraterrestrial or intra-dimensional visitors.  Noticeably, however, there are even fewer stories written about the government’s mass psychological operations against citizens than there are stories written about UFOs.  That’s pretty revealing.  The New York Times would rather hype speculation about little green men than document how federal agencies regularly lie to and manipulate the American people. 

Why do you think that is?  It is because The Times and other prominent news publications are well aware that they have been willing weapons in this decades-long information war against citizens.  The government can’t psychologically manipulate the masses without controlling mass communication.  Likewise, instruments of mass communication can’t effectively disseminate disinformation if the people who are meant to be manipulated recognize those instruments as weapons for spreading colossal lies.

When President Trump first began excoriating reporters for publishing “fake news,” the Dan Rathers and Jim Acostas of the propaganda press huffed and puffed, claiming that Trump’s exercise of his First Amendment right to free speech somehow jeopardized Americans’ First Amendment right to a free press.  Coming from the mouths of known liars, the journalistic Establishment’s choreographed umbrage was hilarious.  The prodigious manufacturers of fake news had long advertised their offal-laden sausages as fine cuts of meat.  And Trump had no problem telling the American people that the most famous names in news sold eyeball- and intestine-filled slop.

But it was not Trump’s insults that the corporate news media really feared.  After all, lame-duck President Obama had used the “fake news” pejorative repeatedly before leaving office in an effort to blame Hillary’s election loss on random social media accounts supposedly spreading “Russian disinformation.”  (Appallingly, Obama was pushing Russia Collusion Hoax disinformation while blaming disinformation for Trump’s victory.)  Even the propaganda press picked up Obama’s baton and published numerous stories in late 2016 claiming that an epidemic of “fake news” got Trump elected.

So the purveyors of fake news had no problem disparaging other news publications as “fake.”  They only started worrying when they belatedly realized that Trump’s belittling of their profession had shattered their decades-long spell over the minds of the American people.  Frauds such as Dan Rather and Jim Acosta called Trump a liar.  Trump called them liars.  And the American people believed Trump more than the pudgy blood sausages of fake news.

Trust in government institutions and newsrooms has been falling for decades.  The Russia Collusion Hoax, the COVID Reign of Terror, and the outrageous lawfare campaigns against conservative politicians and voters have now destroyed public trust in Establishment institutions for the foreseeable future.

Where do we go from here?  When authorities no longer have the trust of the people, they survive only by making amends for past transgressions or adopting even more overt forms of coercion.  In the former case, government transparency, the impartial application of the law, and respect for public dissent help to renew the social contract between citizens and their government.  In the latter case, appeals to expertise, discriminatory criminal enforcement, and rank censorship become hammers beating citizens into submission.

The United Kingdom has chosen coercion.  Law enforcement agencies in the U.K. spend more resources policing public debate on social media platforms than they do curbing illegal immigration or protecting children from rape gangs.  Citizens who express unapproved thoughts that contradict official government policies put themselves in legal jeopardy.  U.K. health authorities continue to defend their COVID totalitarianism as a reasonable emergency response backed by “scientific” expertise.  In the U.K., protections for free speech, dissent, and freedom of conscience are dead.

The Brits will surely reap what they now sow.  They will discover how many citizens are willing to “trust the experts” when “net zero” energy rationing puts lives and livelihoods in danger.  They will learn how many capable warriors are willing to fight and die in future wars for a country that treats illegal aliens better than patriotic citizens.  They will rediscover that the criminalization of public debate leaves silenced citizens no alternative to rebellion.

In the United States, we have a small window to avoid Britain’s fate.  While President Trump is keeping the corporate news media’s propagandists and Silicon Valley’s censors at bay, Americans have one final chance to defend free speech from the contemptible Deep State.  If we fail, everything will soon resemble a UFO.  Nobody will know what’s fake or real...or even care.



Caught Redhanded: Video of Democrat City Councilman Shamelessly Stuffing Ballot Box Goes Viral

 

By Teri Christoph  | August 18, 2025 |  RedState

The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com. |  AP Photo/David Zalubowski

A fun little story popped over the weekend involving a Democrat named Abu Musa, who serves on the city council of Hamtramck, Michigan, and it's getting international coverage. You can just file this one under "Dems doing Dem things."

In the video, it appears that Musa and an acquaintance stuff handfuls of paper ballots into a drop-off box just a few days before a primary election Musa, an incumbent, won handily. Musa is seated in the front passenger seat of the car and can be seen passing large stacks of ballots to the driver, who dutifully stuffs them into the drop box. Under the cover of night, of course.

Watch:

Here's the kicker: Musa beat out 11 other candidates by garnering 1,129 votes, but only 286 of those votes were cast on Election Day (August 5th). Meaning, 842 votes were cast by absentee ballot. Not impossible, but definitely suspicious. 

The video came to light after Michigan State Police launched an investigation into allegations of rampant fraud being perpetrated by Hamtramck's top officials, including Musa and several of his fellow councilmen. Councilmen Muhtasin Sadman and Mohammed Hassan were arraigned last week on charges they forged signatures on absentee ballots during the 2023 election. According to one report, "a city clerk noted absentee ballots were being dropped off in large bundles and filled out with suspiciously similar handwriting."

But, wait, there's more. Earlier this year, Hamtramck City Manager Max Garbarino was placed on leave after he suspended the city's police chief, Jamiel Altaheri, over allegations he violated department policy. 

RELATEDDem Rep Maxine Waters' Campaign Just Got Slapped With a Fine Over Election Violations

DOJ: Enormous Voter Roll Cleanup Soon to Begin


Getting back to Mr. Musa and his now-viral video, he also is under investigation for possible election-related misdeeds, but it's not related to the video of him stuffing the ballot box. Instead, Musa is facing allegations that he doesn't actually live in Hamtramck, which is a requirement for serving on the city council. And while the video raises serious questions about his actions and the validity of his recent win, it doesn't appear that he's currently facing legal scrutiny for that. 

So, the question is: how many ballots can you stuff before finding yourself in hot water? Oakland County (Michigan) Clerk Lisa Brown has the answer: "You can (return more than one ballot), but there's a big caveat as to who, whose ballot you can return." According to Brown, there's not a strict limit to the number of absentee ballots that one person can bring to a ballot box, but those ballots must belong to a close relative or member of your household. She added, "If it's an immediate family member or you co-inhabit with somebody — it doesn't have to be in a romantic way — but if you co-inhabit with someone, you can return their absentee ballots."

Judging by the large number of ballots Musa and his accomplice were caught on camera stuffing, they must have enormous families. Or, they were caught redhanded committing election fraud. Take your pick.

This isn't the first time Hamtramck City Council has made the news. Back in 2021, they grabbed headlines for being the first all-Muslim city council in the United States.

🎭 π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓

 


Welcome to 

The π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


Must Watch: Pay Attention to What Islamists in the West Are Saying Out Loud

 

Guy Benson  | August 18, 2025 | Townhall

We often observe that the Dirtbag Alliance -- known to others as the red-green alliance -- is aligned not just against Israel, but against Western Civilization itself.  For now, Western leftists, who hate capitalism and many of the values that make the West what it is, have joined forces with profoundly illiberal Islamists.  They all hate Israel, of course, which is a Western outpost in a rough neighborhood.  They lie about Israel committing a "genocide" in Gaza, just as they adopt virtually all Hamas propaganda at the drop of a hat.   The Islamists terrorists claim it, and Western leftists amplify it.  And even if some of it makes them queasy, in quite a few Western countries, the Islamist populations have grown so large that entire political coalitions have decided that they have no choice but to placate and pander to that substantial and often growing portion of their voting base.  More on that in a moment.  

Fundamentally, though, it's important to underscore that when they smear and slander Israel, it's not only because they hate Jews, though many of them do.  It's never really about settlements in the West Bank, or how humanitarian aid is or isn't flowing into Gaza.  It's not even about the existence of the Jewish State itself, even as they fervently wish for its annihilation (after all, when they chant "from the river to the sea" and advocate "Intifada" and glorify their "martyrs," they surely mean it).  But they have much broader hatreds and larger goals in mind than the mere destruction of the state of Israel.  Think about how these are merely the ones willing to say, on camera and into microphones, precisely what many others undoubtedly believe:



Those are merely a handful of examples.  I'm also reminded of this moment here in the United States:

Elected Democrats came out of the woodwork to condemn a Wall Street Journal op/ed referring to Dearborn as America's 'Jihad Capital,' but were slow, flat-footed, or totally MIA in response to the subsequent "death to America" chanting in that very city.  It's certainly true that not all Muslims share the sentiments, fanaticism, or stated goals of Political Islamism.  It is disturbing, however, how few Islam-based groups in the West are willing to denounce extremism and terrorism.  Indeed, some of these "civil rights" organizations that present themselves as identity groups within the Left's intersectionality constellation actively defend Islamist bigotry and celebrate Islamist terrorism:


Which brings us back to a point we made earlier.  I've seen many people, seemingly baffled, wondering why leftish-to-leftist political leaders in places like Western Europe and Canada cave to Hamas propaganda so willingly and frequently.  In so many ways, violent theocratic Islamism and Western leftism should mix like water and vinegar.  I don't believe these leaders are all snarling anti-Semites.  But I do believe they know who their voters are.  And their voters include hordes of left-wingers who want to topple the pillars of Western civilization, -- capitalism especially -- and, yes, growing throngs of Islamists.  They can't win elections without them.  Once that is understood, their cravenness and moral duplicity and bankruptcy do not seem nearly as mysterious.  As we are seeing with the rise of anti-Israel fanatic and Communist Zohran Mamdani, America's Democratic Party is in danger of sliding into this abyss, as well.  Consider this recent manifestation of cowardice, in Minnesota:


I suspect this spinelessness arises from a blend of not wanting to offend core Democratic voters in Minnesota, and also not wanting to validate critiques from the Right about a Mamdani-style candidate who's been endorsed by the state Democratic Party.  The 'bad people' believe 'bad' things about him, so if his campaign employs some people who openly celebrated the worst mass-murder of Jews since the Holocaust, silence is deemed the best path forward.  Disgusting. And this from the 'Country Over Party' lecturers who make demands of the opposing coalition that they're utterly unwilling to live up to themselves.  Why should anyone take their high-minded and self-righteous sermons seriously?  I'll leave you with two of the Islamists' most valuable assets -- the thoroughly rotten and corrupt United Nations and the international 'news' media -- doing what they do:


Parting thought: Does the Dirtbag Coalition hate Israel with a special, seething brand of loathing because the Jewish State isn't weak and self-loathing, as are so many other would-be targets in the Western world?  They take their self-defense and their culture deadly seriously, out of necessity -- which are unforgivable sins in the eyes of the Dirtbag Coalition, especially when committed by Jews.

Photo: Townhall/Spencer Brown