#US National Defense

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Michael de Adder

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

January 30, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JAN 31, 2024

Today, according to Clare Foran, Manu Raju, and Morgan Rimmer of CNN, House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told his Republican colleagues that he will not bring forward the bipartisan immigration bill senators have been working on for months, calling it “absolutely dead.” 

Although Johnson insisted in November that border security was so crucial that he wouldn’t bring up aid to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and Gaza until such legislation was attached to it, Trump has made it clear he wants immigration and border security left on the table for him to use as an issue in his run for the presidency.

Instead of addressing border security through legislation, House Republicans instead are moving forward with their plan to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. They wrote articles of impeachment even before holding hearings. Today, members of the House Homeland Security Committee held a hearing to mark up those articles, which claim that Mayorkas committed high crimes and misdemeanors because he allegedly breached the public trust and refused to enforce immigration law. 

In all our history, only one cabinet officer has been impeached. William Belknap, whose eight years as secretary of war under President U. S. Grant had been marked by ostentatious displays of wealth and apparent kickbacks from army contracts, was charged with corruption in March 1876 just hours after he tearfully handed Grant his resignation. 

The House charged Belknap with “criminally disregarding his duty as Secretary of War and basely prostituting his high office to his lust for private gain.” The Senate agreed that it had jurisdiction to hold an impeachment trial even for a former government official, for an officer should not be able to escape justice simply by resigning. After hearing more than 40 witnesses, a majority of senators voted to convict Belknap on each of five charges, but no vote reached the necessary two-thirds threshold for conviction, and he was therefore acquitted. 

Almost 150 years later, the impeachment of Mayorkas would be the second effort to impeach a cabinet member. Yet there is no suggestion that Mayorkas has done anything but try to implement the law, even as the administration has repeatedly asked for more funding to make it possible for him to do his job.

In the hearing today, Representative Seth Magaziner (D-RI) noted that “across the system, we are at and above capacity, and so, what should the secretary do? The secretary, because he has not received the funding to provide adequate detention capacity, has to use his judgment for who to detain and who to release. That is not illegal. It is certainly not impeachable. And it is the exact same kind of discretion that every other director before him has used. In the last two years of the Trump administration, 52% of migrants apprehended at the southern border were released, not detained…. Nearly a million people. I did not hear my Republican colleagues trying to impeach the secretary or acting secretary under the Trump administration during those years. But here they are, trying to impeach Secretary Mayorkas for doing the exact same thing.”

Rather than passing the laws the country needs, the extremist Republicans appear to be determined to tee up an issue on which Trump can run for president in 2024. House speaker Johnson has demanded “ZERO” illegal crossings into the U.S., but this is a standard that no previous homeland security secretary has met because it is impossible to wall off every single means of entering this country by water, air, or land. And—despite Republicans’ false claims that Biden has established “open borders”—immigrants were more likely to be released into the country during Trump's term than during Biden’s. 

What is going on here is an attempt of the extremist Republicans to undercut the administration by attacking a key cabinet officer not for actual misbehavior but on policy grounds.  

There is no chance the Senate, dominated by Democrats, will convict Mayorkas even if the House, with its razor-thin Republican majority, impeaches him, but the extremist minority in the House that is going after him is attempting to set a precedent that a minority can stop the government from functioning. 

The cost of that obstruction has been clear in domestic politics over government funding, but it has now become a global issue over the question of U.S. support for Ukraine. Johnson had said he would not bring forward a bill to provide supplemental funding for Ukraine unless it included measures for increased border security; now his rejection of a bill to provide that border security threatens Ukraine aid. 

Ukraine is defending itself against an invasion by Russia, but the struggle there is larger than one between two countries: it is the question of whether the rules-based international order put in place after World War II will survive, or whether the world will go back to a system in which stronger countries can gobble up less powerful ones. 

Military aid for Ukraine is widely popular among Americans and among American lawmakers, who recognize the larger questions at stake. But extremist Republicans are siding with Trump, who has made his preference for Russia and its autocratic leader over Ukraine clear. The realization that a few extremist Republicans are scuttling Ukraine aid has prompted officials from both parties to warn of the consequences if the U.S. stops providing support to Ukraine.

In Foreign Affairs today, Central Intelligence Agency director Wililam Burns noted that the war has weakened Putin’s Russia significantly. Aid to Ukraine has amounted to less than 5% of the U.S. defense budget, “a relatively modest investment with significant geopolitical returns for the United States and notable returns for American industry,” he wrote.

“For the United States to walk away from the conflict at this crucial moment and cut off support to Ukraine would be an own goal of historic proportions,” Burns said. The secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Jens Stoltenberg, has been in Washington, D.C., this week, urging Republicans to back the aid, if only on the grounds that most of the money appropriated goes to support jobs in the U.S. 

The man behind the extremists, Trump, was in the news today for the fact that the political action committees that back him spent about $50 million covering his legal bills in 2023. That money came from donors and arrived primarily in the months after the 2020 presidential election, when Trump lied that he had actually won the election and needed financial support to challenge the results.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[liberty1776]

Col. Douglas Macgregor (ret.) is one of the most innovative thinkers of our time. In today's Liberty Report he explains his recently-published detailed blueprint for a less expensive - and better - US military and a safer America.

[gwydionmisha]

If this is your critter and you have something to say about his vote:

If you can't safely contact them in person, here are some other options:

Call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to the representative of your choice. Here is one that will send your reps a fax: https://resist.bot/ To get your Critters' numbers to call direct: https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jason Wilson at The Guardian:

Pete Hegseth, Trump’s nominee for secretary of defense, has attacked several key US alliances such as Nato, allied countries such as Turkey and international institutions such as the United Nations in two recent books, as well as saying US troops should not be bound by the Geneva conventions. At the same time, the man who would head America’s gigantic military has tied US foreign policy almost entirely to the priority of Israel, a country of which he says: “If you love America, you should love Israel.” Elsewhere, Hegseth appears to argue that the US military should ignore the Geneva conventions and any international laws governing the conduct of war, and instead “unleash them” to become a “ruthless”, “uncompromising” and “overwhelmingly lethal” force geared to “winning our wars according to our own rules”. Hegseth’s policy preferences may raise concerns about the future of Nato, the escalation of tensions with Israel’s arch-foe Iran, and impunity for US war criminals, such as those who Hegseth persuaded Trump to pardon in his first term. [...]

���Europe has already allowed itself to be invaded’

While in the more distant past Hegseth was a foreign policy hawk aligned with neoconservatism, since what he has called his “Trump conversion”, he has written scathingly of multilateral institutions. In American Crusade (AC), published in 2020, Hegseth asks bluntly: “Why do we fund the anti-American UN? Why is Islamist Turkey a member of Nato?” Elsewhere in that book, Hegseth disparages the International Security Assistance Force, the UN security council’s peacekeeping force sent to Afghanistan in 2006, with claims based on his own service in Afghanistan: “On my camouflage uniform, I wore an American flag on one shoulder and an Isaf patch on the other,” he writes, adding: “The running joke of US troops in Afghanistan was that the Isaf patch actually stood for ‘I Saw Americans Fighting’.” Like Trump, Hegseth characterizes Nato allies as not paying their way: “Nato is not an alliance; it’s a defense arrangement for Europe, paid for and underwritten by the United States.”

He also embeds criticisms of Nato in apocalyptic, “Great Replacement”-style narratives of European immigration. Hegseth writes at one point in AC: “Europe has already allowed itself to be invaded. It chose not to rebuild its militaries, happily suckling off the teat of America’s willingness to actually fight and win wars.” Hegseth is particularly incensed by the inclusion of Turkey in Nato. He argues that the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, “openly dreams of restoring the Ottoman empire” and is “an Islamist with Islamist visions for the Middle East”.

“The defense of Europe is not our problem; been there, done that, twice,” Hegseth writes, adding: “Nato is a relic and should be scrapped and remade in order for freedom to be truly defended. “This is what Trump is fighting for,” he concludes. The UN, meanwhile, he calls “a fully globalist organization that aggressively advances an anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-freedom agenda. Here’s one set of rules for the United States and Israel, another for everyone else.” On Hegseth’s characterization of Turkey as Islamist – the same descriptor he uses for militant non-state actors such as Isis – Hill said: “It’s extremist rhetoric that’s trying to paint literal treaty allies as illegitimate actors.”

‘If you love America, you should love Israel’

Hegseth’s belief in the UN’s bias against Israel mirrors his deepest apparent commitments: that any vision of international cooperation is rooted in his support of Israel, which at times he couches in religious terms. In a striking passage in AC he presents his support for Israel against as a renewal of medieval crusades. “Our present moment is much like the 11th century,” he writes in AC, adding: “We don’t want to fight, but, like our fellow Christians a thousand years ago, we must. We need an American crusade.” He adds: “We Christians – alongside our Jewish friends and their remarkable army in Israel �� need to pick up the sword of unapologetic Americanism and defend ourselves.” Hegseth continues: “For us as American crusaders, Israel embodies the soul of our American crusade – the ‘why’ to our ‘what’.” Hegseth concludes: “Faith, family, freedom, and free enterprise; if you love those, learn to love the state of Israel. And then find an arena in which to fight for her.”

[...]

‘We will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs’

In 2024’s The War on Warriors, Hegseth argues at length that US forces should ignore the Geneva conventions and other elements of international law governing the conduct of war. In the book, Hegseth asks: “The key question of our generation – of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – is way more complicated: what do you do if your enemy does not honor the Geneva conventions? “We never got an answer. Only more war. More casualties. And no victory.” Hegseth’s answer is that the conventions should be ignored. “What if we treated the enemy the way they treated us?” he asks. “Would that not be an incentive for the other side to reconsider their barbarism? Hey, Al Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs.” He then writes: “We are just fighting with one hand behind our back – and the enemy knows it … If our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily and asked to sacrifice more lives so that international tribunals feel better about themselves, aren’t we just better off winning our wars according to our own rules?!”

He continues: “Who cares what other countries think?” Hill said Hegseth’s rhetoric blamed “liberal ideas” for military defeat in a way that resembled the narratives far-right movements have historically used to scapegoat their political opponents for military defeats.

The Guardian reports on potential Trump Misadministration II Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth wrote in two different books that the US should ignore the Geneva Conventions, launches childish criticisms against NATO, and unapologetically defends Israel’s Apartheid by whining about “anti-Israel” bias against the UN.

[davidaugust]

Pete Hegseth has been nominated to become US Secretary of Defense, a position he is unqualified for and will be destructive in.

“Hegseth explicitly rejects democracy in American Crusade, characterizing it as a leftist demand: ‘For leftists, calls for ‘democracy’ represent a complete rejection of our system. Watch how often they use the word,’ adding: ‘They hate America, so they hate the Constitution and want to quickly amass 51 percent of the votes to change it.’”

“He explicitly supports forms of election-rigging through gerrymandering. Fair electoral boundaries, he writes, amount to ‘Playing nice to placate the so-called middle,’ which ‘has been a losing strategy for patriots for decades’. Since ‘the other side is stacked with enemies of freedom’, Hegseth argues, ‘Republican legislatures should draw congressional lines that advantage pro-freedom candidates – and screw Democrats.’”

“Hegseth’s rhetoric about perceived ‘internal’ or ‘domestic enemies’, along with media reports highlighting his tattoo of the crusader motto ‘Deus Vult’, may ring alarm bells for those concerned by Donald Trump’s repeated threats to unleash the US military, which Hegseth would directly control, on those he has described as ‘the enemy within’.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/22/trump-defense-secretary-pete-hegseth-book

[anxiously-sidequesting]

Not to keep beating dead horses like I so much love to do but I am still completely Flabbergasted and Astonished at how you (Merle Ambrose) could discover the most terrifying fact that a child that is essentially under your care has been indoctrinated into a cult (which, by the way, a process that has taken over the course of years) ((by an agent that has been stationed in a direct position to make it easier to access and manipulate children, that has easily escaped your notice for such a long time)) that worships a nihilistic entity whose ultimate goal is the absolute and total destruction of Everything and Everyone around you, and your one, single, simple-sentenced response to that is to say "Oh, that's a shame. He (Duncan) always was pretty terrible. Hope he gets better someday." And then to move on from those extremely worrying and dangerous bundle of issues permanently without taking any sort of action to protect the vulnerable and make sure nothing like this ever happens again

[mollysunder]

What about Silco as Medea? The two are so alike in the way that their actions are essentially held by a different standard because they act as agents of fate. Where Medea is bound to Jason to fulfill the gods' task for him, so does Silco exist to aid Vander to create the nation of Zaun.

On the surface their both easily read as violent and spiteful figures whose actions draw disgust and condemnation, and yet they escape true punishment. That is because the actions of Medea and Silco are above divine reproach. It is their respective partners that walked back on their divine tasks, where Vander abandoned Zaun's independence just as Jason a champion of Hera abandoned his blessed union with Medea.

After both Silco and Medea had their revenge on the men they that loved and helped achieved great heights, they didn't have easy lives but they still found success and even peace in the end. They were both devoted to their divine responsibility and were rewarded in turn. Medea married another king and was rewarded with a place in Elysium. Meanwhile Silco built an empire, got to avoid experiencing the true bloodshed his choice to protect Jinx (the spirit of Zaun), and was able to die with the knowledge that he wasn't betrayed by the last person he ever loved.

[news4dzhozhar]

[thoughtlessarse]

Tucked into a $895 billion Pentagon bill making its way through Congress is a little-noticed provision to further conceal the death toll in Gaza — the latest effort by U.S. policymakers to cast doubt on casualty figures reported by Palestinian health officials. The House approved this year’s National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, on Wednesday and sent it to the Senate for a vote, despite Democratic objections over a GOP proposal to prohibit transgender children on military health insurance from receiving gender-affirming care. The death toll provision of the must-pass bill, which passed 281-140 with 81 Democratic votes, has received significantly less attention. It would bar the Pentagon from publicly citing as “authoritative” casualty data from the Gaza Health Ministry, effectively concealing the full extent of the death toll in Gaza in the military’s public communications. The data from Palestinian authorities has been the only consistent and reliable count of the death toll out of Gaza over the last 14 months, with Israel consistently denying human rights workers access to the enclave and preventing foreign media journalists from entering. “This is an alarming erasure of the suffering of the Palestinian people, ignoring the human toll of ongoing violence,” said Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., in a statement to The Intercept. The provision does not explicitly cite the Gaza Health Ministry; instead, it says that the Pentagon cannot “cite as authoritative in public communications, fatality figures that are derived by United States-designated terrorist organizations, governmental entities controlled by United States-designated terrorist organizations or any sources that rely on figures provided by United States-designated terrorist organizations.”

continue reading

[zoey-angel]

Thinking about the Iranian person who asked to translate my work into persian and, when I said I'm from Israel, replied by saying they don't see why that's relevant, and can they please translate my work because they really like it and want to make it accessible to their friends. Made me question my entire worldview. Had it been a western leftist I would have been crucified I'm pretty sure

[sideblog-side-b]

On Wednesday, Republicans unveiled their first rules package for the upcoming Congress, setting the stage for a contentious legislative session.

Much of the attention has focused on measures like increasing the difficulty of ousting the Speaker of the House

and prioritizing a bill to sanction the International Criminal Court over its investigation of Israel’s actions in Gaza.

However, buried within the package is a provision with enormous potential consequences for transgender people. Among the twelve bills prioritized for early votes in the next session, the very first listed is a bill targeting transgender protections under Title IX.

First reported by independent transgender journalist Maddy Castigan, the provision specifies that Title IX compliance in athletics would be determined by “biological sex.” Notably, the bill does not define “biological sex.” Previous Republican proposals have defined the term in ways that exclude not only transgender individuals but also intersex people.

It remains unclear whether this bill would extend its redefinition of sex beyond athletics to encompass all aspects of Title IX. If so, the implications could be sweeping, potentially affecting transgender people’s access to bathrooms, locker rooms, and protections in discrimination cases nationwide.

The inclusion of an anti-trans bill as the first among the Republican Party’s twelve legislative priorities signals a clear direction for the party over the next two years, with control of both the House and Senate. National Republicans have shown little hesitation in advancing anti-trans legislation, and their momentum appears to be growing.

Recently, 81 Democrats supported a National Defense Authorization Act that stripped transgender healthcare coverage for military service members' youth dependents, [...]

Unlike the NDAA, however, this proposed Title IX bill will stand alone, forcing Democrats to take a direct and unambiguous vote on transgender rights for the first time in this Congress.

[tmarshconnors]

Julian Assange is FREE!

Today marks a historic moment for press freedom and free speech advocates worldwide. After spending 1,901 harrowing days in Belmarsh Prison, Julian Assange is finally a free man. The news of his release, following a plea deal with the US, has brought tears of joy and relief to many who have tirelessly campaigned for his freedom.

Assange, 52, has been a central figure in the fight for transparency and government accountability. His work with WikiLeaks, which disclosed critical information about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, sparked global debates about the balance between national security and the public's right to know. However, it also led to severe legal repercussions, culminating in his incarceration in a high-security British prison since 2019, where he fought against extradition to the US on charges of conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defense information.

The emotional response to Assange's release is palpable. His wife, Stella Assange, expressed deep gratitude to his supporters, stating, "Words cannot express our immense gratitude to YOU - yes YOU, who have all mobilised for years and years to make this come true. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,” in a heartfelt post on X, formerly known as Twitter. This acknowledgment highlights the power of collective advocacy and the unwavering dedication of Assange's supporters over the years.

According to CBS, Assange will spend no time in US custody and will receive credit for the time he has already spent incarcerated in the UK. The plea deal, which requires him to plead guilty to one charge, is set to be finalized in a court in the Northern Mariana Islands on Wednesday, 26 June. This unique location, a US commonwealth in the Pacific much closer to Australia, underscores the unusual nature of Assange's legal journey.

The US has long argued that the release of the WikiLeaks files endangered lives, a claim that has been hotly contested by Assange's supporters and various human rights organizations. The debate over his actions and their implications for press freedom and government transparency has been one of the most significant of our time.

As Assange prepares to return to his native Australia, as confirmed by a letter from the US Department of Justice, the global conversation about press freedom and free speech is reignited. His case has underscored the crucial role that journalists and whistleblowers play in holding power to account and the significant risks they face in doing so.

For many, including myself, this news is overwhelming. The fight for freedom of speech and the protection of those who dare to speak truth to power is far from over, but today's victory is a testament to what can be achieved through persistent and passionate advocacy. Assange's release is not just a personal victory for him and his family but a beacon of hope for journalists, activists, and free speech defenders worldwide.

As we celebrate this momentous day, we must also reflect on the importance of continuing to defend press freedom and the rights of individuals to expose wrongdoing without fear of persecution. Julian Assange's journey has been a stark reminder of the stakes involved, and his release is a powerful affirmation that the fight for truth and transparency is worth every effort.

In the words of Stella Assange, "Thank you" to all who have stood by Julian and advocated for his freedom. Today, we witness the impact of our collective voice and the undeniable power of solidarity in the face of adversity.

[liberty1776]

The Case For Radical Changes In US National Defense, With Guest Col. Dou...

Col. Douglas Macgregor (ret.) is one of the most innovative thinkers of our time. In today's Liberty Report he explains his recently-published detailed blueprint for a less expensive - and better - US military and a safer America. We need to defend America, We need new strategy, America first.

Defending the Antichrist Zionist state of Israel is not worth a single American Life. A real MAGA president's first act would be to end all support for Israel. 

[gwydionmisha]

Remember how we spent all last year and the early part of this one fighting this sort of thing where they slip anti-bodily autonomy stuff into must pass funding bills?

Here we are again. Please, call your critters in the Senate, whether Republican or Democrat. Democrats actually had our backs through these fights in the last few years, but it's not guaranteed given the scapegoating in the press, so call Democratic critters too help stiffen their spines. Thank them if they are standing up for bodily autonomy; tell them your opinion if they aren't. Express support for trans healthcare as well as abortion

If you can't safely contact them in person, here are some other options:

Call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to the representative of your choice. Here is one that will send your reps a fax: https://resist.bot/ To get your Critters' numbers to call direct: https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Andrew Kazcynski at CNN:

CNN — 

Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, has voiced strong opposition to removing the names of Confederate generals from US military bases, repeatedly saying the names should be changed back. Hegseth, a National Guard veteran and longtime Fox News host, has described the renaming efforts as “a sham,” “garbage,” and “crap” in various media appearances between 2021 and 2024 reviewed by CNN. Hegseth said the moves eroded military tradition and were part of what he characterized as a politically motivated progressive agenda infiltrating American institutions. Between 2022 and 2023, the names of nine US military bases previously dedicated to Confederate leaders were changed, the result of the National Defense Authorization Act passed at the end of the first Trump administration. Trump initially vetoed the bill, partly in protest over the renaming provision, but Congress overwhelmingly overrode the veto to pass the bill in January 2021. As secretary of defense, Hegseth could advocate for reverting base names to their former Confederate names, but the changes would require congressional approval. Hegseth, whose Senate confirmation hearings begin January 14, has criticized other cultural shifts in the military, including allowing women to serve in combat roles and gay service members to serve openly. Hegseth did not respond to CNN’s request for comment. During his 2024 book tour promoting “The War on Warriors,” Hegseth frequently criticized the decision to rename military bases, calling it an erasure of legacy and tradition.

“We should change it back by the way,” he said emphatically while promoting his book when discussing North Carolina’s Fort Liberty – previously Fort Bragg – on a podcast. “We should change it back. We should change it back. We should change it back, because legacy matters. My uncle served at Bragg. I served at Bragg. It breaks a generational link.”

[...] Trump has been adamant in his opposition to renaming bases honoring Confederate leaders. “I have been clear in my opposition to politically motivated attempts like this to wash away history and to dishonor the immense progress our country has fought for in realizing our founding principles,” Trump said at the time of the legislation. Hegseth’s remarks are in keeping with a broader opposition expressed by incoming Trump officials to a range of cultural policies they view as overly progressive. [...] In another June 2024 interview, Hegseth referred to renaming the bases as “crap” and “garbage.” “I emailed my company commander from my infantry training, which was at Fort Benning, which is no longer Fort Benning,” he said in 2024. “It’s Fort Moore. And Hal Moore’s a great guy. But like, there’s also a generational link that breaks when you rename Benning and Bragg. Like, where’d you serve? Bragg, where’d you serve Benning? Where’d you serve now Liberty, like, it’s just, it’s garbage. It’s all, it’s just, let’s just crap all over it.” Hegseth was discussing Fort Benning - now Fort Moore - named for Confederate Gen. Henry L. Benning.

Potential Trump Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth supports the reversion of the US base names back to ones that glorified Confederate traitors.