Contradictions?

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D, MN) condemns our sanctions against Iran—sanctions against that nation’s government, various members of that government, and against that government’s oil sales and other business’ international activities.

calling them “crippling” and asserting they would “starve the Iranian people.”

Of course, the crippling nature of the sanctions is the point of them: to convince the men of the Iranian government to change their ways, to in President Donald Trump’s words, stop trying to kill Americans, stop trying to kill our friends and allies, and to stop trying to get nuclear weapons. If sanctions were not crippling, they’d have no effect. Omar knows this.

And, no, the sanctions won’t starve the Iranian people. Iran produces most of its own food, and food trade is not sanctioned. Omar knows this.

And this:

First he canceled our best shot at avoiding armed conflict—the Iran nuclear deal.

The Iran nuclear deal, on the contrary, transferred $150 billion in lifted sanctions and unfrozen assets to the Iranian government, and it transferred billions of dollars—$400 million of it in cold cash in the dead of night—to the Iranian government—money which went directly to funding Iran’s terrorism-by-proxy efforts throughout the Middle East.  The Iran nuclear deal, further to the point, had no hope of avoiding armed conflict—it actually guaranteed it. This “deal” codified Iran’s “right” to have nuclear weapons after a very few years’ delay, and Iran, true to its word, would have used them to destroy Israel. Omar knows this.

Omar also actively supports the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, which designed to destroy the Israeli economy and to starve that nation into submission. Which submission would bring about Israel’s extinction at the hands of enemies sworn to effect that destruction: Hamas and Hesbollah, Iranian terrorist satraps, and Iran itself, which wants to wipe Israel from the map—a major aspect of Iran’s drive for nuclear weapons.  Omar knows this.

Omar also claimed

Since he [Trump] got into office, the president of the United States has been goading Iran into war….

Because objecting to Iran’s terrorist activities throughout the Middle East and in western Europe is goading Iran.

Because objecting to Iran’s attacks on oil tankers in the Arabian Gulf is goading Iran. Because objecting to Iran’s shoot-down of a drone in international airspace is goading.

Because objecting to Iran’s seizure of a US Navy small craft that, with engine failure had drifted a small way into Iranian water, and humiliating the sailors on board is goading Iran.

Because objecting to Iran having its Popular Mobilization Forces militia in Iraq assault and vandalize our embassy in Baghdad is goading.

Omar knows better.

And this:

Sanctions are economic warfare[.]

Of course they are. Would she prefer a shooting war?

No, not contradictive at all.  This is the face of the Progressive-Democratic Party.

Point, Counterpoint

A minor flickers maker:

Michael Moore
@MMFlint
Just wondering – is there an American General for whom millions of us would turn out for his funeral? Mad Dog? Kelly? Colin Powel? William Westmoreland? Can anyone even name the chair of the Joint Chiefs?We all support those who serve but would we pour into the streets like this?

An author and commentator:

Dinesh D’Souza
@DineshDSouza
In case you haven’t noticed, Trump draws crowds like this. He is the only one in America who can. What this shows is that America is not a society captive to Caesarism, where blood and conquest brings feverish popular acclaim

Honorable Military Service

Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate and town mayor Pete Buttigieg has been making a big deal about his heroic service during his five-month tour in Afghanistan.

Greg Kelly and Katie Horgan, both ex-Marines with actual combat duty, had some thoughts about that in their Wall Street Journal op-ed.  So do I.  Kelly and Horgan noted,

He [Buttigieg] entered the military through a little-used shortcut: direct commission in the reserves.

Not even a 90-day wonder—a pomeranian prince.

Especially this:

Mr Buttigieg spent some five months in Afghanistan, where he writes that he remained less busy than he’d been at City Hall, with “more time for reflection and reading than I was used to back home.” He writes that he would take “a laptop and a cigar up to the roof at midnight to pick up a Wi-Fi signal and patch via Skype into a staff meeting at home.”

It’s a mark of the quality of Buttigieg’s “service” that he had less work to do even than that of being a small-town mayor.

Honorable officers, when they’re short of tasks, go looking for more things to do to advance the mission, they don’t head up to the roof top to moonlight on Skype or hide out somewhere recreationally reading.

Oh, and Bob Dole felt no need to lean on his military service, much less his actual wounds, in order to campaign for office. Neither did Phil Hart or Daniel Inouye.  But the unscathed rooftop pomeranian prince does.

Two Impeachment Moves

Senator Josh Hawley (R, MO) has introduced a resolution to dismiss all impeachment charges if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) continues to obstruct the Senate trial by refusing to submit her caucus’ Articles of Impeachment to the Senate.  Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Senator Lindsey Graham (R, SC) says he’ll work with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R, KY) to change Senate rules to allow the Senate to begin the impeachment trial.

Hawley has proposed

So here’s what I think needs to happen. We need to change the Senate rules to allow the Senate to dismiss this case if she refuses to send the articles over[.]

Of the two, Graham’s is the more substantive.

What I would do, if she continues to refuse to send the articles as required by the Constitution, I would work with Senator McConnell to change the rules of the Senate so we could start the trial without her, if necessary[.]
…
If we don’t get the articles this week, then we need to take matters in our own hands and change the rules, deem them to be delivered to the Senate so we can start the trial, invite the House over to participate if they would like[.]

We need to hold the trial. President Donald Trump is allowed to be vindicated by trial; simply dismissing the charges leaves them hanging. It also would give Progressive-Democrats opportunity to bellyache about unfairness. They’re going to do anyway on acquittal, but since they will, they might as well do it on their failed case, rather than on something nebulous.

Engraved Invitations

…personally hand-delivered.

President Donald Trump has notified Congress of his intent to respond to any Iranian attack against Americans or American facilities:

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!
2:25 PM · Jan 5, 2020

Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate and Mayor Pete Buttigieg is dismayed by this form of notification.

Buttigieg said Trump is not handling the situation properly with respect to informing Congress, arguing that the Senate’s Gang of Eight—a group of top Republican and Democratic lawmakers—should have been notified.
“That heads-up to Congress is to Congress as a body, not to certain members who agree with you politically…You don’t notify Congress by tweet,” he responded.

I’ll elide the detail that notification to Congress of such matters is notification to House senior leadership as well as to Senate senior leadership.

No, what Buttigieg is upset about is that nontraditional Trump is using nontraditional means to notify Congress instead of hand delivering personally engraved notifications.

How precious.

How easily distracted.