Posted originally on CTH on March 24, 2025 | Sundance
FBI Director Kash Patel makes his first television appearance on Fox News to discuss his mission priority within the FBI. Defending the honorable rank and file FBI agents, Kash Patel notes his intention is to focus on the massive increase in violent crime that has come as an outcome of open borders and illegal alien inflows.
Kash Patel has a long relationship with both Trey Gowdy and current CIA Director John Ratcliffe going back to the days when Patel was the lead staffer for Devin Nunes on the House Intelligence Committee, and Gowdy with Ratcliffe were selected to review the FISA application at the center of ‘Russiagate.’
Mr. Gowdy puts the number of honorable FBI officials at 95% and Director Patel agrees, saying he wants to return to the time when he and his family would invite FBI agents for a cup of coffee. Patel then emphasizes he has already addressed the bad actors within the FBI and will continue to hold the internal investigative officers accountable with a zero-tolerance approach.
During the interview Trey Gowdy wants to emphasize how qualified Kash Patel is for this role in the FBI, delivering effusive praise for his mentee and friend, Director Patel. Gowdy calls Kash Patel the ’employee of the month’ for his excellence and brilliance in his first 30-days. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on March 24, 2025 | Sundance
Appearing with professional narrative engineer Margaret Brennan, Senator Rand Paul discusses his DC perspective on the need to protect criminal aliens from excessive deportation action.
Senator Paul agrees with Mrs Brennan that all persons, including illegal alien entrants into the United States, deserve constitutional protection. As an outcome of that viewpoint the Alien Enemies Act is in a state of contradiction and conflict. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: And we turn now to Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul. He is the chair of the Homeland Security Committee, and he joins us this morning from Bowling Green, Kentucky. Good morning to you, Senator.
SEN. RAND PAUL: Good morning. Thanks for having me.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Sure, because of your role in Homeland Security, I want to follow up where we left off with National Security Adviser Waltz. There are legal questions around using these authorities to send out detainees without giving them a day in court. But there’s also just questions of how it’s being handled in regard to these individuals who were rejected by El Salvador, one for gender, one because they weren’t Venezuelan at all. Do these concern- does any of this concern you? Along with claims from their family members that many of these people weren’t gang members?
SEN. PAUL: There are some big legal questions here. On the one hand, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, to persons. The Bill of Rights doesn’t specifically designate citizens. It’s really anyone in the United States the Bill of Rights applies to. On the other hand, the Alien and Enemies Act simply says, you really don’t get much process. The president can simply declare that you are somehow a problem for foreign policy and opposed to our foreign policy, and you can be deported. So really, ultimately, this goes to the court, and then the court is going to have to decide, are they going to declare unconstitutional a law that’s been around for a couple hundred years, or are they going to defer to Congress? If you look at the TikTok decision recently, which I don’t agree with, but in the TikTok decision, the court basically said we’re going to defer to Congress. Congress says this is about national security, and who are we to question Congress–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Right and then the president issued executive order that defied the- what Congress did–
SEN. PAUL: Right, right. But my- my point is- is I think the court should have ruled on the First Amendment with regard to TikTok and not said, oh, well, whatever Congress wants. But if you look at the TikTok decision, and you had to guess what the Supreme Court is going to do, my guess is they’ll uphold the Alien and Enemies Act. It’s not necessarily my position, but I think the court will uphold it. So it’s at least debatable on both sides, who’s right or who’s wrong here. And I think it’s not correct for Democrats to simply say, oh, it’s constitutional chaos. There’s no leg to stand on. There actually is legal authority. On the one hand, it’s been around for over 200 years.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But, but just- we’re not talking about partisan politics. We’re talking about the courts right now. And what the judge said he had questions about and talks about this being done, you know, essentially in the cover of night, this seems to be an argument the administration wants to have go to the Supreme Court. Are you comfortable with bypassing what you described as, you know, what’s guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, a day in court, or at least some verification that some of these people actually are guilty in some way of what they’re accused of, which is membership in a gang?
SEN. PAUL: So we have a contradiction. We basically have the Constitution that says everyone, persons in the United States have due process rights, have the Bill of Rights on their side, but we also have law that has been in power for 200 years saying, oh, well, except for when the president wants to deport people. So these are in conflict. There will have to be some decision making. On the question of whether or not a district judge can make a ruling for the whole country, that’s also a very big question, and I suspect, as this works its way up to the Supreme Court, when you get to the Supreme Court, I do believe the Supreme Court is going to limit district judges from having nationwide rulings. So I think that’s also in the offing. But these are huge legal questions, and the only way they begin is by a challenge.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah
SEN. PAUL: If the president doesn’t challenge these, they never have standing and never get to court. So on the one hand, the president is generating this, but it’s the only way to generate a final conclusion from the court.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It just sound- I mean- these are debates for law professors, certainly, but in the meantime, there are individuals who may have been sent wrongly to these facilities that are outside the U.S. jurisdiction. Are you comfortable as the man with oversight, as chair of the committee, with what’s being done?
SEN. PAUL: I think the courts will rule that there has to be some process. I don’t think you are going to be able to deport people–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, yes, you are comfortable with it?
SEN. PAUL: So no, I- well, I think you’re answering for me. I think there is going to be some process afforded by the courts for representation before you’re deported in most cases. I don’t know about the ones under the Alien and Enemies Act, and I’m not sure anybody knows that. And while I love constitutional law, I’m not a constitutional lawyer.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.
SEN. PAUL: I do think it goes to the Supreme Court. And there are arguments to be made on both sides of this question.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Got it. I want to ask you about some congressional business. I’ve seen it reported that you have pitched to Elon Musk a plan to claw back $500 billion in federal funding that Congress has already approved. There was an effort back in 2018 to do something like this, and it failed. Do you think you can actually get this done in a rescission package, and how much money do you think you can get back?
SEN. PAUL: Well, this goes to another huge legal question. Can the president impound money, or does he have to send it back and we approve the cuts through rescission, and this is going all the way to the Supreme Court also, because I think the Trump administration believes they can just not spend it. There’s another question within the question, can the president and his people, can Secretary Rubio pause the spending. On that issue I think they will win. You will be able to pause spending as long as you don’t go through the end of an appropriations year. If you get through that, I believe it’s impoundment, and I think the court so far has said it has to come back, and less as the Trump administration argues that the empowerment Act is unconstitutional. So this was headed to the Supreme Court also. It is my personal belief we should adhere to the law as it is now, and that is, send it back and have Congress confirm it. It’s a simple majority vote. It’s called rescission. I did mention this to Elon Musk. He seemed enthusiastic. It can be done. No Democrats- you have to realize, no Democrats will cut one penny from any spending anywhere. But can we get all the Republicans, is the real question.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You can get 51 Republicans, you think, to get on board with this?
SEN. PAUL: Well, I think the president’s gonna- the president is going to have to use effectively his bully pulpit and his popularity to convince all Republicans to do it. It’s not a given that Republicans will stand, will will vote for this. We tried it once in the first administration it was only–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Right, I remember–
SEN. PAUL: –15 billion, and we we lost. We lost two Republicans. But my suggestion to the Trump-, my suggestion to the Trump administration is come to the Republicans who you suspect might have misgivings and convince them, in advance, don’t put it in their lap. Bring them 500 billion. If they say this, 10 billion, I can’t deal with, I can deal with the 490, you’re gonna have to pre negotiate the rescissions package. But I think you could get there.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you about the Department of Education. States, as everyone I think knows, provide the majority of the funding and oversight for your local schools. But Kentucky, when we looked at the numbers, gets the fourth most federal education funding per student of any state in this country. You have over 900 schools that have these Title One programs, which are low income schools who need that federal subsidy to continue to operate. How are schools going to get that money if the president closes the Education Department?
SEN. PAUL: I think the bigger question, if we’re sending all this money to Kentucky and all the other states, why are our scores abysmal? Why do two thirds of the kids not read at proficiency? Why do two thirds of the kids or more not have math proficiency? So it’s an utter failure–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Isn’t that up to the state?
SEN. PAUL: What I’d like to- let me finish, I’d leave it back to the States. It has always been a position, a very mainstream Republican position, to have control of the schools by the states, send the money back to the states, or better yet never take it from the States. About half of our budget in Kentucky goes to education, and that’s the same in a lot of states. I think we can handle it much better. When I talk to teachers, they chafe at the national mandates on testing they think are not appropriate for their kids. They think they waste too much time teaching-
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Right–
SEN. PAUL: –teaching to national testing. The teachers would like more autonomy, and I think the teachers deserve more autonomy.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But when we look at the budget in Kentucky, the state receives 2 billion in federal education funding. Do you have a guarantee that the federal government, federal taxpayers will still provide 2 billion in education funding? That seems important to your state.
SEN. PAUL: I’d rather well, no, what I’d rather is a guarantee that my kids can read and write and do math. The amount of dollars, look, the number of dollars has gone up exponentially, and our scores have gone the other way. So dollars are not proportional to educational success. What I want is success, and I’ve talked a lot about this, I think there are innovations we can do where there’s more learning via some of the best teachers, and we pay them more. I would like to have an NBA or NFL of teachers, the most extraordinary teachers teach the entire country if not the entire world–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Who would run that? The education department?–
SEN. PAUL: –And some of them- no what you’d find is they’d be selected out state by state across the nation. Look, people say, oh, without the department education, we’d have no testing. I was- I was in school before then, we did achievement tests in the sixth grade, the fifth grade, the eighth grade, and we compared ourselves across state lines. There were international testing.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Yeah–
SEN. PAUL: –You don’t need the Department of Education for any of that. But what I can tell you is–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Okay–
SEN. PAUL: –the best teacher in the world is not teaching the kids. What we need to do is have the best teachers and pay them more, but they wouldn’t teach 30 kids. They might teach 10 million kids at a time, because it would be presented to the internet with local teachers reinforcing the lessons.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I’m sure we’ll be talking more about this. Senator Paul, thank you for your time today. We’ll be right back.
Posted originally on CTH on March 23, 2025 | Sundance
Obviously, Margaret Brennan is a leftist operative within the media space and desperate to direct any conversation toward the narrative issues that are organized by the professional Democrats in DC. Within this interview her priorities are protecting Iran, protecting Hamas and protecting illegal criminal aliens.
Regarding Tren de Aragua criminal gang illegal alien removals, Ms. Brennan says their removal is not a “deportation” they are being sent to prison, and furthermore they are not being afforded “their day in court.”
NSA Waltz misses the opportunity to tell Brennan immigration and DHS are deporting them, removing them; however, we are under no obligation to repatriate them. Perhaps Ms Brennan could look up the term ‘deportation’ in a dictionary. Obviously, illegal aliens do not have U.S constitutional protection, so “their day in court” is a little silly. [Video and Transcript Below]
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to “Face the Nation.” There is a lot to cover on the home front, but we begin first on national security. In just a few hours, U.S. officials will be holding talks with Ukraine, and tomorrow a separate round with Russia, in pursuit of a 30 day cease fire. In the meantime, the Trump administration is ramping up the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, sending a second aircraft carrier to the region. We begin this morning with White House National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. Good to have you here.
WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER MIKE WALTZ: Thanks Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So the Iran-backed Houthis, they continue to fire at Israel. What has the last week of bombing achieved? And if you’re holding Iran responsible, what’s next?
MIKE WALTZ: Well, we’ve taken out key Houthi leadership, including their head missileer. We’ve hit their headquarters. We’ve hit communications nodes, weapons factories, and even some of their over the water drone production facilities. Just in the last couple of days, President Trump has decided to hit the Houthis and hit them hard, as opposed to, in the last administration, where literally weeks or months would go by with these kind of one-off, pinprick attacks. And as a result, we’ve had one of the world’s most critical sea lanes get shut down. I mean, these guys are like al Qaeda or ISIS with advanced cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and some of the most sophisticated air defenses, all provided by Iran, Margaret. Just to- so everybody understands the impact here, the last time one of our destroyers went through the straits there, it was attacked 23 times. 75% of our U.S. flag shipping now has to go around the southern coast of Africa rather than going through the Suez Canal. And keeping the sea lanes open, keeping trade and commerce open, is a fundamental aspect of our national security. The last administration was not effective. The Trump administration and President Trump have decided to do something much harder, much tougher and much- and what- you know, we’ll see, but I think will be much more effective.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So the president said he’s going to hold Iran responsible as well. Envoy Steve Witkoff said in an interview that Iran had responded to this U.S. outreach via multiple channels. In regard to a letter sent by the president, Witkoff described it as an offer to Iran to “create a verification program so [that] nobody worries about weaponization of [your] nuclear material.” Can you clarify? Is the U.S. seeking the dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program, or verification, like what President Obama put in place back in 2015 and President Trump pulled out of?
MIKE WALTZ: Full dismantlement. Iran has to give up its program in a way that the entire world can see. And this is- look–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Have they said they’re interested?
MIKE WALTZ: –as President- as President Trump has said, this is coming to a head. All options are on the table, and it is time for Iran to walk away completely from its desire to have a nuclear- nuclear weapon. That- and they will not, and cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapons program.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Have they responded —
MIKE WALTZ: That’s enrichment–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –to the president’s call for peace talks?
(END CROSSTALK)
MIKE WALTZ: That is weaponization, and that its- its strategic missile program. Can you only imagine? We’ve seen the death and destruction that they’re doing through its proxies, between Hezbollah, the Assad regime, the Houthis, and what have you. If they had nuclear weapons, the entire Middle East would explode in an arms race. That is completely unacceptable to our national security. I won’t get into what the back and forth has been, but Iran is in the worst place it has been, from its own national security, since 1979, thanks to Hezbollah, Hamas, the Assad regime, and its own air defenses being taken out by the Israelis.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So there’s still a chance for diplomacy? I know you won’t get into- okay.
MIKE WALTZ: Well, of course, I mean, the President has all options on the table. But we want to be clear, this isn’t some kind of, you know, kind of tit for tat that we had under the Obama administration, or Biden. This is the full program. Give it up, or there will be consequences.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you closer to home, what has been happening here with Tren de Aragua, TdA, we’re going to call them, which have been designated by the Trump administration as terrorists. Last Saturday, 238 Venezuelan men were handed over to the government of El Salvador. 137 of them were deported using this rarely used, 1789 Alien Enemies Act. This is important because it gives the power to detain and deport without a court hearing first, if they come from countries at war with the U.S. In the hearing on Friday, it was revealed that El Salvador, where they’re being held, rejected two of the people: one on the basis of gender, because it was a woman and they can’t be held at a maximum security prison. The other because the person wasn’t even Venezuelan at all. How does that kind of high consequence mistake happen?
MIKE WALTZ: Well, these kind of one-offs we’ll deal with on an individual basis, but Margaret, the underlying issue here is twofold–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So there was a mistake that you acknowledge, here?
MIKE WALTZ: I can’t speak to those individual cases and the details of the individual cases, but what I can speak to is, President Trump has determined that this- this group is acting as a terrorist organization. It is terrorizing our communities through attacks, torture, rape, and the most awful of situations for those communities, number one, and number two, the Alien and Sedition Act fully applies, because we have also determined that this group is acting as a proxy of the Maduro regime. So–
MARGARET BRENNAN: You have- I’m sorry, just to clarify on that. This is supposed to apply if the U.S. is at war with a country. You are saying you have evidence–
MIKE WALTZ: We are saying–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –that the government of Venezuela is directing these gangs?
MIKE WALTZ: –we are saying- we are saying that TdA is acting as a proxy of the Maduro regime. This is how the Alien and Sedition Act applies, and we cannot have district judges interfering with the Commander in Chief’s actions to take care of, in the way he deems necessary, a terrorist organization.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So the U.S. is at war with Venezuela?
MIKE WALTZ: And I gotta tell you, we can- we can debate on Article Two, Article Three. That’s a fair debate. However, in this case, the Commander in Chief, President Trump, is taking decisive action to rid our communities of these gangs that are operating in a paramilitary fash- fashion, and that we know Maduro is deliberately emptying his prisons in a proxy manner to- to influence and attack the United States.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s different. That’s so different.
MIKE WALTZ: But that’s how–
MARGARET BRENNAN: That- the U.S. is not at war with the country of Venezuela. I know the Attorney General said on another network–
MIKE WALTZ: Look, this is not–
MARGARET BRENNAN: She- she thinks this is going to go to the Supreme Court.
MIKE WALTZ: Sure, that’s fine, but–
MARGARET BRENNAN: You want to have this fight.
MIKE WALTZ: No, but Margaret, we have instances where the IRGC from Iran have operated to- by with and through Mexican cartels, to then bomb facilities here in the United States. We’ve taken decisive action in that regard. We’re going to take decisive action in this regard, and we’re making a Washington D.C. distinction. When the American people are tired of being terrorized by these gangs. So–
(BEGIN CROSSTALK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: No one is defending gangs, but the concern–
MIKE WALTZ: Well, but it sounds like it. It certainly sounds like it from the Democrats–
MARGARET BRENNAN: There is concern–
MIKE WALTZ: –on the other side. It sounds like–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –that this is being carried out in a sloppy way.
MIKE WALTZ: –in the case of this judge that wanted to turn a flight around, full of gang members, that had intelligence packets that had determined what they’re doing–
MARGARET BRENNAN: There was a woman sent to a men’s- man’s prison, and El Salvador said, no.
MIKE WALTZ: I mean, okay, look–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So it’s the question of, if you are suspending the ability to have a day in court–
MIKE WALTZ: –I can’t speak to those individual details, If you want to–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –that you get the list right.
MIKE WALTZ: But, under- right, but under–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right? That you can verify that these people are gang members.
(END CROSSTALK)
MIKE WALTZ: Look, every one of them were here illegally. So first of all, we had every right and every- and should, deport every one of these individuals. If you want–
MARGARET BRENNAN: But they weren’t deported, they were sent to prison.
MIKE WALTZ: –to make a special case for one, that’s fine. But underlying that- underlying that, is the Alien Act that has determined that Commander in Chief has the absolute authority to do this.
(END CROSSTALK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’ll talk about this more with the Homeland Security Committee Chair, Rand Paul, ahead, I’m sure. I need to get to Ukraine with you, because this is active diplomacy, as we mentioned. The- the Ukrainians accepted this U.S. cease fire without preconditions, according to the announcement. The Russians said, only holding back on energy infrastructure. What’s the goal out of these talks that are about to begin in Saudi Arabia?
MIKE WALTZ: Yeah, well, first we’re- we’re moving closer, and we’re closer to peace than we ever have been. This started with President Trump talking to both leaders back to back. We then- Secretary of State Rubio and I engaged the Russians, engaged the Ukrainians at our level, and now we have technical teams actually with Ukrainians and Russians in the same facility, conducting proximity talks. And the progression will be, we have this cease fire on- on aerial infrastructure. That went in place immediately after President Trump’s call with President Putin this week. We are now going to talk about a Black Sea maritime cease fire so that both sides can move grain, fuel, and start conducting trade again in the Black Sea. And then we’ll talk the line of control, which is the actual front lines, and that gets into the details of verification mechanisms, peace keeping, you know, freezing the lines where they are. And then, of course, the broader and permanent peace, which will be some type of discussion of territory for permanent peace, and- and a lasting peace, you know, what the Ukrainians tend to talk about, or- or have talked about, as security guarantees.
MARGARET BRENNAN: One of the things the president has said he wants to see is the return of these Ukrainian children who were abducted as part of a state program by Russia to russify them, take them from their families and move them into Russia. Why did the State Department cut off funding to one of the programs that helps find these kids? It’s a Yale University Program, and they said the- the money was cut off. There are senators, including Grassley and Tillis, who- who want to know, why? Do you know why?
MIKE WALTZ: Well, Secretary Rubio is conducting a review of all of those programs. I can’t speak to that specific one, but I can say–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Because it seems at odds with–
MIKE WALTZ: –that President Trump has spoken to both leaders about prisoner exchanges. Both the Russians and Ukrainians exchanged prisoners, nearly 200, immediately following their call. And he’s also talked about the future of these children. So that’s certainly, first and foremost, and, kind of, confidence building measures. But again, Margaret, we have to take a step back. We have to take a step back. Just a few months ago, no one was talking about how this war would end. And we have to ask ourselves, what would it look like a year from now, two years from now, three years from now? We were in an endless stalemate here, and now we have both sides in the same facility with the United States really living out, I think, in real time, President Trump’s vision to end this war, which he campaigned on.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Just to be clear, are you asking for the release of these children as a confidence building measure? Is that what you meant?
MIKE WALTZ: We’re talking through a number of confidence building measures. That’s one of them.
Posted originally on CTH on March 23, 2025 | Sundance
President Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff discusses his meetings with Vladimir Putin and the ongoing discussions with Ukrainian and Russian officials. WATCH:
Posted originally on CTH on March 23, 2025 | Sundance
Attorney General Pam Bondi makes her 69th Fox appearance this year to talk about how the Biden and Congress approval ratings are terrible when contrast against their opposition to President Trump’s deportation program.
As a political pundit Mrs Bondi is an effective communicator as she outlines how Judge Boasberg made her work on weekends. However, as the head of the United States Dept of Justice, those political skillsets just don’t transfer to legal acumen. What we end up with is performance #69. WATCH:
We worried that AG Pam Bondi would be performative. We didn’t know each performance would be on Fox News.
Posted originally on CTH on March 23, 2025 | Sundance
Within the recent interview between President Trump’s emissary Steve Witkoff and Tucker Carlson, there was a very weird segment where Ambassador Witkoff was heaping praise upon the Qatari government. [SEE HERE] Carlson sat there nodding and affirming his support for Witkoff’s opinion of Qatar. It was really bizarre. {GO DEEP}
That segment of the interview was bizarre because there is zero doubt that Qatar is a bad actor in all things related to the middle east and U.S. domestic policy outcomes. For Ambassador Witkoff to be that wrong about such a big item puts a question mark behind his judgement and the influences on his opinions toward the relationships in the middle east.
Qatar is bad news. President Trump has previously, correctly, called out the nation of Qatar for being the center of support for radical extremism throughout the region. Qatar is also connected at the hip to the CIA.
Qatar funded and supported the original “Arab spring,” more accurately known as the Islamist Spring. Qatar is the banker for the Muslim Brotherhood. The Qatari government fund Al Jazerra. When the Arab extremists were exiled from Egypt the leaders fled to Qatar. The leaders of Hamas also live in Qatar.
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) eventually had to confront Qatar with sanctions and ostracization due to the Qatari support for radical Islamic extremism. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain, all of which barely survived in the Arab Spring uprisings, all put pressure on Qatar to stop their support for radical Sunni extremists.
Qatar is a supporter for Hamas, and Qatar is in cooperative alignment with the Iranian influence in the region. When Biden released the $6 billion for Iran, it was deposited in a Qatari bank. When the 5 Muslim Brotherhood leaders were released from Gitmo, exchanged for Bowe Bergdahl, they went to Qatar. When Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta sent surface to air missiles into Libya, Qatar organized the transfer.
Within the USA Qatar funds the same groups the USAID (technically the CIA) funds that stir up trouble domestically. Those groups include The Brookings Institute, who in turn fund Lawfare, specifically the efforts of Mary McCord, Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen. Qatar spends money on issues in/around the USA that are against the interests of our country and President Trump specifically.
All of this activity is well documented, none of this is supposition. So, when Steve Witkoff sings the praises of Qatar, it really calls his financial relationships with the Qataris into question {SEE HERE}.
Again, remember, the Hamas leaders live a life of affluence and influence from their homes and safe harbor in Qatar.
This reality leads directly into a segment on Fox News earlier today when Steve Witkoff now says he was “duped” by Hamas in his negotiations for peace between Israel and Hamas leadership. WATCH:
🚨 WATCH: Witkoff to Fox News: “I Was Duped by Hams” …"We need to be clear who the aggressor is here, and that is Hams.” pic.twitter.com/1EfuAAXVHM
If Steve Witkoff is listening to Qatar and shaping his opinions and perspectives as an outcome of those discussions with the Qatari government, it makes sense Witkoff would be “duped” by Hamas. Ultimately, he would be getting duped by Qatar.
Lastly, Witkoff cannot be that gullible not to know that listening to Qatar, advocating for the positions espoused by the Qataris, would put Witkoff on the opposite side of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Egypt and the voices of Arab leaders who have been dealing with the mess the Qataris always end up creating.
The Muslim Brotherhood as a political arm of the extremists in the region, could not exist without the support of Qatar. Heck, Hamas itself could not exist without support from Qatar.
This is not to say that Witkoff cannot be effective within the ongoing negotiations around the issue, he certainly can. However, he would need to reorient his thinking toward Qatar and based on the Tucker Carlson interview, that type of self-reflection does not appear present.
I hate to call the baby ugly, but being this wrong on a BIG ISSUE ITEM is either a major blind spot for Witkoff or something else entirely. I have spent the past 36 hours trying to figure out how Witkoff could hold these opinions, and the only thing that makes sense is that Witkoff has some kind of financial relationship with the government of Qatar.
Qatar is in a strong relationship with the CIA.
The neocons in the USA also take Qatari money.
Qatar is bad news; really bad news. It has been this way for a long time.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 