Neocons Poised to Join New Government by Phil Geraldi

Donald Trump was much troubled during his 2016 and 2020 campaigns by so-called conservatives who rallied behind the #NeverTrump banner, presumably in opposition to his stated intention to end or at least diminish America’s role in wars in the Middle East and Asia. Those individuals are generally described as neoconservatives but the label is itself somewhat misleading and they might more properly be described as liberal warmongers as they are closer to the Democrats than the Republicans on most social issues and are now warming up even more as the new Joe Biden Administration prepares to take office.
To be sure, some neocons stuck with the Republicans, to include the highly controversial Elliott Abrams, who initially opposed Trump but is now the point man for dealing with both Venezuela and Iran. Abrams’ conversion reportedly took place when he realized that the new president genuinely embraced unrelenting hostility towards Iran as exemplified by the ending of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad. John Bolton was also a neocon in the White House fold, though he is now a frenemy having been fired by the president and written a book.
Even though the NeverTrumper neocons did not succeed in blocking Donald Trump in 2016, they have been maintaining relevancy by slowly drifting back towards the Democratic Party, which is where they originated back in the 1970s in the office of the Senator from Boeing Henry “Scoop” Jackson. A number of them started their political careers there, to include leading neocon Richard Perle.

It would not be overstating the case to suggest that the neoconservative movement has now been born again, though the enemy is now the unreliable Trumpean-dominated Republican Party rather than Saddam Hussein or Ayatollah Khomeini. The transition has also been aided by a more aggressive shift among the Democrats themselves, with Russiagate and other “foreign interference” being blamed for the party’s failure in 2016. Given that mutual intense hostility to Trump, the doors to previously shunned liberal media outlets have now opened wide to the stream of foreign policy “experts” who want to “restore a sense of the heroic” to U.S. national security policy. Eliot A. Cohen and David Frum are favored contributors to the Atlantic while Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss were together at the New York Times prior to Weiss’s recent resignation. Jennifer Rubin, who wrote in 2016 that “It is time for some moral straight talk: Trump is evil incarnate,” is a frequent columnist for The Washington Post while both she and William Kristol appear regularly on MSNBC.
The unifying principle that ties many of the mostly Jewish neocons together is, of course, unconditional defense of Israel and everything it does, which leads them to support a policy of American global military dominance which they presume will inter alia serve as a security umbrella for the Jewish state. In the post-9/11 world, the neocon media’s leading publication The Weekly Standard virtually invented the concept of “Islamofascism” to justify endless war in the Middle East, a development that has killed millions of Muslims, destroyed at least three nations, and cost the U.S. taxpayer more than $5 trillion. The Israel connection has also resulted in neocon support for an aggressive policy against Russia due to its involvement in Syria and has led to repeated calls for the U.S. to attack Iran and destroy Hezbollah in Lebanon. In Eastern Europe, neocon ideologues have aggressively sought “democracy promotion,” which, not coincidentally, has also been a major Democratic Party foreign policy objective.
The neocons are involved in a number of foundations, the most prominent of which is the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), that are funded by Jewish billionaires. FDD is headed by Canadian Mark Dubowitz and it is reported that the group takes direction coming from officials in the Israeli Embassy in Washington. Other major neocon incubators are the American Enterprise Institute, which currently is the home of Paul Wolfowitz, and the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at John Hopkins University. The neocon opposition has been sniping against Trump over the past four years but has been biding its time and building new alliances, waiting for what it has perceived to be an inevitable regime change in Washington.
That change has now occurred and the surge of neocons to take up senior positions in the defense, intelligence and foreign policy agencies will soon take place. In my notes on the neocon revival, I have dubbed the brave new world that the neocons hope to create in Washington as the “Kaganate of Nulandia” after two of the more prominent neocon aspirants, Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland.
Robert was one of the first neocons to get on the NeverTrump band wagon back in 2016 when he endorsed Hillary Clinton for president and spoke at a Washington fundraiser for her, complaining about the “isolationist” tendency in the Republican Party exemplified by Trump. His wife Victoria Nuland is perhaps better known. She was the driving force behind efforts to destabilize the Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych, an admittedly corrupt autocrat, nevertheless became Prime Minister after a free election. Nuland, who was the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, provided open support to the Maidan Square demonstrators opposed to Yanukovych’s government, to include media friendly appearances passing out cookies on the square to encourage the protesters.
A Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton protégé, Nuland openly sought regime change for Ukraine by brazenly supporting government opponents in spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev had ostensibly friendly relations. Her efforts were backed by a $5 billion budget, but she is perhaps most famous for her foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest that she and the National Endowment for Democracy had helped create. The replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with Moscow over Russia’s attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea.
And, to be sure, beyond regime change in places like Ukraine, President Barack Obama was no slouch when it came to starting actual shooting wars in places like Libya and Syria while also killing people, including American citizens, using drones. Biden appears poised to inherit many former Obama White House senior officials, who would consider the eager-to-please neoconservatives a comfortable fit as fellow foot soldiers in the new administration. Foreign policy hawks expected to have senior positions in the Biden Administration include Antony Blinken, Nicholas Burns, Susan Rice, Valerie Jarrett, Samantha Power and, most important of all the hawkish Michele Flournoy, who has been cited as a possible secretary of defense. And don’t count Hillary Clinton out. Biden is reportedly getting his briefings on the Middle East from Dan Shapiro, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel, who now lives in the Jewish state and is reportedly working for an Israeli government supported think tank, the Institute for National Security Studies.
Nowhere in Biden’s possible foreign policy circle does one find anyone who is resistant to the idea of worldwide interventionism in support of claimed humanitarian objectives, even if it would lead to a new cold war with major competitor powers like Russia and China. In fact, Biden himself appears to embrace an extremely bellicose view on a proper relationship with both Moscow and Beijing “claiming that he is defending democracy against its enemies.” His language is unrelenting, so much so that it is Donald Trump who could plausibly be described as the peace candidate in the recently completed election, having said at the Republican National Convention in August “Joe Biden spent his entire career outsourcing their dreams and the dreams of American workers, offshoring their jobs, opening their borders and sending their sons and daughters to fight in endless foreign wars, wars that never ended.”
This entry was posted in government, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Neocons Poised to Join New Government by Phil Geraldi

  1. Deap says:

    Aren’t neo-cons the same as government employee union members, except they push for government contracts for quasi-private industries like the military industrial complex who suck off tax dollars?
    Is Boeing in Washington state “private industry” or a wholly owned Democrat union operation supported by neo-cons. New con — is just whine in old bottles. No wonder they are happy going back to the pro-union Dems – what butters their bread.
    But this also requires some neo-sabre rattling to fuel new “investments” in the M-I-C. Won”t that be antithetical to the party of peace and love. Who will they target as our mortal global enemy requiring “new investments” in the M-I-C?
    Taiwan, Iran, NK, China, Russia ….who is a worthy enemy these days to warrant re-newed support for the M-I-C? New arms race with China, ship building, Russian Ice Breakers control of the Arctic?

  2. Polish Janitor says:

    It should be noted that the return of “neocons” does not mean the return of people like Wolfowitz, Ladeen, Feith, Kristol who are more “straussian” than “liberal/internationalist”, but those like Nuland, Rice, Sam Powell, Petraeus, Flournoy, heck even Hilary Clinton as UN Ambassador who are CFR-type liberal interventionist than pure military hawks such as Bolton or Mike Flynn. These liberal internationalists, as opposed to straussian neocons, will intervene in collaboration with EU/NATO/QUAD (i.e. multilaterally) in the name upholding human rights and toppling authoritarianism, rather than for oil, WMDs, or similar concrete objectives. In very simple terms, the new Biden administration’s foreign policy will be none other than the return to “endless wars” for nation-building purposes first and last.

  3. fakebot says:

    The name Kagan is the Russianized version of the name Cohen. He was going to be McCain’s NSA had he been elected. They pulled a stunt with the Bush admin to make Obama look weak by pushing Georgia into war with Russia in 2008. Sakaasvili, the president of Georgia, was literally eating his own tie:
    A lot of the neocons are Russian Jews who grew up in households that were Bolshevik communists. They’re idea of spreading democracy goes back to Trotsky who tried to spread communism through the Soviet Union. Their hatred toward Russia dates back to their ancestors feudal days under the Tsars and the pogroms they suffered and the ice pick Trotsky got to the head.
    I don’t think they have that much influence. They pushed a lot of nonsense in the late 70/early 80s about how the Taliban were George Washingtons and here we are today, they’re worst than the Comanche. The last time I saw Richard Perle make a TV appearance, he was crying like a baby. Robert Novak, the prince of darkness, was a Ron Paul supporter. The only ones really kicking around are Bill Kristol and Jennifer Rubin, but Kristol was almost alone when he was talking about putting 50,000 boots on the ground in Syria. Rubin is a harpie who only got crazier and crazier. Kagan had his foot in the door with Hillary only because of his wife. Those two might get back in with Biden on Ukraine, but Biden would do well to keep them at a distance.

  4. Mark K Logan says:

    The lone bright spot is Biden’s stated intention of restoring the JCPOA. And, I guess, the pending defenestration of Pompeo The Great.
    I suspect the condition of the US economy and the massive deficits will assist in discouraging rash actions elsewhere. Have to wait and see.

  5. Fred says:

    Obama’s deep state lied, people died:
    It’s great when career professionals sabotage the elected president’s foreign policy.

  6. JM Gavin says:

    I’ve never quite figured out the “neocon” ideology, beyond the fact that neocons seem devoted to the sort of status quo present in Washington, D.C. during the three administrations prior to Trump. Military adventurism, nation-building, and interventionist foreign policy, all based on nebulous concepts which are applied unevenly around the world.
    It seems now that there is a new breed of neocons, unified by opposition to Trump’s messaging, but not much else. Odd to find people like Samantha Power, John Bolton, Jim Mattis, and Paul Wolfowitz marching together in perfect step.

  7. The Beaver says:

    Mr Geraldi
    A good perspective by Philip Weiss on the same subject. Eliot A Cohen must be communicating a lot with the Kagan brothers , Dennis Ross and Perle to see who can be parachuted either to the WH or Foggy Bottom.

  8. BrianC says:

    @JM Gavin

    I’ve never quite figured out the “neocon” ideology

    The revolutionary spirit (see E. Michael Jones’ work). From communism to neoconservatism it’s ultimately an attack on the Beatitudes and Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.
    “The works of mercy are the opposite of the works of war” —Servant of God Dorothy Day

  9. Mark K Logan says:

    JM Gavin,
    I hold the Cold Warriors like Scoop a species distinct from those of the post-USSR era. The current version started at the end of the cold war. We felt like kings of the world after Gulf War 1 and the shoe seemed to fit.
    The HW Bush administration pondered how best to use this power for good. I’ve read some things which report there was a debate within the administration on whether to clean up Yugoslavia or Somalia first. They got Ron to “do the honors” for the invasion of Somalia at Oxford: About 20 minutes in.
    That was played as part of the pep-talk on the Juneau off the coast of Somalia. Stirring stuff.
    In some small way I never stopped sipping that Kool Aid. It’s hard to stand by and watch unspeakable evil go down when you have the power to stop it…or think you do. Time will tell if the Neocons are capable of perceiving the limits of force. Certainly had some hard lessons in the last few decades.

  10. EEngineer says:

    @JM Gavin
    Hogs lining up for a spot at the trough?
    The Neocon movement seems to have morphed into nothing more than a club for bullies trying to one up each other.

  11. Dan says:

    I think its generally shocking that Trump or the republicans didn’t make a bigger issue of Biden’s history of supporting disastrous intervention, especially his Iraq War vote. Maybe they felt like its not a winning issue, that they would lose as many votes as they gain by appearing more isolationist.
    But overall, Trump favoring diplomacy over cruise missiles should have been a bigger point in his favor in the election.

  12. jerseycityjoan says:

    It is distressing to read that we will have people in the government who are looking for a fight. That is especially true in view of China’s aggression in recent years and the responses we will have to make to that. I think we will have more than enough to do to handle China. What do the neocons want to do about China?
    Here is an article about China that really startled me and made me realize how much of a threat is was becoming. The Air Force chief of staff talks about the challenges of countries trying to compete militarily with us in ways that have not occurred for awhile. Here are two quotes that really got me:
    “Tomorrow’s Airmen are more likely to fight in highly contested environments, and must be prepared to fight through combat attrition rates and risks to the nation that are more akin to the World War II era than the uncontested environments to which we have since become accustomed,” Brown writes.”
    “Wargames and modeling have repeatedly shown that if the Air Force fails to adapt, there will be mission failure, Brown warns. Rules-based international order may “disintegrate and our national interests will be significantly challenged,” according to the memo.”
    The article doesn’t say we will have another arms race but that is an obvious response to China’s competition with us. I thought all that was done and gone. I do not want to resume it. I don’t want another period of foreign entanglements, period. We still haven’t paid for the War Against Terrorism. I look into the future and all I see is us racking up bills that we have no ability to pay. And then there is the human cost of all this, I don’t want to even think about that.

  13. turcopolier says:

    “I thought all that was done and gone. I do not want to resume it.” Childish. “Only the dead have seen the end of war.”

  14. JM Gavin says:

    Snouts in the trough accounts for a certain amount of neocons, I’m sure. There is, however, a unifying vision beyond that which puzzles me, given the very different political orientations of various neocons. Neocons are found in academia and the media as well. Those types are less dependent on taxpayer dollars in exchange for their views (they’ll get whatever tax money gets pushed their way in grants, etc regardless).
    I find Polish Janitor’s “straussian” and “liberal/internationalist” flavors of neocon intriguing, as I hadn’t considered that before.

  15. JM Gavin says:

    COL Lang’s quote from Plato reminds me of another (from Cormac McCarthy): “It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way.”
    Neocons don’t really prefer war, so much as they prefer overseas “engagements” that may look like war and smell like war. All that’s missing in neocon military operations is a defined end state.

  16. JM Gavin says:

    Mark K. Logan,
    I concur with your thoughts about standing by as evil occurs. We just have a habit of jumping into complex situations we don’t understand, and making things worse. I suspect you feel the same way.
    The military misadventures during my career (Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria) were marked by our own black and white thinking. The more successful adventures (Colombia, Nepal) were marked by our appreciation (to a certain extent) of the complex nature of the environments we were getting involved in…and the fact that we weren’t involved in nation-building in the latter two locales. There were viable governments in place, and we weren’t trying to replace them.

  17. Deap says:

    Here is another Biden clip that should have been exploited too – way back when – when the media was a little more trusted, but no less pompous. However, Biden The Plagerizer had it coming.
    Now tell me America is not the Land of Opportunity, when one can continuously shoot themselves in the foot and then rise from the dead yet again, and again:
    Though I am warming more and more to Trump Media becoming the real soul of America. Plus someone, in time. will need to pick up Rush Limbaugh’s empire. America needs a counter-weight to fake news more than it needs the keys to the White House, with all its entangling webs, palace intrigues, chains and pitfalls.
    Godspeed President Trump. If someone with as few talents s Biden can rise like Lazarus, just think what you can do with your little finger. No wonder the Democrats want Trump destroyed; not just defeated in a re-election. We have your back, Mr President.

  18. TV says:

    Mark Logan:
    Iran celebrates “Death to America” as a national day.
    So let’s give them a path to nuclear weapons.

  19. Deap says:

    Ex-CIA analyst, Mich Rep. Elissa Slotkin refuses to back Pelosi for Speaker – anyone know her? She wants more mid-West, and less Calif and NY, as the new face of the Democrat Party.

  20. Fred says:

    “It’s hard to stand by and watch unspeakable evil go down when you have the power to stop it….”
    I hear Trump is evil/Hitler/worse. I wonder if anyone who thinks that is true has the power to rig an election, or thinks they do?

  21. jerseycityjoan says:

    You are right of course.
    Are the people of America up for another arms race and a more or less cold war with China? I think the Chinese will give us a lot more trouble than the Soviets ever did.
    And yet we allow their students to come here and learn all we know and their elites to bring their dirty money here and we give them green cards and citizenship and protect the money they took from the Chinese people. Not so smart on our part.
    I am very concerned about all of this.

  22. Serge says:

    What is the next theater of war that Biden’s new friends will involve us in? I noticed lots of Cold War era conflicts are heating up lately, Ethiopia Morocco Armenia being recent examples. IS in Syria/Iraq is still castrated due to the continued mass internment of their population base in the dozens of camps, but they have established thriving franchises in Africa and their other provinces continue to smolder.

  23. Ishmael Zechariah says:

    re: “Neocons don’t really prefer war, so much as they prefer overseas “engagements” that may look like war and smell like war. All that’s missing in neocon military operations is a defined end state.”
    Perhaps neocons are all about furthering izzie goals to the detriment of USA national interests. Their desired “end state” is specified quite clearly in the israeli “Clean Break” and the USA “PNAC” manifestos. Ask a neocon about the USS Liberty and evaluate their (non)answer…
    Ishmael Zechariah

  24. Artemesia says:

    Since you mentioned USS Liberty: In 2017 the author of this essay organized a group to meet at Arlington Cemetery with survivors and relatives of victims and survivors of Israel’s attack on the Liberty. At the tombstone there, we read their names and acknowledged their sacrifice.
    In September 2020 the TruNews network premiered a 4-hour documentary, Sacrificing Liberty,
    featuring the testimony of those men who experienced first-hand the attack on the Liberty as well as the subsequent betrayal by US government, led by Lyndon B Johnson with the complicity of 4-star admiral John McCain, Jr., father of late senator John McCain. Under threat of imprisonment “or worse,” the survivors of the Liberty attack were warned to tell no one of their experiences. They kept their silence for 53 years.
    Sacrificing Liberty is now available for rent or purchase

    And yes, a primary characteristic of the neoconservatives is their support for Israel and the zionist ideology. Inasmuch as most of them dwell in the happier lands of the USA rather than in Israel, their purpose includes turning US culture and values into those of zionism.
    Fakebot (above) mentioned that a lot of neocons traced their animus toward Russia to Trotskyism and Jewish victimology under the TSARS. Rabbi Henry Abramson hosts video lectures on Jewish history. In 2017 he presented a lecture on Theodor Herzl in which he stated that “the first wave of Russian Jewish immigrants to USA came voluntarily and with the intention to fit in. The second wave of Russian Jewish immigrants were forced, refugees, and they intended to change USA to fit their preferences.” A member of the audience said in heavily accented English that “we agreed to leave Russia only after we were convinced that USA was changing to fit our values.” [or words to that effect]
    That video has since been removed from Abramson’s archive.

  25. lux says:

    Posted by: Ishmael Zechariah | 13 November 2020 at 09:54 PM
    Perhaps, but that may only be the foreign blob angle. On other topics they are as American as apple pie.
    Oxford Language cooperates with Google lately, Google search: neoconservatism definition:
    noun: neoconservatism; plural noun: neoconservatisms; noun: neo-conservatism; plural noun: neo-conservatisms
    a political ideology characterized by an emphasis on free-market capitalism and an interventionist foreign policy.
    “neoconservatism emerged as a force in America in the 1980s”

    What interests us here is Foreign Policy. In his article Philip Giraldi links to one on the topic.
    Michele Flournoy: Queen of the Blob, July 7, 2020, Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
    Now as Phil Weiss reports a lot of desires have been fulfilled, maybe more than wanted already in Trump’s first term, just as the Neocons and their friends weren’t completely absent. Question: Would we have seen a more coherent US Iran strategy, had Flynn not been targeted? More sanctions only?
    Neoconservativism in a Nutshell, March 24, 2016, Jim Lobe

  26. Polish Janitor says:

    To all,
    If you have enough time, I highly recommend this article (link below) for those who want to understand the core ideas of neoconservatism as an intellectual movement. I would like to remind readers this important point that neoconservatism is NOT an exclusively jewish movement or cabal. There are many many highly influential Catholics who are known as part of the movement, such as Daniel Patrick Moynihan, William Bennett, Robert Nozick, John Neuhaus, Michael Lind (protestant, he also left the movement in the mid 90s), the great Bill Buckley, William Rusher, Peter Steinfels, and many others.
    The key to understanding the movement is to view it as a new ‘Nouveau riche’ (literally!) and highly ideologically-driven (Trotskyite, communist, socialist, anti-Leninist left) immigrants-mostly Jewish- from east coast who gradually created a class of elites and joined the elite and influential Eastern Establishment later on, particularly after the end of World War II.
    The neocons present themselves as the “vital center”, who want to balance America between the faction of equality (Democratic Party) and the faction of freedom (Republican Party). The farther you go left (Bernie, AOC) or the right (Ron/Rand Paul, Trump) is considered dangerous to the ‘Vital Center’ and is taboo. They have people at both parties to ensure their grip on national power and politics, so the game is rigged against the Independents or any third-party individuals who dares to challenge the so-called Vital Center. Another central issue of the neocons is the preservation of Israel and they have managed to instill bi-partisan support for Israel (Republicans since the 70s, Dems since the mid 80s).
    You have to understand that since the mid 70s (after Yom Kippur war in 1973) the American foreign policy in the ME has been shaped (at least to a great degree) in Israel and revolves around Israeli interests first, and then if lucky, American interests second or third. So in the neocon thinking, whatever is good for Israeli interests, is naturally going to be good for American interests as well, which of course is totally incorrect.

  27. JM Gavin says:

    Very interesting article. I particularly like these paragraphs:
    “Two final notes about neocons. First, this is a movement with no single recognized leader or politburo. Yes, they work together quite closely and coordinate their messaging to create very effective echo chambers. But they also often have differences of opinion over tactics and sometimes over real substance. Some neocons, like Frank Gaffney (a top Ted Cruz adviser) and Daniel Pipes, actively promote Islamophobia, for example, while others, such as Kagan and Reuel Gerecht, disdain it. There are soft neocons like David Brooks of The New York Times and hard neocons like Bret Stephens at The Wall Street Journal. In other words, the movement is not monolithic, except in the core elements I outlined above.
    Second, neocons have been admirably nimble in creating tactical alliances with very different political forces to achieve their ends. In the mid-1970s, they worked with aggressive nationalists like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld to derail Kissinger’s efforts at détente with Moscow. Under Jimmy Carter, they brought the Christian Right, despite the clear anti-Semitism of some of its leaders, into that coalition. (As Irving Kristol explained: “it’s their theology, but it’s our Israel.”) That broader coalition helped propel Reagan to victory in 1980.”
    This addresses one of the things that has puzzled me about neocons, which is that some very prominent folks considered neocons such as Samantha Power are stridently pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel. This is in marked contrast to most I what I had known about neocons in the past, as pro-Israeli, anti-Palestinian positions seemed like a core view of neocons.

  28. Mark Logan says:

    JM Gavin,
    I don’t agree they work together closely. The Samantha Powers do not work closely with the Frank Gaffneys. IMO it appears they do because their agendas have converging points. The Ziocons exploit this with great skill, I might add.
    A tangential point, but merely another of the many heads of the this beast: A key to their power is the perception that it will be easy. a two minute clip:
    “With each victory you amass, the rest become easier and easier.”
    As the Save The Worlder Sam Powers’ people also imagine.

  29. JM Gavin says:

    Mark Logan,
    I don’t think they work together, but their separate efforts are towards similar ends. I’m not sure it matters whether or not they are coordinating their actions. Time will tell if this changes, and they become more chummy. Keep watching for a confirmed sighting of Paul Wolfowitz and Samantha Power strolling hand-in-hand along The Mall.
    It’s hard to rebut Netanyahu’s statements from 2002 with the events that occurred from 2002 until the present, as our own execution was deeply flawed. In Afghanistan, in particular, we had to work very hard to lose the war. Winning would have been quite simple. We just decided to stick around too long and see if we could foster an outbreak of Jeffersonian democracy.
    One of my own “lessons learned” from 2001 until present is that the U.S.A. should never get involved in any overseas military action that can’t be completed in three weeks.

  30. Ishmael Zechariah says:

    Posted by: lux | 14 November 2020 at 06:58 AM
    re: “Perhaps, but that may only be the foreign blob angle. On other topics they are as American as apple pie.”
    Is overlooking the murder of US servicemen/sailors on Liberty “as American as apple pie”
    Ishmael Zechariah

Comments are closed.