Victor Davis Hanson, Eli Lake, and Elliott Abrams on the war. Plus: The Supreme Court weighs in on birthright citizenship. Do we really need presidential libraries? And more.
President Trump made the case plainly: this is about dismantling Iran’s military-industrial and terror infrastructure, stopping their nuclear ambitions, and removing their ability to threaten the region. Every prior president kicked the can down the road. He didn’t.
There are only four words we should be saying: “thank you” to Trump and our amazing military—and “fuck you” to the Democrats, European leaders, Tucker Carlson, Mearsheimer, Greenwald, Kelly, Owens, and the other conspiracy-laced anti-American isolationists.
So we’re in the bottom of the ninth, we need a slugger, and Coach Trump, with Sauer, subs in someone who washed out of t-ball.
Allen Guelzo is one of our country’s greatest living historians. On Tuesday, he wrote a piece in the Washington Monthly that argued, in essence, the administration’s EO is going down. He concluded with this: “The Civil War overturned Dred Scott and slavery, but in its abolition of slavery, Washington faced the hostility of the old slave-owning class, and their determination to keep political equality forever from Black hands by denying (like Chief Justice Taney) that African Americans could ever be citizens. The Fourteenth Amendment changed that for good: no matter what one’s status had been before 1868, birth on American soil made one a citizen. To lay a finger on the Fourteenth Amendment—however narrowly, through the jurisdiction phrase, however plausibly, through the possibility of abuse—desecrates the amendment and the fight to end slavery.”
He’s right on the facts, and likely the outcome. But this lofty closing is dead wrong. What was the legislative intent of the 14th? The authors of the Amendment knew the U.S. needed to right a horrible wrong perpetrated against a single race of people. This was their intent. To say, as Guelzo has, that trying to stop flagrant abuse of this noble amendment somehow desecrates the “fight to end slavery” is pretzel logic. Shame on Sauer for not making the case that every tourist baby, every baby born on our soil to sperm donors and baby mammas who chant “Death to America” is an affront to this legacy.
Unfortunately, the solution to this mess wrought by more than a century of case law running headlong into the Biden-Harris immigration disaster rests with Congress. If our Constitution is being abused, then it is up to our esteemed legislators to defend and protect it. Fat chance.
Our President just isn't great at this type of talk where messaging is critical and the key goal ( or maybe that wasn't the goal but should have been ).
His asset is that he goes off teleprompter often. His liability is that he goes off teleprompter often.
Oh... and I voted for DT three times but I think it's still important to be critical when needed.
On birthright citizenship. From a political standpoint ( I am leaving the legal and constitutional analysis to Prof Rubenfeld and others ) there should be little doubt this is about open borders (OB) . My strong OPINION is that those who want the border to be open ( the vast majority of those wanting ICE eliminated, whether in Congress, media, Hollywood, campuses, no.kings rallies and the streets of Minneapolis, NY and so forth) will support "whatever it takes" to allow pretty much h all illegals to remain here and to facilitate more coming in, predominantly for purposes of raw politics and political power. Their actions and words make this crystal clear and lets include all those OB judges who are more about politics than the rule of law.
Now let's assume the Supremes rule on a very tight constitutional analysis that all anchor babies are to be deemed American citizens. Such a ruling applies to the kid not the mother. The mother has no right to stay. Will the loving mother want to take her baby if she is deported. It is HER CHOICE ALONE. And those OB zealots should be asked what would you do: take your baby or leave the baby behind? Such questions crystallized the questions about OB and if the mother was just in the wrong place at the wrong time or intentionally was trying to squeeze within a legal loophole that they were encouraged to use by... the OB zealots.
The ultimate issue here is a subtopic of the larger issue of American sovereignty. Which most of the OB zealots want to weaken substantially
Beautiful yes, meaningful absolutely, inspiratioal even, but chanting no matter what the chant doesn't express deep thought but rather a regurgitation of the thoughts of others.
And because of Starmer's dithering -- the fact that Britain sending more troops to the ME and will soon have over 1k defending the Gulf states and has sent military planners to help the US with planning for the opening of the Strait has been obscured. It suits several sides to have this happen but it is a disservice to the service men and women risking their lives. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7vq76g45rvo
Yes, Britain should be spending much more on defence. Yes, Starmer should have allowed the bases to be used in the first place, but games are being played.
Yes unfortunately they will. I happen to think Starmer is wrong.
Badenoch has said that he is wrong as well. As has Blair.
He comes across as very weak. It is doubtful that he will survive after the May local elections as Labour are supposed to do horribly. There won't be a General Election and the new PM may be even worse.
It is becoming more apparent each day that the EU countries are unwilling to fight for their own sovereignty. For the US to continue to pump money into their militaries and provide them with the protection of our military power is foolish.
WHich EU countries are you talking about? Poland spends an incredible amount of its GDP on defence. The Baltics are up there as well.
Germany is rapidly expanding its military and military spend. Hungary and the Czechs have increased their budget but are buying German, not American. Rheinemettal has really benefitted.
The real laggard is Spain.
Britain needs to get its act together -- the Treasury needs to release funds. But Britain still plays a vital role in certain areas -- the 5 Is is vital for US defence. It is far more complicated than one might like.
Spain says its ready to reclaim its glory when it ruled south and central America and proved it could kill indigenous people with the best of them. Any indigenous languages still in use ?
President Trump made the case plainly: this is about dismantling Iran’s military-industrial and terror infrastructure, stopping their nuclear ambitions, and removing their ability to threaten the region. Every prior president kicked the can down the road. He didn’t.
There are only four words we should be saying: “thank you” to Trump and our amazing military—and “fuck you” to the Democrats, European leaders, Tucker Carlson, Mearsheimer, Greenwald, Kelly, Owens, and the other conspiracy-laced anti-American isolationists.
So we’re in the bottom of the ninth, we need a slugger, and Coach Trump, with Sauer, subs in someone who washed out of t-ball.
Allen Guelzo is one of our country’s greatest living historians. On Tuesday, he wrote a piece in the Washington Monthly that argued, in essence, the administration’s EO is going down. He concluded with this: “The Civil War overturned Dred Scott and slavery, but in its abolition of slavery, Washington faced the hostility of the old slave-owning class, and their determination to keep political equality forever from Black hands by denying (like Chief Justice Taney) that African Americans could ever be citizens. The Fourteenth Amendment changed that for good: no matter what one’s status had been before 1868, birth on American soil made one a citizen. To lay a finger on the Fourteenth Amendment—however narrowly, through the jurisdiction phrase, however plausibly, through the possibility of abuse—desecrates the amendment and the fight to end slavery.”
He’s right on the facts, and likely the outcome. But this lofty closing is dead wrong. What was the legislative intent of the 14th? The authors of the Amendment knew the U.S. needed to right a horrible wrong perpetrated against a single race of people. This was their intent. To say, as Guelzo has, that trying to stop flagrant abuse of this noble amendment somehow desecrates the “fight to end slavery” is pretzel logic. Shame on Sauer for not making the case that every tourist baby, every baby born on our soil to sperm donors and baby mammas who chant “Death to America” is an affront to this legacy.
Unfortunately, the solution to this mess wrought by more than a century of case law running headlong into the Biden-Harris immigration disaster rests with Congress. If our Constitution is being abused, then it is up to our esteemed legislators to defend and protect it. Fat chance.
After last night
Scott Johnson
Apr. 2 2026
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2026/04/after-last-night-68.php
And many here will remember they are merely starmers with a different accent
That was one of the worst Prime Time
Presidential speeches I have ever seen.
Our President just isn't great at this type of talk where messaging is critical and the key goal ( or maybe that wasn't the goal but should have been ).
His asset is that he goes off teleprompter often. His liability is that he goes off teleprompter often.
Oh... and I voted for DT three times but I think it's still important to be critical when needed.
So a columnist at TFP can tell me what Trump is thinking. Sure.
FAILURE TO LAUNCH
The best thing that could happen to Europe would be for the U.S. to withdraw from NATO.
Like a kid still living in his parents' basement, Europeans have failed to grow-up and stand on their own two feet.
And learn how to sprechenze russian.
On birthright citizenship. From a political standpoint ( I am leaving the legal and constitutional analysis to Prof Rubenfeld and others ) there should be little doubt this is about open borders (OB) . My strong OPINION is that those who want the border to be open ( the vast majority of those wanting ICE eliminated, whether in Congress, media, Hollywood, campuses, no.kings rallies and the streets of Minneapolis, NY and so forth) will support "whatever it takes" to allow pretty much h all illegals to remain here and to facilitate more coming in, predominantly for purposes of raw politics and political power. Their actions and words make this crystal clear and lets include all those OB judges who are more about politics than the rule of law.
Now let's assume the Supremes rule on a very tight constitutional analysis that all anchor babies are to be deemed American citizens. Such a ruling applies to the kid not the mother. The mother has no right to stay. Will the loving mother want to take her baby if she is deported. It is HER CHOICE ALONE. And those OB zealots should be asked what would you do: take your baby or leave the baby behind? Such questions crystallized the questions about OB and if the mother was just in the wrong place at the wrong time or intentionally was trying to squeeze within a legal loophole that they were encouraged to use by... the OB zealots.
The ultimate issue here is a subtopic of the larger issue of American sovereignty. Which most of the OB zealots want to weaken substantially
“NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND”
Finally, an inane mantra that Left, Right, and Independents can mindlessly recite in unison.
Like a Gregorian chant we have abandoned thinking for repetition.
If we automatically abandon one leg of the conventional triad it is certain what happens to the stool we are sitting on.
Learn from the past but don’t be paralyzed by it.
I would only argue, Lanny, that Gregorian chant can certainly be thoughtful, thought-full, and very meaningful.
https://www.traditionsanity.com/p/ten-gregorian-chants-every-catholic
Beautiful yes, meaningful absolutely, inspiratioal even, but chanting no matter what the chant doesn't express deep thought but rather a regurgitation of the thoughts of others.
The Strait of Covid.
Thank you for publishing the article from Kemi Badenoch on why Britain needs to more.
She was also very sound on the flash mobs in London -- explaining that black teenagers don't react this way in Nigeria. https://x.com/KemiBadenoch/status/2039346087916429676
And because of Starmer's dithering -- the fact that Britain sending more troops to the ME and will soon have over 1k defending the Gulf states and has sent military planners to help the US with planning for the opening of the Strait has been obscured. It suits several sides to have this happen but it is a disservice to the service men and women risking their lives. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7vq76g45rvo
Yes, Britain should be spending much more on defence. Yes, Starmer should have allowed the bases to be used in the first place, but games are being played.
This is the latest MoD update about Britain is doing in the defence of the Gulf: https://x.com/DefenceHQ/status/2039333479280713732
Starmer said this is not Britain's war.
Americans will remember that .
Yes unfortunately they will. I happen to think Starmer is wrong.
Badenoch has said that he is wrong as well. As has Blair.
He comes across as very weak. It is doubtful that he will survive after the May local elections as Labour are supposed to do horribly. There won't be a General Election and the new PM may be even worse.
"...the new PM may be even worse."
Egad!
Always appreciate your insights.
See my response to Steve G. below.
Al Carns would be good but he is a 2024 intake and unlikely. He is ex-SBS
John Healey is competent as defence secretary but he doesn't have the clout.
The Treasury still refuses to fund. Rachel Reeves is just sticking her head in the sand.
Mahmood is competent but to the right of Labour. She is doing well as Home Sec.
Rayner still has her financial problems hanging over her but given the make up of the Labour party might get it. She is on the Left.
The less said about Steve Reed the better.
Part of the trouble is something like 75% of Labour MPs were third sector (charity) or political hacks.
Time for a little tough love.
Loved the work I did with the British military,
The only truly professional European Army I worked with.
That having been said the British ruling political class is as useless as tit on a boar.
But as for the rest of the European militaries, I wouldn't trust them to have my six.
It is becoming more apparent each day that the EU countries are unwilling to fight for their own sovereignty. For the US to continue to pump money into their militaries and provide them with the protection of our military power is foolish.
WHich EU countries are you talking about? Poland spends an incredible amount of its GDP on defence. The Baltics are up there as well.
Germany is rapidly expanding its military and military spend. Hungary and the Czechs have increased their budget but are buying German, not American. Rheinemettal has really benefitted.
The real laggard is Spain.
Britain needs to get its act together -- the Treasury needs to release funds. But Britain still plays a vital role in certain areas -- the 5 Is is vital for US defence. It is far more complicated than one might like.
Spain says its ready to reclaim its glory when it ruled south and central America and proved it could kill indigenous people with the best of them. Any indigenous languages still in use ?