Tuesday, President Biden addressed the UN General Assembly, but his speech was so detached from reality that he might as well have been speaking to the United Federation of Planets. has a good recap complete with video clips.

Biden didn’t mention the border crisis at all. His mention of Afghanistan was to congratulate himself for America no longer being at war (thanks to his supercharging the Taliban, it’s likely to be just a pause before the storm.) He talked about “accountability” over COVID, but didn’t mention China. He announced his intention to rejoin the UN Human Rights Council, which Trump pulled out of because it’s filled with nations that spit on human rights, like China, Cuba, Russia, Somalia, Venezuela and Pakistan. He claimed he’d spent the past months “rebuilding our alliances” (our allies are so furious at him that Britain’s Parliament voted to censure him and France recalled its ambassador.)

He also cited the importance of the UN Declaration of Human Rights in protecting rights from being “trampled and twisted in the pursuit of naked political power,” which is a pretty good description of what he’s been doing to Americans’ Constitutional rights from the moment he took office. And at one point, he mistakenly referred to the United Nations as the “United States.” I suspect that he’d like to turn the USA into the UN, but this is the first time he’s let it slip out loud.

Here’s a complete transcript if you’re so inclined:

Considering President Biden’s performance at the UN, and frankly, any appearances recently, it’s no surprise that White House staff are frantic to keep him from answering any questions from the press. But they’re taking it so far that even the normally sycophantic White House Press Corps lodged a formal complaint Tuesday after Biden’s “press conference” with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

After Johnson took a few questions from British reporters, White House staffers suddenly interrupted as reporters tried to question Biden and started shouting at reporters to clear the room. A reporter who shouted a question about the border said he thought Biden said something in reply, but with all the noise, Biden’s facemask and his being led away, whatever he said was indecipherable. I have a feeling it would have been equally indecipherable if he’d been standing at a podium at the UN. His staffers know that, hence the panicked room-clearing.

As the illegal immigration crisis on the Texas border grows worse with each day while the Biden Administration that caused it tries to ignore it or change the subject, many people are asking how such a thing could keep going on and on if the Administration didn’t want it going on and on? In other words, is this by incompetence or intention?

One person in a position to know believes it’s the latter. Rodney S. Scott is a 29-year law enforcement veteran and the recently-retired head of the US Border Patrol. He wrote a letter to Senate leaders of both parties that was obtained by, and it makes some stunning allegations. Scott writes:

“Common sense border security recommendations from experienced career professionals are being ignored and stymied by inexperienced political appointees. The Biden administration’s team at DHS is laser-focused on expediting the flow of migrants into the U.S. and downplaying the significant vulnerability this creates for terrorists, narcotics smugglers, human traffickers, and even hostile nations to gain access to our homeland.”

Scott also asserts that every option for reducing illegal entries and restoring order that has been offered to the White House has been “summarily rejected.” Meanwhile, he says that the DHS Secretary “and other political appointees within DHS have provided factually incorrect information to Congressional Representatives and to the American public. Furthermore, they have directed USBP personnel to allow otherwise ineligible aliens to remain in the U.S. inconsistent with the…established legal processes and law.”

That’s a serious charge by someone in a position to know, of aiding in the violation of federal law and lying to Congress about it. But what are the odds that we’ll see a Congressional investigation before the 2022 midterm elections? Let’s hope we see one immediately afterward.

In the meantime, I was on “Hannity” last night on Fox News and was asked why Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who’s doing all he can to protect his citizens from the dangers of the Biden-created border disaster (disease, crime, drugs, etc. etc. etc.), didn’t call out the State Guard to secure the border.

As a former Governor myself, I knew the answer: because as soon as he does, the President (or whoever’s really giving the orders) would nationalize the Guard and override him. Abbott already has enough on his hands dealing with the horrific repercussions of Biden’s deliberate border fiasco. He has to rely on the tools he can use without handing even more power to the White House to wield against Texas, and by extension, all Americans who care about stopping this unfettered invasion.

Public schools are off track

September 22, 2021

It’s not just the leftist racist brainwashing and the crushing COVID rules that are driving Americans to take their kids out of public schools. While many schools do a good job, some aren’t even worthy of the name “school.” Or maybe I should spell that “Skool.”

In Baltimore, during the 2020-2021 school year, 41% of public school students averaged less than a 1.0 GPA. At one school, a student with a 0.13 GPA was ranked near the top half of his class. This despite Baltimore spending $18,000 per student, 40% higher than the national average. Also worth mentioning: Baltimore is run solidly by Democrats and hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1967.

And then there’s Maspeth High School, a public school in Queens, New York, where a special investigation turned up so much shocking corruption that one city council member said it was run more like a crime ring than a school. Among the many accusations: fake classes, counting students as present even if they didn’t show up, passing kids with no credits, and handing out diplomas that weren’t worth the paper they were printed on. The principal is quoted as saying about one uneducated student who was graduated anyway that he can “have fun working at Taco Bell.”

It sounds as if there are a lot of people in our current education system who should be working at Taco Bell, and I don’t mean the students. I think the idea of public schools is great, but somehow, we’ve allowed it to go off track. Too often these days, the public school system is being used for anti-American indoctrination, a jobs program for incompetent teachers, and political staff and slush funds for Democrat politicians. It desperately needs reforming, to put the focus back where it belongs: on giving our children a real educational foundation for life.

Until we can overcome the entrenched resistance and turn our schools back into schools again, I predict that home-schooling will continue to grow in popularity.

In a move that infuriated both Republicans and moderate Democrats, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi caved in to the anti-Semitic socialists of “The Squad” and cut $1 billion in funding for Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system from a short-term government funding bill. Pelosi can lose only a few votes or the bill won’t pass, since Republicans unanimously oppose the bill because they’re fighting over raising the federal debt limit.

I can understand why someone might oppose the entire bill on general principle, but why would anyone publicly hold it hostage over just one provision: not funding Israel’s defense from terrorist missiles? Note that this wasn’t new or increased spending. It was standard support for our closest ally for a purely defensive weapons system that stops missiles fired by Hamas terrorists (4400 just last spring) from killing innocent Israeli men, women and children. Why would US Congress members choose to take a hard stand on the side of terrorists who are trying to kill Jews? Well, read some of their previous comments, and I think you’ll figure it out.

Other Democrats say the funding will be added to a larger defense bill or introduced as a stand-alone measure, and it should pass with bipartisan support. But the Squad’s opposition to that one issue tells us a lot about what we’re dealing with from them. Michigan Democrat Rep. Elissa Slotkin said the removal of the funding was “devoid of substance and irresponsible.” That’s a pretty good description of the entire Squad.

The fact that Special Counsel John Durham would release 27 pages of detailed narrative to indict one measly person on one count of making a false statement to the FBI got us wondering immediately what his purpose might have been. We’re not attorneys, but over the next couple of days, some of our favorite legal minds noticed the same thing.

Over the years, you and I have learned not to expect much in the way of justice from the “Justice” Department --- especially now, with an obvious political hack like Merrick Garland running it --- but the indictment of this Clinton attorney might be the harbinger of bigger things to come. It is likely that Hillary will escape jail once again, as she did even after using a private server to circumvent FOIA requests and destroying evidence with BleachBit and hammers, but remember: even though Nixon escaped legal accountability in the Watergate scandal, the whole story did come out. What we’re looking at is probably another situation like that.

For now, many thanks to Dan Bongino for pointing us to a superb analysis of Sussmann’s indictment on SUBSTACK by Shipwreckedcrew’s Port-O-Call. This is long but important to read.

“The Sussmann indictment reads like overt acts in furtherance of a conspiracy,” he writes, “because that’s what it is.”

He explains that the indictment on that one charge is contained in just one paragraph, Paragraph 46, which reads, “On or about September 19, 2016, within the District of Columbia, MICHAEL A. SUSSMANN, the defendant, did willingly and knowingly make a materially false, fictitious and false statement or representation in a matter before the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the Government of the United States, to wit, on or about September 19, 2016, the defendant stated to the General Counsel of the FBI that he was not acting on behalf of any client in conveying particular allegations concerning a Presidential candidate, when in truth, and in fact, and as the defendant well knew, he was acting on behalf of specific clients, namely – Tech Executive 1 and the Clinton campaign.”

That’s it. That’s what he stands accused of. What are all those other pages for? A “false statement” charge doesn’t require all that narrative. What Durham filed is called a “speaking indictment,” which “discloses information in a public document that would not otherwise be known if the indictment set forth only facts needed to meet the requirements of due process.”

“Shipwrecked” says, “In over 30 years of practice as both a federal prosecutor and a defense attorney specializing in federal cases, I’ve never before seen anything remotely resembling the Sussmann indictment in a single ‘false statement’ case.”

He writes that the facts Durham has alleged probably have at least a dozen “strings” hanging off them. Some of these are legal and others are “more in the ‘court of public opinion.’” (See Nixon, above.)

Those who are understandably cynical about the process as it typically applies to Hillary & Co. and dismayed at the length of time Durham has taken to come up with this one indictment should definitely read this analysis. “Shipwrecked” explains why it has taken as long as it has, notably regarding Durham’s search for source materials. Some materials he needed to look at could only be sought by grand jury subpoena if they were over six months old. Anything more recent needed “probable cause.”

So, what materials was Durham waiting on? At least some of them must have been billing records for Perkins Coie, some of which showed Sussmann billing Hillary’s campaign for his work relating to the phony Alfa Bank story. These were absolutely key to the indictment on the false statement. One might imagine that even after being hit with the grand jury subpoena, Perkins Coie put up a huge fight over turning over that information, as it involves attorney-client communications and attorney work product information, both of which would typically be shielded from disclosure to a grand jury.

Perhaps Durham made it clear to Perkins Coie that they themselves could be held criminally liable for their attorney’s misconduct, and that they’d better darn well cooperate.

But even if they did, attorney-client privilege applies to clients as well, which in this case include the DNC, the Clinton campaign and “Tech Executive 1.” They would have had to waive THEIR privilege for some reason. What might that reason be? This situation suggests to me that they might face some pretty fierce legal jeopardy themselves --- that they knew it could be even worse for them if they didn’t cooperate. This is one area that I hope legal experts like "Shipwrecked" will explore in detail.

He does note something called “the crime-fraud exception,” which applies when the normally privileged communications relate to a fraud that is currently occurring or might be contemplated by THE CLIENT (as opposed to the law firm) in the future. That would make sense to me, since clients like the DNC and Hillary can’t go one day without contemplating more fraud. Perhaps it had something to do with their ongoing anti-Trump activities after he was in office.

But, anyway, if you’ve been wondering, “Why is Durham taking SO LONG?,” this legal fight is one reason why.

Something else of interest: we recently reported that Marc Elias had left Perkins Coie to open his own separate firm dedicated to the Dark Art of getting more Democrats elected to office and furthering the progressive agenda. Sussmann was gone, too, on leave until resigning the day of his indictment. As “Shipwrecked” explains, catapulting these two partners might have been one way that Perkins Coie showed its willingness to cooperate with investigators to save its own sorry hide.

The reason we haven’t known about this legal fight is that Durham apparently didn’t take it before a DC grand jury. He could keep it quiet by going to any district where he had a grand jury convened. As “Shipwrecked” points out, disputes over the production of documents to a federal grand jury typically take place behind closed doors –- or, in the age of COVID, on a private Zoom call; no travel required –- and are not part of the public docket. All references to the dispute would be sealed,

I highly recommend this article, as it’s very clearly written for the non-lawyer and brings up a number of considerations we haven’t seen anywhere else. This apparently is the first installment of a series; we’re grateful for the insight and eagerly anticipate the next one. The writer mentions as a tease that another “scene of the crime” (that’s my phraseology) mentioned in the indictment as being outside the District of Columbia, is likely the CIA (“Agency -2”), headquartered in Langley, Virginia. So this gets more interesting all the time.

Allard: The Milley Caper

September 21, 2021

General Mark Milley, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, the nation’s top-ranking military man, is either the most courageous adult in the room while our political system tottered on the brink of instability - or else a camouflaged Democratic swamp-creature who may have committed treason while colluding with the Communist Chinese. Where you stand on these flamboyant issues depends mostly on what you think of mega-journalist Bob Woodward, whose headlines famously out-run his sources. But ever since Watergate, Woodward has pioneered a whole new genre in which his sources remain carefully veiled while the nation’s most highly classified secrets are revealed in voluptuous detail. Perusing one of his earlier books, I was startled to read page after page of intelligence revelations that went beyond top-secret. “But hey man”, as Joe Biden would put it, “isn’t that all just part of the public’s right to know?”


Well maybe but no one in authority ever seems to have asked Bob Woodward about that or to question the ethics of transforming national secrets into highly profitable book sales. Looking over his 50-year track record, Washington insiders know that it pays to stay on Woodward’s good side. If you give him the juicy gossip and inside-the-Beltway psycho-babble he craves, you can be assured of favorable treatment, either in his books or maybe in the pages of the Washington Post (possibly one and the same). An essential part of the gamesmanship includes the pre-publication leaking of lurid headlines. Specifically:

  • Shortly before the 2020 election, GEN Milley called his Chinese counter-part to re-assure him that the US would not attack China. “If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise,” Milley reportedly said.
  • Similar reassurances were repeated shortly after the January 6 riot on Capitol Hill; “We are 100 percent steady. Everything’s fine. But democracy can be sloppy sometimes.” (Lolita C. Baldor, AP, “Milley: Calls were perfectly within scope of the job,” Sept. 17)
  • Also according to the AP, “Milley believed the president suffered a mental decline after the November election, agreeing with a view shared by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a phone call they had on Jan. 8, according to officials. Milley also asked senior officers to swear an “oath” that Milley had to be involved if Trump gave an order to launch nuclear weapons, according to the book.” (Mary C. Jalonick, AP, “Jan 6 Committee seeking records on Milley’s China calls,” Sep 17)


As you would expect, outraged Republicans called for General Milley to be fired while Democrats from President Biden to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressed continued confidence in his judgment.  Since Milley and Austin will testify before the House Armed Services Committee on September 28, the controversy will likely simmer for at least another week: Exactly as Bob Woodward and his media colleagues would have anticipated. Not only is this kind of publicity essential in fueling sales, but it also helps to move the Afghanistan and Southern Border fiascos off the front pages. 


As it happens, my Harvard dissertation and first book was a history of the American command and control system. Shortly thereafter, I had the privilege of working for Congressman Bill Nichols as Congress reformed that system in 1986, including the powers exercised by every subsequent JCS Chairman, including General Milley. If he was indeed free-lancing with his Chinese counter-part, those particulars will certainly become known in our immediate future.


But in that last AP story refenced above, there is a question most observers have missed. Did General Milley actually require senior officers to swear an oath promising to short-circuit the nuclear command and control exercised by President Trump? And if so, what was his authority for making such an extraordinary (and possibly illegal) demand? You see, in their sweeping 1986 reforms, Congress firmly chose to place the JCS Chairman outside the chain of command extending from the National Command Authorities (i.e. the President and SECDEF) directly to the Commanders of our combatant forces in the field.  The principle: Civilians make the decision to go to war while commanders on the ground employ forces and direct missions. The JCS Chairman is expected to give military advice while administering our global command and control systems.


But he is only a Washington staffer, like so many others. That is a distinction General Milley should know well: Bob Woodward not so much!



NOTE: Colonel Allard is the author of Command, Control and the Common Defense, winner of the 1991 National Security Book Award. After leaving active duty, he became an on-air military analyst for the networks of NBC News.

Laura Ainsworth: Big in Japan

September 21, 2021

Congratulations on some exciting news for our contributor Laura Ainsworth, who in addition to being a top notch writer/news researcher is also an award-winning retro jazz singer in the Julie London/Rosemary Clooney tradition.

Her three CDs and best-of LP were recently picked up for distribution in Japan and proved so popular that an expanded CD best of, “Top Shelf,” has just been released there. It includes 16 tracks (one a previously-unreleased Irving Berlin classic), all remastered by Jessica Thompson, who was Grammy-nominated for her work on Erroll Garner’s “The Complete Concert by the Sea.” It includes a 16-page color booklet on Laura’s music and her unique upbringing as the daughter of musician Billy Ainsworth, who played with Tommy Dorsey, Freddy Martin and other legendary big band leaders.

The new Japanese CD just debuted and is available in the US, along with all her other music, through her website,

If you love great American music, here’s your chance to pick up some terrific CDs for yourself or Christmas gifts, and support one of the “Huckabee” family. You can also follow her on Facebook at and on Twitter at @lauraainsworth1.

Just to give you a taste, here she is singing a great old Mills Brothers tune on “Huckabee”: