Ron Paul Institute for Peace And Prosperity All Blogs 2019 http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/rss.aspx?blogid=5 Fri, 15 Nov 2019 05:00:00 GMT Fri, 15 Nov 2019 15:39:55 GMT Tulsi Gabbard, What Does Being a ‘Woman of Color’ Have To Do With It? Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/

Last week I wrote about an apparent contradiction between Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) talking up her 16-plus years in the United States Army and her criticizing certain US military interventions overseas in a recent interview at the ABC show The View. Since her criticism of such interventions is at the heart of her presidential campaign, I suggested that it would be helpful for Gabbard to offer an explanation to dispel the apparent contradiction.

Also in her The View interview, Gabbard brought up being a “woman of color” in challenging people saying she is an unwitting asset of the Russian government, as she put it, “working against the interests of our people and our country, the country that I am willing to lay my life down for.” Said Gabbard:
So, if you’re saying it’s not deliberately, then you are implying that I am too stupid and too naïve and lack the intelligence to know what I am doing. That is extremely offensive to me and to every woman of color.
Come again?

The unwitting Russian asset pejorative has been deployed against plenty of not of color men too. President Donald Trump and libertarian communicator Ron Paul are two prominent examples of individuals who have been called Russian assets, both witting and unwitting. Critics have slung the unwitting Russian asset label at people — be they men, women, people of various races, etc. — who they see as not sufficiently accepting anti-Russia claims of one sort or another or as opposed to US government actions sold as means to challenge purported threats from Russia. And, of course, some women of color have made this sort of accusation.

Nonetheless, Gabbard claims that calling her an unwitting Russian asset is “extremely offensive” to her and every other woman of color. Why? What does she think being a woman of color has to do with it? Her claim sounds like rubbish.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ Thu, 14 Nov 2019 21:44:53 GMT
Court Rules for Some Privacy Protection for Electronic Information of Travelers Entering and Leaving the US Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/

Over the last few years, Americans entering and leaving the United States encountered US government officials increasingly accessing private information on the travelers’ electronic devices on demand. The situation is an affront to the constitutional restraint on searches contained in the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution.

In September of 2017, I discussed the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) having that month filed a lawsuit Alasaad v. McAleenan in a US district court challenging, on behalf of ten US citizens and a US green card holder, this practice by US government agents.

Here is an update: In a Tuesday summary judgement ruling in the case, the court in Massachusetts determined that “reasonable suspicion” is required for such searches but rejected the ACLU and EFF argument that “the higher warrant protection supported by probable cause” found in the Fourth Amendment must be applied.

You can read the ACLU announcement regarding the court decision and the decision itself here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ Wed, 13 Nov 2019 00:14:42 GMT
2008 Green Party Presidential Nominee Endorses 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/

After completing six terms in the United States House of Representatives as a Democrat from Georgia, Cynthia McKinney was the 2008 Green Party nominee for president of the United States. In a Friday letter, McKinney announced her endorsement of Adam Kokesh for the 2020 Libertarian Party presidential nomination.

McKinney concludes her letter with a call to action for people who do not consider themselves Libertarian Party supporters. McKinney writes: “Therefore, I endorse Adam’s quest to become the 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential nominee and encourage supporters of other parties to take a good look at Adam Kokesh for President!!”

Read McKinney’s endorsement letter here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 20:00:05 GMT
The Apparent Contradiction at the Heart of Tulsi Gabbard’s Presidential Campaign Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has presented her opposition to certain United States military interventions overseas as a major issue, and arguably as the primary issue, in her presidential campaign. Yet, there is an apparent contradiction between the way she disparages certain US military interventions overseas and the way she talks up her own past and current employment in the US military.

This apparent contradiction was on display during a Wednesday interview of Gabbard at the ABC show The View.

Gabbard, referring to the show’s hosts, said, “some of you have accused me of being a traitor to my county, a Russian asset, a Trojan horse, or a useful idiot I think was the term you used.” Defending herself from those accusations, Gabbard states:
I want to let your viewers know exactly who I am — set the record straight. I am a patriot. I love our country. I am a strong and intelligent woman of color. And I have dedicated almost my entire adult life to protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.
Gabbard proceeds to make clear that she includes 16 years and counting in the US Army as part of her time dedicated to “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.” Responding to criticism of her by Hillary Clinton that was along the same lines as the criticism from hosts of the show, Gabbard declares:
Unfortunately, you doubled down on the baseless accusation that [Clinton] made that strikes at the core of who I am. I’m a soldier.
Gabbard also presents in the interview this criticism of Clinton, who has been US first lady, senator, and secretary of state:
It is indisputable to say anything other than the fact — let me just close this out — that Hillary Clinton, throughout her career, has levered the foreign policy of interventionism and being the world’s police, going and toppling dictators in other countries, that has caused such destruction and loss of life.
See the apparent contradiction here? Gabbard claims Gabbard is good because she has been in the US military and that Clinton is bad because Clinton has helped direct the military to do bad things. Indeed, Gabbard goes on to criticizes Clinton championing the Iraq War in which Gabbard was deployed. “I believed the lies that were told to us” to promote that war, says Gabbard.

Now that Gabbard recognizes those lies and opposes that war, how does she square her work in the US military in that war with her suggestion that she spent that time “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” Maybe she can. It would be interesting to hear her explanation.

How about the rest of Gabbard’s work in the US military? How has it advanced “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” An explanation would be helpful.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:38:27 GMT
Trump’s Syrian Oil Grab Risks WW3 – Daniel McAdams RPI Staff http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 05:35:23 GMT
Democrats' 'Star Witness' Admits He Wasn't On Trump-Ukraine Call, Sole Source Was NY Times Tyler Durden http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/

House Democrats have released the latest in the series of heavily-redacted transcripts of the secret hearings they had undertaken in recent weeks - that of Bill Taylor - the top US diplomat in Ukraine - ahead of his public testimony next week.

As The Hill notes, Taylor is viewed as a key witness who previously testified in meticulous detail about what he considered an effort by Trump and his allies to pressure Ukraine into opening investigations that would benefit Trump politically.

In leaked copies of his 15-page opening statement, Taylor voiced concerns that the Trump administration had withheld nearly $400 million in aid as leverage to get Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations into interference in the 2016 election and former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his leading 2020 political rivals.

Key excerpts include:

Taylor admits Ukraine's criminal justice system is "flawed"...

Isn't that a good reason to hold up aid to ensure that it is not corruptly flowing to the wrong entities?

Taylor also testified that his knowledge of the phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymr Zelensky wasn’t first-hand knowledge.
'And this isn’t firsthand. It’s not secondhand. It’s not thirdhand,' Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., said to Taylor. 'But if I understand this correctly, you’re telling us that Tim Morrison told you that Ambassador Sondland told him that the president told Ambassador Sondland that Zelensky would have to open an investigation into Biden?'

'That’s correct,' Taylor admitted.

'So do you have any other source that the president’s goal in making this request was anything other than The New York Times?' Zeldin asked.

'I have not talked to the president,' Taylor said. 'I have no other information from what the president was thinking.'
Additionally, as The Federalist notes, under questioning from Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Taylor also testified that the Ukrainian government wasn’t aware US military funding had been temporarily suspended until late August, and then only after the information was leaked to the news media, meaning an alleged quid pro quo would have been impossible.
'So, if nobody in the Ukrainian government is aware of a military hold at the time of the Trump-Zelensky call, then, as a matter of law and as a matter of fact, there can be no quid pro quo, based on military aid,' Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor, said.

'I just want to be real clear that, again, as of July 25th, you have no knowledge of a quid pro quo involving military aid.'

'July 25th is a week after the hold was put on the security assistance,' Taylor testified. 'And July 25th, they had a conversation between the two presidents, where it was not discussed.'

'And to your knowledge, nobody in the Ukrainian government was aware of the hold?' Ratcliffe asked.

'That is correct,' Taylor responded.
The Democrats may need a better witness.

Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge.
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ Wed, 06 Nov 2019 23:08:48 GMT
President Trump: Send the US Military to Fight Drug Cartels in Mexico Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/

Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump, who has the unilateral power to send the United States military to bomb and invade other countries, as several of his predecessors have done, stated at Twitter that he is ready to send the US military to Mexico to defeat drug cartels.

Trump wrote:
This is the time for Mexico, with the help of the United States, to wage WAR on the drug cartels and wipe them off the face of the earth. We merely await a call from your great new president!

Making clear he is talking about a US military action, Trump declared in another Tuesday morning tweet that “the cartels have become so large and powerful that you sometimes need an army to defeat an army!”.

The truth, however, is that the drug war waged by the Mexico government, with the help of the US government, ensures the continued existence of powerful and dangerous drug cartels in Mexico. Similarly, when the US had alcohol prohibition, there were dangerous criminal enterprises that thrived from satisfying people’s demand for prohibited products.

Eliminating drug cartels can best be accomplished by ending, not growing, the drug war. Indeed, this is the course of action the Mexico government seems poised to pursue. Mexico President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who Trump referenced at Twitter, released this year a plan for Mexico to end its drug war. And the Mexico legislature appears to be preparing to take a major step toward ending the drug war — approving legislation to legalize marijuana countrywide.

I am guessing Obrador will not make the phone call Trump suggests. Obrador has available another, better avenue for dealing with drug cartels.

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ Tue, 05 Nov 2019 20:58:33 GMT
Jacob Hornberger Announces Run for Libertarian Party Presidential Nomination Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ wrote that it looked like Future of Freedom Foundation President Jacob Hornberger may run for president of the United States. As I noted then, many people familiar with the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity (RPI) have read some of Hornberger’s articles at the RPI website or watched one of his speeches at an RPI event. Here is an update: On Saturday, Hornberger announced he is seeking the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination.

You can watch Hornberger’s presidential campaign announcement video here:

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:43:20 GMT
Ed Thompson’s 2002 Fight Against Marijuana Prohibition Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/

Reading a Wednesday article by Kyle Jaeger at Marijuana Moment, a quote from a Wisconsin state Assembly member who is a sponsor of a marijuana decriminalization bill struck me. Rep. David Crowley states at Twitter that the legislation “should have been passed years ago - but thanks to the inaction of our legislature, [Wisconsin] is now an island of antiquated drug policy in a sea of decriminalization."

The quote brought to mind the years 2001 and 2002 when I was in Wisconsin to help Ed Thompson with his governor campaign. Thompson, who ran as a Libertarian, made the legalization of medical marijuana a key campaign issue and supported recreational marijuana legalization as well.

A Rasmussen poll Thompson’s campaign commissioned found support for medical marijuana in the state was at 70 percent. However, to this day the state government has yet to allow the use of medical marijuana, much less adopt marijuana legalization generally.

Thompson, who had worked for a while in a Wisconsin state prison, would often talk on the campaign trail of his disgust at people who violated drug laws, including marijuana prohibition, being put in prison along with people who had committed violent crimes. He despised the entire drug war and proposed starting to dismantle it by taking on marijuana prohibition where public support could help him as governor overcome political inertia.

Thompson did not win that election, and sate marijuana law liberalization efforts in Wisconsin have had little success over much of the seventeen years since.

Then, last year, hemp, the low-THC cannabis Thompson championed the legalization of in his campaign, was legally harvested in Wisconsin for the first time in decades. Also, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, elected in November, is supporting significantly rolling back marijuana prohibition in the state, including via adopting medical marijuana legalization and marijuana decriminalization.

Hopefully, soon much more marijuana freedom will come to Wisconsin, and the state government will also chip away other parts of the drug war Thompson despised.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ Wed, 30 Oct 2019 19:46:10 GMT
Lawrence Wilkerson: Protecting Syrian Oil Is Not the Reason US Troops Are Staying in Syria Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/
“The real reason the Pentagon talked the president into not continuing with his withdrawal and leaving his US forces there is they are positioned to try and keep Iran from gaining any real foothold, vis-à-vis Israel in particular, in Syria and they’re also positioned to keep [Syria President] Assad honest with regard to his deal for autonomy for the Kurds whom we have sort of abandoned.”

Watch here Wilkerson’s complete interview in which he also discusses the killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and how the region around Syria “is getting ready to explode again” instead of becoming peaceful:



Wilkerson is an Academic Board member for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ Mon, 28 Oct 2019 22:05:29 GMT
Tulsi Gabbard, What Does Being a ‘Woman of Color’ Have To Do With It? Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/

Last week I wrote about an apparent contradiction between Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) talking up her 16-plus years in the United States Army and her criticizing certain US military interventions overseas in a recent interview at the ABC show The View. Since her criticism of such interventions is at the heart of her presidential campaign, I suggested that it would be helpful for Gabbard to offer an explanation to dispel the apparent contradiction.

Also in her The View interview, Gabbard brought up being a “woman of color” in challenging people saying she is an unwitting asset of the Russian government, as she put it, “working against the interests of our people and our country, the country that I am willing to lay my life down for.” Said Gabbard:
So, if you’re saying it’s not deliberately, then you are implying that I am too stupid and too naïve and lack the intelligence to know what I am doing. That is extremely offensive to me and to every woman of color.
Come again?

The unwitting Russian asset pejorative has been deployed against plenty of not of color men too. President Donald Trump and libertarian communicator Ron Paul are two prominent examples of individuals who have been called Russian assets, both witting and unwitting. Critics have slung the unwitting Russian asset label at people — be they men, women, people of various races, etc. — who they see as not sufficiently accepting anti-Russia claims of one sort or another or as opposed to US government actions sold as means to challenge purported threats from Russia. And, of course, some women of color have made this sort of accusation.

Nonetheless, Gabbard claims that calling her an unwitting Russian asset is “extremely offensive” to her and every other woman of color. Why? What does she think being a woman of color has to do with it? Her claim sounds like rubbish.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ Thu, 14 Nov 2019 21:44:53 GMT
Court Rules for Some Privacy Protection for Electronic Information of Travelers Entering and Leaving the US Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/

Over the last few years, Americans entering and leaving the United States encountered US government officials increasingly accessing private information on the travelers’ electronic devices on demand. The situation is an affront to the constitutional restraint on searches contained in the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution.

In September of 2017, I discussed the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) having that month filed a lawsuit Alasaad v. McAleenan in a US district court challenging, on behalf of ten US citizens and a US green card holder, this practice by US government agents.

Here is an update: In a Tuesday summary judgement ruling in the case, the court in Massachusetts determined that “reasonable suspicion” is required for such searches but rejected the ACLU and EFF argument that “the higher warrant protection supported by probable cause” found in the Fourth Amendment must be applied.

You can read the ACLU announcement regarding the court decision and the decision itself here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ Wed, 13 Nov 2019 00:14:42 GMT
2008 Green Party Presidential Nominee Endorses 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/

After completing six terms in the United States House of Representatives as a Democrat from Georgia, Cynthia McKinney was the 2008 Green Party nominee for president of the United States. In a Friday letter, McKinney announced her endorsement of Adam Kokesh for the 2020 Libertarian Party presidential nomination.

McKinney concludes her letter with a call to action for people who do not consider themselves Libertarian Party supporters. McKinney writes: “Therefore, I endorse Adam’s quest to become the 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential nominee and encourage supporters of other parties to take a good look at Adam Kokesh for President!!”

Read McKinney’s endorsement letter here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 20:00:05 GMT
The Apparent Contradiction at the Heart of Tulsi Gabbard’s Presidential Campaign Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has presented her opposition to certain United States military interventions overseas as a major issue, and arguably as the primary issue, in her presidential campaign. Yet, there is an apparent contradiction between the way she disparages certain US military interventions overseas and the way she talks up her own past and current employment in the US military.

This apparent contradiction was on display during a Wednesday interview of Gabbard at the ABC show The View.

Gabbard, referring to the show’s hosts, said, “some of you have accused me of being a traitor to my county, a Russian asset, a Trojan horse, or a useful idiot I think was the term you used.” Defending herself from those accusations, Gabbard states:
I want to let your viewers know exactly who I am — set the record straight. I am a patriot. I love our country. I am a strong and intelligent woman of color. And I have dedicated almost my entire adult life to protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.
Gabbard proceeds to make clear that she includes 16 years and counting in the US Army as part of her time dedicated to “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.” Responding to criticism of her by Hillary Clinton that was along the same lines as the criticism from hosts of the show, Gabbard declares:
Unfortunately, you doubled down on the baseless accusation that [Clinton] made that strikes at the core of who I am. I’m a soldier.
Gabbard also presents in the interview this criticism of Clinton, who has been US first lady, senator, and secretary of state:
It is indisputable to say anything other than the fact — let me just close this out — that Hillary Clinton, throughout her career, has levered the foreign policy of interventionism and being the world’s police, going and toppling dictators in other countries, that has caused such destruction and loss of life.
See the apparent contradiction here? Gabbard claims Gabbard is good because she has been in the US military and that Clinton is bad because Clinton has helped direct the military to do bad things. Indeed, Gabbard goes on to criticizes Clinton championing the Iraq War in which Gabbard was deployed. “I believed the lies that were told to us” to promote that war, says Gabbard.

Now that Gabbard recognizes those lies and opposes that war, how does she square her work in the US military in that war with her suggestion that she spent that time “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” Maybe she can. It would be interesting to hear her explanation.

How about the rest of Gabbard’s work in the US military? How has it advanced “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” An explanation would be helpful.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:38:27 GMT
Trump’s Syrian Oil Grab Risks WW3 – Daniel McAdams RPI Staff http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 05:35:23 GMT
Democrats' 'Star Witness' Admits He Wasn't On Trump-Ukraine Call, Sole Source Was NY Times Tyler Durden http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/

House Democrats have released the latest in the series of heavily-redacted transcripts of the secret hearings they had undertaken in recent weeks - that of Bill Taylor - the top US diplomat in Ukraine - ahead of his public testimony next week.

As The Hill notes, Taylor is viewed as a key witness who previously testified in meticulous detail about what he considered an effort by Trump and his allies to pressure Ukraine into opening investigations that would benefit Trump politically.

In leaked copies of his 15-page opening statement, Taylor voiced concerns that the Trump administration had withheld nearly $400 million in aid as leverage to get Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations into interference in the 2016 election and former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his leading 2020 political rivals.

Key excerpts include:

Taylor admits Ukraine's criminal justice system is "flawed"...

Isn't that a good reason to hold up aid to ensure that it is not corruptly flowing to the wrong entities?

Taylor also testified that his knowledge of the phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymr Zelensky wasn’t first-hand knowledge.
'And this isn’t firsthand. It’s not secondhand. It’s not thirdhand,' Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., said to Taylor. 'But if I understand this correctly, you’re telling us that Tim Morrison told you that Ambassador Sondland told him that the president told Ambassador Sondland that Zelensky would have to open an investigation into Biden?'

'That’s correct,' Taylor admitted.

'So do you have any other source that the president’s goal in making this request was anything other than The New York Times?' Zeldin asked.

'I have not talked to the president,' Taylor said. 'I have no other information from what the president was thinking.'
Additionally, as The Federalist notes, under questioning from Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Taylor also testified that the Ukrainian government wasn’t aware US military funding had been temporarily suspended until late August, and then only after the information was leaked to the news media, meaning an alleged quid pro quo would have been impossible.
'So, if nobody in the Ukrainian government is aware of a military hold at the time of the Trump-Zelensky call, then, as a matter of law and as a matter of fact, there can be no quid pro quo, based on military aid,' Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor, said.

'I just want to be real clear that, again, as of July 25th, you have no knowledge of a quid pro quo involving military aid.'

'July 25th is a week after the hold was put on the security assistance,' Taylor testified. 'And July 25th, they had a conversation between the two presidents, where it was not discussed.'

'And to your knowledge, nobody in the Ukrainian government was aware of the hold?' Ratcliffe asked.

'That is correct,' Taylor responded.
The Democrats may need a better witness.

Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge.
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ Wed, 06 Nov 2019 23:08:48 GMT
President Trump: Send the US Military to Fight Drug Cartels in Mexico Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/

Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump, who has the unilateral power to send the United States military to bomb and invade other countries, as several of his predecessors have done, stated at Twitter that he is ready to send the US military to Mexico to defeat drug cartels.

Trump wrote:
This is the time for Mexico, with the help of the United States, to wage WAR on the drug cartels and wipe them off the face of the earth. We merely await a call from your great new president!

Making clear he is talking about a US military action, Trump declared in another Tuesday morning tweet that “the cartels have become so large and powerful that you sometimes need an army to defeat an army!”.

The truth, however, is that the drug war waged by the Mexico government, with the help of the US government, ensures the continued existence of powerful and dangerous drug cartels in Mexico. Similarly, when the US had alcohol prohibition, there were dangerous criminal enterprises that thrived from satisfying people’s demand for prohibited products.

Eliminating drug cartels can best be accomplished by ending, not growing, the drug war. Indeed, this is the course of action the Mexico government seems poised to pursue. Mexico President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who Trump referenced at Twitter, released this year a plan for Mexico to end its drug war. And the Mexico legislature appears to be preparing to take a major step toward ending the drug war — approving legislation to legalize marijuana countrywide.

I am guessing Obrador will not make the phone call Trump suggests. Obrador has available another, better avenue for dealing with drug cartels.

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ Tue, 05 Nov 2019 20:58:33 GMT
Jacob Hornberger Announces Run for Libertarian Party Presidential Nomination Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ wrote that it looked like Future of Freedom Foundation President Jacob Hornberger may run for president of the United States. As I noted then, many people familiar with the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity (RPI) have read some of Hornberger’s articles at the RPI website or watched one of his speeches at an RPI event. Here is an update: On Saturday, Hornberger announced he is seeking the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination.

You can watch Hornberger’s presidential campaign announcement video here:

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:43:20 GMT
Ed Thompson’s 2002 Fight Against Marijuana Prohibition Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/

Reading a Wednesday article by Kyle Jaeger at Marijuana Moment, a quote from a Wisconsin state Assembly member who is a sponsor of a marijuana decriminalization bill struck me. Rep. David Crowley states at Twitter that the legislation “should have been passed years ago - but thanks to the inaction of our legislature, [Wisconsin] is now an island of antiquated drug policy in a sea of decriminalization."

The quote brought to mind the years 2001 and 2002 when I was in Wisconsin to help Ed Thompson with his governor campaign. Thompson, who ran as a Libertarian, made the legalization of medical marijuana a key campaign issue and supported recreational marijuana legalization as well.

A Rasmussen poll Thompson’s campaign commissioned found support for medical marijuana in the state was at 70 percent. However, to this day the state government has yet to allow the use of medical marijuana, much less adopt marijuana legalization generally.

Thompson, who had worked for a while in a Wisconsin state prison, would often talk on the campaign trail of his disgust at people who violated drug laws, including marijuana prohibition, being put in prison along with people who had committed violent crimes. He despised the entire drug war and proposed starting to dismantle it by taking on marijuana prohibition where public support could help him as governor overcome political inertia.

Thompson did not win that election, and sate marijuana law liberalization efforts in Wisconsin have had little success over much of the seventeen years since.

Then, last year, hemp, the low-THC cannabis Thompson championed the legalization of in his campaign, was legally harvested in Wisconsin for the first time in decades. Also, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, elected in November, is supporting significantly rolling back marijuana prohibition in the state, including via adopting medical marijuana legalization and marijuana decriminalization.

Hopefully, soon much more marijuana freedom will come to Wisconsin, and the state government will also chip away other parts of the drug war Thompson despised.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ Wed, 30 Oct 2019 19:46:10 GMT
Lawrence Wilkerson: Protecting Syrian Oil Is Not the Reason US Troops Are Staying in Syria Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/
“The real reason the Pentagon talked the president into not continuing with his withdrawal and leaving his US forces there is they are positioned to try and keep Iran from gaining any real foothold, vis-à-vis Israel in particular, in Syria and they’re also positioned to keep [Syria President] Assad honest with regard to his deal for autonomy for the Kurds whom we have sort of abandoned.”

Watch here Wilkerson’s complete interview in which he also discusses the killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and how the region around Syria “is getting ready to explode again” instead of becoming peaceful:



Wilkerson is an Academic Board member for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ Mon, 28 Oct 2019 22:05:29 GMT
Tulsi Gabbard, What Does Being a ‘Woman of Color’ Have To Do With It? Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/

Last week I wrote about an apparent contradiction between Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) talking up her 16-plus years in the United States Army and her criticizing certain US military interventions overseas in a recent interview at the ABC show The View. Since her criticism of such interventions is at the heart of her presidential campaign, I suggested that it would be helpful for Gabbard to offer an explanation to dispel the apparent contradiction.

Also in her The View interview, Gabbard brought up being a “woman of color” in challenging people saying she is an unwitting asset of the Russian government, as she put it, “working against the interests of our people and our country, the country that I am willing to lay my life down for.” Said Gabbard:
So, if you’re saying it’s not deliberately, then you are implying that I am too stupid and too naïve and lack the intelligence to know what I am doing. That is extremely offensive to me and to every woman of color.
Come again?

The unwitting Russian asset pejorative has been deployed against plenty of not of color men too. President Donald Trump and libertarian communicator Ron Paul are two prominent examples of individuals who have been called Russian assets, both witting and unwitting. Critics have slung the unwitting Russian asset label at people — be they men, women, people of various races, etc. — who they see as not sufficiently accepting anti-Russia claims of one sort or another or as opposed to US government actions sold as means to challenge purported threats from Russia. And, of course, some women of color have made this sort of accusation.

Nonetheless, Gabbard claims that calling her an unwitting Russian asset is “extremely offensive” to her and every other woman of color. Why? What does she think being a woman of color has to do with it? Her claim sounds like rubbish.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ Thu, 14 Nov 2019 21:44:53 GMT
Court Rules for Some Privacy Protection for Electronic Information of Travelers Entering and Leaving the US Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/

Over the last few years, Americans entering and leaving the United States encountered US government officials increasingly accessing private information on the travelers’ electronic devices on demand. The situation is an affront to the constitutional restraint on searches contained in the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution.

In September of 2017, I discussed the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) having that month filed a lawsuit Alasaad v. McAleenan in a US district court challenging, on behalf of ten US citizens and a US green card holder, this practice by US government agents.

Here is an update: In a Tuesday summary judgement ruling in the case, the court in Massachusetts determined that “reasonable suspicion” is required for such searches but rejected the ACLU and EFF argument that “the higher warrant protection supported by probable cause” found in the Fourth Amendment must be applied.

You can read the ACLU announcement regarding the court decision and the decision itself here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ Wed, 13 Nov 2019 00:14:42 GMT
2008 Green Party Presidential Nominee Endorses 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/

After completing six terms in the United States House of Representatives as a Democrat from Georgia, Cynthia McKinney was the 2008 Green Party nominee for president of the United States. In a Friday letter, McKinney announced her endorsement of Adam Kokesh for the 2020 Libertarian Party presidential nomination.

McKinney concludes her letter with a call to action for people who do not consider themselves Libertarian Party supporters. McKinney writes: “Therefore, I endorse Adam’s quest to become the 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential nominee and encourage supporters of other parties to take a good look at Adam Kokesh for President!!”

Read McKinney’s endorsement letter here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 20:00:05 GMT
The Apparent Contradiction at the Heart of Tulsi Gabbard’s Presidential Campaign Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has presented her opposition to certain United States military interventions overseas as a major issue, and arguably as the primary issue, in her presidential campaign. Yet, there is an apparent contradiction between the way she disparages certain US military interventions overseas and the way she talks up her own past and current employment in the US military.

This apparent contradiction was on display during a Wednesday interview of Gabbard at the ABC show The View.

Gabbard, referring to the show’s hosts, said, “some of you have accused me of being a traitor to my county, a Russian asset, a Trojan horse, or a useful idiot I think was the term you used.” Defending herself from those accusations, Gabbard states:
I want to let your viewers know exactly who I am — set the record straight. I am a patriot. I love our country. I am a strong and intelligent woman of color. And I have dedicated almost my entire adult life to protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.
Gabbard proceeds to make clear that she includes 16 years and counting in the US Army as part of her time dedicated to “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.” Responding to criticism of her by Hillary Clinton that was along the same lines as the criticism from hosts of the show, Gabbard declares:
Unfortunately, you doubled down on the baseless accusation that [Clinton] made that strikes at the core of who I am. I’m a soldier.
Gabbard also presents in the interview this criticism of Clinton, who has been US first lady, senator, and secretary of state:
It is indisputable to say anything other than the fact — let me just close this out — that Hillary Clinton, throughout her career, has levered the foreign policy of interventionism and being the world’s police, going and toppling dictators in other countries, that has caused such destruction and loss of life.
See the apparent contradiction here? Gabbard claims Gabbard is good because she has been in the US military and that Clinton is bad because Clinton has helped direct the military to do bad things. Indeed, Gabbard goes on to criticizes Clinton championing the Iraq War in which Gabbard was deployed. “I believed the lies that were told to us” to promote that war, says Gabbard.

Now that Gabbard recognizes those lies and opposes that war, how does she square her work in the US military in that war with her suggestion that she spent that time “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” Maybe she can. It would be interesting to hear her explanation.

How about the rest of Gabbard’s work in the US military? How has it advanced “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” An explanation would be helpful.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:38:27 GMT
Trump’s Syrian Oil Grab Risks WW3 – Daniel McAdams RPI Staff http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 05:35:23 GMT
Democrats' 'Star Witness' Admits He Wasn't On Trump-Ukraine Call, Sole Source Was NY Times Tyler Durden http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/

House Democrats have released the latest in the series of heavily-redacted transcripts of the secret hearings they had undertaken in recent weeks - that of Bill Taylor - the top US diplomat in Ukraine - ahead of his public testimony next week.

As The Hill notes, Taylor is viewed as a key witness who previously testified in meticulous detail about what he considered an effort by Trump and his allies to pressure Ukraine into opening investigations that would benefit Trump politically.

In leaked copies of his 15-page opening statement, Taylor voiced concerns that the Trump administration had withheld nearly $400 million in aid as leverage to get Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations into interference in the 2016 election and former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his leading 2020 political rivals.

Key excerpts include:

Taylor admits Ukraine's criminal justice system is "flawed"...

Isn't that a good reason to hold up aid to ensure that it is not corruptly flowing to the wrong entities?

Taylor also testified that his knowledge of the phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymr Zelensky wasn’t first-hand knowledge.
'And this isn’t firsthand. It’s not secondhand. It’s not thirdhand,' Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., said to Taylor. 'But if I understand this correctly, you’re telling us that Tim Morrison told you that Ambassador Sondland told him that the president told Ambassador Sondland that Zelensky would have to open an investigation into Biden?'

'That’s correct,' Taylor admitted.

'So do you have any other source that the president’s goal in making this request was anything other than The New York Times?' Zeldin asked.

'I have not talked to the president,' Taylor said. 'I have no other information from what the president was thinking.'
Additionally, as The Federalist notes, under questioning from Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Taylor also testified that the Ukrainian government wasn’t aware US military funding had been temporarily suspended until late August, and then only after the information was leaked to the news media, meaning an alleged quid pro quo would have been impossible.
'So, if nobody in the Ukrainian government is aware of a military hold at the time of the Trump-Zelensky call, then, as a matter of law and as a matter of fact, there can be no quid pro quo, based on military aid,' Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor, said.

'I just want to be real clear that, again, as of July 25th, you have no knowledge of a quid pro quo involving military aid.'

'July 25th is a week after the hold was put on the security assistance,' Taylor testified. 'And July 25th, they had a conversation between the two presidents, where it was not discussed.'

'And to your knowledge, nobody in the Ukrainian government was aware of the hold?' Ratcliffe asked.

'That is correct,' Taylor responded.
The Democrats may need a better witness.

Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge.
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ Wed, 06 Nov 2019 23:08:48 GMT
President Trump: Send the US Military to Fight Drug Cartels in Mexico Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/

Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump, who has the unilateral power to send the United States military to bomb and invade other countries, as several of his predecessors have done, stated at Twitter that he is ready to send the US military to Mexico to defeat drug cartels.

Trump wrote:
This is the time for Mexico, with the help of the United States, to wage WAR on the drug cartels and wipe them off the face of the earth. We merely await a call from your great new president!

Making clear he is talking about a US military action, Trump declared in another Tuesday morning tweet that “the cartels have become so large and powerful that you sometimes need an army to defeat an army!”.

The truth, however, is that the drug war waged by the Mexico government, with the help of the US government, ensures the continued existence of powerful and dangerous drug cartels in Mexico. Similarly, when the US had alcohol prohibition, there were dangerous criminal enterprises that thrived from satisfying people’s demand for prohibited products.

Eliminating drug cartels can best be accomplished by ending, not growing, the drug war. Indeed, this is the course of action the Mexico government seems poised to pursue. Mexico President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who Trump referenced at Twitter, released this year a plan for Mexico to end its drug war. And the Mexico legislature appears to be preparing to take a major step toward ending the drug war — approving legislation to legalize marijuana countrywide.

I am guessing Obrador will not make the phone call Trump suggests. Obrador has available another, better avenue for dealing with drug cartels.

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ Tue, 05 Nov 2019 20:58:33 GMT
Jacob Hornberger Announces Run for Libertarian Party Presidential Nomination Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ wrote that it looked like Future of Freedom Foundation President Jacob Hornberger may run for president of the United States. As I noted then, many people familiar with the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity (RPI) have read some of Hornberger’s articles at the RPI website or watched one of his speeches at an RPI event. Here is an update: On Saturday, Hornberger announced he is seeking the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination.

You can watch Hornberger’s presidential campaign announcement video here:

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:43:20 GMT
Ed Thompson’s 2002 Fight Against Marijuana Prohibition Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/

Reading a Wednesday article by Kyle Jaeger at Marijuana Moment, a quote from a Wisconsin state Assembly member who is a sponsor of a marijuana decriminalization bill struck me. Rep. David Crowley states at Twitter that the legislation “should have been passed years ago - but thanks to the inaction of our legislature, [Wisconsin] is now an island of antiquated drug policy in a sea of decriminalization."

The quote brought to mind the years 2001 and 2002 when I was in Wisconsin to help Ed Thompson with his governor campaign. Thompson, who ran as a Libertarian, made the legalization of medical marijuana a key campaign issue and supported recreational marijuana legalization as well.

A Rasmussen poll Thompson’s campaign commissioned found support for medical marijuana in the state was at 70 percent. However, to this day the state government has yet to allow the use of medical marijuana, much less adopt marijuana legalization generally.

Thompson, who had worked for a while in a Wisconsin state prison, would often talk on the campaign trail of his disgust at people who violated drug laws, including marijuana prohibition, being put in prison along with people who had committed violent crimes. He despised the entire drug war and proposed starting to dismantle it by taking on marijuana prohibition where public support could help him as governor overcome political inertia.

Thompson did not win that election, and sate marijuana law liberalization efforts in Wisconsin have had little success over much of the seventeen years since.

Then, last year, hemp, the low-THC cannabis Thompson championed the legalization of in his campaign, was legally harvested in Wisconsin for the first time in decades. Also, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, elected in November, is supporting significantly rolling back marijuana prohibition in the state, including via adopting medical marijuana legalization and marijuana decriminalization.

Hopefully, soon much more marijuana freedom will come to Wisconsin, and the state government will also chip away other parts of the drug war Thompson despised.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ Wed, 30 Oct 2019 19:46:10 GMT
Lawrence Wilkerson: Protecting Syrian Oil Is Not the Reason US Troops Are Staying in Syria Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/
“The real reason the Pentagon talked the president into not continuing with his withdrawal and leaving his US forces there is they are positioned to try and keep Iran from gaining any real foothold, vis-à-vis Israel in particular, in Syria and they’re also positioned to keep [Syria President] Assad honest with regard to his deal for autonomy for the Kurds whom we have sort of abandoned.”

Watch here Wilkerson’s complete interview in which he also discusses the killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and how the region around Syria “is getting ready to explode again” instead of becoming peaceful:



Wilkerson is an Academic Board member for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ Mon, 28 Oct 2019 22:05:29 GMT
Tulsi Gabbard, What Does Being a ‘Woman of Color’ Have To Do With It? Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/

Last week I wrote about an apparent contradiction between Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) talking up her 16-plus years in the United States Army and her criticizing certain US military interventions overseas in a recent interview at the ABC show The View. Since her criticism of such interventions is at the heart of her presidential campaign, I suggested that it would be helpful for Gabbard to offer an explanation to dispel the apparent contradiction.

Also in her The View interview, Gabbard brought up being a “woman of color” in challenging people saying she is an unwitting asset of the Russian government, as she put it, “working against the interests of our people and our country, the country that I am willing to lay my life down for.” Said Gabbard:
So, if you’re saying it’s not deliberately, then you are implying that I am too stupid and too naïve and lack the intelligence to know what I am doing. That is extremely offensive to me and to every woman of color.
Come again?

The unwitting Russian asset pejorative has been deployed against plenty of not of color men too. President Donald Trump and libertarian communicator Ron Paul are two prominent examples of individuals who have been called Russian assets, both witting and unwitting. Critics have slung the unwitting Russian asset label at people — be they men, women, people of various races, etc. — who they see as not sufficiently accepting anti-Russia claims of one sort or another or as opposed to US government actions sold as means to challenge purported threats from Russia. And, of course, some women of color have made this sort of accusation.

Nonetheless, Gabbard claims that calling her an unwitting Russian asset is “extremely offensive” to her and every other woman of color. Why? What does she think being a woman of color has to do with it? Her claim sounds like rubbish.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/14/tulsi-gabbard-what-does-being-a-woman-of-color-have-to-do-with-it/ Thu, 14 Nov 2019 21:44:53 GMT
Court Rules for Some Privacy Protection for Electronic Information of Travelers Entering and Leaving the US Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/

Over the last few years, Americans entering and leaving the United States encountered US government officials increasingly accessing private information on the travelers’ electronic devices on demand. The situation is an affront to the constitutional restraint on searches contained in the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution.

In September of 2017, I discussed the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) having that month filed a lawsuit Alasaad v. McAleenan in a US district court challenging, on behalf of ten US citizens and a US green card holder, this practice by US government agents.

Here is an update: In a Tuesday summary judgement ruling in the case, the court in Massachusetts determined that “reasonable suspicion” is required for such searches but rejected the ACLU and EFF argument that “the higher warrant protection supported by probable cause” found in the Fourth Amendment must be applied.

You can read the ACLU announcement regarding the court decision and the decision itself here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/12/court-rules-for-some-privacy-protection-for-electronic-information-of-travelers-entering-and-leaving-the-us/ Wed, 13 Nov 2019 00:14:42 GMT
2008 Green Party Presidential Nominee Endorses 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/

After completing six terms in the United States House of Representatives as a Democrat from Georgia, Cynthia McKinney was the 2008 Green Party nominee for president of the United States. In a Friday letter, McKinney announced her endorsement of Adam Kokesh for the 2020 Libertarian Party presidential nomination.

McKinney concludes her letter with a call to action for people who do not consider themselves Libertarian Party supporters. McKinney writes: “Therefore, I endorse Adam’s quest to become the 2020 Libertarian Party Presidential nominee and encourage supporters of other parties to take a good look at Adam Kokesh for President!!”

Read McKinney’s endorsement letter here.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/2008-green-party-presidential-nominee-endorses-2020-libertarian-party-presidential-candidate/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 20:00:05 GMT
The Apparent Contradiction at the Heart of Tulsi Gabbard’s Presidential Campaign Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has presented her opposition to certain United States military interventions overseas as a major issue, and arguably as the primary issue, in her presidential campaign. Yet, there is an apparent contradiction between the way she disparages certain US military interventions overseas and the way she talks up her own past and current employment in the US military.

This apparent contradiction was on display during a Wednesday interview of Gabbard at the ABC show The View.

Gabbard, referring to the show’s hosts, said, “some of you have accused me of being a traitor to my county, a Russian asset, a Trojan horse, or a useful idiot I think was the term you used.” Defending herself from those accusations, Gabbard states:
I want to let your viewers know exactly who I am — set the record straight. I am a patriot. I love our country. I am a strong and intelligent woman of color. And I have dedicated almost my entire adult life to protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.
Gabbard proceeds to make clear that she includes 16 years and counting in the US Army as part of her time dedicated to “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country.” Responding to criticism of her by Hillary Clinton that was along the same lines as the criticism from hosts of the show, Gabbard declares:
Unfortunately, you doubled down on the baseless accusation that [Clinton] made that strikes at the core of who I am. I’m a soldier.
Gabbard also presents in the interview this criticism of Clinton, who has been US first lady, senator, and secretary of state:
It is indisputable to say anything other than the fact — let me just close this out — that Hillary Clinton, throughout her career, has levered the foreign policy of interventionism and being the world’s police, going and toppling dictators in other countries, that has caused such destruction and loss of life.
See the apparent contradiction here? Gabbard claims Gabbard is good because she has been in the US military and that Clinton is bad because Clinton has helped direct the military to do bad things. Indeed, Gabbard goes on to criticizes Clinton championing the Iraq War in which Gabbard was deployed. “I believed the lies that were told to us” to promote that war, says Gabbard.

Now that Gabbard recognizes those lies and opposes that war, how does she square her work in the US military in that war with her suggestion that she spent that time “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” Maybe she can. It would be interesting to hear her explanation.

How about the rest of Gabbard’s work in the US military? How has it advanced “protecting the safety, security, and the freedom of all Americans in this country?” An explanation would be helpful.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/the-apparent-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-tulsi-gabbard-s-presidential-campaign/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:38:27 GMT
Trump’s Syrian Oil Grab Risks WW3 – Daniel McAdams RPI Staff http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/07/trump-s-syrian-oil-grab-risks-ww3-daniel-mcadams/ Thu, 07 Nov 2019 05:35:23 GMT
Democrats' 'Star Witness' Admits He Wasn't On Trump-Ukraine Call, Sole Source Was NY Times Tyler Durden http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/

House Democrats have released the latest in the series of heavily-redacted transcripts of the secret hearings they had undertaken in recent weeks - that of Bill Taylor - the top US diplomat in Ukraine - ahead of his public testimony next week.

As The Hill notes, Taylor is viewed as a key witness who previously testified in meticulous detail about what he considered an effort by Trump and his allies to pressure Ukraine into opening investigations that would benefit Trump politically.

In leaked copies of his 15-page opening statement, Taylor voiced concerns that the Trump administration had withheld nearly $400 million in aid as leverage to get Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations into interference in the 2016 election and former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his leading 2020 political rivals.

Key excerpts include:

Taylor admits Ukraine's criminal justice system is "flawed"...

Isn't that a good reason to hold up aid to ensure that it is not corruptly flowing to the wrong entities?

Taylor also testified that his knowledge of the phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymr Zelensky wasn’t first-hand knowledge.
'And this isn’t firsthand. It’s not secondhand. It’s not thirdhand,' Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., said to Taylor. 'But if I understand this correctly, you’re telling us that Tim Morrison told you that Ambassador Sondland told him that the president told Ambassador Sondland that Zelensky would have to open an investigation into Biden?'

'That’s correct,' Taylor admitted.

'So do you have any other source that the president’s goal in making this request was anything other than The New York Times?' Zeldin asked.

'I have not talked to the president,' Taylor said. 'I have no other information from what the president was thinking.'
Additionally, as The Federalist notes, under questioning from Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Taylor also testified that the Ukrainian government wasn’t aware US military funding had been temporarily suspended until late August, and then only after the information was leaked to the news media, meaning an alleged quid pro quo would have been impossible.
'So, if nobody in the Ukrainian government is aware of a military hold at the time of the Trump-Zelensky call, then, as a matter of law and as a matter of fact, there can be no quid pro quo, based on military aid,' Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor, said.

'I just want to be real clear that, again, as of July 25th, you have no knowledge of a quid pro quo involving military aid.'

'July 25th is a week after the hold was put on the security assistance,' Taylor testified. 'And July 25th, they had a conversation between the two presidents, where it was not discussed.'

'And to your knowledge, nobody in the Ukrainian government was aware of the hold?' Ratcliffe asked.

'That is correct,' Taylor responded.
The Democrats may need a better witness.

Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge.
]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/06/democrats-star-witness-admits-he-wasnt-on-trump-ukraine-call-sole-source-was-ny-times/ Wed, 06 Nov 2019 23:08:48 GMT
President Trump: Send the US Military to Fight Drug Cartels in Mexico Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/

Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump, who has the unilateral power to send the United States military to bomb and invade other countries, as several of his predecessors have done, stated at Twitter that he is ready to send the US military to Mexico to defeat drug cartels.

Trump wrote:
This is the time for Mexico, with the help of the United States, to wage WAR on the drug cartels and wipe them off the face of the earth. We merely await a call from your great new president!

Making clear he is talking about a US military action, Trump declared in another Tuesday morning tweet that “the cartels have become so large and powerful that you sometimes need an army to defeat an army!”.

The truth, however, is that the drug war waged by the Mexico government, with the help of the US government, ensures the continued existence of powerful and dangerous drug cartels in Mexico. Similarly, when the US had alcohol prohibition, there were dangerous criminal enterprises that thrived from satisfying people’s demand for prohibited products.

Eliminating drug cartels can best be accomplished by ending, not growing, the drug war. Indeed, this is the course of action the Mexico government seems poised to pursue. Mexico President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who Trump referenced at Twitter, released this year a plan for Mexico to end its drug war. And the Mexico legislature appears to be preparing to take a major step toward ending the drug war — approving legislation to legalize marijuana countrywide.

I am guessing Obrador will not make the phone call Trump suggests. Obrador has available another, better avenue for dealing with drug cartels.

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/05/president-trump-send-the-us-military-to-fight-drug-cartels-in-mexico/ Tue, 05 Nov 2019 20:58:33 GMT
Jacob Hornberger Announces Run for Libertarian Party Presidential Nomination Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ wrote that it looked like Future of Freedom Foundation President Jacob Hornberger may run for president of the United States. As I noted then, many people familiar with the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity (RPI) have read some of Hornberger’s articles at the RPI website or watched one of his speeches at an RPI event. Here is an update: On Saturday, Hornberger announced he is seeking the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination.

You can watch Hornberger’s presidential campaign announcement video here:

]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/november/02/jacob-hornberger-announces-run-for-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:43:20 GMT
Ed Thompson’s 2002 Fight Against Marijuana Prohibition Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/

Reading a Wednesday article by Kyle Jaeger at Marijuana Moment, a quote from a Wisconsin state Assembly member who is a sponsor of a marijuana decriminalization bill struck me. Rep. David Crowley states at Twitter that the legislation “should have been passed years ago - but thanks to the inaction of our legislature, [Wisconsin] is now an island of antiquated drug policy in a sea of decriminalization."

The quote brought to mind the years 2001 and 2002 when I was in Wisconsin to help Ed Thompson with his governor campaign. Thompson, who ran as a Libertarian, made the legalization of medical marijuana a key campaign issue and supported recreational marijuana legalization as well.

A Rasmussen poll Thompson’s campaign commissioned found support for medical marijuana in the state was at 70 percent. However, to this day the state government has yet to allow the use of medical marijuana, much less adopt marijuana legalization generally.

Thompson, who had worked for a while in a Wisconsin state prison, would often talk on the campaign trail of his disgust at people who violated drug laws, including marijuana prohibition, being put in prison along with people who had committed violent crimes. He despised the entire drug war and proposed starting to dismantle it by taking on marijuana prohibition where public support could help him as governor overcome political inertia.

Thompson did not win that election, and sate marijuana law liberalization efforts in Wisconsin have had little success over much of the seventeen years since.

Then, last year, hemp, the low-THC cannabis Thompson championed the legalization of in his campaign, was legally harvested in Wisconsin for the first time in decades. Also, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, elected in November, is supporting significantly rolling back marijuana prohibition in the state, including via adopting medical marijuana legalization and marijuana decriminalization.

Hopefully, soon much more marijuana freedom will come to Wisconsin, and the state government will also chip away other parts of the drug war Thompson despised.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/october/30/ed-thompson-s-2002-fight-against-marijuana-prohibition/ Wed, 30 Oct 2019 19:46:10 GMT
Lawrence Wilkerson: Protecting Syrian Oil Is Not the Reason US Troops Are Staying in Syria Adam Dick http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/
“The real reason the Pentagon talked the president into not continuing with his withdrawal and leaving his US forces there is they are positioned to try and keep Iran from gaining any real foothold, vis-à-vis Israel in particular, in Syria and they’re also positioned to keep [Syria President] Assad honest with regard to his deal for autonomy for the Kurds whom we have sort of abandoned.”

Watch here Wilkerson’s complete interview in which he also discusses the killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and how the region around Syria “is getting ready to explode again” instead of becoming peaceful:



Wilkerson is an Academic Board member for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.]]>
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/congress-alert/2019/october/28/lawrence-wilkerson-protecting-syrian-oil-is-not-the-reason-us-troops-are-staying-in-syria/ Mon, 28 Oct 2019 22:05:29 GMT