TRUMP’S ENERGY PLAN: ‘We must take advantage of the estimated $50 trillion in untapped shale, oil, and natural gas reserves’
Shortly after the inauguration of President Donald Trump, the White House posted the administration’s “America First Energy Plan” on its website.
While the plan lacks specifics about implementation, it lays out a foundation for US energy policy for at least the next four years.
Key highlights from the plan include:
- Eliminating “harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the US rule,” which would increase American wages by more than $30 billion over the next seven years, according to the administration.
- Embracing US shale and gas and taking advantage of “the estimated $50 trillion in untapped shale, oil, and natural gas reserves.” US shale has finally become cash flow neutral after years of living on debt.
- Having a commitment to clean coal technology. States like West Virginia and Pennsylvania have been devastated by the collapse of the coal industry.
- Eliminating US dependence on “the OPEC cartel and any nations hostile to our interests.” While the US has eliminated a good portion of its foreign dependence, it still imports 9.4 million barrels a day, according to 2015 data from the US Energy Information Administration.
- Protecting our environment.
Here’s the whole plan:
“Energy is an essential part of American life and a staple of the world economy. The Trump Administration is committed to energy policies that lower costs for hardworking Americans and maximize the use of American resources, freeing us from dependence on foreign oil.
“For too long, we’ve been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry. President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the US rule. Lifting these restrictions will greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years.
“Sound energy policy begins with the recognition that we have vast untapped domestic energy reserves right here in America. The Trump Administration will embrace the shale oil and gas revolution to bring jobs and prosperity to millions of Americans. We must take advantage of the estimated $50 trillion in untapped shale, oil, and natural gas reserves, especially those on federal lands that the American people own. We will use the revenues from energy production to rebuild our roads, schools, bridges and public infrastructure. Less expensive energy will be a big boost to American agriculture, as well.
“The Trump Administration is also committed to clean coal technology, and to reviving America’s coal industry, which has been hurting for too long.
“In addition to being good for our economy, boosting domestic energy production is in America’s national security interest. President Trump is committed to achieving energy independence from the OPEC cartel and any nations hostile to our interests. At the same time, we will work with our Gulf allies to develop a positive energy relationship as part of our anti-terrorism strategy.
“Lastly, our need for energy must go hand-in-hand with responsible stewardship of the environment. Protecting clean air and clean water, conserving our natural habitats, and preserving our natural reserves and resources will remain a high priority. President Trump will refocus the EPA on its essential mission of protecting our air and water.
“A brighter future depends on energy policies that stimulate our economy, ensure our security, and protect our health. Under the Trump Administration’s energy policies, that future can become a reality.”
An invitation has been extended to the Trump administration to participate in Syrian peace talks later this month, a process from which the Obama administration was deliberately excluded.
President-elect Donald Trump has received invitation by Russia to Syrian peace talks set to commence in late January, reports claim.
An anonymous transition official speaking with the Washington Post outlet, confirmed the invitation was made during a Dec. 28 phone call between Russia’s ambassador in Washington D.C., Sergey Kislyak, and Michael T. Flynn, Trump’s prospective national security adviser.
Turkish and Iranian representatives are expected to attend the talks scheduled to tentatively commence Jan. 23, in Astana, the capital city of Kazakhstan. According to Turkish media on Friday, although the anonymous official stated that “no decision was made” during the call, an official spokesman for President Erdogan confirmed the United States will attend.
“It remains unclear which of the non-terrorist opposition groups, variously backed by the United States, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others in the region, will attend the talks,” the Post writes.
Previously, a meeting between Iran, Russia and Turkey in Moscow on Dec. 20 to discuss the cessation of the Syrian conflict declined to extend the invitation to the Obama administration.
The six-year confrontation in Syria has placed the Assad government – and its allies Iran and Russia – against the Syrian opposition, backed by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, including al-Qaeda-allied fighters. Last year saw a leadership battle between Moscow and Washington, both accusing the other side of sabotaging peace talk efforts for the war-torn nation.
The Post noted how “U.S. participation, especially if an agreement is reached, would be the first indication of the enhanced U.S.-Russia cooperation that President Vladimir Putin and President-elect Donald Trump have forecast under a Trump administration.”
Contrary to the reports of the Kislyak-Flynn phone call, Flynn downplayed the context as an exchange of “Merry Christmas” texts and a request by Kislak for a phone conversation post Trump’s inauguration to discuss the tabled meeting in Kazakhstan.
“That was it, plain and simple,” Flynn stated.
A self-confessed pragmatist on Russia, Rex Tillerson, the Secretary of State nominee said on Wednesday that “Russia, Syria, Turkey and Iran are dictating the terms of how things are going to play out in Syria today, absent our participation.” He further called for the U.S. engagement in the Syrian conflict to be increased and made it known that Russia is not a friend of the U.S. but could be a partner.
Trump during his campaign, repeatedly questioned the rebels’ ideological stance in the Syrian war, and called for an increased United States-Russian cooperation in the fight against ISIS.
Meanwhile, Turkey who has coordinated the Jan. 23 talks with Russia agrees that the United States should be present for the slated discussions.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said Thursday “The United States should definitely be invited, and that is what we agreed with Russia … Nobody can ignore the role of the United States.”
Signed less bills into law than one-term Carter
Source: The Washington Times
President Obama oversaw the deepest legislative malaise in modern political history, according to the Washington Times Legislative Index, which captures his struggles to find ways to work with a Congress that ranged from lukewarm to openly hostile toward him.
Over the course of his eight years, he has signed just 1,227 bills into law — less, even, than one-term Presidents Carter and George H.W. Bush. Digging deeper into the numbers, Congress spent less time in session, handled less business on the chamber floors and generally sputtered for much of Mr. Obama’s tenure, according to The Times’ index.
Blame for the poor showing falls across Washington. Some analysts say a Congress with four years of divided control hamstrung Mr. Obama, while others say the president failed to find ways to work with the legislature that voters gave him — particularly after the 2010 elections.
“The president was never good at reaching across the aisle. So when the composition of Congress changed relative to what it was in his first two years, he wasn’t able to accommodate that very well,” said Andrew Busch, a presidential scholar at Claremont McKenna College in California. “He never accustomed himself to operating in a system where he was not the sole player.”
It’s all the more stunning for Mr. Obama having emerged from the legislature himself, having served first in the Illinois Statehouse and then in the U.S. Senate, where he spent two years in a Republican-controlled Congress and two years in a Democrat-run Congress.
He was the first president since John F. Kennedy to make the leap directly from Capitol Hill to the White House, but he took a mostly hands-off approach, leaving his former colleagues on their own to hash out the details of bills.
“Could he have potentially reached out more? I think that’s a fair criticism,” said Joshua C. Huder, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute.
But he said lawmakers on Capitol Hill were putting up more roadblocks than they did to previous presidents — particularly when power was split in the House and Senate in the 112th and 113th congresses.
The White House didn’t respond to repeated requests for comment, but Mr. Obama, in his farewell speech, ticked off a list of accomplishments: working on the economy, bolstering the auto industry, opening diplomatic relations with Cuba, striking a nuclear deal with Iran, ordering the assault that killed Osama bin Laden, arguing for same-sex marriage in the courts and enacting Obamacare. Of those, only health care and the economy required work with Congress.
Mr. Obama’s best years were in 2009 and 2010, when his fellow Democrats held massive majorities in both the House and Senate. He achieved legacy-defining laws including Obamacare, the 2009 stimulus and a new set of rules for Wall Street in the Dodd-Frank legislation.
But even accounting for those big bills, the 111th Congress was still far from active by standards of the post-World War II era. The 383 bills signed into law made it the sixth least productive Congress on record. Even measured by the broader Times Legislative Index, it was middle of the pack.
The 2010 elections put Republicans in control of the House but left Democrats with a majority in the Senate, sending legislative activity into a tailspin for the next four years.
The 112th and 113th congresses were the worst on record, according to the The Times’ index, which checks a broad set of legislative measures, including amount of time spent in session, number of bills considered by each chamber, number of votes taken and number of bicameral conference reports approved. The index is based on data from the Congressional Record, which tracks back to 1947 and spans 35 Congresses.
Even in 2015, when Republicans gained control of the Senate and kept control of the House, things were still stagnant, notching the third-worst Congress in The Times’ Index.
Democrats say that’s evidence that the problem lay with a Republican Party determined to deny Mr. Obama any major accomplishments.
By comparison, they pointed to the final two years under President George W. Bush, when Democrats controlled Congress and found ways to work on a number of big issues. Indeed, the 110th Congress placed in the top third in The Times index, passing a major energy bill, a first stab at an economic stimulus, a minimum wage increase and a new GI bill to send veterans from the war on terrorism back to school.
Mr. Obama never found that common ground with congressional Republicans, however, leaving a striking list of unaccomplished goals: major tax reform, a legacy-building Pacific trade deal, a long-sought immigration overhaul and climate change legislation.
Despite his most fervent pleas, Mr. Obama failed to make any headway on gun control, Mr. Huder said.
“That’s something that he really, really pushed. He put in a lot of effort,” he said.
Stymied in Congress, Mr. Obama took steps on his own instead.
On gun control, he expanded the universe of people who faced background checks on gun purchases. On global warming, he imposed a series of regulations meant to phase out much of the fossil-fuel-based economy. On immigration, he announced two deportation amnesties, a 2012 policy aimed at protecting hundreds of thousands of so-called Dreamers and a 2014 policy aimed at as many as 4 million illegal immigrant parents.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest, in his final daily briefing, blamed Republicans for forcing Mr. Obama to act unilaterally.
“We ran into a brick wall of opposition when it comes to Republicans when they took power in 2011,” he said. “And so we didn’t pass as much legislatively as we would have liked to have done, but the president did use his executive authority to advance our country’s interests and to advance the agenda that he was seeking to implement.”
In response to Rosie O’Donnell trying to delay Donald Trump’s upcoming inauguration, Fox News Channel “Justice” host Judge Jeanine Pirro had a message for Hollywood liberals and Washington D.C. Democrats Saturday.
After noting how Hollywood is known for being so inclusive, Pirro told liberals, from Hollywood to D.C., to swallow their pride because Trump will be president, telling them to just “deal with it.”
Partial transcript as follows:
Rosie, since when are you the bastion of brilliant behavior? Why don’t you put on your big girl pants and come to grips with the fact that Donald Trump is your next president and you are either with him or against America. If you don’t like him, campaign harder next time. And let this be a wake-up call to you and your Hollywood friends that you don’t speak for America. By the way, isn’t Hollywood supposed to be inclusive and accepting of the views of people who don’t look or talk or act like them?
[N]ewsflash, and this isn’t fake news, the people in middle America, some of whom ride a tractor for a living, wear the same boots every day, wear a badge, go overseas not knowing if they will come home are sick and tired of your nonsense — you know, the silent and forgotten men and women of America who rose up against you bozos and your candidate. It’s about time you accepted them and respected them for their hard work, sacrifice and, yes, even their investment in your movies, TV shows and records.
From the liberal D.C. politician to the liberals in Hollywood, my message, actually America’s message, is the same. You lost, we won, swallow your pride, get in line, stop thinking you are so damn important that the world has to stop and listen to your revolutionary nonsense. Your candidate just didn’t cut the mustard. Donald J. Trump is the president for the next four years. Deal with it.
The Washington Post wrote on Friday that President-elect Donald J. Trump “fired” the commanding General of the D.C. National Guard who is heading up the military presence during the coming inaugural event — in the middle of the oath of office ceremony. Yet a second story on Saturday did not contain the claim.
The Post’s original report set off a wave of stories across the world, causing raised eyebrows over Trump’s “extremely unusual” decision to fire a general in the middle of the presidential oath of office ceremony, especially during these dangerous times.
The paper reported that Major General Errol R. Schwartz, who has commanded the D.C. National Guard since his appointment to the position by George W. Bush, was told to vacate his office the moment Trump says his “I dos” to the oath of office. The decision was presented to readers as unfathomable, if not dangerous, by a president who doesn’t know what he is doing.
In an interview, General Schwartz told the paper that his firing was strange. “The timing is extremely unusual,” the general said.
“My troops will be on the street,” Schwartz continued. “I’ll see them off, but I won’t be able to welcome them back to the armory.” The general added he would “never plan to leave a mission in the middle of a battle.”
The paper went on to quote Democrat D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson as saying, “It doesn’t make sense to can the general in the middle of an active deployment.”
The paper concluded its speculation, saying, “Schwartz said that he has not been told why he was asked to step down. ‘I’m a soldier,’ he said, noting that he was following orders and has no regrets. ‘I’m a presidential appointee, therefore the president has the power to remove me.’”
An earlier version of the story can still be seen at Stars And Stripes.
The fact is, of course, that the commander of the D.C. National Guard serves at the pleasure of the president and is not put in place by the Pentagon or any of the federal branches of the military.
But the Post’s early reporting on the “firing” of General Schwartz contains no statements from the Trump transition office and also leaves out key points such as the fact that the general of the D.C. National Guard traditionally supplies his letter of resignation to every new president who is about to take office.
Subsequent to the publishing of the paper’s story making Trump appear incompetent, news emerged that the incoming Trump administration offered to let General Schwartz keep his position through inauguration day, but it was the general himself who refused the offer, preferring instead to quit at 12 noon on January 20, the hour Trump takes his oath of office.
The general then ran straight to the media to “argue his case in the press,” as a recent Fox News report noted.
In essence, while the incoming Trump White House did accept General Schwartz’ resignation, it did not “fire him” in “the midst of the presidential ceremony,” as the Washington Post reported on Friday.
Meanwhile, on the day after its initial publication, the Post made material edits to its story. And as of press time, the paper had not added any notice that it had made the alterations.
The current version of the story now on the paper’s website added two important paragraphs that change the flavor of its earlier story.
Among other changes, one of the paragraphs added makes it clear that it is customary for such generals to submit their resignation, and in this case Trump accepted it. The paragraph also tries to cover for the paper’s poor reporting by insisting that the Trump team “provided contradictory versions” of the general’s situation — another fact not in the original story.
Despite its changes, the Washington Post story did not contain the statement — aired by Fox News on Saturday — that the transition had asked the general to stay until inauguration day was over, but it was the general who decided to quit. According to the Fox News report, “It appears the general would rather argue his case in the press.”
Schwartz, who started his Army career in 1976 but has never seen a deployment to a theater of war, was appointed to head the D.C. Guard by George W. Bush in 2008. According to his bio page, he was first commissioned in 1979 and has served his entire career in the D.C. Guard. Schwartz has a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering and a Master of Science in Business Management.
This is far from the first time the paper made a big splash with a story only to quietly rewrite it the next day when it found its assertions in question. The Washington Post recently courted charges of “fake news” when it published the shocking story that the Russians hacked and infiltrated the computer systems of a Vermont power plant. By the next day, the paper completely rewrote its story, disavowing that any hack took place.
Can we agree slavery is a horrible atrocity? Can we agree the United States never created slavery; it has existed for centuries? Can we agree it is historical fact the first slave owner in the early years of our country was a Black man?
Can we agree the “slave trade” was largely started by rival tribes warring in Africa for land and to eliminate the their enemies they sold captured men and boys to the highest bidder, including fellow Black Muslims. Can we agree there are other races who were subjugated into slavery along with Blacks including the Chinese and White Irish?
But mostly, can we, ALL THE PEOPLE, liberal, conservative, Black, White, agree sins of the father should not be burdened upon the son, or in this case the sons and daughters of the forefathers. One would think we can agree on these facts, but apparently not.
Progressive Soros leftists are joining radical activists who openly hate the US, in stirring the racial pot; creating more animosity between Americans at a time we should be uniting as a nation to fight the real threats to our sovereignty.
The latest tactic is being played out in the House of Representatives, one tried before but failed to achieve a legal goal, yet succeeded in keeping racial conflict thriving; a reparations bill that will force White Americans to pay the descendants of slaves.
Was not the cost of thousands of lives, Black and White, enough payment to end slavery in this country? Are we willing to put a price on those lives, and pay their descendants for making the ultimate sacrifice? According to Progressive Dems, “Only Black Lives Matters,” not the descendants of Chinese and White Irish slaves who are exempted from the bill along with all those American lives lost in the bloodiest war of our history.
The Federalist Papers reports, every Congress for the past twenty years has introduced a “reparations” bill, the latest coming form Progressive Dem, MI Rep. John Conyers. Though yet to be introduced to the House floor, Conyers is clear in his objectives; reparations to individual Blacks, and force White Americans to officially apologize.
What “victims?” Not one Black American living today was ever a slave, and not one White American has ever been a slave owner. So exactly who are the “victims” of this atrocious “crime” and who are the “criminals” who committed the act against them? Neither exists in today’s society and haven’t for decades but that does not stop those who wish to take down this country.
Joining Conyers to punish White America, is the Black Caucus, who is heavily supported by radical activists and Marxist organizations. Non-profit tax-exempt organizations created by Marxist Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and former Obama advisor turned CNN host, Communist Van Jones.
The richest and most powerful instigator pouring gasoline on the racial fire? George Soros. How ironic a White Jewish man is spending billions of dollars from his many “non-profit” organizations to fan the flames of racial division. To what purpose?
Could it be one of many angles this evil, diabolical former Nazi is using to take down the US and force its citizenry into a new system of slavery; one in which the elite ruling class will subjugate billions of individuls into “their” servetude under the New World Order? Naaa, that is just a crazy conspiracy theory, right? Wrong.
History shows when a nations’ people are divided it opens the door to oppressive dictatorial forms of government. The Soros led Democratic party has been implementing the Alinsky model for years to tear down US social bedrocks, destroy the Constitution and with it, states and individual rights. Since the end of the Civil War Progressive eugenists racists have been pandering and using Black Americans to achieve the ultimate goal; total dismantling of the United States as a sovereign nation and annihilation of “inferior” races.
Through indoctrination and revisionist history, the Progressives have subjugated the Black community into a new form of slavery; one that oppressions young black people into a life of government dependency by imprisoning them into government ran housing complexes and then infiltrating the complexes with drugs and crime.
Creating an entire generation of dependence on welfare and food stamps, all the while whispering into their ears, how the White man is to blame instilling fear and hatred. By enforcing “unfair legislation and regulations” they claim will raise up the Black community from poverty but are only designed to create racial divide.
For decades young Black Americans have been lied to over and over. Many have never heard of the Blacks who served as judges and government town leaders in the early years of this country. Many have never been told the Black Americans who were elected to and served in the US House of Representatives immediately after the Civil War; Black men assigned Federal judgeships or that the military was de-segregated until Eugenist Marxist President Woodrow Wilson grabbed power.
A Progressive Democrat, Wilson’s first official act as president was to re-segregate the military and replace all Black Judges with fellow like-minded eugenists. Most Black Americans don’t realize it is the Democratic party who enslaved them with Jim Crowism and fought against equal rights until a Republican sponsored bill was passed to stop racism in this country, The Civil Rights Bill.
Yet, sadly, due to the Progressive Dems’ usurpation of the education system, most Black Americans identify themselves as Democrats and vote such; the very party and leaders whose goal is to subjugate them back into slavery or eliminate the race entirely through eugenics programs such as Planned Parenthood. They are not told the highest abortion rate is in the Black community where the majority of Planned Parenthood clinics operate.
No, reparations will not be paid to anyone. The Bill’s purpose is to fan the flames of racial divide; to prevent ALL Americans from uniting to thwart the end goal, subjugation of us ALL.
Us “deplorables” are actually on your side Black America. We are all equal in the eyes of God and are ALL Americans. Great leaders like Martin Luther King JR, Frederick Douglas and the late prolific writer Maya Angelou understood and fought oppression of All people from tyrannical government.
“Let us gather together”, as Angelou wrote in her trilogy, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.” Let us unite as one race, under one country, “These United States of America,” before freedom is lost to ALL Americans.
Sen. Tim Cruz and Sen. Lindsey Graham have banded together to introduce a bill that will effectively defund payments from the USA to the United Nations. Currently, the budget for operations is split among the member nations, with the USA paying a disproportionately large segment of the bills. Yet, Cruz and Graham have decided that the recent resolution passed by the United Nations against Israel – namely, its alarming declaration that the settlements in East Jerusalem and on the West Bank are illegal – is not something that should go unanswered.
The problem erupted December 23 when the resolution was passed, and the Obama administration – which abstained from voting – responded as if it had been a day like any other day at the United Nations.
It was the combination of a cavalier response from the Obama administration and the disproportionate terms of the resolution that prompted nothing less than outrage by Americans who have long stood by our friendship with Israel as a staple of USA-Middle East foreign policy.
This was yet another chapter in the shenanigans Obama has been pulling as he nears the end of his term in office. Suddenly, the USA is reversing its long-held policy regarding Israel, the Russians are the biggest threat to our security, and it is high time to implement a federal policy on cyber terrorism.
Really? All in the last eight weeks of his administration? Obama is at his passive-aggressive best, but anyone who looks for themselves can easily detect this was all part of a plan to leave Trump in a lurch. Obama has been quietly messing with US policy on Israel, reversing his claim that Russia has not been a threat to our security since the cold war ended, and now he says for the first time we need to formulate a USA policy on cyber terrorism.
All of this comprises more drastic activity than perhaps the entire last two years of his administration combined. No-drama-Obama is on a tear, and no doubt satisfied with himself for kicking up so much dust on the way out.
The United Nations resolution walked back several assumptions that had been agreed upon between Israel and the USA for decades – several extremely important assumptions. For example, the West Wall is acclaimed as the single most important religious site in the Jewish religion. Obama made a big point of getting a photo op wearing a yarmulke and praying in front of the West Wall in 2008. Yet, the recent resolution stipulates that the Western Wall is actually part of Palestine.
Furthermore, Israel immediately accused the USA of being behind the resolution, even though the USA had abstained from the vote. The USA has veto power in the United Nations, and could have shut down the resolution by simple rejecting it.
These two aspects of the United Nations resolution, the egregious rejection of previous assumptions that had long been held as sacred by Israel and its allies, as well as the sudden appearance and passing of the resolution with no USA supervision or foreknowledge of it, were the focus of the outrage.
However, the anti-United Nations sentiment from Cruz and Graham goes deeper. The heartfelt criticism of the United Nations is itself based on two wider points of interest. First, according to FOX News, “The U.N. General Assembly adopted 20 anti-Israel resolutions this year, while passing just four for the rest of the world – one for North Korea, one for Syria, one for Iran and one for Russia.”
It is impossible for any reasonable person to believe that Israel is the seat of evil on the planet, and deserves to have twenty resolutions against it compared to only one a piece for countries like N. Korea, Syria, Iran, and Russia. It is as if the United Nations is saying by its actions that Israel is twenty times more of a threat to world security than N. Korea or Iran, for example.
Second, in the United Nations budget that is shared by the world community of member nations, there is a system that allots payments of each country according to the wealth of the nation. For example, in this scheme, 35 member nations pay approximately .001 percent of the regular budget, which equals $28,269 each. There are 20 member nations paying approximately .0001 percent of the minimum peacekeeping assessment of $8,470 each. Yet while these countries get a big break on the price of being a member of the United Nations, the USA covers 22 percent of the United Nations budget – $622 million – and 28 percent of the peacekeeping budget – $2.402 billion.
The bottom line? America is paying way more than its fair share of the United Nations budget and peacekeeping operations. The USA is covering a whopping 22% of the United Nation’s budget for operations and peacekeeping, and Cruz and Graham are sending a message on behalf of a lot of Americans: defund the United Nations until and unless it reverses the Israel resolution of December 23, 2016.
Here is the payoff for the USA: while member nations are routinely paying small fractions of one percent of the United Nations operational budget and peacekeeping missions, the USA outshines and out pays everyone. However, the United Nations summarily passed numerous resolutions against Israel, while it refuses to pass similar resolutions against Thailand, for example, which is well-known for being a source, transit, and destination country for human trafficking.
Perhaps it is not widely known, but the United Nations has instituted an Office to Monitor and Combat Human Trafficking in Persons. Every year, it publishes a listing of all the member nations and it places them in Tier, Tier 2, or Tier 3. Tier 3 is reserved for those countries with the most unacceptable human trafficking violations.
The following countries are on Tier 3, and absolutely nothing has been done in the form of resolutions or sanctions against them:
Tier 3: United Nations members guilty of worst human trafficking offenses in 2016
- Central African Republic
- Equatorial Guinea
- The Gambia
- Korea, North
- Marshall Islands
- Papua New Guinea
- South Sudan
Countries on Tier 3 receive no punishment from the United Nations – just a warning. Since 2001, the United Nations has supposedly been dedicated to fighting human trafficking – so what? Who cares? Not even the United Nations cares. It has bigger fish to fry – like Israel.
The United Nations has no right to allow human rights violations to take place every day, with no resolutions or sanctions imposed on many countries around the world, while it lauds a pretense to power in an attempt to dismantle Israel in front of the whole world. This is one of those rare moments in national politics when the actions of Sen. Cruz and Sen. Graham have actually created a platform that will unite many Americans. As Sen. Cruz noted, this issue goes beyond party lines and it stands to unite all Americans who are friends of Israel.