Chuck Hagel Mauled in Bizarro World of US Senate

The confirmation hearing in the Senate for Chuck Hagel, President Obama’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, was painful to watch because it displayed the tomfoolery, pretense, self-righteous know-nothingism, and embarrassing lack of contact with reality that dominate the landscape of America’s broken democracy. It was like watching a Nebraska ordinary Joe set upon by circus freaks– a phalanx of moral midgets, stalking cat-men, vicious lobster boys and ethical werewolves.

Those who regretted that Hagel seldom stood his ground, often just deflected persnickety questions, and sometimes was made to recite the catechisms of Neoconservative orthodoxy, should remember that what is important in Washington is willingness to conform orally, regardless of what one actually believes or how one acts. Hagel might agree to look like he is being pushed around by his former colleagues, for the sake of their face and his. He won’t agree actually to be pushed around once he is in office.

Ted Cruz, a Texas tea partier who probably won’t be there after Texas turns blue in a few years, tried to carry out a Fox News-style ambush of Hagel. He played a 2009 Aljazeera interview of Hagel on the issue of nuclear disarmament.

At one point a caller called in from London with a rambling statement, who made an argument that there is a double standard, with the US and its allies free from international law on things like possessing and using nuclear weapons, whereas other countries are held to stricter standard. He said that this unequal application of the law was clear in that Omar al-Bashir, the president of Sudan, had been convicted of war crimes in Darfur by the International Criminal Court, but Israeli leaders, who had committed war crimes against the Palestinians, had been held harmless. He went on rambling, complaining about alleged war crimes the Sri Lankan government committed against the Tamil Tigers, then the host asked him for a question and to finish up. When Hagel responded, he began by saying he agreed with the caller’s point. It is obvious to me that he was agreeing that there had been a double standard, and he later said it should be overcome with regard to nuclear disarmament by the US and Russia taking the lead to reduce stockpiles. The caller had a thick accent and it wasn’t even clear that Hagel understood everything he said in his rant, much less meant to agree with it. Is Cruz saying that Hagel was agreeing about Sri Lanka, too?

The relevant bit begins at 6:26 minutes in:

Cruz insisted that Hagel should have disagreed with the caller about Israel having committed war crimes, given that Jews were victims of war crimes. Cruz is a truly bright and energetic man, with a Princeton education, who clerked for Rehnquist. He knows very well that he is lying about Hagel. And he knows that Israel is guilty of plenty of war crimes. He managed to make Hagel deny this obvious fact, however. Cruz’s performance underlines the importance of Christian Zionism in reinforcing the crackpot conviction in the US senate that it is impossible ever to say anything slightly negative about Israeli policy (the only country in the world so exempted).

Ironically, Cruz’s implausible grandstanding occurred on the same day when, as the New York Times headline put it, “U.N. Panel Says Israeli Settlement Policy Violates Law ”

Or how about “UN mission finds evidence of war crimes by both sides in Gaza conflict.”

In fact, a British court issued an arrest warrant for Tzipi Livni for her role in launching the attack on Gaza in 2008-9, and it is not clear that she can travel to the UK without fear of arrest. The charge, Senator Cruz? War crimes.

Ah, and then there is Lindsey Graham, the Red Queen of the Senate (who is the essence of the pedantic governess and asks through-the-looking-glass questions like: “Divide a loaf by a knife: what’s the answer to that?”).

Graham wanted to know why Hagel voted against the 2007 senate resolution declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps a terrorist organization.

The reason that was a dumb resolution is that terrorism is defined in the US civil code as the deployment of violence by a non-state actor against civilians for political purposes. Since the Revolutionary Guards are a kind of Iranian national guard, they are not a non-state actor. They are therefore not a terrorist organization. They may deploy terror, but it is state terror. (The senate also said they were terrorists because they were guilty of killing US troops in Iraq. First of all, there is no evidence that is true. Second of all, killing troops is not terrorism, it is an act of war). Graham’s position is illogical and makes a hash of any reasonable definition of terrorism.

Graham wants to pile on illogical charges against Iran and its institutions in order to force the US into a war on that country, which is 3 times more populous and much more geographically vast than Iraq. Because, like, Iraq went so well, I guess.

Then the Red Queen went after Hagel for having said that the “Jewish lobby” intimidates people. He demanded, “Name one person here who’s been intimidated by the Jewish lobby . . . Name one dumb thing we’ve been goaded into doing due to pressure by the Israeli or Jewish lobby.”

Hagel said he didn’t have anyone in mind.

The irony, of course, is that Graham is himself part of the Israel lobby, and there he was intimidating Hagel for complaining about having been intimidated!

All the congressmen and senators know that the Israel lobby intimidates them or tries to, on a daily basis. Ernst Hollings complained, “you can’t have an Israeli policy other than what AIPAC gives you around here.” AIPAC is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the de facto foreign agent of the Israeli government in the United States, which gets away with not having to register as such because it has bought off or intimidated Congress. 22-year Illinois veteran of congress Paul Findley has also complained about this. And, just read former AIPAC lobbyis M.J. Rosenberg regularly to get the inside scoop on how AIPAC pressures Congress, including against the president. As Graham knows, there is a whole book by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt about the Israel lobbies, which will soon be supplemented by further publications documenting all the … intimidation. The Israel lobbies work by threatening to give money to a rival in the next primary or election. Since races in many districts are close, and since there is no wealthy, organized lobby for the Palestinians or Arabs, it is crazy for a US politician to risk AIPAC’s ire. AIPAC doesn’t always win, and recognizing its effectiveness as a lobby is not to buy into the bigotted notion of Jews secretly controlling Gentiles. In fact, denying that the Israel lobby exists is not only willful blindness, it is itself a form of anti-Semitism, since such a denial depicts Jews as inherently unlike Cubans, Armenians, Indians, Latinos and all the other ethnic groups that lobby Congress.

The long arm of these lobbies is something about which I have a little personal experience.

Senator John McCain then attacked Hagel for having predicted that the surge or troop escalation ordered by George W. Bush would be a huge mistake. The Iraq War was fought under false pretenses (that the Saddam Hussein regime was two years from having a nuclear weapon and had big stores of biological and chemical weapons, and that it was behind the 9/11 attacks and trained al-Qaeda in the use of chemical weapons– all of these pretexts for war being wretched, bald-faced lies). The Neocons promised McCain’s committee a short inexpensive war of $60 billion, over within 6 months. Instead it turned into a quagmire that cost thousands of American lives and some 33,000 badly injured veterans who lead diminished lives. McCain was a cheerleader for the war, then a skeptic, then a cheerleader, and now he has decided that the troop escalation was a success.

If the ‘surge’ was a success, it was a minor one in a vast and pockmarked terrain of abject failure. But there are plenty of reasons to question the David Petraeus narrative of a successful surge. In Baghdad, the horrible civil war that killed tens of thousands in 2006 gradually subsided through 2007 mainly because the Shiites ethnically cleansed Sunnis from mixed neighborhoods. The US troop escalation was complicit here because it disarmed the Sunni neighborhood militias first, exposing them to night-time attacks by the still-armed Mahdi Army and Badr Corps. I have talked to Iraq vets who were on the ground and saw this process unfold with their own eyes; they say everyone knew that was what was happening. The turning of Baghdad into a largely Shiite city, while it tamped down violence, could hardly be called a big success (it had been about 50/50 Sunni and Shiite in 2002 before the Americans came).

The other element of the surge was the creation in al-Anbar Province and elsewhere of “Awakening Councils” or “Sons of Iraq,” essentially clan-based Sunni Arab militias willing to fight the Sunni-Muslim radicals who had asserted themselves in the Sunni Arab center-west of the country. Shiite prime minister Nouri al-Maliki opposed this program, which resulted in 80,000 armed Sunni militiamen, as a threat to the future public order in Iraq. After the violence began subsiding somewhat, he declined to bring more than about 9,000 of the Sons of Iraq into government security forces. The others were either cut off altogether or given small stipends. Some were hunted down and killed by the Muslim radicals, once they no longer had the protection of being in an organized unit. Some of the Sons of Iraq had been terrorists in 2005-2006, and al-Maliki refused to amnesty them, having them arrested and tried.

The big news from Iraq these days is precisely the continued discontent of Sunni Arab Iraqis, some of them (like the Abu Rishas) from families that had joined the Awakening Councils. They are demanding increased stipends for their service under Petraeus, demanding that hundreds of Sunni Arab youth arrested arbitrarily be released, demanding that the stigmatization of Sunni Arabs and the barring of them from public service be ended, and demanding that the pro-Iran, pro-Syrian, Shiite Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, step down.

So the “surge” didn’t account for the decline of violence in Baghdad, and its Awakening Councils created as many problems as they solved, and created expectations that continue to roil Iraqi politics and perhaps threaten a break-up of the country.

I’d say Chuck Hagel got it about right.

36 Responses

  1. It’s interesting to see how the Senate gets to intimidate one of their own veterans, especially one who is a Republican. This is even after reports that ‘Israel’ has mentioned that it has no problems with Hagel.* But, that could have been kissy-face, all the while knowing that supporters in the Senate would take on the ogrish troll roles. And, this is also knowing that Hagel has been through the process from the perspective of the dais, having listened to the private comments no one ever hears on the television.
    This is reminiscent of the impeachment hearing when Alan D accused Bob Barr of using ‘code words’ when he uttered something about ‘real Americans.’ We know all well that Alan D was using ‘code words’ by even mentioning ‘code words.’ (But who would accuse the lawyer of using language obliquely?)
    The Senators talking about influence and being right about Iraq and whatnot were obviously catering to their constituencies simply because of the statements they made and how they were making them. Any attacks on ‘Israel’ had the effect of sending a message to the White House about its perceived attitude and perspective with regard to the little country on the Eastern Mediterranean coast, in view of reports that there is conflict between the American President and his adversarial counterpart over there. It’s interesting that ‘Israel’ owes its existence to a U.N. mandate but is non-compliant with so many U.N. resolutions, even to the point of being chastised regularly and currently by the parent organisation.
    Hagel, on the other hand, seems to be holding his cards close to the vest, not revealing his hole cards too quickly or falling for bluffs and losing his stake in the whole affair. In so doing, he’s playing a better game of ‘Texas Hold ‘Em’ better than Cruz (who should probably being playing ‘Go Fish’) or the unmatched pouilleuse Graham (better at ‘Old Maid’**).

    * [Among many] link to
    ** link to

    • They weren’t catering to their constituents:
      1) Maybe 5-10% of Americans are following the Hagel nomination.
      2) Vast majority of Americans (70%) do not want the US to unilaterally strike ‘first’ in Iran (meaning without support of international body). The number of Americans who think Iraq was a mistake has been above 50% for years.

      The tragedy is that these people are representing their own little conservative-neoconservative club that refuses to accept the failure of the war in Iraq. How stupid to ask Hagel if he supported the surge when he’d come to the conclusion the entire war was a mistake. McCain should have had enough guts to ask him if he support the Bush war effort – them we might have had a good debate. Instead of brisk defense of his positions, Hagel was forced to be fuzzy and not fall into the trap (as you say) over-testifying when he opponents hold back.

      It must have been even more unnerving to Hagel to testify under such hostile questioning from former colleagues than it would be for most people.

      • The problem is that by being able to meaningfully influence 535 individual people (at most), in apparently inconsequential ways, US foreign policy can be essentially hijacked by an agenda that has nothing to do with its own best interests. And when the US sneezes the World catches cold.

        This influence was not the cause of Iraq, but there’s a BIG question of whether that would every have happened without the added weight (this is making the generous stipulation that the Neocons are a completely different force.)

        It isn’t just that there will never be any peace or resolution to the abuses associated with the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, but rather that things could get far, far worse, and they might well have a direct and profound impact on the well-being of otherwise uninvolved Americans.

        Its actually kind of hard to overstate how this influence is not just pernicious, but down-right dangerous to the World

  2. Interesting point about Tzipni Livni. Don’t forget Henry Kissinger can’t come and visit us in the UK without being threatened with arrest over his alleged war crimes in Cambodia.

  3. Being from SC, I had to smile at your title for Lindsey Graham, “The Red Queen.”

    I think back to the early days of the Obama administration when another patriot was maligned. As positions were being filled for the incoming Obama administration, Gen. Zinni’s name was brought up as a candidate to serve. The general was denied a position because Gen. Zinni dared to point out that because of the no fly zone, Saddam was boxed in and not a threat, making the invasion of Iraq totally unnecessary.

    It would have been a great moment in courage if Hagel had answered Graham by recounting a bragging comment made by Mr.Fox, the director of AIPAC. Fox reportedly held up a napkin and said, “If I need to, by noon I can have every senator’s signature on this napkin.” McCain and Graham know this to be a fact.

  4. Hagel was a bizarre confused mess, uncomprehending of geo-politics, unknowledgable about the President’s positions, and having to walk back about 3 dozen of his own previous statements. A complete embarrassment.

  5. I support Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Secretary of Defense and agree with most of his basic positions. (Although I disagreed then and now with his 2007 characterization of the “Surge” in Iraq as “the greatest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam.”)

    Nevertheless, I thought he performed poorly at the hearing. Yes, he was under fire, but he appeared hesitant, backtracked occasionally, and at times seemed much less sure-footed than I would have expected. I just did not think he appeared to be well-prepared for what he must have known would be some rough questioning.

  6. Often, the level of silliness in these hearings in inversely related to their importance.

    That the Republicans are indulging themselves so dramatically suggests to me that Hagel’s confirmation has all the votes it needs and then some.

    • Another good, and generally accurate point. Sadly, when the silliness does recede and the Congress as a whole at least tacitly condones it, you have a problem. My fear is that this is what may here happen.

    • Hagel’s nomination probably has the votes in the Senate as a whole, but he has to be voted out of the Armed Services Committee. All of the Republicans there are wingnuts who want us to bomb Iran or get Israel to do it for us.

  7. Anybody who votes for Chuck Hagel will end up getting the same kind of treatment from the ‘Israel lobby’ (note: the Israel lobby includes at least 98 of the 100 senators and at least 95% of the reps. In other words our government has become the ‘Israel lobby’.) Israel is not the 51st state as some people have claimed. It is in fact the 1st state, more than the equal of all the others put together.

    • This really is the Point. As was alluded to in the posting, it is only by a nuance of the legalities that Congress isn’t understood to be under the influence of foreign agents.

      AIPAC et al has a very explicit and designed focus, and a track record of success with the Congress. They begat WINEP to focus on the Executive Branch, and the success with which they have placed their people in the most critical policy making positions in the White House testifies to their power.

      The fight with Hagel is really over whether they are going to accept the perception that their power and influence has been diminished. The nomination has come to be seen in that way, and if successful the Congress might well start to think they don’t have to tow the line. That’s the sort of thinking that has to be stopped and why Hagel’s approval is hardly a gimme.

  8. An excellent analysis as always, but repeatedly calling Lindsey Graham a “Queen” is beneath you. There are plenty of things to criticize the senior Senator from SeCessionland about without having to go there.

    • I did not take this as gay bashing but as a characterization. Lewis Caroll’s red queen was “formal and strict, yet not unkindly; pedantic to the 10th degree” very much like Graham in his lawyerly mode.

  9. There is an amazing output of worthwhile, very informative articles by Juan Cole.

    Thanks very much.

  10. The USA should be thankful to the Republican Senators at the Hagel’s hearing: They managed to sanction open public discourse, (e.g. Juan Cole’s), on the USA-Israel relationship.

  11. My fave’ – as always – is the amazing Jeff Sessions. With all due respect to any of my southern brothers out there, but this putz is the poster boy for dumb, ignorant crackers. He’s also a congenital liar. Let’s turn back the clock to the Senate Judiciary hearings for Kagan & Sotomayor. He offered up and repeated specious arguments, saying he’d keep an open mind and judge the candidates by their answers. When they each answered the questions fairly , intelligently, and comprehensively, it mattered not. He voted like the petty poison political hack he is.

  12. The problem is that this nomination has come to be seen as a test of The Lobby’s influence, and its a fight they cannot afford to lose.

    At another moment it would not have been, but over the past few years obeisance to anything Israeli has been diluted, thanks to Mearsheimer/Walt and a variety of other commentators. It has now become possible to think the unthinkable, and the time has come for their power to be reasserted or lost.

    Judging from the intensity of posturing during this hearing, the focus of their attention must now have an incredible focus on the Congress, and stopping a nomination that at another moment would’ve been no big deal. Obama had to know he was going to get in a heck of a fight, and the stakes are huge.

    • Keep-an-eye-on-the-prize: Chuck Hagel’s central policy is to be sure we make sure that the GI’s life is sacrificed for a just cause only.

      • I don’t think Hegel’s concern is with just causes, but with the national interest. Which is exactly what we citizens should require. The case that just causes support the national interest exists, but not in all cases. Stopping Hitler was an extraordinary case because Hitler was propounding the economic model of a state turned into a pure predator, invading its neighbors, stripping their resources, then invading the next country over, to the ends of the Earth. It gets much tougher when you’re trying to distinguish our national interest in stopping ethnic cleansing in the Balkans versus stopping genocide in Rwanda. I think there was a difference, but it takes a tough-minded person to draw the distinction and stick to it. If Hegel can’t get this job because of an arrogant special interest group employing insane arguments, then forget about a rational accounting of national interest.

  13. Bravo Juan!

    “a phalanx of moral midgets, stalking cat-men, vicious lobster boys and ethical werewolves”

    I kept wishing he’d have ripped into them as well only to keep coming back to the realization that they were trying to bait him into exactly that.

    Revenge is a dish best served cold

  14. So much, once again, for the idiot hubris of the Late-Roman-Empire “world’s greatest deliberative body.” Subject, for a fistful of dollars, to the inevitably mortal tyranny of the minority:

    link to

    Of course, all that analysis requires accepting as a postulate that there’s this monadic entity called “foreign policy,” and I bet Schopenhauer or one of those guys could point out a whole lot of flaws in that notion. He did have some other insights that might throw some more shadow on the immediate issue:

    link to

    AIPAC and all the other special courtiers have mastered the relatively easy subversion of the institutions that are supposed generally to “promote the general welfare.” Organize, concentrate, metastasize. More money = more malignancy.

  15. The Senate Un-Israeli Activities Committee (SUAC) Grills Witness

    Sen. Graham asks Hagel the $64 question: “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the American Party of the United States?”

  16. “……..Cruz’s performance underlines the importance of Christian Zionism in reinforcing the crackpot conviction in the US Senate that it is impossible ever to say anything slightly negative about Israeli policy (the only country in the world so exempted).”

    Christian Zionism is a very real phenomenon in fundamentalist Christian churches in America. Thomas Friedman, the former New York Times Jerusalem correspondent, in his award-winning book “From Beirut to Jerusalem” correctly observed that these Christians do not identify with or necessarily care about Israel in a poltical sense, but believe that Israel’s creation in 1948 was fulfillment of divine prophecy and Israel proceeds toward future eschatological significance. Many Christian Zionists believe that the construction of the Third Temple is nearing and have corresponded and kept abreast of the actions of Rabbi Chaim Richman, the director of the Temple Institute, who is attempting to plan the building of the Third Temple. Friedman rightly points out that most Israeli leaders are not aware that the motivations of these Christians adherents arises not out of affinity to Israel but rather due to religious observance.

    Pastor John Hagee of Texas is a prime example of a Christian Zionist who in one of his books implied that Communism in post-war Germany was the punishment of Germans for the Nazi persecution of Jews, citing the fact that the height of fences of the Nazi concentration camps approximated the height of the physical partitions between the former East and West Germany. Hagee has attended pro-Israel fund-rasing functions and was applauded by former PM Yitzhak Rabin. Hagee has predicted that the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple and the necessary demolition of the Al-Aksa Mosque in Jerusalem will trigger catastrophic war between Jews and Muslims. Hagee has a huge following nationwide.

    The Christian Zionists are and have been a major political force in the U.S.; they believe that any criticism of Israeli policies is nothing less than anti-Christian and that Israel must be supported fully by America at all costs.

    The “Israel Lobby” is very real and powerful, however the Christian Zionists are also influential in America. It is the collective attitudes of these two groups which fuel the lack of accountability of Israel for war crimes and human rights violations and prevent meaningful peace discussions.

    • Earlier this week, on 1/29/13, the article “Hagee vs. Hagel; Christian Conservatives Mobilizing Against Hagel” detailed Pastor John Hagee’s Christians United For Israel(CUFI) organization and its attempts to derail the Hagel confirmation.

      See: link to

  17. “….a British court issued an arrest warrant for Tzipi Livni for her role in launching the attack on Gaza in 2008-9…”

    This is an attempt to invoke “universal jurisdiction” under international law.

    Nothing new here.

    Belgium had at one point charged Ariel Sharon with war crimes arising out of his role as defense minister during the Sabra and Shatila massacre during September of 1982.

    A key prosecution witness, Lebanese cabinet minister Elias Hobeika, was murdered after it was revealed he was cooperating with the Belgians in the case.

    NATO warned they would pull their headquaters out of Brussels unless the case was dropped.

    In the end, the law upon which Sharon was charged was repealed.

    There have been other unsuccessful attempts to prosecute Israeli officials in other jurisdictions for various offenses under international law.

  18. The saddest thing in all of the crazy TeaBagging/Neo-Con/MIC question’s was not one mention of one of the problems that the Sec. of Defense could do something about, the Rape Crisis Epidemic gripping the USA military. It was as if Hagel wasn’t even there, it was just all about further pursuit with the insane agenda of “Pax Americana” and all the babble that we hoped had died with the Bush Administration. So sad that these leaders have learned absolutely nothing from their abject idiotic policy failures. War is hell.

  19. One of the most sickening things about the hearings was the indignation shown towards Hagel ‘s concern about the Palestinians. Concern about Palestinians is a crime in DC.

    Even if he gets thru, the pro-Israel lobby will have gotten what it wanted from the hearings-to show who is in charge, and what fate aw sits apostates.

    • So Bob….

      Do you really think the lobby is going to be satisfied by pushing Hagel around for an hour or two, then allowing the nomination to go through?

      Methinks they have to make an example of him, to re-establish their authority in the US and abroad, after the Obama win (against which Netanyahu worked) and the (modest) erosion of right-wing influence following the Israeli election.

      Think of it another way: where will they find their influence over Congress and US Middle East policy be if they allow it to be perceived an action not to their benefit was allowed to go through?

    • It is all politics.

      In Metro Detroit, with its large Arab population, there is sgnificant supportby local Congressmen for Palestinian issues in particlular and Arab matters in general.

      Former U.S. Representative David Bonior once announced he would not vote for a routine symbolic resolution supporting Israel because it ignored the suffering of the Palestinian people; Congressmen John Conyers of Detroit and John Dingell also voted against that resolution – which easily passed the House. The story of the failure of these three Congressmen to vote for this resolution made the Associated Press wire.

      • The more I read the more I can see this as being mere theatre…. Still, in context and on balance, its hard to see Hagel passing through that easily: the stakes, all things considered, are too high. I don’t think we’ve heard the last of Hagel’s “suitability” by a long-shot.

        Again, not unrelated to this, see the fight shaping up between Glenn Greenwald and Alan Dershowitz over Brooklyn College. link to

        My general over-made point is that public perceptions are beginning to turn against those who could previously take them pretty much for granted. Whenever a person or group starts to loose their grip you will see some sort of push-back, and with these guys it is impossible to see it as half-hearted; perhaps tactically adroit, but not complacent. Elliott Abrams may have fired his shots prematurely on NPR, but there is plenty where that came from, the only question being how that clout stands to be exercised.

        Stay tuned.

  20. To me, it’s fascinating to watch the American people indoctrinated into treating Israel as an extension of their own values surrounded by the dark-skinned “Other”. Precisely because most people haven’t considered Middle Eastern issues in any factual depth, they react to their emotions. What emotions are at work here?

    This is why I wanted to know how the Tea Party in Congress would deal with Hegel, whose foreign policy is the closest thing they will ever get to their supposed hero Ron Paul. Since the real TP maniacs are in the House, we won’t get to find out unless Hegel is confirmed. But I’ve long suspected that under their supposed libertarian, isolationist skins, most are just Christian Zionists, white supremacists, and imperialists who not only wish to return America, but the entire world, to the 19th Century by force to resolve their unquenchable paranoia.

  21. The level of gasbaggery (to borrow from the great Matt Taibbi) of these neocons only shows how desparately they are clinging to the status quo.

    The truth is that the tide is turning on the Israelis and the Israel lobby. The United Nations just called them out on their illegal settlements, the world outside of the United States is rejecting their claims, and the Palestinians have begun using the nonviolent tactic of setting up camps on seized lands, so that the Israelis are pointing their guns at women and children and showing their brutality on a regular basis – all documented for the whole world to see. It is a British-v-Ghandi moment, and all the phone calls to Congresspersons by Roger Ailes in the world is not going to change the course of history!

Comments are closed.