Rosenstein Above The Law Because He Works For Justice? Acceptance A Two Edged Sword?

Rosenstein is being duplicitous because Congress has every right, acting through one of its constitutionally established committees, to obtain documents in a timely fashion. If there is a reasonable dispute because the documents sought pertain to a current investigation and/or law suit then  a meeting to work out the dispute is mandatory.  For Rosenstein to believe he can be above the law of the very aganecy he is employed by that enforces the law is bizarre at best. (See 1 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have always maintained acceptance can be a two edge sword.

It is nice to be part of society and to be able to feel included. Mankind wants to be wanted.  That is a natural emotional feeling.

On the other hand, being accepted dilutes one's defensive mechanisms, weakens one's connection with his own and often results in a fear of speaking out against the crowd.

In the case of American Jewry, social and business acceptance has caused a sharp reduction in giving by Jews to Jewish causes.  Furthermore, it has weakened Jewish attitudes towards defending Israel for fear of social ostracism and now that there is a growing Muslim influence and spread of hatred towards Israel, because it has prospered, is strong and has been able to defeat its enemies, standing up for Israel carries a social stigmatic cost.

I am an unabashed Zionist who believes, as with all other ethnic and/or religious groups, Israel too has a right to exist, was legally established as a homeland for Jews. is a democratic nation that has brought untold benefits to mankind unlike the many partitioned Arab/Muslim nations which have brought untold misery. That these nations and peoples were foot-balled and exploited by Colonialism is a tragic fact .  That said, this is no excuse for them remaining a cancer and seeking to return to the 7th century. There comes a time to lay aside hatred and make a positive contribution to world betterment.

Carter's apartheid comments and Obama's antipathy towards Netanyahu were used as a subtle club with which to bash Israel, challenge its legitimacy and continue to turn the world against it and though Israel has weathered the storm its survival always seems threatened. Iran now seeks Israel's total annihilation so the Ayatollah's can focus their citizen's attention away from their misery and subjugation. The world always needs a victim.

In November I am bringing Avi Jorisch to Savannah to speak about his recent book about Jewish Innovation. More on that as we get closer to the date of his presentation. (See 2, 2a and 2b below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This from a dear friend and fellow memo reader who, with her husband, are retired Bobbies. They now run a B and B.

She sends me e mails from time to time that always reveal that wonderful, droll sense of British humor. (See 3 below.)

And:

Sent to me by a very dear friend and fellow memo reader.  This is what nostalgia means. (See 3a below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The globalist, Soros, wants to de-border America and funds our State Department's interference in other nations which makes a mockery of our allegations about Russian collusion and interference..

I am a modest contributor to Global Watch.(See 4 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Rod Rosenstein Protests

The deputy attorney general’s intemperate attack on Congress.

The Editorial Board

Rod Rosenstein this week invoked an unusual defense to explain his slow-walking of documents to Congress. “They should understand by now that the Department of Justice is not going to be extorted,” Mr. Rosenstein said. “We’re going to do what’s required by the rule of law, and any kind of threats that anybody makes are not going to affect the way we do our job.”

The deputy attorney general was reacting to reports that some Republicans are drafting articles of impeachment against him if he doesn’t comply with subpoenas. His choice of the word “extorted” is illuminating. Mr. Rosenstein is right to say Justice and FBI aren’t obliged to “just open our doors to allow Congress to come and rummage through the files.”

But that isn’t happening here. In the cases at hand, Congress is acting through its committees as a separate and co-equal branch of government—the branch that funds Justice and has the right and obligation to exercise oversight. Congress is making specific requests regarding specific questions and documents.

As for the articles of impeachment, these too are expressions of Congress’s power. The practical worth of contempt and impeachment actions is less about removing an official from power than leverage to encourage cooperation. We had a demonstration of how this works in January, when Mr. Rosenstein and the new FBI director, Christopher Wray, tried to make an end run around the House Intelligence Committee’s subpoenas for information about the Steele dossier on Donald Trump. Only when Speaker Paul Ryan said Congress would hold them in contempt if they didn’t comply did they turn over the documents.

Mr. Rosenstein’s irritation might be warranted if the documents produced so far demonstrated that Congress’s demands were frivolous or imperiled national security. But remember how Justice warned the Intelligence Committee that making public its report on FISA warrants would be “extraordinarily reckless”? Instead, it provided the public with welcome (but still incomplete) insight about what went down in the 2016 election.

 Or take the recently released memos written by then-FBI director James Comey to “memorialize” his private conversations with Donald Trump. We can see why Mr. Comey might not want it known that he assured Mr. Trump he didn’t leak or “do weasel things.” Now that everyone’s seen the memos, it’s clear nothing in them justifies the stonewalling before they were turned over to Congress.

Mr. Rosenstein’s complaint comes as Congress is involved in a similar tussle over the intelligence community’s redactions in the House Intelligence Committee’s report on Russia. In particular there is a battle over the redacted material on pages 53 and 54, which speaks to what FBI agents thought of former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s statements about his interactions with Russia.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.) has said that Mr. Comey told Congress that the FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn didn’t believe he was lying. But on his book tour, Mr. Comey has denied saying this. The American people deserve to know who is telling the truth.

Justice can legitimately withhold information from Congress that might jeopardize specific criminal cases. But that doesn’t seem relevant here. We don’t want to see Mr. Rosenstein fired or impeached, but he and the FBI need to recognize Congress’s constitutional authority.

 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2) The disintegration of American Jewry

By ISI LEIBLER

American Jewry, apart from the Orthodox and a minority of committed non-Orthodox, is demographically imploding.

Paradoxically, this is taking place at a time when support for Israel among the American people is at an all-time high and traditional antisemitism is at its lowest level. Jewish education among non-Orthodox Jews is catastrophic, with widespread ignorance of Judaism and understanding about Israel. Assimilation is rampant, with intermarriage levels reaching 70%.

Although right-wing antisemitism has made headlines, the real threat emanates from the viciously anti-Israel and antisemitic Left and the growing numbers of Muslim extremists.

Under normal circumstances, a proud Jewish community supported by most Americans could neutralize these negative elements. However, the crisis is largely internal. In the past, American Jews, with valid historical justifications, have always had a penchant for liberalism. Their attachments to Israel and Judaism were synonymous and liberal political forces were Israel’s strongest supporters, while conservatives were less inclined to support the Jewish state.

However, over the past two decades, the far Left has become viciously anti-Israeli, even supporting terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah and depicting Israel as an imperialist occupier.

This trend reached a climax under US president Barack Obama, who made overtures to the Iranians and treated Israel politically as a rogue state.


Aside from ZOA head Morton Klein, not a single mainstream Jewish leader had the courage to stand up and protest Obama’s bias against Israel and constant bracketing of Israeli defensive actions as morally equivalent to the actions of terrorists.

Despite this, incredibly, aside from African-Americans, the Jews remained consistently Obama’s greatest supporters.

When Donald Trump was elected president, the hatred manifested against him from the bulk of the Jewish leadership reached hysterical levels.

Many of the so-called leaders intensified the anti-Israeli hysteria by falsely accusing Trump of fascism and even antisemitism – despite his Jewish friends and family members and outstanding support for Israel. In fact, the administration’s wholehearted, ongoing support for the Jewish state even seemed to intensify their anti-Israeli inclinations.

The Anti-Defamation League, headed by Jonathan Greenblatt, relinquished any pretense of being apolitical.

It continuously lashed out against the administration and behaved like an extension of the extreme anti-Trump opposition. The ADL frequently seemed more inclined to defend Muslim extremists than Jews, maintaining that organizations like Canary Mission, which exposes antisemitism on college campuses, are Islamophobic and racist. It also ignored or dismissed much of the left-wing antisemitism and soft-pedaled its criticism of Black Lives Matter, an organization that accused Israel of ethnic cleansing and exaggerated the influence of far-right radicals, seeking to link them to Trump. The ADL also took upon itself to repeatedly condemn Israeli policies and the so-called “occupation.”

The Reform movement leader, Rabbi Rick Jacobs, behaved similarly, usually with the support of leaders of the Conservative movement. Jacobs initially even condemned Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

In this environment, the anti-Israeli-government J Street was absurdly promoted by sectors of the establishment as a moderate and a legitimate vehicle to soften the more delusional Jewish groups openly seeking the demise of Israel and even defending Hamas.

By remaining silent and appealing for tolerance even toward groups castigating Israel like Jewish Voice for Peace, the Jewish establishment created a defeatist climate, paving the way for the chaos currently prevailing in the Jewish community.

This has impacted on large numbers of Jews, especially youth with virtually no Jewish education and for whom Israel has already become a marginal factor.

In turn, this has strengthened the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement and created an atmosphere in which it is chic for unaffiliated Jews to distance themselves from, or in some cases even publicly condemn, Israel.

Twenty years ago, it would have been inconceivable to have any other than delusional Jewish fringe groups attacking Israel. Today, especially on campuses, it requires courage to even stand up against these perverted anti-Israeli Jews.

These self-hating Jewish deviants have combined with Muslim extremists and the far Left to intimidate Jews committed to Israel, making life for them unbearable, particularly on campuses. They are at the forefront of the BDS movement, deny Israeli spokesmen the right to speak, disrupt their lectures and support the depiction of Israel as an apartheid state.

The extent of the madness is reflected in groups of Jewish radicals publicly reciting Kaddish for jihadist Palestinians killed by Israeli soldiers defending their borders.

Sadly, many Jewish leaders urge supporters of Israel to be tolerant of these hostile Jewish groups and, rather than confronting them, entreat them to engage in dialogue. Regrettably, many Hillel groups encourage and provide venues for such dialogue.

It is hardly surprising that, in such an environment, encouraged by the anti-Israel media and the radical wing of the Democratic Party, whereas in the past Jewish support for Israel was almost a given, today the preponderance of liberal Jews – especially their leaders – feel awkward supporting Israel. Wishing to conform to their self-image as “enlightened,” in most cases they feel comfortable publicly condemning the Israeli government.

The current, almost unprecedented unity of the Israeli people transcends politics over issues such as war and peace, defense of the borders and deterring terrorism, including the violent efforts by Hamas to breach Israel’s borders. This is ignored by many liberal American Jews living in an atmosphere in which they not only feel the need to conform and condemn Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his democratically elected government but in many cases, go even further, castigating the IDF for allegedly responding disproportionately to terrorists who use human shields.

It is in this context that Academy Award-winning actress Natalie Portman’s outburst, a symptom of the current climate, was a public relations gift to Israel’s enemies, despite her subsequent mealy-mouthed utterances. She would never have contemplated such behavior a few years ago, before the atmosphere had become so poisoned that criticism of Israel by Jews barely raises eyebrows.

It is time for those committed to Israel to be courageous and stand up and be counted. They should dismiss the absurdity of promoting the “big tent” and attempts to engage in dialogue with Jews condemning Israel’s right to defend itself.

They should publicly demand the resignation of leaders who criticize Israel’s security policies, which are supported by a broad Israeli consensus. They should call on their leaders to publicly castigate Jews who denigrate Israel and expel from their ranks those who support or tolerate groups promoting BDS or defend those seeking Israel’s destruction.

Jews who align themselves with Islamic extremists or the antisemitic far Left are equivalent to Jews who would have supported the Nazis had Hitler not turned on them. They should be spurned by the community and rejected from Jewish gatherings or synagogues.

Until there are Jewish leaders who are fully committed to supporting Israel during these critical times rather than primarily concerned with displaying their tolerance toward those who seek our destruction, the disintegration of the non-Orthodox American Jewish community will proceed unimpeded.

2a) Netanyahu and Abbas Clarify Israel's Choices 

The Prime Minister confirmed the Obvious On Iran, While The Palestinian Leader Spouted His Deep Hatred of Jews

By Daniel Cordis

Israelis held their breath when Benjamin Netanyahu’s office announced, on Monday afternoon, that the prime minister would be addressing the nation with “dramatic news” about Iran. The looming announcement, coupled with reports that the prime minister had asked the Knesset to authorize his declaring war with the approval of only the defense minister (which the Knesset did approve), led many to believe that Netanyahu was preparing Israelis for the prospect of war.

Ultimately, the prime minister’s announcement, made with his characteristic theatrics and an utterly amateurish backdrop of loose-leaf binders and CDs, was not about war, but about what he called one of the greatest accomplishments in the history of Israeli intelligence. Mossad operatives, it is now being said, managed to break into an Iranian archive documenting Iran’s nuclear program, and smuggled to Israel some 55,000 pages of documents and more than 180 CDs, which contained another 55,000 digital files.

Netanyahu had no “smoking gun” proving that Iran had violated the nuclear deal which President Donald Trump may choose to exit on May 12. What the documents did confirm was Iran’s abiding nuclear ambitions and the extent of its work on the components of a bomb.

Netanyahu obviously hoped his theatrics would persuade Trump not to back down from his threat to trash the U.S.-Iran deal. But in Israel, where there was nothing surprising about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, it was the enormity of the intelligence coup — and not what the documents revealed — that quickly became the talk of the town.

It was due to that preoccupation with the heist that it took networks a day or two to make much mention of a speech that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas gave the same day in Ramallah. At a meeting of the Palestinian National Council, Abbas addressed a crowd of hundreds and stated that the Jews have no historic connection to the land of Israel and that the Holocaust was the result not of anti-Semitism, but of Jewish anti-social behavior and money lending. He even let the Jews off the hook for the State of Israel, claiming that it was the British — not the Jews — who wanted to create the State, as part of a larger colonial project.

U.S. officials and Jewish leaders across the board condemned Abbas in no uncertain terms (though a leading Haaretz opinion writer did insist, somewhat incomprehensibly, that Abbas’s anti-Semitism does not indicate his lessening support for a two-state solution). Dan Shapiro, the U.S. ambassador to Israel during the Barack Obama administration, tweeted: “It’s over for Mahmoud Abbas. What a disgusting note to go out on.”

If Israelis were not surprised by Netanyahu’s proof of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, they were even less nonplussed by Abbas’s reprise of classic European anti-Semitic tropes. What is worth noting, however, is that Israelis intuit that Iran’s nuclear ambitions and Abbas’s deep-seated Jew-hatred actually share one critical characteristic — neither can be assuaged by territorial compromise.

Iran and Israel were not always enemies. Though Iran, like every Muslim country, voted against the Partition of Palestine (and thus the creation of Israel) in the United Nations vote of November 1947, Iran was the second Muslim nation (after Turkey) to recognize Israel. It was only after the Islamic Revolution and the rise of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979 that Iran severed diplomatic relations with Israel.

Since then, Iran’s vitriol has only intensified. In 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s then newly elected president, said that Israel needed to be “wiped off the map.” In 2012, the Iranian chief of staff, Hassan Firouzabadi, announced, “The Iranian nation is [committed to] the full annihilation of Israel.” In 2014, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (not to be confused with Khomeini) said that the “barbaric” Jewish state “has no cure but to be annihilated.”

Iran and Israel share no border, and there is no territorial dispute between the two. Yet nothing about radical Islam’s appetite for Israel’s destruction can be sated, and ultimately, Israelis believe, the same is true of the Palestinians as well. What Abbas’s diatribe did was simply to confirm that Palestinian lust for Israel’s demise has not abated in 70 years; in an ironic way, there is relief in Abbas’s ending the charade.

The Mossad heist, the Iranian drone that followed a few weeks later (perhaps in response to the Mossad operation) and Israel’s bombing raids over Syria may be the first shots across the bow in a much larger conflict to follow. No one knows.

What unites Israelis, interestingly, is their largely shared sense that other than ceasing to exist, there is nothing that Israel can do to end the calls for its destruction and avoid periodic armed conflict. In 1923, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the father of revisionist Zionism, wrote his famous essay, “The Iron Wall,” arguing that the Arabs would never accept the existence of a Jewish entity in their midst, and that to survive, Zionists would have to put up an iron wall and be willing to fight, perhaps forever.

Increasing numbers of even left-leaning Israelis sense that Jabotinsky, sadly, may have been right. Few Israelis want a war with Iran. If war does come, however, most will see it not as a fresh conflict, but as the latest tragic battle in the now century-long conflict over whether the Jews have a right to a national home in the Middle East.

Daniel Gordis is senior vice president and Koret distinguished fellow at Shalem College in 
Jerusalem. Author of 11 books, his latest is "Israel: A Concise History of a Nation Reborn."


2b)Thou Shalt Innovate:  How Israeli Ingenuity Repairs

The World

Avi Jorisch

 Review by Philip K. Jason

Innovation, suggests author Avi Jorisch, is the sacred calling of modern Israel. But while many have written about Israel’s grand success in developing problem-solving technologies, this is the first study to focus primarily on Israeli innovations that extend, improve, and save lives. Presenting uplifting profiles of fifteen innovations, all framed as contributing to Israel’s success at being “a light unto the nations,” Jorisch argues that the Israeli commitment to tikkun olam, repairing the world, is a characteristic written in Judaism’s spiritual DNA.

The innovations Jorisch describes are modern miracles—miracles resulting from the genius and dogged determination of exceptional, and frequently colorful individuals. The biographical profiles of these individuals are half the fun of the book. The creation of their inventions, often in the face of enormous obstacles, is the other half.

Many of the innovators, Jorisch recounts, received nothing but scorn for their unconventional ideas. Others endured multiple failures before their world-changing concepts were transformed into successful businesses that solved monumental problems—not just for Israel, but for all who would learn how to take advantage of their breakthroughs.

Jorisch details the story of the Hatzalah ambucycle organization that sharply reduced the time between accidents and the arrival of first responders. This is a wonderful story of the interaction between informed, trained volunteerism and established professional expertise. It is also a story of cooperation between Arabs, Jews, and Christians. The influence of United Hatzalah on other nations has been enormous.

Less known is the story of the “grain cocoon,” a technology that hermetically seals harvested agricultural material and kills the bugs that would otherwise destroy those potential foodstuffs. This invention, adopted worldwide, has reduced starvation by protecting vulnerable food resources. The story of the inventor, Shlomo Navarro—his background, struggles, and eventual success—is intriguing and uplifting. So, too, is the story of Imad and Reem Younis, two Technion graduates from Nazareth, who built Alpha Omega, a company that develops devices that drastically improve the accuracy and success rate of brain surgery.

These examples are characteristic of Jorisch’s approach throughout the book. He explains the scientific or engineering issues behind a technology while stressing the human element—the character and experiences of the innovators, and the invention’s impact on the well-being of individuals and communities across the globe.

Lucid, vivid, and elevating, this inspired and inspiring book is a thoughtful antidote to despair about Israel’s place in today’s world and, literally, the world to come.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

3) How do you tell the difference between an English Police Officer, a Canadian Police Officer, an American Police Officer and a Scottish police officer?

QUESTION: You're on duty by yourself (don't ask why, you just are, and your Sergeant hates you) walking on a deserted street late at night.

Suddenly, an armed man with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife and lunges at you.

You are carrying your truncheon and are an expert in using it. However, you have only a split second to react before he reaches you.  What do you do ?

ANSWER:

British  Police Officer:

Firstly, the Officer must consider the man's human rights.

1) Does the man look poor or oppressed ?

2) Is he newly arrived in this country and does not yet understand the law ?

3) Is this really a knife or a ceremonial dagger ?

4) Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack ?

5) Am I dressed provocatively ?

6) Could I run away ?

7) Could I possibly swing my truncheon and knock the knife out of his hand ?

8) Should I try and negotiate with him to discuss his wrong-doings ?

9) Why am I carrying a truncheon anyway and what kind of message does this send to society ?

10) Does he definitely want to kill me or would he be content just to wound me ?

11) If I were to grab his knees and hold on, would he still want to stab and kill me ?

12) If I raise my truncheon and he turns and runs away, do I get blamed if he falls over, knocks his head and kills himself ? 

13) If I hurt him and lose the subsequent court case, does he have the opportunity to sue me, cost me my job, my credibility and the loss of my family home ?

Canadian Police Officer:

BANG !

American Police Officer:

BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG !

'Click'...Reload...

BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG ! BANG !

Glasgow Police Officer:

"Haw, Jimmie.. Drop the knife, noo, unless you want it stuck up yer arse!"



3a)2 Old Guys Dancing

James Cagney and Bob Hope at a Friar's Club Meeting when actors were real performers. Bob Hope was 52 and James Cagney was 56. The year was 1955.

For the young folks, here is something you've probably never seen before and, unfortunately, you may never see again

For us older folks, this is the best of the best, and we had it for many years! This is a side of these two entertainers you hardly ever saw, but it shows you their enormous talent. Bob Hope, the best of comedians, and James Cagney, mostly cast as the bad guy, a gangster in the movies.

Click HEREto watch the video!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4)An open borders group that has benefitted from U.S. taxpayer dollars and is funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros launched a smartphone application to help illegal immigrants avoid federal authorities. The app, Notifica (Notify), is described in a Laredo, Texas news article as a tool to protect immigrants living in the U.S. illegally by utilizing high tech and online social communications. With the click of a button, illegal aliens can alert family, friends and attorneys of encounters with federal authorities. “Immigration agents knocking at the door?” the news story asks. “Now, there’s an app for that, too.”

The group behind the app is called United We Dream, which describes itself as the country’s largest immigrant youth-led community. The nonprofit has more than 400,000 members nationwide and claims to “embrace the common struggle of all people of color and stand up against racism, colonialism, colorism, and xenophobia.” Among its key projects is winning protections and rights for illegal immigrants, defending against deportation, obtaining education for illegal immigrants and acquiring “justice and liberation” for undocumented LGBT “immigrants and allies.” Illegal aliens encounter lots of discrimination, which creates a lot of fear, according to United We Dream. “We empower people to develop their leadership, their organizing skills, and to develop our own campaigns to fight for justice and dignity for immigrants and all people,” United We Dream states on its website, adding that this is achieved through immigrant youth-led campaigns at the local, state, and federal level.

United We Dream started as a project of the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. Between 2008 and 2010, NILC received $206,453 in U.S. government grants, the records show. The project funded was for “immigration-related employment discrimination public education.” Headquartered in Los Angeles, NILC was established in 1979 and is dedicated to “defending and advancing the rights of immigrants with low income.” The organization, which also has offices in Washington D.C. and Berkeley, California claims to have played a leadership role in spearheading Barack Obama’s amnesty program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which has shielded hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens from deportation. “Ultimately, NILC’s goals are centered on promoting the full integration of all immigrants into U.S. society,” according to its website.

Both the NILC and its offshoot, United We Dream, get big bucks from Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF). In fact, both nonprofits list OSF as a key financial backer. In the United States Soros groups have pushed a radical agenda that includes promoting an open border with Mexico and fighting immigration enforcement efforts, fomenting racial disharmony by funding anti-capitalist black separationist organizations, financing the Black Lives Matter movement and other groups involved in the Ferguson Missouri riots, weakening the integrity of the nation’s electoral systems, opposing U.S. counterterrorism efforts and eroding 2nd Amendment protections. OSF has also funded a liberal think-tank headed by former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and the scandal-ridden activist group Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), so corrupt that Congress banned it from receiving federal funding.

Incredibly, the U.S. government uses taxpayer dollars to support Soros’ radical globalist agenda abroad. As part of an ongoing investigation, Judicial Watch has exposed several collaborative efforts between Uncle Sam and Soros in other countries. Just last week Judicial Watch published a special investigative report that exposes in detail the connection between U.S.-funded entities and Soros’ OSF to further the Hungarian philanthropist’s efforts in Guatemala. The goal is to advance a radical globalist agenda through “lawfare” and political subversion, the report shows. Much like in the United States, OSF programs in Guatemala include funding liberal media outlets, supporting global politicians, advocating for open borders, fomenting public discord and influencing academic institutions.

Last year Judicial Watch exposed a joint effort between the U.S. government and Soros to destabilize the democratically elected, center-right government in Macedonia. Records obtained by Judicial Watch in that investigation show that the U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia worked behind the scenes with OSF to funnel large sums of American dollars for the cause, constituting an interference of the U.S. Ambassador in domestic political affairs in violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The cash—about $5 million—flowed through the State Department and USAID.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++