COMMENTARY / OPINION
Who ordered the hits on Charlie & Ella? Peggy Tierney
DEC 21, 2025 TIERNEY’S REAL NEWS
The Democrats (Communists) just showed me who murdered Charlie Kirk of TPUSA and Ella Cook of the College Republicans at Brown University. They can’t help themselves. They love to brag. Forget all the noise and distractions and rabbit holes and focus on the MOTIVE and you’ll see clearly what’s going on.
This newsletter covers a wealth of material in a 10 minute read – and connects lots of dots – so it’s complicated. But, I guarantee you won’t find my educated conclusions anywhere else.
State by state, America is following Canada’s euthanasia policy and here’s why… LEO HOHMANN
New York becomes 13th state to allow doctor-assisted suicide. We should expect more states to join the fray; idea is to make offing yourself a socially acceptable option when you check into hospital.
DEC 21, 2025
New York is set to become the latest state to legalize medically assisted suicide for the terminally ill under a deal reached between the governor and the state Legislature, leaders announced on Wednesday.
In an op-ed in the Albany Times Union, Governor Kathy Hochul announced she will sign the proposal after she made an agreement with lawmakers to include a series of “guardrails.”
Hochul, a Catholic, said she came to the decision after hearing from people on all sides of the issue.
She wrote:
“I was taught that God is merciful and compassionate, and so must we be. This includes permitting a merciful option to those facing the unimaginable and searching for comfort in their final months in this life.”
Long Island News reports that 12 other states and the District of Columbia have laws to allow medically assisted suicide, according to advocates, including a law in Illinois signed last week that goes into effect next year.
Look at the map below and see if you notice a pattern in the countries where killing one’s self is encouraged.
New York’s new law, the Medical Aid in Dying Act, requires that a terminally ill person who is expected to die within six months make a written request for life-ending drugs.
Two witnesses would have to sign the request to ensure that the patient is not being coerced. The request would then have to be approved by the person’s attending physician as well as a consulting physician.
The Long Island News notes that the governor said the bill’s sponsors and legislative leaders have agreed to add provisions to require confirmation from a medical doctor that the person truly had less than six months to live, along with confirmation from a psychologist or psychiatrist that the patient is capable of making the decision and is not under duress.
Of course, we know that doctors don’t always have the best track record of predicting the length of their patients’ lives. Yet, they have been granted god-like powers under these laws to approve or disapprove the termination of life.
The legislation was first introduced in 2016 but stalled amid opposition from New York State Catholic Conference and other groups. The Catholic organization argued the measure would devalue human life and undermine the physician’s role as a healer.
In a statement, New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan said Hochul’s position “signals our government’s abandonment of its most vulnerable citizens, telling people who are sick or disabled that suicide in their case is not only acceptable, but is encouraged by our elected leaders.”
HERE’S MY TAKE: We all know where this is heading. All one needs to do is look at the progression of assisted suicide in Canada. When it was first passed, there were all sorts of so-called guardrails. One by one, those guardrails have been gradually removed and the death squads get bolder and bolder, to the point where they are now considering euthanizing children. This is a path down which no society should go. Because once you open Pandora’s Box and turn doctors into killers, the possibilities for nefarious actors are endless.
And we all know who is driving this trend toward turning doctors into killers.
The technocrats and globalist power elites have already committed to a future in which AI runs our factories, our offices, our military, our churches, everything. The need for human beings just isn’t what it once was. We are all considered expendable.
That’s why you see the reckless foreign policies that invite war, in the name of keeping the peace. The reckless medical treatments that get advanced at “warp speed,” in the name of keeping us healthy. And the reckless war on food that substitutes bioengineered material for real food, then stamps it “healthy” and “safe for human consumption.”
It really doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out. It just takes a commitment to having your eyes, ears and minds wide open, paying attention to patterns and false narratives.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard Warns About Islamic Ideology and Sharia Law at AmFest 2025 by Turning Point USA [24:41]
December 20, 2025
[Alex Grobman: A response to JD Vance. No friend of Israel. Written a number of years ago. Nothing has changed.]
When is criticism of Israel legitimate? Dr. Alex Grobman
No democratic states should consider themselves immune to rebuke but no one should be discussing their right to exist either. Op-ed.
Feb 20, 2023, 4:14 PM (GMT+2) Israel National News
Clearly, not all criticism of Israel is antisemitic. As the late American sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset explained, no democratic states should consider themselves immune to rebuke. “Israel is a liberal democratic state,” he said, recalling that, “in ancient Israel, the Biblical prophets devised the art of self-criticism.”
A useful key in determining whether the criticism in question is legitimate or just antisemitism disguised as such was offered by journalist Edward Rothstein, who suggested examining the “standards of justice.” When they are “applied in profoundly distorted fashion, when those distortions put the literal survival of a society at stake, and when murders are taking place and explicitly encouraged declarations are being made that may even fit university standards for ‘hate speech,’ it is safe to say the rhetoric is no longer honest criticism, but, rather, antisemitism,” he said.
Recognizing What It Is
Like pornography, antisemitism is recognized as such by those who know what it looks like.
The late-Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. did not hesitate to label anti-Zionist remarks as antisemitic. On one occasion when speaking to African-American students at Harvard, he heard an anti-Zionist remark from one of them. According to reports of the incident, Dr. King “snapped at him” and said, “Don’t talk like that! When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You’re talking about antisemitism.”
The late leftist literary scholar Hans Meyer understood this as well, writing that “whoever attacks Zionism, but by no means wishes to say anything against the Jews, is fooling himself and others.” “The State of Israel is a Jewish state. Whoever wants to destroy it, openly or through politics that can affect nothing else but such destruction, is practicing the Jew-hatred of yesterday and time immemorial,” he said.
Ironic Antisemitism
Josef Joffe, former editor of the German weekly Die Zeit and a former visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, saw the irony in the fact that many fine people see it as beneath their dignity “in decorous western society” to acknowledge they hate Jews, yet see nothing wrong with the open avowal of hatred “with impunity” of an Israeli prime minister or any other Israeli leader.
“Lashing out at an Israeli leader does not risk the raised eyebrows that demonizing his people, let alone Jews as such, would do in a post-racist age. The irony in such a statement is the current worldwide imperative to deem everything in racial jargon, meaning that we are clearly not in a ‘post-racist age.’ Israel is constantly the focus of outrage in the media, while other countries who repress their minority populations or engage in widespread human rights violations are rarely condemned or become front-page news,” he said.
Joffe saw this clearly when haters of Israel engage in the “fleeting” denunciation of Palestinian-Arab terrorism, which they then justify by condemning Israel’s alleged “occupation” and tyranny.
Calling this an “obsessive need for moral denigration,” Joffe said it indicates that, for people who engage in this rhetoric, “Israel has assumed a special place in contemporary demonology,” one in which facts do not determine judgment, but, rather, are selected based on prejudices.
Hatred “Only” Towards the Jewish State
Often anti-Zionists argue that they harbor no ill will towards Jews, but “only” against the Jewish state. New York Times columnist, Thomas Friedman, a well-known harsh critic of Israel, termed the effort to equate criticizing Israel with antisemitism “vile.”
However, he said, “singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction—out of all proportion to any other party in the Middle East—is antisemitic, and not saying so is dishonest.”
Per Ahlmark, the late deputy prime minister of Sweden and a renowned writer, compared this approach to an individual who says he is “only” against the existence of Great Britain but is not anti-British, or really loves the Swedes but believes Sweden should be eliminated. Anyone who would make such remarks would not be believed, said Ahlmark, because “you cannot love or respect a people and hate their state.” The logic in Ahlmark’s explanation is lost on those who imagine they can separate the two feelings when it comes to Israel.
“I Support the Right of Britain to Exist?”
Even some seemingly banal statements of support for Israel may betray more sinister undercurrents. Daniel Taub, a former Israeli ambassador to Great Britain, admitted he frequently heard people say, “I’m a friend of Israel and I support its right to exist.”
It made the ambassador wonder: “Can you imagine anyone saying that in relation to any other country? I support Australia’s right to exist, or Guatemala’s right to exist—as though that somehow makes me a friend of Guatemala. In relation to what other country does a discussion or policy descend into a question mark over the very existence of that state?”
Former Canadian Minister of Justice and Chair of the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, Law Professor Irwin Cotler has frequently spoken about the enduring threats to Israel. He said he finds “the silence, the indifference, and sometimes even the indulgence” the most disturbing in the face of such genocidal antisemitism.
Fooling No One
The only glimmer of light is that those who are crossing the line from criticizing Israel into blatant antisemitism are increasingly no longer allowed to do so with equanimity.
In an address to Parliament shortly before he died, the late former Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom, Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, pointed out that antisemites rarely admit to hating Jews. On the contrary, he said, throughout history, many antisemites insisted they liked or even loved Jews.
“In the Middle Ages, they said, we don’t hate the Jews, we just hate their religion. In the 19th and 20th centuries, they said, we don’t hate the Jews, we just hate their race. Today, they say, we don’t hate the Jews, we just hate their nation-state. It’s the same antisemitism dressed up in a different gown,” he said.
And this time, they are fooling no one.
Dr. Grobman is the senior resident scholar at the John C. Danforth Society and a member of the Council of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East. Copyright. Alex Grobman
Sorry, JD, antisemitism and ‘not liking Israel’ aren’t that different Jonathan S. Tobin
Why is U.S. Vice President Vance staking out a position that aligns him with young conservative Zoomers who are against the Jews and the Jewish state? JONATHAN S. TOBIN
(Dec. 19, 2025 JNS)
Intense scrutiny comes with high office.
So when someone like Vice President JD Vance makes a statement in an interview or posts a comment on social media about a hot topic, it inevitably becomes news. And when that topic is especially controversial—antisemitism, for instance—and he’s made little or no effort not to get mired in it, anything he winds up saying or writing is likely to feed speculation about where he really stands.
And that has been the case of late. When Vance denied that Jew-hatred is “exploding” among young conservatives in an interview with NBC News and then engaged in an exchange on X with an Israel-bashing white nationalist who uses antisemitic tropes, as he has done in the last two weeks, it’s far from unreasonable to wonder about his motives.
But there’s more to it than that. Vance is the current frontrunner for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination. That fuels the belief that his every action is calculated to enhance his chances of being President Donald Trump’s successor.
An antisemitism problem
Fair or not, and though he and his supporters would deny it, that means he now has an antisemitism problem.
Any discussion about the vice president—and the question of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel bigotry—starts with his apparently unbreakable ties with Tucker Carlson. The former Fox News host and current far-right podcaster is, by all accounts, a good friend of Vance. In fact, he owes Carlson a debt of gratitude. Carlson was a significant booster of Vance’s successful campaign for an Ohio U.S. Senate seat in 2022 and then reportedly played a decisive role in persuading Trump to choose him as his running mate in 2024.
When Carlson hosted faux historian and Holocaust denier Daryl Cooper on his podcast just weeks after Vance was tapped for vice president, what followed was significant. Not only did Vance not disassociate himself from Carlson. Instead, he kept a commitment to appear with him on one of the political commentator’s live shows, which, for all intents and purposes, turned out to be a Republican campaign rally.
Flash-forward a year later, and Carlson’s flirtation with antisemitism and Israel-bashing has turned into a full-blown obsession. Vance’s buddy seems to platform virtually anyone who will demonize Israel, including floating antisemitic blood libels about its war against Hamas in Gaza or opposing efforts to stop the nuclear threat from Iran. After his chummy interview with “groyper” Nick Fuentes—a self-avowed neo-Nazi—and his attacks on Christian Zionists and even the idea of a Judeo-Christian heritage, there’s no denying that he’s become the most dangerous antisemite in the country.
But for Vance and some other increasingly disreputable voices on the right, like podcaster Megyn Kelly, the priority is protecting their friendship with Carlson. Given that distancing himself from a conservative movement that has a lot at stake in the success of the Trump administration and in the failure of the Democrats to win back the White House in 2028, Vance’s decision to stick with his friend must be seen as significant.
A crisis among young Zoomers
That’s the context for the dustup about Vance’s denial of the growing antisemitism problem on the right. That comment was enough to feed the controversy. But it only grew after he decided to engage in a back-and-forth with Sarah Stock, another person with a problematic record on Jew-hatred, and, oddly enough, to do it on the same evening that he was hosting a Chanukah party at the vice-presidential residence in Washington.
That Vance would deny that antisemitism is “exploding” among young conservatives is perhaps to be expected. But after the Fuentes interview and the subsequent blow-up at the Heritage Foundation, when its president, Kevin Roberts, refused to disavow Carlson and the growing belief that a sizable percentage of young conservatives are following the groypers, that’s no longer a credible position.
Writer Rod Dreher wrote that he was told that 30% to 40% of Zoomers who work for the administration or Republicans in Washington these days are fans of Fuentes. Heritage vice president Victoria Coates told me in an interview on my “Think Twice” podcast that she fears the true number might be double that.
The situation on the right might not be as dire as that on the left, where the intersectional base of the Democratic Party is clearly hostile to Israel and has accepted blood libels about it committing “genocide” in Gaza. But if the true number of Fuentes followers among young conservatives is even half of either Dreher’s or Coates’s estimates, then there’s no denying that the right has a crisis that needs to be acknowledged.
Indeed, a Manhattan Institute poll published earlier this month showed that some 17% of Republicans are “anti-Jewish” and hold views that encompass Holocaust denial or the left-wing myth about Israel being a “settler-colonial” state that has no right to exist. Those numbers are far higher among younger GOP voters and minorities.
Anti-Zionism and antisemitism
Vance’s exchange with Stock was equally problematic.
The vice president was partially correct. One can criticize Israeli policies without being antisemitic. After all, 10 million Israelis do it every day on one issue or another, just as 340 million Americans find fault with their government.
The problem is that the “criticism” being voiced and the attitudes that have surfaced in the Manhattan Institute poll reflect the spread of pro-Hamas propaganda that delegitimizes the Jewish state and treats its justified war of self-defense after the Oct. 7 attacks as genocide. In the current context, talk of “not liking” Israel isn’t an innocent opinion about not being enamored with the weather in Tel Aviv. It’s invariably the product of some of the lies being platformed on Carlson’s show and even on more extreme venues, such as what is heard on the podcasts of Fuentes or the unhinged conspiracy theorist Candace Owens.
More to the point, language such as that used by the vice president can be interpreted as maintaining the entirely fictional distinction between antisemitism and anti-Zionism. Anti-Zionists may claim not be antisemitic, but that is a distinction without a difference.
To deny the Jews, alone of all the peoples in the world, the right to live in peace, security and sovereignty in their ancient homeland is not an assessment about which reasonable people should be expected to agree to disagree.
To support the elimination of the one Jewish state on the planet—something that could only be accomplished by the genocide of its citizens—while having no problem with the scores of other nations that are explicitly Muslim or officially devoted to one specific faith or ethnic group is to discriminate against Jews.
And there is more proof of prejudice. Carlson continues to declare that the fictional “genocide” being committed by Israel is the most urgent of issues. At the same time, he remains unconcerned by the fact that the Palestinians intend to continue their murderous onslaughts against the Jews, all while downplaying and denying that genocidal assaults on Christians are right now being waged by Muslims in African countries.
A political calculation
The vice president is clearly treading in dangerous waters. But that begs the question as to why he’s doing so.
The only logical answer? It seems that similar to the leadership of the Democratic Party, he has come to the conclusion that it’s good politics.
Democrats have embraced open antisemites like New York City mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, whose short political career has revolved around his obsession with destroying the Jewish state, not to mention the members of the left-wing congressional “Squad” who are treated like rock stars by their voters, as well as the chattering classes.
By contrast, the Republicans had become a lockstep pro-Israel party in recent decades, with only libertarian outliers like Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) or erratic extremists like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) being exceptions to a pro-Israel consensus among GOP officeholders.
But Vance, a savvy political player and someone, in contrast to Trump or veteran conservatives, who is very much attuned to online trends, is sensing that the tide is shifting against the Jews among younger Republicans.
This generation has largely been indoctrinated in the same leftist ideologies like critical race theory, intersectionality and settler-colonialism in K-12 schools and colleges that grant a permission slip to Jew-hatred as their liberal compatriots. And they are swimming in the same sea of anti-Jewish prejudice and Israel-bashing that the algorithms of TikTok and other social-media platforms enable.
Their vulnerability to these toxic myths and lies is partly due to their addiction to the internet, as well as the product of the deleterious impact of the COVID pandemic isolation they suffered.
But if Vance aspires to become president, then voters have a right to expect him to do more than appease or validate these prejudices, as did his predecessor, former Vice President Kamala Harris. And for him to argue that antisemitism isn’t that big a problem or that it’s OK to “not like” Israel in the aftermath of two years of a post-Oct. 7 surge in Jew-hatred that culminated in the massacre of 16 people on Bondi Beach in Australia isn’t just bad taste. It’s not unreasonable to conclude that he is dog-whistling to Fuentes fans and other young antisemites that he’s on their side—or at least doesn’t openly oppose them.
The jury is still out about whether that is as smart a political move as he may think it is.
For those who spend their days on X or TikTok, the views of Carlson or even the groypers may seem normative. But in contrast to the situation with the Democrats, the GOP base, which is dominated by evangelical Christians, remains solidly pro-Israel. So, too, are the majority of Republican voters and even most Americans.
What voters want
Working-class Americans of all races who played a decisive role in re-electing Trump to a second term agree with Vance on immigration and share his skepticism about the European establishment’s disdain for democratic norms that interfere with policies that undermine their national sovereignty. But they’re not going to turn out for him if he becomes too closely identified with extremism and hate.
In a 2024 speech to the Quincy Institute, Vance made a strong case for Israel as the perfect “America First” ally for the United States because of its strength, technological prowess and willingness to defend itself. He’s also consistently denounced antisemitism.
Still, he seems to be drifting away from that principled stance in less than a year as vice president. He seems to think that the political future belongs to ignorant young voters who have been spoon-fed anti-Israel and antisemitic propaganda for years. Whether or not that’s a correct analysis of the 2028 electorate, it’s feeding a crisis that is both undermining Jewish security and harming an alliance that benefits the United States.
JONATHAN S. TOBIN Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of the Jewish News Syndicate, a senior contributor for The Federalist, a columnist for Newsweek and a contributor to many other publications. He covers the American political scene, foreign policy, the U.S.-Israel relationship, Middle East diplomacy, the Jewish world and the arts. He hosts the JNS “Think Twice” podcast, both the weekly video program and the “Jonathan Tobin Daily” program, which are available on all major audio platforms and YouTube. Previously, he was executive editor, then senior online editor and chief political blogger, for Commentary magazine. Before that, he was editor-in-chief of The Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia and editor of the Connecticut Jewish Ledger. He has won more than 60 awards for commentary, art criticism and other writing. He appears regularly on television, commenting on politics and foreign policy. Born in New York City, he studied history at Columbia University.
Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate). Follow him: @jonathans_tobin.
Corsi Speech: Silent No More, Part 2 [13:27] JEROME R. CORSI, PH.D.
..How I Became a Political Prisoner of Mueller’s ‘Witch Hunt'”
DEC 20, 2025
Silent No More: How I Became a Political Prisoner of Mueller’s “Witch Hunt”
Bestselling author of Killing the Deep State Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D. meticulously details the psychological torment he was subjected to in what the media has simply called, “The Mueller Investigation.”
In late 2018, in an FBI closed conference room with no windows, Dr. Corsi was confronted for hours upon hours at a time by detailed questioning about events that occurred in 2016. Dr. Corsi’s inquisition was worthy of the Gestapo or KGB, designed to break even the most cooperating witness. Over a period of two months, three of Mueller’s top prosecutors and an army of FBI agents—up to nine government officials at a time—questioned Dr. Corsi with his attorney, David Gray.
Throughout this harrowing ordeal, Dr. Corsi handed over his personal computers, his cell phone, all of his email accounts, his Twitter account, and his Google account. Finding no “smoking gun,” Mueller’s prosecutors blew up the meetings. Dr. Corsi refused to lie to the prosecutors to give them the ammunition they needed to prosecute Roger Stone, and as a result he was told he would be charged with a criminal offense for lying to the FBI and the Special Prosecutor.
At seventy-two years of age, Dr. Corsi was subjected to extreme mental anguish, imagining that he may never see his family again as a free man.
Rather than conducting an honest investigation, Mueller’s Special Prosecutors reinforced a prefabricated narrative aiming to charge President Trump with Treason. Silent No More: How I Became a Political Prisoner of Mueller’s “Witch Hunt” exposes the inner workings of this governmental escapade, and clearly states why Mueller has no case against the President.
Dr. Corsi creates a compelling case indicating that the entire matter is an investigation in search of a crime—to force lying testimony from witnesses if that’s what it takes to achieve Deep State political objectives.
God’s Five Stones Website: https://www.godsfivestones.com
Corsi Nation Website: https://www.corsination.com
The Truth Central: https://www.thetruthcentral.com
