Jason Willick Agree. Debate has been all about, 'Take it or leave it, help or not,' not what help is supposed to accomplish. Lack of process in the House is a big part of that. And, to be clear, the critics mostly want to shut the issue down rather than debate. They're frustrated by leaders,…

I hope aid passes. But I had hoped that the *debate* over aid might lead to a clearer sense of U.S. strategy. It has not.

The level of absolutism + vitriol is way too high on far too many natsec issues these days--at precisely the time we need more nuance, pragmatism, and humility. This is a thoroughly unfair attack on a moderate + balanced piece trying to get at historical facts

If you want to see what principled free speech advocacy looks like, check out these two pieces from Jason Willick and James Kirchick, both of whom are pro-Israel but were willing to forcefully defend pro-Palestinian speech however much they disagreed with it. This is the model.…

Unpopular opinion: she’s right that societies need unifying myths.

We need to stress the real shared *interests* we have with Europe rather than put too much weight on shared values when those are more up for dispute in a period of political ferment and change on both sides of the Atlantic.

Definitely a change in tone from Biden on Israel since Iran attack. Also, a much more unifying and realistic message on Ukraine than the ugly partisanship in State of the Union.
wsj.com/articles/momen…

And that if it did do the same, it would be an illegitimate autocracy.
twitter.com/varadmehta/sta…

J6 was dreadful. But problem for Sotomayor (and others') notion of 'J6 exceptionalism' is there is no violence requirement in the obstruction law. Prosecutors don't charge 'situations' or events, they charge specific acts of specific people.
politico.com/news/2024/04/1…

Vivek voters

WSJ overview of the Israeli triumvirate. 'Gallant is considered the most hawkish of the three'—but also closer than Netanyahu to the Biden administration.
wsj.com/world/middle-e…

I get that Trump distorts peoples’ judgment. But it is just *so obvious,* in this case, how the government’s novel use of a criminal law could soon hurt people they like, too. You’d think that would at least register.

Charging parents for their kid's crimes may feel good in the moment. May even win votes. But it won't make us any safer & will fall hardest on hardworking parents.

There are smarter ways to do this. Shanta Trivedi & Aubrey Edwards-Luce of UBalt Law Center for Families, Children & Courts explain:
bit.ly/49E6gV9