VIDEO: Victor Davis Hanson on hot topics of the day

Yes, again. Regular readers of WWW know Walt has a handful of favourite vloggers, but we do try not to repost too many videos by the same commentator all at once. But today's episode of the Victor Davis Hanson Show is a must-watch!

Mr Hanson and host Jack Fowler discuss the raid on John Bolton's house, the Cracker Barrel logo change, male cheerleaders in the NFL, the hot water James Comey finds himself in, and -- the best part IMHO -- how the Dimocrats got where they are. Blame it on all those Karens!

And there's a bonus! At about 1 hour 04 Mr Hanson goes off on the way certain truck drivers -- graduates of the infamous Singh School of Truck Driving -- make America's roads unsafe. 

Key takeaway: "California is a dangerous place to live!"

Remember, dear readers, your comments are always welcome... moderated, but welcome. Just click on the headline and the article will open as a separate page, with the comments window at the bottom.

Impeachment: The Fat Lady is warming up in the wings

The impeachment trial of Still-President Trump is all but over. That's according to third-most senior Republican Senator John Barrasso, who told Thomson-Reuters it was possible the trial could end on Friday without witnesses being called, as urged by the Democrats.

"The momentum is clearly in the direction of moving to final judgment on Friday," he said. "That vote will be Friday. We still have a couple of members who said they want to listen to the answers to questions, but that's where the momentum is."

Yesterday, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), who's in charge of the persecution of the President, tried to convince the Senate that it had to subpoena more witnesses and documents because... wait for it... it could not "rely on what was investigated in the House."

Cazart! Did he really mean to admit that the House investigation was insufficient, even as fellow House impeachment manager Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) claimed that the impeachment case had already been "proven beyond any doubt at all. See "Senate refuses Dem motions to delay hearing their 'unassailable case'", WWW 21/1/20.

Mr Schiff claimed that it would be unprecedented to hold a Senate trial without witnesses. He had previously denied all Republican requests for new witnesses in the House Intelligence Committee, which he chairs, but this is different, see, because this is the Senate and, errr, we haven't had a chance to bring forward all the important new evidence which we suddenly manufactured... errr, discovered.

In the marathon question-and-answer sessions which are expected to wrap up today, the Democrats repeatedly stressed the need to call former National Security Adviser John Bolton. But Republicans noted that Mr Schiff did not want to have the so-called "whistleblower" (Eric Ciaramella?) testify, and had hidden a key transcript that could reveal details about how the complaint against the president had been launched.

When asked why the Senate should call more witnesses and documents if the House Intelligence Committee would not release the testimony of the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Mr Schiff dodged the query, saying that whatever deficiencies the House may or may not have brought to the Senate were not "sufficient to relieve the Senate of the obligation to have a trial." Mr Schiff reported channelled Vince offer, exclaiming "But wait! There's more!"

During a break in the Q&A, Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) was asked if the Dumbocrats' fight for witnesses was lost. "I don't know that for sure one way or the other," he said, but called the tone and questions of senators "not encouraging." The Schiff show continues. Stay tuned...

Mysterious meeting between WH bigshots and former Canadian PM

Here's the lead of a story which appeared this afternoon on the CBC News website, headed: "Stephen Harper expected to meet Trump's top economic adviser in Washington amid trade tensions".

Former prime minister Stephen Harper is poised to meet with two top Trump administration officials in Washington against a backdrop of fractious talk over tariffs.... Harper is expected to travel to Washington on Monday, July 2, and has scheduled meetings with Larry Kudlow — the director of the National Economic Council and Trump's go-to economic adviser — and John Bolton, the president's national security adviser, according to multiple sources who spoke to CBC News on the condition of anonymity.

Walt's innocent question: Why do "two top Trump administration officials" suddenly want to talk with Mr Harpoon, who, since his defeat in October of 2015, has been merely a private citizen of Canuckistan? Could it be that the Americans have had enough of Just In Trudeau and his angry little woman sidekick Chrystia Freeland? Have they let it be known that if Canada wants to bug out of the upcoming trade war and salvage some kind of free trade deal with the US of A, they need to send someone to the table who can talk common sense, not gender ideology/global warming/"fair trade" nonsense?

In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny, "Ehhhhh... could be!" Stay tuned.

Where next? Syria? Iran? Walt's morning line

Last week was a slow news week. Republican presidential wannabes are chewing on each other's haunches. The Greeks and the EU are still in denial about the former's effective bankruptcy and the inevitable demise of the euro. (Lifetime pct .986) And sound of gunfire and explosions reverberates through the streets of Baghdad, Tripoli, Homs, Damascus, Cairo etc. etc. ad infinitum.

As to Syria, the usual forces for Peace and Progress are shrieking that Something Must Be Done. And since the Arab Union (sic) and the United (sic) Nations can't agree to do anything, who better to take matters in hand than the good ole US of A.

There's also been some talk that Weapons of Mass Destruction -- to wit, nuclear bombs -- are being developed by Iran. You may think you've seen this movie before, but that was Iraq and the intended target of the non-existent WMDs was... well... that was never altogether clear but it didn't really matter, since the WMDs were really just a pretext to start a fight that the US was pretty sure it could win. (Lifetime pct .010)

No, the next American invasion of a Middle Eastern country will be a sequel to the glorious successes of Iraq and Afghanistan. And it's been in the pipeline -- the oil pipeline, that is -- for at least nine years.

In February of 2003, John Bolton (then "under-secretary of state for arms control" -- how's that for a title?!) told Israeli government officials that it would be "necessary to deal with" Iran, Syria and North Korea after the war in Iraq. Source: respected journalist Gwynne Dyer, in his column of 30 March 2003, reproduced in With Every Mistake (Random House, 2005).

Note, please, that Bolton was speaking to Israeli officials. Today the high-ranking American "advisor" doing the talking is General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. General Dempsey, echoed by UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, is warning the Israelis not to attack Israel, because an Israeli attack is "not prudent". Since that phrase was already taken, Mr. Hague said an attack would not be "a wise thing".

Walt's translation and sub-text: "Hang on a minute. We're not ready yet!"

Clearly, if the Jews start a war with Iran, they will be counting on the West to intervene on their side. And plenty of people in high places in London, Ottawa and (especially) Washington would be happy to do so. The only problem is that the West is broke. The war in Afghanistan is still syphoning billions of dollars a month out of the American and Canadian economies, and the governments of Britain and other EU countries are still pouring their pounds and euros down the rathole that is Greece. The West can't afford another war.

Nor can Israel, if the West doesn't send troops, arms and matériel. Yet Iran is the Middle Eastern power the Jews fear most. Israel believes a nuclear-armed Iran would be a threat to its very existence, citing Iran's support for Arab militant groups, its sophisticated arsenal of missiles capable of reaching Israel, and its leaders' calls for the destruction of the Jewish state.

The Jews have been known to attack their neighbours before. There was the infamous Six-Day (Non-)War in 1967. In 1981, the Israeli air force destroyed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor. And in 2007, Israeli warplanes are believed to have destroyed a target in Syria that foreign "experts" think might have been an unfinished nuclear reactor... or possibly a hospital, who knows?

But Iran would prove a much tougher nut to crack than Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq or Syria. It is doubtful that the Israelis could single-handedly destroy, Iran's nuclear facilities, if such there be. And the Iranians (not being Arabs) would surely fight back. They could fire missiles at Israel, get their Muslim friends Hezbollah and Hamas to launch rockets into "the Jewish entity" and cause global oil prices to spike by striking targets in the Gulf.

So... if the Jews are smart ["if"? Ed.] they'll wait until Western support has gone from rhetoric to military readiness. That should take until 2013, at least. Walt's prediction: no war against Iran... this year. (Lifetime pct .986)