The President's Daily Brief - January 29th, 2024: US Troops Killed, Immigration Deadlock, & Border Reinforcements

Episode Date: January 29, 2024

In this episode of The President's Daily Brief: Three US troops were killed and dozens were injured in an attack by an Iran-backed militia in Jordan on Sunday—the first U.S. fatalities after months of strikes by Iranian-proxies against American forces across the Middle East. The White House is working with a bi-partisan group of US Senators to reach a deal on new legislation that would limit the number of illegal migrants allowed to enter the country. We’ll take a look at why House speaker Johnson is calling the proposal “dead on arrival.” Red state governors are looking to send more manpower to Texas to assist the Lone Star State in its efforts to shore up our border with Mexico. In today's Back of the Brief, the Pentagon’s funding for Ukraine’s efforts against the Russian invasion may have run out but White House may have found a new way to bypass congressional objections and keep flow of arms moving into the war-torn country. Please remember to subscribe if you enjoyed this episode of The President's Daily Brief.   Email: [e-mail] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's Monday, 29 January. Welcome to the President's Daily Brief. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage. Let's get briefed. First up, three U.S. troops have been killed and dozens were injured in an attack by an Iran-backed militia in Jordan this weekend, the first U.S. fatalities after months of strikes by Iranian proxies against American forces across the Middle East. We'll dig into the details. Later in the program, We'll turn our focus to the fight over the U.S. southern border. The White House is working with a small bipartisan group of U.S. senators to reach a deal on new legislation that could limit the number of illegal migrants allowed to enter the country.

We'll take a look at why House Speaker Johnson is calling the proposal, quote, dead on arrival. Plus, red state governors are looking to send more manpower to Texas to assist the Lone Star State in its efforts to shore up our border with Mexico. And finally, in today's back of the brief, the Pentagon's funding for Ukraine's efforts against the Russian invasion may have run out, but the White House may have found a new way to bypass congressional objections and keep the flow of arms moving into the war-torn country.

But first up, the PDB spotlight. Three U.S. service members were killed, and 25 more were wounded at an American base in Jordan in a suicide drone attack launched on Saturday night. A U.S. official said the drone struck living quarters for the troops, which contributed to the high number of casualties. Now, many of you might be surprised to find out that we even have troops in Jordan. The U.S. presence there is not well publicized. The attack was carried out at a small outpost,

which is located in northeast Jordan, near the nation's border with Syria, where U.S. forces have worked with local partners combating Islamic State militants. Tower 22 is basically a logistics hub and hadn't previously been targeted in the recent series of Iran-backed militia attacks, which might be why troops there could have been caught off guard.

Needless to say, but I'm about to say it, this is a major escalation. And the White House, well, they need to have an appropriate response in a timely fashion. This is the first time American troops have been killed in months of drone and missile attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq, Syria, and now Jordan, that began not long after Hamas's October 7th attack on Israel. In a statement released following the attack, President Biden said, quote, we will hold all those responsible to account at a time

and in a manner of our choosing, end quote. Biden added that while the U.S. is still gathering the facts of this attack, we do know it was carried out by radical Iran-backed militant groups operating in Syria in Iraq. The most likely culprit is the so-called Islamic resistance in Iraq. That's an umbrella group of pro-Iranian militias that have already claimed responsibility for a number of attacks against U.S. bases in Syria in recent months. But returning to President Biden's comments, if the plan or intention is to hold those responsible to account, well, that would start with the Iranian regime and the IRGC. There is no doubt that the Pentagon has already provided the White House with a variety of target packages dealing directly with Iranian facilities and infrastructure.

Now, it's fine to say that the U.S. doesn't want to escalate, but Iran already has, and will continue to provoke and attack U.S. and allied facilities through their proxies unless the regime itself is dealt with directly. If the U.S. response here is to attack the Islamic resistance in Iraq or whichever proxy is deemed responsible for the killing of U.S. service members, now nothing will change, and the Iranian regime will continue undeterred. Okay. Turning our attention to Israel and the ongoing conflict there, it seems the Biden administration is exploring new diplomatic strategies to influence the Israeli government. NBC News reports, citing multiple U.S. officials and a former official,

that the White House is considering the use of arms sales as a means to pressure Prime Minister Netanyahu's government. The aim here is to encourage Israel to respond to persistent U.S. appeals from the White House for a reduction in its military operations in the Gaza Strip. The White House has directed the Pentagon to evaluate potential weapons sales to Israel that could serve as bargaining or leverage chips. Among these are artillery rounds and joint direct attack munitions, J-dam's, kits that transform unguided bombs into smart precision guidance weapons. Now, as of now, no final decisions have been made on this matter. This development follows a recent phone call in which President Biden reportedly told Netanyahu

that he's unwilling to back an extended conflict in Gaza, especially with the looming election in November. According to a White House advisor who spoke to Axios, there is a growing concern with the administration about the potential alienation of young voters in the U.S., many of whom have expressed disapproval of the administration's stance on the war in Gaza, and by that they mean disapproval of the White House's support of Israel. Well, there's nothing like letting domestic politics and concern over losing the presidential election determine your foreign policy and national security decisions. All right, after the break, we'll turn our attention to the U.S. border as the White House pushes new legislation to limit the number of migrant crossings, and Republican

governors call up reinforcements to boost Texas's efforts to stem the tide. Kayak gets my flight, hotel, and rental car right, so I can tune out travel advice that's just plain wrong. Bro, Skycoin, way better than points. Never fly during a Scorpio full moon. Just tell the manager you'll sue. Instant room upgrade. Stop taking bad travel advice.

Start comparing hundreds of sites with kayak and get your trip right. Kayak. Got that right. Welcome back. I want to turn our attention now to the debate of the U.S. border, where it looks like the Biden administration and a handful of senators are trying to negotiate a deal that would ostensibly resolve the standoff between Texas and the White House, although not actually fully resolving the border and immigration chaos. While we don't have the text of the proposed legislation yet, some details of the deal have been made public, and to be honest, they seem, well, perhaps the word is convoluted. According to reports, the legislation would empower the Department of Homeland Security, at DHS, to shut the border if the number of migrants without prior authorization exceeds an average of 4,000 daily, that's daily, over the course of a week.

The legislation reportedly becomes even more strict if the daily average surpasses 5,000 migrant crossings. In such cases, DHS would actually be able to be. be obligated to close the border to those entering illegally and outside of designated ports of entry. Now, in case you don't feel like doing math today, setting the daily quota at 5,000 per day equals, on average, 150,000 per month, or 1.8 million per year. The proposal would still allow individuals fleeing torture or persecution to remain in the United States. President Biden has thrown his support behind the bill, mainly because the Democratic strategists worried about the November

election need the optic of the president doing something about the border. On Friday, Biden called the legislation the, quote, toughest and fairest set of reforms possible and vowed to shut down the border the day he signs the bill. Well, a couple of points here. He could shut the border down today with executive action, similar to what the previous administration did. And since Nobody outside the small group of senators that are cobbling this deal together has any clue what the actual text says, the lack of transparency has made politicians and voters on both sides of the aisle somewhat skeptical. If it's such a good deal, how about releasing the actual text for all to read and assess? Despite the White House's promise, the legislation faces an uphill

battle. While it might find favor in the Senate, House Republicans have already dismissed the proposal outright. U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson warned the deal as, quote, dead on arrival in its current form. In a letter to his Republican House colleagues, Johnson wrote, quote, I am emphasizing again today that House Republicans will vigorously oppose any policy proposal from the White House or Senate that would further incentivize illegal aliens to break our laws, unquote. Johnson also pointed out that it has been nine months since the GOP-led House passed its own border legislation which would narrow asylum eligibility, mandate employers to electronically verify the immigration status of their workers, and restart border wall construction.

Of course, that legislation faced considerable opposition from Democrats and was never taken up by the Democrat-controlled Senate. The legislation is also being blasted by former President Trump, who aims to make border security a centerpiece of his 2024 presidential campaign. Trump told a crowd in Las Vegas that the proposal is a, quote, open borders portrayal. Now, it's unfortunate, not to mention completely expected, that both sides would be playing politics with an issue that is central to national security. The Democrats in White House are only now worrying about the issue because, well, it's an election year and because it's becoming a political problem in Democrat-run sanctuary cities around the country, where the influx of migrants is straining

city resources and upsetting residents who are beginning to feel like the government cares more about illegal migrants than U.S. citizens. And Republicans are keen to keep the issue front and center through to the November election. The current deal being proposed by the small band of senators, well, it may be awful or it may be okay with some problems that need fixing. The problem is we don't know, because they can't be bothered to release the text of the deal. The lack of transparency has created an uninformed feeding frenzy on both sides, in part leading the Speaker of the House to attempt to placate hard right Republicans with his DOA comments on the possible deal.

You would think that all parties, all sides, would be keen to work together to fix this problem and promote Homeland Security. But it's an election year, which only amplifies the hyperbole, the blame game, and the useless politics typically prevalent in Washington, D.C. Everybody in D.C. needs to unask the fading couch and act like they work for the citizens of this country. Fix the problem and quit worrying about your own electability. All right. Continuing with our coverage of the crisis at the border, 25 Republican governors have now publicly stated their support of Texas in their standoff with the federal.

government. As we reported last week, a joint statement by the Red State governors read in part, quote, we stand in solidarity with our fellow governor, Greg Abbott, and the state of Texas in utilizing every tool and strategy, including razor wire fences, to secure the border, end quote. However, the support of some states is going beyond strongly worded public statements. Some governors are actually sending reinforcements. Idaho Governor Brad Little is sending two teams of Idaho state police troopers to the Texas-Mexico border. This is an addition to two teams of troopers the Idaho governor sent back in May of 2023. Little said the troopers will assist with controlling the border and with learning tactics on policing human trafficking. Now, full disclosure, I know Governor Little,

and he's a good, hardworking man. In addition to Governor Little's promise to send Idaho law enforcement, the state of Florida is preparing to potentially send members of the Florida State Guard to help out at the Texas border. This is a significant development as the Florida State Guard is controlled directly by the state. A little background on the Florida State Guard. It was initially set up during World War II to replace Florida National Guard members who were then deployed overseas. It became inactive in 1947, but was reactivated by Governor DeSantis in 2022. leading some critics to claim DeSantis was trying to establish his own personal army, and really who doesn't want their own personal army.

However, the reason this is a big deal is that the Florida State Guard can't be federalized. If Florida ultimately decides to send them to Texas, there's not much the White House can do about it, unlike the National Guard, which can be federalized. As of right now, Florida law only allows a State Guard to be deployed within Florida's borders. However, that could change very soon. There's currently a bill being considered in the Florida legislature that would allow the force to be deployed to other states based on mutual agreement. The legislation would also expand the governor's power to activate the state guard during periods of civil unrest and, quote, at any other time deemed necessary and appropriate.

Florida Governor Ronda Santis appeared to support the idea. During a press conference on Friday, the Santis told the media, quote, If we need to stand up and ensure the sovereignty of the country, then we need to do that, so they can count on me to help the state of Florida." It's worth noting that a number of states already have presences at the southern border, beginning last year, Arkansas, Virginia, the Dakotas, and others began sending state law enforcement and national guardsmen to Texas in order to assist efforts to secure the border in the absence of federal action.

All right. With U.S. funding having run out, it looks like the White House is finding new ways to keep the flow of arms moving into Ukraine and bypassing congressional objections. I'll have the details in tonight's back of the brief. I'll be right back. Paraday presents in the Red Corner the Undisputed Undefeated Weed Wacker Guys. Champion of hurling grass and pollen everywhere.

And in the blue corner, the challenger, extra strength, Padiday. Eye drops and work all day to prevent the release of histamines that cause itchy allergy eyes. And the winner by knockout is Padity. Paradig. Paraday. Bring it on. In today's back of the brief, despite the fact that U.S. funding for Ukraine has now officially dried up, the Biden administration appears to have found a creative, way of keeping arms and equipment flowing to the Ukrainian military, and that road leads to the

nation of Greece. Elada, as they say in Aleniki. This week, the United States announced a significant step in bolstering Greece's military capabilities, with Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, writing a letter to Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis of its intention to sell up to 40 F-35 jets to Greece. That's a sale worth around $8.6 billion, give or take a few. few hundred million. The U.S. also agreed to hand over a variety of other surplus items to Greece, including spare aircraft engines and 60 Bradley Infantry fighting vehicles, all free of cost. Now, in addition to the announcement of this military cooperation, there's another notable section of Blinken's letter. Blinken wrote that the U.S. quote, continues to be interested in the defense

capabilities that Greece could transfer or sell to Ukraine. If these capabilities are of interest to Ukraine and pending an assessment of their status and value by the U.S. government, we can explore opportunities for possible additional foreign armed forces financing of up to $200 million for Greece, end quote. In other words, the U.S. is willing to pay Greece for any arms and equipment that the nation may transfer to Ukraine. While this would all require congressional approval, it technically would appear as military aid to Greece, sidestepping any legislative resistance to direct funding for Ukraine. According to reports, Greece is taking Blinken up on his offer, with plans to offload, outdated military systems no longer in active service within the Greek

military. Athens has sanctioned the transfer of these systems, which could be pivoted. for Ukraine's defense needs, particularly as resources from the U.S. and the EU have slowed. As of now, there's been no public disclosure detailing the exact equipment that Greece will provide. However, it's worth noting that the Greek arsenal includes Soviet-era air defense systems, which could significantly aid the Ukrainian military in its ongoing conflict. And that, my friends, is the President's Daily Brief from Monday, 29 January. If you have any questions or comments, please reach out to me at PDB at thefirsttv.com. I'm Mike Baker, and I'll be back later today with the PDB afternoon bulletin.

Until then, stay informed, stay safe, stay cool. Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile, with a message for everyone paying big wireless way too much. Please, for the love of everything good in this world, stop. With Mint, you can get premium wireless for just $15 a month. Of course, if you enjoy overpaying, no judgments, but that's weird. Okay, one judgment. Anyway, give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Up front payment of $45 for three-month plan, equivalent to $15 per month required.

Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. See full terms at mintmobile.com.