I know what you're thinking. The headline has to be some sort of clickbait, right? Actually, no. The Biden administration is working on a final solution for Israel. 

It's been a hell of a week for the Joe Biden foreign policy shop at Foggy Bottom, and that has now extended to Turtle Bay. The two-state solution that Joe Biden wants to impose on the two parties currently at war in the Middle East, a solution neither side will ever accept in the near future, is a myth that's also threatening to collapse the Democratic Party from within.

If Joe Biden supports Israel, he loses the Arab-American voting bloc in Michigan, and with that, possibly the state overall, and the presidential election with it. If he turns on Israel and supports Hamas to placate his anti-Semitic base, he risks losing the Jewish-American vote that's been monolithically aligned with the Democratic Party for decades. In a 50/50 country, Biden can't afford to lose either faction of his base, and talk of a two-state solution isn't helping Biden navigate the growing chasm. 

[Duane 'Generalissimo' Patterson has exclusive content for VIP members every week, and co-hosts the VIP show "Week in Review" with Ed every Friday. Join us to support the fight against Big Tech, mainstream media, and government censorship. Become a Hot Air VIP member today and use promo code SAVEAMERICA to receive a 40% discount on your membership!]

Earlier this week, The Telegraph of London reported, well before any U.S. major media outlet, mind you, that the Biden administration was on the precipice of going to the United Nations Security Council and offering a motion to force a temporary ceasefire upon Israel. A few hours later, Fox News picked up on the story. The alphabet networks and other cable outlets ignored the story entirely. Hugh Hewitt spent virtually his entire show trying to shoot down this trial balloon before it actually happened. It would be devastating to the relationship between the United States and Israel, and the betrayal after the 10/7 attacks would be just as much of a gut punch as Biden's disastrous decision to abandon Afghanistan to the Taliban. Hugh had help in sounding the alarm. Our friends at Commentary Magazine's podcast, John Podhoretz and Seth Mandel included, as well as former Trump administration National Security Council alum Richard Goldberg, all railed at the proposed betrayal of Israel. 

Florida Congressman Cory Mills, who went to Israel in the days after 10/7 and flew out 32 Americans trapped after the Hamas attacks, attributed the proposed backstabbing of Israel to Michigan politics. 

Our very good friend, Five For Fighting's John Ondrasik, is making the media rounds to promote his new single, OK, which you should do your part to circulate, because it shines a light on the growing anti-Semitic problem the West in general, and domestically on American college campuses specifically, face. He appeared on Fox Business Tuesday with Maria Bartiromo and was beside himself as to why Team Biden would even think about doing this.

At the United Nations, two dueling resolutions are being brought to the Security Council. The first one, authored by Algeria, is one that the United States, using its permanent veto power, killed Tuesday afternoon. That's very good. Except what seems to be taking place is that the United States wanted to be the one authoring a demand for a ceasefire, one that has very similar language. That second resolution, our resolution, the U.S. will not veto. When it comes to the floor of the Security Council for a vote is unclear. 

The United States Ambassador to the U.N., Linda Thomas-Greenfield, spoke before the vote on why the United States would veto the Algerian resolution, stating that a ceasefire without the full release of all hostages held by Hamas, would never result in any meaningful peace. I would have liked to have seen more passion and sharper language, but it was a relatively reasoned response, albeit pedestrian in delivery.

After the vote, Thomas-Greenfield took to the press room podium, and read a prepared statement. This is very important. What you are about to watch and hear is not something that the Ambassador adlibbed. This was written up for her. Watch all the way to the end. 

Come again? We're working on a final solution for Israel? I'll pause and start a paragraph in order for you to catch your breath. 

Let me state for the record that I have no evidence, nor do I believe, that Linda Thomas-Greenfield is a Nazi. I don't really believe that she is an anti-Semite. She may yet turn out to be, but there is nothing in her public track record that would indicate that she is. What I do believe is that she is a not very bright person, and she is employed as a diplomat that seems entirely ignorant of history. She also has someone on her staff who is either intentionally trying to get her in trouble, or is just as clueless about history as Thomas-Greenfield seems to be. 

The Final Solution, of course, was Hitler's way of dealing with the Jews he felt were polluting the master race in Germany. His solution was fairly simple. Round them all up, disappear them from German society, and take them away to concentration camps where they were either used as slave labor until they were no longer useful, and then killed and either cremated or buried in mass graves, or they were deemed not useful enough to work for a while and gassed to death, and then cremated in order to cover up the genocide. Over six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust. The Final Solution was introduced by Heinrich Himmler and implemented in large part by Adolf Eichmann. It was as evil as anything we've experienced on Earth in many centuries, and the Never Forget movement, as well as Holocaust museums all over the world over the last eight decades, have served to remind people of what happened in Nazi Germany and why we cannot ever allow a holocaust of Jews to take place again.

Thomas-Greenfield is a diplomat. She plies her trade using words and rhetoric as weapons instead of guns and bullets. You would think that any diplomat of any age from any country would have the common sense and foresight to recognize that using the two words "final" and "solution" together in the same sentence, let alone one that is discussing policy vis-a-vis Israel, is not a good idea. Yet somehow, this particular phrasing snuck past our Ambassador. 

As the White House, in a desperate attempt to salvage Michigan's Electoral Votes in the fall, works up whatever it is they're going to propose to their anti-Semitic colleagues on the Security Council, which Israel will totally ignore regardless, ask yourself this question. If you're a Democratic Jewish-American voter in the United States, how can you trust this administration's attempt at a peace plan when they can't even describe that attempt without accidentally comparing it to Hitler's "peace plan"?

By the way, in the 24 hours since Thomas-Greenfield said we're working on the final solution for Israel, there has been no regime media picking up on the gaffe and pressing the administration on it. None. Instead, the only blowback to our Ambassador's remarks has been that she issued the veto in the first place. That's the controversy - her not accepting this ceasefire, not her historical ignorance and tone deaf rhetoric. 

We're about three weeks from a change of seasons. I fully expect someone in media to write a story propping up Joe Biden by claiming, "It's springtime for Biden in Delaware". Nothing out of media these days would surprise me.