Trump Won the Battle, But Will He Take Iran?

 

We’re concluding the third week of the Israeli-United States effort to emasculate Iran, and we’re, sort of, in a standoff period. I think people have compared Iran to the black knight in the old Monty Python movie. The more that he loses a leg and arm, the more he thinks that it’s just a scratch.

By all traditional methodology and criteria, Iran is now inert. This is what President Donald Trump keeps saying. The navy is nonexistent. There is no air force. There are no missile defenses that can interrupt allied planes going over the country. The army is useless because nobody is fighting on the ground.

We keep hearing that, and I think accurately, that missiles and drones have been attrited, either by bombing or by being intercepted or being expended, to about 10%.

So, what is the remaining obstacle? Target-wise, it’s just two or three. There seems to be caches or secret locations where you have three or four ballistic missiles or three or four drone sites with maybe 20 or 30 drones, and those are very hard to find.

So, you’re going to be able to stop almost all of the incoming, but not all of them. And because they’re aimed at residential areas. Remember, the United States and Israel are trying to hit military targets and command and control, and any civilian damage is collateral.

But in the case of Iran, it’s deliberately targeting hotels in Dubai or hotels and airports in Qatar or cluster bomb attacks on civilian high-rises in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. That’s what they want to do.

So, what’s going to happen? The thing to remember, I think, historically, is that tactical success is not necessarily equivalent to strategic victory or resolution.

By that, I mean, you can argue that when Napoleon invaded Russia, he won almost every battle and he captured Moscow. But he did not have a plan to force the czar out, Alexander. He had no plan to force him out. He had no ability to go beyond Moscow to get the fleeing imperial forces of Russia.

Same thing with the Germans. They won every battle up until they were within the first subway station of Moscow around Dec. 10, 1941. But they did not have a plan to, or they were not able to take Leningrad, St. Petersburg, take Moscow, and drive all of the Russians out of European and industrialized Russia. Or, barring that, to bomb the factories that were on the other side of the Ural Mountains.

They did not have a plan. So, they didn’t have a strategic victory. They had impressive tactical victories.

We had impressive tactical victories in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s hard to think we lost a single battle in Iraq, but we did not have a plan of strategic resolution.

So, where we are now in this war is Iran’s strategy is the following: that it can withstand repeated attacks on all of its military assets because it believes the United States cannot afford either politically, economically, socially, culturally to put ground troops after the fiascos in Afghanistan and Iraq. So, it doesn’t have to worry about an invasion to displace the regime.

It also believes that the more that we hit any civilian targets out of frustration, the more it will hurt the Iranian people and the more the theocracy will say, “You may not like us, but the fact that you don’t have water or power or fuel is because they hate you and us.” And that’s another strategy they are taking.

In other words, they’re saying as long as we have oil, Kharg Island, and as long as we have these huge oil fields, when you get tired of pounding us into rubble, you’re going go back to the United States. Israel’s going to go back and be quiet, and we’re going to get all of our oil revenues and we’re going have them.

And we are going to buy from Russia, North Korea, and China missiles, drones, recreate our own drone industry, and we probably have enough fissile material that you didn’t get, and nobody could get. It’s hidden deep in the mountains, that we will make bombs. And this time we’re going to use them because we understand what you will do next time.

And more importantly, we are planning practically that Donald Trump is an aberration. The last seven presidents didn’t attack us, even though we blew up your American Embassy in Beirut, your barracks and Marines in Beirut, Khobar Towers, behind the USS Cole, behind the embassy destruction in Africa.

So, we believe that the norm is not Trump. He will be gone in two and a half years, and we will get either a left-wing Democrat or a neo-isolationist Republican or some Republican that’s feckless and not going to do anything. So, all we have to do is outlast Trump and have the oil, and we’ll come back.

His opposition said he had no point, no agenda, no purpose. He did. He said it on March 1 and March 20. He said he had a multifaceted agenda. No. 1, he wanted to destroy the ability to launch missiles. He’s pretty close to that. Not completely. But get rid of their missiles, not just the missiles that they launch, but the ability to make them.

No. 2, he said he wanted to destroy their air forces and air defenses so that they would have no air superiority, but the Americans and Israelis have the air supremacy.

When you reach air supremacy, you can use tactical aircraft. That would mean Warthogs at low level, Apaches. You can do anything you want if you have air supremacy. And we do now.

He wanted to destroy additionally the navy. He’s almost done that.

No. 4, he wanted to preclude the ability of Iran not just to launch ballistic missiles, but to make another bomb. He’s bombed all of the nuclear sites that he hit before. He’s bombed the fabrication plants. He’s killed more of the scientists. He’s even attacked a university research area.

So, pretty much, it’ll be very, very hard for them for eight, nine years unless they get a lot of Chinese help and North Korean help, and they come in en masse.

The fifth agenda is a little bit less clear because he never said my reason is to go in there and—he might’ve thought that, he might’ve implied it, but if you look at his written statement and what he said formally, regime change.

And yet we all know that the regime change, whether it be the Venezuela model or a true uprising of the dissatisfied Iranian public to take control of the government and have a constitutional system, whichever the replacement is, it’s preferable to the mullahs.

But we are not going to be able to shepherd that in because we’re not going to go in on the ground. All we can do is emasculate the theocracy and then hope that there’s a popular uprising.

And then we have to be very careful because if we’re going to drain the theocracy of their ability to recoup and have money, then you have to go into Kharg Island.

If you go into Kharg Island and grab the oil or attack the oil fields, then you’re hurting the people that supposedly you want to help to take over the government.

At some point, and I don’t know what it is, you don’t know what it is, I don’t think anybody knows where it is, Iran will have no more viable targets.

The United States will be looking at its arsenals and wanting to make sure that we have enough if China does go into Taiwan because it’s angry that we have begun in Venezuela, kicked it out of Venezuela, kicked it out of Iran, kicked it out of everywhere we could. We have to be very careful.

At some point, the Israelis, the Americans and the Iranians will think it’s not in their interest to continue, and we don’t know when that point is.

For us in the United States, it’s when the economy and the price of gas gets to such a level that it becomes almost impossible, given the hostile media and the propaganda that’s coming from the Left that this is a disaster, that Donald Trump cannot win the midterms. And therefore, the entire MAGA agenda will be inert in the next two and a half years.

If that starts to crystallize, then he will probably say we’ve done enough, and we now turn it over to the Iranian people. Then it’ll be a question, will the Iranians, when there’s not an active war going on and when there’s such damage to the theocracy, will they come out? Especially if we arm them, or we have people in there that can arm them. And will that regime fall in the next four or five months?

If it should do that, that will be to the credit of Donald Trump.

As far as the regime, again, it will do anything, lie, steal, murder, anything to stay in power because it knows it’s on the back of a lion or tiger. If it steps off, they’re all going to be jailed and probably executed for what they’ve done to the Iranian people.

The New Marxist-Leninist Democratic Party

 

For all practical purposes, there is no longer a Democratic Party,
at least as we’ve known it for 50 to 100 years. What we’re witnessing
in Washington as the opposition under Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries
is something that we haven’t really seen before. It is a full-blown
Socialist Revolutionary Party

.

The players of that party that are running things are not even Chuck
Schumer or Hakeem Jeffries. They’re people like [outgoing] Congresswoman
Jasmine Crockett.
They’re people like Mr. [James] Talarico in Texas, Mr. [Zohran]
Mamdani. Elizabeth Warren. The socialist Bernie Sanders, etc., etc.

They’re radical leftists. And they believe in a mandated equality of
result, perpetuated or completed by radically high taxes from people who
have been successful and to transfer that money to people who have been
unsuccessful. Not because of any fault of their own or any gift or
success of the wealthy, but because of oppression.

And they’ve created a Marxist Leninist binary in the world. There’s 70%, the
so-called white population, because they’ve confused and conflated race
with class. That is the oppressor class. And the 30% that is the
oppressed class.

And the victimized class feels that they have legitimate grievances
against the other 70% for not having what they do. And therefore, the
Democratic Party steps in and says that we will mandate an equality of
result. That is the agenda. And you can see it on all fronts.

If people are poor, they want to come to the United States, then open
the border. They should have a right to do that. And when they come to
the United States, they can become better off than they were in Mexico
or El Salvador or the Caribbean because they’re going to get
entitlements. And those entitlements will be costly and expensive,
fraud-ridden, as we’ve seen in California and Minnesota.

 

Statue of Lenin
The Statue of Lenin in Seattle, Washington in 2012

 

And that will require people to pay their, quote, fair share and
higher taxes. Which is a good in itself. Not just because the money is
transferred to the people who don’t have it through entitlements, but
more importantly, you’re emasculating people who “didn’t earn that.”
“You didn’t build that,” as Elizabeth Warren said.

So that’s what the party is. You can see it on the border. You can
see it with crime. They believe that crime is committed not by
individuals who break existing laws, but by society, which created the
conditions for crime.

And so, therefore, we see no-cash bail, or we see somebody who
commits a heinous crime, and they’re let out. They’re either not jailed.
They’re not indicted. They’re not convicted, and they’re not
incarcerated, because of, I guess we would call it, critical legal
theory.

Behind all of it, though, is diversity, equity, and inclusion. And
this is what they’ve had a problem with because when the American public
sees this, and they said, you’ve created a victim class that you
represent, and then you’ve demonized the other 70% that ar so-called
white, and people are saying, well, you’re on the wrong side of
percentages.

Unless you can convince, as happened with Barack Obama’s candidacy,
to get more white people to vote for him than maybe voted for Romney or
John McCain. Or maybe more white people voted for Obama than they did
for John Kerry, four years earlier. But the point is that it has nothing
to do with class.

So, one of the problems that democratic socialists, or whatever these
people call themselves, have is Mamdani’s a multimillionaire. His
parents are multimillionaires. When he says he wants to go after white
neighborhoods for equity, the wealthiest minority in the United States,
today, ethnic minority, is Mamdani. It’s Indian Americans. Americans of
Indian heritage.

And the next six or seven or eight ethnic groups are not white. And
there is no direct relationship anymore between your skin color and your
class status or your income. And so, if that’s not true, when you go
after these people, then you are basically an out-and-out racist because
they haven’t done anything to you. And the greatest number of people
who are poor in the United States remain white.

Let’s just ask ourselves what happened to the Democratic Party. If we
were to look at the ’92 and ’96 agendas at the Democratic Convention,
and those were written by Doug Schoen and Mark Penn. It’s pretty much a
Republican agenda now.

It was closed borders. Legal-only immigration. Strong support for
unions. Trying juveniles who commit violent crimes as adults. Strong
national defense. Balanced budget, achieved for four years under Bill
Clinton, and with the help of Newt Gingrich. That’s all out the window.
Anybody in the Democratic Party who espouses those views today would be
considered a heretic or worse.

So between the Clinton phenomenon of ’92 to 2000, what happened? It’d
be easy to say Barack Obama happened. That he ginned up latent racial
tensions and grievances and used them for political purposes to get
himself elected and reelected. That’s true

But there were larger cosmic forces that created a Barack Obama.
And the first, of course, was open borders. We have now 53 million
people. It’s the largest in the history of the United States. In
numbers, 16.2% of the United States resident population was not born in
the United States.

Some of them are naturalized citizens, but as we’ve seen this last
two weeks, whether it was the Old Dominion shooting or the attack on the
synagogue or the IEDs that were thrown out in front of the New York
governor’s mansion or the shooting in Austin, we have a problem with
naturalized citizens

They do not assimilate, acculturate or integrate in the way that they
used to under the melting pot. And they formed constituencies for the
Democratic Party. And they are told that you came here—and it doesn’t
really matter under what auspices—if you’re part of the 53 million, and
there’s probably 30 million, with the Biden additions that came
illegally, you still had a right.

We don’t believe in borders, and therefore, you come here. We will
provide the entitlements. And we will water down voting laws. No voter
ID, even though 70% of the American people want them. And you will be
either a present or a future constituency.

So that was a big change. Demography is destiny, they told us. The
new Democrat majority, they told us and that came true. That was a big
factor in their rise.

The second thing was globalization.
Globalization created two societies in the United States. The East
Coast, from Massachusetts down to the Carolinas, looked out at the EU,
and the West Coast, from Seattle to San Diego, looked out at Asia, the
Tigers, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and, of course, mainland China.

And people who had particular skills that were globalized, and here
they were in tech, insurance, investment, law, media, academia. They
found that their audience, their constituency, was expanded from 300
million, let’s say, 10 years ago, maybe 340 million now, to seven
billion. But for those who mined or farmed or assembled or manufactured,
they were outsourced offshore, or they couldn’t keep up with cheap
imports

This is what got Donald Trump elected, but it also explains the new
Democratic Party. They used to rail about the importance of the middle class.
They dropped that. That was the meme of Donald Trump. They found that
by supporting the 30% DEI agenda and the globalized elite, they had a
new constituency. And that was vast amounts of money. All of Silicon
Valley and its $9 trillion in market capitalization, until recently, was
put at the service of the Democratic Party.

So this party radicalized in two fashions. You brought in a lot of
poor people, and you re-energized people of color to say that your
problems were not your own, but they were committed by the deplorables,
the irredeemables, the clingers, the chumps, the dregs, the garbage. And
then you had the money to outspend your Republican candidates in vast
numbers.

And more importantly, with the rise of left-wing big tech and the
left-wing corporate boardroom and the left-wing academics, you could
control institutions. The medium is the message.

So ABC, NBC, NPR, social media, Facebook, the old Twitter, you name
it. There was a popular culture, professional sports. There was a
monopoly on left-wing knowledge, and that was very, very valuable.

And finally, the old idea of integration, intermarriage,
assimilation, the melting pot, that was not conducive to this new
Socialist Democratic Party. They said, why would we bring in people who
wanted to be American and wanted to identify essentially as American and
only incidentally, in their former country?

We saw what happened, the Democrats said, in 1956 when we let in the
Hungarians, anti-communist, they came over here. They assimilated as
Americans. They became very, very conservative voters. We saw what
happened in 1959 to 1980 when we let in all of these Cubans, who had
been driven out by communism. They were very patriotic Americans. They
assimilated, and they were a constituency that we didn’t like.

So, what we want to do is refabricate the immigration. Let in a lot
of people, but not from particular countries that would mean they were
successful, they had skills. We don’t want anybody from Europe. We don’t
want anybody from Australia or the former British Commonwealth, such as
New Zealand. We don’t want anybody coming in here who is anti-communist
as a refugee.

We want people who are poor and are accustomed to socialist countries
and will come here and want more socialist benefits. That’s South
America, Latin America, Africa, large parts of Asia. And they will be
the constituency that allows us to have an unpopular message that
existing Americans have never liked and do not like at all.

And the result was the Democrats can’t win elections with open,
transparent balloting, one-day balloting, and they know it. But if you
take over the institutions and you use this globalized financial power
and you appeal to very, very wealthy people’s sense of noblesse oblige
or guilt or whatever strategy you use, and you combine that with a mass
of very poor people who came in very recently, many under illegal
circumstances, you have a constituency that required one thing.

You had to give up the white middle working class. The union class
that you used to champion. The Hubert Humphrey, John F. Kennedy, Harry
Truman class. You despise those people. And we know that because you
didn’t just give up on them and accept a globalized agenda and an
expanded welfare state, but you created a vocabulary of disparagement.

As I said earlier, these were the clingers. These were the people who
had no teeth in their head. These were the people who Peter Strzok,
Lisa Page texted about smelling up Walmart. All this disparagement for a
class of people you despised, and I don’t think you’re going to win
them back.

But just to finish, there is no Democratic Party. There’s a Socialist
Party. But it’s a very weird Socialist Party. It’s a pyramiddle party
with a lot of very wealthy, globalized elites that run things at the
top. Nothing in the middle of the pyramid. And then an expansive big
base of poor people, of immigrants, and of people who claim that they
identify mostly in their diversity, equity, inclusion person, and not
necessarily as a full-fledged American.

No, MAGA Is Not Falling Apart Because a Few Podcasters Did Not Get Their Way

 Oh no, the America First/MAGA coalition is completely falling apart because – and I want to make sure I’ve got this correct – Donald Trump has systematically destroyed a bunch of Third World semi-human pagan savages who have been murdering Americans for nearly 50 years before they could top a missile with a hot rock and nuke Philadelphia. Yeah, the coalition is gravely disappointed – but not in Trump. It’s disappointed that a small component of his coalition that, for reasons that remain elusive and probably involve extreme greed, a psychotic break, gross stupidity, and/or libertarianism, which is an amalgamation of all three, has decided to adopt views that are functionally identical to those of the damn communists. This is both inevitable and unsustainable. 

Coalitions have tensions. They resolve; we’re going to be fine.

Here’s the thing. Donald Trump built a new coalition. He brought together a whole bunch of people who were united by a resistance to the gooey, nanny-state socialist woke blob that was doing the bidding of our garbage ruling class and screwing us over in the process. But the thing about a coalition is that coalitions are composed of different groups with different interests. In 2024, folks like me and most of you – straight-up patriots, largely Republican, who love America, love freedom, and hate the woke communist self-hating garbage that has infiltrated so many of our institutions – united with other factions to put Donald Trump back in office. Now, the folks like me and you, pretty much the normal conservatives, make up the vast majority of the Trump coalition. But we don’t make up a majority of the country. To win a majority, we had to unite with other folks to beat Kamala. That is, we created a coalition. But we don’t agree with those other people on everything. 

We agree with them on a lot. Some of these groups we probably agree with on 75-80 percent of the stuff, and that’s pretty good. A coalition in which you agree with people on most things is strong. But it’s those places where you differ that the cracks and the fissures develop. It’s the seams where the coalition is vulnerable to fracture. And there’s some fracturing going on now. The question is whether it will break the coalition apart.

Before we talk about where the coalition is cracking, let’s talk about what the coalition is made up of. We have the aforementioned normal Republicans. Again, these are flag, faith, and family folks who like America, and are generally not living bizarre lifestyles that involve multiple genders, animated animal costumes, or welfare fraud. It’s the majority of the Republican Party. It’s not all of the Republican Party; it’s about 80 percent+ of it, to judge from the polls of Republicans that show Trump has about 80 percent+ GOP support on Iran. The Republican Party is, itself, a coalition and is composed of several factions besides normal Republicans, like establishment shills and Never Trump traitors. The shills use the Republican Party as a vehicle for personal gain and power. They will be with us as long as it’s to their advantage. The Never Trump types are as faithful to other Republicans as their wives are to them when Pablo the Pool Boy shows up. The loud and proud Never Trumpers long ago disassociated themselves with the GOP. It’s the hidden ones who are the problem; when they finally reveal themselves and see they’ve got no future, they feel free to indulge their pro-Democrat inclinations. But enough about Thom Tillis. 

The Trump coalition is not only these normal Republicans, but it is also some folks who were previously associated with the left. Look at the MAHA Moms – vaccine skepticism and inverting the food pyramid, where about -12 on a scale of 1 to 10 in importance for regular Republicans. But it was 10 out of 10 for the MAHA Moms. Donald Trump brought Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., into the coalition and threw that part of the coalition oversight of American health. Which was fine with normal Republicans – if you’re telling us we should eat more steak, we’re all ears. And, frankly, the disgraceful behavior of Science Inc. during COVID-19 and otherwise made us quite willing to give people we might, in other contexts, have thought of as crackpots a crack at fixing our society. While SNL did a very funny take of (I know, the sun coming up in the west, right?) on The Pitt if run by RFK, Jr., the biggest and best joke they could do about the Health Secretary was that he’s like 75 years old and super muscular. We should all be so lucky.

Another significant group was the pod bro contingent. In many cases, these were associated with libertarians, so you know where this is going. But JD Vance is also somewhat associated with them, though that may change. Many of them were young men completely alienated by the Democrats’ war on, well, young men. Their avatars were guys like Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens. They hated wokeness, but they also hated what they called "forever wars." And not without good cause. Our establishment killed and maimed countless Americans through its utterly inept foreign policies and failed execution of military projects. Trump was the first to speak out as a Republican against the Iraq War in no uncertain terms, and his opposition to that kind of foolishness was key to winning over this particular demographic.

But pod people seemed to hear what they wanted to hear from Donald Trump, not what Donald Trump was saying. Donald Trump is no pacifist. Donald Trump is a Jacksonian. Donald Trump is happy to use the United States military as a Louisville slugger to beat Third World scum who get uppity with the United States into a pulp. But he’s not willing to waste American lives where there’s no cognizable interest, nor where we’re doing uncompensated work for alleged allies who won’t pull their weight. Yes, we’re talking about you, NATO, which is right next to Ukraine, and is eager to fight Russia to the last drop of American blood.

There are other little groups, too. Some people overlap groups. But the bottom line is this: this is a coalition. These are different groups with different focuses, each expecting a slice of the pie of power. The Democrats do this, too. They’ve got their coalition – normie liberals, race communists, various flavors of perverts, as well as ethnic hustlers, criminal excusers, and welfare cheats. We’ve happily exploited the fault lines in their coalition, and now they’re exploiting the ones in ours. That’s why, suddenly, Marjorie Taylor Greene – if only this could be the last time I ever have to mention that creature, who is about 47 minutes into her 15 minutes of fame – is all over CNN. That’s why Joe Kent, who should have more common sense, is getting approving tweets from Bernie Sanders and the like. 

The podcast people have turned on Donald Trump, not because he started a war with Iran, but because he decided to finish one. It bears repeating – it is not a forever war if you win it. The real objection to those wars was losing them. And Donald Trump intends to win this one despite the full-scale fake panic of people who seem more than a little committed to America’s defeat. Why that is unclear – I’m convinced that a psychotic break explains why Tucker Carlson is sounding like a daddy-disappointing 23-year-old gender studies sophomore from Oberlin. But others just see they can carve out a tiny, but lucrative, niche by hating on the guy who made them relevant in the first place.

Now, we may lose some of the podcast people, but the idea that this is somehow because of a betrayal by Donald Trump is idiocy, if not an outright lie. Donald Trump never promised to withdraw America into some sort of shame closet of Thomas Massie- approved isolationist onanism and allow bizarre primitives to hassle the United States without fear of our righteous wrath. He promised no more endless wars pushed by our garbage elite and fought by normal Americans that resulted in tactical victories and strategic defeats. He rejected the Rules of Engagement Theory of warfare, which prioritizes upholding an arbitrary standard imposed by academics far outside the battlefield, instead of embracing the one and only metric that matters in war: victory. And Trump is keeping his promise.

But will this shatter MAGA? Well, according to at least one poll, Donald Trump has achieved a North Korean dictator-level of support of 100 percent among MAGA. It’s not at all clear why a minority portion of the coalition would expect Donald Trump to embrace their radical minority view regarding the masculinity of our foreign policy. The podcast people are basically rounding errors when it comes to numbers – they’re just very loud. We normals are a much bigger group, and we strongly support the president. Why is it a betrayal for our president to do what the vast majority of the coalition wants, instead of catering to a few bespoke ideological neophytes who just became political last week and now expect us to embrace the brand new bunch of beliefs they just adopted and now aggressively advocate with all the feverish zeal of a convert? Before last Tuesday, most of these goofs couldn’t have found Palestine on a map, even if Palestine existed on a map. They look and sound foolish, which they no doubt think is somehow the fault of the Jews.

So no, the fight over the Iran War won't destroy this coalition. The fact that Donald Trump hasn’t already done everything every subgroup of the coalition wants isn't going to destroy the coalition either. Oh, they may stay home in November. Some of them were not hyper-voters because they’ve never voted before. Either the valid argument that the Democrats are much worse will work, or it won’t. They may cut off their nose to spite their face, but you can’t make people politically mature, especially when they’re politically immature. 

But the fact is that a useful coalition partner is a coalition partner whose members understand that they can’t get everything they want all the time. A functioning coalition consists of partners who sacrifice some of their preferences to achieve other of their preferences. If your reaction to not getting everything you want all the time, right now, is to throw a temper tantrum, you’re not actually a member of the coalition anyway. You’re just a free rider. Donald Trump should save his rewards for those who do the hard work of being members of the MAGA coalition, not pay tribute to a bunch of people who will turn on him the moment he does something they dislike. That’s not being part of a coalition. That’s being a jerk.

The Epstein Mystery Takes a New Turn

 

The body of prison inmate and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was discovered on the morning of August 10, 2019, in the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in Manhattan.

Despite U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr quickly ruling the questionable death a suicide, there have been continuing suspicions that Epstein was murdered.

As the release of his extensive files demonstrated, Jeffrey Epstein was extremely connected throughout the world. There were many powerful people with a motivation to kill him so that their involvement in his illegal activities would not be revealed.

One person who does not believe Epstein committed suicide is famed forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Baden, former Chief Medical Examiner in New York City. Baden has performed more than 20,000 autopsies in his storied career. He said, “The autopsy findings are much more consistent with a crushing injury caused by homicidal strangulation than caused by hanging by suicide.”

Baden noted that Epstein had three fractures in his neck. He said that individuals with “even one fracture, we have to investigate the possibility of a homicide.” Baden has never seen a suicide with three neck fractures, nor has such a case ever been referenced in “findings in textbooks.”

Dr. Baden was a witness to the autopsy at the request of Mark Epstein, Jeffrey’s brother, who also believes that he was murdered.

Recently, in the trove of Epstein documents released by the Department of Justice, a video was discovered from the Metropolitan Correctional Center. In the corner of the video footage, a blurry “orange blob” is seen going up the stairs to Epstein’s floor at 10:39 P.M. on August 9, 2019.

The FBI speculated that the image could have shown an inmate or a correctional officer, but no definitive answer has ever been provided. Instead, the image could have been the murderer accessing the stairwell to kill Epstein. No one knows for sure because the video cameras outside of Epstein’s cell were conveniently not working.

However, video from the nearby “officer station of the ninth floor L tier wing” was included within the massive release of Epstein files. According to reporters Gabrielle Fahmy and Shane Galvin of the New York Post, this station was just “a short set of stairs” away from Epstein’s cell.

The video from 3:15 A.M. on the morning of August 10, 2019, shows the MCC prison guards assigned to Epstein, Tova Noel and Michael Thomas. Instead of checking on Epstein and the other inmates every 30 minutes as was required, the guards were sleeping, surfing the Internet, “writing on a piece of paper, walking back and forth and talking on the phone.”

Along with searching online for furniture, Noel made several searches for the “latest on Epstein in jail.” The last search occurred just minutes before his body was discovered.

Noel and Thomas falsified records to indicate that Epstein’s cell was checked. They were fired for “misconduct and poor job performance,” but criminal charges against them were dropped.

One issue that must be investigated is new reports that Noel made 12 questionable cash deposits from April 2018 to July 30, 2019, just ten days before Epstein’s body was found. The last deposit of $5,000 was the largest amount and the overall total was $11,880.

Possibly, these cash deposits helped Noel purchase a “$62,000 2019 Land Rover Range Rover,” which is an expensive vehicle considering the average salary for an MCC prison guard was $52,481 in 2019.

It should also be noted that Noel moved to the “Special Housing Unit,” which included Epstein’s cell on July 7, 2019, “just weeks before his death.”

Hopefully, these issues will be examined thoroughly by Republican House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (KY-1) and his colleagues. Comer said that Noel has been called to testify before his committee on Thursday, March 26. He said if she does not appear, “I’ll subpoena her” because “We’ve got a lot of questions to ask.”

Since the prison guards were preoccupied with everything but doing their jobs, the exact time of Epstein’s death has never been determined. This is just one of many mysteries in this perplexing case. Assistant U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the problems were due to “dishonest” prison guards who did not check on the inmates.

Another problem is how the case was managed by the Department of Justice, which transferred the Epstein death investigation to the Office of Inspector General, which lacked “prosecutorial powers.” Unfortunately, this transfer prevented “the examination of Epstein’s death as a murder.”

According to an investigation by The Miami Herald, “As a result his cell was never considered a possible crime scene that would, under normal circumstances, be examined by experienced criminal and forensic experts who would take fingerprints, blood samples, and other evidence. One thing that got lost…was that the piece of fabric that Epstein allegedly used to hang himself was never identified.”

We are also learning that there were bags of evidence destroyed in the days after Epstein’s death. An analysis by The Miami Herald revealed there were “people shredding documents” in the immediate aftermath of Epstein’s death. It is unknown what was in the “bags” of documents, but it was reported to be “unusual volumes of materials.”

One correctional officer reported to the FBI that he had “never seen” so many “bags of shredded documents…put in the dumpster at the rear gate” of the prison. The “bags” of documents were shredded and removed before federal agents reviewed their contents.

What was in those “bags” of documents? Additionally, there is no video, no hanging noose, no prison guards performing their duties, mysterious Internet searches, questionable payments, and ample motivation to kill Epstein.

Also, the world’s most renowned forensic pathologist believes Epstein was murdered. Yet, if Americans do not believe the official “suicide” narrative, we are labeled “conspiracy theorists.”

This case has been poorly administered from the beginning. It is not a “hoax,” it is now the story with unending questions. However, the first question that needs to be answered is “Who killed Jeffrey Epstein?”

Why 2026 Could Be the Most Dangerous and Transformational Year Since World War II

2026 looks like it’s going to be the most tumultuous, geo-strategically significant and dangerous year since the fall of the Soviet system and the fall of the Berlin Wall. The whole world is in upheaval. Donald Trump is the catalyst of this. A lot of people, both in his base and his opponents, both here in the United States and abroad, blame him.

I think a few years ago, one European diplomat said, “Well, he’s a bull in a China shop, only he’s a bull in a nuclear China shop.” Maybe, maybe not.

But let’s just review what’s taking place right now. For the second time, we’re bombing Iran, and this time the negotiations clearly were not going to lead to this 47-year problem resolution.

Iran’s theocracy has no intention of stopping nuclear proliferation. It wants a bomb to dominate the Middle East, to intimidate the petro kingdoms of the Gulf, to show its dominance over Sunni Islam, and to destroy eventually Israel, threaten Europe for blackmail concessions and eventually us.

We’ve known that. Every president, all seven of them before Trump, said that, and they were going take care of the problem or prevent it from exacerbating. None did anything.

Trump tried to negotiate, take out the nuclear facilities, and then he learned that they were still trying to, after the bombing: restore them, expand their Russia, North Korean, Chinese ballistic missile force, ensure that nobody would dare attack them again.

And Trump did. And this time his plan is to remove either now or so detrite the theocracy that it would erode in the next few months by a popular uprising or maybe have a Venezuela solution. Barring that, at least make it inert militarily.

This follows the [Nicolas] Maduro, what do we call it, kidnapping coup. We removed this communist thug, drug lord, shipper of dangerous opiates into the United States, propped up Cuba and was trying to spread the Chavez communist message throughout Latin America. It looked like he was succeeding under Joe Biden. Now the whole world there is different.

Venezuela doesn’t have Maduro. It has a strong government in the sense that they will keep order, and maybe they will have transitions to democracy. We hope so. But they are terrified of the United States that removed their government and told them they put the oil on the world market, they reform their economy, they get the Chinese out, and they will have a bright future.

This coincides with democratic revolutions in Central America, Chile, maybe Bolivia and Peru. We’ll see how those work out. And of course, Argentina.

So it’s a whole new Latin America. It’s experiencing a westernized constitutional system revolution. And again, the catalyst has been Donald Trump.

First, by telling the Panamanians, “We know what you’re doing. It’s not smart for you to do this, to triangulate with the Chinese. If you do it, we’ll take back the canal.” And he got results. And the result is China and Russia are now excluded from the Western Hemisphere.

At the same time, he’s pressuring the Cubans. They have no more subsidized oil from Russia. They know that their drugs—that they are intermediaries in smuggling and shipping to the U.S.—are being blown up on the high seas. There’s no more Chavez-Maduro free fuel, and their innately incompetent and inert economy is imploding.

And Trump is basically saying, “You saw what happened to Venezuela, you saw what happened to Iran. You’re not halfway across the world. You’re not down in South America. You’re right here 90 miles away from us. And this will be a cakewalk if you don’t try to reform and give your people a choice, an economic liberation, a political liberation, a cultural, social liberation.”

And it looks like they’re going allow American businessmen, mostly Cuban Americans, to go back in there and invest.

If that happens and you start to see offshore companies, energy development, hotels, tourism, communism will die on the vine.

So what am I getting at? I’m getting at that there’s a world upheaval that Donald Trump sort of took a fuse and he lit it, and things are blowing up everywhere, and everybody is paranoid and crazy, and they’re thinking that he’s a disruptor.

And then we have the Ukraine war, and he has convinced the Europeans that you have to do two things that they don’t understand. You can’t buy energy from Russia. Maybe he’s lifted that because the Straits of Hormuz are closed temporarily. But you can’t subsidize the Russian war machine and then tell the United States that because of your suicidal energy policies, you have to do that. But you also have to have the United States step in and save you.

And so, we’re trying to find a solution, but one of the tactics that Trump is using, that’s very misunderstood. He is trying to say [Vladimir] Putin is a monster. Of course, he is. Don’t trust him. But I wasn’t the one that started this crazy reset. I was the one that got rid of the Wagner Group. I was the one that went after the oligarchs. I was the one that got out of the missile treaty. I was the one that gave offensive weapons to Ukraine, not you.

I was the one that warned you about the Nord Stream pipeline, not you, not [Joe] Biden. I did. So here, if I’m going to get involved, don’t demonize him, because we can weaken him and then we can flip him so that he doesn’t go back into Europe, but he also triangulates against China.

So what I’m getting at, if that happens, and you see a different government in Cuba, Venezuela and a tidal wave of reform in Latin America, where at the same time you get rid of the 47-year cancer in the Middle East for which American troops have been based, take away the Iranian theocracy, and there’s not going to be 200 installations of Americans in Syria and Iraq.

And then you add into the combination what Cuba has done to us all these years. It’s been a receptacle of American terrorists, hijackers, drug smugglers.

At one time, remember, it was going to base nuclear weapons from Russia pointed at us, the Cuban Missile Crisis of ’62. It’s just been a headache.

If you could solve all of those things in one year, it would be unheard of. It would make [Ronald] Reagan’s achievement of destroying the Soviet Union, although it fell during the successor George H.W. Bush, it would look minor in comparison almost.

Think about this very quickly. This was not necessary in Trump’s political calculus. He had the midterms coming up. Eight or nine months when he went into Venezuela and Iran. That took a great risk to distract attention away from the economy. The economy had been moribund under Joe Biden, and it was starting to pick up, and he was bragging about the low cost of energy.

If you’re just a political animal, what you don’t do right before the midterms is go into two of the largest oil-producing countries in the world and, for the short term at least, ensure their oil is going be reduced. And yet he took that risk.

And more importantly, he knows how Europe feels about it. Europe is so touchy because they have ruled out basically producing their own natural gas, their own oil. They’re very reluctant to follow the French example of nuclear power. And the result is they’re very dependent on imported oil, and they’re whispering to Trump, “Don’t do this, don’t be disruptive.” So he’s got a problem with this.

And then the MAGA base, remember, says, “No optional wars abroad.” And Trump is trying to say, well, these are using air power. I haven’t used ground troops. This is not Afghanistan. These are going to be short-term solutions to long-term problems. And in the future, if we’re successful, there’ll be fewer Americans abroad because we’ll have a greater number of American allies and friends who will be consensual.

They’ll be ruled by consensual governments. They’ll have free economies. And more importantly, they will have a different attitude or view of the United States, not one as a reluctant weakling or an unarmed or a Joe Biden, Barack Obama appeaser, but somebody who’s very unpredictable but follows up what he says, and they will be more likely to respect and join us. Strength radiates friendship, weakness repels it.

Finally, again, I think we misunderstood what’s going on. There are disruptions all over the world, but three quarters of them are reaching a consensus, an end, some type of resolution one way or the other.

I don’t know how they’re all going turn out, but there is a good chance they could turn out with the United States in a preeminent position that we haven’t seen at least since WWII. 

What Is It With the Fickle Europeans?

What is it with the fickle Europeans? I know that they have different interests than ours, but we’re both Western entities. You’d think that we’d be more collaborative on the effort to disarm and denuclearize Iran. But a lot of strange things are happening.

The traditional use of the Diego Garcia critical airbase in the Indian Ocean, run by the British, but often leased to us and allowed us to have a very valuable base for our long-range bombers. The British initially refused to allow us to use it. And then, only under conditions that it would be used for defensive purposes.

I don’t know what that means. But I think they forgot the 1982 Falklands War. They were in big trouble going all the way across the world to attack a country in the Western Hemisphere.

We were trying to be on friendly relationships so that [Argentina] wouldn’t join the other communist nations. And of course, we offered them 2 million gallons of gasoline. We offered them the use of a carrier if they needed it. We gave them sophisticated intelligence. Without the United States’ help, they would’ve had a very hard time retaking it. So, what’s happened?

And then Spain has said that we can’t use at all the NATO base there in Spain. [President Emmanuel] Macron in France and [Chancellor Friedrich] Merz in Germany have also said they’ve expressed reservations.

President Donald Trump is now trying to say, you know, we’re using all of our assets to disarm this common threat to the West. Could you just send a few ships to help us, you know, patrol the Strait of Hormuz? And they’re reluctant.

This gets back to the United States, who pays an inordinate amount of the NATO budget. And it keeps having to, you know, to harangue and hammer. “Please, please defend yourself. We are here to help you, but we’re across the ocean, 3,000 miles away. And this is in your interest. You know, this is the third time Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine.”

So, don’t they have a fear of Iran? I mean, there was a joint missile defense project. Obama canceled it, in that infamous quid pro quo hot mic conversation where he made a deal with the Russians to give him space so he could get reelected. He would dismantle the Czech and Polish project to have missile defense. That was primarily for the protection of Europe. The United States was going to pay a great deal of it. Protection from Iran.

So, what’s going on? What explains this European schizophrenia? That they want to be an ally, but they don’t want to be an ally. They’re scared to death of a nuclear Iran, but they don’t want to do anything about it. They want the United States to handle it, but they want the United States to handle it and keep them out of it.

But most of their oil comes from the Middle East or North Africa. So, they are adamant that they want the supplies, reliable. They want the Strait of Hormuz open. They want the United States to ensure that. They want the United States to clear the Red Sea of Houthi attacks. We know all that, but they’re not there when we need them at all. And a very, you know, a very reasonable request.

And so why is this? Well, I think there’s a lot of reasons. I think they’ve made some disastrous, internal and external choices in their policies. First of all, Germany has 16% of its population are immigrants that weren’t born in Germany. The vast majority of them are unassimilated, unacculturated, unintegrated Muslims.

Many of them, or most, under Angela Merkel policy. She was the German version of Alejandro Mayorkas, who opened the border and pretty much enacted this destructive policy. In other countries at 6% to 10% to 12%.

But the key is there’s a force multiplier of these open-border illegal immigration policies. And that is the Muslim communities that immigrate are more radical often than the countries they left that were radical enough.

They don’t want to be part of the West. They feel that their birth rate and their increased immigration will soon swamp these European governments. And the European governments are terrified of them.

So, on key issues of concern to the West, to emasculate Iran, they’re afraid to say anything. And they’re afraid to express support for Israel because these internal populations within the continent will turn on them, or they won’t get their votes.

The second disastrous policy was green energy. Germany and other countries, with the exception of France, have either put on hold or dismantled their coal plants. In the case of Germany, they had to restart them because they disarmed or displaced their nuclear facilities.

They don’t want to tap the huge natural gas deposits that are thought to be in continental Europe. They are not looking for new sources of offshore oil. They don’t want any fossil fuels. No natural gas unless we import it.

They don’t want to develop themselves. And the result is their energy is two or three times more expensive than their economic competitors. And they’re captives of the Middle East and Russia for energy. So that has affected their political independence.

Third, they thought they were at the end of history after the fall of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact. So, they thought they were in some type of disarmament utopia. So, they, more or less, disarmed.

So, here we are with tiny little Israel with 11 million, 10 million people, and they have 300 front-line aircraft fighters, jets that are flying every day with some of the best pilots in the world. And they have more fighters than our key trio of NATO partners. More than Germany. More than France. More than Great Britain.

Of course, we know about European fertility. Ours is bad enough at 1.65. Theirs is down to 1.3 and 1.4 in some countries, and 1.1. There’s been a new credo in Europe that you’re not going to have children. The good life is too precious. Why waste it raising children? And of course, socialism is not sustainable.

They have this huge socialist safety net, which is exacerbated by millions of impoverished Middle East people coming in illegally who demand entitlements and, sort of, threaten their hosts. And they’re not very gracious immigrants. And you put it all together, and you get European schizophrenia.

And what is that schizophrenia? It’s quietly whispering to the United States, “Help us. Help us. You’ve got to make sure that Russia doesn’t go further west in Ukraine. What are you going to do?”

“All seven presidents before you, Mr. Trump, they’ve all worried about the Iranian nuclear ballistic missile crisis. We’re closer than you are. We can’t keep appeasing them. They hate us as much as they hate you. Who is going to do something? Please, Mr. President.”

And then publicly, “Oh, we’re very disturbed. This is very disturbing. This is very dangerous. I don’t think that we really want to be actively a participant.”

And, the final irony, Europe’s got a bigger population than we do. 450 million people. And its GDP is about the size of China’s. So, it’s got huge resources and potential, even under its socialist and green energy policies. Even with its open borders. Even with its low fertility. With all of those crises that are self-inflicted, it still could arm itself and be a full partner. And yet, it will not do it.

And therefore, it knows it should do it. And it knows there’s things that must be done. And it wants them done, but it wants the United States to do it. So, at the same time, it can criticize them and triangulate against its own savior.

It’s a tragic and really, to be honest, pathetic situation. 

The Ungrateful Immigrant

 I’d like to talk about a very controversial topic. I call it the ungrateful immigrant. You know, it used to be in the United States that immigrants were our great strength. We all saw maybe Elia Kazan’s “America, America,” the story of his uncle’s struggles to get to the U.S., and how much he worshiped the country when he arrived here.

Max Nikias, he is the former president of USC. He came with nothing from Cyprus, and he has a new memoir out, “American Trojan,” about how lucky he was to get here, and how he worshiped the United States.

That was sort of the general perception that we had of immigrants. Think of Silicon Valley. I mean, Tesla, SpaceX, eBay, Stripe, Sun Microsystems, I could go down the list. They’re all created by these wonderful legal immigrants.

But that’s changing. And I’m not talking about the 500,000 illegal immigrants who were known to have come across with criminal records. I’m not talking about the truck drivers.

Thousands of them that were given licenses, even though they did not qualify for a driving competency test. Even though they didn’t know English. Even though they had been involved in a number of lethal accidents.

I’m not talking about the Somali fraud. That’s self-evident. Thousands of Somalis were involved as payback to arriving in America, and to us, their magnanimous hosts, they paid us back by what? Embezzling up to $9 billion. I’m not talking about Rep. Ilhan Omar and antisemitic remark, “It’s the Benjamin’s baby,” or labeling and vilifying the United States as trash. That’s all self-evident.

What’s new are legal immigrants and naturalized citizens. As if they become almost … They have a schizophrenic idea. They hate the country, but under no circumstances do they want to leave it.

Just in an eight-day period: A week ago, we had in Austin, Texas, a Senegal naturalized citizen who went into a beer garden and opened fire. Killed three and wounded a lot of them. At Old Dominion University in Virginia, a naturalized immigrant from Sierra Leone came in, and he shot the ROTC instructor and yelled, “Allahu Akbar.”

All of these were Islamicists. Although you won’t find that very readily in the mainstream media. Out in front of the New York mayor’s mansion, there was a protest against Islam and a counterprotest supporting Mamdani and two naturalized citizens, one an Afghan, one parents from Turkey, they brought two IEDs and tried to, they said, surpass the Boston Marathon bomber of 2013.

Remember them? The Tsarnaev brothers? They were Chechens from Russia. And we were very magnanimous in allowing them to come in. And how did they repay us? By trying to slaughter people. They injured dozens. Dozens. More than dozens in Boston.

And then, of course, we had the synagogue attempt by a Lebanese naturalized citizen. And he had ties with Hezbollah. His family were Hezbollah members. He tries to drive his car into a synagogue in Michigan and kill people. And the question is, why do they do that?

Maybe a better rephrasing it would be why don’t they do it?

We have no civic education. We ask very little of the immigrant when they come to the United States. We don’t ask them to have a high school diploma all the time. We don’t ask them to be fluent in English. We don’t ask them to study the Constitution. We don’t ask them to profess their greater loyalty and love to the United States.

Instead, we have open borders. Or we bring in thousands of students from the Middle East.

And what do they do? They protest, and they push Jews around, and they celebrate at a time when we’re at war. As we saw in New York City recently, they celebrate our enemies: Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran. They’re on their side.

This is a far different phenomenon from the past when we had wonderful immigrants from Japan who were treated pretty badly, that many of them, most of them, went to internment camps, and yet they joined the 442 combat brigade in Italy. And they took horrendous casualties fighting for whom? The United States.

So, something’s wrong, and what I’m getting at is this: These immigrants, whether they’re temporary immigrants, they’re illegal immigrants, they’re legal immigrants, or they’re naturalized citizens, or they’re on student visa, they sense something.

They look at the Tsarnaev brothers, and they say, “Well, yes, they were Islamicists and yes, they killed a lot of Americans, but Rolling Stone put one of the brothers in a very photogenic pose on their cover as if he was a romantic type of person. Oh, I remember Fort Hood.” That was Major Nidal Hasan. He shot 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded over 30 of them.

And the Pentagon said, we’re not going to attribute this to what? Terrorism. Even though he yelled, “Allahu Akbar.” And, you know, I have nothing against then-Chief of Staff of the Army George Casey. But you remember what he said? He said one of the greatest tragedies of this shooting might be the injury to our diversity program.

No, no. It was not the injury to the diversity. It was the paradigm that was established that you can go in and kill people and not suffer public opprobrium and condemnation. It’s almost as if anytime someone yells “Allahu Akbar”—citizen, illegal citizen, anybody—and you scream and yell, and you do something terribly, the first thing we say is, “Well, we don’t want to condemn it. That would be Islamophobic.”

But again, that sends a message. And all of these people, all 50 million people, who have come to the United States, many of them, some of our best citizens, but all of them have to be reminded and are reminded, if we’re doing our duty, that they chose to come here, and they need to become Americanized.

And a lot of them are not. And you saw that in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement riots in Los Angeles. What in the world were people doing who were here illegally from Mexico, and they were waving the flag of the country under no circumstances they wished to return to? While they’re burning the flag of the country under no circumstances they wish to leave?

Where did they get that idea? Was it from the universities? Was it from the K-12 curriculum where we teach people that the story of the United States is sexism and racism and homophobia? Or is it when they look on TV and we see ICE people trying to enforce the law, and predominantly looking at the 500,000 criminals that came in.

And what happens to them? They’re demonized by us as Gestapo, as Nazis.

How did we create this Frankensteinian monster of immigration? That used to be our great strength, and is still in some cases, many cases. But how did we create it? Where we’re getting people killing us and yelling Islamic sloganeering and championing Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran at the same time we’re at war with them?

Where did this come from? And the answer is: Dr. Frankenstein created the Frankensteinian Monster. We’re the Dr. Frankensteins. We created this, and these people are taking advantage of our messaging. And their messaging says, basically, you get what you deserve. And boy, have we got it lately.

The Democrat DHS Shutdown Has Hit 30 Days, and It Has Been an Unmitigated Disaster

 

Democrats in Congress have now kept the Department of Homeland Security shuttered for 30 straight days, and in that time we have seen four Islamic terror attacks, countless threats against universities, military installations, and airports, and an unprecedented delay at TSA checkpoints. 

On Monday morning, the security line at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport stretched out the door to what seemed to be the length of the terminal by 4:30 in the morning. Domestic travelers were advised to get to the airport two and a half hours early. By 5:30, the line extended past the sidewalk for the facility.

Content from blocked embed:

Good morning, travelers.

Here is a 4:30 am view of the general security line for Checkpoint 1.

We’re expecting a record-breaking volume of people — there are about 38k of you flying out today. Please arrive at least 2.5 hours prior to your flight’s departure for domestic. pic.twitter.com/4BSomFYRXz— Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (@AustinAirport) March 16, 2026

 

Content from blocked embed:

The line for TSA in Austin, Texas this morning.

Insane. pic.twitter.com/qyGhR6XUey— Eric Spracklen 🇺🇸 (@EricSpracklen) March 13, 2026

The story of lengthy lines isn’t limited to Austin. Across the country, major air travel hubs have been inundated with a swarm of Spring Break travelers. Estimates put the number of travelers at 170 million. TSA reported that many were experiencing over a three hour wait for security. More than 300 of their officers have left the job, and the remainder continue to work without pay. The situation has gotten so out of hand that even CNN has labeled it as an “impending disaster.”

 

Content from blocked embed:

3+ hour TSA lines for travelers.

300+ TSA officers who have quit.

A $0 paycheck for those continuing to serve.

Enough is enough.

No more playing politics with the lives of Americans. The Democrat shutdown of DHS must end now. pic.twitter.com/VsHc71TOA9— TSA (@TSA) March 14, 2026

Content from blocked embed:

Brought to you by Democrats https://t.co/JARe9qNKcY— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 15, 2026

 

Content from blocked embed:

🚨 This is Fort Lauderdale International Airport yesterday.

People are having to show up for their flights ridiculously early due to the Dems DHS shutdown.

pic.twitter.com/Jm0q2KPn1E— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) March 16, 2026

 

Content from blocked embed:

TSA is bracing for more than 170 million spring break travelers — all while agents are working without pay during the Democrat Shutdown.

“Those winter storms…they are just part of the problem…” pic.twitter.com/devfPGl6RY— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 16, 2026

Content from blocked embed:

The chaos at Hartsfield-Jackson Airport is worse than even Thanksgiving or Christmas travel:

“The tears have been flowing from all sorts of people.” pic.twitter.com/pzT1OMKFgG— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 16, 2026

And a major inconvenience at the airport is the smallest of the problems that have arisen. In a matter of weeks, we have had four Islamic terror attacks thrust upon us. Those attacks haven’t been limited to a singular region of the country, either. In Texas, New York, Virginia, and Michigan, jihadists have taken up arms against students and bar patrons, thrown bombs at anti-Islam protestors, and plowed an explosives-laden vehicle through an early childhood center. Only after these attacks have Democrats felt any sort of pressure to reopen DHS.

How many more Islamic terrorists need to wreak havoc upon our communities before Democrats will say that enough is enough? How many missed flights for someone visiting a sick relative, the birth of a grandchild, or a wedding need to happen before they stop holding the government hostage? How long must the families of government workers go without pay until Democrats understand that their political stunt has real world consequences?

Content from blocked embed:

My dear wife @KyraPhillips gets the human side of the shut down’s effects on @TSA workers who are going without pay to keep us safe… https://t.co/ndm3oCE5Ej— John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) March 16, 2026

The pretense for the Democrat shutdown is to keep funds out of the hands of immigration authorities, despite the fact that ICE is funded through 2029, so these leftist radicals are taking the “principled stand” of siding with illegal immigrants over their own citizens.

In that case, I guess they are working to the benefit of their voters.

‘It’s a Very Surreal War’

 

We’re in the second week, just completing it, of the so-called Iran war. This effort of the United States to bomb the theocracy into submission, so they will cancel their missile and nuclear programs, and to champion the popular protest on the streets that have some potential to get rid of the regime itself.

But it’s a very surreal war. I haven’t seen—I don’t think any of us have seen—anything like it. It’s only been two weeks, and we’re told that it’s dragging on, that it’s a forever war, that we’re losing, that the Pentagon and the Trump administration had no plans.

And yet, when you look at Iran, this huge country, much, much bigger, much, much more populous than Iraq or Afghanistan, and it has no military left.

The navy is dismantled. The air force is dismantled. The Revolutionary Guard. All of these special contingents are under enormous assault. The command and control is destroyed. The missile defense is destroyed. And yet people say that it’s unconquerable.

It doesn’t make any sense. Its output of missiles and drones at the Gulf petrol states and Israel has dropped by 90%.

So, what’s going on? And I think part of the problem is that there’s no media coverage. There are no embedded reporters there because we are not on the ground. When you don’t have a ground fight in enemy territory, you don’t have American embedded journalists traveling with the troops that can give diverse opinions, accurate accounts.

All we have are the journalists who are allowed into Iran, and that happens to be—guess who—CNN, and they report the party line that comes out of the Iranian theocracy.

Again, an air war is very hard to cover because pilots can’t talk to anybody. They’re at bases that are secluded and secure. They get in the planes, they fly their mission, and they go home, and there’s no way a journalist can really get to them or talk to them.

So, all of our information comes from three sources: the Iranian propaganda machine, which is completely not credible. It’s about as credible as the Hamas body count that we saw two years ago. Or CNN and a few other Western—but very biased—news outlets that only Iran will let in, based on the conditions which they impose on them.

And the only thing you can find out about this war that’s official comes from the Israeli government and some Israeli newspapers—The Times of Israel or The Jerusalem Post. So, there’s a lot of misinformation about the actual damage that we’re inflicting.

And then there’s the attitude toward the war. The attitude in World War II—everybody was behind the United States. We did a lot of things that we regretted—the Japanese internment.

We made a lot of mistakes, strategically. Okinawa, Tarawa were disasters. The B-17 bombing program cost 40,000 [lives], but everybody basically said we don’t have to be perfect to be good. We’re going win our war because our cause is better than the alternative.

That’s gone now. It is gone. Even in the first Gulf War of 1990-91, people were united, but the Democratic Party is not the Democratic Party of Bill Clinton.

It’s a socialist party. That’s a euphemism. It really does not believe in traditional America, and it believes that if it can convey a sense that America is losing, then two things follow it.

For some, it means that the November midterms might give power back to the Democrats, and therefore it’s in their self-interest to magnify the debacle, so to speak, or the tragedy, or that we’re losing.

And then there’s others that actually, in the Democratic Party—and I’m talking about the “squad” or Rep. Ilhan Omar—they actually are sympathizing with the enemy.

If you think I’m crazy, there was a protest out in New York where we had resident aliens, students here on student visas, naturalized citizens, and what were they screaming? Shame on the United States.

Why we’re at war. And who were they protesting on behalf of Iran, the Hezbollah terrorists, and the Hamas terrorists. And so, this is a very bizarre thing. And in addition to that, we’ve got the element of antisemitism where we have the Democratic Party now. Its base is just avowedly antisemitic.

And I’ll just make a casual observation. I will predict that you will not have a Jewish American presidential candidate or vice presidential candidate for the foreseeable future. It is impossible to nominate anybody with a Jewish background on a national ticket in the Democratic Party.

And you can see that as the Democrats look at this war, they have bought hook, line, and sinker the idea that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pulling the strings of the President Donald Trump puppet and tiny Israel is getting us into this war.

Despite the fact that all seven prior presidents, and Trump himself, said on the record that Iran would not get a nuclear weapon on its watch, and that they would take measures to ensure that it didn’t in the future. And none of them did that. None of them did that.

And so, when you look at the first Gulf War, it was 42 days, but only four days were on the ground. It was a magnificent victory, but 300 people were killed. We’ve lost about, what, 14, 13 fatalities. Three hundred—that was considered amazing at the time. And they overran the country, but it took 42 days to disable it, and they left Saddam Hussein in power, and they had to go back.

And so that was considered a stellar success. But this is a much more dramatic victory. We’ve only been here two weeks and a much more formidable enemy is in shambles. And we’re left with just three alternatives.

Either the regime is going be replaced now or in the next few weeks as the people come out of their homes and see what their country is like, and what the theocracy caused, and what it did to them.

Or there’s going be some Venezuelan solution where a strongman will come forward.

Or maybe that won’t happen at all, and the United States, under political pressure, will stop. But if it stops, they have destroyed the Iranian military and its nuclear and missile program for years.

So, this was all preferable to the situation prewar, in which Iran still was working on the bomb, still had 3,000 missiles and more drones, and was boasting that it was going to, anytime it wanted, close the Strait of Hormuz. And they’ve tried it, and they will not be successful.

Put it all together, this is a surreal war. What is actually happening is not being reported.

And there’s an alternate reality that’s been constructed by the Left that sees this war as politically advantageous to its agenda to recapture power in the United States if it can convince us, the American people, that A, we’re losing, B, we may deserve to lose, C, it’s all Donald Trump’s fault, and this war will be beneficial in denying him the Republican majorities in Congress in about eight months.

Newsom’s Rocky Month Shows the Risks of Running on Style Over Substance

 

Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, and the presumptive front-runner in the Democratic presidential primary for 2028—I am biased because I’ve had to live under his tenure for six years—but I think you could make the argument he had the worst February of any major want-to-be candidate in modern memory, or surely the worst record of any governor in the last 30 days.

It wasn’t supposed to be that way. He has a new autobiography, and his problem there is he comes across as what he is: a child of privilege, a nepo baby, a person whose father was a close, intimate friend of Gov. Pat Brown, senior Gov. Pat Brown. He was a good friend and somewhat related to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and former Gov. Jerry Brown. And of course, he was subsidized and helped in his business venture by the Getty family and their mega-oil fortune inherited from their father, who created Getty Oil. So, he wants to dispel that image.

So, when he talked about how he just ate white bread or he had all of these problems growing up—he said he had dyslexia. We’ll get to that in a minute. But the idea that Gavin Newsom was somehow parallel to former President Abraham Lincoln in a log cabin or Vice President JD Vance just doesn’t work.

Then he went over to Munich, German Democratic Republic, because, you know, he’s a California governor. He doesn’t have any foreign experience, and he thought he was going to impress the Europeans with their shared dislike of President Donald Trump. But it was a disaster.

He said something about you shouldn’t wear knee pads. He’s a vulgarian. He really is. He can’t keep his potty mouth clean. I don’t think anybody at that type of serious discussion of foreign policy wants some upstart California governor to come over and talk about people being on their knee pads. I suppose that’s a reference for a sexual act of submission.

Then he’s had this social media team, and their theory is that Donald Trump—with his capital letters, exclamation points, personal ad hominem attacks—has upped his popularity. And therefore, he’s going to imitate Donald Trump’s style with capital letters, the same format, but he’s going to use a constant level of pejoratives that are obscene, almost pornographic. And then, therefore, he will outtrump Trump. He has a fundamental failing, everybody, and you know that.

You will vote for Donald Trump because of his record and his courage and breaking existing norms and taboos and trying to do things that no one ever did. Like close the border, stop crime, deal with the Left, the Department of Government Efficiency, deal with the Iranians, deal with Venezuela. And the tweets in which he describes that are attacks of Robert De Niro or—that’s something that you will tolerate despite, not because of, those tweets.

Gavin Newsom got it all wrong. He thought, well, Trump is doing well because of his tweets, and I’m gonna be outtrumping Trump. And the result is he’s unleashed this unfortunate character. I think he’s called Izzy Gardon. I don’t know how you pronounce it, but my gosh, they’re full of expletives.

He’s in a tweet war with Sean Hannity. He used the F-word. He used the S-word. They come out of the mouth of the governor of California like they’re nothing. He’s really debased the office. He’s got one of the most foul mouths, Gavin Newsom, and now you’re putting it, if I could use that archaic term, in print, in these social media, daily outbursts.

You know, there was a simple reporter, Susan Crabtree. She has a very good reputation. She works for RealClearPolitics, and getting back to dyslexia, she says, all of a sudden, you’re emphasizing dyslexia. But we would like to know when he was officially diagnosed with this medical condition. And his social media, Gardon, Izzy, said F off to a reporter, which didn’t go down well.

As far as dyslexia goes, it’s very hard to find him credible. Not that he doesn’t have it, but when he says, “I can’t read,” I can’t believe that’s true, because not too long ago, he bragged to us, I think, that he was reading a 260-page book in an hour and a half, as if he was a speed-reader.

And my gosh, anybody who is a governor of a huge state like California, a governor of any state, gets page after page daily in memoranda and policy papers and speeches. So, when he says he can’t read, it wouldn’t convince most people.

And why did he say that he couldn’t read? Because he’s flailing, and he wants to have some sympathy. I think that’s the reason.

The same thing—he wants to be a pseudo-poor boy. When Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said you were historically illiterate, and Newsom again fired from the hip and said that Trump had no historical precedent or right to bring in federal troops, that’s happened five or six times in our history. Civil War draft riots; World War I veterans marching for their bonuses they didn’t receive; Rodney King riots, where then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell sent in, I think, 4,000 or 5,000 Marines on the order of then-President George H.W. Bush.

And so, Ted Cruz said, Gavin, you’re historically illiterate. And sure enough, he says, how dare you make fun of a person with a handicap because I’m—you’re saying that I’m illiterate because I can’t read. Of course, being historically illiterate means you’re able to read, you just don’t read history, or you would’ve not made such a blunder. And he confused that. Again, the subtext was, please feel sorry for me because otherwise I have no redeeming values as a candidate.

And then he made the faux pas of all mistakes. He got before an African American audience. And remember, every time a Democratic white elite gets in front of an African American audience, something happens. They either feel uncomfortable or they want to fake it like they’re somebody they’re not, or they’re condescending, or they—it just doesn’t work well.

Remember former President Joe Biden, when he wanted to attack former Sen. Mitt Romney. He said to a group of highly educated, professional blacks in the audience that Mitt Romney’s “gonna put you all [back] in chains.” He kind of did the accent. “Put you all in”—as if these capable people couldn’t protect themselves without Joe Biden. As if we were gonna go back to slavery.

When we had former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, remember, I tried so—“I didn’t come this far.” She was trying to imitate, I guess, the voice she thought Sojourner Truth or Harriet Tubman would’ve said, somebody like that. It was a disaster. Even former President Barack Obama, who’s half African American, always went into a different patois to condescend to his audience.

And that’s exactly what Gavin Newsom did, only it was worse because it was content, not just style. He was speaking very slowly and changed his cadence. But when he said to them, I am not—I’m just like you. Basically, I am illiterate, and I had a 960, and I’m not saying I had a 960 to make you out there in the audience have 940, that was an insult because he was saying to them: You are not very bright, and therefore, you should feel empathy with me because I’m claiming that I’m not very bright, but I really don’t believe it. And they don’t believe that he really meant that either. So, it was completely racist and insulting.

It’s up there with Joe Biden’s “Corn Pop” sagas, you know. Barack Obama’s the first black who’s clean and can articulate. It’s up there with his use of “boy” and “Negro.” As I said, all of these politicians have a checkered record when it comes to race, which is ironic because they pose as defenders of civil rights.

Finally, what’s the elephant in the room? All of what I talked about is a camouflage, a mask for the problem. And that is 300,000 people are leaving his state per year since he’s been governor. He’s taken paradise and turned it into purgatory. Whether it’s the fires, the high-speed rail boondoggle, the highest income taxes in the nation, the recent billionaires tax—it’s already driven $1 trillion out of the state.

We have the highest number of homeless people. We have one-third of all welfare recipients. We have the highest poverty rate, I think we’re 21% to 22%. We have no plans to assimilate a culture rate or integrate 27% of the population that was foreign-born. We have the highest number of illegal aliens. About one out of every three people that enters our now-bankrupt health system has diabetes. And Louisiana and Mississippi have higher test scores in their elementary schools than we do.

Add it all up, and he’s got only one campaign slogan. Gavin Newsom will have to run as “I want to do to the United States what I did to California.” We’ll see how that works out.

CNN Repeatedly Screws Up on Mamdani and 2 Muslims With Bombs

 On March 7, two teenaged Muslims were arrested for lighting and throwing improvised explosive devices at an anti-Islam protest outside Gracie Mansion, the home of New York’s Democrat Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

This provided the latest exhibit of how our elitist media seek to protect Muslims from the “Islamophobia” of conservatives. It’s fascinating that when the extremism and “phobias” run another direction—of Muslims being viciously antisemitic—it doesn’t outrage these people.

CNN has launched into an embarrassing week of false and insensitive coverage of these college-age jihadis. On Tuesday, CNN’s X account tweeted this narrative: “Two Pennsylvania teenagers crossed into New York City Saturday morning for what could’ve been a normal day enjoying the city during abnormally warm weather. But in less than an hour, their lives would drastically change as the pair would be arrested for throwing homemade bombs during an anti-Muslim protest outside of Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s home.”

Within hours, it had taken down the tweet, but it mirrored the lede of its original CNN.com article by reporters Taylor Romine and Gloria Pazmino. It inspired a wave of satires, framing the Lincoln assassination, Pearl Harbor, and other violent events into an idyllic frame.

Then, on Tuesday’s edition of “CNN NewsNight,” host Abby Phillip erroneously stated the bomb-throwers carried out “an attempted terror attack against New York’s mayor, Zohran Mamdani” while heading into a commercial break. She later apologized and blamed it on whoever put these words into her teleprompter.

CNN commentator Ana Navarro repeated this lie just moments later: “Supposedly some of these comments are as a result of the attempt against Mayor Mamdani in New York, who was raised Muslim, was he not?” He was, but he wasn’t targeted by these two Muslims.

On Wednesday, CNN reporter Edward-Isaac Dovere apologized on X after tweeting that Mamdani had messaged Democrat Gov. Josh Shapiro last year, “a fellow target of political violence.”

Then there were overly vague allusions leaving the impression that Mamdani was targeted. Wolf Blitzer announced on “The Situation Room” on Wednesday: “Investigators are digging into the background of the two terror suspects accused of throwing homemade bombs near New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s home.”

But according to a transcript search on Nexis, there’s been nothing on CNN about the vicious social media “likes” of Rama Duwaji, the mayor’s wife, celebrating the Oct. 7, 2023, mass murder in Israel, as reported by The New York Times on March 6. The only mention of her name came from Pazmino about the bomb incident: “I should mention that both Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the First Lady Rama Duwaji were safe. There were no injuries during this protest yesterday.”

After Mamdani’s victory last November, Pazmino did a puff piece celebrating Duwaji as “the first Muslim member of Gen Z to become first lady of New York City.” Behind the scenes, she “advised Mamdani on how to better use social media.” Oh, really?

This week, CNN was posting partisan attacks, like this one from political reporter Aaron Blake: “The GOP’s increasing blind eye to anti-Muslim bigotry.” That’s pretty funny, considering CNN’s blind eye on the celebration of genocide inside Israel. Blake even cited Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, mocking Mayor Mamdani for eating rice with his hands, saying, “Go back to the Third World.”

CNN should find it more outrageous that someone would celebrate the slaughter on Oct. 7 than mockery of the eating habits of a Ugandan American. But that’s not how CNN rolls. Its Islamophilia led it into a cascade of Fake 

A MAGA Split Over Iran? What MAGA Split?

 

There’s a lot of talk about a Make America Great split among Trump supporters, and this originated here in context with the Iranian war. I’m speaking on a Monday, the 10th day of the war. And there’s talk in the air that the MAGA base may desert President Donald Trump because, after all, MAGA’s credo was no optional wars in the Middle East.

That came out of a disgust with the 20-year misadventure in Afghanistan and the skedaddle from Kabul that left billions of dollars of weapons, and, of course, the 8,000-plus dead and more casualties in the Iraq and Afghanistan war. But this is different.

This war is only conducted by air, and there’s certain characteristics of it that we haven’t seen before. It’s a top-down war.

We are targeting the leaders, not the military rank and file. We have been taking out, along with the Israelis, 50, 60, a hundred scientists, generals, mullahs, political leaders to decapitate, not try to organically destroy the entire Iranian military.

Second, they were all part of negotiations. We were negotiating with Iran and gave them a lot of options. Just don’t fund your terrorist proxies. Don’t create a bomb, knock it off. And they didn’t want to do it. It’s just like the prior Iran strike last year, where we gave them another option.

It’s very different. You can’t really change a regime, we’re told, if you don’t have ground troops. But maybe there’s something different about the modern age with the sophisticated satellite imagery and reconnaissance, that you know where individual people are by their GPS footprint, by their cellphone communications.

And then you couple that with these highly sophisticated missiles and drones where you can actually take something through a window and dispatch somebody at a meeting. We’ve never quite seen that before.

So, you don’t really need a sniper to take out a toxic Hitlerian-type of leader.

The other thing is that Donald Trump pretty much knows there’s three alternatives that we’ve talked about before. And none of them really require ground troops.

The most desirable obviously would be to get an interim government, maybe former dissidents, get expatriates back, depose the mullahs so that there are—or people in the army, depose them, and then you have elections. That would be wonderful, with the problem solved.

Or you could find somebody within the apparatus, the theocracy that was a dissident and felt that he had military backing, and he would, you know, pick the Venezuela solution. Sort of what we see in Venezuela. We’re not going to nation-build.

The worst scenario is not all that bad. We say stew in your own juice. You know, we mow the lawn and we can do it anytime we want.

We can come back in and destroy your new navy, your new missiles as long as we have a president, post-Trump, who’s willing to do that and ensure that they don’t become nuclear again, or they don’t build another missile fleet. And that’s reflected, getting back to my original point, in the MAGA so-called dissidents.

If you look at polls, and there were some released by CNN, Donald Trump has 87% support among Republicans. That is much higher than Joe Biden had among Democrats or even Barack Obama had among Democrats. And when you look at the MAGA base, the people who identify themselves as Trump Conservatives or Trump MAGA people, the support for the Iran war is over 90%.

And now why? How could that be, when they have told us that there’s a widespread civil war among the MAGA people? That’s what the Left is saying. But when you look at the people who are objecting, you know, it’s the Steve Bannon wing, the Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, maybe Megyn Kelly, I don’t know.

And they’re saying that this is contrary to the MAGA philosophy of no optional wars. It would be if we insert ground troops, and we’re there for months.

I mean, if we end up bombing, as Barack Obama did, in Libya for seven months without congressional authority, one of the last things he did while in office was to bomb Libya, then that would be another matter.

But nobody has ever seen a war in which one side destroyed the entire air force of the enemy, the entire navy of the enemy, and has got pretty much 90% of its ballistic missile arsenal nullified and probably 85% of the drones and decapitated the entire command and control of the military. And now is looking at secondary targets where maybe Revolutionary Guard headquarters and regional areas, but there hasn’t really been any American losses of equipment.

We’ve had, tragically, seven people killed. But tragically and terribly as that is, in a war of 10 days with being that kinetic, it’s very rare to see such few casualties.

I mean, we’re looking at the Ukraine war. There’s been 1,200,000 Russians killed and probably another two million wounded, probably three or 400,000 Ukrainians. So, this isn’t comparable to what we’ve seen.

And I think the president understands that there is a deadline. And the deadline is going to be met. And the deadline consists of we do not want this war to drag on with the midterms coming up. And he wants to pivot back to the economy.

And the people on the MAGA base who are saying that the party is split in two, they don’t really have a constituency, as the polls, I just told you, illustrate.

They’re loud, they have audiences, and they make points that, you know, you can consider. But they don’t represent a constituency, at least not yet.

On the other side, this sort of, on-to-Cuba, Lindsey Graham wing of the party, I think that after Venezuela, which we didn’t lose anybody. We lost some wounded people that were hurt, but we have a Venezuela solution of a strong person there that will be an improvement over Nicolas Maduro and might lead to elections.

But we’re not going to go on the ground and insist that we’re going to create Carmel, California, in Venezuela.

And we have, as I said earlier, three choices and they’re all preferable to what’s there now in Iran, how the war in Iran ends.

And so, after that, I think the president will say, I’m going to concentrate on making sure that the Western Hemisphere is free, and it’s not captive to the cartels, and it doesn’t kill Americans.

And obviously Cuba might be a concern, but there’s no need now to go into Cuba or to bomb Cuba to do any of that. It’s falling. It’s dying on the vine. And the more pressure we apply, insidiously so, not kinetic or dramatic, it’ll soon, I think, deteriorate to a point where there’ll be a change of government.

But that’s something in the future.

Right now, I think the MAGA base and the Republicans are sticking with Trump because they don’t see oil prices spiking. They don’t see the economy in danger, and they don’t see the war dragging on for months and months like the Libyan fiasco or the misadventures in Afghanistan and Iraq.

What we’re looking at instead, I think, is a spectacular achievement of getting rid of the two worst governments that we were dealing with in Venezuela.

And if we don’t get rid of the one in Iran, at least it’s neutered or nullified so it doesn’t have the clout to subsidize terrorists, and it doesn’t have the wherewithal to threaten us or our allies in Europe, in the Middle East.

More importantly, the Gulf states are now openly hostile or at war with Iran, and they will not be subsidizing Hamas or Hezbollah or the Houthis to the same degree they were in the past, and Iran won’t be doing it at all.

I think people have absorbed that, and now it’s time, I think, to think of the midterms and if they can, they being the Trump people, can overturn the historical trends that the in party usually loses the first midterm, dramatically loses seats in the House and Senate. And maybe they can avoid that by having good economic news.

And with the deregulation, the tax cuts, the energy development, the foreign investment, the interest rates coming down. I think there’s a good chance by June or July, as I’ve said earlier, the economy will be strong and he can point to the foreign policy successes, and that is reflected in the overwhelming support that the recent polls show for the Trump agenda.