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.