Trump Revealed Why He Dropped an F-Bomb in His Easter Post.

 The Left had an intense meltdown over the weekend, speculating that President Trump was sick. Even more absurd, they used a July 2024 clip of Trump’s motorcade at a hospital as evidence. You can't just run old clips, like the one from when Trump was shot in Butler, Pennsylvania, and claim there’s speculation he’s at Walter Reed. He wasn’t—the US Marine standing outside the West Wing was your sign that the president was inside. 

🚨 NOW: A Marine Sentry is STILL posted outside the White House West Wing, signifying President Trump is inside

News outlets from all sides of the aisle have confirmed this, yet scumbags online keep trying to say 47’s at Walter Reed Hospital

Fake News! pic.twitter.com/1b8WdB12V6— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) April 4, 2026

As of 5:04pm ET, there's Marine sentry standing guard outside the West Wing, which means President Trump is present in the Oval Office

Trump had "Executive Time" on his public schedule starting at 8:00 am today. The White House issued a lid for press at 11:08 a.m pic.twitter.com/iLtxEWsnWf— Selina Wang (@selinawangtv) April 4, 2026

A Marine sentry is standing at the door of the West Wing as of 1:50pm, indicating the president is working inside. pic.twitter.com/UYGDhQeJJA— Emma Nicholson (@emmacnicholson) April 4, 2026

Well, today’s Easter Egg Roll event featured vintage Trump—vibrant, energetic, and very much alive and well. The Democrats and their losing influencers are eager for their Joe Biden moment, who looked decrepit and senile, fading before our eyes. The White House Easter Bunny didn’t have to lead Trump around, as the holiday critter had to do with President Drool-in-Soup.  

🚨 LMAO! Trump to kids at the Easter Egg Roll: “I could sign autographs for you guys, and then tonight, you could sell them for $25,000 on eBay!” 🤣

“Biden would use the AUTOPEN... he was incapable of signing his name, so they'd follow him around with this big machine. You know… pic.twitter.com/KJS0dgA3NN— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) April 6, 202

TRUMP: "What about the rescue that took place yesterday?"

"In most instances, you're really not able to go in."

INCREDIBLE JOB! pic.twitter.com/6OAcd0qef1— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) April 6, 2026

Trump joked about Biden’s use of an autopen while talking with kids at the event. He was looking at their artwork. He shushed the press because he wanted to hear the band, and he slapped around reporters, calling PBS a bunch of lunatics and not being overly concerned about dropping an F-bomb in his Easter post on social media. He noted that everyone, including the reporter who asked the question, has heard that word or worse, so calm down.  

"Only making a point," Trump said regarding his use of profanity in the post. "I think you've heard it before."

President Trump just ROASTED a PBS reporter 🔥

"Who are you with?"

REPORTER: PBS.

"Well, that's a radical left group of lunatics if you will."pic.twitter.com/PD6tWva23V— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) April 6, 2026

🚨 WOW! President Trump just MIC DROPPED this reporter

Q: "Mr. President, how would it not be a war crime to strike Iran's bridges and power plants?!"

TRUMP: "Because they KILLED 45,000 people! It could be as much as 60,000!"

"They kill protesters. They're ANIMALS. And we have… pic.twitter.com/IxehvNH9PX— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) April 6, 2026

🚨 President Trump just DUSTED an MSM reporter clutching her pearls over his Truth Social post telling Iran to “open the f*cking Strait.”

All it took was one line.

REPORTER: “Why did you use such vulgar language in that Truth Social post?”

TRUMP: “Only to make my point.”

“I… pic.twitter.com/mxqn3pmFD4— Overton (@overton_news) April 6, 2026
Advertisement

POTUS politely shushed us and told us he wants to listen to the band 😂 pic.twitter.com/aaPplrxpoU— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) April 6, 2026

He also provided some updates on the rescued weapons systems officer who was saved after being shot down in Iran on Good Friday. 

Pope Leo's Flawed War Doctrine

 Pope Leo XIV used part of his Palm Sunday message to castigate the United States for attempting to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power and threatening the world with mass destruction. In doing so, the "American Pope" confused the real enemy in the war.

Addressing thousands in St. Peter's Square, the Pope claimed that God rejects the prayers of leaders who wage war. He called the Iran war "atrocious" violence that cannot be justified by faith. He further said that God doesn't hear the prayers of people whose "hands (are) full of blood." Does he not include Iran's maniacal regime which has murdered Americans directly and through proxies, as well as tens of thousands of their own people? Does the Pope believe the Muslim god doesn't hear prayers asking him to destroy Jews, Israel, and the United States?

The Pope favors "diplomacy" over war, but you can't negotiate with evil. Recall how that worked with Adolf Hitler in Munich and more recently with North Korea, which has nuclear weapons because several American presidents refused to do what President Trump is doing to Iran.

Leo said Jesus is the "King of Peace" and is deaf to those initiating armed conflict, citing the Book of Isaiah. He ignores the bloody conflicts between the Israelites and many tribes and nations God directly ordered them to kill (even children) in order to claim the Promised Land.

The Pope also suggested that no one can use God to justify war. This appeared to be a direct response to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who had prayed for "overwhelming violence" in the name of Jesus earlier in the week. He's right about that, but would the Pope also condemn Iran's leaders for claiming to know the will of their god? Vladimir Putin is targeting civilians in Ukraine, and Nigerian Muslims are killing Christians by the thousands. The Pope is not known for highlighting those atrocities. In his view it appears only America is doing evil things.

American presidents, beginning with George Washington, have appealed to God to justify their policies and bless America. Washington believed the revolution's fate rested on God's favor.

Abraham Lincoln openly and privately sought Divine guidance for the nation's survival, famously stating he knew the Lord was "on the side of the right." His Second Inaugural Address could have been read in the churches of his day. His famous qualifying line was that "...my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right."

In announcing the D-Day invasion of France on June 6, 1944, President Franklin Roosevelt closed his national radio address with a heartfelt prayer that conceded the certain cost of the operation: "Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity. ... Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy Kingdom."

Supreme Allied Commander General Dwight Eisenhower prayed the invasion would lead to victory over the Germans.

Gen. George Patton, faced with bad weather leading up to that fateful day, asked God to "Grant us fair weather for battle. Graciously hearken to us as soldiers who call upon Thee that, armed with Thy power, we may advance from victory to victory, and crush the oppression and wickedness of our enemies and establish Thy justice among men and nations."
Advertisement

The Pope seems to be equating war against evil regimes that murder tens of thousands of innocents with a country that is trying to stop them. Would he have preferred more negotiations with Hitler, or waiting until Iran developed nuclear weapons with the ability to strike Israel, Europe, and the U.S.?

President Trump has engaged in a pre-emptive strike against an evil regime. People can pray he will succeed without the fear of having blood on their hands. Contrary to the Pope's assertion, God is likely not plugging His ears.

Wisdom From America’s Founders: Government Isn’t Evil, But…

 “The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society, and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.” – James Madison

Government isn’t evil. People are evil, not institutions or things. An army, a gun, isn’t evil, but they certainly can be, and have been, used by evil people, for evil purposes. And this describes governments down through history as well.

I have often said that government is a “necessary evil.” That isn’t quite accurate; it is, sadly, “necessary.” If all men were angels, Mr. Madison said, we wouldn’t need government. But, obviously, all men aren’t angels, thus some restraining force is required to curb what evil men do. Governments should be established for that purpose, and it is a legitimate one. The apostle Paul, in Romans 13, describes the reality of our world even today by talking about the rationale for government and what our response to it should be. Even Jesus’s “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” recognizes the truth that government is required in this present evil age.

But while government itself isn’t evil, it can, as noted, do evil things—if it is controlled by evil men. And that has, way too often in human history, been the case. One of the great temptations that plagues some humans is the desire for power, the ambition to control others and make them do what the megalomaniac wants them to do. And, of course, down through history, such power-mad individuals have gained control of governments and used their governmental power to do much evil. And it is obviously the case in our world today, too.:

Thus, James Madison’s statement at the beginning of this article is so important. Our Founding Fathers knew history, and Madison wrote his words based on the history of mankind—and governments—up to his day. Sadly, the past 250 years, and especially the last 100 years of leftist governments, have only—once again—proved the brilliance of our Founders and how accurate they usually were.

Because governments can, and have (nearly always) been used for at least some nefarious purposes, the first aim of a political constitution, Madison tells us, is to ensure that wise, virtuous people are selected to govern. “Since the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” it is essential that virtuous people be put into positions of power over others. People who do not fear God are not wise, and they can be, and usually are, very destructive and harmful to others, especially if given government power. Again, one only needs to look at the last 100 years of communist governments—and Democratic Party-run American cities—to see the truth of this. True wisdom produces true virtue, and there is almost none of either in today’s Democratic Party. If Americans elect unwise, unvirtuous people into government, we are headed for serious trouble. Indeed, such people have caused too many of the problems the country now suffers.

But notice Madison’s statement that it’s not only necessary to ensure wise, virtuous people are selected to govern, but the second goal is to make sure such people are always in government. No man, Madison said in another place, should be entrusted with too much power. He knew history. He knew what humans tend to do when they have power, when they have control of government. And so, it was the desire of our Founding Fathers to make certain the power-hungry gangsters did not get into positions of power—that only virtuous, wise (i.e., God-fearing) individuals do—and then, to ensure only such people remain there.
Advertisement

Otherwise, we get what we see in the Deep State and the rest of the world’s governments today.

It is impossible, of course, to quantify how much good or evil government does. When it supports and adheres to the laws of God, it will do good. Madison again: “The future and success of America is not in this Constitution, but in the laws of God upon which this Constitution is founded.” Our Founders not only knew and understood history, they knew that God established eternal principles of truth that never change and must be respected by all humans and institutions, including government. The Left, the Democrats, hate this philosophy, of course, arguing for an ever-evolving, ever-changing world where they can decide what is “virtuous” and “wise,” and rule in conjunction with their vision of what man should be and ought to become. And if it costs hundreds of millions of lives in the process, so be it. “They are all going to die anyway,” Joseph Stalin said.

When government leaders refuse to respect the laws of God…well, again, look at leftism in America and the world over the past several decades.

Government isn’t evil; people are. And thus, as James Madison warned, we should be very careful about whom we give the power of government to. We need to learn from our Founders, but we never do. And it is quite obvious why the Left hates them so much. The Left loves power; thus, loves government. And all we have to do is look at the last 100 years to witness what the godless, unvirtuous Left does when it obtains the power it craves.

Nothing Terrifies Democrats More Than a Little Transparency

 Sunshine is the best disinfectant, but serious scrutiny so concerns some Democrats that you’d think they, themselves, were the infection. Democrats would like you to think they’re nothing but a naked body behind a thin sheet of Saran Wrap – totally transparent and honest. But dig just a little and that clear wrap becomes aluminum foil. Democrats are terrified of a little scrutiny, and should tell you a whole lot.

Eric Swalwell, the, gassy, buffoonish Congressman from California who regularly steps into a field of metaphorical rakes, even in friendly interviews, is absolutely terrified that the FBI might release their file of the Bureau’s investigation into his being honey-potted by the Chinese Communist Party. In the past, Eric has insisted he was completely exonerated after he was targeted by our enemy, so why would the release of information the FBI gathered that led to that conclusion scare him?

That’s an important question to ask, especially given how Swalwell was a very loud voice in the calls for the Epstein files to be released. He wanted everything out in that case, mostly so his fellow Democrats could weaponize every garbage scrap of paper in it, no matter who stupid or fraudulent it clearly was. Eric doesn’t want that to happen to him. 

There’s also the reality that the only person’s word we have to go on when it comes to just how “sweet and innocent” he was in the affair is him. Granted, he could be stupid enough to not know, but he could also be lying. After all, why would a moderately attractive woman want to have anything to do with him in nature? It was pretty obvious he was played, but the extent to which he was (and by extension, us, since he would have betrayed all of us, inadvertently or not) we don’t know. That file might help us understand.

But he’s running for Governor of California, so that he’s terrified and threatening to sue to keep those secrets sealed tells you pretty much everything, doesn’t it? He’s previously denied anything sexual happened – surely Fang Fang wishes that were true – but won’t go into any details about any of it or give interviews with anyone with the integrity to ask about it; he’s just hoping to run out the clock.

Maybe he will be able to do it, too. Time will tell, just as time will tell if the people of California will support a Forrest Gump with honey pot problem who pays his wife for “child care” for her own kids. All kinds of gross, those Swalwells…

But the Swalwells aren’t the only trash in the Democrats’ dumpster. On the other side of the country, Westly Moore – who goes by Wes to hide his rich kid upbringing – the Governor of Maryland wants you to know he has nothing to hide…while being terrified at the prospect of anyone looking into the probably fiction he has woven about his own life.

Westley served in the military and talks about it often. But he won’t release his military records, for some reason. He swears his service was honorable, even being awarded some medals. Only he wasn’t, at least not at the time he claimed it. Weirdly, it was “awarded” later, after the “mistake” of him not having been given it was noticed, or so we’re told. Don’t know too much more about his service, beyond what he’s claimed. 

If Westley’s file backs up his story, why wouldn’t he want it released? 

But when the Baltimore Sun decided to ask some questions about the state’s Governor and his biography, the Moore-ons ran to Semafor for protection. 

Pro-tip: If you’re a “news” organization and members of one party run to you for cover and security when they’re facing tough questions, you’re doing something wrong. When it works, you’re an embarrassment. 

Their headline, “Maryland’s biggest newspaper is going after the governor’s 2028 campaign.” 

Why is a media outlet vetting a Democrat who was never really vetted somehow “news” or “going after” that politician? What happened to that “We speak truth to power” crap the media always cries when they’re screaming at the President? 

Gone. Semafor worked intimately with Moore’s people to preemptively deflect any questions about his biography, his service, his family and his fortune. That’s a whole lot of work for someone with nothing to hide. 

Realistically, Semafor should have been asking these questions, or demanding answers to stories like those uncovered by the Washington Free Beacon showing Westley’s claims that his great-grandfather was run out of the country by the KKK were completely made up. But that’s too much like work, and way too honest for a left-wing media that serves more as a security blanket for “progressive” politicians and an emotional tampon for Democrats desperately searching for a savior.
Advertisement

If basic information about your life coming out has you terrified, you probably shouldn’t be anywhere near the levers of power. If you have something to hide, feel free to hide it in the private sector. But if you’re afraid of people you seek to represent getting a peek beyond how you’ve chosen to represent yourself, maybe you’re the problem…

Sec. Markwayne Mullin's Newest Proposal Should Have the Left Terrified

 Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin unveiled a new proposal on Monday night to eliminate Customs and Border Patrol at international airports in sanctuary cities, effectively ending all international travel from the location.
Advertisement

NEW: In interview w/ colleague @BretBaier, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin floats the idea of stripping CBP/customs officers from airports in large sanctuary cities as retaliation for refusing to cooperate with the federal government. International travelers wouldn’t be able to…— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) April 6, 2026

DHS Secretary Mullin raises the possibility of pulling CBP and customs officers from airports in large sanctuary cities, citing lack of cooperation with the federal government and funding refusals.

International arrivals would be unable to clear customs at those airports.

“It’s… pic.twitter.com/wdYNlNIcr1— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) April 6, 2026

🚨 HOLY CRAP! DHS Sec. Markwayne Mullin reveals sanctuary cities may lose CBP-CUSTOMS at airports until they comply

This would effectively BLOCK international travel there

DO IT! FAFO! pic.twitter.com/GtKbF9WCap

"Should sanctuary cities be processing Customs into their city? I'm…— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) April 6, 2026

“If they are a sanctuary city, should they really be processing customs into their city?” Mullin asked Fox News’ Bret Baier. “Seriously, if they are a sanctuary city and they are receiving international flights, and we’re asking them to partner with us at the airport, but once they walk out of the airport, they’re not going to enforce immigration policy? Maybe we need to have a really hard look at that because we need to focus on cities that want to work with us.”

His proposal would end international travel for countless major hubs of travel in blue cities, like Los Angeles and New York.

Immigration policy has taken center-stage in national politics, as DHS continues on a nearly two-month long shutdown. Democrats have refused to come to the negotiating table, and have claimed that they will only fund the department if Congress agrees to essentially end the deportation of illegal immigrants by requiring a judicial warrant and forbid ICE from operating at polling places to protect their illegal immigrant voters.

The shutdown saw massive lines develop at airports around the country after an exodus of TSA workers who missed multiple paychecks, which led to President Donald Trump ordering ICE to begin security operations to alleviate the pain.

Trump has ordered his administration to find the funds necessary to pay the government employees of the department, many of whom have gone with intermittent pay since the historically-long government shutdown last fall.

If Donald Trump Did What Obama Did, Media Would Cheer—So Why the Outrage Now?

 I’ve talked about the opposition to the Iran war that we are witnessing, but it’s a little bit more than opposition. I would call it the “hysterics.” What do I mean by that? I haven’t seen a—since I was a student—protests, as we saw in New York, where people are proudly waving communist flags with, you know, anti-war sentiment

That used to be kind of a taboo. You were a communist or a socialist, but you didn’t wave the hammer and sickle, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union and, kind of, the articulation of the Communist Party in China to market capitalism.

But here we have a stronghold of communism who are proudly in New York and said, are they in enthused by the opposition to the war. Is it Mayor [Zohran] Mamdani? I don’t know, but it’s unusual.

I’ve never seen an anti-war protest like we just witnessed in Philadelphia, where most of the people seem to be either from the Middle East or hardcore socialist, communist, and the speaker, many of them had their identities masked, which is, kind of, ironic because the Left has told us that Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which has a real fear of being doxed as federal employees, were Gestapo-like for being masked.

The speaker was masked. He called for the defeat of America and Iran, but even more chilling, he cheered on coffins that came home with American dead.

This was right in Philadelphia. We had them in LA with the “No Kings” violence and what’s going on? Well, part of it is the media-generated war. Remember, we’ve mentioned it before, and we all know that if this bombing of Iran had been conducted by [Barack] Obama or [Joe] Biden, it would’ve been cheered on by the mainstream media, the network news, NPR-PBS, New York Times, Chicago Tribune, LA [Times], etc.

We know that because Obama conducted 500 drone assassinations over the Pakistani and Afghan border. No one objected. They thought that was fine. Killed an American citizen or two, you know, collateral damage. He bombed Libya for seven months without congressional authority for no given reason, and the result was chaos and American dead at the consulate in the annex of the CIA.

So the media is reporting as negatively as it can. CNN, with the permission of the theocratic government of Iran, is inside Iran. That would be almost like somebody going into Nazi Germany during World War II with the permission of Hitler. So all of that information is questionable. So the media is contributing to this hysteria.

Then there’s the Trump derangement syndrome. People call George W. Bush a Nazi, a brown shirt, people as diverse as John Glenn and Al Gore. But I don’t think anybody’s ever called for the president to be killed.

We’ve had major news people joke about killing Donald Trump. You look at the placards at these anti-war protests. They’re asking, they’re literally and openly and unambiguously calling for Trump to die.

James Carville said he’ll die in office. I’ve never quite seen that from the opposition, both the street opposition and the formal Democrat Party.

Again, this is a continuation of firebombing Tesla dealerships over the DOGE cuts, the No Kings mass protests. Nobody ever quite figured that out because Donald Trump was not only elected twice, but he was constitutionally impeached twice, and he’s had more audits, lawfare conducted against him than any president in modern memory.

So he’s hardly an autocrat or a monarch. And this is also an extension of the ICE hysteria, where ICE agents were doxed, were attacked for enforcing federal law.

It’s a continuation of the shutdowns. We’re into the third shutdown now and it’s coinciding with the bombing of Iran.

And it’s kind of ironic because we have had four naturalized citizens from the Middle East who have conducted terrorist operations in the United States. We’ve had mysterious drones go in the air.

Nobody knew where they were from, they couldn’t be jammed. They were military-grade drones above the B-52 base in Louisiana. And at the very time that we’re facing these suspect challenges, what has happened? The Democrats have denied funding for the Department of Homeland Security.

It doesn’t make sense unless you are hysterical, you want us to lose, and you want to destroy Donald Trump.

The shutdown, we know—the second shutdown—stalled the economy and made a readjustment in fourth-quarter 2025 gross domestic product. I think they think the same thing is going to happen if they can create the hysteria with the war. They feel very confident that the midterms are theirs. So, there’s only a four- or five-seat margin in the House, and they feel that if they can gin up opposition to the Iranian 30-day bombing campaign, it can do for them what their agenda cannot do because they don’t have an alternate agenda.

What the ICE raids did not do, what the No Kings protest did not do, what the Tesla protest did not do, this will be the final magic bullet that will take down Donald Trump.

And so is that true? Well, most presidents do in fact lose their first midterms in their first administration. This is a continuation of that. Donald Trump historically should lose the House and maybe the Senate. But when you actually look at the seats involved and you look at the gerrymandering on Left and Right, out of those 435 House races, there’s only about 17 that are actually up for a reasonable contest.

The rest are more either leaning, the Republican seats that they have in the House are either solidly Republican in November or they’re leaning Republican. So, it’s a matter, can the Democrats win 15 of 17 or 18 seats that are open that will have legitimate contested elections? And I’m not sure that’s true, but more importantly, I don’t think they think it’s true.

So, a lot of this opposition is paranoia that they’re expected to win the House as everybody would expect of the opposition party in a midterm, but they’re not confident they can do that.

They’re not confident because they don’t have the agenda. They’re not confident about the effects of the Iranian war. They’re not confident that the economy won’t boom. It may well boom even after the war.

So, this shows a lot of suspicion, hysteria, anger, but mostly uncertainty that they’re not convinced they can win the midterms when they should.

And finally, there’s one other element that contributes to this hysteria. It’s more at the elite level. I don’t know how to call it, maybe envy or jealousy. What I mean by that is Donald Trump removed this communist narco dictator [Nicolas] Maduro in Venezuela at no U.S. fatalities. We had some wounded but no fatalities, and at almost no extended war.

And the government that’s in there is nothing to be proud of, but at least it’s maintaining order and it’s not shipping drugs and illegal aliens to the United States. And it’s under notice that it will not be exporting as it has been through Ecuador, Bolivia, Colombia its communist message. Donald Trump did that. He flipped that and he took away a Chinese oil supplier.

And now that oil will be back on a free-market architecture in the world global trade.

Second, it looks like Cuba. It has been so isolated by Trump, and it’s been embargoed and sanctioned that the people are restive and the government has lost control of its own narrative that communism works and there’s nobody to bail it out.

There’s not China, there’s not Russia. Now, there’s not Venezuela. Nobody in Latin America wants to bail them out. In fact, privately they despise that government as much as the people of Cuba despise that government.

Does Donald Trump want to invade and have regime change? No. All he’s doing is pressuring it and pressuring it until this nut cracks.

And then what would happen? They would agree to let Cuban exiles, Americans in general, come back and invest in that island, and maybe under an autocratic government, who knows? But there would be a transition away from communism and Cuba would be open and transparent and rich again.

And then finally, there’s Iran. Every one of the last seven presidents promised to deal with Iran. None of them did. None of them, not Jimmy Carter. Even Ronald Reagan did not deal with Iran. George H.W. Bush did not. Bill Clinton did not. George W. Bush did not. Barack Obama did not. Joe Biden did not.

Donald Trump did, and he may, we don’t know the complete number yet, but he may ensure that Iran is no longer on the edge or virtually a nuclear power, that it doesn’t have ballistic missile capability to hit Europe or the United States, that it is neutered, that he’s done a trillion dollars in damage to its military, and he’s going to let them stew in their own juice.

And they’re going to have a restive population who’s going to say, “You gave money to terrorists. You spent a trillion dollars on all of these weapons that are now up in smoke at our expense, and we’ve had it with you.”

If that should happen, Donald Trump would have created the greatest geo-strategic change in our lifetime. He would’ve weakened China. He would’ve weakened Russia. He would’ve weakened radical Islam. He would’ve had a convergence of moderate Arabs and Israel in the Middle East. He would punish the country that’s killed more Americans than any other terrorist entity.

He would’ve solved the problem of Cuba since 1959 that no president has, and he’d all done it in about a year. And that creates a lot of jealousy and a lot of anger, and a lot of effort to make sure it doesn’t happen.

Trump Could Crush Iran, So Why Doesn’t He?

 There’s always two wars, as I mentioned on earlier occasions, a political war and a military war, once the conflict begins. But I didn’t discuss really what the political war is about. President Donald Trump can easily decimate Iran. He can knock out the water, he can knock out the sewage facilities, the power grid, the communications grid, and paralyze the entire country.

And that might even lead to the removal of the regime. But he is not doing that for political reasons. No. 1, he would get global outrage from even our allies, and that is a restraining influence. But more importantly, he wants to empower the Iranian resistance movement, and they need all of that infrastructure if someday they were going to come to power.

Now, I mentioned earlier that regime change was not an explicit aim of this administration when they went to war, but it was a collateral dividend that they hoped would occur by their earlier aims, which all weakened, existentially, the regime: cutting off the Houthis and the terrorist proxies, getting rid of their nuclear proliferation program, the ballistic missiles, etc., etc.

Wiping out command—that will all weaken it to such a degree that even if we were to stop without regime change and follow the agenda, they would stew in their own juice, and people would get very, very angry. We’ll get to that in another video. But right now, what are the constraints that Donald Trump has to deal with?

No. 1, the MAGA base says, “It’s a forever war. It’s an endless war. He broke his word.” We see Megyn Kelly making that argument. We see Tucker Carlson making that argument. Steve Bannon—a lot of people in the MAGA base.

But if you look carefully, he’s used force on many occasions. Took out Qasem Soleimani in his first term, the ISIS kingpin Baghdadi, bombed ISIS into oblivion, took out the Wagner program, the Wagner Group. Second term, he took out Maduro, 25 hours over—all of those were one-offers. He hasn’t had a forever war.

What he did learn is: If you say that you are against forever wars or endless wars, that can be interpreted by your enemies that you’re an isolationist. And therefore, you can increase aggression, and you’ll lose deterrence. So, it’s much better to be a Jacksonian and basically say, “We don’t want to nation-build, we don’t want to get into people’s affairs, but if you aggrieve us, if you’re aggressive, if you provoke us or the interests of our allies and us, we may retaliate in a way that you have no idea [what] will follow.”

It will be asymmetrical, disproportionate, deadly, and that’s what Trump is doing. And I don’t think that anybody historically would say 30 days of an exclusively air campaign is an endless war. But he has to worry about that MAGA base. Not in numbers—the numbers are 90%, 85% of the Republican Party supports him—but the people who don’t have large audiences, and they can be influenced as they look at the pulse of the battle.

Then he has to worry about the economy. One of his signature achievements was getting gas down to $2.50 a gallon in some states. I think in Iowa, it was down to $1.80 prior to the war. The price of oil has soared from $50 to $60 a barrel to $100 to $120 a barrel, and oil is one of the linchpins of the economy. That can hurt him.

And the news, the psychological news of war, and it could be regional and could involve the Houthis, it could involve the Gulf states, it could blow up, we might have to interdict supplies from Russia. All of that creates tension and uncertainty on Wall Street, the stock market, the bond market. So, he has got to be careful of that. That’s an impediment to a purely military campaign.

Then I mentioned earlier, he has the midterms coming up, and he can’t lose his legislative majority. If he does, you will see his last two years in office consumed by investigations of the Trump people, his family, his associates, and they [Democrats] will impeach him. You can count on that. They will not convict him, but they will impeach him.

And then, of course, there’s the Israel question. He’s working with a very competent ally. Seventy-five percent of their aims and our aims overlap. We’re both Western democracies. We have a common theocratic enemy that has attacked and killed hundreds, in our case thousands, probably, if you count the Iraq War, and the Israelis have the similar—but we don’t have necessarily completely identical aims.

Why? Because we’re distant and not that vulnerable yet, because they don’t have, yet, an intercontinental ballistic missile with a nuclear warhead. They will, but not yet. Israel is proximate and vulnerable. So, in their way of thinking, the idea that we would neuter or disarm Iran would be like shooting a bear in the shoulder and leaving him on the prowl. He is going to be angry and capable and furious, and he’s going to crawl or charge them. They are the people who will take the punishment. So, in their way of thinking, why would you go to all this trouble, and that’s not an explicit aim of your campaign, i.e., regime change? “It is our aim,” the Israelis are saying.

But that’s not influencing Donald Trump necessarily. He said it wasn’t an aim. He may change and announce he’s changed, but the idea that the Israelis are running things is untrue, but he has to be careful about that.

Finally, there are some other impediments, and those impediments are: if you put an American boot on the ground in the Middle East, everybody left and right becomes hysterical, and for good cause. They remember the first Gulf War. They remember a brilliant four-day war. They remember the liberation of Kuwait. They remember the march on Baghdad.

And what happened? We let Saddam [Hussein] stay in power. We had years of no-fly zones, and then we went back again, and we spent a trillion dollars from 2003 all the way into 2011, and we tried to have a consensual government. We lost over 4,000 soldiers, many more wounded and casualties. And then the Obama administration essentially, by 2010, 2011, said “I’m done with it,” and pulled out.

And now we have Iraq—sort of consensual, sort of not—as a proxy, sort of, sort of not, of Iran. And then we had a 20-year … misadventure in Afghanistan, and we remember that pullout, that horrible August 2021 pullout that led to 13 deaths and, I don’t know, 15, 20, 50—I’ve heard 50—we heard $70 billion of military assets left.

So anytime you go into the Middle East, Americans say, “Tell me when it has ever worked.” Did the Suez Crisis of ’56 work? Did the first Gulf War work and get rid of Saddam? Did the second Gulf War with the Iraq invasion work? Did Afghanistan work? Even did the bombing—we went and bombed the nuclear facilities, and now we have to do it again. It’s a quagmire. We don’t like the Middle East. That’s the American left and right, Republican and Democrat. That is a limitation. So, anybody who says, “I’m going to end this problem with Iran, once and for all, and neuter them, people are going to say,” “It’s in the Middle East, Mr. President.”

So, Donald Trump has to contend with the MAGA base, the crazy Democratic opposition, the midterms, the economy, definitely handling the charge that he’s too influenced by Israel, and the general repulsion of the American people for anything to do with the Middle East, militarily, and blood and treasure on our part spent for people we feel are either ungracious or ungrateful or not worth it in a cost-benefit analysis.

Impeach The B*****d Liberal Judges

 

It takes a lot to really get me pissed off, but when I get there, the expletives flow. That happened Tuesday night, as two court rulings pissed me right off before I sat down to record my podcast for the next day. I generally try not to swear, though sometimes something slips out – the difference between radio and the internet is slipping an f-bomb past the goalie every once in a while, online. This time, I’d had it. I’d had it with liberal federal judges inserting themselves into the legislative role and overruling the actions of the duly elected President. And one thing became perfectly clear to me: If Republicans can’t impeach a couple of these rogue robed radicals, there’s no point in holding onto the majority or the country.

I realize the Senate will never vote to convict a liberal judge, no matter how incompetent or how much they abuse their power. These Democrat piles of post-digested food do not care about abuses of power if the power is abused in a way they support; it’s just how they roll. But to not try, to just let it slide like all of the other times before, effectively cedes control of the country to people who’ve been elected to nothing. If we do that, is there really anything worth celebrating on July 4th?

Yes, almost 250 years is a pretty good run, but it should be better. Our Founding Fathers created a system of government that has the potential to be close to eternal, but is being destroyed from within like a log cabin infested with termites.

You can live with cancer, but you must destroy it before it destroys you – it has to be wiped out completely. This is what the left is: a cancer.

One federal judge (guess which party) ruled the Trump administration couldn’t end funding to NPR and PBS. Why? Why not? What’s the consequence for a judge being an a*s and making a bad ruling? Nothing, except maybe being invited to be a high-paying guest lecturer at some Ivy League hive of anti-Americanism.

Yes, President Trump did sign an order ending funding to NPR and PBS, but Congress also cut the funding through the rescission process, so there is literally no leg for this judge to stand on. No one this partisan or stupid (maybe both) should remain on the federal bench. Democrats, naturally, would never vote to convict one of their own, but the humiliation of impeachment and the evidence brought out at trial should be used to stain U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss’ name for the rest of his existence.

The same goes for U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs, who ordered the Trump administration to reinstate almost 900,000 illegal aliens’ status because, according to the worthless Burroughs, when the President ended Joe Biden’s easy pass CPB One app, it was “not in accordance with law.”

The “law” was created by Biden through executive action, not an act of Congress. Another example of illegal aliens being favored over the rule of law and Americans. The Trump administration should ignore this ruling and immediately appeal to the Supreme Court to smack down the lower courts.

Judge Burroughs should be removed. Since that won’t happen, thanks to Democrats, the country needs John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the United States, to act.

John Roberts can restore some sanity and trust to the federal courts by accepting these direct appeals – fast-tracking them through the usual process – and smacking them down with language that shows exactly how inappropriate they were, both embarrassing the judges and providing fodder for impeachment.

Again, Democrats will never vote to convict one of their own, no matter how blatant their abuses are. But the impeachment – aided by a ruling from the Supreme Court – would slap a scarlet “H” for hack on the chest of these activists in robes and stand as a warning to others that there will be a cost for abuse. That cost can be reputational and it can be financial, as they’d have to defend themselves in a Senate trial (provided Republicans took the Constitutionally proscribed process seriously).

These judges are unaccountable and unhinged – there is no consequence for releasing murderers and rapists on the state level, nor are there any for purposefully imposing their political will and ignoring the laws on a federal level.

Impeachment was not meant to be a punishment for political hackery, but only because our Founding Fathers could not fathom the modern left’s contempt for the Constitution and our country in general. They couldn’t imagine a federal government doing all that ours now does and tries to do because they pretty unambiguously wrote the Constitution in a way to prevent it from happening.

But Democrats have shifted our founding principles from ideals to be upheld to annoyances to be ignored. That has to be reversed, and impeachment of a few activist judges is just the way to do it…before it’s too late.

Republicans need to act now, and they need to act decisively on this and on clarifying what the plain language of the 14th Amendment means on birthright citizenship as not applying to offspring of those in the country illegally or on vacation, just to nip that in the bud, too.

Otherwise, what’s the point in having a majority?