President Donald Trump says he will make an endorsement in the Texas Senate Republican primary soon, and when he does so, he wants the other candidate to drop out so that Republicans in the Lone Star State can focus on gearing up for a potentially expensive and closely watched general election fight with Democratic nominee James Talarico.

The president explained his strategy after Sen. John Cornyn and Attorney General Ken Paxton both advanced to a runoff election on Tuesday night after an already brutal primary race. Trump had initially opted not to endorse any specific candidate in the three-way race that also included Rep. Wesley Hunt, who failed to earn enough votes to move forward.

“The Republican Primary Race for the United States Senate in the Great State of Texas, a State I LOVE and won 3 times in Record Numbers (the HIGHEST vote ever recorded, by far!!!), cannot, for the good of the Party, and our Country, itself, be allowed to go on any longer. IT MUST STOP NOW!” Trump posted to Truth Social on Wednesday afternoon, saying that the party needs to “TOTALLY FOCUS” on beating Talarico, who defeated Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX).

“Both John and Ken ran great races, but not good enough. Now, this one, must be PERFECT! My Endorsements within the Republican Party have been virtually insurmountable!” he said.

“It is such an honor to realize and say that almost everyone I Endorse WINS, and wins by a lot, especially in Texas! I will be making my Endorsement soon, and will be asking the candidate that I don’t Endorse to immediately DROP OUT OF THE RACE! Is that fair?” the president added, stressing that Republicans “must win” the midterms. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, but that margin could shift in either direction, thanks to several competitive races on the table in November.

The attacks between Cornyn and Paxton, which colored much of the primary race, showed no signs of stopping as of Tuesday night.

“I refuse to allow a flawed, self-centered and shameless candidate like Ken Paxton risk everything we’ve worked so hard to build over these many years,” Cornyn said, according to CSPAN.

Meanwhile, Paxton posted to X on Wednesday morning that he wants to “fire John Cornyn once and for all.”

“Last night, in a historic failure for John Cornyn, he failed to get nearly 60% of the GOP vote after spending $100 million,” he wrote. “It’s time to finish the job in the runoff.”

The Cook Political Report currently ranks the race as “Likely Republican,” but there has been some concern among Republicans that a lengthy, messy primary — especially one that drags even further through a contentious runoff — could continue to drain resources and boost the Democrat in the general election. Trump won the state of Texas with over 56% of the vote in 2024.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

President Donald Trump says he will make an endorsement in the Texas Senate Republican primary soon, and when he does so, he wants the other candidate to drop out so that Republicans in the Lone Star State can focus on gearing up for a potentially expensive and closely watched general election fight with Democratic nominee James Talarico.

The president explained his strategy after Sen. John Cornyn and Attorney General Ken Paxton both advanced to a runoff election on Tuesday night after an already brutal primary race. Trump had initially opted not to endorse any specific candidate in the three-way race that also included Rep. Wesley Hunt, who failed to earn enough votes to move forward.

“The Republican Primary Race for the United States Senate in the Great State of Texas, a State I LOVE and won 3 times in Record Numbers (the HIGHEST vote ever recorded, by far!!!), cannot, for the good of the Party, and our Country, itself, be allowed to go on any longer. IT MUST STOP NOW!” Trump posted to Truth Social on Wednesday afternoon, saying that the party needs to “TOTALLY FOCUS” on beating Talarico, who defeated Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX).

“Both John and Ken ran great races, but not good enough. Now, this one, must be PERFECT! My Endorsements within the Republican Party have been virtually insurmountable!” he said.

“It is such an honor to realize and say that almost everyone I Endorse WINS, and wins by a lot, especially in Texas! I will be making my Endorsement soon, and will be asking the candidate that I don’t Endorse to immediately DROP OUT OF THE RACE! Is that fair?” the president added, stressing that Republicans “must win” the midterms. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, but that margin could shift in either direction, thanks to several competitive races on the table in November.

The attacks between Cornyn and Paxton, which colored much of the primary race, showed no signs of stopping as of Tuesday night.

“I refuse to allow a flawed, self-centered and shameless candidate like Ken Paxton risk everything we’ve worked so hard to build over these many years,” Cornyn said, according to CSPAN.

Meanwhile, Paxton posted to X on Wednesday morning that he wants to “fire John Cornyn once and for all.”

“Last night, in a historic failure for John Cornyn, he failed to get nearly 60% of the GOP vote after spending $100 million,” he wrote. “It’s time to finish the job in the runoff.”

The Cook Political Report currently ranks the race as “Likely Republican,” but there has been some concern among Republicans that a lengthy, messy primary — especially one that drags even further through a contentious runoff — could continue to drain resources and boost the Democrat in the general election. Trump won the state of Texas with over 56% of the vote in 2024.

“}]] 

The post Trump Wants To Play Kingmaker In Heated Texas Senate Race appeared first on Spin Politico.

Legendary Notre Dame football coach Lou Holtz has died at the age of 89, the university announced on Wednesday.

A cause of death was not immediately stated.

Holtz was considered one of the most influential coaches in college football history, winning 249 games as a collegiate head coach. He began his coaching career at William & Mary in 1969 and spent one season in the NFL before returning to college football.

One hundred of those wins happened at Notre Dame, where he served as head coach from 1986 until 1996.

“Notre Dame mourns the loss of Lou Holtz, a legendary football coach, a beloved member of the Notre Dame family and devoted husband, father and grandfather,” University of Notre Dame President Rev. Robert A. Dowd, C.S.C. said in a statement published on their website.

“Among his many accomplishments, we will remember him above all as a teacher, leader and mentor who brought out the very best in his players, on and off the field, earning their respect and admiration for a lifetime. In the years since leaving the head football coach position, Lou, together with his beloved wife, Beth, supported Notre Dame in innumerable ways, among them making possible the refurbishment of four residence hall chapels and the construction of the Beth and Lou Holtz Grand Reading Room on the first floor of Hesburgh Library — tangible signs of their great love for their Catholic faith and the mission of Our Lady’s University.”

The statement went on, “Whenever Notre Dame called to ask for his help, Lou answered with his characteristic generosity, and he will be sorely missed. The prayers of the entire Notre Dame community are with his family and many friends in this time of sorrow. May he rest in the peace and love of Christ.”

Holtz called coaching for Notre Dame “the dream of a lifetime.” 

“I remember at school that we would pray every Friday before a game for Notre Dame’s success,” he said, per ESPN. “So, it’s just part of our religion. It’s a part of the way we are, and the football team should reflect the values of Notre Dame. That means we had to play with great enthusiasm, we had to play together. We had to play with great character, great integrity, but we also should be playing for our lady on the Dome.”

After retiring from coaching, Holtz worked in television, including spending more than a decade with ESPN.

The coach was inducted into the College Football Hall of Fame in 2008, the university website noted, and was the man behind several honored Notre Dame football traditions including the “Play Like A Champion” sign in the locker room.

Holtz was also a close friend and longtime supporter of Donald Trump. The president honored Holtz with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in December of 2020 for his contributions to the nation.

Holtz is survived by his four children, Luanne, Lou “Skip” Junior, Kevin and Elizabeth. The latter three graduated from the University of Notre Dame.

“He was successful, but more important he was Significant,” his son Skip shared on X. 

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Legendary Notre Dame football coach Lou Holtz has died at the age of 89, the university announced on Wednesday.

A cause of death was not immediately stated.

Holtz was considered one of the most influential coaches in college football history, winning 249 games as a collegiate head coach. He began his coaching career at William & Mary in 1969 and spent one season in the NFL before returning to college football.

One hundred of those wins happened at Notre Dame, where he served as head coach from 1986 until 1996.

“Notre Dame mourns the loss of Lou Holtz, a legendary football coach, a beloved member of the Notre Dame family and devoted husband, father and grandfather,” University of Notre Dame President Rev. Robert A. Dowd, C.S.C. said in a statement published on their website.

“Among his many accomplishments, we will remember him above all as a teacher, leader and mentor who brought out the very best in his players, on and off the field, earning their respect and admiration for a lifetime. In the years since leaving the head football coach position, Lou, together with his beloved wife, Beth, supported Notre Dame in innumerable ways, among them making possible the refurbishment of four residence hall chapels and the construction of the Beth and Lou Holtz Grand Reading Room on the first floor of Hesburgh Library — tangible signs of their great love for their Catholic faith and the mission of Our Lady’s University.”

The statement went on, “Whenever Notre Dame called to ask for his help, Lou answered with his characteristic generosity, and he will be sorely missed. The prayers of the entire Notre Dame community are with his family and many friends in this time of sorrow. May he rest in the peace and love of Christ.”

Holtz called coaching for Notre Dame “the dream of a lifetime.” 

“I remember at school that we would pray every Friday before a game for Notre Dame’s success,” he said, per ESPN. “So, it’s just part of our religion. It’s a part of the way we are, and the football team should reflect the values of Notre Dame. That means we had to play with great enthusiasm, we had to play together. We had to play with great character, great integrity, but we also should be playing for our lady on the Dome.”

After retiring from coaching, Holtz worked in television, including spending more than a decade with ESPN.

The coach was inducted into the College Football Hall of Fame in 2008, the university website noted, and was the man behind several honored Notre Dame football traditions including the “Play Like A Champion” sign in the locker room.

Holtz was also a close friend and longtime supporter of Donald Trump. The president honored Holtz with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in December of 2020 for his contributions to the nation.

Holtz is survived by his four children, Luanne, Lou “Skip” Junior, Kevin and Elizabeth. The latter three graduated from the University of Notre Dame.

“He was successful, but more important he was Significant,” his son Skip shared on X. 

“}]] 

The post Beloved Notre Dame Football Coach Lou Holtz Dies At 89 appeared first on Spin Politico.

A Senate Armed Services Committee hearing went sideways on Wednesday when an anti-war protester and Green Party candidate attempted to disrupt the proceedings, shouting, “No one wants to fight for Israel!”

The protester, identified as Brian McGinnis, a Marine Corps veteran and Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate in North Carolina, had to be dragged from the hearing by Capitol Police — and when he grabbed onto a door to prevent them from removing him, Senator Tim Sheehy (R-MT) jumped into action as well.

WATCH:

UPDATE: New video from the moments BEFORE the Sen. Sheehy intervened show the veteran aggressively resisting US Capitol Police’s attempts to remove him from the hearing following his interruption

THREE officers were treated for injuries by DC EMS, per USCP

You can also… pic.twitter.com/nZdSHpw9dB

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) March 5, 2026

The initial confrontation showed McGinnis, wearing his Marine Corps dress uniform as he resisted, flailing and attempting to use his body weight against the officers who were trying to get him out of the room. When Capitol Police were finally able to get him to the door, he could bee seen grabbing the door, wedging his arm between the door and the frame.

Sheehy, a retired Navy SEAL, assisted the officers in their efforts, pausing only briefly to help pry McGinnis’s hand from the door.

WATCH:

Senator Sheehy joined Capitol Police in lifting up and ejecting anti war protestor Brian McGinnis from a SASC subcommittee hearing. McGinnis is a Green Party candidate running for Senate in N.C. An antiwar activist filmed the video below: pic.twitter.com/0dVA0ORWXQ

— Alan He (@alanhe) March 4, 2026

“No one wants to fight for Israel!” McGinnis shouted, apparently referencing Operation Epic Fury, the joint campaign with Israel against the Iranian regime.

Another protester could be heard shouting as Sheehy tried — with no luck — to pull McGinnis’s hand away from the door, claiming that Sheehy had broken the candidate’s hand: “A U.S. Senator just broke the hand of a Marine!”

Back on his feet, McGinnis complained that his hand was stuck, and several Capitol Police officers continued to attempt to free him from the door.

Sheehy responded to the incident in a post on X, saying, “Capitol Police were attempting to remove an unhinged protestor from the Armed Services hearing. He was fighting back. I decided to help out and deescalate the situation. This gentleman came to the Capitol looking for a confrontation, and he got one. I hope he gets the help he needs without causing further violence.”

Capitol Police also released a statement following the altercation, telling The Daily Montanan, “This afternoon, an unruly man who started to illegally protest during a hearing, put everyone in a dangerous position by violently resisting and fighting our officer’s attempts to remove him from the room.”

The statement also said that McGinnis was treated for an unspecified injury — but that three of the Capitol Police officers also had to be treated for injuries as a result of his actions.

McGinnis faces three counts of  “resisting arrest and crowding, obstructing, and incommoding for the unlawful demonstration” as well as three counts of assaulting a law enforcement officer.

“Protests are not allowed inside the Congressional Buildings. There are plenty of other spots on Capitol Grounds, outside, where demonstrations are allowed,” the statement added.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

A Senate Armed Services Committee hearing went sideways on Wednesday when an anti-war protester and Green Party candidate attempted to disrupt the proceedings, shouting, “No one wants to fight for Israel!”

The protester, identified as Brian McGinnis, a Marine Corps veteran and Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate in North Carolina, had to be dragged from the hearing by Capitol Police — and when he grabbed onto a door to prevent them from removing him, Senator Tim Sheehy (R-MT) jumped into action as well.

WATCH:

UPDATE: New video from the moments BEFORE the Sen. Sheehy intervened show the veteran aggressively resisting US Capitol Police’s attempts to remove him from the hearing following his interruption

THREE officers were treated for injuries by DC EMS, per USCP

You can also… pic.twitter.com/nZdSHpw9dB

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) March 5, 2026

The initial confrontation showed McGinnis, wearing his Marine Corps dress uniform as he resisted, flailing and attempting to use his body weight against the officers who were trying to get him out of the room. When Capitol Police were finally able to get him to the door, he could bee seen grabbing the door, wedging his arm between the door and the frame.

Sheehy, a retired Navy SEAL, assisted the officers in their efforts, pausing only briefly to help pry McGinnis’s hand from the door.

WATCH:

Senator Sheehy joined Capitol Police in lifting up and ejecting anti war protestor Brian McGinnis from a SASC subcommittee hearing. McGinnis is a Green Party candidate running for Senate in N.C. An antiwar activist filmed the video below: pic.twitter.com/0dVA0ORWXQ

— Alan He (@alanhe) March 4, 2026

“No one wants to fight for Israel!” McGinnis shouted, apparently referencing Operation Epic Fury, the joint campaign with Israel against the Iranian regime.

Another protester could be heard shouting as Sheehy tried — with no luck — to pull McGinnis’s hand away from the door, claiming that Sheehy had broken the candidate’s hand: “A U.S. Senator just broke the hand of a Marine!”

Back on his feet, McGinnis complained that his hand was stuck, and several Capitol Police officers continued to attempt to free him from the door.

Sheehy responded to the incident in a post on X, saying, “Capitol Police were attempting to remove an unhinged protestor from the Armed Services hearing. He was fighting back. I decided to help out and deescalate the situation. This gentleman came to the Capitol looking for a confrontation, and he got one. I hope he gets the help he needs without causing further violence.”

Capitol Police also released a statement following the altercation, telling The Daily Montanan, “This afternoon, an unruly man who started to illegally protest during a hearing, put everyone in a dangerous position by violently resisting and fighting our officer’s attempts to remove him from the room.”

The statement also said that McGinnis was treated for an unspecified injury — but that three of the Capitol Police officers also had to be treated for injuries as a result of his actions.

McGinnis faces three counts of  “resisting arrest and crowding, obstructing, and incommoding for the unlawful demonstration” as well as three counts of assaulting a law enforcement officer.

“Protests are not allowed inside the Congressional Buildings. There are plenty of other spots on Capitol Grounds, outside, where demonstrations are allowed,” the statement added.

“}]] 

The post Watch Navy SEAL Senator Help Cops Drag Out ‘Unhinged’ Anti-War Protester appeared first on Spin Politico.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) grilled Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) during a contentious Capitol Hill hearing addressing the rampant fraud in his state, much of which has been tied to the Somali immigrant community.

Mace specifically asked Walz a series of questions about fraud linked to funding designated to help children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder — and the Minnesota governor, combative at times, struggled to answer some of the most basic questions about the people in his state.

WATCH:

Tim Walz can’t, or won’t, answer simple questions about the absolutely massive increase in Autism program spending in his state.

These numbers have been circulating publicly for some time.

This is just insane. What a fraud. pic.twitter.com/eF2nWEL7Le

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) March 4, 2026

Mace began by asking Walz how much the state of Minnesota had spent on autism programs in 2017. Walz at first said that he did not know, and when Mace challenged him directly — asking whether he’d prepared for the hearing ahead of time — he argued that he did not know because he was not the governor in 2017.

“We’re gonna do some Minnesota math today,” Mace said, and she eventually revealed that Minnesota had spent approximately $1,000,000 on autism programs in 2017.

“How much money was spent on autism in Minnesota in 2024?” Mace asked then.

“I don’t have the number in front of me,” Walz replied. As governor I don’t —”

“Were you governor in 2024?” Mace asked.

“I was, but I’m not the —”

“Okay, so your excuse before, you didn’t know what 2017 autism numbers were because you were not governor, and today you can’t answer the numbers about 2024 as governor and you still said you prepared for this hearing today, it’s unbelievable,” Mace said. “$343,000,000 was spent in 2024. What percent increase is that, from one million to 343 million?”

“I’m not here to be your prop, go ahead and tell me,” Walz snapped.

“Are you governor of Minnesota or not?” Mace asked.

“Yes, I am,” Walz replied.

“Well, when I’m governor of South Carolina, you can sure as hell bet that I’m going to know the math,” Mace shot back, explaining that it those numbers represented a 34,200% increase.

“Do you know the number of children in Minnesota?” she asked.

“I know that Minnesota ranked as a top three state for children in the last year,” Walz said.

Mace asked what the state’s total population was, and Walz knew the answer to that question: “5.7 million.”

“What is the total population of children in Minnesota?” Mace followed up.

“I don’t have the number in front of me,” Walz said.

“Are you governor of Minnesota?” Mace repeated. “And you don’t know the number of children residing in Minnesota? … As governor, I expect you to know this information. Thank God you’re not the vice president.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) grilled Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) during a contentious Capitol Hill hearing addressing the rampant fraud in his state, much of which has been tied to the Somali immigrant community.

Mace specifically asked Walz a series of questions about fraud linked to funding designated to help children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder — and the Minnesota governor, combative at times, struggled to answer some of the most basic questions about the people in his state.

WATCH:

Tim Walz can’t, or won’t, answer simple questions about the absolutely massive increase in Autism program spending in his state.

These numbers have been circulating publicly for some time.

This is just insane. What a fraud. pic.twitter.com/eF2nWEL7Le

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) March 4, 2026

Mace began by asking Walz how much the state of Minnesota had spent on autism programs in 2017. Walz at first said that he did not know, and when Mace challenged him directly — asking whether he’d prepared for the hearing ahead of time — he argued that he did not know because he was not the governor in 2017.

“We’re gonna do some Minnesota math today,” Mace said, and she eventually revealed that Minnesota had spent approximately $1,000,000 on autism programs in 2017.

“How much money was spent on autism in Minnesota in 2024?” Mace asked then.

“I don’t have the number in front of me,” Walz replied. As governor I don’t —”

“Were you governor in 2024?” Mace asked.

“I was, but I’m not the —”

“Okay, so your excuse before, you didn’t know what 2017 autism numbers were because you were not governor, and today you can’t answer the numbers about 2024 as governor and you still said you prepared for this hearing today, it’s unbelievable,” Mace said. “$343,000,000 was spent in 2024. What percent increase is that, from one million to 343 million?”

“I’m not here to be your prop, go ahead and tell me,” Walz snapped.

“Are you governor of Minnesota or not?” Mace asked.

“Yes, I am,” Walz replied.

“Well, when I’m governor of South Carolina, you can sure as hell bet that I’m going to know the math,” Mace shot back, explaining that it those numbers represented a 34,200% increase.

“Do you know the number of children in Minnesota?” she asked.

“I know that Minnesota ranked as a top three state for children in the last year,” Walz said.

Mace asked what the state’s total population was, and Walz knew the answer to that question: “5.7 million.”

“What is the total population of children in Minnesota?” Mace followed up.

“I don’t have the number in front of me,” Walz said.

“Are you governor of Minnesota?” Mace repeated. “And you don’t know the number of children residing in Minnesota? … As governor, I expect you to know this information. Thank God you’re not the vice president.”

“}]] 

The post ‘Thank God You’re Not The Vice President’: Nancy Mace Grills Tim Walz Over Autism Funding Fraud appeared first on Spin Politico.

The following is an edited transcript excerpt of The Michael Knowles Show.

* * *

Scientists are using DMT (dimethyltryptamine), a powerful hallucinogenic drug, to allow people to communicate with the seemingly alien creatures they see when they do the drug. I wish I were making this up.

If you’ve ever had a friend who’s done DMT — or shrooms or acid for that matter — and then have them describe what they see, they may claim to see little gray weirdo aliens that all sound eerily similar. 

The title of the article in WIRED reads, “Some People See Aliens While on DMT. Researchers Want to Find Out What They Can Teach Us”

I agree with the first sentence. I think the second sentence would not follow from the first sentence. It’s probably not a good idea.

The subtitle reads, “A new psychedelic retreat calling itself a “SETI for the mind” aims to establish two-way communication with the nonhuman entities people encounter while tripping on DMT.”

What could go wrong?

From the article:

The idea had been suggested six years earlier in a paper by neurobiologist Andrew Gallimore.

So, these are not just some weirdo entrepreneurs. These are not just some journalists — he’s a neurobiologist.

The ethnobotanist Terence McKenna…

Boy, howdy, there are just so many specializations in science today, aren’t there? What do you want to be when you grow up, Sally? “I want to be an ethnobotanist.” Whatever that is.

— one of the more gifted articulators of the psychedelic experience — famously described these entities as “self-transforming elf machines” and “jeweled, self-dribbling basketballs from hyperspace …” McKenna likened them to playful leprechauns, but others, like Bilton, have also met more sinister beings: “dark, evil motherfuckers—horrible things,” as he describes them.

Okay. Tell me more. I’ve never done psychedelics.

The thread connecting most perceived DMT entity encounters is an overwhelming sense of technological sophistication and godlike power. “I was confronted with what seemed to me to be the undeniable hand of some kind of intelligence,” Gallimore said of his first DMT trip during his recent appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, “a supremely advanced, ancient, and yet highly technological intelligence.”

Is this sounding familiar to anyone? If you’ve done psychedelics it might be sounding familiar because you’ve experienced it. If you are familiar with religion — Christianity in particular — this might be sounding familiar, and it might not be sounding good.

Gallimore argues that whatever is happening to the brain during a DMT trip, it’s not mere “hallucination”—a term he uses somewhat derisively. He makes the case that DMT unlocks a realm ordinarily cut off to our senses and populated by unfathomably advanced nonhuman entities.

So right off the bat, there are two options. These things can be one of two things. 

They can either be, to use the language of the scholastics: “ens reale” or “ens rationis.”

They can be mind-independent beings — that is, things that have a reality in themselves outside of your own conceptions — or they can be figments of your imagination, things that we come up with in our heads.

Now the whole premise here is that we need to communicate with these things. That very phrase tells us that if these things matter at all — if we’re going to do any of this stuff, have the weird science summer camp DMT trip — then they can’t just be figments of our imagination. Because you can’t communicate with something that is not in itself a cognitive power.

Otherwise you’d just be talking to yourself. But you don’t need a DMT trip to talk to yourself. You can have a conversation in your own head.

WATCH: The Michael Knowles Show on DailyWire+

The only way to communicate is to involve two cognitive powers. I can’t communicate with my tumbler. I can’t communicate with this piece of paper. I can communicate with another person — because he or she has cognitive power.

So right off the bat, we are assuming these things are real — but they’re not physical. They’re not visible ordinarily. They’re purely intelligence. Pure intelligence with which we might communicate, but only if we do things that are bad and sinful, like lose our minds on drugs.

That is a demon.

That’s a long way of saying, that’s a demon.

Invisible, nonphysical cognitive powers are spirits. That’s what a spirit means. Spirits can be angels. They can be demons. There are other kinds of spiritual realities.

Now, the ones we invite in to communicate when we are doing bad things — when we are sinning — they’re not the good ones. They’re the bad ones. They’re demons.

I am not a guy — I’ve said this many times — who sees demons under every rock. I know that’s very popular now. I’ve had conversations with exorcists. I acknowledge spiritual reality. But I take the C.S. Lewis approach: you don’t want to think about demons none of the time, because then you might leave yourself open to danger. But you also don’t want to think about demons all the time, because then you’re obsessing over spiritual darkness instead of focusing on God.

So you should think about demons a little bit of the time. This is one of those times.

Do not go do a bunch of drugs with a bunch of hippie scientists and try to talk to demons. It’s a bad idea.

What is it you desire that would impel you to go do this? There are plenty of people who take psychedelics and want to talk to the aliens — which are demons. Either they’re hallucinations, in which case the whole thing is pointless, or they’re demons.

What would impel you?

Because you want to learn something about yourself or about the world?

Well, if you want to learn something — if you want to learn the truth — you should speak to God, who is the truth, the way, and the life. Christ says that. You would want to speak to the true source and summit of all being, rather than demons whose defining characteristic is that they’re evil and they lie.

Why else would you want to do it?

I’ll tell you why. And to be fair to the drug users, the reason they want this is because they recognize we are partly spiritual creatures. They recognize we don’t comprehend all the truth.

They want knowledge.

But if you want that, the reason you would go do drugs with scientists instead of going to church, reading the Bible, praying, or receiving the sacraments — the difference is this: those things promise the truth on God’s terms, while drugs promise the truth on your terms.

You want to increase your personal agency. You want to become like a god yourself rather than submit your will and reason to God, who is omnipotent and omniscient.

That’s why it’s just a reiteration of the original sin in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve had everything. They were walking with God. It was paradise. But they wanted paradise on their own terms.

And when you try to make paradise on your own terms, it turns into hell.

So, have I made my point clear? Don’t do drugs and try to talk to demons. This should go without saying, but we’re living in a very confused age.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

The following is an edited transcript excerpt of The Michael Knowles Show.

* * *

Scientists are using DMT (dimethyltryptamine), a powerful hallucinogenic drug, to allow people to communicate with the seemingly alien creatures they see when they do the drug. I wish I were making this up.

If you’ve ever had a friend who’s done DMT — or shrooms or acid for that matter — and then have them describe what they see, they may claim to see little gray weirdo aliens that all sound eerily similar. 

The title of the article in WIRED reads, “Some People See Aliens While on DMT. Researchers Want to Find Out What They Can Teach Us”

I agree with the first sentence. I think the second sentence would not follow from the first sentence. It’s probably not a good idea.

The subtitle reads, “A new psychedelic retreat calling itself a “SETI for the mind” aims to establish two-way communication with the nonhuman entities people encounter while tripping on DMT.”

What could go wrong?

From the article:

The idea had been suggested six years earlier in a paper by neurobiologist Andrew Gallimore.

So, these are not just some weirdo entrepreneurs. These are not just some journalists — he’s a neurobiologist.

The ethnobotanist Terence McKenna…

Boy, howdy, there are just so many specializations in science today, aren’t there? What do you want to be when you grow up, Sally? “I want to be an ethnobotanist.” Whatever that is.

— one of the more gifted articulators of the psychedelic experience — famously described these entities as “self-transforming elf machines” and “jeweled, self-dribbling basketballs from hyperspace …” McKenna likened them to playful leprechauns, but others, like Bilton, have also met more sinister beings: “dark, evil motherfuckers—horrible things,” as he describes them.

Okay. Tell me more. I’ve never done psychedelics.

The thread connecting most perceived DMT entity encounters is an overwhelming sense of technological sophistication and godlike power. “I was confronted with what seemed to me to be the undeniable hand of some kind of intelligence,” Gallimore said of his first DMT trip during his recent appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, “a supremely advanced, ancient, and yet highly technological intelligence.”

Is this sounding familiar to anyone? If you’ve done psychedelics it might be sounding familiar because you’ve experienced it. If you are familiar with religion — Christianity in particular — this might be sounding familiar, and it might not be sounding good.

Gallimore argues that whatever is happening to the brain during a DMT trip, it’s not mere “hallucination”—a term he uses somewhat derisively. He makes the case that DMT unlocks a realm ordinarily cut off to our senses and populated by unfathomably advanced nonhuman entities.

So right off the bat, there are two options. These things can be one of two things. 

They can either be, to use the language of the scholastics: “ens reale” or “ens rationis.”

They can be mind-independent beings — that is, things that have a reality in themselves outside of your own conceptions — or they can be figments of your imagination, things that we come up with in our heads.

Now the whole premise here is that we need to communicate with these things. That very phrase tells us that if these things matter at all — if we’re going to do any of this stuff, have the weird science summer camp DMT trip — then they can’t just be figments of our imagination. Because you can’t communicate with something that is not in itself a cognitive power.

Otherwise you’d just be talking to yourself. But you don’t need a DMT trip to talk to yourself. You can have a conversation in your own head.

WATCH: The Michael Knowles Show on DailyWire+

The only way to communicate is to involve two cognitive powers. I can’t communicate with my tumbler. I can’t communicate with this piece of paper. I can communicate with another person — because he or she has cognitive power.

So right off the bat, we are assuming these things are real — but they’re not physical. They’re not visible ordinarily. They’re purely intelligence. Pure intelligence with which we might communicate, but only if we do things that are bad and sinful, like lose our minds on drugs.

That is a demon.

That’s a long way of saying, that’s a demon.

Invisible, nonphysical cognitive powers are spirits. That’s what a spirit means. Spirits can be angels. They can be demons. There are other kinds of spiritual realities.

Now, the ones we invite in to communicate when we are doing bad things — when we are sinning — they’re not the good ones. They’re the bad ones. They’re demons.

I am not a guy — I’ve said this many times — who sees demons under every rock. I know that’s very popular now. I’ve had conversations with exorcists. I acknowledge spiritual reality. But I take the C.S. Lewis approach: you don’t want to think about demons none of the time, because then you might leave yourself open to danger. But you also don’t want to think about demons all the time, because then you’re obsessing over spiritual darkness instead of focusing on God.

So you should think about demons a little bit of the time. This is one of those times.

Do not go do a bunch of drugs with a bunch of hippie scientists and try to talk to demons. It’s a bad idea.

What is it you desire that would impel you to go do this? There are plenty of people who take psychedelics and want to talk to the aliens — which are demons. Either they’re hallucinations, in which case the whole thing is pointless, or they’re demons.

What would impel you?

Because you want to learn something about yourself or about the world?

Well, if you want to learn something — if you want to learn the truth — you should speak to God, who is the truth, the way, and the life. Christ says that. You would want to speak to the true source and summit of all being, rather than demons whose defining characteristic is that they’re evil and they lie.

Why else would you want to do it?

I’ll tell you why. And to be fair to the drug users, the reason they want this is because they recognize we are partly spiritual creatures. They recognize we don’t comprehend all the truth.

They want knowledge.

But if you want that, the reason you would go do drugs with scientists instead of going to church, reading the Bible, praying, or receiving the sacraments — the difference is this: those things promise the truth on God’s terms, while drugs promise the truth on your terms.

You want to increase your personal agency. You want to become like a god yourself rather than submit your will and reason to God, who is omnipotent and omniscient.

That’s why it’s just a reiteration of the original sin in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve had everything. They were walking with God. It was paradise. But they wanted paradise on their own terms.

And when you try to make paradise on your own terms, it turns into hell.

So, have I made my point clear? Don’t do drugs and try to talk to demons. This should go without saying, but we’re living in a very confused age.

“}]] 

The post Scientists Are Convincing Drug Addicts To Talk To Demons appeared first on Spin Politico.

Psychologists, counselors, and social workers in Texas can be penalized just like doctors for helping facilitate children’s sex changes, according to an opinion clarifying the state’s ban on sex-rejecting interventions.

The Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council (TBHEC) asked Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton if mental health providers met the criteria of “health care provider” described in the state’s child sex-rejection ban, S.B. 14, suggesting the care provided by mental health professionals fell outside the outlawed interventions.

“The agency respectfully seeks clarification as to how such providers are impacted by S.B. 14, given that the prohibited activities and services are exclusively medical in nature and fall outside the scope of practice for mental health professionals,” the council wrote in a July 2025 letter. 

“Any radical facilitating the ‘transitioning’ of our kids is committing child abuse. The law is clear that these radical procedures are illegal and in no world should Texans’ tax dollars be used to permanently harm children,” Paxton told The Daily Wire. “This opinion should send a clear warning that there will be consequences for any medical professional, whether a doctor or a therapist, who is illegally ‘transitioning’ Texas kids.”

The TBHEC helps regulate and uphold professional standards within the state’s behavioral health and social service professions.

Paxton unequivocally said mental health professionals fell within the criteria of the ban in an opinion published on February 27, 2026.

“The unambiguous definition of ‘health care provider’ does not require a prescription pad or scalpel,” Paxton stated in the opinion. “S.B. 14 codified more than a prohibition on providing certain surgeries and prescriptions.” 

Paxton further clarified that the Texas ban on child sex-rejection forbids the use of public money to fund any individual or organization that “provides or facilitates” the gender transition of minors.

The TBHEC told The Daily Wire the professionals they help regulate are “expected to comply fully with Texas law.” 

“S.B. 14 prohibits certain medical procedures for minors in Texas. The question before us was whether the technical statutory definition of ‘health care provider’ included behavioral health professionals,” Darrel Spinks, Executive Director of the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council, told The Daily Wire. 

“Out of deference to the statutory framework and the Attorney General’s role in interpreting state law, we sought formal clarification to remove any ambiguity. The opinion confirms what many would reasonably assume; that licensed mental health professionals are health care providers under the statute. This does not change the law or our responsibilities. Our licensees are expected to comply fully with Texas law,” Spinks stated. 

The council’s letter mentioned the pending Supreme Court case, Chiles v. Salazar, where Christian counselor Kaley Chiles is challenging Colorado’s law banning so-called conversion therapy. The Colorado law prohibits counselors from “attempts or purports to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity,” which Chiles argues violates her freedom of speech and pushes children towards sex-rejecting medical interventions. 

“The court is examining whether the regulated practice of mental health counseling is conduct or speech,” wrote the TBHEC. “Circuit courts are split, as the Third and Eleventh Circuits treat mental health counseling as speech and not conduct, while the Ninth and Tenth Circuits treat it as conduct and not speech. Given the significance of the question before the court, which may have far reaching implications, this case may be something you want to consider in your opinion.” 

Paxton addressed these concerns in the opinion footnotes, writing, “You also imply that your questions may intersect with the First Amendment, referencing Chiles v. Salazar … But Chiles concerns a statute that is markedly different from the framework at issue in your request.”   

However, Paxton wrote his office generally did not comment on pending litigation and would offer “no speculation on the scope of the Court’s eventual holding in Chiles.” 

Mental health providers play a pivotal role in the sex-rejecting medical intervention pipeline by providing psychological assessments that are often required to obtain sex change surgeries, such as a double mastectomy, the opinion noted. 

“The multidisciplinary path to medically transitioning children often starts with mental ‘health care,’” the opinion states. “Mental health professionals serve as the ‘clinical gatekeepers whose assessments and recommendations initiate the interventions’ prohibited by S.B. 14.”

Many insurance companies and surgeons require a recent mental health assessment and surgery recommendation letter in order to move forward with sex-rejecting surgery.

The quality and clinical practice surrounding these assessments were heavily criticized in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 2025 report on the treatment of gender dysphoria. 

Leor Sapir, PhD, a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and co-author of the HHS report, explained how gender clinician assessments often focus on achieving teens’ sex-rejection goals rather than examining their gender dysphoria. 

“Gender clinicians have abandoned the assessment model pioneered by the Dutch and replaced it with ‘readiness assessments’ designed to help kids clarify and pursue their ‘embodiment goals,’” Sapir told The Daily Wire.   

“Importantly, gender clinicians freely acknowledge that these goals can shift, with some claiming that this is not a failure of treatment but rather part of a teen’s ‘gender journey.’ And increasingly, the gender-focused specialists in the mental health field have come to view assessment in the traditional sense as a form of harmful gatekeeping, or even ‘conversion therapy.’ “ 

TODAY: The Texas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of @SorenAldaco, an Independent Women ambassador & detransitioner seeking justice for what she says is medical malpractice that led to her double mastectomy at age 19.
pic.twitter.com/EQc7rtsaua

— Independent Women (@IWF) February 11, 2026

Mental health assessments performed by gender clinicians have recently been scrutinized in detransitioners’ lawsuits. 

Fox Varian, a female detransitioner, successfully sued her psychologist and surgeon and was awarded $2 million for harm caused by a double mastectomy she received at age 16.  Psychologist Dr. Kenneth Einhorn recommended and pressured Varian’s mother to sign off on the surgery, saying the gender-confused teen would commit suicide without it, according to reporting from independent journalist Benjamin Ryan for the Free Press.

Arguments in the case centered around a letter sent by Einhorn to Varian’s surgeon recommending she receive the double mastectomy, which Varian’s legal team argued was inaccurate and improper, according to reporting from The Epoch Times.

Soren Aldaco, a woman who struggled with gender confusion throughout her adolescence and underwent a double mastectomy at 19 that she later regretted, sued her mental health providers, alleging they negligently wrote a surgical recommendation that granted her access to the mastectomy, court documents show.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Psychologists, counselors, and social workers in Texas can be penalized just like doctors for helping facilitate children’s sex changes, according to an opinion clarifying the state’s ban on sex-rejecting interventions.

The Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council (TBHEC) asked Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton if mental health providers met the criteria of “health care provider” described in the state’s child sex-rejection ban, S.B. 14, suggesting the care provided by mental health professionals fell outside the outlawed interventions.

“The agency respectfully seeks clarification as to how such providers are impacted by S.B. 14, given that the prohibited activities and services are exclusively medical in nature and fall outside the scope of practice for mental health professionals,” the council wrote in a July 2025 letter. 

“Any radical facilitating the ‘transitioning’ of our kids is committing child abuse. The law is clear that these radical procedures are illegal and in no world should Texans’ tax dollars be used to permanently harm children,” Paxton told The Daily Wire. “This opinion should send a clear warning that there will be consequences for any medical professional, whether a doctor or a therapist, who is illegally ‘transitioning’ Texas kids.”

The TBHEC helps regulate and uphold professional standards within the state’s behavioral health and social service professions.

Paxton unequivocally said mental health professionals fell within the criteria of the ban in an opinion published on February 27, 2026.

“The unambiguous definition of ‘health care provider’ does not require a prescription pad or scalpel,” Paxton stated in the opinion. “S.B. 14 codified more than a prohibition on providing certain surgeries and prescriptions.” 

Paxton further clarified that the Texas ban on child sex-rejection forbids the use of public money to fund any individual or organization that “provides or facilitates” the gender transition of minors.

The TBHEC told The Daily Wire the professionals they help regulate are “expected to comply fully with Texas law.” 

“S.B. 14 prohibits certain medical procedures for minors in Texas. The question before us was whether the technical statutory definition of ‘health care provider’ included behavioral health professionals,” Darrel Spinks, Executive Director of the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council, told The Daily Wire. 

“Out of deference to the statutory framework and the Attorney General’s role in interpreting state law, we sought formal clarification to remove any ambiguity. The opinion confirms what many would reasonably assume; that licensed mental health professionals are health care providers under the statute. This does not change the law or our responsibilities. Our licensees are expected to comply fully with Texas law,” Spinks stated. 

The council’s letter mentioned the pending Supreme Court case, Chiles v. Salazar, where Christian counselor Kaley Chiles is challenging Colorado’s law banning so-called conversion therapy. The Colorado law prohibits counselors from “attempts or purports to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity,” which Chiles argues violates her freedom of speech and pushes children towards sex-rejecting medical interventions. 

“The court is examining whether the regulated practice of mental health counseling is conduct or speech,” wrote the TBHEC. “Circuit courts are split, as the Third and Eleventh Circuits treat mental health counseling as speech and not conduct, while the Ninth and Tenth Circuits treat it as conduct and not speech. Given the significance of the question before the court, which may have far reaching implications, this case may be something you want to consider in your opinion.” 

Paxton addressed these concerns in the opinion footnotes, writing, “You also imply that your questions may intersect with the First Amendment, referencing Chiles v. Salazar … But Chiles concerns a statute that is markedly different from the framework at issue in your request.”   

However, Paxton wrote his office generally did not comment on pending litigation and would offer “no speculation on the scope of the Court’s eventual holding in Chiles.” 

Mental health providers play a pivotal role in the sex-rejecting medical intervention pipeline by providing psychological assessments that are often required to obtain sex change surgeries, such as a double mastectomy, the opinion noted. 

“The multidisciplinary path to medically transitioning children often starts with mental ‘health care,’” the opinion states. “Mental health professionals serve as the ‘clinical gatekeepers whose assessments and recommendations initiate the interventions’ prohibited by S.B. 14.”

Many insurance companies and surgeons require a recent mental health assessment and surgery recommendation letter in order to move forward with sex-rejecting surgery.

The quality and clinical practice surrounding these assessments were heavily criticized in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 2025 report on the treatment of gender dysphoria. 

Leor Sapir, PhD, a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and co-author of the HHS report, explained how gender clinician assessments often focus on achieving teens’ sex-rejection goals rather than examining their gender dysphoria. 

“Gender clinicians have abandoned the assessment model pioneered by the Dutch and replaced it with ‘readiness assessments’ designed to help kids clarify and pursue their ‘embodiment goals,’” Sapir told The Daily Wire.   

“Importantly, gender clinicians freely acknowledge that these goals can shift, with some claiming that this is not a failure of treatment but rather part of a teen’s ‘gender journey.’ And increasingly, the gender-focused specialists in the mental health field have come to view assessment in the traditional sense as a form of harmful gatekeeping, or even ‘conversion therapy.’ “ 

TODAY: The Texas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of @SorenAldaco, an Independent Women ambassador & detransitioner seeking justice for what she says is medical malpractice that led to her double mastectomy at age 19.
pic.twitter.com/EQc7rtsaua

— Independent Women (@IWF) February 11, 2026

Mental health assessments performed by gender clinicians have recently been scrutinized in detransitioners’ lawsuits. 

Fox Varian, a female detransitioner, successfully sued her psychologist and surgeon and was awarded $2 million for harm caused by a double mastectomy she received at age 16.  Psychologist Dr. Kenneth Einhorn recommended and pressured Varian’s mother to sign off on the surgery, saying the gender-confused teen would commit suicide without it, according to reporting from independent journalist Benjamin Ryan for the Free Press.

Arguments in the case centered around a letter sent by Einhorn to Varian’s surgeon recommending she receive the double mastectomy, which Varian’s legal team argued was inaccurate and improper, according to reporting from The Epoch Times.

Soren Aldaco, a woman who struggled with gender confusion throughout her adolescence and underwent a double mastectomy at 19 that she later regretted, sued her mental health providers, alleging they negligently wrote a surgical recommendation that granted her access to the mastectomy, court documents show.

“}]] 

The post Texas Therapists Will No Longer Get Away With Pushing Kids Toward Sex Changes appeared first on Spin Politico.

WASHINGTON—Iran was using negotiations with the United States to stall for time as it stockpiled materials needed to reach weapons-grade enrichment level, senior administration officials revealed this week. Once President Donald Trump was made aware of the deception, he decided Iran was directly threatening the United States and launched Operation Epic Fury.

The president shared Tuesday that the negotiations made him believe Iran was going to attack first. “I felt strongly about that,” he emphasized. Asked whether Israel forced the hand of the United States, he responded, “No, I might have forced their hand. We were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first.”

The president’s decision stemmed at least in part from Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner’s time at the table with Iranian negotiators, senior administration officials said on a call with reporters on Tuesday afternoon. Iranian negotiators, during several rounds of meetings, came to the Trump team with an agreement that allegedly addressed the needs of the Iranian people over the next decade.

Because the agreement was needs-based, they asked only for enrichment they might need over the next decade, tying the agreement to a program they have to build out more nuclear facilities. Trump’s negotiators asked if they could take the agreement back to the United States so they could have other nuclear experts from the CIA, War Department, and State Department weigh in. They were refused.

That was a tell, one senior administration official shared — one of many throughout the exchange.

Smoke rises from the area after it was targeted in attacks as a series of explosions are heard in Tehran, Iran on March 01, 2026.  (Photo by Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)

After reading through the agreement, Witkoff and Kushner were dismayed that the Iranians asked to enrich five times more uranium than was allowed under the Iran nuclear deal. They also discovered a chart at the end of the agreement, on the back of the seventh page, that attested to the amount of enrichment they would need for each new project that they were planning.

Importantly, it centered on the Tehran Research Reactor.

As its name suggests, this reactor was purportedly meant for civilian research, unlike the industrial nuclear reactors destroyed in Operation Midnight Hammer.

“Everybody all along out there has been under the impression that that’s what it’s been doing,” one senior administration official shared.

Since Operation Midnight Hammer, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not been able to make inspections in Iran, which senior administration officials said was yet another tell that the Iranians were being deceptive.

Witkoff and Kushner were in conversations with the IAEA about the Iranians’ agreement, and, unfortunately for Iran, the IAEA knew how much existing fuel Iran had at the Tehran Research Reactor. That number was “roughly seven to eight years of what they need to burn on an annual basis,” a senior administration official shared.

Witkoff and Kushner did some fast math. They realized that the research reactor had not been making any radioisotopes, and that the seven to eight year supply of fuel that Iran had been retaining there was “being stockpiled along with all the other stockpiling that had been done at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan.”

“So the claim that they were using a research reactor to do good for the Iranian people was a complete and false pretense,” a senior administration official shared.

The Trump negotiators recognized that the Iranians are incredibly clever, doing everything internally in Iran to bring that enrichment process to fruition. If the United States had allowed them to continue their work for a year, the administration officials said, Iran could have gone from having 460 kg of weapons-grade material to 1,500 kg of it.

About 42 kg of 90% enriched uranium is required to make one nuclear warhead, according to the IAEA, and Iran had material enough for 11 bombs at the beginning of these negotiations.

Within a short period of time, the senior administration official said, they could have had 1,500 kg of weapons-grade material, meaning Iran would have had not just 11 bombs, but up to 50 bombs.

“That is literally the place that we were sailing into,” the official said.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Iranians were claiming they need research reactors that start at a 20% enrichment rate, saving them roughly two months before they get to weapons grade at 90%, the officials shared, calling this a “complete lie.” Witkoff and Kushner figured this all out at the table, and the IAEA “supported and attested” to their findings that Iran was never enriching at TRR for civil purposes.

“They had never made isotopes there,” explained one administration official. “They had done a couple of medical tests to sort of disguise what they were really doing, and in reality, what they were doing was they were stockpiling.”

There were many other things that made Kushner and Witkoff realize the Iranians were being deceptive, but when they discovered what Iran was really doing at the Tehran Research Reactor, above everything else, it was “very, very clear” what was really going on. Iran was telling the world they were developing isotopes for medicinal purposes and “all the while not using any of it for medicinal purposes, in fact, stockpiling for some other use.”

“The only other use it could be would be to bring it towards a weapons-grade enrichment level,” said an administration official.

Witkoff and Kushner went into the meetings determined to assess for the president whether they could make a deal on his primary objectives, and if they could, to find out how long it would take to get that deal done, whether Iran would comply with the deal, and whether it was enforceable.

But clearly, all along, they were trying to hide their nuclear enrichment program underground, one senior administration official said, as well as building another one that doesn’t have air shafts attached to it — since Operation Midnight Hammer’s bunker-busting bombs went through the air shafts in order to destroy the nuclear facilities.

Witkoff and Kushner had studied the Iranians and their previous efforts to negotiate with the United States, and they knew ahead of time that the Iranians were adept at making short-term deals to buy time. In this case, the senior administration officials said, it appears that the Iranians were hoping to stall until Trump was no longer president, and the United States might be less observant about how Iran was stockpiling or what deals Iran was able to swing.

Given that the United States was amassing such a powerful force outside Iran, officials were surprised that Iranian officials would not cooperate.

“We really thought that they would show real movement towards creating a real deal,” one administration official said. “All we got were games and tricks and denials.”

In one telling anecdote, Trump’s negotiators reminded Iran that their facilities needed to be above ground.

“Well then it could be bombed!” the Iranian negotiators reportedly said, to which team Trump told them: “If there’s nothing nefarious being done there, then you shouldn’t be worried about a bomb.”

“I think now we’re seeing with their attacks all over the region, the dangers that they pose and the capabilities that they’ve created over time,” a senior administration official shared. “And that really is what we concluded from the negotiations.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

WASHINGTON—Iran was using negotiations with the United States to stall for time as it stockpiled materials needed to reach weapons-grade enrichment level, senior administration officials revealed this week. Once President Donald Trump was made aware of the deception, he decided Iran was directly threatening the United States and launched Operation Epic Fury.

The president shared Tuesday that the negotiations made him believe Iran was going to attack first. “I felt strongly about that,” he emphasized. Asked whether Israel forced the hand of the United States, he responded, “No, I might have forced their hand. We were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first.”

The president’s decision stemmed at least in part from Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner’s time at the table with Iranian negotiators, senior administration officials said on a call with reporters on Tuesday afternoon. Iranian negotiators, during several rounds of meetings, came to the Trump team with an agreement that allegedly addressed the needs of the Iranian people over the next decade.

Because the agreement was needs-based, they asked only for enrichment they might need over the next decade, tying the agreement to a program they have to build out more nuclear facilities. Trump’s negotiators asked if they could take the agreement back to the United States so they could have other nuclear experts from the CIA, War Department, and State Department weigh in. They were refused.

That was a tell, one senior administration official shared — one of many throughout the exchange.

Smoke rises from the area after it was targeted in attacks as a series of explosions are heard in Tehran, Iran on March 01, 2026.  (Photo by Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)

After reading through the agreement, Witkoff and Kushner were dismayed that the Iranians asked to enrich five times more uranium than was allowed under the Iran nuclear deal. They also discovered a chart at the end of the agreement, on the back of the seventh page, that attested to the amount of enrichment they would need for each new project that they were planning.

Importantly, it centered on the Tehran Research Reactor.

As its name suggests, this reactor was purportedly meant for civilian research, unlike the industrial nuclear reactors destroyed in Operation Midnight Hammer.

“Everybody all along out there has been under the impression that that’s what it’s been doing,” one senior administration official shared.

Since Operation Midnight Hammer, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not been able to make inspections in Iran, which senior administration officials said was yet another tell that the Iranians were being deceptive.

Witkoff and Kushner were in conversations with the IAEA about the Iranians’ agreement, and, unfortunately for Iran, the IAEA knew how much existing fuel Iran had at the Tehran Research Reactor. That number was “roughly seven to eight years of what they need to burn on an annual basis,” a senior administration official shared.

Witkoff and Kushner did some fast math. They realized that the research reactor had not been making any radioisotopes, and that the seven to eight year supply of fuel that Iran had been retaining there was “being stockpiled along with all the other stockpiling that had been done at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan.”

“So the claim that they were using a research reactor to do good for the Iranian people was a complete and false pretense,” a senior administration official shared.

The Trump negotiators recognized that the Iranians are incredibly clever, doing everything internally in Iran to bring that enrichment process to fruition. If the United States had allowed them to continue their work for a year, the administration officials said, Iran could have gone from having 460 kg of weapons-grade material to 1,500 kg of it.

About 42 kg of 90% enriched uranium is required to make one nuclear warhead, according to the IAEA, and Iran had material enough for 11 bombs at the beginning of these negotiations.

Within a short period of time, the senior administration official said, they could have had 1,500 kg of weapons-grade material, meaning Iran would have had not just 11 bombs, but up to 50 bombs.

“That is literally the place that we were sailing into,” the official said.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Iranians were claiming they need research reactors that start at a 20% enrichment rate, saving them roughly two months before they get to weapons grade at 90%, the officials shared, calling this a “complete lie.” Witkoff and Kushner figured this all out at the table, and the IAEA “supported and attested” to their findings that Iran was never enriching at TRR for civil purposes.

“They had never made isotopes there,” explained one administration official. “They had done a couple of medical tests to sort of disguise what they were really doing, and in reality, what they were doing was they were stockpiling.”

There were many other things that made Kushner and Witkoff realize the Iranians were being deceptive, but when they discovered what Iran was really doing at the Tehran Research Reactor, above everything else, it was “very, very clear” what was really going on. Iran was telling the world they were developing isotopes for medicinal purposes and “all the while not using any of it for medicinal purposes, in fact, stockpiling for some other use.”

“The only other use it could be would be to bring it towards a weapons-grade enrichment level,” said an administration official.

Witkoff and Kushner went into the meetings determined to assess for the president whether they could make a deal on his primary objectives, and if they could, to find out how long it would take to get that deal done, whether Iran would comply with the deal, and whether it was enforceable.

But clearly, all along, they were trying to hide their nuclear enrichment program underground, one senior administration official said, as well as building another one that doesn’t have air shafts attached to it — since Operation Midnight Hammer’s bunker-busting bombs went through the air shafts in order to destroy the nuclear facilities.

Witkoff and Kushner had studied the Iranians and their previous efforts to negotiate with the United States, and they knew ahead of time that the Iranians were adept at making short-term deals to buy time. In this case, the senior administration officials said, it appears that the Iranians were hoping to stall until Trump was no longer president, and the United States might be less observant about how Iran was stockpiling or what deals Iran was able to swing.

Given that the United States was amassing such a powerful force outside Iran, officials were surprised that Iranian officials would not cooperate.

“We really thought that they would show real movement towards creating a real deal,” one administration official said. “All we got were games and tricks and denials.”

In one telling anecdote, Trump’s negotiators reminded Iran that their facilities needed to be above ground.

“Well then it could be bombed!” the Iranian negotiators reportedly said, to which team Trump told them: “If there’s nothing nefarious being done there, then you shouldn’t be worried about a bomb.”

“I think now we’re seeing with their attacks all over the region, the dangers that they pose and the capabilities that they’ve created over time,” a senior administration official shared. “And that really is what we concluded from the negotiations.”

“}]] 

The post How Trump’s Negotiators Realized Iran Was Lying To Stall For Time appeared first on Spin Politico.

Five Republicans joined all Democrats in attendance on the GOP-led House Oversight Committee in passing a motion to subpoena U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify on the administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

Wednesday’s vote means Bondi could soon be in front of the same committee that grilled former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over their ties to Epstein last week. The motion was proposed by Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina and supported by Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), Tim Burchett (R-TN), Michael Cloud (R-TX), and Scott Perry (R-PA), along with every Democrat who was present for a 24-19 vote.

“AG Bondi will testify about missing Epstein evidence. The videos, the audio, the documents the DOJ is hiding,” Mace said. “The American people deserve transparency. Survivors deserve justice. We’re delivering both. Accountability is coming.”

It would not be the first time for Bondi to testify under oath about her handling of the Epstein case. The attorney general faced numerous questions from Democrats and Republican Rep. Thomas Massie during a House Judiciary Committee hearing last month. Bondi blasted Democrats’ focus on the Epstein case as a “circus.”

Bondi has faced intense scrutiny since she suggested last year that Epstein’s so-called client list was sitting on her desk, but later clarified that she was referring to a file on the Epstein case, not an actual client list. When the Justice Department closed its investigation into Epstein in July, it said that it found no evidence of a client list.

The Justice Department has also been criticized for its messy rollout of the millions of documents and tens of thousands of images related to the Epstein case. After the final file dump in late January, the Justice Department scrambled to remove unredacted nude images of young women. Other files had to be removed because they revealed personal information of people, which should have been redacted, including full names and addresses.

After the final Epstein document dump in January, the Justice Department took down more than 47,000 files, which made up around 65,000 total pages, as it worked to redact sensitive information. While those files contain some of the sensitive photos and information that should have been redacted, it’s unclear why most of the 65,000 pages continue to be held by the Trump administration. Mace accused the Justice Department of hiding the missing 65,000 pages.

“We’re gonna be talking about real, substantive issues, like the 65,000 documents that are being hidden by the DOJ right now,” Mace said after voting to subpoena Bondi.

Robert Garcia, the ranking Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said before the vote, “Look, the American public has significant questions about the DOJ and the process for releasing of the files. … I think it’s important that [Bondi] is in front of our committee, she can directly answer questions about the release of the files, about transparency, about ensuring that victims and survivors are protected.”

After the Clintons were deposed last week, Democrats called for the committee to subpoena President Donald Trump, arguing that the Republican effort to grill the Clintons “set a new precedent.”

While Trump has not been accused of any wrongdoing related to Epstein’s crimes, the Epstein case has been a thorn in his administration’s side for most of his second term. On Tuesday, Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick agreed to testify before the Oversight Committee on his ties to Epstein.

Former President Clinton told lawmakers under oath last week that he has “no information that [Trump] did anything wrong” in relation to Epstein’s sex crimes.

“The president never … said anything to me to make me think he was involved with anything with regard to Epstein either,” Clinton said. “He just didn’t. He just said, ‘We were friends, and then we had a falling out over a land deal or a property deal.’”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Five Republicans joined all Democrats in attendance on the GOP-led House Oversight Committee in passing a motion to subpoena U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify on the administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

Wednesday’s vote means Bondi could soon be in front of the same committee that grilled former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over their ties to Epstein last week. The motion was proposed by Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina and supported by Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), Tim Burchett (R-TN), Michael Cloud (R-TX), and Scott Perry (R-PA), along with every Democrat who was present for a 24-19 vote.

“AG Bondi will testify about missing Epstein evidence. The videos, the audio, the documents the DOJ is hiding,” Mace said. “The American people deserve transparency. Survivors deserve justice. We’re delivering both. Accountability is coming.”

It would not be the first time for Bondi to testify under oath about her handling of the Epstein case. The attorney general faced numerous questions from Democrats and Republican Rep. Thomas Massie during a House Judiciary Committee hearing last month. Bondi blasted Democrats’ focus on the Epstein case as a “circus.”

Bondi has faced intense scrutiny since she suggested last year that Epstein’s so-called client list was sitting on her desk, but later clarified that she was referring to a file on the Epstein case, not an actual client list. When the Justice Department closed its investigation into Epstein in July, it said that it found no evidence of a client list.

The Justice Department has also been criticized for its messy rollout of the millions of documents and tens of thousands of images related to the Epstein case. After the final file dump in late January, the Justice Department scrambled to remove unredacted nude images of young women. Other files had to be removed because they revealed personal information of people, which should have been redacted, including full names and addresses.

After the final Epstein document dump in January, the Justice Department took down more than 47,000 files, which made up around 65,000 total pages, as it worked to redact sensitive information. While those files contain some of the sensitive photos and information that should have been redacted, it’s unclear why most of the 65,000 pages continue to be held by the Trump administration. Mace accused the Justice Department of hiding the missing 65,000 pages.

“We’re gonna be talking about real, substantive issues, like the 65,000 documents that are being hidden by the DOJ right now,” Mace said after voting to subpoena Bondi.

Robert Garcia, the ranking Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said before the vote, “Look, the American public has significant questions about the DOJ and the process for releasing of the files. … I think it’s important that [Bondi] is in front of our committee, she can directly answer questions about the release of the files, about transparency, about ensuring that victims and survivors are protected.”

After the Clintons were deposed last week, Democrats called for the committee to subpoena President Donald Trump, arguing that the Republican effort to grill the Clintons “set a new precedent.”

While Trump has not been accused of any wrongdoing related to Epstein’s crimes, the Epstein case has been a thorn in his administration’s side for most of his second term. On Tuesday, Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick agreed to testify before the Oversight Committee on his ties to Epstein.

Former President Clinton told lawmakers under oath last week that he has “no information that [Trump] did anything wrong” in relation to Epstein’s sex crimes.

“The president never … said anything to me to make me think he was involved with anything with regard to Epstein either,” Clinton said. “He just didn’t. He just said, ‘We were friends, and then we had a falling out over a land deal or a property deal.’”

“}]] 

The post Bondi Released Massive Epstein Document Trove — Democrats Still Aren’t Happy appeared first on Spin Politico.

America’s military isn’t just hammering Iran’s regime on the battlefield — it’s blowing apart Tehran’s propaganda machine online too.

U.S. Central Command issued a blunt fact check on Wednesday, dismantling a string of dramatic claims pushed by the Iranian regime as Operation Epic Fury continues expanding across Iranian airspace.

Iranian state outlets and officials have circulated a series of sweeping claims in recent days, including that United States forces are withdrawing from the region, that an American destroyer had been sunk, that Iranian forces shot down United States fighter jets, and that 100 United States Marines had been killed.

CENTCOM says none of it is true.

“More fake news from the Iranian regime,” the command wrote in a statement posted to X, before outlining what it said is actually happening on the battlefield.

More fake news from the Iranian regime:
The regime claims U.S. forces are withdrawing.
They say they sank a U.S. destroyer.
IRGC claims to have taken down U.S. fighter aircraft.
The regime says they killed 100 U.S. Marines.
ALL LIES.

Reality:
U.S. forces are… pic.twitter.com/X0P0X4VdTa

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 4, 2026

According to the United States military, American forces are not retreating — they are expanding the fight.

United States aircraft and naval assets are pushing deeper into Iranian airspace as strikes intensify against military infrastructure tied to Tehran’s drone and ballistic missile programs.

At the same time, American forces have already destroyed a significant portion of Iran’s naval capability in the region.

According to CENTCOM, United States forces have sunk more than 20 Iranian regime vessels using what the command described as overwhelming firepower from air, land, and sea operations.

The campaign is also dramatically degrading Iran’s ability to launch attacks.

Over a four-day period, United States forces have reduced Iranian regime drone launches by 73 percent and ballistic missile launches by 86 percent, according to the military’s latest assessment.

The command concluded its fact check with a blunt reminder of the imbalance between the two forces.

“United States military power projection capability is unmatched,” CENTCOM said.

The update comes as Operation Epic Fury enters one of its most intense phases since the joint United States–Israel operation began.

The campaign was launched after United States and Israeli forces carried out a precision strike that eliminated Iran’s longtime Supreme Leader and targeted key components of the regime’s military infrastructure tied to its missile and nuclear programs.

In response, Iranian officials vowed what they called the “fiercest offensive in history,” launching waves of missiles and drones across the region, including attacks targeting Israel and United States positions.

But the latest battlefield data suggests those capabilities are already being severely degraded.

American and allied air defenses have intercepted many incoming threats, while follow-on United States strikes have systematically targeted drone launch sites, missile batteries, and naval assets tied to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

At the same time, Iranian officials and state media have continued circulating dramatic claims of battlefield victories — assertions the United States military says simply don’t match reality.

Battlefield data tells a very different story: Iranian missile launches are plummeting, its naval forces are being destroyed, and American forces are expanding strikes deeper into Iranian airspace as Operation Epic Fury intensifies.

As Iran pushes propaganda online, the United States military says the battlefield continues delivering the truth.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

America’s military isn’t just hammering Iran’s regime on the battlefield — it’s blowing apart Tehran’s propaganda machine online too.

U.S. Central Command issued a blunt fact check on Wednesday, dismantling a string of dramatic claims pushed by the Iranian regime as Operation Epic Fury continues expanding across Iranian airspace.

Iranian state outlets and officials have circulated a series of sweeping claims in recent days, including that United States forces are withdrawing from the region, that an American destroyer had been sunk, that Iranian forces shot down United States fighter jets, and that 100 United States Marines had been killed.

CENTCOM says none of it is true.

“More fake news from the Iranian regime,” the command wrote in a statement posted to X, before outlining what it said is actually happening on the battlefield.

More fake news from the Iranian regime:
The regime claims U.S. forces are withdrawing.
They say they sank a U.S. destroyer.
IRGC claims to have taken down U.S. fighter aircraft.
The regime says they killed 100 U.S. Marines.
ALL LIES.

Reality:
U.S. forces are… pic.twitter.com/X0P0X4VdTa

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 4, 2026

According to the United States military, American forces are not retreating — they are expanding the fight.

United States aircraft and naval assets are pushing deeper into Iranian airspace as strikes intensify against military infrastructure tied to Tehran’s drone and ballistic missile programs.

At the same time, American forces have already destroyed a significant portion of Iran’s naval capability in the region.

According to CENTCOM, United States forces have sunk more than 20 Iranian regime vessels using what the command described as overwhelming firepower from air, land, and sea operations.

The campaign is also dramatically degrading Iran’s ability to launch attacks.

Over a four-day period, United States forces have reduced Iranian regime drone launches by 73 percent and ballistic missile launches by 86 percent, according to the military’s latest assessment.

The command concluded its fact check with a blunt reminder of the imbalance between the two forces.

“United States military power projection capability is unmatched,” CENTCOM said.

The update comes as Operation Epic Fury enters one of its most intense phases since the joint United States–Israel operation began.

The campaign was launched after United States and Israeli forces carried out a precision strike that eliminated Iran’s longtime Supreme Leader and targeted key components of the regime’s military infrastructure tied to its missile and nuclear programs.

In response, Iranian officials vowed what they called the “fiercest offensive in history,” launching waves of missiles and drones across the region, including attacks targeting Israel and United States positions.

But the latest battlefield data suggests those capabilities are already being severely degraded.

American and allied air defenses have intercepted many incoming threats, while follow-on United States strikes have systematically targeted drone launch sites, missile batteries, and naval assets tied to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

At the same time, Iranian officials and state media have continued circulating dramatic claims of battlefield victories — assertions the United States military says simply don’t match reality.

Battlefield data tells a very different story: Iranian missile launches are plummeting, its naval forces are being destroyed, and American forces are expanding strikes deeper into Iranian airspace as Operation Epic Fury intensifies.

As Iran pushes propaganda online, the United States military says the battlefield continues delivering the truth.

“}]] 

The post America Isn’t Just Blowing Up Iran’s Battlefield — It’s Blowing Up Tehran’s Propaganda appeared first on Spin Politico.

There’s a coalition of people who are uniting to take down the United States.

These people are cowards, plus liars, plus people who despise America.

It’s a coalition of scavengers.

There are the cowards who mouth platitudes about how much they really didn’t like the Ayatollah, but then they spend their days talking about how the United States couldn’t and shouldn’t ever do anything about that.

There are the liars who literally craft stories out of nothing in order to undermine America.

And finally, there are the actual American haters who are often both cowards and liars, and really, really just despise America and her pursuit of our national interests in the world.

That coalition is now coming together, but it’s not going to win because President Trump is going to win this war.

Let’s start with the cowards. These are the people who pretend they didn’t like the Ayatollah very much, but they’re really, really upset when anyone takes action. So, for example, they’re really, really mad that international law — the precious gewgaw of the pseudo-intellectuals — has somehow been violated.

Yes. If we don’t have Myanmar’s approval of a military strike on the ayatollahs or China’s approval — and if there is one country we need approval from, it is China, currently oppressing a billion people — or Russia —which is currently engaged in an aggressive war of conquest in Ukraine while throwing dissenters out of random third-story balconies at hotels — we need Russia’s approval?

That’s international law. And if we don’t have their approval, the mullahs must remain immune.

Here is the pathetic Mark Carney of Canada:

The current conflict is another example of the failure of the international order. Despite decades of UN Security Council resolutions, the tireless work of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the succession of sanctions and diplomatic frameworks. Iran’s nuclear threat remains. And now the United States and Israel have acted without engaging the United Nations or consulting allies, including Canada.

Who gives a sh*t? Really? You guys can’t even win a hockey match.

My favorite part of that is when Carney suggests the IAEA has been thwarted for decades, and U.N. resolutions have been ignored for decades, and now the United States and Israel won’t even go to the U.N.

He just said why those organizations are trash and do nothing. But oh, my gosh, we didn’t turn to Canada with its vast military prowess. Do we need to drop maple syrup on the Iranians?

New York City’s mayor, Zohran Mamdani, who has been happy to express support for terror supporters throughout his entire career, is now hiding behind international law as cover for his consistent opposition to Western strength.

Asked if Iran was “better off without the Ayatollah,” he answered:

I’ve said before that the Iranian government has engaged in systematic repression of its own people, even killing thousands of Iranians who were seeking to express the most basic forms of dissent earlier this year. It is a brutal government. And I’ve also said that while I may be a young mayor, I am old enough to remember the devastating consequences of our country pursuing a war with the intent of regime change in that very same region, not that many years ago.

The answer should be, “Yes.”

Even if you have questions about what comes next, the answer should be yes. Yes, Iran is better off without Ayatollah Khamenei. But according to Mamdani, the important thing is saying that the ayatollah is really bad — but the minute anybody does anything, that is so much worse. We have to make sure that Khamenei stays in place because, after all, “the Iraq war.”

This Iraq War syndrome nonsense that has been promoted by the Left and then the horseshoe Right together, that every war is Iraq, every single intervention is Iraq, is ahistorical and absurd and tripe.

In 2015-2016, candidate Donald Trump ran on the platform that the Iraq war was bad — which was a controversial opinion inside the Republican Party at the time. The idea that he is now going to engage in a new, long-lasting occupation — not the first three weeks of the Iraq War, where the United States kicked the living hell out of Saddam Hussein and ended his regime, but what came after that, is ludicrous.

By the way, the first three weeks of the Iraq War were, by every available metric, a win for the United States. It was what came after that became problematic.

The argument of the cowards and liars is that Trump is going to engage in Bush-style nation-building in Iran.

Then there are the cowards who slander Israel to somehow imply that Israel is the bad guy in the conflict between Israel and Iran.

Take Gavin Newsom, who is absolutely slimy. As I said before, the man takes more positions on politics than the Kama Sutra. This is the same guy who, in an interview with me, freely admitted that Israel had not committed genocide in Gaza. Last night, however, he went on with the “Pod Save America” bros, knowing he had to please their Israel-hating asses.

Thus, he immediately started talking about how Israel is an apartheid state.

False.

20% of the Israeli population is Arab Muslim. They’re on the Supreme Court. They are in the medical system. A huge percentage of Israeli doctors are Arab Muslims. They’re in every area of Israeli society.

How can it be apartheid for Israel to have delegated certain parts of land to, for example, the Palestinian Authority, a terror-supporting group?

But Gavin Newsom knows he has to mouth these platitudes to his far-Left friends if he wants the nomination, because the Democratic Party — as Senator John Fetterman said yesterday on my show — is moving dramatically away from Israel.

Here’s Gavin Newsom telling lies and being a coward, speaking of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

He’s got his own domestic issues. He’s trying to stay out of jail. He’s got an election coming up. He’s potentially on the ropes. He’s got folks, the hard line, that want to annex the West or the West Bank. I mean, (Thomas) Friedman and others are talking about it, appropriate, sort of an apartheid state. They couldn’t even, I mean, we’re talking about regime change. For two years, they haven’t even been able to solve the Hamas question.

Asked about rethinking our military support for Israel. He replied, “It breaks my heart, because the current leadership in Israel is walking us down that path where I don’t think you have a choice. But that consideration, I mean to say this is in America’s interest at a time when affordability crisis levels, where you had an administration literally got elected, saying this is exactly the opposite of what they would ever consider doing. The fact that we are in this now regional war, all these proxies.”

He is a coward and a liar.

The fact of the matter is that blaming the attack on Iran on Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, is a lie. There’s complete solidarity in Israel from Left to Right on what Israel is doing right now. From Yair Lapid, who is on the Left, to Naftali Bennett, the chief rival to Netanyahu, to Yair Golan on the far, far, far Left, everyone agrees on this.

But when you are a coward, and you’re afraid of your own party, you have to start lying.

And then there are the actual liars, the people making actual stories up out of nothing. Stories they know aren’t true, but they push them anyway. The catastrophists aren’t actually worried about World War III or a long-standing boots on the ground occupation, but try to lie to Americans that they are.

Thus, Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who has had his own shady history with the truth when it comes to his purported military service, said he’s worried that we’re going to put boots on the ground.

Does he mean that there might be special operators on the ground? Because if we’re talking about special operators on the ground, welcome to the real world, where the United States has special operators on the ground all over the world, everywhere from Asia to Africa and the Middle East.

But that’s not what he was implying. He was implying a gigantic airlift of hundreds of thousands of troops, a gigantic boots on the ground footprint. It’s a lie. It is untrue.

It’s astonishing to watch this while he is wearing the American flag/Ukraine flag pin on his lapel.

“I am more fearful than ever after this briefing that we may be putting boots on the ground, and that the troops from the United States may be necessary to accomplish the objectives that the administration seems to have, but I also am no more clear on what the priorities are going to be given this regime going forward,” he hyperventilated.

These are lies. It’s not true.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), directly from the Native American reservation, from her teepee, says that there is no plan.

And she would know because, after all, she is a military leader and expert.

“I just left a classified briefing on Iran,” she huffed. “And here’s what I can say: It is so much worse than you thought. The Trump administration has no plan in Iran. This illegal war is based on lies and it was launched without any imminent threat to our nation. Donald Trump still hasn’t given us a single clear reason for this war, and he seems to have no plan for how to end it either. Like a lot of you, I am really angry. I am angry at what Donald Trump is doing, and I feel grief for those already killed in this unnecessary conflict. And I will keep doing everything I can to fight to end this war.” 

What a liar she is. What an absolute liar. President Trump hasn’t explained it? What’s been happening for the past 50 years?

This notion that no one knows why, that what has happened is some mystery out of the blue?

No one believes that.

The idea that there’s no plan here is horsesh*t. There is a plan here, and the military is laying it out, but the liars are going to lie.

Finally, there are the American haters. There are a lot of people who live in America who truly hate America.

There’s an easy way to tell who hates America.

If you call America a terrorist organization for killing one of the world’s most evil dictators, for example, I know you hate America.

If you say that the United States is the worst terror organization in the world, you don’t like America, period, because that is such an overt lie.

That is such a moral calumny that there can only be one explanation, and it is your deep and abiding hatred for America’s role in the world.

To make that argument, you have to deliberately obscure the difference between actual terrorists who deliberately seek to kill innocent people and nation states seeking to avoid civilian casualties, often while fighting those actual terrorists.

That is the point for people who hate America: To reduce America to the level of its enemies in order to uphold those enemies. 

You also hate America if you claim that the president of the United States is merely a tool of foreign interests without any evidence whatsoever. You are promoting lies directly mirroring those of the Iranian terrorist government, in direct contravention of truth and of the Trump administration’s own words.

President Trump was asked directly whether it was Israel that was leading him around. He fired back, “I might have forced their hand. You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack if we didn’t do it, they were going to attack first. I felt strongly about that. And we had great negotiators, great people, people that do this very successfully and have done it all their lives, very successful. And, based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they were going to attack first.”

Another game that the Coalition of Scavengers is playing here with regard to President Trump is that what he’s doing right now is wildly unpopular with the American people.

According to CBS News, 85% of Republicans support the president’s strikes on Iran.

According to Fox News, 84% of Republicans support the strikes on Iran.

According to The Washington Post, 81% of Republicans support the strike on Iran.

According to Reuters/Ipsos, 82% of Republicans support the strikes on Iran.

So, it doesn’t sound like much of a split inside the Republican Party.

Military households approve of the current action against Iran by a 20-point margin, 60-40. One of the great ironies of all the people on the Left and the horseshoe Right who claim to speak in the name of the military is that they very rarely actually talk to people who are in the military. The military is quite conservative and hawkish when it comes to actual effectuating of American foreign policy.

The lesson of all this?

Be a lion, not a scavenger.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

There’s a coalition of people who are uniting to take down the United States.

These people are cowards, plus liars, plus people who despise America.

It’s a coalition of scavengers.

There are the cowards who mouth platitudes about how much they really didn’t like the Ayatollah, but then they spend their days talking about how the United States couldn’t and shouldn’t ever do anything about that.

There are the liars who literally craft stories out of nothing in order to undermine America.

And finally, there are the actual American haters who are often both cowards and liars, and really, really just despise America and her pursuit of our national interests in the world.

That coalition is now coming together, but it’s not going to win because President Trump is going to win this war.

Let’s start with the cowards. These are the people who pretend they didn’t like the Ayatollah very much, but they’re really, really upset when anyone takes action. So, for example, they’re really, really mad that international law — the precious gewgaw of the pseudo-intellectuals — has somehow been violated.

Yes. If we don’t have Myanmar’s approval of a military strike on the ayatollahs or China’s approval — and if there is one country we need approval from, it is China, currently oppressing a billion people — or Russia —which is currently engaged in an aggressive war of conquest in Ukraine while throwing dissenters out of random third-story balconies at hotels — we need Russia’s approval?

That’s international law. And if we don’t have their approval, the mullahs must remain immune.

Here is the pathetic Mark Carney of Canada:

The current conflict is another example of the failure of the international order. Despite decades of UN Security Council resolutions, the tireless work of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the succession of sanctions and diplomatic frameworks. Iran’s nuclear threat remains. And now the United States and Israel have acted without engaging the United Nations or consulting allies, including Canada.

Who gives a sh*t? Really? You guys can’t even win a hockey match.

My favorite part of that is when Carney suggests the IAEA has been thwarted for decades, and U.N. resolutions have been ignored for decades, and now the United States and Israel won’t even go to the U.N.

He just said why those organizations are trash and do nothing. But oh, my gosh, we didn’t turn to Canada with its vast military prowess. Do we need to drop maple syrup on the Iranians?

New York City’s mayor, Zohran Mamdani, who has been happy to express support for terror supporters throughout his entire career, is now hiding behind international law as cover for his consistent opposition to Western strength.

Asked if Iran was “better off without the Ayatollah,” he answered:

I’ve said before that the Iranian government has engaged in systematic repression of its own people, even killing thousands of Iranians who were seeking to express the most basic forms of dissent earlier this year. It is a brutal government. And I’ve also said that while I may be a young mayor, I am old enough to remember the devastating consequences of our country pursuing a war with the intent of regime change in that very same region, not that many years ago.

The answer should be, “Yes.”

Even if you have questions about what comes next, the answer should be yes. Yes, Iran is better off without Ayatollah Khamenei. But according to Mamdani, the important thing is saying that the ayatollah is really bad — but the minute anybody does anything, that is so much worse. We have to make sure that Khamenei stays in place because, after all, “the Iraq war.”

This Iraq War syndrome nonsense that has been promoted by the Left and then the horseshoe Right together, that every war is Iraq, every single intervention is Iraq, is ahistorical and absurd and tripe.

In 2015-2016, candidate Donald Trump ran on the platform that the Iraq war was bad — which was a controversial opinion inside the Republican Party at the time. The idea that he is now going to engage in a new, long-lasting occupation — not the first three weeks of the Iraq War, where the United States kicked the living hell out of Saddam Hussein and ended his regime, but what came after that, is ludicrous.

By the way, the first three weeks of the Iraq War were, by every available metric, a win for the United States. It was what came after that became problematic.

The argument of the cowards and liars is that Trump is going to engage in Bush-style nation-building in Iran.

Then there are the cowards who slander Israel to somehow imply that Israel is the bad guy in the conflict between Israel and Iran.

Take Gavin Newsom, who is absolutely slimy. As I said before, the man takes more positions on politics than the Kama Sutra. This is the same guy who, in an interview with me, freely admitted that Israel had not committed genocide in Gaza. Last night, however, he went on with the “Pod Save America” bros, knowing he had to please their Israel-hating asses.

Thus, he immediately started talking about how Israel is an apartheid state.

False.

20% of the Israeli population is Arab Muslim. They’re on the Supreme Court. They are in the medical system. A huge percentage of Israeli doctors are Arab Muslims. They’re in every area of Israeli society.

How can it be apartheid for Israel to have delegated certain parts of land to, for example, the Palestinian Authority, a terror-supporting group?

But Gavin Newsom knows he has to mouth these platitudes to his far-Left friends if he wants the nomination, because the Democratic Party — as Senator John Fetterman said yesterday on my show — is moving dramatically away from Israel.

Here’s Gavin Newsom telling lies and being a coward, speaking of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

He’s got his own domestic issues. He’s trying to stay out of jail. He’s got an election coming up. He’s potentially on the ropes. He’s got folks, the hard line, that want to annex the West or the West Bank. I mean, (Thomas) Friedman and others are talking about it, appropriate, sort of an apartheid state. They couldn’t even, I mean, we’re talking about regime change. For two years, they haven’t even been able to solve the Hamas question.

Asked about rethinking our military support for Israel. He replied, “It breaks my heart, because the current leadership in Israel is walking us down that path where I don’t think you have a choice. But that consideration, I mean to say this is in America’s interest at a time when affordability crisis levels, where you had an administration literally got elected, saying this is exactly the opposite of what they would ever consider doing. The fact that we are in this now regional war, all these proxies.”

He is a coward and a liar.

The fact of the matter is that blaming the attack on Iran on Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, is a lie. There’s complete solidarity in Israel from Left to Right on what Israel is doing right now. From Yair Lapid, who is on the Left, to Naftali Bennett, the chief rival to Netanyahu, to Yair Golan on the far, far, far Left, everyone agrees on this.

But when you are a coward, and you’re afraid of your own party, you have to start lying.

And then there are the actual liars, the people making actual stories up out of nothing. Stories they know aren’t true, but they push them anyway. The catastrophists aren’t actually worried about World War III or a long-standing boots on the ground occupation, but try to lie to Americans that they are.

Thus, Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who has had his own shady history with the truth when it comes to his purported military service, said he’s worried that we’re going to put boots on the ground.

Does he mean that there might be special operators on the ground? Because if we’re talking about special operators on the ground, welcome to the real world, where the United States has special operators on the ground all over the world, everywhere from Asia to Africa and the Middle East.

But that’s not what he was implying. He was implying a gigantic airlift of hundreds of thousands of troops, a gigantic boots on the ground footprint. It’s a lie. It is untrue.

It’s astonishing to watch this while he is wearing the American flag/Ukraine flag pin on his lapel.

“I am more fearful than ever after this briefing that we may be putting boots on the ground, and that the troops from the United States may be necessary to accomplish the objectives that the administration seems to have, but I also am no more clear on what the priorities are going to be given this regime going forward,” he hyperventilated.

These are lies. It’s not true.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), directly from the Native American reservation, from her teepee, says that there is no plan.

And she would know because, after all, she is a military leader and expert.

“I just left a classified briefing on Iran,” she huffed. “And here’s what I can say: It is so much worse than you thought. The Trump administration has no plan in Iran. This illegal war is based on lies and it was launched without any imminent threat to our nation. Donald Trump still hasn’t given us a single clear reason for this war, and he seems to have no plan for how to end it either. Like a lot of you, I am really angry. I am angry at what Donald Trump is doing, and I feel grief for those already killed in this unnecessary conflict. And I will keep doing everything I can to fight to end this war.” 

What a liar she is. What an absolute liar. President Trump hasn’t explained it? What’s been happening for the past 50 years?

This notion that no one knows why, that what has happened is some mystery out of the blue?

No one believes that.

The idea that there’s no plan here is horsesh*t. There is a plan here, and the military is laying it out, but the liars are going to lie.

Finally, there are the American haters. There are a lot of people who live in America who truly hate America.

There’s an easy way to tell who hates America.

If you call America a terrorist organization for killing one of the world’s most evil dictators, for example, I know you hate America.

If you say that the United States is the worst terror organization in the world, you don’t like America, period, because that is such an overt lie.

That is such a moral calumny that there can only be one explanation, and it is your deep and abiding hatred for America’s role in the world.

To make that argument, you have to deliberately obscure the difference between actual terrorists who deliberately seek to kill innocent people and nation states seeking to avoid civilian casualties, often while fighting those actual terrorists.

That is the point for people who hate America: To reduce America to the level of its enemies in order to uphold those enemies. 

You also hate America if you claim that the president of the United States is merely a tool of foreign interests without any evidence whatsoever. You are promoting lies directly mirroring those of the Iranian terrorist government, in direct contravention of truth and of the Trump administration’s own words.

President Trump was asked directly whether it was Israel that was leading him around. He fired back, “I might have forced their hand. You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack if we didn’t do it, they were going to attack first. I felt strongly about that. And we had great negotiators, great people, people that do this very successfully and have done it all their lives, very successful. And, based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they were going to attack first.”

Another game that the Coalition of Scavengers is playing here with regard to President Trump is that what he’s doing right now is wildly unpopular with the American people.

According to CBS News, 85% of Republicans support the president’s strikes on Iran.

According to Fox News, 84% of Republicans support the strikes on Iran.

According to The Washington Post, 81% of Republicans support the strike on Iran.

According to Reuters/Ipsos, 82% of Republicans support the strikes on Iran.

So, it doesn’t sound like much of a split inside the Republican Party.

Military households approve of the current action against Iran by a 20-point margin, 60-40. One of the great ironies of all the people on the Left and the horseshoe Right who claim to speak in the name of the military is that they very rarely actually talk to people who are in the military. The military is quite conservative and hawkish when it comes to actual effectuating of American foreign policy.

The lesson of all this?

Be a lion, not a scavenger.

“}]] 

The post Cowards, Liars, And The Anti-American Alliance appeared first on Spin Politico.

As of today, whether you want to hear it or not, the midterm election season is officially underway.

The first primaries of the year were held on Tuesday in Texas, North Carolina, and Arkansas. I must report, first of all, that my personal favorite candidate, Jasmine Crockett, tragically did not prevail in her bid to become the first Senate nominee in U.S. history with a lower IQ than the average pumpkin. Crockett lost her Senate bid to James Talarico, who is smarter than a pumpkin, and even smarter than most of the other members of the squash family.

But at least I can say this for Ms. Crockett. She is as dignified and honest in her loss as she has been throughout her entire career. Which is to say that she’s accused the other side of cheating, and initially refused to admit that she actually lost:

LMFAO! Jasmine Crockett is ALREADY coming out and saying there was CHEATING in the Democrat US Senate Primary in Texas, as it’s looking like she’ll lose

But wait: I thought Democrat cheating was just a “CONSPIRACY THEORY”?! pic.twitter.com/AWp01jrRrU

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) March 4, 2026

Source: @nicksortor/X.com

Remember to update your scorecards at home. It is officially okay to question the results of a democratic election again. Provided, anyway, that you’re black, and a woman, and a Democrat. In any case, it’s shocking that she would lose in this way. Indeed, cheating is the only possible explanation. Especially if you go back and watch her career highlights. Which, even though Jasmine Crockett is not really the subject of our monologue today, we’ll watch them now anyway: 

The best of Jasmine Crockett

pic.twitter.com/uXvN1Lq3FQ

— ALX (@alx) March 4, 2026

Source: @alx/X.com

I cannot, for the life of me, understand how a woman of such eloquence and elegance, a woman who looks and sounds like a part-time Waffle House waitress, could have lost her senate campaign.

But she wasn’t the only shocking loss. There was also the legitimately surprising defeat of the neocon Dan Crenshaw, which obviously signals the direction the Republican Party is headed towards.

Tuesday was also a reminder — and this is what I actually want to talk about today — that the leaders of the Republican Party are doing everything they can to sabotage the second Trump administration — and to ensure that a candidate like Trump never wins the presidency ever again. This is the single most important story in the country right now, but because of the war in the Middle East, it’s not getting anywhere near the attention it should. As DHS Secretary Kristi Noem testified in the Senate yesterday, outgoing Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina declared that, because of his frustrations with the DHS, he would go out of his way to undermine the president’s agenda at every available opportunity.

Watch:

Source: PBS News/YouTube.com

In other words, because the DHS Inspector General isn’t happy with Kristi Noem’s responses, Thom Tillis is going to burn everything down. The administration won’t be able to appoint anyone or pass any legislation as long as the Inspector General of the DHS says Kristi Noem is stonewalling.

To be very clear about what’s going on here — the inspector general of the DHS is named Joseph Cuffari. In 2024, when Joe Biden was president, a committee of inspectors general and federal officials determined that Cuffari had “abused his authority and engaged in substantial conduct” that would justify his removal. The allegations of wrongdoing included claims that Cuffari had interfered in independent investigations, fired a whistleblower who reported his misconduct, lied during his nomination process, and spent millions of taxpayer dollars to hire a law firm to advance his own interests.

Source: Washington Post

This is the inspector general that Tillis is throwing his support behind. He’s an official who’s obviously corrupt, even though his job is to prevent corruption. This is the person Noem needs to placate, apparently.

In particular, according to Tillis, Kristi Noem needs to answer questions about why ICE is deporting so many illegal aliens.

Watch:

Source: PBS News/YouTube.com

It’s indistinguishable, in every way, from the questions the Democrats asked throughout this hearing. First of all, yes, we want “numbers.” The more illegal aliens who are deported, the better. It doesn’t matter if those illegal aliens have committed additional crimes or not. The simple fact that they’re in this country is a major problem. They need to be deported.

But Tillis disagrees. His position, and the position of most establishment Republicans, is that illegal entry into the United States is no big deal. Tillis also believes that violently interfering with ICE is no big deal, either, which is why he brought up Alex Pretti and Renee Good — who everyone on the planet has already forgotten about, except Thom Tillis.

Watch:

Source: PBS News/YouTube.com

There you have it. According to Thom Tillis, Leftists aren’t threatening ICE agents because they want open borders, lawlessness, and the destruction of the United States. Instead, Leftists are threatening ICE agents because of Alex Pretti and Renee Good. Never mind the fact that the ICE agents were being threatened long before either of those activists died. Never mind the fact that both Alex Pretti and Renee Good decided to attack ICE agents in order to prevent them from doing their jobs. Never mind the fact that the Left openly celebrated the murder of one of the top conservative leaders in the country, simply because they didn’t like his opinions. We’re supposed to believe that there’s a universe where the Left would be totally fine with immigration enforcement if only the DHS had conducted a more transparent investigation into the shooting of the lesbian who drove her SUV into an ICE officer.

This is nothing new for Tillis. In 2024, he was the ringleader of a fake amnesty bill in the Senate, which was intended to undermine the president’s immigration policy. But lately, he has become a lot more animated in his disdain for this administration. In case it’s not obvious, Tillis is shouting all of the time because he’s trying to impress some non-profit or university. He wants to get a job when he leaves Washington, which is a day that can’t come soon enough. And that’s why, when he was dealing with Biden’s DHS secretary, he had a very different approach:

Watch very carefully to see if you can spot the difference in how “Republican” Thom Tillis treats the DHS Secretary who allowed 15M unvetted illegal aliens in the U.S. versus the one who is trying to deport them pic.twitter.com/H76jk4ECbT

— Corey Inganamort (@TheBirdWords) March 3, 2026

Source: @TheBirdWords/X.com

Watching this, you might say that Thom Tillis is leaving office because he’s unpopular, so what’s the big deal? He’s just one outgoing Republican senator who’s threatening to derail the president’s agenda. How bad can things be?

The problem is that Thom Tillis is not, in fact, an exception. He represents the entrenched Republican power structure in Washington. The leadership of the party does not want to enact Donald Trump’s agenda. They’re doing everything they can to interfere with it. The GOP leader in the Senate, John Thune of South Dakota, is about to send the Senate off to vacation. And instead of giving a speech where he outlined some kind of plan to advance legislation that the White House is pushing for, Thune simply complained about Democrats, over and over again. 

Watch:

Source: JohnThune/YouTube.com

This isn’t going to cut it. 

Democrats are going to use every tool they have — including a government shutdown — to get what they want. We don’t accomplish anything by whining about it. Instead, we should be using every tool that we have to achieve our own policy objectives.

For starters, instead of standing in the way of Trump’s appointments — as Thom Tillis is doing — Republicans in the Senate could go on recess for 10 days or longer. Under current law, that would allow the president to make “recess appointments” to key positions, including seats on federal courts, if he chooses to do so. No approval from the Senate is necessary as part of a recess appointment. And that’s important because, as we’ve discussed before, the Senate follows a so-called “blue slip” process, which allows an individual senator to veto a nomination, as long as the nominee is from her home state. It’s an outdated and pointless process, but Republicans are going along with it.

But here’s the issue: Thune has deliberately prevented recess appointments from occurring. And he’s done so by holding so-called “pro forma” sessions in the Senate. The idea is that, even though the Senate is on vacation, they hold a quick session with basically no one in attendance. And that “resets the clock” on recess appointments. It prevents the Senate from counting as “in recess” for the 10 days that are required by law. 

Here’s what these pro forma sessions look like. This is from last summer:

During August recess, Speaker Johnson and Leader Thune plan to call the House and Senate into session every four or five days, with practically no one there, for the sole purpose of preventing Trump from making recess appointments. Here was today’s House “pro-forma” session: pic.twitter.com/sK1tZTCdYQ

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) July 25, 2025

Source: @RepThomasMassie/X.com

The clerk gets up there, reads some nonsense for less than 2 minutes, and everyone goes home. The sole purpose of these “pro forma” sessions is to prevent Donald Trump from making recess appointments.

Did you know this was going on? Did you have any idea that the president’s own party — which controls both houses of Congress — is using a procedural mechanism to block him from appointing administration officials, along with dozens of US attorneys and judges? That’s what Republicans in the Senate are doing.

For the same reason, Republicans in the Senate aren’t taking any action to advance the SAVE Act, which is short for “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility.” This is, in every respect, the single most important piece of legislation that anyone currently serving in Congress has ever considered. 

Passing this legislation is the most important thing that any of them can possibly achieve right now, by far. That’s why Donald Trump specifically called on Republicans to pass the SAVE Act during his State of the Union Address. This law will determine whether we have fair elections, real elections going forward. It will determine if Americans get to decide who leads them, or if foreign invaders get to decide for them. That’s what’s at stake. 

The terms of the SAVE Act are straightforward: If you want to register to vote or update your voter registration, then you need to present documentary proof that you’re a citizen. And you need to present this proof in person. A passport would satisfy this requirement all by itself. A majority of Americans have a passport already. 170 million Americans, in fact. Which means if you don’t have one, it’s not very hard to get one. 170 million Americans have already done it. 

But if you don’t have one and don’t want to get one, then a birth certificate paired with a driver’s license will satisfy the requirement. Additionally, the law would require that voters show photo identification in order to cast a ballot in person. If voting absentee — which would only be allowed in rare cases — a copy of the photo identification would need to be provided.

There is no good-faith basis whatsoever for opposing this legislation. There is no valid argument against it. The only argument is that some American citizens might be too dumb or lazy to fulfill the rudimentary requirements. But as I’ve explained, far from being an argument against it, that’s just one more justification for it. Anyone who can’t live up to the baseline standards this law puts in place shouldn’t be voting. Either it means they aren’t citizens, or they’re exceptionally stupid and lazy. In any of those cases, they shouldn’t be voting. That’s why everyone, outside of elected representatives in the Democrat Party, supports it. Gallup just ran a poll finding that 84 percent of Americans support the voter-ID requirement. 83 percent support the requirement that first-time voters provide documentary evidence of citizenship. It’s extremely difficult to get broad, bipartisan agreement like this. 83 percent of Americans wouldn’t agree on whether or not the Earth is flat.

So everyone knows why Democrats have an issue with the SAVE Act. As Trump said, they want to cheat. They want to flood the United States with illegal aliens, allow them to vote — using the honor system — and permanently seize control of the country. That’s been their game plan for many years now. They’re on the verge of success. And Republicans have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to stop it.

It wouldn’t even take any special effort. That’s what you have to understand. If the Republicans fail here, it is because they chose to fail. They want to fail. They don’t want to protect our elections. They have no other excuse. The obstacle right now is that Democrats are threatening to filibuster the bill. And under normal circumstances, 60 votes are needed to end the filibuster and hold the vote. All John Thune would have to do is keep the Senate’s legislative session open and force a “standing filibuster” on this particular piece of legislation. Under a standing filibuster, if they want to delay a vote, Democrats can’t simply announce their intent to block the legislation. Instead, they would have to get up, walk to the podium, and talk endlessly — without taking any breaks. If they take a break, then they’re done. They have to pass the torch to another Democrat. And if they can’t do that, then the filibuster ends, and Republicans can hold a vote.

Eventually, the standing filibuster would come to an end — since senators can’t return to the podium more than two times during any one “legislative session.”. It wouldn’t be pleasant for anyone — including Republicans, who would have to remain near the Senate chamber at all times, in order to ensure that there’s a quorum. If there’s no quorum, then the legislative session ends, the speech counter resets, and Democrats can go back to the podium the next day and filibuster some more.

But this is what we elected Republicans to do. This is the most important fight they can undertake. They don’t even have to change the rules of the Senate to do it. They just have to stay near the Senate complex for a few days. That’s it. Instead, here’s what John Thune is up to. 

This is one of his social media posts yesterday:

“Great to sit down with members of Ducks Unlimited, including the students who started the SDSU chapter of DU, who are working to further wildlife and conservation priorities in the state.”

Instead of sitting down with the members of the Mighty Ducks or whatever and whining about Democrats, John Thune needs to put the SAVE Act up for a vote. And if Democrats want to filibuster, he needs to require them to stand up and talk until they can’t talk anymore. And then, when the bill is passed, the president will sign it. And we’ll have some chance of fair elections in this country going forward.

If that’s too much for Senate Republicans, they also have the option of eliminating the filibuster entirely. We all know that Democrats will do it, the first chance they get. No use fretting that if you do it, they’ll do it. They’ll do it regardless. The Democrats are fighting fascists and Nazis and Darth Vader, remember? They’ll do anything at all that they need to do to advance their agenda. There’s no reason we shouldn’t do the same thing — especially since the odds are very low that Republicans will remain in power in Congress for much longer.

Right now, Republicans have a real chance of losing Senate races in several key states in November, from Alaska to Ohio to Georgia. Meanwhile, the establishment wing of the GOP is throwing around enormous amounts of money to prop up neocons like John Cornyn, who spent something like $70 million to receive 43 percent of the vote in yesterday’s primary in Texas, while Ken Paxton spent around 4 million to receive 40 percent of the vote. And Paxton probably would have won outright if there hadn’t been a spoiler candidate in the race.

There is ample evidence, in other words, that the Republican Party is in a state of managed decline. The leaders are waiting for Donald Trump’s exit at this point. Frankly, it doesn’t appear that our elected representatives in Congress actually want to hold onto power any longer. What you have to understand about the political scene in modern America is that many politicians — especially Republicans — don’t actually want to be in power. They don’t crave power so much as they crave the prestige of holding elected office, and the many ways they can financially benefit from their position, both while they’re in office and once they leave. Many of them want to trade their elected office in for cushy jobs as lobbyists and consultants. Many of them, especially the younger ones, dream of nothing more than being podcasters. It’s a relative few who want power in order to actually use that power. For the rest, having power, being in the majority, is an inconvenience. Why would they actually want to fly the plane when they can sit in first class and drink Bloody Marys?

As John Thune demonstrated, Republicans are very comfortable complaining about Democrats. And as Thom Tillis demonstrated, Republicans have no problem berating the Trump administration and threatening to shut down his entire agenda. To this point, most of the achievements of the Republican Party in Washington have really just been achievements of the Trump Administration. Republicans have done the bare minimum, if even that. They passed the Big Beautiful Bill, and I guess we’re just supposed to be satisfied with that. We handed them control over the entire government; in return, we got one piece of legislation. That’s supposed to be good enough. Well, it isn’t. That is not going to be satisfactory. And for anyone who is willing to accept the “filibuster” excuse for Republicans, keep something in mind: Republicans will never have — and I mean never have — a filibuster-proof majority. It’s not going to happen. It’s only happened once this century, and that was for Democrats. Republicans are never going to have enough votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster. There is no path for it. It’s not going to happen. Republicans haven’t had one since the 1920s, and the country today doesn’t even vaguely resemble the country in the 1920s. So either they will barrel through, force their agenda through by eliminating the filibuster or doing a standing filibuster, or they will not advance their agenda at all. Not now. Not ever again. Those are your choices. Kill the modern filibuster, or never see an actual conservative piece of legislation passed ever again in your life. That’s it. Either we keep the current filibuster system alive, or Republicans carry out the will of the voters. We can’t have both.

Right now, hiding behind these excuses, Republicans have decided against the will of the voters. And unless that changes, and the SAVE Act becomes law, our elections will be permanently compromised — and then, filibuster or not, the will of the voters won’t matter at all.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

As of today, whether you want to hear it or not, the midterm election season is officially underway.

The first primaries of the year were held on Tuesday in Texas, North Carolina, and Arkansas. I must report, first of all, that my personal favorite candidate, Jasmine Crockett, tragically did not prevail in her bid to become the first Senate nominee in U.S. history with a lower IQ than the average pumpkin. Crockett lost her Senate bid to James Talarico, who is smarter than a pumpkin, and even smarter than most of the other members of the squash family.

But at least I can say this for Ms. Crockett. She is as dignified and honest in her loss as she has been throughout her entire career. Which is to say that she’s accused the other side of cheating, and initially refused to admit that she actually lost:

LMFAO! Jasmine Crockett is ALREADY coming out and saying there was CHEATING in the Democrat US Senate Primary in Texas, as it’s looking like she’ll lose

But wait: I thought Democrat cheating was just a “CONSPIRACY THEORY”?! pic.twitter.com/AWp01jrRrU

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) March 4, 2026

Source: @nicksortor/X.com

Remember to update your scorecards at home. It is officially okay to question the results of a democratic election again. Provided, anyway, that you’re black, and a woman, and a Democrat. In any case, it’s shocking that she would lose in this way. Indeed, cheating is the only possible explanation. Especially if you go back and watch her career highlights. Which, even though Jasmine Crockett is not really the subject of our monologue today, we’ll watch them now anyway: 

The best of Jasmine Crockett

pic.twitter.com/uXvN1Lq3FQ

— ALX (@alx) March 4, 2026

Source: @alx/X.com

I cannot, for the life of me, understand how a woman of such eloquence and elegance, a woman who looks and sounds like a part-time Waffle House waitress, could have lost her senate campaign.

But she wasn’t the only shocking loss. There was also the legitimately surprising defeat of the neocon Dan Crenshaw, which obviously signals the direction the Republican Party is headed towards.

Tuesday was also a reminder — and this is what I actually want to talk about today — that the leaders of the Republican Party are doing everything they can to sabotage the second Trump administration — and to ensure that a candidate like Trump never wins the presidency ever again. This is the single most important story in the country right now, but because of the war in the Middle East, it’s not getting anywhere near the attention it should. As DHS Secretary Kristi Noem testified in the Senate yesterday, outgoing Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina declared that, because of his frustrations with the DHS, he would go out of his way to undermine the president’s agenda at every available opportunity.

Watch:

Source: PBS News/YouTube.com

In other words, because the DHS Inspector General isn’t happy with Kristi Noem’s responses, Thom Tillis is going to burn everything down. The administration won’t be able to appoint anyone or pass any legislation as long as the Inspector General of the DHS says Kristi Noem is stonewalling.

To be very clear about what’s going on here — the inspector general of the DHS is named Joseph Cuffari. In 2024, when Joe Biden was president, a committee of inspectors general and federal officials determined that Cuffari had “abused his authority and engaged in substantial conduct” that would justify his removal. The allegations of wrongdoing included claims that Cuffari had interfered in independent investigations, fired a whistleblower who reported his misconduct, lied during his nomination process, and spent millions of taxpayer dollars to hire a law firm to advance his own interests.

Source: Washington Post

This is the inspector general that Tillis is throwing his support behind. He’s an official who’s obviously corrupt, even though his job is to prevent corruption. This is the person Noem needs to placate, apparently.

In particular, according to Tillis, Kristi Noem needs to answer questions about why ICE is deporting so many illegal aliens.

Watch:

Source: PBS News/YouTube.com

It’s indistinguishable, in every way, from the questions the Democrats asked throughout this hearing. First of all, yes, we want “numbers.” The more illegal aliens who are deported, the better. It doesn’t matter if those illegal aliens have committed additional crimes or not. The simple fact that they’re in this country is a major problem. They need to be deported.

But Tillis disagrees. His position, and the position of most establishment Republicans, is that illegal entry into the United States is no big deal. Tillis also believes that violently interfering with ICE is no big deal, either, which is why he brought up Alex Pretti and Renee Good — who everyone on the planet has already forgotten about, except Thom Tillis.

Watch:

Source: PBS News/YouTube.com

There you have it. According to Thom Tillis, Leftists aren’t threatening ICE agents because they want open borders, lawlessness, and the destruction of the United States. Instead, Leftists are threatening ICE agents because of Alex Pretti and Renee Good. Never mind the fact that the ICE agents were being threatened long before either of those activists died. Never mind the fact that both Alex Pretti and Renee Good decided to attack ICE agents in order to prevent them from doing their jobs. Never mind the fact that the Left openly celebrated the murder of one of the top conservative leaders in the country, simply because they didn’t like his opinions. We’re supposed to believe that there’s a universe where the Left would be totally fine with immigration enforcement if only the DHS had conducted a more transparent investigation into the shooting of the lesbian who drove her SUV into an ICE officer.

This is nothing new for Tillis. In 2024, he was the ringleader of a fake amnesty bill in the Senate, which was intended to undermine the president’s immigration policy. But lately, he has become a lot more animated in his disdain for this administration. In case it’s not obvious, Tillis is shouting all of the time because he’s trying to impress some non-profit or university. He wants to get a job when he leaves Washington, which is a day that can’t come soon enough. And that’s why, when he was dealing with Biden’s DHS secretary, he had a very different approach:

Watch very carefully to see if you can spot the difference in how “Republican” Thom Tillis treats the DHS Secretary who allowed 15M unvetted illegal aliens in the U.S. versus the one who is trying to deport them pic.twitter.com/H76jk4ECbT

— Corey Inganamort (@TheBirdWords) March 3, 2026

Source: @TheBirdWords/X.com

Watching this, you might say that Thom Tillis is leaving office because he’s unpopular, so what’s the big deal? He’s just one outgoing Republican senator who’s threatening to derail the president’s agenda. How bad can things be?

The problem is that Thom Tillis is not, in fact, an exception. He represents the entrenched Republican power structure in Washington. The leadership of the party does not want to enact Donald Trump’s agenda. They’re doing everything they can to interfere with it. The GOP leader in the Senate, John Thune of South Dakota, is about to send the Senate off to vacation. And instead of giving a speech where he outlined some kind of plan to advance legislation that the White House is pushing for, Thune simply complained about Democrats, over and over again. 

Watch:

Source: JohnThune/YouTube.com

This isn’t going to cut it. 

Democrats are going to use every tool they have — including a government shutdown — to get what they want. We don’t accomplish anything by whining about it. Instead, we should be using every tool that we have to achieve our own policy objectives.

For starters, instead of standing in the way of Trump’s appointments — as Thom Tillis is doing — Republicans in the Senate could go on recess for 10 days or longer. Under current law, that would allow the president to make “recess appointments” to key positions, including seats on federal courts, if he chooses to do so. No approval from the Senate is necessary as part of a recess appointment. And that’s important because, as we’ve discussed before, the Senate follows a so-called “blue slip” process, which allows an individual senator to veto a nomination, as long as the nominee is from her home state. It’s an outdated and pointless process, but Republicans are going along with it.

But here’s the issue: Thune has deliberately prevented recess appointments from occurring. And he’s done so by holding so-called “pro forma” sessions in the Senate. The idea is that, even though the Senate is on vacation, they hold a quick session with basically no one in attendance. And that “resets the clock” on recess appointments. It prevents the Senate from counting as “in recess” for the 10 days that are required by law. 

Here’s what these pro forma sessions look like. This is from last summer:

During August recess, Speaker Johnson and Leader Thune plan to call the House and Senate into session every four or five days, with practically no one there, for the sole purpose of preventing Trump from making recess appointments. Here was today’s House “pro-forma” session: pic.twitter.com/sK1tZTCdYQ

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) July 25, 2025

Source: @RepThomasMassie/X.com

The clerk gets up there, reads some nonsense for less than 2 minutes, and everyone goes home. The sole purpose of these “pro forma” sessions is to prevent Donald Trump from making recess appointments.

Did you know this was going on? Did you have any idea that the president’s own party — which controls both houses of Congress — is using a procedural mechanism to block him from appointing administration officials, along with dozens of US attorneys and judges? That’s what Republicans in the Senate are doing.

For the same reason, Republicans in the Senate aren’t taking any action to advance the SAVE Act, which is short for “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility.” This is, in every respect, the single most important piece of legislation that anyone currently serving in Congress has ever considered. 

Passing this legislation is the most important thing that any of them can possibly achieve right now, by far. That’s why Donald Trump specifically called on Republicans to pass the SAVE Act during his State of the Union Address. This law will determine whether we have fair elections, real elections going forward. It will determine if Americans get to decide who leads them, or if foreign invaders get to decide for them. That’s what’s at stake. 

The terms of the SAVE Act are straightforward: If you want to register to vote or update your voter registration, then you need to present documentary proof that you’re a citizen. And you need to present this proof in person. A passport would satisfy this requirement all by itself. A majority of Americans have a passport already. 170 million Americans, in fact. Which means if you don’t have one, it’s not very hard to get one. 170 million Americans have already done it. 

But if you don’t have one and don’t want to get one, then a birth certificate paired with a driver’s license will satisfy the requirement. Additionally, the law would require that voters show photo identification in order to cast a ballot in person. If voting absentee — which would only be allowed in rare cases — a copy of the photo identification would need to be provided.

There is no good-faith basis whatsoever for opposing this legislation. There is no valid argument against it. The only argument is that some American citizens might be too dumb or lazy to fulfill the rudimentary requirements. But as I’ve explained, far from being an argument against it, that’s just one more justification for it. Anyone who can’t live up to the baseline standards this law puts in place shouldn’t be voting. Either it means they aren’t citizens, or they’re exceptionally stupid and lazy. In any of those cases, they shouldn’t be voting. That’s why everyone, outside of elected representatives in the Democrat Party, supports it. Gallup just ran a poll finding that 84 percent of Americans support the voter-ID requirement. 83 percent support the requirement that first-time voters provide documentary evidence of citizenship. It’s extremely difficult to get broad, bipartisan agreement like this. 83 percent of Americans wouldn’t agree on whether or not the Earth is flat.

So everyone knows why Democrats have an issue with the SAVE Act. As Trump said, they want to cheat. They want to flood the United States with illegal aliens, allow them to vote — using the honor system — and permanently seize control of the country. That’s been their game plan for many years now. They’re on the verge of success. And Republicans have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to stop it.

It wouldn’t even take any special effort. That’s what you have to understand. If the Republicans fail here, it is because they chose to fail. They want to fail. They don’t want to protect our elections. They have no other excuse. The obstacle right now is that Democrats are threatening to filibuster the bill. And under normal circumstances, 60 votes are needed to end the filibuster and hold the vote. All John Thune would have to do is keep the Senate’s legislative session open and force a “standing filibuster” on this particular piece of legislation. Under a standing filibuster, if they want to delay a vote, Democrats can’t simply announce their intent to block the legislation. Instead, they would have to get up, walk to the podium, and talk endlessly — without taking any breaks. If they take a break, then they’re done. They have to pass the torch to another Democrat. And if they can’t do that, then the filibuster ends, and Republicans can hold a vote.

Eventually, the standing filibuster would come to an end — since senators can’t return to the podium more than two times during any one “legislative session.”. It wouldn’t be pleasant for anyone — including Republicans, who would have to remain near the Senate chamber at all times, in order to ensure that there’s a quorum. If there’s no quorum, then the legislative session ends, the speech counter resets, and Democrats can go back to the podium the next day and filibuster some more.

But this is what we elected Republicans to do. This is the most important fight they can undertake. They don’t even have to change the rules of the Senate to do it. They just have to stay near the Senate complex for a few days. That’s it. Instead, here’s what John Thune is up to. 

This is one of his social media posts yesterday:

“Great to sit down with members of Ducks Unlimited, including the students who started the SDSU chapter of DU, who are working to further wildlife and conservation priorities in the state.”

Instead of sitting down with the members of the Mighty Ducks or whatever and whining about Democrats, John Thune needs to put the SAVE Act up for a vote. And if Democrats want to filibuster, he needs to require them to stand up and talk until they can’t talk anymore. And then, when the bill is passed, the president will sign it. And we’ll have some chance of fair elections in this country going forward.

If that’s too much for Senate Republicans, they also have the option of eliminating the filibuster entirely. We all know that Democrats will do it, the first chance they get. No use fretting that if you do it, they’ll do it. They’ll do it regardless. The Democrats are fighting fascists and Nazis and Darth Vader, remember? They’ll do anything at all that they need to do to advance their agenda. There’s no reason we shouldn’t do the same thing — especially since the odds are very low that Republicans will remain in power in Congress for much longer.

Right now, Republicans have a real chance of losing Senate races in several key states in November, from Alaska to Ohio to Georgia. Meanwhile, the establishment wing of the GOP is throwing around enormous amounts of money to prop up neocons like John Cornyn, who spent something like $70 million to receive 43 percent of the vote in yesterday’s primary in Texas, while Ken Paxton spent around 4 million to receive 40 percent of the vote. And Paxton probably would have won outright if there hadn’t been a spoiler candidate in the race.

There is ample evidence, in other words, that the Republican Party is in a state of managed decline. The leaders are waiting for Donald Trump’s exit at this point. Frankly, it doesn’t appear that our elected representatives in Congress actually want to hold onto power any longer. What you have to understand about the political scene in modern America is that many politicians — especially Republicans — don’t actually want to be in power. They don’t crave power so much as they crave the prestige of holding elected office, and the many ways they can financially benefit from their position, both while they’re in office and once they leave. Many of them want to trade their elected office in for cushy jobs as lobbyists and consultants. Many of them, especially the younger ones, dream of nothing more than being podcasters. It’s a relative few who want power in order to actually use that power. For the rest, having power, being in the majority, is an inconvenience. Why would they actually want to fly the plane when they can sit in first class and drink Bloody Marys?

As John Thune demonstrated, Republicans are very comfortable complaining about Democrats. And as Thom Tillis demonstrated, Republicans have no problem berating the Trump administration and threatening to shut down his entire agenda. To this point, most of the achievements of the Republican Party in Washington have really just been achievements of the Trump Administration. Republicans have done the bare minimum, if even that. They passed the Big Beautiful Bill, and I guess we’re just supposed to be satisfied with that. We handed them control over the entire government; in return, we got one piece of legislation. That’s supposed to be good enough. Well, it isn’t. That is not going to be satisfactory. And for anyone who is willing to accept the “filibuster” excuse for Republicans, keep something in mind: Republicans will never have — and I mean never have — a filibuster-proof majority. It’s not going to happen. It’s only happened once this century, and that was for Democrats. Republicans are never going to have enough votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster. There is no path for it. It’s not going to happen. Republicans haven’t had one since the 1920s, and the country today doesn’t even vaguely resemble the country in the 1920s. So either they will barrel through, force their agenda through by eliminating the filibuster or doing a standing filibuster, or they will not advance their agenda at all. Not now. Not ever again. Those are your choices. Kill the modern filibuster, or never see an actual conservative piece of legislation passed ever again in your life. That’s it. Either we keep the current filibuster system alive, or Republicans carry out the will of the voters. We can’t have both.

Right now, hiding behind these excuses, Republicans have decided against the will of the voters. And unless that changes, and the SAVE Act becomes law, our elections will be permanently compromised — and then, filibuster or not, the will of the voters won’t matter at all.

“}]] 

The post Why Are Republican Senators Sabotaging Trump? appeared first on Spin Politico.

Annie Bosko is a California-native country singer whose latest hit is a plea to save her home state.

The song is called “Goodbye California,” which she describes as the most “beautiful state in the world.” And while its title sounds like the closing of a chapter, she hopes her song brings about a welcome change to a place she says has rapidly declined since the pandemic.

Bosko hails from Thousand Oaks, California, and has fond memories growing up on a farm, surrounded by her four siblings. Fresh air, hard work, and endless miles of beauty are what she remembers most about where she was born and raised.

Living in Nashville, the country music capital, she still associates the real cowboys of the world with the West, especially California, known for cattle farms and growing a large portion of the country’s produce. Unfortunately, her home state is now associated with tremendous negativity, and she is addressing that through her lyrics.

“Now you’re just a wasteland of dust and broken dreams,” Bosko says in the song.

Her lyrics address the billions of dollars California spent trying to combat the homeless crisis. Instead, according to the Public Policy Institute of California, the homeless population grew by more than 20% between 2019 and 2024.

Bosko also laments the devastating Palisades wildfires in her song, including how California fire hydrants ran dry. The song’s bridge highlights California’s critical issues during the fires that destroyed 23,000 acres.

“When working hard hardly works, can’t keep up with the dollar. Even when it’s free, you can’t afford the water,” she sings.

Bosko wants the Golden State to return to its desirable roots. She wants affordability, safety, and an economy that attracts businesses, not one that forces them to relocate.

“When you lose the things about a place that made it special, it’s a really sad thing to watch,” Bosko told The Daily Wire. “When you lose the history, the culture of a city, and you lose its landmark and what made it so special … it’s just hard to come back from that.

In “Goodbye California,” she sings about longing for the better days, not just for her, who has finally left it behind, but for those who can’t leave and are stuck in the current climate.

“They don’t feel safe, they can’t afford a yard,” Bosko said.

While her goal is to bring change to the state, the song also doubles as a love ballad, with California representing an old flame.

“Goodbye, California, you still got my heart. This view of you in my rearview is tearing me apart,” Bosko sings.

Bosko said it was actually Kid Rock who had the idea to make the song have a double meaning.

“Whichever side you’re on, you can’t refute he’s a great artist,” Bosko said.

While California dreaming has turned into a nightmare for many, Bosko hopes to one day return home, and said she is hopeful California is close to making a comeback. She is honored to release “Goodbye California” to the world to help with that.

“I’m an artist, so I think our jobs are to look around at what we see, what we observe… and write about it,” Bosko said. “If it can just make a difference in saving California … because it needs to be saved.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Annie Bosko is a California-native country singer whose latest hit is a plea to save her home state.

The song is called “Goodbye California,” which she describes as the most “beautiful state in the world.” And while its title sounds like the closing of a chapter, she hopes her song brings about a welcome change to a place she says has rapidly declined since the pandemic.

Bosko hails from Thousand Oaks, California, and has fond memories growing up on a farm, surrounded by her four siblings. Fresh air, hard work, and endless miles of beauty are what she remembers most about where she was born and raised.

Living in Nashville, the country music capital, she still associates the real cowboys of the world with the West, especially California, known for cattle farms and growing a large portion of the country’s produce. Unfortunately, her home state is now associated with tremendous negativity, and she is addressing that through her lyrics.

“Now you’re just a wasteland of dust and broken dreams,” Bosko says in the song.

Her lyrics address the billions of dollars California spent trying to combat the homeless crisis. Instead, according to the Public Policy Institute of California, the homeless population grew by more than 20% between 2019 and 2024.

Bosko also laments the devastating Palisades wildfires in her song, including how California fire hydrants ran dry. The song’s bridge highlights California’s critical issues during the fires that destroyed 23,000 acres.

“When working hard hardly works, can’t keep up with the dollar. Even when it’s free, you can’t afford the water,” she sings.

Bosko wants the Golden State to return to its desirable roots. She wants affordability, safety, and an economy that attracts businesses, not one that forces them to relocate.

“When you lose the things about a place that made it special, it’s a really sad thing to watch,” Bosko told The Daily Wire. “When you lose the history, the culture of a city, and you lose its landmark and what made it so special … it’s just hard to come back from that.

In “Goodbye California,” she sings about longing for the better days, not just for her, who has finally left it behind, but for those who can’t leave and are stuck in the current climate.

“They don’t feel safe, they can’t afford a yard,” Bosko said.

While her goal is to bring change to the state, the song also doubles as a love ballad, with California representing an old flame.

“Goodbye, California, you still got my heart. This view of you in my rearview is tearing me apart,” Bosko sings.

Bosko said it was actually Kid Rock who had the idea to make the song have a double meaning.

“Whichever side you’re on, you can’t refute he’s a great artist,” Bosko said.

While California dreaming has turned into a nightmare for many, Bosko hopes to one day return home, and said she is hopeful California is close to making a comeback. She is honored to release “Goodbye California” to the world to help with that.

“I’m an artist, so I think our jobs are to look around at what we see, what we observe… and write about it,” Bosko said. “If it can just make a difference in saving California … because it needs to be saved.”

“}]] 

The post ‘Sad Thing To Watch’: Country Singer Strives To Save California With Her New Song appeared first on Spin Politico.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt put a quick stop to The Independent’s Andrew Feinberg, who tried to claim that the Trump administration had not properly outlined the imminent threat posed by the Iranian regime.

Leavitt rejected “the premise of the question” out of hand, then laid out a list of Trump administration officials who had, in fact, made the case for Iran posing an imminent and ongoing threat to the United States and to American interests.

WATCH:

.@PressSec: “@POTUS does not make these decisions in a vacuum. This decision to launch this operation was based on a cumulative effect of various direct threats that Iran posed to the United States of America.” pic.twitter.com/hJtO1Igz5S

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 4, 2026

“At the top of the briefing, you listed a long list of grievances against the Iranian government going back to the takeover of the embassy in ’79,” Feinberg began, listing a couple of examples. “But no one in this administration has laid out the imminent threat that was supposed to be taken care of by this … Why is it that you can’t say what the imminent threat against the U.S. was that required us to launch this?”

“I completely reject the premise of your question,” Leavitt replied. “You have had the President of the United States, the Secretary of War, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Vice President of the United States, the Secretary of State, and now I am out here today to explain to you exactly what led the president to make the decision to launch Operation Epic Fury.”

But Leavitt didn’t stop there. Instead, she went on to lay out, in more detail, some of the actions taken by the Iranian regime that had spurred President Trump to action, from their previous and ongoing support of terror proxies to their persistent attempts to create nuclear weapons that could eventually threaten the American people even at home.

“President Trump does not make these decisions in a vacuum. This decision to launch this operation was based on a cumulative effect of various direct threats that Iran posed to the United States of America, and the president’s feeling based on the fact that Iran does pose an imminent and direct threat to the United States of America,” she continued.

The press secretary took her explanation a step further, noting that Trump had only resorted to military action when it was abundantly clear that negotiations were going nowhere — and once he’d determined that Iran was likely to take action against the United States, he chose to strike first and prevent it from happening.

“The president found that through these extensive, exhaustive, failed negotiations with Iran that they were hell-bent on death and destruction,” she said. “So again, the president was not going to be just another president on a very long list who sat back, and stood by, and passed the buck of this direct threat to the next administration … Again, these decisions are not made in a vacuum. They are made by the president’s feeling that Iran was going to strike the United States and our assets in the region, and he was not going to sit back and watch that happen. The determination was made that the president was going to strike first alongside Israel, and that has obviously been proven to be the right decision and an effective one at that.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt put a quick stop to The Independent’s Andrew Feinberg, who tried to claim that the Trump administration had not properly outlined the imminent threat posed by the Iranian regime.

Leavitt rejected “the premise of the question” out of hand, then laid out a list of Trump administration officials who had, in fact, made the case for Iran posing an imminent and ongoing threat to the United States and to American interests.

WATCH:

.@PressSec: “@POTUS does not make these decisions in a vacuum. This decision to launch this operation was based on a cumulative effect of various direct threats that Iran posed to the United States of America.” pic.twitter.com/hJtO1Igz5S

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 4, 2026

“At the top of the briefing, you listed a long list of grievances against the Iranian government going back to the takeover of the embassy in ’79,” Feinberg began, listing a couple of examples. “But no one in this administration has laid out the imminent threat that was supposed to be taken care of by this … Why is it that you can’t say what the imminent threat against the U.S. was that required us to launch this?”

“I completely reject the premise of your question,” Leavitt replied. “You have had the President of the United States, the Secretary of War, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Vice President of the United States, the Secretary of State, and now I am out here today to explain to you exactly what led the president to make the decision to launch Operation Epic Fury.”

But Leavitt didn’t stop there. Instead, she went on to lay out, in more detail, some of the actions taken by the Iranian regime that had spurred President Trump to action, from their previous and ongoing support of terror proxies to their persistent attempts to create nuclear weapons that could eventually threaten the American people even at home.

“President Trump does not make these decisions in a vacuum. This decision to launch this operation was based on a cumulative effect of various direct threats that Iran posed to the United States of America, and the president’s feeling based on the fact that Iran does pose an imminent and direct threat to the United States of America,” she continued.

The press secretary took her explanation a step further, noting that Trump had only resorted to military action when it was abundantly clear that negotiations were going nowhere — and once he’d determined that Iran was likely to take action against the United States, he chose to strike first and prevent it from happening.

“The president found that through these extensive, exhaustive, failed negotiations with Iran that they were hell-bent on death and destruction,” she said. “So again, the president was not going to be just another president on a very long list who sat back, and stood by, and passed the buck of this direct threat to the next administration … Again, these decisions are not made in a vacuum. They are made by the president’s feeling that Iran was going to strike the United States and our assets in the region, and he was not going to sit back and watch that happen. The determination was made that the president was going to strike first alongside Israel, and that has obviously been proven to be the right decision and an effective one at that.”

“}]] 

The post Leavitt Rejects Premise Of ‘Imminent Threat’ Question In Fiery Defense Of Iran Strike appeared first on Spin Politico.

This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.

***

I told myself it was motion sickness. The tour bus had lost air conditioning, my entire college chorale sweating our way back to campus from a tour of New England. I tried to distract myself in conversation, but nausea won out and I ran for the tiny bathroom at the back of the bus. “Did you get your reading report turned in, yet?” A friend asked as I whizzed by. I shook my head.

When we got home, my husband and I stopped to grab groceries and a pregnancy test. I didn’t keep them stocked because I had no intention of needing one for over a year — when I would graduate with a journalism degree. We wanted to start our family young, just not before graduation.

I had ignored early symptoms until fatigue consumed me a few days into the tour. I pushed on in denial, trying not to throw up lobster rolls and clam chowder. The positive pregnancy test didn’t surprise me much, but it did send shockwaves through our little world. We were grateful and humbled (so much for natural family planning).

My journalism professor’s reaction captured my own tension between delight and overwhelm.

“Oh are you?” He asked with a congratulatory smile. “But how are you going to do all of the things I need you to do?” I laughed and assured him that, God permitting, I would do it all.

Conversations about the benefits of getting married young are cropping up all over the internet recently. Pronatalist activists are encouraging people to have more kids, and sooner. Simone and Malcolm Collins are a pronatalist couple warning about the birthrate crisis and aiming for 14 children through IVF. They recently argued for having kids in college, especially if universities better support parents. They even imply that college could be an ideal context in which to have kids: “Late night wake-ups with a baby are no problem for college students who are used to pulling all-nighters,” they say.

I believe children are a gift from God, and I was given remarkably favorable circumstances for finishing school with a baby. But I learned that college and kids are a difficult, not an ideal, combination. You just can’t do it all. 

At least attempting to graduate was a no-brainer for me.

I once wandered a park with my boyfriend and our conversation drifted to whether we could get married while still in school; he could graduate a year before me and work while I finished up. But I worried that dragging debt into a young marriage was unwise and impractical. Would it be too much of a burden? He listened thoughtfully before responding. 

“If you really want this, I’ll work hard and we’ll get through it,” he said. “I’ll do whatever it takes to help you finish.”

We got married two years later over Christmas break, and jumped back into classes together. Fast forward to April, and we discovered our baby was due at the beginning of Christmas break (a truly providential due date). I hoped that professors at my Christian conservative school would be supportive. I still wanted my degree and one more year in a community I loved. But that year would look starkly different from my dreams. My paradigm would shift from “soak in senior year” to “survive.”

I carried a bag of almonds with me through the end of the spring semester like a talisman to ward off nausea. I nibbled them behind the piano at strategic moments during chorale concerts. Getting out of bed in the morning felt impossible, and I drove home to sleep through classes I couldn’t sit through. I only made it through finals thanks to weeks of extensions from professors.

My husband helped me prepare for my new normal. Stress about academics was not an option. Health was the priority for me and the baby. Previously nicknamed “Hermione” for my type-A approach, I would need to settle for passing grades.

Extracurriculars had been the frosting to my college cake. I loved chorale, moot court, and drama, and I’d even started an a cappella group. Now I had to cut back or let go. Before I told my close friends my news, I told my moot court coach. My goal had been to secure a competitive partner and shoot for the national championship. But now that I likely couldn’t compete in January, I didn’t want to disappoint an ambitious partner.

I front-loaded an immense credit load for senior fall to make the spring semester with a newborn a little easier. I registered for 17 credits plus another 8 credits of intermediate French online. I waddled around in maternity blouses and slacks, battling brain fog. All that French I paid thousands for? It’s pretty much gone. I qualified for nationals in moot court, but made the painful decision to opt out.

I finished finals before my due date and emailed professors to make sure I could bring my baby into class. Then I slept, curb-walked, and pulled my first all-nighter birthing my daughter into the world. 

I had no idea how the spring would unfold. My mother-in-law flew out for three weeks to help me resume classes. She stocked our freezer with food. I stocked the stroller with burp cloths, pacifiers, and nursing covers, taking notes when I wasn’t breastfeeding or walking hallways.

Nighttime feedings weakened my academic abilities. Research suggests that sleep deprivation impairs your brain’s ability to retain new information. I’d stare at a single physics problem for an hour, my mind just as blurry as my tear-filled eyes. Before the baby, I had been reveling in a rich education. Now I was just hoping to secure a degree. 

I also felt cut adrift from class camaraderie. I was known to one student simply as “that girl with the stroller.” I skipped social events and felt my wit and energy wither. My classmates were soaking in their college experience. I was savoring quieter moments with my family of three.

Community looked different, but it was still sweet. Some friends took slots to play with my daughter each week while I tackled assignments. They helped me with diaper blow-outs during physics lab. They endlessly encouraged me. Guys in my classes helped me wrangle the stroller in and out of classrooms. My daughter became a mascot in classes, cooing happily on her blanket while I took notes. I dreaded being a distraction, but she brought smiles and baby fever everywhere she went.

Just a few weeks before graduation, we got strep throat. I spent days in bed tending a feverish baby and feeling the weight of late assignments with every excruciating swallow. My mom flew across the country to help me catch up. Through it all, my husband worked full-time, washed countless dishes, rocked the baby, and folded laundry.

By God’s grace, I walked across the graduation stage with my 5-month-old in attendance. I’ve already forgotten my final grades. I don’t even remember the GPA threshold for the honors tassels I earned. I do remember the pink tassel I found hanging in my apartment before commencement. My husband bought it to represent an honor that wouldn’t be recognized on my diploma: bringing life into the world and nurturing it. I couldn’t do it all, but the sacrifices were worth it.

***

Clara York is a freelance reporter and poet writing on family and religious issues. She lives in Virginia with her husband and two young daughters.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.

***

I told myself it was motion sickness. The tour bus had lost air conditioning, my entire college chorale sweating our way back to campus from a tour of New England. I tried to distract myself in conversation, but nausea won out and I ran for the tiny bathroom at the back of the bus. “Did you get your reading report turned in, yet?” A friend asked as I whizzed by. I shook my head.

When we got home, my husband and I stopped to grab groceries and a pregnancy test. I didn’t keep them stocked because I had no intention of needing one for over a year — when I would graduate with a journalism degree. We wanted to start our family young, just not before graduation.

I had ignored early symptoms until fatigue consumed me a few days into the tour. I pushed on in denial, trying not to throw up lobster rolls and clam chowder. The positive pregnancy test didn’t surprise me much, but it did send shockwaves through our little world. We were grateful and humbled (so much for natural family planning).

My journalism professor’s reaction captured my own tension between delight and overwhelm.

“Oh are you?” He asked with a congratulatory smile. “But how are you going to do all of the things I need you to do?” I laughed and assured him that, God permitting, I would do it all.

Conversations about the benefits of getting married young are cropping up all over the internet recently. Pronatalist activists are encouraging people to have more kids, and sooner. Simone and Malcolm Collins are a pronatalist couple warning about the birthrate crisis and aiming for 14 children through IVF. They recently argued for having kids in college, especially if universities better support parents. They even imply that college could be an ideal context in which to have kids: “Late night wake-ups with a baby are no problem for college students who are used to pulling all-nighters,” they say.

I believe children are a gift from God, and I was given remarkably favorable circumstances for finishing school with a baby. But I learned that college and kids are a difficult, not an ideal, combination. You just can’t do it all. 

At least attempting to graduate was a no-brainer for me.

I once wandered a park with my boyfriend and our conversation drifted to whether we could get married while still in school; he could graduate a year before me and work while I finished up. But I worried that dragging debt into a young marriage was unwise and impractical. Would it be too much of a burden? He listened thoughtfully before responding. 

“If you really want this, I’ll work hard and we’ll get through it,” he said. “I’ll do whatever it takes to help you finish.”

We got married two years later over Christmas break, and jumped back into classes together. Fast forward to April, and we discovered our baby was due at the beginning of Christmas break (a truly providential due date). I hoped that professors at my Christian conservative school would be supportive. I still wanted my degree and one more year in a community I loved. But that year would look starkly different from my dreams. My paradigm would shift from “soak in senior year” to “survive.”

I carried a bag of almonds with me through the end of the spring semester like a talisman to ward off nausea. I nibbled them behind the piano at strategic moments during chorale concerts. Getting out of bed in the morning felt impossible, and I drove home to sleep through classes I couldn’t sit through. I only made it through finals thanks to weeks of extensions from professors.

My husband helped me prepare for my new normal. Stress about academics was not an option. Health was the priority for me and the baby. Previously nicknamed “Hermione” for my type-A approach, I would need to settle for passing grades.

Extracurriculars had been the frosting to my college cake. I loved chorale, moot court, and drama, and I’d even started an a cappella group. Now I had to cut back or let go. Before I told my close friends my news, I told my moot court coach. My goal had been to secure a competitive partner and shoot for the national championship. But now that I likely couldn’t compete in January, I didn’t want to disappoint an ambitious partner.

I front-loaded an immense credit load for senior fall to make the spring semester with a newborn a little easier. I registered for 17 credits plus another 8 credits of intermediate French online. I waddled around in maternity blouses and slacks, battling brain fog. All that French I paid thousands for? It’s pretty much gone. I qualified for nationals in moot court, but made the painful decision to opt out.

I finished finals before my due date and emailed professors to make sure I could bring my baby into class. Then I slept, curb-walked, and pulled my first all-nighter birthing my daughter into the world. 

I had no idea how the spring would unfold. My mother-in-law flew out for three weeks to help me resume classes. She stocked our freezer with food. I stocked the stroller with burp cloths, pacifiers, and nursing covers, taking notes when I wasn’t breastfeeding or walking hallways.

Nighttime feedings weakened my academic abilities. Research suggests that sleep deprivation impairs your brain’s ability to retain new information. I’d stare at a single physics problem for an hour, my mind just as blurry as my tear-filled eyes. Before the baby, I had been reveling in a rich education. Now I was just hoping to secure a degree. 

I also felt cut adrift from class camaraderie. I was known to one student simply as “that girl with the stroller.” I skipped social events and felt my wit and energy wither. My classmates were soaking in their college experience. I was savoring quieter moments with my family of three.

Community looked different, but it was still sweet. Some friends took slots to play with my daughter each week while I tackled assignments. They helped me with diaper blow-outs during physics lab. They endlessly encouraged me. Guys in my classes helped me wrangle the stroller in and out of classrooms. My daughter became a mascot in classes, cooing happily on her blanket while I took notes. I dreaded being a distraction, but she brought smiles and baby fever everywhere she went.

Just a few weeks before graduation, we got strep throat. I spent days in bed tending a feverish baby and feeling the weight of late assignments with every excruciating swallow. My mom flew across the country to help me catch up. Through it all, my husband worked full-time, washed countless dishes, rocked the baby, and folded laundry.

By God’s grace, I walked across the graduation stage with my 5-month-old in attendance. I’ve already forgotten my final grades. I don’t even remember the GPA threshold for the honors tassels I earned. I do remember the pink tassel I found hanging in my apartment before commencement. My husband bought it to represent an honor that wouldn’t be recognized on my diploma: bringing life into the world and nurturing it. I couldn’t do it all, but the sacrifices were worth it.

***

Clara York is a freelance reporter and poet writing on family and religious issues. She lives in Virginia with her husband and two young daughters.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

“}]] 

The post ‘That Girl With The Stroller’ — I Loved My Baby, But College Was Never The Same appeared first on Spin Politico.

With 99% of the vote reporting, North Carolina’s Republican primary for State Senate District 26 has come down to just two votes, setting up what is almost certain to be a recount.

According to Decision Desk HQ, the latest tally stands at:

Sam Page 13,077 

Phil Berger 13,075

The two-vote margin, out of more than 26,000 ballots cast, falls well within North Carolina’s 1% recount threshold.

The race pits Rockingham County Sheriff Sam Page against longtime Senate leader Phil Berger, who has served as President Pro Tempore of the North Carolina Senate since 2011 and has been one of the most influential Republicans in state politics for over a decade.

Page, who has served as sheriff since 1998 and spent more than four decades in law enforcement, ran as an outsider taking on what he repeatedly called the “Raleigh establishment.” A vocal supporter of Donald Trump, Page led “Sheriffs for Trump” in 2016 and served as the president’s North Carolina campaign chair in 2020.

On the campaign trail, Page focused heavily on law-and-order themes, calling for stronger penalties for violent offenders and pushing to restart North Carolina’s death penalty. He also proposed raising starting teacher pay to $50,000, expanding school choice with what he described as “commonsense guardrails,” and eliminating state taxes on overtime pay and tipped wages in line with Trump’s proposals at the federal level. Page further called for repealing a legislative public records exemption backed by Berger and supported term limits for legislative leadership.

Berger, first elected to the Senate in 2000, rose to Minority Leader in 2004 and helped engineer Republicans’ return to majority control in 2010, the first time the GOP had controlled the chamber in more than a century. Since becoming Senate President Pro Tempore, he has led efforts to cut income taxes, reduce regulations, expand school choice, enact voter ID, and pass a range of conservative social policies, including legislation affecting transgender participation in sports and restrictions on gender transition procedures for minors.

Berger has closely aligned himself with Trump’s national agenda, highlighting cooperation on immigration enforcement, tax cuts, energy production, and cultural issues. He also points to North Carolina’s economic growth, manufacturing recruitment, and tax reductions during his tenure as evidence of conservative governance delivering results.

Despite securing Trump’s endorsement, Berger found himself locked in a dead heat with Page. In a February Truth Social post, Trump praised Berger as a “Highly Respected Leader” while also describing Page as “GREAT,” underscoring the delicate balancing act in a race where both candidates emphasized their loyalty to the former president.

The winner of the primary will face Democratic nominee Steve Luking, a physician. Berger previously defeated Luking in 2024 by nearly 15 percentage points. The 26th district has been a safe Republican seat since 1981 and will likely go to the winner of the GOP primary.

The outcome now hinges on a recount and any outstanding provisional ballots. If the margin holds, it would mark a stunning upset of one of the state’s most powerful lawmakers by a local sheriff running on an anti-establishment message by a margin so slim it would be difficult to believe. For now, the contest stands as a reminder of just how narrow the margins can be, even for entrenched political leadership.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

With 99% of the vote reporting, North Carolina’s Republican primary for State Senate District 26 has come down to just two votes, setting up what is almost certain to be a recount.

According to Decision Desk HQ, the latest tally stands at:

Sam Page 13,077 

Phil Berger 13,075

The two-vote margin, out of more than 26,000 ballots cast, falls well within North Carolina’s 1% recount threshold.

The race pits Rockingham County Sheriff Sam Page against longtime Senate leader Phil Berger, who has served as President Pro Tempore of the North Carolina Senate since 2011 and has been one of the most influential Republicans in state politics for over a decade.

Page, who has served as sheriff since 1998 and spent more than four decades in law enforcement, ran as an outsider taking on what he repeatedly called the “Raleigh establishment.” A vocal supporter of Donald Trump, Page led “Sheriffs for Trump” in 2016 and served as the president’s North Carolina campaign chair in 2020.

On the campaign trail, Page focused heavily on law-and-order themes, calling for stronger penalties for violent offenders and pushing to restart North Carolina’s death penalty. He also proposed raising starting teacher pay to $50,000, expanding school choice with what he described as “commonsense guardrails,” and eliminating state taxes on overtime pay and tipped wages in line with Trump’s proposals at the federal level. Page further called for repealing a legislative public records exemption backed by Berger and supported term limits for legislative leadership.

Berger, first elected to the Senate in 2000, rose to Minority Leader in 2004 and helped engineer Republicans’ return to majority control in 2010, the first time the GOP had controlled the chamber in more than a century. Since becoming Senate President Pro Tempore, he has led efforts to cut income taxes, reduce regulations, expand school choice, enact voter ID, and pass a range of conservative social policies, including legislation affecting transgender participation in sports and restrictions on gender transition procedures for minors.

Berger has closely aligned himself with Trump’s national agenda, highlighting cooperation on immigration enforcement, tax cuts, energy production, and cultural issues. He also points to North Carolina’s economic growth, manufacturing recruitment, and tax reductions during his tenure as evidence of conservative governance delivering results.

Despite securing Trump’s endorsement, Berger found himself locked in a dead heat with Page. In a February Truth Social post, Trump praised Berger as a “Highly Respected Leader” while also describing Page as “GREAT,” underscoring the delicate balancing act in a race where both candidates emphasized their loyalty to the former president.

The winner of the primary will face Democratic nominee Steve Luking, a physician. Berger previously defeated Luking in 2024 by nearly 15 percentage points. The 26th district has been a safe Republican seat since 1981 and will likely go to the winner of the GOP primary.

The outcome now hinges on a recount and any outstanding provisional ballots. If the margin holds, it would mark a stunning upset of one of the state’s most powerful lawmakers by a local sheriff running on an anti-establishment message by a margin so slim it would be difficult to believe. For now, the contest stands as a reminder of just how narrow the margins can be, even for entrenched political leadership.

“}]] 

The post 26,000 Ballots Cast — And A GOP Senate Race Is Separated By A Razor-Thin Margin appeared first on Spin Politico.

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has alerted all 50 states that affirming “biological reality” does not constitute child abuse or neglect under federal law.

“We sent letters to every state reminding them that children may not be removed from their home solely because parents declined to support a child’s self-identification as the opposite sex,” said Alex Adams, the Assistant Secretary for the ACF, in a video published by HHS.

“Removing a child from their home must be based on objective evidence or imminent risk of serious harm. So a state’s decision to break up a family cannot be based solely on a parent’s objection to radical gender ideology or irreversible sex rejecting medical interventions,” Adams stated.

The ACF encouraged states to clearly define the terms “abuse” and “neglect,” saying these definitions should clarify that affirming a child’s sex and “refusing to condone sex-rejecting interventions” does not constitute abuse.

Several states have already taken steps to legally clarify that affirming a child’s sex is not abuse, including Indiana, North Carolina, and Texas.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has alerted all 50 states that affirming “biological reality” does not constitute child abuse or neglect under federal law.

“We sent letters to every state reminding them that children may not be removed from their home solely because parents declined to support a child’s self-identification as the opposite sex,” said Alex Adams, the Assistant Secretary for the ACF, in a video published by HHS.

“Removing a child from their home must be based on objective evidence or imminent risk of serious harm. So a state’s decision to break up a family cannot be based solely on a parent’s objection to radical gender ideology or irreversible sex rejecting medical interventions,” Adams stated.

The ACF encouraged states to clearly define the terms “abuse” and “neglect,” saying these definitions should clarify that affirming a child’s sex and “refusing to condone sex-rejecting interventions” does not constitute abuse.

Several states have already taken steps to legally clarify that affirming a child’s sex is not abuse, including Indiana, North Carolina, and Texas.

“}]] 

The post Trump Admin Sends New Guidance To All 50 States On Trans Kid Disputes appeared first on Spin Politico.

The Ayatollah is dead. The IRGC has no headquarters.

The head of the snake is gone.

With “Operation Epic Fury,” Trump has proven that the United States is a strong world superpower that’s unafraid to show force when necessary. And contrary to what the liberal media will tell you, these moves in the Middle East have widespread support.

A survey of 1,800 likely voters found that most of the American public is on board with the joint U.S.-Israeli mission to wipe out the authoritarian regime.

The poll shows that 56% of likely voters support the United States taking out Iranian leadership, while 63% agree with targeting Iranian nuclear and ballistic missile sites. Nearly 70% of respondents, meanwhile, agree with the Trump administration’s argument that Iran is a “threat to global peace and democracy,” and 76% agree that “if Iran built a nuclear weapon, [it] would pose a direct threat to the United States.”

On Tuesday, Trump explained to reporters in the Oval Office that Iran could have “taken out many countries.”

“If we didn’t do what we’re doing right now, you would’ve had a nuclear war and they would’ve taken out many countries because you know what? They’re sick people. They’re mentally ill, sick people. They’re angry. They’re crazy. They’re sick,” the president said.

Luckily for everyone here at home, living their lives of prosperity and freedom, that never happened because we have a strong, decisive leader in power. Everyone at home is free to celebrate a massive victory with the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the obliteration of Iran’s air defenses and most of their navy.

For 47 years, the Iranian regime killed Americans, funded terror proxies, and screamed “Death to America.” They killed over 1,000 U.S. citizens through the IRGC alone. Then Trump came back, and now we are all SO back.

Today there’s only one way to celebrate: by raising a glass and making a toast to freedom. Fill your cup with the sweet taste of American resolve and give this moment the drinking vessel it deserves.

Enter: the Terrorist Tears Tumbler.

A close cousin to the perennial fan favorite Leftist Tears Tumbler, this cup makes a whole statement without you saying a single word. Each 20 ounce stainless steel tumbler with sweat-proof vacuum insulation keeps drinks hot for 5+ hours or cold for 50+ hours.

Because we know you accept nothing less than the best, it also boasts an air-tight sliding-closure lid, is BPA-free, has a narrow base that fits most cup holders, and is dishwasher safe.

We would’ve made it with salvaged steel from Iranian naval ships — but they’re at the bottom of the sea.

Fill this tumbler with whatever you want. Just know that every beverage going forward will taste a lot like freedom. Get yours at the Daily Wire Shop.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

The Ayatollah is dead. The IRGC has no headquarters.

The head of the snake is gone.

With “Operation Epic Fury,” Trump has proven that the United States is a strong world superpower that’s unafraid to show force when necessary. And contrary to what the liberal media will tell you, these moves in the Middle East have widespread support.

A survey of 1,800 likely voters found that most of the American public is on board with the joint U.S.-Israeli mission to wipe out the authoritarian regime.

The poll shows that 56% of likely voters support the United States taking out Iranian leadership, while 63% agree with targeting Iranian nuclear and ballistic missile sites. Nearly 70% of respondents, meanwhile, agree with the Trump administration’s argument that Iran is a “threat to global peace and democracy,” and 76% agree that “if Iran built a nuclear weapon, [it] would pose a direct threat to the United States.”

On Tuesday, Trump explained to reporters in the Oval Office that Iran could have “taken out many countries.”

“If we didn’t do what we’re doing right now, you would’ve had a nuclear war and they would’ve taken out many countries because you know what? They’re sick people. They’re mentally ill, sick people. They’re angry. They’re crazy. They’re sick,” the president said.

Luckily for everyone here at home, living their lives of prosperity and freedom, that never happened because we have a strong, decisive leader in power. Everyone at home is free to celebrate a massive victory with the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the obliteration of Iran’s air defenses and most of their navy.

For 47 years, the Iranian regime killed Americans, funded terror proxies, and screamed “Death to America.” They killed over 1,000 U.S. citizens through the IRGC alone. Then Trump came back, and now we are all SO back.

Today there’s only one way to celebrate: by raising a glass and making a toast to freedom. Fill your cup with the sweet taste of American resolve and give this moment the drinking vessel it deserves.

Enter: the Terrorist Tears Tumbler.

A close cousin to the perennial fan favorite Leftist Tears Tumbler, this cup makes a whole statement without you saying a single word. Each 20 ounce stainless steel tumbler with sweat-proof vacuum insulation keeps drinks hot for 5+ hours or cold for 50+ hours.

Because we know you accept nothing less than the best, it also boasts an air-tight sliding-closure lid, is BPA-free, has a narrow base that fits most cup holders, and is dishwasher safe.

We would’ve made it with salvaged steel from Iranian naval ships — but they’re at the bottom of the sea.

Fill this tumbler with whatever you want. Just know that every beverage going forward will taste a lot like freedom. Get yours at the Daily Wire Shop.

“}]] 

The post Raise A Toast To Freedom With The Taste Of Terrorist Tears appeared first on Spin Politico.

Michael Knowles’ new high-energy show “Bar Fight” is going live from downtown Nashville on Wednesday night, with the Daily Wire host facing off against Texas Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw and liberal political commentator Luke Beasley.

Knowles, Crenshaw, and Beasley are set to debate President Donald Trump’s ongoing military operation against Iran, breaking down an increasingly contentious debate in front of a rowdy Nashville audience. And the debate comes just one day after Crenshaw, who has served in Congress since 2019, lost his primary election in Texas’ 2nd district.

Wednesday night’s heavyweight debate marks the first time “Bar Fight” will stream live. It will only be available on DailyWire+.

The three “Bar Fight” participants will also face questions from Daily Wire members and the live Music City audience. The live edition of “Bar Fight” is slightly different from normal programming as past episodes typically feature Knowles facing off against two liberals. Will the audience see Knowles and Crenshaw team up to take down Beasley’s arguments or is there also a divide between the two conservatives?

Crenshaw, a retired Navy SEAL, has supported Trump’s strikes on Iran, while Beasley, who hosts his own political podcast, has called the president’s action “an unconstitutional initiation of a war.”

The Iran conflict, like nearly every political issue, has divided Republicans and Democrats, but the American public is mostly supportive of Trump’s actions so far, according to a poll released by OnMessage on Tuesday. The poll shows that 56% of likely voters support the United States taking out Iranian leadership, while 63% agree with targeting Iranian nuclear and ballistic missile sites. Nearly 70% of respondents, meanwhile, agree with the Trump administration’s argument that Iran is a “threat to global peace and democracy,” and 76% agree that “if Iran built a nuclear weapon, [it] would pose a direct threat to the United States.”

Watch “Bar Fight” on DailyWire+.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Michael Knowles’ new high-energy show “Bar Fight” is going live from downtown Nashville on Wednesday night, with the Daily Wire host facing off against Texas Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw and liberal political commentator Luke Beasley.

Knowles, Crenshaw, and Beasley are set to debate President Donald Trump’s ongoing military operation against Iran, breaking down an increasingly contentious debate in front of a rowdy Nashville audience. And the debate comes just one day after Crenshaw, who has served in Congress since 2019, lost his primary election in Texas’ 2nd district.

Wednesday night’s heavyweight debate marks the first time “Bar Fight” will stream live. It will only be available on DailyWire+.

The three “Bar Fight” participants will also face questions from Daily Wire members and the live Music City audience. The live edition of “Bar Fight” is slightly different from normal programming as past episodes typically feature Knowles facing off against two liberals. Will the audience see Knowles and Crenshaw team up to take down Beasley’s arguments or is there also a divide between the two conservatives?

Crenshaw, a retired Navy SEAL, has supported Trump’s strikes on Iran, while Beasley, who hosts his own political podcast, has called the president’s action “an unconstitutional initiation of a war.”

The Iran conflict, like nearly every political issue, has divided Republicans and Democrats, but the American public is mostly supportive of Trump’s actions so far, according to a poll released by OnMessage on Tuesday. The poll shows that 56% of likely voters support the United States taking out Iranian leadership, while 63% agree with targeting Iranian nuclear and ballistic missile sites. Nearly 70% of respondents, meanwhile, agree with the Trump administration’s argument that Iran is a “threat to global peace and democracy,” and 76% agree that “if Iran built a nuclear weapon, [it] would pose a direct threat to the United States.”

Watch “Bar Fight” on DailyWire+.

“}]] 

The post ‘Bar Fight’ Goes Live: Knowles Debates Iran War With Republican Dan Crenshaw And Liberal Luke Beasley appeared first on Spin Politico.

Democratic California Rep. Eric Swalwell tried to upend Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s testimony with a deportation sob story, but left out the detail that the illegal immigrant had a criminal history.

Swalwell shared the story of Miguel Lopez, 47, who was deported to his home country of Mexico in June, during a House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday. Lopez received a deportation order in 2008, which a judge later blocked, according to CBS News.

In 2016, the Department of Homeland Security again tried to pursue a deportation order that Lopez has fought ever since, the outlet reported.

“He does not have a job, he has not been able to provide, and he said his Spanish isn’t even that great because he hasn’t been there for 30 years, and it’s hard for him to communicate. Do you see the pain of families like Miguel Lopez, someone who did not commit a violent crime, but has been separated from his family and is not providing, is not working, do you see that pain?” Swalwell asked Noem.

Noem then asked if Lopez had a “criminal record.”

Swalwell paused before responding: “In 1995, he pled to a lesser nonviolent charge. But do you see the pain …”

Miguel was arrested in 1998 for DUI and was convicted of a lesser charge, according to CBS News.

Additionally, on his first attempt to cross the border illegally in 1996, Lopez lied to border agents by claiming to be an American citizen before he was ultimately removed to Mexico, CBS News reported. He then tried again and made it into the country on his second attempt.

Lopez, who is married to a U.S. citizen and has two children who are also U.S. citizens, was nabbed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement during an immigration hearing in May, according to CBS News.

.@RepSwalwell beclowns himself by telling a sob story of a deported illegal alien who he admits has a criminal record.@Sec_Noem informs him that he had the chance to remain with his family by self-deporting, and returning home with $2,600 per eligible family member. pic.twitter.com/jtYH6X2Luw

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 4, 2026

“I do see the pain, and I wish people would do things correctly. If they’re not in legal status in this country, they can return home, we will pay for them to return home. I hope he got the $2,600 he could’ve gotten,” Noem said in response to Swalwell’s question.

“Do you think that makes up for not being with his family?” the California Democrat asked.

Noem said the self-deportation incentives help “because we have agreements with these countries, where they are helping to facilitate housing and training.”

“It was a nonviolent crime, secretary,” Swalwell said.

Noem went on to add: “But then he gets a chance to come back the right way. Now that he’s waited until he’s been detained and deported, he will never get the chance to come back to the United States. And so I wish that he would’ve made the right decision and decided to go home to help his family and him to be together. They have choices that they can make to be together, and we’re hopeful that they will continue to do that.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Democratic California Rep. Eric Swalwell tried to upend Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s testimony with a deportation sob story, but left out the detail that the illegal immigrant had a criminal history.

Swalwell shared the story of Miguel Lopez, 47, who was deported to his home country of Mexico in June, during a House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday. Lopez received a deportation order in 2008, which a judge later blocked, according to CBS News.

In 2016, the Department of Homeland Security again tried to pursue a deportation order that Lopez has fought ever since, the outlet reported.

“He does not have a job, he has not been able to provide, and he said his Spanish isn’t even that great because he hasn’t been there for 30 years, and it’s hard for him to communicate. Do you see the pain of families like Miguel Lopez, someone who did not commit a violent crime, but has been separated from his family and is not providing, is not working, do you see that pain?” Swalwell asked Noem.

Noem then asked if Lopez had a “criminal record.”

Swalwell paused before responding: “In 1995, he pled to a lesser nonviolent charge. But do you see the pain …”

Miguel was arrested in 1998 for DUI and was convicted of a lesser charge, according to CBS News.

Additionally, on his first attempt to cross the border illegally in 1996, Lopez lied to border agents by claiming to be an American citizen before he was ultimately removed to Mexico, CBS News reported. He then tried again and made it into the country on his second attempt.

Lopez, who is married to a U.S. citizen and has two children who are also U.S. citizens, was nabbed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement during an immigration hearing in May, according to CBS News.

.@RepSwalwell beclowns himself by telling a sob story of a deported illegal alien who he admits has a criminal record.@Sec_Noem informs him that he had the chance to remain with his family by self-deporting, and returning home with $2,600 per eligible family member. pic.twitter.com/jtYH6X2Luw

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 4, 2026

“I do see the pain, and I wish people would do things correctly. If they’re not in legal status in this country, they can return home, we will pay for them to return home. I hope he got the $2,600 he could’ve gotten,” Noem said in response to Swalwell’s question.

“Do you think that makes up for not being with his family?” the California Democrat asked.

Noem said the self-deportation incentives help “because we have agreements with these countries, where they are helping to facilitate housing and training.”

“It was a nonviolent crime, secretary,” Swalwell said.

Noem went on to add: “But then he gets a chance to come back the right way. Now that he’s waited until he’s been detained and deported, he will never get the chance to come back to the United States. And so I wish that he would’ve made the right decision and decided to go home to help his family and him to be together. They have choices that they can make to be together, and we’re hopeful that they will continue to do that.”

“}]] 

The post Swalwell Shares Illegal Immigrant Sob Story, Leaves Out Critical Detail appeared first on Spin Politico.

Country singer Carrie Underwood said she’s unfazed by the constant booing she’s been getting recently, which may or may not have something to do with her association with President Donald Trump.

The 42-year-old “American Idol” winner dealt with major backlash from followers when she opted to perform “America the Beautiful” at Trump’s inauguration ceremony last January. Now she’s stepped in as a judge on “American Idol” and has already gotten booed on several occasions. Though it’s not completely clear the reason fans are booing her, many have been speculating it’s because of that performance.

Either way, Underwood said she’s not letting it get to her. “You guys are gonna boo me. You’re gonna boo me,” the singer told the crowd at one point during a recent episode of the show. “It’s coming. Bring it on. I love it! Your boos are feeding me.”

“Boo me. I don’t care,” she posted Monday night on X alongside a laughing-crying emoji.

Underwood also stated further proof that the booing went beyond her feedback for contestants. The singer asked fellow judge Luke Bryan, “Why don’t they boo you?” to which he replied, “I don’t know, I’m trying to get booed.”

Her followers on social media assumed it was at least partly due to her association with the current administration.

“For every boo there’s at least 10000 of us who support you!  You are a great role model for young girls. Never stop being you, never sacrifice your values, and never give in to the mob,” one person wrote in reply.

“So thankful that you’re an example of a strong female role model who shows girls to grandmas that you don’t have to cower to the mob. God bless you for taking those arrows with grace and a smile on your face,” another fan wrote.

Several commenters speculated that the crowd could be booing Underwood because of her comments as a judge on the show, saying it had nothing to do with her inauguration performance at all. But several people in the comments validated that if anything, it was probably a bit of both.

“I will always like “before he cheats” but you support Tr*mp and so let them boo! You deserve it,” one hater wrote.

“MAGA lunatic Carrie Underwood is upset that she is getting booed on American Idol,” singer Ricky Davila wrote on X last month. “Well in that case I hope the boos are louder and much more frequent.”

Underwood has remained private about her political leanings. She issued a statement following the immense backlash she faced for singing at the inauguration. 

“I love our country and am honored to have been asked to sing at the inauguration and to be a small part of this historic event,” she said ahead of the event, as The Daily Wire previously reported. “I am humbled to answer the call at a time when we must all come together in the spirit of unity and looking to the future.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Country singer Carrie Underwood said she’s unfazed by the constant booing she’s been getting recently, which may or may not have something to do with her association with President Donald Trump.

The 42-year-old “American Idol” winner dealt with major backlash from followers when she opted to perform “America the Beautiful” at Trump’s inauguration ceremony last January. Now she’s stepped in as a judge on “American Idol” and has already gotten booed on several occasions. Though it’s not completely clear the reason fans are booing her, many have been speculating it’s because of that performance.

Either way, Underwood said she’s not letting it get to her. “You guys are gonna boo me. You’re gonna boo me,” the singer told the crowd at one point during a recent episode of the show. “It’s coming. Bring it on. I love it! Your boos are feeding me.”

“Boo me. I don’t care,” she posted Monday night on X alongside a laughing-crying emoji.

Underwood also stated further proof that the booing went beyond her feedback for contestants. The singer asked fellow judge Luke Bryan, “Why don’t they boo you?” to which he replied, “I don’t know, I’m trying to get booed.”

Her followers on social media assumed it was at least partly due to her association with the current administration.

“For every boo there’s at least 10000 of us who support you!  You are a great role model for young girls. Never stop being you, never sacrifice your values, and never give in to the mob,” one person wrote in reply.

“So thankful that you’re an example of a strong female role model who shows girls to grandmas that you don’t have to cower to the mob. God bless you for taking those arrows with grace and a smile on your face,” another fan wrote.

Several commenters speculated that the crowd could be booing Underwood because of her comments as a judge on the show, saying it had nothing to do with her inauguration performance at all. But several people in the comments validated that if anything, it was probably a bit of both.

“I will always like “before he cheats” but you support Tr*mp and so let them boo! You deserve it,” one hater wrote.

“MAGA lunatic Carrie Underwood is upset that she is getting booed on American Idol,” singer Ricky Davila wrote on X last month. “Well in that case I hope the boos are louder and much more frequent.”

Underwood has remained private about her political leanings. She issued a statement following the immense backlash she faced for singing at the inauguration. 

“I love our country and am honored to have been asked to sing at the inauguration and to be a small part of this historic event,” she said ahead of the event, as The Daily Wire previously reported. “I am humbled to answer the call at a time when we must all come together in the spirit of unity and looking to the future.”

“}]] 

The post Trump Inaugural Singer Carrie Underwood Keeps Getting Booed, But She Doesn’t Care appeared first on Spin Politico.