MAGAs burn hats as Trump hides Epstein client list

Looks like we have to wait for one of those then-14-year-old girls to come forward 

 

Story by Charlie Jones

The Mirror US

MAGA loyalists are calling for the burning of the iconic MAGA cap as anger over the Epstein Files grows, even among Donald Trump's own supporter base.

The Justice Department claimed on Monday that Jeffrey Epstein did not maintain a “client list" and said no more files related to the wealthy financier’s sex trafficking investigation would be made public. This was despite promises from Attorney General Pam Bondi that had raised the expectations of conservative influencers and conspiracy theorists. 

The claims have been met with fury from the far-right who claim they have been strung along by the Trump administration. Bondi previously said in a Fox News interview earlier this year that such a document was “sitting on my desk” for review. It comes after a Trump family member revealed the latest disturbing symptom of his "cognitive decline".

READ MORE: Dementia fears raised as mysterious lump spotted in Trump’s pants

READ MORE: Lip reader reveals Trump's three-word question to Melania that hints at state of their marriage

Controversial right-wing figure Nick Fuentes wrote on X: "We need to burn our MAGA hats, I think that's a solution. That's the only language Trump will understand. He needs to be abandoned at this point."

Trump came under fire for hosting Fuentes, who has been described as a white supremacist, as a dinner guest at his Mar-a-Lago resort in 2022 as he geared up for the 2024 election. 

Fuentes added: "Now he's going to tell us there's no Esptein black book, no client list. The message needs to be this: 'We're done. We don't understand. The radical right is f***ing furious. We are done.'"

He continued: "I'm burning my MAGA hat. I think other people should too."

Another video showed a man who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 burning his MAGA hats over the fact that the Epstein files will not be released. We have chosen not to use the video due to the insensitive language used, but still images can be seen below:

Bondi for weeks had suggested more material was going to be revealed — “It’s a new administration and everything is going to come out to the public,” she said at one point — after a first document dump she had hyped angered President Donald Trump’s base by failing to deliver revelations.

That episode, in which far-right influencers were invited to the White House in February and provided with binders marked “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” and “Declassified” that contained documents that had largely already been in the public domain, has spurred conservative internet personalities to sharply criticize Bondi.

After the first release fell flat, Bondi said officials were poring over a “truckload” of previously withheld evidence she said had been handed over by the FBI.

In a March TV interview, she claimed the Biden administration “sat on these documents, no one did anything with them,” adding: “Sadly these people don’t believe in transparency, but I think more unfortunately, I think a lot of them don’t believe in honesty.”

But after a months-long review of evidence in the government’s possession, the Justice Department determined that no “further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted,” the memo says.

The department noted that much of the material was placed under seal by a court to protect victims and “only a fraction” of it “would have been aired publicly had Epstein gone to trial.”

The gang's all here.  Such good friends.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell Torches Trump In Scathing Rant On Deadly Floods

 

 Lawrence O'Donnell

 

‘Doesn’t Know What He’s Doing’ 

 

Tommy Christopher Jul 8th, 2025, 1:07 pm

mediaite 

MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell tore into President Donald Trump over the deadly Texas floods that have claimed more than 100 lives and counting, telling viewers Trump “doesn’t know what he’s doing.”

The tragic flash floods in Texas over the 4th of July weekend have claimed at least 118 lives, and drawn criticism of the Trump administration over cuts to weather-related agencies and Trump’s own ongoing desire to scale back or eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

The White House has pushed back on the criticisms, and reporting indicates it’s too early to tell what direct impact Trump’s policies may have had on the disaster, if any.

On Monday night’s edition of MSNBC’s The Last Word, O’Donnell blasted Trump for his stance on FEMA, just the jumping-off point for a marathon commentary with the theme that Trump “doesn’t know what he’s doing” about everything:

LAWRENCE O’DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Well, Donald Trump proved once again today beyond a reasonable doubt that he does not know what he is doing.

Donald Trump proved that in more than one way today, including his response to a question in the aftermath, the tragic aftermath of the horrible flooding in Texas where the death count is now at 118 with the possibility of going higher (170 are still missing). 28 of the victims were children sleeping at a summer camp on the banks of the river.

After declaring a federal disaster area in the flood zone in Texas, which then activates a full response by FEMA, the federal emergency management agency, Donald Trump was asked, “Are you still planning to phase out FEMA?” to which Donald Trump said, “Well, FEMA is something we can talk about later, but right now they’re busy working, so we’ll leave it at that.”

Right now, they’re busy working? how could they possibly be busy working if, as Donald Trump and Elon Musk believed back when they were pretending to be friends, that FEMA is a complete waste of money and should be disbanded? Only someone who doesn’t know what he’s doing could say, “Let’s get rid of FEMA.”

There’s a reason no other president has ever suggested that because every other president always knew that FEMA was busy working somewhere because FEMA’s work goes on long after the disaster is in the news. And that work always overlaps with new FEMA jobs that come along when other very predictable disasters take place like hurricanes during hurricane season or horrible massive flooding in a place in Texas known as Flash Flood Alley.

That’s the area where that deadly flood occurred. It is predictable that horrible flooding will occur in such a place, and it is a long-established government function to create as strong an early warning system as possible for predictable disasters like hurricanes and blizzards and floods and fire in dry high wind areas.

Earthquakes are completely unpredictable. So, you never know when FEMA is going to be rushed to the site of a deadly earthquake. But Donald Trump wanted to get rid of FEMA and now refuses to say if he wants to get rid of FEMA because now, they’re busy working.

Those are the words of someone who does not know what he’s doing as president of the United States. The first federal disaster relief from Washington was in 1803 after a devastating fire in New Hampshire. And federal disaster relief has been going on since 1803 and was formally centered in one organization when FEMA was created 46 years ago.

FEMA has been a bipartisan success and enjoyed bipartisan support until Donald Trump decided to get rid of it because Elon Musk told him way back when they were still pretending to be friends. What was that? Years ago or I guess weeks ago.

"Dammit Donald, when are you going to act like you know what the hell you're doing."

 

A New Declaration of Independence From Tyranny...

 

A woman holds an upside down American flag. (photo: Allison Robbert/Getty)  (Today, most protestors associate the upside down flag with the nation heading in the wrong direction, or being under the control of the wrong political party. The upside down version of the flag is becoming more pronounced among both conservatives and liberals.)

 

(Editor's note: Satirist Andy Borowitz turns serious on this 4th of July weekend.)

 

"...to build a future grounded in compassion, courage, and shared humanity." 

Andy Borowitz / The Borowitz Report 

 

04 July 25

 

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to break from a leader who governs with cruelty, contempt, and corruption, a decent respect to the opinions of humankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all people are created equal, endowed with inherent dignity and unalienable rights—among these are life, liberty, equality, and the pursuit of justice.

That to secure these rights, governments derive their power from the consent of the governed. When a leader becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right and duty of the people to refuse allegiance and to stand united in the defense of their freedoms.

The current holder of high office has shown himself to be unfit to lead a free and just society.

* He disrespects women, mocking survivors of violence and stripping away their rights.

* He fuels racism and white supremacy, scapegoating communities of color and denying their equality.

* He assaults free speech, attacking the press, punishing dissent, and spreading disinformation.

* He exploits public office for private gain, enriching himself and the billionaire class while abandoning the poor and working people.

* He undermines justice, ignores the rule of law, and places himself above accountability.

* He disregards science, endangering lives in times of crisis and sacrificing the planet for profit.

* He fans division and incites violence to maintain power, wielding fear as a weapon against the people.

Time and again, we have protested peacefully, spoken truthfully, and appealed to our shared humanity. We have been met with indifference, hostility, and violence. A leader who governs through hatred and greed is unfit to govern at all.

Therefore, we, the people of conscience and conviction, do solemnly declare our independence from this tyrant and all he represents.

We withdraw our consent.

We refuse to be complicit in cruelty.

We reject the abuse of power for personal gain.

We stand for dignity, truth, equality, and justice for all people.

With firm reliance on each other and unwavering hope in our collective strength,

We pledge to resist oppression in all its forms,

To uphold the rights of the vulnerable,

And to build a future grounded in compassion, courage, and shared humanity.

Let this declaration be both a breaking and a beginning.

 

Now Trump’s weaponizing the DOJ in his illegitimate war on the media

A seemingly sleepy Donald Trump answers questions during a media briefing on June 27.

The DOJ is supposed to be independent of the president, not a vehicle for Trump to use for retaliatory prosecution 

 

By Lisa Needham 

Daily Kos Staff

Tuesday, July 01, 2025 at 6:01:06p MDT

 

REPUBLISHED BY:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog 

President Donald Trump is simply not going to stand for the media reporting anything he doesn’t like, and he’s going to use every tool in his toolbox to make that happen. If that means prosecuting media outlets, he’s down. If it means suing them, he’s all in. And if it means gutting nonpartisan government media, he’ll do it. 

On Tuesday, Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem threw a little temper tantrum about CNN’s coverage of the ICEBlock app.

Yes, Noem threatened to get the Department of Justice to prosecute CNN for running a segment about an iPhone app. You’d think that CNN had presented a detailed tutorial on how to use ICEBlock to ambush Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, but the coverage is nothing more than an explainer on the app’s inventor and what the app does.

Homeland Security Secretary and dog murderer Kristi Noem, another Trump bimbo who is in way over her mental capacity.

According to Joshua Aaron, the app’s creator, ICEBlock is an “early warning system” to track ICE agents nearby. Users can report the location of agents with notes on how to identify them, and any user within a 5-mile radius will get notified—not unlike the Google Maps feature where you can report that there are police ahead. 

It should go without saying, but it is not illegal to determine where ICE agents are and to tell other people. And it certainly isn’t illegal to use an app that does that. Noem’s confusion may be understandable, though, since she thinks of them as her own personal masked secret police. 

Ever eager to help Trump weaponize the DOJ, Attorney General Pam Bondi already did a media hit against CNN on Fox News Monday. The app, she claimed, is “giving a message to criminals where our federal officers are, and he cannot do that, and we are looking at it, we are looking into him, and he better watch out.” 

Always a legal genius, Bondi went on to say that ICEBlock is “not protected speech.”

That is absolutely not the case. It’s legal to publicize the whereabouts and actions of law enforcement and even to record police. Well, at least until the Supreme Court carves out a special exception for Trump, as it’s wont to do.

Trump lackey and Attorney General Pam Bondi is about as illegal as they come.  She makes a mockery of the title.

After Noem’s threats, Trump had to get in on the action, but he’s actually mad about something entirely different.

“And they may very well be prosecuted also for having given false reports on the attack in Iran. They were given totally false reports. It was totally obliterated,” he said. “So they may very well be prosecuted for that. What they did there, we think, is totally illegal.”

This is the same thing that Trump was mad about a few days ago. But back then, he was threatening the media in his personal capacity—because we now live in a world where the president is allowed to routinely sue media outlets he doesn’t like. 

Despite being president, Trump has still made time to pursue his personal grievances against the media. CBS is close to paying him off over his nonsense lawsuit in which he claims that the network deceptively edited a segment featuring Vice President Kamala Harris.

---

Related | Why Republicans desperately want the media to be their cheerleaders

---

In other words, CBS is going to pay Trump—the person—millions and millions of dollars so that Trump—the president—will tell the Federal Communications Commission to approve a merger between CBS’ parent company, Paramount, and Skydance Media. It’s the same thing that ABC News did before Trump even took office. 

Last week, Trump had his personal attorney, Alejandro Brito—who also handled the ABC suit—send letters to CNN and The New York Times threatening to sue over reporting on a preliminary intelligence report that said that Trump’s drone strikes had only knocked Iran’s nuclear program back a few months. 

In his letter to the Times, Brito said that the reporting “undermined the credibility and integrity of President Trump in the eyes of the public and the professional community.”

Apparently, reporting anything at odds with Trump’s assertions is now considered defamation of Trump, allowing him to sue. But it’s also now considered a crime, so Trump, as president, can get the DOJ to prosecute. And just to round things out, Trump’s already had his administration destroy the nonpartisan Voice of America for being “radical.”

The DOJ is supposed to be independent of the president, not a vehicle for Trump to use for retaliatory prosecution. The president shouldn’t be able to pursue his personal civil grievances against the same media outlets that he threatens with prosecution. But it’s happening because norms have not held, and checks and balances fell apart. 

Trump’s attacks on the media are an assault on the First Amendment and other core democratic principles. In other words, it’s business as usual for Trump.

SENATE PASSES BIG BULLSHIT BILL: JD Vance says millions losing health insurance is 'immaterial'

 

Vice President JD Vance doesn't care about 17 million Americans losing their health insurance.

 

"Republicans are about to force the largest loss of health care in American history — and they clearly couldn’t care less...." 

 

By Emily Singer 

Daily Kos Staff

July 2, 2025 

 

REPUBLISHED BY:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog 

By Emily Singer Daily Kos Staff Senate Republicans barely got the votes on Tuesday to pass the “One Big, Beautiful Bill” Act—which could lead to roughly 17 million people losing their health insurance, cause millions more to have their food stamps yanked away, and cause energy prices to skyrocket.

Vice President JD Vance sought to get GOPers on board by saying that all of those negative things are just "immaterial" "minutiae" compared to the money the bill provides to help Republicans deport immigrants.

"The thing that will bankrupt this country more than any other policy is flooding the country with illegal immigration and then giving those migrants generous benefits. The OBBB fixes this problem. And therefore it must pass," Vance wrote in a post on X. "Everything else—the [Congressional Budget Office] score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy—is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions."

---

Related | Senate GOP races to pass bill that screws everyone but the rich

---

Not only is Vance's statement absurd as he claims that actively harming the poorest among us is not important, but his statement is also false.

The nonpartisan CBO has said immigrants actually help lower budget deficits.

"People are rightly noting that kicking millions off of Medicaid is not 'minutiae,' but the premise is wrong here too. Of the reasons to deport undocumented immigrants, federal fiscal health is one of the worst ones. CBO found they *lower* deficits by ~$1T over the next 10 years," Ernie Tedeschi, director of the Budget Lab at Yale, wrote in a post on X. "That’s because undocumented immigrants tend to pay taxes funding programs like Medicare & Social Security (despite the stereotype, most undocumented immigrants who work are above the table) but are often ineligible to receive benefits."

Democrats immediately pointed out the cruelty of Vance's tweet

"The 17 MILLION Americans you’re kicking off their health insurance aren’t 'minutiae,'" Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. Brendan Boyle, ranking member of the House Budget Committee, wrote in a post on X. "Republicans are about to force the largest loss of health care in American history — and they clearly couldn’t care less about working families."

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) pointed to one of his constituents who is at risk of losing his Medicaid coverage in his response to Vance's tweet.

"Ben, a disabled 14-year-old from Chesterfield, VA, isn’t 'minutiae,'" Warner wrote. "His health insurance isn’t minutiae. His future isn’t minutiae. Medicaid matters and I am fighting to protect it."

Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins have “serious reservations” about the bill.

Vance was needed to help Republicans pass the travesty of a bill with a 51-50 vote—which hurts the poor and working class in order to give tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefit the richest few. 

Republican Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, all either said they were voting no or had “serious reservations” about the bill.

“As I've said from the beginning, I have a lot of serious reservations about the bill,” Collins told reporters Tuesday morning. “I'm going to wait ‘til we're done, know what direction we're going in, before announcing my position.”

Republicans tried to get Murkowski on board by making a specific carveout for Alaska that would keep the state from losing its Medicaid and food stamp benefits—while screwing everyone else.

There was also talk about trying to flip Paul to a yes by lowering the debt ceiling increase from $5 trillion to $500 billion.

However, Erik Wasson of Bloomberg News reported that Senate Majority Leader John Thune was confident he had a deal to get the bill to pass, though it’s unclear what that deal entails.

As we’ve said repeatedly, never bet against Republicans caving to Dear Leader’s will.

Editor’s note: This story was updated after the Senate passed the bill on Tuesday.

Will Trump's BBB spell the end of America as we knew it?  Have we become the land of the fearful and the home of the billionaires?

 

The US Military’s Loyalty Is to the Constitution, Not the President

 

Trump at West Point.

National security depends on citizens’ trust in our armed forces. We lose that if we turn soldiers into law-enforcement officers.

 Leon E. Panetta / The Atlantic 28 June 25

 

Our security is dependent on those who are willing to fight our foreign enemies and die for their country. We honor them and their families because their bravery and courage protect our democracy. We respect our military precisely because its role in defending the nation means that the military does not get involved in politics. 

If we allow the president to politicize the military, that will undermine the trust of the American people in our national security. The mobilization of the National Guard in California has raised concerns about whether the reason for its deployment was based on real threats to law and order, or on political differences between the governor of California and the president of the United States.

To protect the role of the military, the U.S. has historically made clear in its laws that federal troops should not be used for civilian law enforcement. In 1878, President Rutherford Hayes signed the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the military from doing the work of law-enforcement officers. Even the statutes that authorize the president to activate the National Guard make clear that troops are to be limited to responding to “invasions” or “rebellions.” The U.S. is not facing either an invasion or a rebellion.

Respect for the military’s role is crucial for our democracy. That is why the law is designed to ensure that our armed forces are not politicized or misused. This rule-of-law tenet is the fundamental difference between a free society and an autocracy. Tyrants use the military as a pawn to solidify power, put down protests, and arrest opponents. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin has incurred as many as a million casualties among the soldiers he sent into Ukraine for his dictatorial goal of restoring the supposed greatness of the Soviet Union. Putin has found an ally in another ruthless autocrat, North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong Un, who has sent forces to help Russia’s fight in Ukraine. In China, the primary purpose of the military is to protect those in power. In each case, the tyrant demands—for his own survival—that the loyalty of the military is solely to him, not to the nation, let alone the people.

Doing a dictator’s bidding is not how the military works in America. Our service members swear an oath of loyalty to the Constitution, not to the president. They follow the orders of the president as their commander in chief, but may do so only if those orders are legal and pursuant to the Constitution. Their job demands training, skill, and courage, certainly. The job also requires the capacity to make decisions based solely on the goal of accomplishing a national-security mission, not appeasing political leaders. As secretary of defense, I was a party to the kinds of tough decisions our military has to make. That judgment must not be damaged by those who seek to use it for political purposes.

At the Pentagon, I bore the vital responsibility of deciding on the deployment of our men and women in uniform, and whether to put them in harm’s way. The concern that some of those deployed would not return from a mission was always uppermost in my mind. Whenever we lost a serving soldier, I would receive a report and see their name. On those occasions, I personally wrote a condolence note to their family. The list of fallen warriors was also sent to the White House so that the president could do the same and convey the nation’s gratitude to the family for the sacrifice that their loved one had made.

Admiral Bill McRaven, the head of Special Operations Command at the time, made clear to me that every military judgment must be based on doing what’s right to accomplish the mission. As the director of the CIA, I was in charge of the covert operation to hunt down the al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden at his secret compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. McRaven was the Afghanistan-based operational commander of the raid, in which two teams of Navy SEALs flew 150 miles at night. 

As they were about to land, residual heat from the day caused one of their helicopters to stall out and make a hard landing that left its tail stuck on one of the compound’s walls. I called McRaven to ask what was going on. He was decisive in his response. “I have called in a backup helicopter, and we will proceed with the mission breaching through the walls,” he said. “The mission will go on.” I gave my approval. The mission was successful: The man who had masterminded the 9/11 attacks was finally eliminated. The kind of split-second judgment that McRaven showed is what our military is trained to do.

In the recent success of the U.S. forces that were deployed to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, the military did a great job of planning and execution. America has the strongest military force on Earth, but all of the technologically advanced weapons, planes, ships, and equipment would not be worth much without the skill and training of our service men and women. At outposts throughout the world, they are our front line of defense. They are our national security.

To maintain that security demands that we protect and respect the constitutional purpose they serve. If a president deliberately misuses the military for partisan reasons, he is weakening America’s safety.  

Leadership of a military devoted to defending our nation is an honored role that goes back to George Washington and the creation of the Continental Army 250 years ago. During that long history, Americans have learned that presidential parades do not define their military; what does is their respect for the military’s mission of protecting national security. Trust in the military is indivisible from trust in the Constitution. Both must remain inviolable.

Donnie Bone Spurs reporting for duty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses" and I'll send their sorry asses to El Salvador.  Except Melania, of course.  On second thought...

PRESIDENT LIES AGAIN: US Strikes on Iran’s Nuclear Sites Only Set Back Program by Months, Pentagon Report Says

This satellite image of the Isfahan nuclear technology site in Iran on Sunday after U.S. strikes. (photo: Maxar Technologies/AP)

 

 TRUMP POST: “THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED!”

 

Hugo Lowell / Guardian UK 25 June 25 

 

ALSO SEE: US Airstrikes Failed to Destroy Iran's Nuclear Sites, Sources Say

An initial classified US assessment of Donald Trump’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities over the weekend says they did not destroy two of the sites and likely only set back the nuclear program by a few months, according to two people familiar with the report.

The report produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency – the intelligence arm of the Pentagon – concluded key components of the nuclear program, including centrifuges, were capable of being restarted within months.

The report also found that much of Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium that could be put to use for a possible nuclear weapon was moved before the strikes and may have been moved to other secret nuclear sites maintained by Iran.

The findings by the DIA, which were based on a preliminary battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command, which oversees US military operations in the Middle East, suggests Trump’s declaration about the sites being “obliterated” may have been overstated.

Trump said in his televised address on Saturday night immediately after the operation that the US had completely destroyed Iran’s enrichment sites at Natanz and Fordow, the facility buried deep underground, and at Isfahan, where enrichment was being stored.

“The strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,” Trump said in his address from the White House.

While the DIA report was only an initial assessment, one of the people said if the intelligence on the ground was already finding within days that Fordow in particular was not destroyed, later assessments could suggest even less damage might have been inflicted.

Long regarded as the most well-protected of Iran’s nuclear sites, the uranium-enrichment facilities at Fordow are buried beneath the Zagros mountains. Reports have suggested that the site was constructed beneath 45-90 metres (145-300ft) of bedrock, largely limestone and dolomite.

Media coverage of the DIA assessment appeared to anger Trump, who on Tuesday evening accused news outlets of demeaning the military strike by saying it only set back Iran’s nuclear program by a few months.

“THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED!” Trump posted in all caps on his Truth Social platform.

The White House also disputed the intelligence assessment, which was first reported by CNN. “The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.

The US vice-president, JD Vance, admitted on Sunday that Washington did not know where Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranian was, saying: “we are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel”.

Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Monday that the IAEA could no longer account for Iran’s stockpile of 400kg of uranium enriched to 60% purity.

The Guardian revealed last Wednesday that top political appointees at the Pentagon had been briefed at the start of Trump’s second term that the 30,000lb “bunker buster” GBU-57 bombs meant to be used on Fordow would not completely destroy the facility.

In that briefing, in January, officials were told by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency at the Pentagon that developed the GBU-57 that the bombs would not penetrate deep enough underground and only a tactical nuclear weapon would wipe out Fordow.

The US strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities involved B2 bombers dropping 12 GBU-57s on Fordow and two GBU-57s on Natanz. A US navy submarine then launched roughly 30 Tomahawk missiles on Isfahan, US defense officials said at a news conference Sunday.

Defense secretary Pete Hegseth repeated Trump’s claim at the news conference that the sites had been “obliterated”, but the chair of the joint chiefs of staff, Gen Dan Caine, who helped oversee the operation, was more measured in his remarks.

Caine said that all three of the nuclear sites had “sustained severe damage and destruction” but cautioned that the final battle-damage assessment for the military operation was still to come.

TOUGH GUY PINOCCHIO: “The strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated."