Thursday, March 12, 2026

‘A Very Dangerous Person’: Alarm as Pete Hegseth Revels in Carnage of Iran War

 ‘A Very Dangerous Person’: Alarm as Pete Hegseth Revels in Carnage of Iran War 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. (photo: Jacquelyn Martin/AP)

"Brash, bombastic, blustering Fox News host is out of his depth."

David Smith / Guardian UK

Brash and bellicose, he sounded more like a cartoon bully than a sombre statesman. “Death and destruction from the sky all day long,” Pete Hegseth, wearing a red, white and and blue tie and pocket square, bragged to reporters at the Pentagon near Washington. “This was never meant to be a fair fight, and it is not a fair fight. We are punching them while they’re down, which is exactly how it should be.”

Hegseth, 45, a former Fox News TV host who now commands the world’s most powerful military, has this week become the face of Donald Trump’s war in Iran. That has set off alarm bells for critics who warn that the Secretary of Defense – pointedly rebranded “Secretary of War” – has rapidly transformed the Pentagon into the staging ground for an ideological and religious crusade.

With machismo, Christian nationalism and callousness toward the lives of US troops, they say, Hegseth’s puerile displays on TV are aimed at sating Trump’s desire for a warmonger worthy of the manosphere. This was reinforced by a lurid social media video that intersperses clips from Hollywood blockbusters such as Braveheart, Gladiator, Superman and Top Gun with Hegseth and real kill-shot footage of the attacks in Iran.

Janessa Goldbeck, chief executive of Vet Voice Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy organisation, said: “Pete Hegseth is a very dangerous person. He’s a white Christian nationalist and has the arsenal of the United States government at his disposal and a permission slip from President Trump to deploy carnage wherever he wishes against whomever he wishes.”

Hegseth’s rise would have been unthinkable under any other commander-in-chief. Born in Minneapolis, he studied politics at Princeton University and became publisher and editor of the Princeton Tory, a conservative student journal, where he frequently waded into culture-war issues such as feminism and homosexuality.

After leaving Princeton, Hegseth joined the US army national guard as an infantry officer. His service included deployments to Guantánamo Bay in Cuba and tours of Iraq and Afghanistan. He later revealed in a book that he told soldiers under his command in Iraq to ignore legal advice about when they were permitted to kill enemy combatants under their rules of engagement.

Hegseth became chief executive of Concerned Veterans for America, a conservative advocacy group, but departed in 2016 amid allegations of financial mismanagement, sexual impropriety and personal misconduct.

In 2018 Hegseth’s mother, Penelope, sent him an email that said: “You are an abuser of women – that is the ugly truth and I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around, and uses women for his own power and ego. You are that man (and have been for years) and as your mother, it pains me and embarrasses me to say that, but it is the sad, sad truth.”

Hegseth subsequently became a familiar face on TV as a contributor and co-host of Fox … Friends on Fox News, frequently interviewing Trump and defending his policies. He once wrote that, in the event of a Democratic election win, “the military and police … will be forced to make a choice” and “Yes, there will be some form of civil war”.

But Trump prevailed in 2024 and nominated Hegseth to serve as secretary of defense. At his confirmation hearing, senators raised serious questions about his record: disparaging remarks about women serving in the armed forces; allegations that he drank while on duty; claims of sexual assault and misconduct; his troubled tenure running two small veterans’ nonprofit organisations; and his lack of experience for a post overseeing the world’s most powerful military.

The Senate ultimately split 50–50, forcing the vice-president, JD Vance, to cast the tie-breaking vote. As defense secretary Hegseth has vowed to “unleash overwhelming and punishing violence” on enemies and promised to dispense with “stupid rules of engagement” – rules designed to restrict attacks on civilian populations.

Now, in his first week guiding the nation through a murky new Middle East conflict, Hegseth has largely forgone the solemnity of a traditional defense secretary in favour of the performative antics of a partisan broadcaster revelling in America’s capacity to inflict violence.

For years he had cultivated a hypermasculine “muscleman” aesthetic designed to play to Trump’s sensibilities and the rightwing media ecosystem. Now, faced with a geopolitical crisis that demands nuance and strategic foresight, he appears to many to be out of his depth.

Goldbeck, a Marine Corps veteran who was deployed overseas as a combat engineer officer, commented: “I wish I could say how cavalier, obtuse and hopeless Secretary Hegseth is at leading the Pentagon. I can’t even muster the words to describe his self-adulation, matched only in scope by his apparent moral depravity.”

She added: “Let’s not forget that Pete Hegseth is a former morning-show Fox News TV host, and has this cartoonish persona, speaking what he thinks is tough-guy language, but sounds to me as a veteran and to many of my peers who served in combat like somebody who is completely inept and pretending to have this macho persona.

“Honestly, it’s embarrassing. We know this guy is incompetent. I wouldn’t feel safe leaving Pete Hegseth in charge of putting together a DoorDash order.”

Former White House officials share the concerns. Brett Bruen, president of the public affairs agency Global Situation Room and former global engagement director of the Barack Obama administration, said: “Hegseth is ill-suited for the kind of reassurance and strategy that Americans and our allies need to hear from the Pentagon right now.

“They don’t need a bumper sticker. They don’t need the bravado and the brashness that he brings. They need to know that America’s military is in strong, stable hands and what we have seen in his first couple of war press conferences is an inability to move beyond this Fox personality and into the role of leader of our nation’s military at a time of war.”

During his Pentagon briefing on the war on Wednesday, Hegseth adopted a bombastic tone, saying of Iranian leaders: “They are toast and they know it. Or at least soon enough they will know it. America is winning – decisively, devastatingly and without mercy.”

He bashed “fake news” while addressing the six army reservists killed in an Iranian attack on an operations center in Kuwait. “When a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it’s front-page news. I get it. The press only wants to make the president look bad. But try for once to report the reality. The terms of this war will be set by us at every step.”

The comments provoked uproar for their lack of empathy for America’s fallen. Jeremy Varon, a history professor at the New School for Social Research in New York, said: “That’s outrageous. You have a national effort by all media regardless of partisan bent to memorialise and honour the dead and he sees that simply as a tactic to bring down Trump.”

There was another aspect of Hegseth’s personality barely addressed by the Senate: his sympathy for Christian nationalism. Photos have shown him bearing two tattoos associated with crusader imagery. One depicts the Jerusalem cross – a cluster of five crosses long connected to medieval crusader iconography – on his chest.

Nearby is an image of a sword accompanied by the Latin phrase “Deus vult”, meaning “God wills it”, a slogan historically linked to the crusades and revived in recent years by various far-right groups. It appeared on clothing and flags carried by some participants in the January 6 Capitol attack.

Nor are the references merely symbolic. In his 2020 book, American Crusade, Hegseth wrote that those who benefit from “western civilisation” should “thank a crusader”. The book suggests that democratic politics alone may not suffice to achieve the goals of his political allies, declaring: “Voting is a weapon, but it’s not enough. We don’t want to fight, but, like our fellow Christians one thousand years ago, we must.”

There have been reports of more troubling behaviour. The  New Yorker reported that a colleague at Concerned Veterans for America complained that he and another man repeatedly shouted “Kill all Muslims!” during a drunken episode at a bar while travelling for work.

Hegseth has previously endorsed the doctrine of “sphere sovereignty”, a worldview derived from the extremist beliefs of Christian reconstructionism (CR). The philosophy calls for capital punishment for homosexuality and strictly patriarchal families and churches.

The defence secretary attends Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship, a church linked to the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, a denomination co-founded by the pastor Doug Wilson, who has openly advocated a theocratic vision of society in which wives should submit to their husbands and women should be denied the vote. Wilson recently led a worship service at the Pentagon at Hegseth’s invitation.

Robert P Jones, president and founder of Public Religion Research Institute thinktank in Washington, said: “This is not one or two comments. It’s not a kind of one-off behaviour. This is like a longstanding publicly demonstrated orientation that Hegseth has. It’s not just a glorification of violence but a glorification of violence in the name of Christianity and civilisation.”

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) says it has received more than 200 complaints from service members about military commanders invoking extremist Christian rhetoric about biblical “end times” to justify involvement in the Iran war. Such language could also be offensive to Arab allies and provide Iran with the fodder it needs to justify its own holy war against the US.

Jones warned: “It casts this not as anything related to the public – is it about a nuclear programme? Is it about sponsoring terrorism? – which are legitimate political concerns. It takes it out of the realm of politics and casts it as a holy war of a supposedly Christian nation against a Muslim nation.”

Doug Pagitt, a pastor and executive director of the progressive Christian group Vote Common Good, compares Hegseth’s worldview to the historical heresy of Constantine, who allegedly painted a cross on his shield to conquer in the name of God – a theology the broader Christian church has spent centuries trying to distance itself from following the horrors of the Crusades.

Pagitt said: “It seems to me that Pete Hegseth has a worldview, which is contorted toward thinking that this administration has a particular divine calling. He believes – because he said it – that God has uniquely ordained Donald Trump and those that he chooses to accomplish very specific purposes in the world.

“Pete Hegseth’s own version of Christianity is one that’s built around a certain Christian advancement that comes through the domination of the governments of nations. He believes that not only is the military at his disposal to use for his purposes but it’s there to fulfill God’s agenda for the world.”

SCARY DUDE: "Pistol Pete Hegseth fulfills Trump’s desire for a warmonger worthy of the manosphere."  If god has anointed this blustering buffoon, god help us!

Tuesday, March 10, 2026

WAY TO GO DONNIE: Trump's war spikes gas prices—and gets Iran a worse leader

 no image description available

A gas station in Baltimore on March 4.
 
"Half-witted reality TV host surrounded by stupid and evil aides egging on his thirst for world domination" 

Seven American service members are dead, dozens of Iranian children were murdered by a U.S. missile strike, oil is raining from the skies to poison the air for thousands of people living in Iran following an Israeli missile strike, and oil and gas prices worldwide are surging as the war has led to the blockade of a critical waterway used to transport oil.

But hey, at least we have a new Iranian leader who is in some ways worse than the murderous oppressor whom the United States killed a little over a week ago!

Indeed, Iran announced on Sunday that it replaced Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with his son Mojtaba Khamenei. The 56-year-old religious cleric lost his mother, wife, and a son, as well as his father, to U.S. strikes.

Given his relative youth, Iran’s new supreme leader could have many years left to rein over the nation with an iron fist. That means we spent billions, lost American lives, and potentially decimated the global economy only to put in someone who may in fact be more extreme than the previous guy who brutally oppressed both dissenters and women.

This image taken from video provided by Iran state TV shows Mojtaba Khamenei, a son of Iran's slain supreme leader, who has been named as the Islamic Republic's next ruler, authorities announced Monday, March 9, 2026. (Iran state TV via AP)
Mojtaba Khamenei, a son of Iran's slain supreme leader, who has been named as the Islamic Republic's next ruler, is shown in this image from Iran state TV.

Axios reported that "Mojtaba is expected to be more hardline than his father, and his ascent means the Iranian regime may get more repressive."

Apparently, regime change in Iran isn't as easy for President Donald Trump as firing people in an episode of "The Apprentice."

Of course, that was obvious if you weren't a half-witted reality TV host who is surrounded by both stupid and evil aides who are egging on your thirst for world domination.

But it was apparently not obvious for Trump, who reportedly thought war with Iran would be easy, consisting of brief strikes to take out the old regime and then an acquiescence from the remaining government figures to choose a new leader more acceptable to Trump—similar to what transpired in Trump's Venezuela invasion.

"Khamenei's son is a lightweight. I have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy [Rodriguez] in Venezuela," Trump told Axios on March 5, days before the very “lightweight” Trump spoke of was appointed without Trump’s input. 

Ultimately, instead of rolling over as Trump thought Iran would do, it fought back. The country's military launched drone strikes that are dangerous, expensive to thwart, and could expand the war into other Middle Eastern countries. World War III, anyone?

Iran also choked off the Strait of Hormuz—a critical waterway that oil-rich Middle Eastern nations use to transport the commodity around the world. It's led oil prices to surge and in turn caused gas prices to skyrocket, leading Americans to pay much more to fill up their tanks.



“In just a week, consumers have seen gasoline prices surge at one of the fastest rates in years after oil prices spiked following U.S. strikes on Iran and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, wrote in a post on X. 

“With additional attacks across the Middle East over the weekend pushing oil above $100 per barrel for the first time in years, fuel markets are now rapidly recalibrating to the risk of prolonged disruption to global supply flows. As a result, gasoline prices in many states could climb another 20 to 50 cents per gallon this week, with price-cycling markets potentially seeing increases as early as today."

This is the opposite of what Americans wanted when they wrongly voted Trump back into office in 2024 under his promise to lower prices and bring peace. So much for that!

It's no wonder that the war—or “short-term experience,” as one House Republican leader ridiculously called it—is so unpopular. Majorities of Americans disapprove of the conflict, with even Trump's own MAGA base angry about their Dear Leader’s decision to launch another Middle East conflict.

The unpopular war threatens to sink the GOP in the November midterms, with voter backlash possibly costing Republicans their majorities in the House and Senate.

Even worse for Republicans—who are spineless cowards refusing to use their power to rein Trump in—is that Trump is dismissing Americans' fears of rising gas prices that will almost certainly lead to another spike in inflation.

"Short term oil prices, which will drop rapidly when the destruction of the Iran nuclear threat is over, is a very small price to pay for U.S.A., and World, Safety and Peace," Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Sunday. "ONLY FOOLS WOULD THINK DIFFERENTLY!"

Hear that, voters? Trump says if you think it's bad that you are paying more at the pump you're a fool.

Please use that message in the midterms, Republicans. It’ll go great for you.

One good thing about Trump: he makes so many stupid mistakes you can always repurpose old messages.

 

Saturday, March 7, 2026

It Can Now Be Plainly Said: Trump Is Planning a November Coup d’État

It Can Now Be Plainly Said: Trump Is Planning a November Coup d’État  
Donald Trump. (photo: Erin Schaff/NYT/Redux)
 
Michael Tomasky / The New Republic
"That’s how fascism descends. And it’s becoming less and less hypothetical by the week."

Back in 2024, Kamala Harris and the Democrats struggled to convince voters that a second Donald Trump term would constitute a serious threat to democracy. 

We can debate the effectiveness of her, and their, rhetoric. But on a certain level, it was a hard argument to make because it was hypothetical. Voters aren’t very interested in wrapping their heads around hypotheticals, or at least vague ones. And Harris’s hypotheticals were mostly vague, so if she or any Democrat tried to say, for example, that there was a very real threat that once in office, Trump might try to cancel elections, most people kind of tuned that out.

I was more than willing to believe that Trump might try to cancel elections or take over the media. But even I, when I sat down to think about exactly how, couldn’t quite pin down the specifics. No president had ever tried to do either of those things, so how exactly could Trump pull them off?

Well, we’re now beginning to see. 

Let’s start with elections. The Washington Post—and yes, there’s still good reporting going on there—reported Thursday that pro-Trump “activists” (a rather generous and perverse use of that word, I think) who say they’re working with the Trump administration “are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.” The plan would mandate voter ID and ban mail-in balloting, and calls on Trump to issue an executive order announcing both measures.

The premise, it almost goes without saying, is a total lie. China did not interfere in the 2020 election. Trump and his people often said so, the implication being that China interfered on behalf of its old friend Joe Biden and his son Hunter, whose alleged business dealings in China left his father hopelessly compromised.

None of it was true. Hunter Biden did have some business interests in China, but nothing that reached his father. The U.S. intelligence services studied foreign influence in the 2020 election, and in March 2021, the government released an intelligence report concluding that China “considered but did not deploy influence efforts intended to change the outcome of the US Presidential election.”

In fact, the report found—and isn’t this a surprise?—the biggest foreign actor in 2020 was Russia, trying to help Trump: “The primary effort the IC [intelligence community] uncovered revolved around a narrative—that Russian actors began spreading as early as 2014—alleging corrupt ties between President Biden, his family, and other U.S. officials and Ukraine.”

But Trump administration officials—including Attorney General Bill Barr—pushed the China lie aggressively. So it’s very easy for Trump today to invoke China again and lie that the threat of even greater Chinese interference in 2026 demands that he take emergency measures.

With respect to those measures, he has no power whatsoever to impose them. As anti-Trump legal expert Norm Eisen put it on Morning Joe Friday: “Just as the Supreme Court struck his supposed emergency powers over tariffs, he has even less here.” That is true. But remember: Between tariff “Liberation Day” (April 2, 2025) and the day the Supremes finally ruled against Trump on tariffs (February 20, 2026), more than 10 months passed.

Trump has no power to “decree” that voters must present ID or to end mail-in balloting. But that doesn’t mean he can’t at least try both. Under the Insurrection Act or some other dusty statute, he can declare a state of emergency. Then he can decide that said state permits, nay requires, him to take extraordinary measures. On October 5, say, that might mean outlawing early voting. By October 13, it might mean no mail-in voting. By October 29, a reminder that all voters must present ID to vote. And by Sunday, November 1, two days before the election—an announcement that all these “reasonable” measures have alas failed, and he is now forced, against his will, to postpone the election.

Have trouble seeing that happen? I didn’t think so.

As for the media takeover: What I didn’t foresee in 2024 was the aggressiveness of Trump patsy David Ellison, the CEO of Paramount Skydance, in trying to take over both CBS and CNN. But he wouldn’t stop. Netflix bid $83 billion. Ellison topped that this week with a bid of $111 billion, and Netflix dropped out.

And somewhere in there, Ellison attended Trump’s State of the Union address, and Trump took to social media to “urge” Netflix to remove Obama and Biden administration official Susan Rice from its board. I once would have written that this is how things go in tinpot dictatorships, or in Viktor Orbán’s Hungary. But today, it’s how things go in the United States of America.

So picture this. It’s October. The mystery Trump accuser, the one about whom those FBI files have strangely gone missing, has come forward. Her allegations against the president of the United States are lurid and, to most of the country, credible. Trump is down to 29 percent in the polls. The economy is still limping. The polls all indicate that the GOP is in for a historic thrashing. Democrats are favored to win the House and, by now, are odds-on to maybe take the Senate too—their candidates in Alaska and Texas have now pulled slightly ahead.

And Trump declares a state of emergency and postpones the election. The Supreme Court issues an emergency stay, saying he can’t do that. But the court has no army, and Trump does, along with a handful of lickspittle governors who just might follow him down whatever dark path he plows.

That, not to mince words, is a coup d’état. Will he get away with it? I don’t know, but having effective control over how it is presented to viewers of CBS and CNN, and readers of the Bezos-owned Washington Post, to say nothing of the already vast pro-Trump propaganda empire of Fox News and the rest, will certainly make it easier.

That’s how fascism descends. And it’s becoming less and less hypothetical by the week.

Uncanny, you say.  He probably practices these moves in the mirror.

Tuesday, March 3, 2026

The Islamic Republic Was Built for This Day

Bombing Iran is the easy part. What comes next is where U.S. confidence goes to die. 
 
Bobby Ghosh / Substack 

The Islamic Republic of Iran has spent its entire existence preparing for this moment. Not in the loose, rhetorical sense that authoritarian regimes always anticipate trouble. Literally. 

Since Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini consolidated power amid the chaos of revolution in 1979, the subsequent hostage crisis, and the eight-year war with Iraq, every successive generation of Iranian leadership has war-gamed the scenario that arrived Saturday morning: a sustained American and Israeli military assault aimed at shattering the theocratic state.

This is the foundational insight missing from the triumphant rhetoric now emanating from Washington and Jerusalem. President Trump has called on the IRGC to lay down its arms or face “certain death.” Prime Minister Netanyahu says the joint operation will create conditions for Iranians to “take their destiny into their own hands.” 

The assumption embedded in both statements is that sufficient military force will cause the regime to buckle — that the Islamic Republic is a building whose load-bearing walls can be identified and demolished from the air.

It is a seductive assumption. It is also, on the available evidence, wrong.

I covered the Iraq war for years, and the pattern is sickeningly familiar. The opening blow lands with devastating precision. Smoke over Tehran, missile sites reduced to rubble, command centers struck. Officials brief reporters on the percentage of targets destroyed. Optimism fills the air like cordite. And then the fog rolls in.

Destroying Iranian weapons systems and destroying the Iranian state are two entirely different undertakings, and the history of American military intervention in this region is largely a history of confusing one for the other. Air campaigns can shatter hardware. They have never, on their own, shattered a regime. What they cannot do, absent a credible internal force capable of seizing power, is produce political transformation.

Consider what the regime has built over forty-six years. The IRGC is not merely a military organization; it is a parallel state — an economic empire, an intelligence apparatus, and a political machine rolled into one. Its officers are stakeholders in the system’s survival, with personal fortunes, patronage networks, and family legacies tied to the regime’s continuity. The question of who follows Khamenei is not one the regime has left to chance. The New York Times reported last week that Khamenei has named four potential successors for every senior post he appoints, and has delegated authority to a trusted inner circle to act if he cannot be reached. 

Khamenei was reportedly moved to a secure location before the first missiles landed. Even if he is dead — and Iran’s foreign minister insists he is not — the apparatus around him was built for exactly this contingency. Killing the Supreme Leader is not the same as killing the system.

This does not mean the regime is invulnerable. It faces what is arguably its most severe strategic crisis since the revolution. The June 2025 strikes degraded its nuclear infrastructure. The protests that erupted in December show how angry the populace is. The economy is in ruins, the currency in free fall, and the social contract between rulers and ruled has been shattered beyond repair, as I wrote last week. The cumulative pressure is immense.

But a regime under enormous strain is not the same thing as a regime on the verge of disintegration, and the distance between those two conditions is precisely where overconfidence turns lethal. The fact that Iran launched retaliatory missile salvos within hours of Saturday’s strikes — hitting targets across the Gulf, from Bahrain to Qatar to the UAE — tells us something important about the regime’s operational capacity. 

These were not the spasms of a dying animal. They were the execution of a war plan that has been sitting in IRGC operational drawers for years — measured to inflict enough pain on the American coalition to alter its political calculus, but not so much as to invite the ground invasion Tehran knows it cannot survive.

Watch the pattern carefully. The individual salvos are lighter than June’s massive barrage, but they keep coming — a rhythm that suggests Iran is pacing itself for a long campaign rather than exhausting its arsenal in a single dramatic gesture. And by targeting U.S. facilities hosted by Arab states, Tehran is pursuing a classic strategy of horizontal escalation — dragging reluctant Gulf capitals into the conflict, raising the political cost for Washington’s regional partners, and fracturing the coalition from within. Saudi Arabia has already warned of “grave consequences” for Iran, but Riyadh’s fury is directed at Tehran for striking its territory, not at Washington for provoking the retaliation. That distinction may not survive a prolonged campaign.

The critical variable in the days ahead is whether Iran fully activates its remaining proxy network. The Houthis have already announced they will resume Red Sea attacks. Iraq is a tinderbox: militia-linked forces have reported casualties from strikes near Baghdad. Lebanon remains volatile. If Tehran decides to open multiple fronts simultaneously, the nature of the conflict changes entirely — what is currently an air campaign between defined belligerents becomes a regionwide conflagration with no obvious exit.

History offers uncomfortable lessons here. Authoritarian elites do not typically abandon the palace when bombs are falling on it — they hunker down and consolidate. External threat is the oldest binding agent in politics, and regimes under fire almost invariably grow more unified in the short term, not less. Saddam Hussein survived weeks of devastating bombardment in 2003 — it took a ground invasion and occupation to remove him, and even then, the aftermath consumed American blood and treasure for a decade. Bashar al-Assad endured years of civil war before his regime finally crumbled. The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions, not under American bombardment.

Trump has told Iranians to “take over your government” once the strikes conclude. But since the attacks are coming from the air rather than the ground, it remains unclear what mechanism he envisions for this transfer of power. The Iranian protesters, for all their courage, have no command structure, no territorial base, and no means of converting popular anger into institutional control. The opposition in exile is forever bickering, and lacks credibility with Iranians. And within the regime itself, there is no sign of the kind of elite fracture — a military defection, a provincial breakaway, a palace coup — that might give external force something to work with.

The distance between what has been accomplished militarily and what would be required to actually unravel the Islamic Republic remains vast. The regime is wounded this morning — its air defenses in tatters, its command structure under siege, its people terrified. But wounded is not the same as finished, and mistaking the former for the latter is the kind of error that turns a military campaign into a quagmire — and we have made that error before, in this very region, with consequences we are still living with.

Another heroic mission by our glorious leader.  

Monday, March 2, 2026

Bill Clinton's Epstein hearing proves 1 thing—Trump must testify too

FILE - Former President Bill Clinton speaks in the Cash Room of the Treasury Department during an event for the anniversary of the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund,, Nov. 21, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File)
Former President Bill Clinton, shown in 2024.

On Friday, it was former President Bill Clinton’s turn to be hauled in front of the House Committee to Protect Donald Tru— oh, sorry, it’s the House Oversight Committee.

You can see why one would get confused. After all, how is it that someone who left the White House 25 years ago, a man with less recent and less damning appearances in the Jeffrey Epstein files than the sitting president, has been called before the committee while President Donald Trump has not?

Clinton’s opening statement didn’t pull any punches, calling the committee out for dragging his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, during the previous day’s hearing

“She had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Nothing. She has no memory of even meeting him. She neither traveled with him nor visited any of his properties,” the former president said. “Whether you subpoenaed 10 people or 10,000, including her was simply not right.”


Related | Hillary Clinton keeps her cool during bogus Epstein hearing


Clinton’s opening statement also said he saw nothing, and did nothing wrong, and that “as someone who grew up in a home with domestic abuse, not only would I not have flown on his plane if I had any inkling of what he was doing—I would have turned him in myself and led the call for justice for his crimes, not sweetheart deals.”

The former president also got in a couple of bangers, including, “Since I am under oath, I will not falsely state that I am looking forward to your questions.” 

And this: “With that, Mr. Chairman, fire away.”

About that Mr. Chairman ...

Rep. James Comer, R-KY, speaks outside the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center after a deposition by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who was testifying before U.S. House lawmakers as part of a congressional investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026, in Chappaqua, N.Y. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)
James Comer chairs the House Oversight Committee.

Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, who apparently assumes everyone is as brick-thick stupid and partisan as he is, continues to try to make us believe that threatening the Clintons with jail time to force them to appear while avoiding even mentioning Trump’s connections to the Epstein files is the real work of justice here. 

He called Friday a historic day and said he was bringing “some of the most powerful people in the world” to testify and that “there are a lot of photos.”

Does he mean a photo like the one the Department of Justice altered to make it look like Clinton, Diana Ross, and Michael Jackson were photographed with Epstein victims, but the people blacked out were actually Ross’ and Jackson’s kids?

Here’s a fun fact about all the photos of Bill Clinton in the Epstein files: They have no dates, no locations, and no context. In contrast, the Department of Justice continues to protect Trump by withholding and removing files that may implicate him, such as files related to a woman who accused Trump of sexually abusing her when she was underage.

It’s almost like the Trump administration, the DOJ, Comer, and everyone else involved in this charade don’t want to acknowledge that Bill Clinton seemingly stopped spending time with Epstein before 2006, when he was indicted for solicitation of prostitution. This is corroborated by flight logs, documents, and correspondence in the Epstein files—but why let a little truth get in the way?

One of the reasons demanding Bill Clinton, but not Donald Trump, sit for sworn testimony is that everybody knows that if there were anything damning about Clinton in the Epstein files, the DOJ would have released it ages ago. 

House members from both parties made mid-hearing statements, and you will not be surprised to learn that Comer’s statement was another opportunity to try to clear Trump. 

He told the press that Clinton said he had never seen evidence that led him to believe Trump was criminally involved with Epstein. 

Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., speaks outside the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center where former President Bill Clinton was testifying before U.S. House lawmakers as part of a congressional investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Friday, Feb. 27, 2026, in Chappaqua, N.Y. (AP Photo/Angelina Katsanis)
Rep. Robert Garcia speaks outside the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center where former President Bill Clinton was testifying before House lawmakers as part of a congressional investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein on Feb. 27 in Chappaqua, New York. 

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said this mischaracterized Clinton’s statements about Trump and Comer’s explanation was “not a complete, accurate description” of the testimony. 

James Comer? Lying? To smear a Democrat and protect Trump? Impossible!

Whatever Clinton did say, Democratic Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida said that Democrats now have “new questions” about Trump’s ties to Epstein. 

Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California also pointedly reminded the GOP that by dragging the Clintons in, they seem to have established there isn’t a special “no presidents” rule. 

“Now we have the Clinton rule, which is the presidents and their families have to testify when Congress issues a subpoena,” Khanna said.

Somehow, Comer and the other GOP House geniuses managed to question Bill Clinton for less time than they grilled Hillary Clinton, a person who never met Jeffrey Epstein. It really brings home what a farce this whole thing is.

If you were expecting immediate post-hearing fireworks, you’ll likely be disappointed. Let’s be frank: If some bombshell had come out of today’s testimony, Comer and Rep. Nancy Mace would be shouting it from the rooftops.

There was a mid-hearing leak about Clinton’s answer to questions about a photograph the DOJ released, where Clinton is in a hot tub with a woman whose face is redacted. Clinton said he didn’t know who she was and, when asked the inevitable question, said he did not have sex with her. 

There was also a Trump-friendly leak from “sources familiar with the testimony” that claimed Clinton told the panel that Trump revealed in the early 2000s that he and Epstein were no longer best buds because they had a fight about a land deal. 

On second thought, maybe that isn’t as Trump-friendly as the leaker might have hoped, given that Trump has offered up different explanations. Maybe they stopped being friends over a real estate deal in 2004. Maybe it’s that Epstein poached his employees at some undefined time. Or maybe it was that Epstein was creepy to a teenager at Mar-a-Lago in 2007. 

Gosh, if only someone could question Trump under oath about all these different claims. 


Related | Trump gives masterclass with Epstein files on how to appear very guilty


Comer spoke after the hearing and made clear that he is going to keep questioning everyone except Trump and people in his orbit. Instead, he bragged to the press that “we have two more depositions already booked.” Those big gets? Epstein’s accountant and his lawyer. 

Come on, man. 

Unlike Hillary, Bill Clinton didn’t make any post-hearing statements, so let’s end with this delightfully pointed comment from his spokesman, Angel Urena, earlier in the day. 

The most recent Epstein file release showed the first complaint about Epstein was received by the FBI in 1996, though there was no investigation for about another decade. Urena was asked if Clinton would have known about it.

Urena said that sort of complaint wouldn’t be escalated to the presidential level because “before this White House started telling the F.B.I. what to do” there was “a firewall between law enforcement and the president.”

Sadly, those days are long gone.

no image description available

A cartoon by Clay Jones.

at 4:55:14p MST 

 

Sunday, March 1, 2026

The Generals Said No but Trump Was Bored of Peace with Epstein Closing in.

 The Generals Said No but Trump Was Bored of Peace

Trump launched his war from a hastily constructed space in Mar-a-Lago with (left) John Ratcliffe, the Director of the CIA, (fourth from right) Secretary of State Marco Rubio, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and (second from right), Dan Scavino, his golf caddy turned aide. (photo: White House)
 
The peace president has gone to war, again.
 
Philippe Naughton / The Daily Beast
 


America’s top generals have been as clear as they dare in warning Donald Trump off his latest military adventure. But the president wasn’t listening.

Eight weeks after sending helicopter-borne special forces into Caracas to seize Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Trump has taken his warmongering to a new level with the launch overnight of “major combat operations” in Iran.

The Venezuela raid was well planned, limited in scope, and a clear military success, just the kind of stunt Trump and the former Fox News host who serves as his “Secretary of War” needed to fire up the troops in their new anti-woke army.

But Iran is a whole different matter. There’s a reason why, as Trump put it, the Iranian regime has been able to chant “Death to America” for the past 47 years as it targeted American forces and interests in the region through its network of terror groups and proxy militias.

The last time the United States tried to use military power to deliver regime change in the Middle East, with the ill-fated invasion of Iraq in 2003, its forces were bogged down for eight years. The real winner of that adventure was Iran, which was effectively handed control of the new Iraq after the dismantling of the Baathist regime.

Of course, Iran has been massively weakened over the past couple of years. Hezbollah and Hamas, its main proxy forces, have been all but destroyed by Israel, and while an American bombing raid last June did not actually “obliterate” Iran’s nuclear program, as Pete Hegseth claimed at the time, it did set it back.

Reports from inside the White House say Trump’s military advisers, including Gen. Dan “Raizin” Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have warned the president against a full-scale attack on Iran, briefing not just that it could cost American lives but dangerously degrade already depleted weapons stockpiles. Trump dismissed a Washington Post report that Caine is “against us going to War with Iran” as “100% incorrect.”

It’s possible that Trump will walk away with an “easy” military victory, or that the Islamic regime, once prodded, could fall, as the president suggested in his video address from the White House. That will depend on Iran’s will and ability to resist the warfighting power of the United States and Israel and whatever allies they can persuade to join them in the ominously titled “Operation Epic Fury.”

But it’s far from clear why Trump had to go to war with Iran now, while his son-in-law Jared Kushner and New York property pal Steve Witkoff are still trying to bring the regime to heel. The massive military force gathered in the Middle East and Mediterranean was already sending a pretty clear message to the Mullahs.

In a text message last month to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump explained that since Norway had denied him the Nobel Peace Prize despite him supposedly ending at least eight wars, “I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace.”

When Trump first entered the White House in 2017, there was widespread fear that the nuclear suitcase would be following around such a volatile president. But he defied expectations and ended up being more cautious militarily than his Democratic predecessor as commander-in-chief, Barack Obama.

The great American peacemaker of the late 20th century was another second-term conservative president, Ronald Reagan, who clearly had an eye on his legacy as he joined with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to limit nuclear arsenals and call an end to the Cold War. 

Trump seems to have gone in the opposite direction in his second term: he wants to blow everything up, to test the limits of his power, as though a switch has flicked in his 79-year-old brain.  And, of course, to finally put his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein on the back page.  

The peace president is bored of peace and the ghosts of young dalliances past are drawing near.

Generalissimo Bone Spurs strikes again.  

Friday, February 27, 2026

LESSONS FROM MINNEAPOLIS: Denver mayor’s executive order limits ability of ICE to operate in city

  

First-term Denver Mayor Mike Johnston, a former educator, superimposed over the Denver City and County Building. 

Local law enforcement will intervene to protect residents from ICE excesses, including arresting federal agents.

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston signed an executive order Thursday that attempts to limit the ability of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to operate in the city. 

The order blocks ICE agents from staging on city property to enforce immigration law if they don’t have a judicial warrant, a court order or other legal mandate. And it empowers Denver Police officers and sheriff’s deputies to arrest ICE agents in some instances.

“When civil immigration enforcement operations disrupt our neighborhoods, they don’t just target individuals — they spread fear, tear families apart, and erode the trust that holds our community together,” the executive order states. “These actions put our residents and law enforcement personnel at risk and undermine the values we stand for as a community. Our responsibility is clear: We will work to protect the people who call Denver home and guard against federal overreach.”

ICE did not immediately respond to request for comment. 

The order was inspired by community members who asked the mayor and city council how they planned to protect residents against a potential immigration surge from President Donald Trump’s administration.

“We've seen Americans like Renee Good and Alex Pretti killed for peacefully raising their voices,” Johnston said at a Thursday press conference.  “And Denverites ask me every day, ‘What will we do if that chaos comes to Denver?’ To answer that question for Denverites today, I will sign Executive Order 152.”

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston holds a press conference to sign a bill prohibiting federal overreach, condemning tactics used by ICE in front of the City and County Building in Denver, Colo., on Thursday, Feb. 26. 2026.
McKenzie Lange/CPR News

The order was informed by Johnston’s conversations with mayors around the country — including Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey — who have been trying to protect their communities from ICE surges. 

Denver City Council members, who have been working on banning law enforcement from wearing facial coverings in response to ICE actions, backed the order. 

“No one should live in fear, not the fear of being separated from their families, not the fear of being targeted because of who they are, and not the fear of systems that are inaccessible,” City Council President Amanda Sandoval said. “Public safety must mean safety for every one of us in every neighborhood.”

And, Sandoval said, that includes safety from law enforcement itself. 

What does the order do? 

The order explicitly states that Denver Police and Sheriff departments must intervene if immigration enforcement agents engage in actions that could kill or seriously injure someone. That could include arresting, citing or detaining federal agents. 

The focus, though, Police Chief Ron Thomas said, would be de-escalation rather than physical or deadly conflict. 

Per the order, law enforcement now explicitly has the right to provide life-saving aid if people are harmed by ICE agents. If agents interfere, Denver Police would be permitted to cite or arrest them. 

“We are not looking to create hostility or to create conflict or to escalate,” Johnston told Denverite. “But when it comes to protecting people's rights, [Denver police] swear an oath to do that and they're going to keep doing that.”

Men in facemasks and tactical vests stand on a street under a blue sky.
ICE and ERO officers stand in the middle of Park Avenue in Minneapolis, a block away from where Renee Good was killed. Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026.
Courtesy: Ben Hovland/Minnesota Public Radio

The department will document ICE activity with body-worn cameras. Police will independently investigate any reported legal violations and will refer potential felonies to the Denver District Attorney or the Colorado Attorney General for prosecution – whether a simultaneous federal investigation occurs. 

City agencies will continue to refuse to share databases or enter into technology use agreements with the Department of Homeland Security or immigration enforcement unless the law explicitly requires them to do so. 

Finally, the order continues to bar ICE from schools, churches, stadiums, libraries and hospitals, and the agency is also barred from racially profiling residents. 

Protecting residents or ‘poking the bear’?

The order immediately made national news, in part because the mayor granted The New York Times an exclusive early interview to break the story.

One reporter asked the mayor whether he was “poking the bear,” and another wondered whether Johnston feared signing the order could provoke President Donald Trump’s administration to invade Denver.

The executive order could pit armed Denver officers against armed federal officers, raising the possibility of a standoff or even a conflict.

When Denverite asked Thomas about the possibility of the executive order leading to a civil war, he said: “I think that that is a reasonable concern, but again, we are experts in de-escalation. That is our value. That is what we will lead with.”

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston holds a press conference to sign a bill prohibiting federal overreach, condemning tactics used by ICE in front of the City and County Building in Denver, Colo., on Thursday, Feb. 26. 2026.
McKenzie Lange/CPR News

He’s also aware ICE has used deadly force against armed residents and understands that could occur with his own officers.

“At the end of the day, I think we're all human, and I think that we're going to hope that humanity prevails,” Thomas said. 

Thomas told reporters he has run multiple “tabletop” scenarios about possible interactions between his officers and ICE, and he’s confident his team will not engage in a fight.  

“We've developed systems that really work for public safety and law enforcement here, and we are going to extend those to the people that do operations here,” Johnston said.

‘A Very Dangerous Person’: Alarm as Pete Hegseth Revels in Carnage of Iran War

    Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. (photo: Jacquelyn Martin/AP) "Brash, bombastic, blustering Fox News host is out of his depth....