Blog

Democrats Got Caught in a Huge Lie About Trump’s Iran Strike

The Democrat-media complex got caught red-handed peddling yet another false narrative, only to have it blow up in its face when the facts came crashing down. 

The latest chapter in the Democrats’ never-ending war against the Trump administration centers on the successful strike against Iran’s nuclear sites. As you’ve likely seen, Democrats and their media allies wasted no time launching a coordinated campaign of phony outrage. 

Their claim? The White House recklessly bypassed congressional leadership — specifically Democrats — before the operation, supposedly violating the Constitution. It’s a laughable accusation, especially considering that they had no such concerns when Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, or Joe Biden launched military strikes without congressional approval or proper notification.

CNN tried to stir controversy by reporting that while House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune were briefed ahead of time, Democrat leaders Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries were only informed shortly before the public announcement, after the operation had already taken place. But as White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt explained on Fox News, this was nothing more than a misleading narrative designed to distract from a major American victory. Leavitt didn’t just push back; she dismantled the lie piece by piece.

“We did make bipartisan calls,” Leavitt stated, setting the record straight from the outset. “Thomas Massie and the Democrats — he should be a Democrat ’cause he’s more aligned with them than with the Republican Party — were given notice. The White House made calls to congressional leadership. They were bipartisan calls.”

The White House, contrary to the manufactured narrative, conducted its due diligence and reached out to leaders on both sides of the aisle. The administration’s outreach efforts were comprehensive, but in a detail that speaks volumes, the top Democrat in the House was apparently unavailable to take a call of such national security importance. 

Leavitt revealed the specifics of the outreach, exposing the disingenuous nature of the complaints.

“In fact, Hakeem Jeffries couldn’t be reached,” she explained. “We tried him before the strike and he didn’t pick up the phone, but he was briefed after, as well as Chuck Schumer was briefed prior to the strike.”

Keep reading

“Where’s Jackie?”: Why The Public Needs Answers On Biden’s Alleged Incapacity

“Jackie, are you here? Where’s Jackie?”

When then-President Joe Biden asked in September 2022 if House Rep. Jackie Walorski, an Indiana Republican who had died weeks earlier in a car accident, was in a meeting, observers were shocked. Biden had not only issued a statement of condolence; he had attended the  congresswoman’s memorial service to lower the flags at the White House in her honor.

As Washington Post media critic Erik Wemple noted last week, that moment should have been a wake-up call. In Washington parlance, it left no room for “plausible deniability” about whether Biden was still fit to hold the office of president. And it wasn’t just Democratic politicians who were willfully blind to Biden’s obvious deterioration; it was the media, too.

That’s why the country should fully support President Donald Trump’s June 4 order for his administration to investigate Biden’s competence and answer some of these questions, including the possible abuse of an autopen to sign legislation, pardons and other documents while he was president, instead of looking for political motivations.

Similarly, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee is also investigating.

The New York Times called it part of Trump’s “campaign of retribution against his perceived enemies” and “the latest effort by President Trump to stoke conspiracy theories about his predecessor.”

There is a weird dissonance when journalists blame Biden’s White House for a coverup, but then criticize efforts to investigate that coverup. While criminal charges are unlikely to stem from the investigation, if the White House autopen, for instance, was used without Biden’s consent, that would amount to forgery, obstruction of justice, fraud or other serious crimes.

The complicity of politicians, staff and even the press in deception is nothing new in Washington. A century ago, after President Woodrow Wilson experienced a severe stroke in September 1919, his wife, Edith, and his staff covered up the severity of his condition, which made him incapable of fulfilling his duties till the end of his term and affected the race for a Democratic successor. To end such abuses, we must demand accountability and greater transparency on matters of presidential health and competence.

The 25th Amendment of the Constitution was intended to address succession issues, including the incapacity of a president, but it is very difficult to remove a president without the support of the vice president and most of the Cabinet, meaning, little can be done without a virtual mutiny within the White House.

Keep reading

The Dangerous Consequences of the US Attack on Iran

On June 21, the United States committed an act of war, attacking a sovereign nation that had neither attacked nor threatened it without the approval of the Security Council. Iran’s nuclear facilities were severely damaged. But that is not all that was damaged. The aggression has potentially left international law in ruins.

America’s consistent appeals to the rules-based order instead of international law has long left the impression in much of the world that the U.S. selectively applies the rules when it suits them and exempts itself from the rules when it does not. That impression will be strengthened by the inconsistency of simultaneously condemning Russia for violating Ukrainian sovereignty by an act of war while the U.S. violates Iran’s sovereignty by dropping some of the largest bombs in the world on Iran’s civilian nuclear facilities.

Prior to the U.S. attack, Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi pleaded that “It’s up to the international community to condemn this, to prevent this. Otherwise, there will be nothing left of international law.”

And it is not only the architecture of international law that has been damaged by the bombing, it is also the foundations of diplomacy. The U.S. has undermined its credibility as a diplomatic nation and irreparably damaged its credibility in this and future negotiations.  The U.S. did not just violate an agreement as they did when they pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear agreement with Iran as they did in 2018. This time around, Trump used diplomacy as cover for his war plans. The promise of a next round of talks in two days was, according to Trump advisors, “a headfake,” and the talk of two weeks to decide was a “misdirection.” In using diplomacy as a cover for war, Araghchi said, “the U.S. betrayed diplomacy. They betrayed negotiations.”

“We were in the middle of talks and negotiation with Europeans [that] happened only two days ago in Geneva, when this time, Americans decided to blow it up…. They have proved that they are not men of diplomacy.” “What conclusion would you draw?” Araghchi asked.

It is not just Iran, but other nations that will draw this conclusion, jeopardizing important future negotiations.

Keep reading

HARVARD REPORT: The Hidden Numbers Behind Gaza’s Real Death Toll

A recent report prepared by Garb Yaakov, a Professor at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel, and published on The President & Fellows of Harvard College Dataverse website, has substantiated what critics of Israel’s actions in Gaza have long asserted, regarding the actual number of individuals killed by Israel in the Gaza Strip. The report suggests that the real number significantly surpasses the officially reported death toll, as victims who are buried under debris or dismembered are not included in mainstream reports.

Yaakov Garb’s report [Garb, Yaakov, 2025, “The Israeli/American/GHF ‘aid distribution’ compounds in Gaza: Dataset and initial analysis of location, context, and internal structure”, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QB75LB. Harvard Dataverse] has analysed the Israeli military’s own data and combined these with careful spatial mapping to reveal a “demographic horror story”. The report presents maps, locational data, and an initial concise analysis of the Israeli/American/GHF aid distribution facilities that were swiftly constructed and commenced operations in Gaza in May 2025. The overall geographic relationship of these facilities to the Gazan population and the infrastructures of Israeli military control over Gaza, along with their consistent internal design, indicates that their architecture is primarily tailored to align with Israeli military strategies and tactics, rather than being focused on a comprehensive humanitarian relief effort. The reports unequivocally demonstrate that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) compounds are strategically placed and built to be inaccessible to most, particularly to the one million residents of Gaza City, cut off by the Netzarim corridor. The current system fails to support the 1.85 million accounted for, let alone the 377,000 missing Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

Keep reading

GM crops fuel rise in pesticide use despite early promises, study shows

Spread of GM crops has not contributed to chemical reductions or land reclamations, but to increased use of the pesticides they were claimed to curtail. Report: Claire Robinson

GM crops have increased agriculture’s dependence on pesticides rather than reducing it, a study published in April 2025 found.

Drawing on data from four GM crops – Bt cotton, herbicide-tolerant (HT) soybean, HT and/or Bt maize, and HT canola, the researchers – including agricultural development expert Prof Glenn Davis Stone from Washington and Lee University and Bt cotton expert K. R. Kranthi of the International Cotton Advisory Committee – traced the surge in chemical use over three decades.

They found a paradox: while GM seeds were supposed to reduce pesticide use, their introduction caused pesticide use to soar. The researchers explain this outcome using the Jevons paradox, an economic theory that dates back to 1865. British economist William Stanley Jevons argued that efficiency in resource use often leads to more, not less, consumption. The study applies this idea to GM crops, which were claimed to reduce pesticide use, but in reality have made it skyrocket.

The researchers consider the two most prevalent GM seed-pesticide technology regimes: Bt crops and herbicide-tolerant (HT) crops. Both seeds are billed as efficient technologies: HT crops are claimed to facilitate more efficient weed control, and Bt crops are claimed to control insect pests more efficiently.

However, the researchers found that, “Like other technological efficiencies… the increased use of GM crops over the past 30 years has not contributed to input reductions nor to land reclamations, but to the expansion of agricultural land and increased use of the very pesticides these technologies are purported to curtail.”

This is due to the complexity of agricultural systems: “The efficiencies of GM crops not only lower the cost for individual farmers to use, in aggregate, more pesticides; they also make those pesticides ever more essential to the political economy of agriculture through the input-intensive monocultures in which they are embedded. In fact, increases in chemical usage occur throughout these GM crop systems because technological substitutions like GM seeds cannot be separated from their cascading impacts on labour, weed and pest ecology or agricultural decision-making.”

Keep reading

How the US and Israel Used Rafael Grossi To Hijack the IAEA and Start a War on Iran

Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), allowed the IAEA to be used by the United States and Israel – an undeclared nuclear weapons state in long-term violation of IAEA rules – to manufacture a pretext for war on Iran, despite his agency’s own conclusion that Iran had no nuclear weapons program.

On June 12th, based on a damning report by Grossi, a slim majority of the IAEA Board of Governors voted to find Iran in non-compliance with its obligations as an IAEA member. Of the 35 countries represented on the Board, only 19 voted for the resolution, while 3 voted against it, 11 abstained and 2 did not vote.

The United States contacted eight board member governments on June 10th to persuade them to either vote for the resolution or not to vote. Israeli officials said they saw the U.S. arm-twisting for the IAEA resolution as a significant signal of U.S. support for Israel’s war plans, revealing how much Israel valued the IAEA resolution as diplomatic cover for the war.

The IAEA board meeting was timed for the final day of President Trump’s 60-day ultimatum to Iran to negotiate a new nuclear agreement. Even as the IAEA board voted, Israel was loading weapons, fuel and drop-tanks on its warplanes for the long flight to Iran and briefing its aircrews on their targets. The first Israeli air strikes hit Iran at 3 a.m. that night.

On June 20th, Iran filed a formal complaint against Director General Grossi with the UN Secretary General and the UN Security Council for undermining his agency’s impartiality, both by his failure to mention the illegality of Israel’s threats and uses of force against Iran in his public statements and by his singular focus on Iran’s alleged violations.

The source of the IAEA investigation that led to this resolution was a 2018 Israeli intelligence report that its agents had identified three previously undisclosed sites in Iran where Iran had conducted uranium enrichment prior to 2003. In 2019, Grossi opened an investigation, and the IAEA eventually gained access to the sites and detected traces of enriched uranium.

Despite the fateful consequences of his actions, Grossi has never explained publicly how the IAEA can be sure that Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency or its Iranian collaborators, such as the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (or MEK), did not put the enriched uranium in those sites themselves, as Iranian officials have suggested.

Keep reading

The Ideological Subversion of Biology

Biology faces a grave threat from “progressive” politics that are changing the way our work is done, delimiting areas of biology that are taboo and will not be funded by the government or published in scientific journals, stipulating what words biologists must avoid in their writing, and decreeing how biology is taught to students and communicated to other scientists and the public through the technical and popular press. We wrote this article not to argue that biology is dead, but to show how ideology is poisoning it. The science that has brought us so much progress and understanding—from the structure of DNA to the green revolution and the design of COVID-19 vaccines—is endangered by political dogma strangling our essential tradition of open research and scientific communication. And because much of what we discuss occurs within academic science, where many scientists are too cowed to speak their minds, the public is largely unfamiliar with these issues. Sadly, by the time they become apparent to everyone, it might be too late.

We’re all familiar with the culture wars that pit progressive Leftists against centrists and those on the Right. In the past, those skirmishes dealt with politics and sociocultural issues and in academia were restricted largely to the humanities. But—apart from the “sociobiology wars” of the seventies and our perennial battles against creationism—we biologists always thought that our field would avoid such struggles. After all, scientific truth would surely be immune to attack or distortion by political ideology, and most of us were too busy working in the lab to engage in partisan squabbles.

Keep reading

Does Kamala Really Think This Will Revive Her Political Career?

After her billion-dollar humiliation in November, many are wondering what Kamala Harris’s next move is going to be. Will she go for a third failed presidential bid? Will she run for governor of California? Maybe just start an unlistenable podcast? According to past reports, she would be making a decision about her political future before the end of the summer. But reportedly, she’s leaning toward running for governor.

Sources close to Harris say she’s seriously mulling a bid for governor, with one insider claiming the prospect has put “a glimmer in her eyes.” Of course, there are plenty of voices in her ear telling her this is her best shot — maybe her only shot — at remaining relevant. I’m sure some of those voices are from actual people, too. 

However, even among her own circle, there’s pushback. Not everyone is convinced Harris can — or should — wade into an already crowded Democratic field, which includes the likes of former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former state Attorney General Xavier Becerra, both of whom have deeper roots and broader appeal in California and don’t specialize in word salads.

But that’s why a trial balloon has been leaked to the media, and we’re not going to know for sure until the end of the summer. According to a report from The Hill, Kamala is “planning to take some time off in July, when sources say she hopes to further reflect on the next step in her political career.”

Keep reading

Israel Says They “will Respond with Force” to Iran Attack

Israel has announced plans to “continue the intensive operation to strike Tehran” after both sides apparently ignored the ceasefire agreement that President Trump announced yesterday. 

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Iran bombed Israel on Tuesday morning after a ceasefire was agreed to on Monday.

This comes after the US dropped bombs on three Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend amid an escalating conflict between Israel and Iran, and Iran responded with a coordinated attack on a U.S. airbase in Qatat but gave advanced notice.

The response from Iran, President Trump said, was “very weak,” but “they’ve gotten it all out of their ‘system,’ and there will, hopefully, be no further HATE.” He added, “I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice, which made it possible for no lives to be lost, and nobody to be injured,” calling on Iran and Israel to “proceed to peace and harmony.”

Trump later  announced that Israel and Iran had agreed to a total ceasefire “upon the 24th Hour, an Official END to THE 12 DAY WAR will be saluted by the World.”

“During each CEASEFIRE, the other side will remain PEACEFUL and RESPECTFUL,” the President demanded.

However, Iran’s attacks came in response to Israel launching the first attacks on Tehran last night after the ceasefire was announced by President Trump on Monday evening.

Keep reading

World War is on the Horizon

Have you noticed how the Trump-hating media is praising Trump to the high heavens for his gratuitous, reckless, military aggression against Iran, an act of war without a declaration?  This tells us something.  Trump has deserted MAGA-America and joined the ruling establishment.  In return the establishment is presenting their man as a great success.  

The establishment now has Trump at war.  The power and profit of the military/security complex is secured.  Trump’s attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities was no more successful than Israel’s.  If Iran continues to hold together, Iran, if its government is competent, will use its missile advantage to continue to punish Israel. Within two weeks Israel could be out of missiles and forced to sue for peace.  But that time is unlikely to come. Israel’s plight and Israel’s control over the US government will bring Trump in to save Israel from humiliating defeat.

Remember, Iran is on the list of Muslim countries to be destroyed by the US for Israel.  Here is 4-star general Wesley Clark, former commander of NATO on TV explaining that on 20th September 2001 he was informed by a general in the Pentagon that the US had decided to take out 7 Muslim countries in 5 years. It has taken longer, but 5 of those countries have been destroyed.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo6u9DpASp8

Norman Podhoretz, editor of Commentary had called for this action, and it became the essential component of the neoconservatives’ policy. We watched it, if we paid attention, unfold in the “Dubya,” Obama, Biden, and Trump regimes.

Iran’s parliament has voted to close the Strait of Hormuz except for oil delivery to China.  The final approval has to come from the Supreme Leader.  Iran should simply wait and let Washington close the Strait, allegedly to punish Iran by blocking oil sales, but really to punish China by denying China its oil supply. Iran should let Trump, who has sold out MEGA-America, and the American Establishment execute themselves.

If the Strait is closed, what would be the price of gasoline in the United States?  Could it be $8 a gallon?  Or would the Kremlin rush oil to the US to save Americans from the consequences of their own policy? The Kremlin often seems more concerned to rescue its enemies than to stand by its allies and to protect Russia.

Keep reading