Featured posts

    National Security

    Home National Security

    WHCA Dinner Shooting Prompts New Discussion Surrounding White House Ballroom

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    The attempted shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner is rapidly reshaping the debate over President Donald Trump’s long-controversial plan to build a new White House ballroom — with even some Democrats signaling a shift in tone.

    Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), who had previously opposed aspects of the project, acknowledged Monday that lawmakers may now need to reconsider it — not as a political issue, but as a security necessity.

    “Do we need a ballroom? Well, that we can discuss that,” Rosen said in an interview. “This isn’t about Donald Trump. It is really about safety. It’s really about safety.”

    The $400 million, 90,000-square-foot ballroom proposal — which would replace the demolished East Wing — has drawn criticism for months over cost, transparency, and historical preservation concerns. But Saturday night’s attack, in which an armed suspect attempted to storm the event before being stopped, has injected new urgency into the conversation.

    President Trump wasted little time connecting the incident to his long-standing push.

    “I didn’t want to say this but this is why we have to have all of the attributes of what we’re planning at the White House,” Trump told reporters shortly after the shooting. “It’s actually a larger room, and it’s much more secure.”

    Security concerns take center stage

    Trump allies argue the incident underscores a glaring vulnerability: Washington lacks a truly secure venue capable of hosting large gatherings of top officials.

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is now moving quickly to capitalize on that argument, pushing legislation that would fund the project and include additional security infrastructure beneath the ballroom, including a Secret Service annex.

    “It’s very difficult to have a bunch of important people in the same place unless it’s really, really secure,” Graham said. “The times in which we live are unusual… I’ve never felt the sense of threat that exists today.”

    The Justice Department echoed that urgency in a late-night court filing, arguing that the shooting should end legal delays blocking the project.

    “This Court should never have enjoined this Project, but now, after the Saturday night attempted assassination… reasonable minds can no longer differ — The injunction must be dissolved,” the administration wrote.

    The DOJ went even further, warning that halting the project “greatly endangers the lives of all Presidents, current and future.”

    Democrats show signs of movement — with caveats

    While many Democrats remain skeptical, Rosen’s comments suggest cracks in the previously unified opposition.

    She emphasized that large events inherently carry risk and that stronger protections may be necessary.

    “You can’t harden each and every [event],” she said, “but you want to try to be sure that they’re as safe as possible.”

    Still, Rosen cautioned that the ballroom alone is not a silver bullet.

    “One ballroom isn’t the answer to this,” she said.

    She also criticized how the project has been handled, particularly the demolition of the East Wing — which housed the first lady’s office and other staff — without what she described as proper congressional process.

    “What I object to is it didn’t go through any of those processes before the demolition,” Rosen said. “What was lost… that should have been preserved for history?”

    Other Democrats, including Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), have gone further, openly urging their party to reconsider outright opposition to the project.

    GOP divisions emerge over funding

    Despite broad Republican support for the concept, divisions are emerging over how to pay for it.

    Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a longtime Trump ally, pushed back against using taxpayer dollars, insisting the project should remain privately funded.

    “We have $39 trillion of debt,” Scott said. “Maybe we ought to stop spending money.”

    Trump has previously maintained that private donors would cover the ballroom’s cost, though critics have raised questions about transparency.

    Legal battle intensifies

    The project remains tied up in court after a federal judge ruled the administration lacked proper congressional approval, limiting construction to below-ground work while the case proceeds.

    The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued last year after the East Wing was torn down, arguing the project violated preservation laws.

    Now, in the wake of the shooting, the administration is urging the court to reverse course — or at least signal it would do so — calling the lawsuit “frivolous” and “dangerous.”

    A turning point?

    Saturday’s attack — the third assassination attempt against Trump since 2024, according to the administration — may prove to be a pivotal moment in the debate.

    What was once dismissed by critics as an expensive and unnecessary expansion is now being reframed by supporters as a critical national security upgrade.

    And with even some Democrats beginning to acknowledge the security argument, the political battle over the ballroom may be entering a new phase.

    Whether that shift is enough to overcome legal hurdles and funding disputes remains to be seen — but after this weekend, the question is no longer just whether the White House needs a ballroom.

    It’s whether Washington can afford not to have one.

    John Kennedy here. The last fundraising deadline passed — and we came up short. Now the woke crowd is celebrating, saying “Kennedy’s finished.” Let’s prove them wrong. Chip in $25, $50, or whatever you can to close the gap and keep fighting.

    Inside The White House Correspondents’ Dinner Suspect’s ‘Manifesto’

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3

    The man accused of opening fire outside the White House Correspondents’ Dinner left behind a detailed “manifesto” describing his intent to target members of the Trump administration, “prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest,” according to a copy obtained by CBS News.

    Cole Allen, 31, allegedly sent the writing to family members before the attack. In it, he stated that while law enforcement, hotel employees, and guests were not his intended targets, he was willing to harm them if necessary to reach administration officials. “I really hope it doesn’t come to that,” he wrote.

    Authorities say Allen charged a security checkpoint outside the Washington Hilton on Saturday night armed with a shotgun, a handgun, and knives. President Donald Trump and other officials were quickly escorted from the event, which was later canceled. A Secret Service agent who was shot during the incident, while wearing a bulletproof vest, has since been released from the hospital.

    The suspect’s brother reportedly alerted police in Connecticut after receiving the email, prompting law enforcement to intervene. Investigators later recovered additional writings from Allen’s home in Torrance, California, and his hotel room at the Hilton.

    A chilling and ironic tone

    Throughout the message, Allen adopted a matter-of-fact tone, at times veering into irony.

    “Hello everybody!” he began. “So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today.”

    He apologized to his parents “for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for ‘Most Wanted,’” and to colleagues and students for claiming he had a personal emergency. He suggested that by the time the email was read, he might already require medical attention, referring to potential injuries as “self-inflicted status.”

    Declared targets — with one exception

    Allen wrote that he chose to act because he did not want the administration’s alleged “crimes” to “coat [his] hands.” While he did not explicitly name Trump or the event, he described a plan to target officials in descending order of rank.

    He made one notable exception: “not including Mr. Patel,” he wrote, referencing the FBI director, who was also in attendance.

    Allen added that he would avoid targeting Secret Service, Capitol Police, or National Guard personnel unless necessary. “I hope they are wearing body armor,” he wrote.

    He also detailed tactical decisions, claiming, “In order to minimize casualties, I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls).”

    Anticipating criticism

    The manifesto included a section addressing hypothetical objections to his actions, along with rebuttals.

    “As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this,” he wrote as a potential criticism. “Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack.”

    He also referenced his Christian faith, writing that some might argue he should “turn the other cheek.”

    “Rebuttal,” he continued, “Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed.”

    Allen then described various unnamed individuals experiencing hardship, in some cases attributing their struggles to the administration.

    “I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it,” he added.

    Criticism of security

    In a postscript, Allen sharply criticized security measures at the event.

    “PS… what the hell is the Secret Service doing? … No damn security. Not in transport. Not in the hotel. Not in the event,” he wrote.

    He claimed that if he had been a foreign agent, he could have brought in heavier weaponry without detection. Officials note that while the Washington Hilton hosted the event, it remained an operational hotel with public access, and only specific areas were secured.

    Family warnings and prior behavior

    Allen’s sister reportedly told investigators that he frequently used “radical” rhetoric and had previously discussed doing “something” to address what he saw as problems in society and government.

    She also revealed her brother was a regular visitor to the shooting range, was a member of a group called “The Wide Awakes” and had previously attended a “No Kings” rally in California. 

    Political reaction and unanswered questions

    The motive behind the attack remains under investigation.

    Former President Barack Obama emphasized the lack of confirmed details while condemning political violence broadly.

    “Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night’s shooting… it’s incumbent upon all of us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy,” Obama wrote. He also praised the Secret Service, calling their work “a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice” they show.

    During a “60 Minutes” interview, Trump reacted angrily after host Norah O’Donnell read excerpts from the alleged manifesto.

    “You read that crap from some sick person? I got associated with all stuff that has nothing to do with me,” Trump said, adding, “You should be ashamed of yourself… You’re a disgrace.”

    More than 2,500 people had gathered for the annual dinner, which celebrates the First Amendment. Trump, who has typically declined to attend during his presidency, had made a historic appearance this year and has since said he hopes to reschedule the event within 30 days.

    The Full Manifesto

    To read Allen’s full 1,052-word manifesto as published by The New York Post, with minor edits to improve profanity, see below:

    Hello everybody!

    So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today. Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused.

    I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for “Most Wanted.”

    I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.)

    I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near.

    I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure.

    I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it. Again, my sincere apologies.

    On to why I did any of this:

    I am a citizen of the United States of America.

    What my representatives do reflects on me.

    And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.

    (Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I’ve had to do something about it.)

    While I’m discussing this, I’ll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I’m not military so too bad.)

    Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest

    Secret Service: they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible (aka, I hope they’re wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who *aren’t*

    Hotel Security: not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me)

    Capitol Police: same as Hotel Security

    National Guard: same as Hotel Security

    Hotel Employees: not targets at all

    Guests: not targets at all

    In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls)

    I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people *chose* to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn’t come to that.

    Rebuttals to objections:

    Objection 1: As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek.

    Rebuttal: Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed. I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration.

    Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.

    Objection 2: This is not a convenient time for you to do this.

    Rebuttal: I need whoever thinks this way to take a couple minutes and realize that the world isn’t about them. Do you think that when I see someone raped or murdered or abused, I should walk on by because it would be “inconvenient” for people who aren’t the victim?

    This was the best timing and chance of success I could come up with.

    Objection 3: You didn’t get them all.

    Rebuttal: Gotta start somewhere.

    Objection 4: As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this.

    Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack

    Objection 5: Yield unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

    Rebuttal: The United States of America are ruled by the law, not by any one or several people. In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered.

    I would also like to extend my appreciation to a great many people since I will not be likely to be able to talk with them again (unless the Secret Service is *astoundingly* incompetent.)

    Thank you to my family, both personal and church, for your love over these 31 years.

    Thank you to my friends, for your companionship over many years.

    Thank you to my colleagues over many jobs, for your positivity and professionalism.

    Thank you to my students for your enthusiasm and love of learning.

    Thank you to the many acquaintances I’ve met, in person and online, for short interactions and long-term relationships, for your perspectives and inspiration.

    Thank you all for everything.

    Sincerely,

    Cole “coldForce” “Friendly Federal Assassin” Allen

    PS: Ok now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the Secret Service doing? Sorry, gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone.

    Like, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10 feet, metal detectors out the wazoo.

    What I got (who knows, maybe they’re pranking me!) is nothing.

    No damn security.

    Not in transport.

    Not in the hotel.

    Not in the event.

    Like, the one thing that I immediately noticed walking into the hotel is the sense of arrogance.

    I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat.

    The security at the event is all outside, focused on protestors and current arrivals, because apparently no one thought about what happens if someone checks in the day before.

    Like, this level of incompetence is insane, and I very sincerely hope it’s corrected by the time this country gets actually competent leadership again.

    Like, if I was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen, I could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed s**t.

    Actually insane.

    Oh and if anyone is curious is how doing something like feels: it’s awful. I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done.

    Can’t really recommend it! Stay in school, kids.

    John Kennedy here. The last fundraising deadline passed — and we came up short. Now the woke crowd is celebrating, saying “Kennedy’s finished.” Let’s prove them wrong. Chip in $25, $50, or whatever you can to close the gap and keep fighting.

    Report: Pentagon Mulls Deploying Anti-Drone Lasers Near Hegseth, Rubio Homes in DC

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    David B. Gleason from Chicago, IL, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    The Pentagon is weighing the deployment of “powerful” anti-drone technology to a Washington, D.C., military installation that houses two top Cabinet officials, according to a report published Tuesday.

    Officials are considering sending a laser-based defense system to Fort Lesley J. McNair, where multiple drones of unknown origin were detected earlier this month, The New York Times reported, citing four people briefed on the discussions. The installation sits less than four miles from the White House and is located within some of the most tightly controlled airspace in the country.

    The proposal, however, faces logistical challenges. The Times noted that deploying such a system over Washington’s high-traffic airspace could complicate efforts, given the risks associated with operating advanced counter-drone technology in a densely populated and heavily regulated flight zone.

    The deliberations follow a series of recent drone incidents that have raised security concerns across multiple U.S. military installations. Earlier this month, unidentified drones were spotted over Fort McNair on at least one night, prompting heightened monitoring and internal discussions about potential responses. The sightings also led officials to consider relocating senior officials who reside at the base, though they ultimately remained in place, according to prior reporting.

    The incidents in Washington are part of a broader pattern of drone activity near sensitive military sites.

    On March 9, personnel at Barksdale Air Force Base in Bossier Parish, Louisiana, were ordered to shelter in place after an unmanned aircraft was observed overhead. Although the order was lifted later that day, additional drone sightings were reported at the base throughout the week.

    Officials have not publicly identified the source of the drones in any of the incidents, and investigations remain ongoing. The recent activity has underscored growing concerns within the Pentagon about the vulnerability of domestic military installations to unmanned aerial systems, particularly as global tensions continue to rise.

    Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

    Top Iranian Official Responds To Report He’s Trump’s Secret Negotiating Partner

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2

    A senior Iranian official identified in media reports as a potential backchannel to President Donald Trump has publicly denied any involvement in negotiations with the United States.

    Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, rejected the reports after The Jerusalem Post described him as the “top person” Trump had suggested his administration was engaging with behind the scenes.

    In a post on X, Ghalibaf dismissed the claim and accused the U.S. of spreading misinformation.

    “Iranian people demand complete and remorseful punishment of the aggressors. All Iranian officials stand firmly behind their supreme leader and people until this goal is achieved. No negotiations have been held with the US, and fakenews is used to manipulate the financial and oil markets and escape the quagmire in which the US and Israel are trapped.”

    The denial comes amid conflicting signals from Washington about the state of diplomacy. Just hours earlier, Trump said his administration had engaged in “very good and productive conversations” with Iran and announced a five-day pause on planned military strikes targeting Iranian energy infrastructure.

    Read Trump’s Truth Social message:

    “I AM PLEASE TO REPORT THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND THE COUNTRY OF IRAN, HAVE HAD, OVER THE LAST TWO DAYS, VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS REGARDING A COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESOLUTION OF OUR HOSTILITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST,” Trump wrote. “BASED ON THE TENOR AND TONE OF THESE IN DEPTH, DETAILED, AND CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS, WITCH WILL CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE WEEK, I HAVE INSTRUCTED THE DEPARTMENT OF WAR TO POSTPONE ANY AND ALL MILITARY STRIKES AGAINST IRANIAN POWER PLANTS AND ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR A FIVE DAY PERIOD, SUBJECT TO THE SUCCESS OF THE ONGOING MEETINGS AND DISCUSSIONS.”

    The pause marked a sharp shift in tone after Trump had warned over the weekend that Iran could face “total decimation” if it failed to comply with U.S. demands regarding the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global shipping route.

    Speaking to reporters before boarding Air Force One, Trump hinted at the existence of a high-level Iranian contact but declined to identify the individual.

    “A top person,” Trump said, offering no further details.

    When asked whether Iran’s newly named supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, was involved, Trump said the U.S. had not heard from him. Khamenei has not appeared publicly since his appointment and is widely believed to be gravely injured.

    “Don’t forget: We’ve wiped out the leadership phase one, phase two and largely phase three. But we’re dealing with a man who I believe is the most respected and the leader, you know it’s a little tough, they’ve wiped out — we’ve wiped out everybody,” Trump added.

    Trump’s claims of active discussions followed his announcement that strikes would be temporarily halted to allow negotiations to continue. However, Iran’s Foreign Ministry has also denied that any talks are taking place, underscoring the uncertainty surrounding the diplomatic track even as tensions remain high following U.S. threats tied to the Strait of Hormuz.

    Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

    Trump Addresses Possibility Of Ordering Boots On The Ground In Iran

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    President Donald J. Trump is presented with a 10th Combat Aviation Brigade challenge coin following an air assault and gun rain demonstration at Fort Drum, New York, on August 13. The demonstration was part of President Trump's visit to the 10th Mountain Division (LI) to sign the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, which increases the Army's authorized active-duty end strength by 4,000 enabling us to field critical capabilities in support of the National Defense Strategy. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Thomas Scaggs) 180813-A-TZ475-010

    President Donald Trump said Monday that the United States is “nowhere near” sending ground troops into Iran to secure enriched uranium reportedly stored at the country’s Isfahan nuclear complex.

    In a phone interview with the New York Post, Trump said no decision has been made about deploying American forces on the ground.

    “We haven’t made any decision on that. We’re nowhere near it,” Trump told the outlet.

    Trump’s comments come after reporters aboard Air Force One asked him Saturday about the possibility of deploying ground troops as part of a potential operation involving Iran.

    At the time, Trump indicated such a move would require strong justification.

    “There would have to be a very good reason,” he said.

    “And I would say if we ever did that, [Iran] would be so decimated they wouldn’t be able to fight at the ground level,” Trump added on Saturday.

    The president also addressed Iran’s leadership transition following the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. His son, Mojtaba Khamenei, has reportedly succeeded him as Iran’s new supreme leader.

    Trump said he was displeased with the development, telling the New York Post he is “not happy” that the younger Khamenei has taken power.

    Asked what actions he might take in response to Iran’s new leadership, Trump declined to elaborate.

    “Not going to tell you. Not going to tell you. I’m not happy with him,” Trump said.

    In a separate interview with ABC News on Sunday, Trump suggested Iran’s new leader would struggle to remain in power without U.S. backing.

    “Whoever becomes Iran’s new leader is not going to last long without approval from us,” Trump said.

    Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.

    Iran Rebukes Trump Demand While Announcing New Supreme Leader

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,

    Iran has selected a new supreme leader to replace Ayatollah Ali Khamenei following his death in a U.S.-Israeli strike, while rejecting demands from President Donald Trump to have any role in the leadership selection.

    Iran’s Assembly of Experts — the powerful body of senior clerics responsible for choosing the country’s supreme leader — announced Sunday that Mojtaba Khamenei, the late leader’s 56-year-old son, will succeed his father.

    CNN’s Jeremy Diamond, reporting from Tel Aviv, said the decision came just over a week after the killing of Ali Khamenei during the opening phase of the conflict with Israel.

    “This is just in from Iran’s Assembly of Experts,” Diamond said. “This is the body of senior Iranian clerics responsible for electing the next supreme leader, and they have now chosen, just over a week after the assassination of the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, his son Mojtaba Khamenei as his successor.”

    Diamond noted that Mojtaba Khamenei is widely seen as a hardline figure with close ties to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

    “He is known for having close ties to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and his selection will largely be viewed as a continuation of his father’s rule,” Diamond said. “This is quite a hard-line stance for the Assembly of Experts to be choosing as the next supreme leader of Iran.”

    According to the report, Mojtaba Khamenei was wounded in the same strike that killed his father. The attack also killed his wife.

    His appointment comes amid escalating tensions with the United States and Israel, both of which have sharply criticized Iran’s leadership.

    President Trump had previously dismissed the possibility of Mojtaba Khamenei becoming supreme leader, calling him a “lightweight” in an interview with Axios and saying such a choice would be unacceptable.

    Iranian officials, however, have firmly rejected any suggestion that Washington could influence the selection.

    Speaking Sunday on NBC News’ Meet the Press, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the choice of supreme leader is strictly an internal matter for Iran.

    When asked whether Iran would allow Trump any role in choosing the country’s next leader, Araghchi responded bluntly.

    “We allow nobody to interfere in our domestic affairs,” he said. “This is up to the Iranian people to elect their new leader. They have already elected the Assembly of Experts, and the Assembly of Experts will do the job. It is only the business of the Iranian people and nobody else’s business.”

    Araghchi also pushed back on Trump’s earlier demand for Iran’s “unconditional surrender.”

    “This is what he asked the previous time in June, when Israel started to attack us,” Araghchi said. “President Trump used the same phrase, ‘unconditional surrender.’ That was the tweet he made. And that didn’t happen.”

    “We resisted, and after 12 days Israelis asked for an unconditional ceasefire,” he continued. “So we never give up, we never surrender, and we will continue to resist as long as it takes. We are defending our territory, our people, and our dignity. And our dignity is not for sale.”

    Even as Iran moves forward with its new leadership, Israeli officials have issued stark warnings that the country’s next leader will also become a target.

    Days before the leadership announcement, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz warned that anyone appointed to lead Iran’s ruling regime could face assassination if they continue policies hostile to Israel and its allies.

    “Every leader appointed by the Iranian terror regime to continue and lead the plan to destroy Israel, to threaten the United States and the free world and the countries of the region, and to suppress the Iranian people will be an unequivocal target for elimination,” Katz wrote in a post on X.

    “It does not matter what his name is or the place where he hides,” he added.

    Katz said he and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have instructed the Israel Defense Forces to prepare for such action as part of Israel’s ongoing military campaign against Iran, known as Operation Lion’s Roar.

    “The Prime Minister and I have instructed the IDF to prepare and act by all means to carry out the mission as an integral part of the objectives of Operation Lion’s Roar,” Katz said.

    He added that Israel will continue coordinating with the United States to weaken the Iranian regime and create conditions that could lead to political change inside the country.

    Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

    Hegseth Confirms Leader Behind Trump Assassination Effort Has Been ‘Hunted Down and Killed’

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    By Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America - Pete Hegseth, CC BY-SA 2.0

    Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the Iranian leader behind multiple assassination attempts against President Donald Trump was killed during U.S. strikes on Iran over the weekend as part of Operation Epic Fury.

    “The leader of the unit that attempted to assassinate Trump has been hunted down and killed,” Hegseth said during a press conference Wednesday morning.

    “Iran tried to kill President Trump and President Trump got the last laugh,” Hegseth continued. “Now, this is not a ‘mission accomplished’ situation. This is simply a reality check.”

    U.S. officials confirmed earlier this week that strikes against Iran, which began Saturday, killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several senior figures in the regime’s leadership.

    The military campaign comes amid escalating tensions between Washington and Tehran following repeated threats from Iran against Trump after the 2020 U.S. strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani.

    In 2024, Iran-linked actors attempted to arrange an assassination plot targeting Trump. The U.S. government has also previously warned of other Iranian efforts to target the former president.

    In 2022, an Iranian video depicted an assassination attempt on Trump while he played golf.

    Trump referenced those threats during a phone call with ABC News’ Jonathan Karl earlier this week following reports of Khamenei’s death.

    “I got him before he got me,” Trump said.

    “They tried twice,” Trump continued, referring to Iran’s previous attempts on his life. “Well, I got him first.”

    During Wednesday’s press conference, Hegseth said the combined power of U.S. and Israeli intelligence and military forces is rapidly weakening Iran’s ability to respond.

    “America is winning decisively, devastatingly and without mercy,” Hegseth said.

    He also emphasized that the current military campaign was never intended to be evenly matched.

    “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,” he said.

    Iran has launched retaliatory attacks in response to the strikes. A drone strike in Kuwait earlier this week killed at least six Americans, according to U.S. officials. Hegseth vowed those casualties would be avenged.

    He said:

    “As President Trump said, more and larger waves are coming. We are just getting started. We are accelerating, not decelerating. Iran’s capabilities are evaporating by the hour, while American strength grows fiercer, smarter and utterly dominant. More bombers and more fighters are arriving just today. And now, with complete control of the skies, we will be using 500-pound, 1,000-pound and 2,000 pound GPS and laser-guided precision gravity bombs, of which we have a nearly unlimited stockpile. We used more exquisite standoff munitions at the start, but no longer need to. Our stockpiles of those, as well as patriots, remains extremely strong.”

    Hegseth added that the United States has the capacity to sustain the conflict if necessary.

    He warned the U.S. can “sustain this fight easily for as along as we need to.”

    The defense secretary compared Iran’s situation to a football team that had prepared only the opening portion of a game.

    “I liken Iran’s predicament to a football team who scripted the first 20 plays of a game,” he said. “The team knew what plays to run because their first few drives were scripted. But now that the game has started and the blitz is on, they don’t know what plays call, let alone how to get in the huddle and call those plays.”

    Hegseth concluded by saying the strikes represent Trump getting the “last laugh” against Iran.

    Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.

    Dem Senator Left ‘Baffled’ By Lack of Support for Trump’s Iran Strikes and Death of ‘Evil’ Leaders

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    5
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is expressing disbelief at fellow Democrats who have criticized President Donald Trump’s military strikes against Iran, calling the action a decisive moment for regional peace and security.

    Fetterman questioned members of his own party who voiced opposition to the strikes, arguing that preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon has long been a bipartisan priority.

    “Every single member of the Senate has agreed that we can never allow Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb, and clearly they [Iran] were actually intending to do that. So, are you really committed to that?” Fetterman asked Monday on Hannity.

    U.S. and Israeli forces launched coordinated strikes on Iranian military and government targets on Feb. 28, deploying air, sea and missile power in what officials described as a sweeping operation. The mission, dubbed Operation Epic Fury, struck more than 1,000 military, intelligence and government sites across Iran within its first 24 hours, according to U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and dozens of senior regime officials were eliminated in the strikes.

    Fetterman said he was “baffled” that more people were not celebrating the death of what he described as “one of the most evil men ever” and the crippling of the Iranian regime.

    “It’s a good thing for the region, it’s a good thing for Israel, it’s good for America, and so, for me, that’s why I stand with the country over perhaps what the base may demand,” Fetterman said.

    Watch:

    He also defended the legality and strategic rationale behind the operation, pushing back on critics who questioned whether the president overstepped his authority.

    “Imagine if people just listened to the conventional wisdom, that they could have possibly have acquired a bomb if we weren’t bombed back in June. So, yes, there is a threat. It’s not imminent that it could happen right now. But it’s one that I think is entirely appropriate to deal with it,” Fetterman told CNN host Dana Bash. “And that’s why I support it. So, again, people keep— describe that it was a legal war. Now read the War Powers Act. And, now, that has not been violated at this point what happened yesterday.”

    The War Powers Act requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing U.S. military forces. The Trump administration notified the “Gang of Eight” — the bipartisan group of top congressional leaders and intelligence committee chairs — before the strikes but did not seek formal authorization.

    Fetterman noted that Trump had previously attempted diplomacy before resorting to military action.

    “Well, what is true is that President Trump tried to negotiate that and tried to find a firm kinds [sic] of agreements, absolutely. And they refused to those basic, basic kinds of things: remind everybody, you are never allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. And, clearly, they was [sic]. And I absolutely supported what happened last June,” Fetterman continued.

    Fetterman is one of the few Democrats who backed Operation Midnight Hammer, the June 2025 U.S. strike on Iranian nuclear facilities ordered by President Trump. While most of the Democratic caucus condemned that action, Fetterman later voted as the lone Democratic senator against a war powers resolution seeking to curb the president’s authority following the operation.

    URGENT MISSION: 35 brave House GOP members are in JEOPARDY! Today ONLY, you can donate ANY amount and it will go DIRECTLY to fending off attacks on our 35 brightest MAGA fighters in Congress in these vulnerable districts! [Rush Donation HERE]

    MTG Accuses Trump Of Implementing ‘Manufactured Crisis’ To Cancel Midterm Elections

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    5
    Marjorie Taylor Greene -Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) said Sunday that she could envision President Donald Trump declaring a “national emergency” tied to Iran or another crisis, responding to speculation that such a move could affect the upcoming midterm elections.

    The comments came after conservative podcaster Shannon Joy posted on X, “Trump doesn’t seem to care about the midterms. Who wants to bet he’ll declare a ‘national emergency’ because of Iran (or some other manufactured crisis) and try to cancel the elections in November?”

    Greene replied, “Yeah, I could see it. INSANE.”

    Her response follows a recent public break with the president over U.S. military action against Iran. Greene has sharply criticized the strikes in multiple social media posts, arguing they run counter to the “America First” platform that helped elect Trump.

    “The Trump admin actually asked in a poll how many casualties voters were willing to accept in a war with Iran???” Greene wrote Saturday on X. “How about ZERO you bunch of sick f*cking liars. We voted for America First and ZERO wars.”

    In another post, she added: “This is NOT freeing the Iranian people!!! This is murdering their children!!! WTF are you insane people doing??? AMERICA DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS!!!”

    The exchange comes amid debate within Republican circles about the administration’s decision to strike Iran. Critics have questioned the timing, noting that Trump said in June that prior U.S. strikes had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

    In an interview Sunday with Fox News’ Jacqui Heinrich, Trump defended the latest action, saying that without U.S. and Israeli missile strikes, Iran “would have had a nuclear weapon within two weeks.”

    However, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) offered a more measured assessment during an appearance on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”

    “I don’t have present-day intelligence on what progress they had made toward rebuilding nuclear weapons since we bombed their facilities,” Cruz said. “I have no indication that they were anywhere close to getting nuclear weapons, because our bombing was devastating… That’s one of the reasons I urged President Trump, ‘Now is the time’” to strike.

    The midterm elections, scheduled for November, are expected to be closely contested, with some political analysts projecting potential Republican losses in key districts. Greene’s comments reflect broader concerns among some conservatives about U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts and their potential domestic political implications.

    A January report from Roll Call cited a prior Oval Office meeting in which Trump discussed elections during wartime. According to the report, during an Aug. 18 meeting, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy spoke about the conditions required to restart elections in Ukraine.

    “So you say, during the war, you can’t have elections,” Trump mused, according to the report. “So you mean if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections. I wonder what the fake news would say to that.”

    CHIP IN $26 NOW to lock in Founder Status and join me on the frontline! Your support at this critical moment helps fight with Trump and fuel the grassroots movement that’s defending America’s future. FIGHT WITH TRUMP — JOIN THE FRONTLINE and stand with patriots like you.

    Mexican President Pushes Back On Trump’s Latest Cartel Proposal

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,

    Mexico’s new president, Claudia Sheinbaum, says she had “a very good conversation” with President Donald Trump on Monday — a call that focused heavily on cartel violence, cross-border drug trafficking, and the Trump administration’s push for tougher action against transnational criminal groups

    The call lasted about 15 minutes and came after Sheinbaum said she requested direct dialogue with the Trump administration, following a week of escalating rhetoric from Trump about the cartels and Mexico’s security crisis.

    A familiar dispute: U.S. military action vs. Mexican sovereignty

    Trump has repeatedly suggested the United States could use the U.S. military to strike cartel networks inside Mexico — an idea that resonates with many Republican voters who view the cartels as a direct national-security threat tied to fentanyl deaths, human trafficking, and illegal immigration.

    Sheinbaum, however, again rejected the idea of U.S. intervention, signaling that her government wants continued security cooperation, but on Mexico’s terms.

    Trump “still insisted that if we ask for it, they could help” with military forces, Sheinbaum said, adding that she rejected the offer again:

    “We told him, so far it’s going very well, it’s not necessary, and furthermore there is Mexico’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and he understood.”

    For Republican-leaning audiences, the tension here is straightforward: Mexico wants U.S. support — but not U.S. control, even as American communities continue facing the fallout of cartel-driven fentanyl trafficking.

    Trump presses the issue: “The cartels are running Mexico”

    Trump’s posture has been consistent: treat cartels like the enemy force they are.

    In a Fox News interview aired last week, he said:

    “We’ve knocked out 97% of the drugs coming in by water and we are going to start now hitting land, with regard to the cartels. The cartels are running Mexico. It’s very sad to watch.”

    That message plays to a key Republican argument: the U.S. cannot allow criminal organizations to operate with near-military power just across the border, especially when those groups fuel drug deaths and destabilize communities on both sides.

    Venezuela raid adds new weight to Trump’s threats

    The conversation also came in the wake of a dramatic U.S. operation in Venezuela — the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro — which Sheinbaum said Trump raised directly.

    “He (Trump) asked me my opinion about what they had done in Venezuela and I told him very clearly that our constitution is very clear, that we do not agree with interventions and that was it,” Sheinbaum said.

    Sheinbaum’s comments reflect a longstanding Mexican government position against foreign military interventions, but the timing matters: the Venezuela operation has made leaders across the region take Trump’s warnings more seriously — including when he talks about Mexico, Cuba, and even Greenland. AP News+1

    Rubio demands “tangible results” from Mexico

    The Trump administration’s pressure campaign hasn’t been limited to the president.

    Mexico’s Foreign Affairs Secretary Juan Ramón de la Fuente spoke Sunday with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who called for “tangible results” and more cooperation to dismantle cartel power, according to the U.S. State Department.

    That demand reflects what many Republican voters have argued for years: Mexico must do more than make promises — it must deliver measurable enforcement.

    Sheinbaum claims progress — and wants credit

    Sheinbaum said Mexico shared results with the U.S. side, including:

    • a significant drop in homicides
    • falling U.S. fentanyl seizures
    • lower fentanyl overdose deaths in the U.S.

    Even so, U.S. officials and border-state Republicans have frequently questioned whether Mexico’s progress is durable and nationwide, or simply temporary or concentrated in certain regions while cartels continue adapting.

    Why intervention is still unlikely — for now

    Experts say U.S. intervention in Mexico remains unlikely because Mexico is currently doing much of what Washington has requested and remains one of America’s most important economic partners. But they also expect Trump to keep using hardline rhetoric to maintain pressure.

    Cuba left out — but still a point of friction

    Sheinbaum said the two leaders did not discuss Cuba, even though Trump has recently threatened action related to the island. Mexico remains an important ally of Cuba, including through oil shipments, which have become even more significant now that the Trump administration has moved to stop Venezuelan oil from reaching Cuba.

    Steve Scalise is giving you exclusive access to his 2026 Priorities Survey. Thanks for standing strong and defending conservatives — your support hasn’t gone unnoticed. Now he wants to hear directly from you. Complete the 2026 Priorities Survey now.
    12Page 1 of 2
    © Great America News Desk 2022