You’ll note that ridiculous pieces of propaganda was circulated by Tom Cotton and the Senate Republicans. They’re all doing it now. As if we’re supposed to be impressed that Trump’s cultists still back their cult leader … and that cult support is all that’s necessary to take us into war.
In case you were wondering how many of these deluded weirdos there are:
Creepy.
The good news is that the coalition that brought him and the GOP victory in ’24 is crumbling. G. Elliott Morris has this:
To measure how Trump’s 2024 coalition is holding up, I pooled nine months of Strength In Numbers/Verasight national surveys from May 2025 through Feb. 2026 and isolated respondents who said they voted for Trump in 2024.
Among these self-described Trump voters, 83.5% currently approve of his job performance while 15.3% disapprove.
Fifteen percent might seem low, but consider that if Trump lost 15% of his voters in 2024, he would have won just 42% of the vote. So it’s a meaningful slice of the electorate.
The chart below breaks down Trump’s job approval today among different demographic groups. People who say they voted for Trump in 2024 and are at least 65 years old are the most likely to approve of his job as president (92%), whereas Black 2024 Trump voters are the least likely (65%).
Still too many, but it’s getting better slowly but surely.
Stanley Kubrick’s 1964 satirical masterpiece “Dr. Strangelove” brilliantly parodied the lunacy of the nuclear threat during the Cold War. “I’m not saying we wouldn’t get our hair mussed,” says Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and Air Force Col. Buck Turgidson, one of the film’s most memorable characters, while agitating the president in the war room for a first strike against the Soviet Union. “But I do say no more than 10 to 20 million killed, tops, uh, depending on the breaks.”
Unbelievable as it sounds, Turgidson was based on a real-life war hawk. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay advocated immediate airstrikes and a full-scale invasion to destroy the Soviet nuclear missiles. Even after President John F. Kennedy’s naval blockade proved successful, possibly preventing a nuclear war between the superpowers, LeMay called it “the worst defeat in our history.”
He was also known for another quote: “We should bomb them to the stone age,” a sentiment expressed thousands of times during the era by drunk right-wingers propped up at the end of the bar. Turns out, LeMay borrowed the phrase; the words were originally coined by satirical columnist Art Buchwald, but they lived on as the ultimate hawkish critique of the American strategy during the Vietnam War. Right-wingers believed that the U.S. needed to go all-out and prove their enemy’s cause was hopeless. The belief was that by bombing all of North Vietnam’s infrastructure to rubble, not to mention killing a massive amount of people, the Viet Cong would be forced to surrender.:
This idea has held the imagination of the right-wing in America for more than 60 years: if only we had taken the gloves off — if only we had obliterated Hanoi, or gone into Baghdad in 1991, or attacked Iran years earlier — all the wars we have lost or brought to a draw would have been won. America’s presidents, cowed by public opinion, just didn’t have the stomach for what it takes to really demonstrate our superiority and put our enemies in their place. Trump’s Trugidson
Lindsey Graham is the contemporary embodiment of this philosophy. As the quintessential Trump suck-up who sees the president as an opportunity to advance his own personal agenda, he knows all too well — like so many other establishment Republicans — that Trump is barely hanging on to sanity at this point, and that he should never be allowed to wield such massive power. But Graham is the Senate’s version of LeMay — a hawk who wants to see the United States use its mighty military to settle scores and punish any and all who have been a thorn in its side. And he has learned how to persuade Trump to be his instrument in that cause.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Graham has been the most relentless and the most successful of all the hawks pushing for Trump to attack Iran. He finds ways to get next to the president on the golf course and at his resorts to lobby for major military incursions, and he’s also been traveling overseas to tutor Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on how best to speak to Trump to get him to agree. Obviously, Trump listened.
Despite his claim of being the president for peace, Trump has always believed in the idea that the U.S. military should be unleashed to do its worst so as to teach the country’s adversaries a lesson they won’t soon forget. In this he was largely contained during his first term by good-faith officials and staff, and by his own insincere promise to keep America out of wars. He also, one suspects, has been haunted by a personal fear of making a mistake in an arena in which he has no experience.
Trump knows that a failed war would be the ultimate black mark on his legacy, and until now he was reluctant to go all out. But Graham was there, the little devil on his shoulder, whispering sweet nothings into the presidential ears about how Trump will be remembered as one of history’s greatest leaders if only he will do what no president in his lifetime has been willing to do: launch wars of choice to demonstrate American military might.
Until now, even the most hawkish Republican presidents knew this notion was absurd. They had learned from the mistakes of Lyndon Johnson, a Democrat, and Richard Nixon, a Republican. Over three years, from 1965 to 1968, the U.S. conducted Operation Rolling Thunder, a sustained bombing campaign with the objective of putting the Viet Cong in their place — and it was remarkably unsuccessful. Nixon tried it again with Operation Linebacker in 1972, and it was equally a failure. The North Vietnamese were not cowed. They just kept on fighting until the U.S. finally pulled up stakes three years later and withdrew.
Of course the hawks all said that the military just didn’t go hard enough, destroy enough, kill enough or it would have worked — an argument that persisted throughout the rest of the Cold War and the years of Iraq and Afghanistan. America was restrained by what our current Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently called the “stupid rules of engagement” and “outdated” international norms like the Geneva Convention. Hegseth believes that the United States must be “ruthless” and “uncompromising,” willing to use “overwhelmingly lethal” force geared to “winning our wars according to our own rules.”
Over the weekend, Graham took to the airwaves and agreed, making Buck Turgidson look like Mahatma Gandhi by comparison. He told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo about Iran, “You just wait to see what comes in the next two weeks. We’re going to blow the hell out of these people.”
Then the senator turned his attention back to the Western hemisphere. “If we get in a fight,” he said, “I want to win it quick. I’m in Miami. You see this hat? ‘Free Cuba.’ Stay tuned. The liberation of Cuba is upon us. We’re marching through the world. We’re clearing out the bad guys. Cuba is next.”
Subtle, Graham is not. It’s clear that this bombing campaign in Iran has him high on his own supply. He sees that Trump is loaded with over confidence from the administration’s successful action in Venezuela, which saw the seizure of the country’s president Nicolás Maduro, and he is now champing at the bit to get going on Cuba, which the president has been talking about incessantly. At a White House event last week with soccer players, Trump blurted out to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, “Your next one is gonna be Cuba. [Rubio’s] waiting but he says, ‘Let’s get this one finished first.’ We could do them all at the same time, but bad things happen.” That’s what passes for prudence in this administration.
When Graham says that they’re “marching through the world,” he means it. According to the Journal, he is also pushing Trump to bomb Lebanon back into the stone age, although it appears Israel is well on its way to doing that already. Graham called up Trump and pitched the idea of “‘Operation Semper Fi’ in honor of the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut that killed 241 American personnel.” He told the president he could go even farther than Ronald Reagan, which, in this context, is an interesting statement, since Reagan rattled some sabers initially but actually made the judicious decision to withdraw.
With his inane bleating on television about taking over the world, Graham sounded unhinged. But like so many members of the GOP establishment who signed on to the MAGA movement as a way to either line their pockets or fulfill their ideological holy grails, he knows what he is doing. Graham is finally getting what he always wanted.
I suspect the late John McCain would be dismayed to see his protegé thinking that Donald Trump could be trusted with such decisions. The late Arizona senator may have been a war hawk, but he knew the president was a disaster. But then, so did Graham — until he realized Trump could be manipulated for his own ends.
Donald Trump is feeling the economic blowback from his [your spin on what this is here] in Iran. “I think the war is very complete, pretty much,”Trump said in a phone interview on Monday. Afterwards, markets shot up and the soaring price of oil fell.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth vowed that Tuesday would be the “most intense day” of American strikes against Iran since the start of the war after President Trump sent mixed signals about a possible end to the conflict.
So is the war that isn’t a war over or isn’t it?
“We have won in many ways, but not enough,” he told a gathering of Republican lawmakers in Florida. Asked later if the war would be over this week, Mr. Trump said, “No.” He said only, “Soon, very soon.”
Q: You said the war is 'very complete.' But your defense secretary says 'this is just the beginning.' So which is it?
Where’s that legendary, Trump “truthful hyperbole” now?
Oh, about Trump Always Chickens Out (TACO), Bill Kristol notes at The Bulwark:
Yesterday we saw the mother of all TACO trades. Oil prices were soaring and the market was falling. Then at 3:30 p.m., President Trump told Weijia Jiang of CBS that the war could be over soon: “I think the war is very complete, pretty much.” Oil prices promptly plunged and stocks shot up. You could have made a lot of money in that last half hour of trading. For all we know, some Trump insiders did.
But chickening out isn’t a matter of one phone call. It takes time and can be a bit complicated to pull off. And of course Trump won’t acknowledge he’s doing it.
Sometime soon Donald Trump will ring the closing bell on his Iran war. That moment will have less to do with whether his mission is accomplished (whatever that is) than how much pain he can endure. We can safely assume that Iran’s pain threshold is higher than his. Trump will nevertheless present his exit as a victory. Iran will have every incentive to ensure nobody believes him. That is the crux of his self-inflicted dilemma.
Anticipating this would have served Trump well. One step would have been to build up America’s strategic petroleum reserves, which dropped sharply after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and were never replenished. Oil and natural gas prices may have soared but an ounce of prevention is still worth a pound of cure. A second would have been to win the Gulf monarchies round to his war plan in advance. That he had no fixed goal made that difficult. Now he is faced with an increasingly irascible Gulf. A third would have been to prepare the US public for a longer conflict. Ditto.
The question is whether Trump has become aware of the drawbacks of not thinking ahead. Were he on a learning curve, he would know that even a severely degraded Iran can continue to frighten oil tankers from the Gulf and shutter much of the region’s energy production. Short of occupying Iran, Trump cannot guarantee safe passage in the Strait of Hormuz. Drone production is decentralised and hard to eradicate from the air.
Speaking of drones, or at least cruise missiles:
Trump on Tehran School Bombing: "Whatever the Report Shows, I’m Willing to Live With It"
REPORTER: You just suggested that Iran somehow got its hands on a Tomahawk and bombed its own elementary school on the first day of the war… Why are you the only person saying this? pic.twitter.com/W8hbcz9cEi
The Tomahawk is an advanced subsonic cruise missile that is primarily launched from submarines and ships and used to conduct precision strikes. The U.S. Navy and the U.K.’s Royal Navy are the main operators of the Tomahawk and in recent years the Japanese and Australian Navies have also agreed to acquire the weapon. Neither Iran or Israel is known to operate the Tomahawk.
Adam Serwer on Monday took on our “bizarre epidemic of gullibility and cynicism” in The Atlantic. “Gullicism” is his shorthand for this explosion of a variety of epistemic closure. Or is that “epistemic explosure”?
Many Americans believe that vaccines are unsafe, but will jab themselves full of performance enhancers. They think seed oils cause chronic disease, but beef tallow is healthy. They’ll say you can’t trust federally insured banks, but you can trust the millionaires who want you to invest in their volatile vaporware crypto tokens. They think food additives are toxic but support an administration removing all restrictions on pumping pollutants into the air and water. They’ll insist that you can’t trust scientists, because they’re part of the conspiracy. The podcaster selling you his special creatine gummies, though? He seems trustworthy.
A carnival of mountebanks (if that’s the right collective noun) exploits the suckers born every minute, as our sitting president surely has tens of millions. Vaccine conspiracists are behind the measles outbreaks across the country, Serwer notes, a disease thought eradicated 26 years ago.
It’s unnerving to watch friends and relations disappear down the conspiracy rabbit hole and become gullicists. The schoolteacher who “did her own research” in online threads and recommends stockpiling supplements for warding off Covid. The once liberal nurse whose Facebook posts suddenly fill with vaccine conspiracy “truths” from right-wing websites. All enhanced by the confidence in knowing that the rugged, fiercely independent You know more than the duplicitous Them. Gullicism knows no partisanship.
(I’m still waiting for someone on the left to produce a perpwith the means, motive, and opportunity to steal Ohio for Bush in 2004, or for Rudy Giuliani to produce the volumes of proof he repeatedly claimed to have that Democrats stole the 2020 election from Trump.)
Serwer is on my page when he writes:
Part of what’s going on here is that people want a simple explanation for their troubles in a complicated world. Autism? It’s vaccines. Disease? Some foods are “poison.” Trouble with your kid? Must be brainwashed by … novels? Video games? Rap music? (This one depends on the decade.) The One True Reason trains a mind not only to reject complexity but to accept bigotry—which is why it’s so ideal for reactionary politics. No housing? Immigrants. No job? Immigrants. Inflation? Immigrants. Immigrants? It’s the Jews.
Lately, however, even some conservatives have begun to lament this monster they’ve helped create. The right-wing activist Christopher Rufo, who peddled garbage about African immigrants eating pets, recently complained that “the right’s brain is getting melted in a vat of slop, conspiracy and algorithm chasing.” But conservatives built that vat. Using legal and political pressure, they pressed the platforms to eschew any consistent or responsible content moderation in the hopes they would serve as frictionless distributors of conservative propaganda. They got their wish.
But it’s Serwer’s reference to frictionlessness that’s also familiar. At The Ink, Anand Giridharadas writes about the culture of elite impunity and, especially, immunity from respecting any limits at all. “These are men who do not like resistance. Friction. Pushback. Any obstacle to the sprawl of their ideas and needs.” he writes. Including women who might have ideas and power of their own. That’s what makes young girls so attractive to the Epstein class:
It is a different experience of life never to have to wait for your turn on the ski lift. Never to have to contend for space in the overhead locker with another person. Never to have to be charming to get into a restaurant. After a time, one imagines, all the not-having-to-dos will change you. You will become less capable of exerting yourself in ways you once did without a care. And one can even dig deep and muster the empathy to appreciate that, the smoother and easier and more frictionless many parts of your life become, the more intolerable is whatever continues to resist you.
Like having to pursue and woo a grown woman.
There is a politeness culture, Giridharadas writes in another installment, “where disagreement is treated like ugly tribalism rather than intellectual engagement.” But the need for frictionlessness is a culture among grifters and gullicists in general, and not isolated to the rich.
I observed it while studying the New Age Movement of the 1990s. One vendor at a New Age trade show might offer a (non-FDA approved or tested) device that would reduce wrinkles with electrical stimulation. The vendor in the next booth might sell magic amulets (made from recycled circuit boards) that they claimed removed the harmful effects of electrical fields. Neither questioned the other’s placebo. It would be bad form. Like questioning the young girls hanging around Epstein giving massages on demand.
The Iranian council chose their new leader, a nepo baby son of the former Ayatollah. Trump said before the announcement:
“Khamenei’s son is a lightweight. I have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy in Venezuela.
That demand is one of the most delusional he’s made since this whole thing has started, second only to the fact that he keeps comparing Venezuela to Iran which is completely daft.
Mojtaba,Ali’s second-eldest son, was born in 1969. His childhood was shaped by both the 1979 Iranian Revolution that toppled the previous dynasty and by his father’s rise to power, first as president in 1981, then as supreme leader in 1989.
A cleric, Mojtaba studied under the late Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi, who called for killing Iranian youths who promoted “Western immorality.”
Mojtaba joined the Revolutionary Guard at 17, serving during the Iran-Iraq War in the Habib Battalion.
The battalion is a “notoriously ideological unit” led by one of the founders of Hezbollah, according to the Atlantic Council. Many of its alumni later became high-ranking members of the regime’s security and intelligence bodies.
Between the lines: Mojtaba is expected to be more hardline than his father, and his ascent means the Iranian regime may get more repressive.
He has close ties to some of the most “ideologically extremist clerics” who have been at the forefront of the regime’s most violent crackdowns, per the Council.
Mojtaba also allegedly engineered the 2005 election that installed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president. In the 2009 election, protesters flooded the streets to insist Ahmadinejad didn’t win again, and Mojtaba reportedly personally supervised how the IRGC crushed these demonstrations.
Mojtaba reportedly oversees a massive business empire of luxury properties and investments worldwide, according to Bloomberg.
He does not list the investments under his name but has amassed wealth despite 2019 U.S. sanctions for his role in his father’s inner circle.
At the time, the Treasury said Mojtaba worked to “advance his father’s destabilizing regional ambitions and oppressive domestic objectives.”
He may be a lightweight, I don’t know. He does, in fact, seem a bit like Don Jr., what with all the corrupt investments. And he’s a hard line extremist too. So maybe he’s just a clown like the Trump boys are. But it appears to be done and Trump isn’t going to have a say in it.
What did the White House think it was getting into in Iran? A strike against Iran’s oppressive and fanatical regime, sure. A display of America’s awesome military might, definitely. But it’s become increasingly, painfully clear: They didn’t think there was going to be a war.
The Trump administration developed no real theory of the objectives of the Iran war, because they didn’t think there was going to be a war. ..
The Trump administration made no effort to get the American people on board with war, because they didn’t think there was going to be a war…
They didn’t think there was going to be a war, and so the White House seemingly gave no thought to what the economic ramifications of war would be…
They didn’t think there was going to be a war, and so the president assumed he’d be in charge of picking Iran’s next political leadership…”
They didn’t think there was going to be a war. But now they’ve got one, and they don’t have the faintest idea how to end it.
Looks like he’s getting bored and just wants to declare victory:
NEW—In a phone interview, President Trump told me the war could be over soon: “I think the war is very complete, pretty much. They have no navy, no communications, they’ve got no Air Force.” He added that the U.S. is “very far” ahead of his initial 4-5 week estimated time frame.
Well ok then. I’m sure everything’s going to turn out just fine.
They obviously still do not have a plan and Trump is trying to dance on the head of a pin, hoping against hope that everything will turn out ok like it has his whole life.
One week into President Trump’s war on Iran, the most severe shock to energy markets since the 1970s is cascading through the world economy. The disruption quickly fed into higher gasoline and diesel prices at the pump, and higher mortgage rates and borrowing costs for the U.S. government, endangering Trump’s economic priorities.
To be sure, the U.S. has more shock absorbers this time around. Oil is a far smaller component of gross domestic product than it once was, and the U.S. has become a top energy exporter in its own right.
Appearing Sunday on Fox, U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said that “energy will flow soon” through the Strait of Hormuz. He blamed the rise in prices on “the unknown that this could be some long, you know, drawn-out crisis. But it won’t be.”
Whew. That’s a relief.
Massive amounts of fertilizer sail through these waters, feeding crops on every continent. The few ships that have left the strait since the start of the war were mostly carrying Iranian oil. Traders say crude markets could soar even higher if the strait doesn’t open within days, either with U.S. naval escorts or because shipowners think the danger has receded
The strait’s closure is spilling through commodity markets. Aluminum prices hit multiyear highs after Middle Eastern smelters declared force majeure—a legal maneuver that means suppliers aren’t liable if they fail to deliver. Norsk Hydro, which is curtailing output in Qatar, said a full restart could take six to 12 months.
“We are looking at what is by far the biggest disruption in world history in terms of daily oil production,” said energy historian Daniel Yergin. “If it goes on for weeks, it will reverberate across the global economy.”
Here’s what the experts are saying:
“In the whole written history of the strait, it has never been closed, ever,” said JPMorgan Chase analyst Natasha Kaneva. “To me, it was not just the worst-case scenario. It was an unthinkable scenario.”
The Trump administration says there’s nothing to worry about so you can rest easy.
When a baby is born in a hospital in the US, one of the first things that happens — usually within 24 hours — is a hepatitis B shot, which prevents a virus that can cause liver cancer. The newborn shot has been a standard practice nationwide since 1991, after earlier efforts at prevention kept missing the mark. In the decades that have followed, most parents haven’t thought twice about it.
But over the past two years, more and more parents have started saying no. Because the birth dose is given inside the hospital, before the family goes home, there’s no appointment to miss, no chance of a scheduling mix-up — ways other childhood vaccines can be missed. If a newborn didn’t get this shot, in most cases, someone actively declined or delayed it.
A study published on February 23 in JAMA puts a clear number on that shift. The researchers tracked 12.4 million newborns — roughly a third of all US births — across hospitals in all 50 states that use Epic, one of the country’s largest electronic health record systems. Using years of prior data, the researchers modeled where vaccination rates should have been heading, and compared those projections to what was actually happening.
The study found that between 2023 and mid-2025, the share of newborns getting the hepatitis B birth dose fell from 83.5 percent to 73.2 percent. That translates to roughly “400,000 or more babies a year declining or delaying the hepatitis B [birth] vaccine,” said Joshua Rothman, a pediatrician at UC San Diego School of Medicine and the study’s lead author. For context, that’s roughly equivalent to the entire population of Minneapolis declining or delaying the shot every year.
Apparently, this has been happening for a while. The Hep B vaccine is declined because people don’t think a baby needs a shot against a sexually transmitted disease. But “the scientific answer — that hepatitis B can also spread during birth and through close household contact in infancy — is true, but harder to fit on a bumper sticker.” Well then, don’t bother trying because that’s all some people can understand.
The roots of this go back to the Covid pandemic, which reshaped how millions of Americans think about all vaccines — not just the Covid shot.
“This is a classic example of what we in the literature have come to refer to as a Covid-19 vaccine spillover effect,” said Matt Motta, a public health researcher at Boston University who studies vaccine hesitancy. Researchers have documented distrust of the Covid shot bleeding into generalskepticism of flu vaccines, childhood MMR shots, even vaccination for pets. Polls have sent mixedsignals about whether that skepticism is actually changing behavior — but a study like this captures what parents are doing, not what they are telling a pollster.
According to this article, Americans have been skeptical of “inoculations” since George Washington but until now we didn’t empower quacks like RFK Jr in the U.S. government to make it a policy. This is new.
Kids and adults will get sick and some will die. We’re seeing it with measles right now with some kids being permanently disabled because of it. And all because people are listening to snake oil salesmen and wellness influencers instead of the decades of scientific evidence that shows the vaccines are safe. It’s mod-boggling.
One of the reasons so many Americans never believed Donald Trump’s promise to end the “forever wars” was a simple observation. To all but his most fanatical followers, it’s clear he possesses a megalomaniacal personality and violent temperament. How could someone with such characteristics resist the urge to lead a war? It seemed fundamental to his personality and his desire to go down in history.
During the 2016 campaign the country was still dealing with fairly regular terrorist attacks from followers of ISIS, and despite Trump’s professed disdain for the leadership that took the U.S. into Afghanistan and Iraq, it was clear when you listened closely to him that he was contemptuous of their apparent unwillingness to take the gloves off. He was never some kind of peacenik. After all, Trump confessed to being a big fan of torture, casually saying, “Would I approve waterboarding? You bet your a*s I would. In a heartbeat. I would approve more than that. It works. And if it doesn’t work, they deserve it anyway for what they do to us.”
He repeatedly stated his belief that the U.S. should have “taken” Iraq’s oil. His supposed isolationism was nothing more than a crude way of differentiating himself from the decisions of his predecessors.
Trump was talked out of military action by his advisers more than once during his first term, and he seemed more or less content with ordering assassinations and limited bombing strikes. But there was one big decision he made in 2019 that telegraphed and previewed his true beliefs about warfare: his pardoning, over the strenuous objections of the military brass, of service members and contractors accused of war crimes.
One was known to shoot at unarmed civilians to “make them afraid” and was serving a 19-year sentence for ordering the murder of two unarmed Afghan villagers. Another was awaiting trial on charges of killing a suspected Afghan bomb maker. Then there was the Navy SEAL who had been accused and acquitted of murder but was convicted of posing with a mutilated corpse of an Iraqi soldier. Over the objections of top SEAL commanders, Trump reversed his demotion and invited him to a Christmas party at Mar-a-Lago.
Trump made his philosophy known in October 2019 when he tweeted, “We train our boys to be killing machines, then prosecute them when they kill!” At the time, it seemed odd that he tagged “Fox & Friends Weekend” co-host Pete Hegseth in the post. But Hegseth had been publicly and privately lobbying for the pardons, and he and Trump had a meeting of the minds on the subject.
Aside from all Hegseth’s character flaws and a lack of experience that should have disqualified him for the job, it was largely that episode that horrified so many political observers when Trump nominated him as defense secretary. Here was someone who openly supported war criminals, defended the barbarity at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison and believed torture to be justified.
Now that Trump has finally let his warmongering flag fly the way he always wanted to, we are seeing exactly how dangerous this partnership may end up being.
Hegseth’s intentions as secretary were never secret. Since his confirmation he has crusaded to rid the Pentagon of “wokeness,” by which he means any desire for diversity, intolerance of racism and bigotry, and adherence to the rules of war. He has purged the military’s top brass of many of its Black and women officers, and he took an ax to the Judge Advocate General’s office, which administers the military justice system. All of this was done in service of his aim of returning the Pentagon to a “warrior ethos” — which is really nothing more than a simple-minded call to be more macho and violent. The fact that he chose to rename the Defense Department as the Department of War should settle any dispute about his worldview.
Now that Trump has launched a growing war with Iran, which he seems convinced will result in Middle East peace — something he announced he had achieved with the Gaza ceasefire deal — we are about to see how this warrior ethos works in practice.
From the carnage inflicted on Indigenous and enslaved peoples to barbarity in the Philippines during the Spanish-American war — celebrated repeatedly by Trump during the 2016 campaign — and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, America has plenty of blood on its hands. Atrocities have been a feature of warfare since time began. But over the centuries, humans developed rules of warfare designed to, at least in theory, minimize the blood-letting. Since the horrors of the 20th-century’s two world wars and the development of technology that can deliver mass injury and slaughter, it has become more important than ever.
America used to at least give lip service to the rules of war, if only for the self-serving reasons that it would protect their own troops. But Trump and Hegseth’s overwhelming hubris seems to preclude even that as a concern, with the defense secretary callously dismissing the deaths of American service members and the president shrugging off the possibility of reprisals on American soil.
On Feb. 28, just as the war had started, an airstrike hit an elementary school in the Iranian town of Minab, near the adjacent naval base operated by Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. More than 175 civilians were reportedly killed, many of them children. According to the New York Times, the available evidence suggests it was a U.S. missile that hit the school. The administration says they are investigating.
No one has implied this was a targeted attack. One assumes that it was a mistake resulting in “collateral damage,” as the military likes to call it. But it is a perfect example of the kind of stories we are going to start seeing juxtaposed with Hegseth’s grotesque rhetoric in these first few days of the war. He has cheered the conflict as having “no stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars.” The Israelis, he said, are “good partners, unlike so many of our traditional allies who wring their hands and clutch their pearls, hemming and hawing about the use of force.” Hegseth’s irresponsible commentary will have the effect of robbing the U.S. military of any benefit of the doubt, as it well should.
America had already squandered most of its moral authority with the Iraq debacle, and Trump’s paeans to peace notwithstanding, it’s clear that we’ve now embraced a mercenary foreign policy in which there are no rules nor restraint. The president said as much in January when he was asked by the New York Times if there were any limits on his global powers. “Yeah, there is one thing,” he replied. “My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
Donald Trump launched two wars on February 28. One with Iran and another among his base of true believers. Media Matters last week sketched out the rift inside MAGA that’s grown since:
Many prominent right-wing figures spoke out in praise of the war. Ben Shapiro praised Trump as “the most courageous commander in chief.” Marc Thiessen called Trump “one of the most consequential commanders in chief in American history.” Mark Levin gushed over the “humane” war. And one Fox guest even suggested that the war “could qualify him once again for a Nobel Peace Prize.”
However, a wide variety of streamers and podcasters have broken with the administration, with Tucker Carlson calling the decision “absolutely disgusting and evil.” Streamer Adin Ross called it “really fucking stupid.”
Red hats are the new black hats, and MAGA knows it. Many don’t like the look. Not one bit.
Melissa Ryan posts a few of the MM links on MAGA infighting at Ctrl Alt Right Delete:
Laura Loomer lashing out at Megyn Kelly as not MAGA (with some sexist language)
Kelly calling her former Fox News Colleague Sean Hannity a “supplicant to Donald Trump” who exists to “puff” Trump up
And (completely unrelated to Megyn Kelly), Groyper Nick Fuentes calling Donald Trump “demonic” and “diabolical.”
“It’s objectively good when MAGA fights amongst themselves. It weakens their movement and their hold on the base. It’s energy they’re spending on one another rather than harming the rest of us,” Ryan writes:
MAGA is a coalition with differing ideologies brought together under Trump’s umbrella. The Epstein files already weakened them, and Iran has the potential to do so even further. Especially as Donald Trump is a lame duck president, and given what Americans can see of his declining physical health, it seems unlikely that Trump would be able to hang on for a third term even if that’s what he very much wants to do.” But will the faithful come back?
The MAGA faithful see their very worst qualities “redeemed” in Trump. Jesus tells them to love their neighbors. Trump tells them the opposite. He models that it’s okay to lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead in this world. Guess which gospel they’d rather follow? They chose Trumpism with a Jesusy glow.
Trump has lived a privileged life under the blanket of elite impunity for nearly 80 years. He’s evaded meaningful punishment for his misdeeds both in private and public life. MAGA believers thought they’d be covered by the same unholy dispensation. But with his Iran war, Trump finally has ripped down the myth of Americans as the good guys that they learned from infancy. They considered it a birthright. Now the world is asking cult members to account for themselves. They don’t like that either. Not one bit.
We on the left have long held a more nuanced view of America’s mixed legacy. But on balance, we believed that “long arc of the moral universe bent toward justice” stuff, that American ideals and principles of equal justice still meant something. We don’t like wearing black hats either.
Canadian-born Leigh McGowan is pissed.
Now they’re floating a draft? For a war they said we wouldn’t have and isn’t justified? Congress, WTFU. pic.twitter.com/RmWB7xYZmk
The question now is will the prodigals return to Trump’s fold?
“I’m just going to be brutally frank,” adviser Steve Bannon said over the weekend. “That was not pitched in the 2024 campaign. It just wasn’t. We’re going to bleed support.”
But Trump is betting that they repent. Ryan observes:
His Regime is the path for MAGA’s more extreme influencers to have actual power, and those like Kelly who screwed up their chance for a more mainstream audience and now rely on MAGA to make a living. A fractured MAGA coalition shrinks MAGA’s political capital and the available profit from the grift instantly. These folks might all be upset at Trump over Epstein and/or Iran and hate one another, but you can argue that they still need him and one another to have influence.
Thus, rumors of MAGA’s demise may be greatly exaggerated.
