Popular Posts

[MUSIC PLAYING] Before thousands were brutally killed, including Americans. Before Iran helped Hamas plan the attack, killing Americans. Before Biden gave billions of taxpayers money to Iran. Trump played hardball with Iran. Destroyed ISIS. Kept the Middle East at peace. Kept us out of endless wars through strength. History shows very plainly that evil only respects one thing, unyielding strength. When I'm back in the White House, our enemies will know, if you spill a drop of American blood, we will spill a gallon of yours. President Trump, the strength we need to make America strong again. I'm Donald J. Trump and I approve this message.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A bar-chart-style infographic titled "Our Pool is Bigger than Skyscrapers," comparing the height of the Lincoln Reflecting Pool (depicted as a tall vertical blue pool with the Lincoln Memorial illustrated atop it) against three real skyscrapers. A vertical axis on the left is marked in 500 ft increments from 0 to 2,000 ft. The "pool" bar, labeled 2,030 ft, is drawn taller than all three building silhouettes: the Willis (Sears) Tower at 1,451 ft, the Empire State Building at 1,454 ft, and One World Trade Center at 1,776 ft, each shown as a simplified illustrated building silhouette matching its real architectural shape.

Text in image: Our Pool is Bigger than Skyscrapers 2,030 ft Lincoln Reflecting Pool 1,451 ft Willis (Sears) Tower 1,454 ft Empire State Building 1,776 ft One World Trade Center 2,000 ft 1,500 ft 1,000 ft 0 ft

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A big news for President Trump last night as the Supreme Court declines to speed up the ruling on Jack Smith's immunity case against him, 45 taking to Truth Social to celebrate the court's decision, saying in part, "Crooked Joe Biden and his henchmen waited three years to bring this sham case, and now they have tried and failed to rush this witch hunt through the courts." Here to break it all down, let's bring in Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett. Nobody better to talk about this, Greg, and I want to get right to it because it seemed significant to me that the High Court wasted no time in a single sentence with no descents saying no. Go with the regular appellate process. We're not taking this. What's your read? Yeah, it was always, Griff, highly unlikely that the Supreme Court would take the case at this juncture because it's premature. The justices want to hear first from the appellate court, the DC Circuit. That's the normal process, and for good reason. The intermediate court refines the issues and scrutinizes what is essentially a novel legal theory here of immunity. It's untested. So their opinions are quite valuable to the Supreme Court. The justices also don't like it, Griff, when somebody tries to butt to the front of the line and rob them, the justices of meaningful legal judgment, and here the special counsel really offered no compelling reason, except obviously wants a trial of Trump in the middle of a presidential campaign, I think, to damage him to the benefit of Democrats and Joe Biden, and perhaps the justices saw this for what it was, election interference. Jack Smith, the special counsel, keeps insisting Trump should be treated like everybody else all right, and then appeal the case like everyone else. Well, that's a great point, Greg, and it seems to me that what ultimately had the court take in it, what Jack Smith either intentionally or not would have accomplished, is to show that the court can be bullied and feel political pressure when they are the institution that should be independent. Yes, and the Supreme Court, Griff, doesn't like such antics or imaginations. Eventually, they may decide Trump's immunity argument. It is, I think, a credible one, that he acted consistent with his sworn duty to uphold and enforce all laws, and that includes ensuring free and fair elections. If he actually suspected there was fraud or faulty vote counting, well, he's entitled to pursue challenges under the law and even contest the electors, which Democrats obviously did in prior elections. Somehow, it's okay for them to do it, but not a Republican president. Well, and Greg, in just 30 seconds I got left, I want to ask you, because if it goes through the appellate process, it could still end up in the Supreme Court. Do you think that this could end up having implications on future presidents? Oh, I think it's a precedent-setting case, as to whether a president enjoys absolute immunity, limited immunity. What is the conduct in the course and scope of presidential duties? These are all open issues that the U.S. Supreme Court has never directly decided. The Supreme Court doesn't like to take political cases. In the end, they may be forced to. We'll wait and see.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A bar chart infographic titled "Length of Wars," bearing the "45|47" presidential seal logo (Trump's official second-term branding) in dotted-circle eagle emblems at top left and right, separated from the title by a gold bar. It compares the duration in weeks of several U.S. wars/conflicts using blue horizontal bars, with a final entry, "Iran Excursion," highlighted separately below in a red-outlined box with red text, showing a value of "6" (weeks) with no bar graphic.

Text in image: Length of Wars 45 | 47 (x2, in circular eagle seals) Afghanistan War 543 Weeks Iraq War 457 Weeks Vietnam War 439 Weeks US Civil War 209 Weeks World War II 196 Weeks Korean War 161 Weeks War of 1812 139 Weeks Iran Excursion | 6

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

This is a rough winter in Asia, this is a rough flight, we could have waited an hour maybe. This is a tough conditions for interviews, they're gonna be watching Trump, they're gonna say he didn't look too good, he's got the shanks, I don't have the shanks but people are gonna think I do. What a rough ride this is, this is, the interviews are tough enough without, you know, without your life being threatened. You guys okay? That camera guy's very steady. We're gonna look real bad today on television, I'll tell you.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

>> Jim Hansen's a former U.S. Army Special Forces and Chief Strategist for the Middle East Forum. Jim, what do you think is going on today in Tehran? >> I think they are scrambling and anybody who says this fracture between the religious leadership and the military and their civilian political leadership is a bad thing doesn't understand how to break a tyrannical regime. Of course we want them arguing with each other and obviously I think the military will come out on top as you said they do have the guns but in the end they don't have much in the way of weapons left and anytime they poke any of those weapons out of their holes we destroy them. So they've got a very short window before they run out of money, they run out of the ability to pump oil, they already can't sell it and there's not any money coming in to run the regime. Anybody who thinks they're ahead in this game is not paying attention. >> So is it more of a negotiating tactic or is it them trying to consolidate power as they lead negotiations going forward? >> They want the world and anybody else to think that they are ahead. That's why you hear them say things like 26 ships broke the blockade, well no, 26 ships got turned back and the 27th got a free engine room redecoration courtesy of a U.S.S. destroyers five inch gun, free ventilation, that's not how you win. Next we take a tanker and now we've got 2 million barrels of free oil. They don't have any way to come out ahead in the blockade game. They're wrong if they can think they can wait President Trump out and if he has to start breaking some more of their stuff to emphasize the point, we have plenty of ways to do that. They have nothing but maybe an opportunity to attack a ship trying to transit the strait. >> And they don't have a lot of time left. You heard Bessin say these oil wells, they're going to fill up and they're going to have to shuttle production soon. Do you think the president waits and sees how things unfold inside Tehran or do you think he needs to give him a little nudge? >> Here's the thing. Anything the president blows up right now causes damage for the Iranian people and he's got the opportunity, there was a point there where I guess the defeat mongers thought they were going to convince the world that President Trump had to stop this because of the pressure. We can absorb some short term oil price jumps and the political pressure at home is not going to change President Trump's calculation. He can beat them at this game. The fewer things he blows up from here going forward, the better, but they shouldn't think for a second, he will not give them an object lesson in how to make the rubble bounce. >> And the United States and Israel have been accumulating so much intelligence over the last two weeks that whatever fighting does break out will end pretty quickly. Is that your understanding? >> Yeah, we've got all of their people identified. If we wanted to, we could take out another layer of their leadership again, but we need somebody to go ahead and quasi surrender whatever this ends up being. So if they want to try and I mean, they can't fight in the normal use of that word. They can cause damage, they can be a terrorist state breaking other people's things, but they can't take us on force. And if they want to go ahead and let the IRGC take a run at being the heads of a military as opposed to a theocracy, that will be a very short-lived event.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Screenshot of a tweet/X post from Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC), verified account, timestamped 10:47 AM, Apr 4, 2026, with 1.2M views. The post expresses support for Trump's ultimatum to Iran regarding the Strait of Hormuz and references a military operation called "Operation Epic Fury."

Text in image: Lindsey Graham ✓ 🛡️ @LindseyGrahamSC I just had a great conversation with @POTUS. I totally support his ultimatum to the Iranian regime to open up the Strait of Hormuz and to do a peace deal. A massive military operation awaits Iran if they choose poorly. This regime has been severely crippled through Operation Epic Fury. Their reign of terror against the region and the world needs to come to an end, hopefully through a peace deal. After speaking with President Trump this morning, I am completely convinced that he will use overwhelming military force against the regime if they continue to impede the Strait of Hormuz and refuse a diplomatic solution to achieve our military objectives. If it's not clear to Iran and others by now that President Trump means what he says then I don't know when it will ever be. Choose wisely. 10:47 AM · Apr 4, 2026 · 1.2M Views

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

It's a truly historic day, and under this president's leadership, this historic peace deal has been truly made into reality. When people actually go back and look at the history, you hit the high points there. These two countries have been in some form of conflict, sometimes very bloody, other times a very tense situation where conflict could spark out again at any moment for over 35 years. So for this event to happen today, again, President Trump said in some of his remarks today that his aspiration, his greatest aspiration as president is to bring about peace and stability. This is yet another example of his effective leadership that brought these two leaders together in a way that hasn't happened before. And I can tell you there was a lot of work that led to this moment. This wasn't something that just happened overnight. Again, when you look at over 35 years of conflict, under President Trump's leadership, he encouraged and helped move along this ongoing negotiation between these two leaders and their countries that led to this truly historic and great event.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.