Popular Posts

Fox News alert the Iran deal is now in immediate effect both sides have signed Trump did it over lobster and caviar at Versailles and the gay Ayatollah had his number two use an auto pen so one day in how's it looking? I think the president's peace plan in Iran is already bearing real fruits for the American people. Last night 12.5 million barrels of oil went through the Strait of Hormuz that is a high since the beginning of the conflict. On the military side the Iranians for the second night in a road did not shoot at any ships in the Strait of Hormuz. CENTCOM lifted the blockade and the first ships to set sail were three Saudi super tankers the price of oils now in the 70s same as it was before the war and gas just fell under four bucks a gallon POTUS said told you so. I just do want to say though the stock market just hit a new all-time high the 401ks just hit a new all-time high and oil is dropping like a rock other than that it's another day in paradise. It could be paradise for Iran too it's without the versions if they behave and follow through on the deal we'll open Iran for business. There is a great desire from the Arab world and from outside the Arab world to actually get involved in Iran if they behave properly. If you behave and if the Emiratis themselves want to build a power plant then we will do the sanctions relief necessary to make that possible. A world where the Gulf Coast coalition has greater leverage into the Iranian economy is a world where the Iranians are going to be heavily prevented from misbehaving. There's a big brouhaha brewing in Washington over Iran getting money remember we control the money they're like a kid if they screw around they don't get an allowance it's the exact opposite of the Obama deal where we paid them to build missiles and enrich. The Obama nuclear deal allowed enrichment ours will not the Obama deal allowed the accumulation of stockpiled weapons grade material ours is actually leading to the destruction of that stockpile of enriched material so there are many differences the Obama deal gave them over a billion dollars of American money the this seal gives them zero dollars of American money. The way the deal structured is if Iran holds up their end of the bargain they don't get American money they get Arab money and we decide what they can build with it and we can see what they're doing with it after they get it but they don't get anything until they blow up the dust and this just in Whitcoff just briefed Congress that Iran's inviting the International Atomic Energy Agency to come inspect its nuclear sites and uncover the enriched material this is big. The Iranians have also agreed that US nuclear inspectors would be allowed into the country that's huge on day one we're already getting somewhere hopefully these are good signs but it's not about words it's about action. I've seen skeptics of the deal people say the Iranians will never change their behavior well maybe that's true and if so they don't get any of the benefits of the bargain but isn't it worth trying isn't it worth seeing whether this incredibly weakened position that the President of the United States has put the Iranians under whether that motivates them to change their behavior. The Iranians are dealing with a trillion dollars of damage we sunk their navy air force and 50 liters and we wiped out thousands of factories and they are in a deep deep depression they have to rebuild their country before they can even think about rebuilding a new program and if they start rebuilding their new program they won't get any money to rebuild their country. If space force even sees a man on a camel wander anywhere near one of their three new sites sanctions back and a love tap. Let's say two years down the road they've done what we need to see on the nuclear program and we release the sanctions as the deal contemplates then they decide they're gonna start rebuilding the nuclear program then of course those sanctions are gonna come back on and that's why it's really kind of like a dial as they dial up their good behavior we can dial up the economic relief if they dial down their good behavior we can turn it off. People are all saying well what about the strain in 60 days the deal leaves it open for Iran to toll. JD says wrong again. When you say it leaves it open it doesn't really leave it open and except in the sense that of course the final negotiation is gonna set the terms of what comes afterwards the Omanis the Iranians and the Gulf Coast Coalition together will figure out a proper security framework for the straights in the future and what I mean by that is that we don't ever want this to happen again but that's not about tolling that's about ensuring that the straights are never used as a choke point for the global economy ever again. The deal won't allow tolls if some Persian swashbuckler shows up rattling a tin can the Navy rolls up and we close their banks. When the blockade opens fully we'll step back and allow commerce to flow but if Iran doesn't comply then we're more than able to re-impose an ironclad blockade. Remember Iran suffered a painful and humiliating defeat. They've been living underground and under a blockade. They don't want to go back to that. The only reason we didn't kill more of their leaders is because we needed someone to sign a deal. They know that. Trump knows where the gay Ayatollah sleeps. If they're stupid we're violent. Bottom line. They're already praising Allah that Trump's letting them sell oil again. The VP says that's not even a concession. They've been selling oil for decades. Even though it was sanctioned they were still making money but we couldn't see the whole shadow fleet or the black market trades. Now with the sanctions off the oil sales we can see exactly who's buying and what Iran's doing with the money. So if they're funding Hezbollah paying for centrifuges with the oil revenue boom economic fury. The deal requires Iran to put their proxies on a leash. That means Israel needs to chill. Vance thinks Netanyahu has been a little too trigger happy. We seem to be right on the cusp of a major breakthrough in the agreement and then all of a sudden there's a major explosion that goes off in a civilian population center in Beirut and a lot of people who have nothing to do with Hezbollah lose their lives. That's not acceptable. Vance sent a warning to the Jews. He said watch out. Trump's your daddy too. You've seen people within BB's cabinet who have come out and attacked the deal and in some ways very personally attacked the president of the United States and I guess my message to them would be twofold. Number one Donald J Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. Two-thirds of the defensive weapons that have protected your homeland have been built by American hands and paid for by American tax dollars. The problem for Israel is not Donald J Trump. This isn't Israel's deal. They wanted regime change which I completely understand but hard to do without ground troops. Trump didn't want to use ground troops. A lot of people said he would but he didn't. They told us it'd be a quagmire. Wasn't. Said it would cause World War III. Didn't. They predicted oil would hit $200 a barrel. We'd be rocked by deadly domestic terror attacks. We had no strategy to open the strait. We'd be in a recession. The stock market would crash and the same people who said all these things are now saying the deal is dumb. Now we're not Nostradamus. We just covered it. Trump could have easily done nothing on Iran. Let him keep building missiles, drones, terrorizing the neighborhood, nuking up deeper and deeper underground. That might have been smarter politically to do nothing but Trump's not a politician. He's a leader and leaders have to do the hard things so that life can be easier in the long run. And if it pays off and so far so good he'll have fundamentally changed the Middle East. A place that sucked America dry for 50 years. The people in that desert who have the most to lose here's what they say. The Gulf Coast Coalition loves this deal because they think that it makes Iran weaker. They hated the Obama deal because they thought that it made Iran stronger. They know more about this and they have more to lose than anybody including the United States of America. So I trust their judgment. The only people saying America lost this war, Iran and the Democrats. Everybody else recognizes the reality. We buried their leaders, their military and their dust. Number one, their nuclear program has been completely destroyed. Their capacity for enrichment, the facilities at which they were using to develop enrichment and develop a potential nuclear weapon, those facilities are still destroyed. Their conventional military is still destroyed. We did in three months with no ground troops. Thirteen casualties. God bless their souls. Cracked open the strait, took over the world oil market and aren't sending the mullahs a dime. We blocked China's Belt and Road and made them think twice about taking Taiwan. Kicked Russia out of the region. They've been kicked out of Venezuela, Syria, Iraq, Iran and we brought the Jews and the Arab Muslims closer together. Even if the deal goes south, which it very well could, Iran is financially and militarily crippled and their new programs dead and buried. But if this thing holds and hopefully it does, Kushner, Wyckoff, Rubio, and Vance deserve a lot of credit. Now I have seen some progressive criticisms of me personally saying what experience does the vice president of the United States have with hostile high-stakes negotiations and I would point those progressive critics to the fact that just two days ago I spent over an hour on the view. I mean look, Joy Behar is way tougher than the Iranians and she and I are best friends now so we're going to get to a good place. Peter Schweitzer is the president of the Government Accountability Institute. Peter how do you think this deal is going down in DC? I think a lot of people on the left and on the right are being critical of it but I think they're lacking an imagination in what Trump is trying to do here. Look, everybody wants her to be a final solution to have the Iran problem solved. That's not in the cards. The question is where do you go from here? Iran is in an enormously weakened position. If you look at the estimates of just the economic damage they've faced, you talked about their military has basically been decimated. The estimates are that they have suffered economic costs of between 40 and 50 percent, Jesse, of their entire gross domestic product. That's massive. So the question is you know they are a fanatical regime but fanatics believe in self-preservation as well and so there's an opportunity to do a deal. Look at the way that this has been structured. What Trump is doing is saying Iran is going to commit to these things and by the way the money is going to flow when we sign off and when the people in the region that most hate the Iranians, the Gulf states, when they are prepared to write a check and by the way those checks are not going to go to banks in Iran. They are going to pay the contractors who are creating the economic projects in the country. So it's not a case where Obama handed them a bunch of cash. So look, it could all go south. It could all fall apart but I think it's a really good effort to try to bring some finality to what has been a problem for 47 years. You know that's a good point because we can still control what the money in Iran is spent on. If they're going to take the money and build missile factories that's not going to happen. It just won't ever get off the ground and in terms of what we're hearing now and I had my doubts about this thing obviously you can't trust these people but when you're hearing on day one that they've invited the IAEA and U.S. nuclear inspectors into the country already they promised it not yet but they promised that that seems like we're heading in the right direction. Yeah I mean there's some positive signs here again look Iran has a long record of leading the West on. The question is by the way that this deal is being structured again the funds are not being handled by the United Nations they're not being handled by the Iranian government they're being handled by the Gulf Cooperative Council states which is Saudi Arabia Kuwait the Emiratis etc they hate the Iranians and the idea is that if you have an American company or a Japanese or a Korean company going to build a project in Iran and if we sign off on it it's going to be paid for by the Gulf states they're not going to hand that cash off to the Iranians to run off and not pay their bills so I think it's a very genius approach if you ask me where we're going to be in a couple years I think it's very possible we're going to have more military strikes against Iran I think they can't help themselves in terms of violating this deal but it is worth the effort and again think about Trump's strategic position the time is moving along Iran has a possibility to kind of rebuild economically but as all of this is going on Jesse Ray Theon is producing missiles we're producing more bombs we are upgrading our military capabilities and we can bring those to bear again absolutely and who's to say the people going into Iran to rebuild aren't CIA agents be nice to put maybe a listening device in one of the steel beams just saying just just thinking all right Peter yeah hopefully this goes well thank you

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A screenshot compiling five separate X (Twitter)-style posts, each praising a Trump State of the Union speech. Each entry shows a small circular profile photo, the poster's name/handle (some with blue verified checkmarks and a black "Subscribe" button next to their names), and their comment text. Posters shown, top to bottom: Dave Rubin (@RubinReport), Sean Davis (@seanmdav), Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec), Steven F. Hayward (@stevenfhayward), and Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_).

Text in image: Dave Rubin ✓ @RubinReport Trump was born for this. He never gets tired of it. Never phones it in. Genuinely loves America. And that's why they hate him. Sean Davis ✓ @seanmdav Subscribe Home run, from beginning to end. What a fantastic speech. Jack Posobiec ✓ @JackPosobiec Subscribe This State of the Union speech makes you fall in love with America all over again Steven F. Hayward @stevenfhayward This isn't a SotU speech; this is a command performance at America's Carnegie Hall. Paul Sperry ✓ @paulsperry_ HAPPENING NOW: President Trump is aggressively taking Democrats to the woodshed--singling them out for rebuke to their faces and shaming them for not standing for popular, common-sense, even patriotic, policies--like no Republican president has ever done previously. On issue after issue, he is pointing out their lunacy, and in turn, making it very hard for Independents to vote for them in November's congressional midterms. The hard-hitting strategy may just work.

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

[ Applause ]

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

♪ In the jungle, the mighty jungle ♪ ♪ The lion sleeps tonight ♪ ♪ In the jungle, the quiet jungle ♪ ♪ The lion sleeps tonight ♪ ♪ A windmower, a windmower, a windmower ♪

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A vertical, apparently AI-generated or digitally rendered image. A man with blond-combed hair, wearing a navy suit, white shirt, red tie and a small flag lapel pin, leans over a large pale stone slab and signs it with a black marker. Gold coin-like discs sit on the slab. The slab has engraved text naming a president. Behind him is the White House South Portico under a clear blue sky, with a large tree to the right. Two groups of construction workers in white hard hats and high-visibility vests stand watching on both sides. The text on the slab appears mirrored or reversed relative to the viewer, and the signature on it is a scrawl.

Text in image: DONALD J. TRUMP 45 - 47 PRESIDENT

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

A black-and-white, portrait-format image with a white banner at the top carrying the caption "Super Intelligence" in bold black sans-serif type. Below it, an older man with light swept-back hair, in a dark suit, light tie and a small American flag lapel pin, leans forward with both hands flat on a dark, glossy ornately carved wooden desk. He has a stern, frowning expression and looks straight at the camera. Behind him are a large American flag on the left, other flags on the right, and framed photographs on a credenza, in an office setting resembling the Oval Office. The photo looks stylized or possibly AI-generated or heavily processed. It works as a captioned image or meme, with the caption presenting the pictured man as "Super Intelligence". No other text or attribution is visible.

Text in image: Super Intelligence

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

Screenshot of a social media post (X/Twitter-style) from a verified account named "KMG" (@Caligurlkim), whose profile picture shows a person wearing sunglasses. The post text reads "I voted for this!" above an attached animated GIF. The GIF is a comic-book style explosion graphic on a black background: an orange and white starburst/explosion shape with jagged rays radiating outward, with the word "BOOM!" in large yellow bubble letters outlined in black across the center. A "GIF" label with a pause icon appears in the bottom-left corner of the image, indicating it's an animated GIF. The post is timestamped "2:01 AM · Jul 8, 2026" with "55 Views" shown below.

Text in image: KMG @Caligurlkim I voted for this! BOOM! GIF 2:01 AM · Jul 8, 2026 · 55 Views

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

UFC fans have traveled far and wide across the United States and around the globe all to witness history and be a part of this uniquely special mixed martial arts showcase that is UFC Freedom. - Freedom at the White House on Donald Trump's birthday. What an event. - Welcome to UFC Freedom 250. Here is the President of the United States of America, Donald J. Trump. - From the South Park of the White House, Diego Lopez was serving. - Now, that is a nickel on the White House. - What is your white house? - He's too sick. - On the feet of Josh Hookett. - All eyes, rock shot on Ali. - Give him a shot! - Ladies and gentlemen, this is the many men! - And look at where we are. - This is insane. - The only until 40 against the tried and true American. - Justin Gaetschy. - These dudes are going at it. - Justin Gaetschy with the ultimate career capstone at the loss. - One of the great upsets in the history of the sport. - On the 250th anniversary, Justin Gaetschy showed that American spirit that allowed them to become a world champion. - This is the greatest night in the history of combat sports.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A news photograph of a man with blond/orange combed-back hair, wearing a dark navy suit with a red tie and an American flag lapel pin, hugging and kissing/puckering his lips against a large American flag that he holds bundled close to his face and chest with both hands (one hand bears a ring/cufflink visible at the wrist). The background is dark with a blurred red, white, and blue striped design on the right side, suggesting a stage or rally backdrop.

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

Screenshot of a post on X (formerly Twitter) from an account displaying the name "My2Commonc̶ents..." with a blue verified checkmark and handle @7CommonSense. The avatar is a black-and-white photo of a smiling person with light hair wearing a wide-brimmed hat, holding up a hand. The post tags @potus and says he has many gifts and character traits, one of which is loyalty, followed by a clapping hands emoji. The timestamp shows 8:14 PM on 10/9/26 with 3.6K views. It is a plain text post with no other image or meme content.

Text in image: My2Common¢ents... X.com @7CommonSense @potus has many gifts and character traits... one of which is loyalty.👏 8:14 PM · 10/9/26 · 3.6K Views

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

Photograph taken from between the columns of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., looking east across the Reflecting Pool toward the Washington Monument, which is visible in the distance and mirrored in the still water. A crowd of people is gathered at the base of the steps near the near end of the Reflecting Pool, in front of green barricades, with some stage/production equipment (scaffolding, lighting rigs, a camera boom/crane extending out over the pool) visible, suggesting an event or gathering is set up on the Lincoln Memorial plaza. Smaller groups of people walk along the paths on either side of the pool. The sky is partly cloudy with soft blue and pale tones, suggesting early morning or evening light. No text overlays are present in the image.

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

A political polling infographic/slide titled "INDIANA – SD 41" with a red banner background showing "TRUMP 2024" rally signs. It presents Republican primary polling data comparing two bar charts. The left chart, labeled "CURRENT POLLING / INCUMBENT +14%," shows Greg Walker (photo of an older bald man, purple bar) at 34%, Michelle Davis (photo of a smiling woman with brown hair, red bar) at 20%, and Undecided (yellow bar) at 46%. The right chart, labeled "POLLING IF TRUMP ENDORSES / CHALLENGER +36%" and featuring a circular photo of Donald Trump above it, shows Walker dropping to 23%, Davis rising to 59%, and Undecided at 17%. Below each chart is a data table citing pollster "Fabrizio, Lee & Associates," dated 1/6 - 1/8, 2026, with the same numbers and spread (Walker +14 on the left, Davis +36 on the right).

Text in image: INDIANA – SD 41 Republican Primary Polling CURRENT POLLING INCUMBENT +14% POLLING IF TRUMP ENDORSES CHALLENGER +36% 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 34% 20% 46% Greg Walker Michelle Davis Undecided 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 23% 59% 17% Greg Walker Michelle Davis Undecided Pollster: Fabrizio, Lee & Associates Date: 1/6 - 1/8, 2026 Walker: 34 Davis: 20 Undecided: 46 Spread: Walker +14 Pollster: Fabrizio, Lee & Associates Date: 1/6 - 1/8, 2026 Walker: 23 Davis: 59 Undecided: 17 Spread: Davis +36

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

(dramatic music)

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A photograph of a printed newspaper page from The Epoch Times' Opinion section, dated Friday, Sept. 11, 2026. At the top are two smaller linked headlines with thumbnail photos flanking the "Opinion" masthead: "The Data Center Backlash Has a Practical Fix" by Howard Franklin (A18) on the left, and "We Spend a Lot More on Welfare Than Bombs" by David Harsanyi (A21) on the right, the latter thumbnail showing a road sign reading "THE NATIONAL DEBT $40 [TRILLION]". Below is a large photo of a hazy, smoke-filled cityscape (buildings, an unfinished concrete structure with rebar and ladders in the foreground) captioned "Smoke rises from the site of airstrikes in Tehran, Iran, on March 6, 2026." Below that is the main opinion column headlined "Iran Is Not Even Close to Winning the War" by Mike Fredenburg, with a small circular author photo, a pull-quote in italics, and body text in three columns arguing that despite domestic political criticism, Iran's military and economy have been severely degraded and it is not winning the war against the U.S./Israel/coalition forces. A subheading "Iranian Regime in Historically Bad Shape" appears near the bottom of the third column, with "Continued on A18" at the very bottom.

Text in image: Opinion THE EPOCH TIMES A17 FRIDAY, SEPT. 11, 2026 The Data Center Backlash Has a Practical Fix Howard Franklin | A18 We Spend a Lot More on Welfare Than Bombs David Harsanyi | A21 [thumbnail sign text: THE NATIONAL DEBT $40 [TRILLION]] Smoke rises from the site of airstrikes in Tehran, Iran, on March 6, 2026. Iran Is Not Even Close to Winning the War By Mike Fredenburg The airwaves and blogs are full of pundits and other self-proclaimed experts declaring that the United States has lost or is losing the war. Certainly, there is little doubt that the war has not gone as smoothly as the Trump administration expected it to. And if you believe that the United States' inability to wrap up a nice, clean win (super unlikely) before the November midterms is a significant win for the Iranian regime, you are correct. But does that really mean that Iran is winning the war, strategically or otherwise? History tells us that merely maintaining a limited capacity to lob missiles and drones at your opponent does not mean that you are winning. Neither does the ability to exert limited control over a waterway mean that you are winning. By any reasonable standard of military degradation, strategic isolation, economic collapse, and regional realignment, it is the United States that is winning this war that probably should have been fought after Iran's proxies, including the Hezbollah terrorist group, executed the 1983 truck bomb attack on the U.S. Marine compound, killing 241 U.S. servicemen. Consider the facts: U.S. forces have sunk or crippled the overwhelming majority of Iran's conventional navy. Retired Vice Adm. Robert Harward, a former deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, assessed that Iran has lost 80 percent to 90 percent of its naval capacity. With the vast majority of Iran's largest naval vessels having been crippled or destroyed, Tehran's ability to project meaningful naval power has been reduced to an ever-decreasing number of small Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fast-attack boats of minimal capability. While the United States has not gained air dominance over all of Iran, it does have air superiority over significant portions, and the Trump administration has claimed that 1,500 strikes have destroyed some 80 percent of Iran's air defense system. Of course, as is the case with all wars, we won't know the real numbers until well after the war concludes, but there is little doubt that Iran's air defenses have been severely degraded. And given the dire economic circumstances the regime finds itself in, those systems will be very difficult to replace, and even if they can eventually do so, it will be many years—assuming that the regime lasts that long. On the industrial and infrastructure front, the campaign has been even more decisive. U.S. and coalition forces have struck more than 13,000 targets inside Iran, including 90 percent of Iran's weapons factories. While striking targets is certainly not the same as destroying them, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine has described Iran's defense industrial base as "shattered," with CENTCOM reporting that more than two-thirds of Iran's missile, drone, and naval production facilities and shipyards were damaged or destroyed, including nearly all Shahed drone production facilities and solid-rocket-motor production facilities—critical to the production of Iran's cheap but effective ballistic missiles. Satellite analysis has documented extensive damage to more than 50 Iranian military bases, including Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps headquarters, air bases, naval hubs, and ballistic-missile facilities. Iran has never suffered this level of damage, and with the most comprehensive economic sanctions seen in recent memory strangling Iran's economy, reconstituting this industrial capacity will take many years, and that assumes the extremely unpopular regime lasts that long. Beyond the battlefield, Iran's prestige and ability to wield influence in the Middle East have been severely degraded. Countries that once feared crossing Tehran publicly are now doing so, up to and including conducting air and missile strikes on military targets inside Iran. The United Arab Emirates has severed ties with Iran and has joined a self-defense pact that includes Turkey and Pakistan. Saudi Yes, the war is making a tough midterm even tougher, but to say that the United States is losing is just plain ludicrous. Arabia has participated in attacks on Iranian targets. And it genuinely looks like after decades of bullying by Iran, its neighbors, with the help of the bully of the Middle East—a major blow from which the regime will never fully recover. Iran's economy is in shambles, with point-to-point food and beverage inflation skyrocketing to between 113.8 and 128 percent, forcing essential groceries to more than double in cost over the past year. Overall inflation has soared above 60 to 80 percent, with food inflation in triple digits in many categories. Iran's currency, the rial, has collapsed, tens of thousands of factories and petrochemical plants being shuttered or damaged (estimates run to 20,000 industrial units affected), and oil revenues have dropped to a fraction of what they were. And with new sanctions coming online and a blockade it cannot lift, the Iranian regime is in dire straits, the likes of which it has not seen since overthrowing the shah. For some context, U.S. grocery prices have risen by only 2.7 percent over the past year, while overall U.S. inflation, bumped up by gasoline prices, stands at 3.5 percent. Adding to Iran's woes, when oil is not pumped from a well for an extended period, the well's future production is often severely degraded. The regime has been struggling to pay its troops and security forces on time; foreign bank accounts and financial channels have been severed or frozen. International Monetary Fund projections show a 6 percent gross domestic product contraction for 2026. And if the blockade stays in place, 2027 will be far worse. Iranian Regime in Historically Bad Shape When a government cannot pay its forces, the vast majority of whom are conscripts, keeping itself in power becomes much more difficult. Economic hardship, combined with the visible failure of the Islamic regime to Continued on A18

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

A screenshot of a newspaper/magazine opinion article continuation (marked "Continued from A17") headlined "Iran Is Not Even Close to Winning the War." The piece argues that despite setbacks, the U.S. and Trump administration are strategically winning against Iran, citing declining Iranian regime support, polling data, shipping route changes around the Strait of Hormuz, defense industrial base shortcomings, and media coverage framing. A pull-quote is set off in the middle column. An author bio at the end identifies the writer as Mike Fredenburg, who writes on military technology and defense matters.

Text in image: Iran Is Not Even Close to Winning the War Continued from A17 protect its own territory or deliver prosperity, has diminished the regime's support among the small minority of Iranians that actually supported it before the current conflict ramped up. Further, while precise polling is difficult to obtain given the level of repression and control exerted by the regime, reporting by the GAMAAN institute indicates that substantial portions of the population view the strikes as justified or at least as a necessary reckoning with a failed system. U.S. President Donald Trump is far more popular in Iran than the regime itself—about 44 percent support for Trump versus roughly 13 percent support for the Islamic republic. Iran's Ability to Affect the World Economy Is Diminishing Daily Each day sees the importance of the Strait of Hormuz diminished, as pipelines and tankers are being built to give the world the capacity to bypass it. In as little as six months, the necessity of transiting the Strait of Hormuz will have been reduced to a fraction of what it was at the start of the conflict, permanently weakening Iran. By any reasonable standard of military degradation, strategic isolation, economic collapse, and regional realignment, it is the United States that is winning this war. The extra cost per trip on the new routes, such as those going around the Cape of Good Hope, is only about 0.5 percent to 1 percent of the value of the oil carried; in other words, a small fraction of the price swings we have seen in oil prices. Record numbers of Very Large Crude Carrier ships are being ordered, with some 60 expected to be delivered in 2027 and many more in 2028 and 2029. This additional capacity will facilitate the use of alternative routes that bypass the Strait of Hormuz. Yes, the strait remains a vulnerability, but there is little doubt that its significance will be reduced as a consequence of this conflict. To be fair, the Trump administration has been overly optimistic at times. The war is almost certainly not going as planned. Further, it is clear that the administration had more confidence in what airpower alone could accomplish than was warranted, overestimated the effectiveness of our air defenses, and underestimated the effectiveness of Iran's drones and missiles. The conflict has also revealed major shortcomings in our defense industrial base, highlighted the Navy's failure to develop and field truly effective littoral combat ships in sufficient numbers, and has shown that the practice of spending millions of dollars on individual missiles is a loser that puts our national security at risk and needs to be immediately corrected if we are to have any chance against an opponent such as China. These are real problems that demand urgent attention, but they are problems inherited by the current administration, not created by it. Yet none of these problems and shortcomings change the fundamental strategic picture. Iran's navy is largely gone, its air force grounded, its factories and bases devastated, its economy collapsing, its regional influence shrinking, and its great-power allies unwilling to openly provide significant support. From a big-picture perspective, the ability to sporadically launch drones and missiles to harass shipping is a Pyrrhic victory that is incentivizing the world to lessen dependence on the Strait of Hormuz. Yes, the war is making a tough midterm even tougher, as the media have seized on it to divert attention away from the hundreds of Trump administration accomplishments that have made life better and safer for the average American, but to say that the United States is losing the war is just plain ludicrous. Mike Fredenburg writes on military technology and defense matters with an emphasis on defense reform. He holds a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering and master's degree in production operations management.

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

A political meme titled "What a Difference!" comparing two photos of U.S.-China leader meetings. Top photo: an older, gray-haired man in a navy suit (resembling Joe Biden) walks ahead of and turned away from a man in a navy suit and red tie (resembling Xi Jinping), both walking toward a dark doorway flanked by columns and potted plants, with no eye contact or physical interaction between them. Bottom photo: a man with reddish/blond hair in a navy suit and red tie (resembling Donald Trump) shakes hands and smiles with the same man resembling Xi Jinping, both smiling, on a wide stone staircase with a large blue urn/planter and onlookers in the background.

Text in image: What a Difference!

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

My relationship with the president, hey, listen, if somebody is doing good stuff and president Trump is doing a lot of good stuff, I believe, I know I'm irritating a lot of you again, but I think so. Because as I said, also in Davos, the 2% reach by all, uh, NATO countries now at the end of 2025 would never, ever, ever have happened without Trump. Do you really think that Spain and Italy and Belgium and Canada would have decided to move from 1.5 to 2% Italy spending 10 billion more in our own defense at the beginning of the year without president Trump? No way it would not have happened. And do you really think that in the Hague we would have come to the 5% commitment without president Trump? No way. So when president Trump is doing good stuff, I have operation, uh, and I don't mind him, uh, publishing text messages. And if anyone thinks here again, that the European union or Europe as a whole can defend itself without the US, keep on dreaming. You can't, we can't. We need each other. And why do we need each other? I tell you, first of all, because also the US needs NATO for the US to stay safe. And by the way, Arctic region is evidence here. They need a secure Arctic. They need to secure your Atlantic. And you also need to secure Europe. So the US has every interest in NATO as much as Canada and the European NATO, uh, NATO allies, but for Europe, if you really want to go with alone and those who you are planning for that, forget that you can never get there with 5%. It will be 10%, you have to build up your own nuclear capability. That costs billions and billions of euros. You will lose them in that scenario, you would lose the ultimate guarantor of our freedom, which is the US nuclear umbrella. Uh, so, Hey, uh, good luck.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A photograph taken at ground level looking across a large flat outdoor concrete surface (resembling a reflecting pool basin or plaza) that has been coated with a bright blue liquid/sealant, applied with a streaky, uneven texture. Three workers in high-visibility yellow/green safety vests, hard hats, and work pants stand at the edge where the untreated gray concrete meets the blue-coated area, each using a long-handled squeegee or spreading tool to apply or smooth the blue coating along the boundary line. Behind them is more gray pavement, a low white curb or barrier, a line of trees, and a grassy area in the background, suggesting a park-like public space.

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

A screenshot of a tweet/post exchange on X (Twitter). At top, a verified account "Michael Whatley" (@WhatleyNC), with a profile photo of a man in a suit, posts: "I will never let North Carolina down! Thank you, President Trump!" Below this is an embedded quoted post from "Donald J. Trump" (@realDonaldTrump), whose profile picture is an American flag design, endorsing Michael Whatley as a U.S. Senate candidate for North Carolina. The embedded Trump post praises Whatley as an "America First Patriot," touts Trump's own election wins (2016, 2020, 2024), credits Whatley's role as RNC Co-Chair, criticizes the Biden Administration's flood response, lists policy priorities (economy, taxes, regulations, "Made in the USA," energy, border security, migrant crime, military/veterans, Second Amendment), and gives Whatley his "Complete and Total Endorsement." Timestamp shows 7:24 AM · Feb 17, 2026 · 33.1K Views.

Text in image: Michael Whatley @WhatleyNC I will never let North Carolina down! Thank you, President Trump! Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump America First Patriot Michael Whatley will be an amazing United States Senator for the Great State of North Carolina, which I love and WON BIG, six times, including Primaries, in 2016, 2020, and 2024! Michael is fantastic at everything he does, and was certainly a STAR as Co-Chair of the RNC where, in the Presidential Election, we won every Swing State, the Popular Vote, and the Electoral College by a landslide. Michael is a wonderful man, has ALWAYS delivered for North Carolina, especially after the terrible floods, where the Biden Administration did nothing, and will continue doing so as your next U.S. Senator, where he will fight tirelessly to Grow our Economy, Cut Taxes and Regulations, Promote MADE IN THE U.S.A., Champion American Energy DOMINANCE, Keep our now very Secure Border, SECURE, Stop Migrant Crime, Strengthen our Incredible Military/Veterans, and Protect our always under siege Second Amendment. Michael Whatley has my Complete and Total Endorsement – HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN! 7:24 AM · Feb 17, 2026 · 33.1K Views

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

A political campaign graphic with a blue-to-red gradient background bordered by a thin blue frame. It announces a Republican primary win for a Wisconsin congressional district candidate, with a headshot of a close-cropped, smiling young man in a plaid shirt and gray jacket on the right, and a serious/scowling headshot of Donald Trump (blond hair, dark suit, blue tie) on the left. At the bottom center is a "TRUMP VANCE / MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" campaign logo framed by stars.

Text in image: REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR WI-07 MICHAEL ALFONSO WINS! ENDORSED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP! TRUMP VANCE MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

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

Many days after Kevin McCarthy was sworn in as speaker, did you subpoena his records? I don't recall, but those two things had nothing to do with it. It was 16 days after becoming the highest-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives. You subpoenaed his toll records. Do you agree that that might reasonably be considered a violation of the speech or debate clause? I do not, and I want to be clear that the toll records— We were collecting months' worth of phone data on the Republican Speaker of the House, the leader of the opposition, right after he got sworn in as speaker, all around the time of a major vote. That sounds like a flagrant violation of the speech or debate clause to me, and I think most people agree with me. And Speaker McCarthy had no recourse, did he, because you issued a non-disclosure order ensuring that neither he nor any of the American people knew about these subpoenas. Is that right? The toll record, the non-content toll record subpoenas, we did secure non-disclosure orders for those subpoenas. You did, and let me ask you, Mr. Smith, at the time you secured those non-disclosure orders, was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk? The non-disclosure order was based on concerns about— Was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk? He was not. He was not. Then why did your non-disclosure order refer to him as a flight risk? It says right here, "The court finds reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result in flight from prosecution." Sir, when securing a non-disclosure order, the risks don't have to be associated with the— Do you think the Speaker of the House is a flight risk? Did he finish answering the question? No, this is not your time. This is my time. You think the Speaker of the House is a flight risk? Do you think he's going to hop on a plane and leave the country? No, what I was trying to explain is with respect to a non-disclosure order, the risks aren't necessarily associated with the subscriber to the phone. There are risks to the investigation. I think that you were using—this was clearly in reference to Speaker McCarthy, and you were using clearly false information to secure a non-disclosure order to hide from Speaker McCarthy and from the American people the fact that you were spying on his toll records. But I've got more, so let's move on. In May of 2023, you also issued subpoenas for toll records of nine U.S. Senators and an additional representative. Is that right? In May of 2023, we did issue— You did, and there were non-disclosure orders in conjunction with those subpoenas as well, right? That's correct, consistent with Department policy and the law. So again, nobody would know what you were doing. The Senators would, and the Representatives would, and the American people wouldn't know what you were doing. Is that right? The toll records that we secured and the non-disclosure orders were consistent with policy and consistent with— And you knew, whenever you were doing that, that there was a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause. Is that right? The toll record subpoenas that we secured were with the concurrence of the public— Your own analysis says that you knew there was a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause. I have it right here. It's an email from John Keller at public integrity section to your team. As you are aware, there is some litigation risk regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a member's legislative calls violates the speech or debate clause in the D.C. Circuit. That's from your own analysis right there. So you did know, didn't you? So with respect to the item you just put up on the screen, the last sentence states— We're going to get to the last sentence. We're going to get to the last sentence. And you cite case law in here, quote, "The bar on compelled disclosure is absolute." Is that right? Or do you think that you didn't have to abide by that precedent? To be clear, this is not—this statement is not from my office. This is the statement of public— This is your justification for those subpoenas and NDO's that you ordered. This was part of your analysis. It's a cursory analysis. I think it's worth noting. But let's get to that last sentence then. Quote, "Given my understanding of the low likelihood that any of the members listed below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here." In other words, you're using a novel legal theory, which you knew was novel, has never been tested by any court. You're not charging any of these members. Nobody's going to know about it because you issued NDO's. Nobody's going to sue about it, so sue this. So who cares? We're going to do it anyways. You walked all over the Constitution throughout this entire process, buying our members of Congress, and you know it. - It's absolutely disgraceful. - The time.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A news photograph of the presidential helicopter (Marine One, a green-and-white VH-92A helicopter marked "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" with a U.S. flag on the nose) parked on the South Lawn landing pad of the White House, which is painted with the Seal of the President of the United States. In the background, framed by trees, are the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial under an overcast, cloudy sky.

Text in image: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

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