Posts from Monday, June 15, 2026

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 11:17 PM

Iran has agreed to never have a Nuclear Weapon! Also, the story that the U.S. is paying Iran 300 million Dollars is Fake News, put out by the Dumocrats!!! President DJT

0:00 0:00

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 1:11 PM

Sadly, if you import people from Third World Countries, you quickly become a Third World Country — And there’s not a thing you can do about it. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP

0:00 0:00

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 1:10 PM

‘Thank You, President Trump’: Reflecting Pool in D.C. Wows After Trump Renovations: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2026/06/08/thank-you-president-trump-reflecting-pool-d-c-wows-after-trump-renovations/

0:00 0:00

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 1:10 PM

Trump makes a splash with Oval Office chart comparing reflecting pool to skyscrapers: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/4594088/trump-makes-splash-oval-office-chart-reflecting-pool-skyscrapers/

0:00 0:00

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 1:10 PM

U.S. Counts Far More Hormuz Ship Transits Than Commercial Tracking Data Shows: https://gcaptain.com/u-s-counts-far-more-hormuz-ship-transits-than-commercial-tracking-data-shows/

0:00 0:00

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 1:09 PM

Dems replace ‘mother’ with ‘gestating parent’ in latest woke rewrite of NY law: https://nypost.com/2026/06/03/us-news/dems-replace-mother-with-gestating-parent-in-latest-woke-rewrite-of-nys-law/

0:00 0:00

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 1:06 PM

Ships are starting to move, many loaded up with Oil, out of the Strait of Hormuz. They are going along the Southern “Highway,” which is totally safe, secure, and pristine. There are other areas of travel, also!!! President DJT

0:00 0:00

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 12:46 PM

Video transcript 5:20

Let's bring in Victoria Coates, Vice President of National Security and Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation. You probably heard Senator Jack Reed talking to Shannon Bream a little bit earlier in the hour. He said this potential deal with Iran that the Trump administration appears ready to sign is not giving us anything that we didn't have under Barack Obama. Your reaction. Well, good afternoon, John. Good to be with you. I think Senator Reed is in a rather difficult position as a card-carrying supporter of the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the JCPOA, which failed miserably. You know, he's trying to cover his back here and say, "Oh, this deal isn't going to be any good because we already had all this with the JCPOA." That is just categorically false. For starters, we don't know what's in this deal. And I think everybody on X should take a deep breath and stop freaking out about a deal we haven't seen yet and, you know, being in a race to be wrong. But let's look at what we do know. We do know President Trump was the only president willing to take major military action against Iran in advance of any negotiations and to take also major economic action against them to decimate their economy. This gives him leverage President Obama never had in those. And what's more, we're hearing very clearly out of the White House no cash up front like the Obama people did and dismantle the nuclear program. Don't enshrine it in some deal so they can restart it again later. That's what Senator Reed is trying to defend. But apparently there's going to be some kind of a 60-day negotiating period after the agreement is signed. You know, what's to say? What's to prevent Iran from, you know, dragging its feet and at the end of 60 days saying, "Oh, we didn't really mean it. We don't want to do this deal." I think what happened last week is what prevents that from happening, the additional strikes from the United States where, as Secretary Hegseth was saying, we can strike whatever we want whenever we want in Iran. And they know that now. They might not have fully taken that on board before Operation Epic Fury and before the U.S. went back in last week to take out some more, you know, missile launchers, some more radar systems, and we can keep doing that. So it's entirely up to them if they would like to do the sensible thing and actually come to this good deal for the Iranian people. Or do they want to just keep on being obstreperous? And I'm hearing a lot of reports about political fracturing inside Iran. It may be we don't have to do that much to push the situation over the edge. Yeah, so much of their leadership has been decimated. It's kind of hard to know who is in charge right now, but I guess it's the guy who is basically in command of the Revolutionary Guard there. Yeah, that would be Vahini. And so he controls the guns, and that's a pretty good place to start if you want to be in power in Iran right now. But we also have the new supreme leader who's showing potentially signs of life, Mashtaba Khamenei, the son of the old one. And, you know, the president has been saying that he's somebody we might be able to come to an arrangement with. But my big question tonight, John, is it does it even matter what's in this deal? Is Iran too damaged both in terms of their infrastructure and their economy to be able to recover regardless of what's in this deal? I think that's a very real possibility. So let's see what comes out. But they have a just world of problems regardless of what's on this piece of paper. UN Ambassador Michael Walts, as you might expect, is defending the Trump administration's position here. He says this is way better than any negotiating the Obama administration did. Listen. Under the JCPOA, under Obama's deal, there was not anytime anywhere verification. They could determine or even delay the inspectors. And most importantly, they could just call a site a military site, and then it was off limits. And number two, you're not going to see, you know, these pallets of cash moving up front. It is going to be pay for performance. So it seems that after 47 years, the Iranians maybe are realizing there's a new sheriff in town. I think so. And I would add to Ambassador Walts' list, you know, number three, which is I haven't seen any sunsets on this deal. And if there were any, they would be a whole lot longer than 10 years. Say we had Senator Reid's dream. We'd stayed in the JCPOA. Well, guess what? It expired last year. So that wouldn't even be in effect at this point. That's a non-deal. And so that is not a permanent solution as Ambassador Walts was also saying. It didn't get rid of all of this infrastructure. They kept it. And then after President Biden came in in 2021, they activated all of the sophisticated centrifuges. And that's when they spun up their highly enriched uranium. So I think what President Trump has done, which is demonstrating overwhelming, devastating military and economic superiority, has given him the leverage to negotiate something meaningful, but also to damage the regime so badly. As I said before, I don't know that they can recover. We'll see. Victoria Coates from the Heritage Foundation. Thank you.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

2mo ago Jun 15, 2026 at 12:46 PM

Video transcript 6:17

Let's bring in two experts, former National Security Advisor to President Trump, Victoria Coates, and Brent Sadler, a graduate of the Naval Academy and an expert on naval warfare. Welcome to you both. Victoria, we'll start with you. The strait will be opening for shipping. The blockade is lifted. What is known about other parts of the agreement, in particular sanctioned relief and unfreezing assets? Well, Trey, great to see you, and good to see you too, Brent. What we know about the deal is that it's performance-based. And this is what differentiates it from the JCPOA, the Obama-era nuclear deal, in which they got all of the goodies up front, the sanctions relief, the pallets of cash. Instead, what we're going to do is see if they actually do what they're supposed to do. We're going to open up the strait. That's very important. And then we're going to start these negotiations on the nuclear deal, which aren't just to limit where they can enrich to, but rather to dismantle that program, to get the highly enriched uranium out. If that all takes place, then great. Yes, we can talk about future incentives for them, but they have to take those steps first. So that's the critical thing here. And I would say this is opening the door to a new Middle East. This is a Middle East under President Trump's leadership, where we can have our Gulf allies with Israel come together for a more prosperous, secure region. That wasn't possible four months ago. Now it is. And so for all the naysayers, all the deniers, let's see what's actually in the deal. Let's go forward and get to a more positive outcome. All right, Brent. A Senate like me, for instance, might argue that this kind of takes us back to the status quo ante, where we were before the recent hostilities. Is there more? Am I missing something? Because before the most recent hostilities, their nuclear program was degraded or obliterated to use the administration's word. The straight was open and there was no blockade. So how is this different? Well, I can understand the cynicism about the Middle East. There's certainly lots of reasons for that. The region has changed fundamentally. And I think what we're seeing now is the beginning of a page of a new era in the Middle East. I mean, it's not going to be smooth, of course, but it's not the same. Of course, Iran is alienated and actually agitated to actually force of arms many of its neighbors and also rallied in unity with Israel, which was unheard of before, which probably means you're going to see an acceleration and a broadening benefits of things like the Abraham Accords. So the region is fundamentally different now than it was several months ago and to include even the economics to say nothing of the global energy markets that are now changed and it's not going to go back to the way it was before. All right, Victoria, Brent has turned me into something of an optimist with his answer as it relates to the broader region. However, the Iranian regime has been a theocratic despotic one for 47 years and thugs don't become good neighbors overnight. Is Iran content stringing things along and waiting for President Trump term to end, hoping for a different negotiating partner in the future or do you think that they really are desirous of fundamental change? Well, Trey, I will say I don't want to stomp on your sunny optimism, but I mean, yes, we're dealing with the Iranians and so this regime is bad. They're hostile. They're the death to America, death to Israel crowd. And what makes them the most upset actually is the fact of how effective the United States Israel partnership was during Operation Epic Fury. So for everyone who's trying to point to differences between the United States and Israel tonight, look at that. Look at how seamless that cooperation was and how good it can be going forward. But for what we're going to do with dealing with them going forward, what we have to do is continue to keep the economic pressure on them, and they also know that we can strike them at the time of our choice in the place of our choice. So this isn't going to happen out of the goodness of their hearts because they don't have hearts. So this is going to happen because they're scared about more of those those strikes that the president called in last week that can happen any time. And so that's how we keep the pressure on them. We make sure they make good on this nuclear deal because that's the basic line here. No nuclear weapons for Iran. All right, Brent, is there a material difference between giving Iran cash and giving Iran access to frozen assets and allowing it to make money from selling oil if they're going to use the money for nefarious purposes? I mean, does it matter where they get the money from? And what we call it? Well, there is a big difference between pallets of cash and an aircraft that shows up and then disappears into wherever nefarious purpose. Then financial flows that you can actually monitor and also control. So on its surface, there's that. But again, the devil's in the details. We'll see when the actual agreement is hopefully released on Friday after the next phase of this is reached. And we'll be able to look at a lot closer what we're talking about on finances. All right, we've got about 30 seconds, so I'm going to get you both to quickly answer this question, Victoria, you and then Brent. Any chance in the world Israel is upset and tries to do something to upend this agreement? Victoria, then you, Brent. I'd be shocked, I mean, Trey, rather. I think that Israel wants to get to peace in the region. Well, thank you for calling me now. That's the nicest thing anyone's called me. You go ahead, Brent. No, I agree with that. There's very little reason to expect anything like that. The U.S. and Israel are aligned very closely in national security and national interest.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.