Latest news with #TheIntercept
The Intercept
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Intercept
Pete Hegseth Is Mad the Media Won't Celebrate U.S. War With Iran
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had a meltdown on Thursday during a Pentagon press conference, excoriating reporters for failing to act as cheerleaders for his boss, President Donald Trump. In a briefing about U.S. strikes on Iran, Hegseth criticized the press for not following the Pentagon line and called on journalists to 'wave an American flag.' His statements harken back to past Pentagon calls for fawning coverage in the name of patriotism. 'The press corps,' Hegseth complained, 'cheer against Trump so hard, it's like in your DNA and in your blood to cheer against Trump because you want him not to be successful so bad.' Hegseth's tantrum stemmed from reporting that cast doubt on Trump's assertion that recent U.S. air strikes had 'obliterated' Iranian nuclear facilities last Saturday. The Intercept reported on skepticism about Trump's claims by current and former defense officials on Monday. On Tuesday, multiple media outlets disclosed information from a preliminary classified Defense Intelligence Agency, or DIA, report that said the attacks set back Iran's nuclear program by only a few months. 'You have to cheer against the efficacy of these strikes. You have to hope,' Hegseth said at his second-ever news conference, claiming that the media assembled 'half truths, spun information, leaked information' to 'manipulate … the public mind over whether or not our brave pilots were successful.' Before and after Hegseth's atomic meltdown on Thursday, Trump unleashed a paroxysm of posts on Truth Social. 'FAKE NEWS CNN IS SO DISGUSTING AND INCOMPETENT. SOME OF THE DUMBEST ANCHORS IN THE BUSINESS!,' he shout-typed. 'Rumor is that the Failing New York Times and Fake News CNN will be firing the reporters who made up the FAKE stories on the Iran Nuclear sites because they got it so wrong. Lets see what happens?' It remains unclear whether the U.S. strikes significantly damaged Iran's nuclear program — which, according to American intelligence organizations, did not involve an active effort to produce a nuclear weapon. 'To me, it still appears that we have only set back the Iranian nuclear program by a handful of months,' Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said following a classified briefing on Thursday. 'There's no doubt there was damage done to the program. But the allegations that we have obliterated their program just don't seem to stand up to reason.' Complaints by the White House about the press during unpopular wars have a long history. As TV news increasingly showed the Vietnam War to be an intractable stalemate, if not an outright failure, President Lyndon Johnson complained about their coverage, 'I can prove that Ho Chi Minh is a son-of-a-bitch if you let me put it on the screen,' he told a group of reporters, referring to the leader of North Vietnam, but said that the networks 'want me to be the son-of-a-bitch.' His successor, Richard Nixon, was even more vitriolic about coverage of the war — and more succinct in his criticism. 'Our worst enemy seems to be the press!' he barked in 1971. In 1965, CBS News sent Morley Safer to Vietnam to cover the escalating American war. In July, Marines entered the village of Cam Ne and met stiff resistance, suffering three dead and four wounded. The next month, with Safer and a cameraman in tow, the troops set out for the area in armored vehicles. Safer recalled: The troops walked abreast toward this village and started firing. They said that there was some incoming fire. I didn't witness it, but it was a fairly large front, so it could have happened down the line. There were two guys wounded in our group, both in the ass, so that meant it was 'friendly fire.' They moved into the village and they systematically began torching every house— every house as far as I could see, getting people out in some cases, using flamethrowers in others. No Vietnamese speakers, by the way, were among the group with the flamethrower. About 150 homes in Cam Ne were burned; others were bulldozed, as Marines razed two entire hamlets. Artillery was then called in on the wreckage. According to reports, one child was killed and four women were wounded. In actuality, many more may have died. Safer's segment, 'The Burning of Cam Ne Village,' sparked public outrage. The Defense Department demanded CBS recall Safer from Vietnam, and Johnson called CBS President Frank Stanton. 'Are you trying to fuck me,' the U.S. president barked. 'Who is this?' Stanton asked, according to reporting by David Halberstam and others. Johnson replied, 'Frank, this is your president and yesterday your boys shat on the American flag.' A year later, Safer wrote a newspaper column about a visit to Saigon by Arthur Sylvester, the assistant secretary of defense for public affairs. Per Safer, Sylvester laid into the press: 'I can't understand how you fellows can write what you do while American boys are dying out here,' he began. Then he went on to the effect that American correspondents had a patriotic duty to disseminate only information that made the United States look good. A network television correspondent said, 'Surely, Arthur, you don't expect the American press to be the handmaidens of government.' 'That's exactly what I expect,' came the reply. Sylvester also told the reporters: 'Look, if you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you're stupid. Did you hear that? Stupid.' Sylvester later denied the 'handmaiden' comment, but others present backed Safer. 'Sylvester engaged specific correspondents in near name-calling, twice telling Jack Langguth [of The New York Times] he was stupid,' another attendee noted. 'At one point Sylvester actually made the statement he thought press should be 'handmaiden' of government.' In his press conference, Hegseth called on journalists to publish stories lauding troops for doing their jobs, asking rhetorically if outlets had written on the difficulty of flying a plane for 36 hours, manning a Patriot missile battery, or executing mid-air refueling. 'Time and time again, classified information is leaked or peddled for political purposes to try to make the president look bad. And what's really happening is you're undermining the success of incredible B-2 pilots and incredible F-35 pilots and incredible refuelers and incredible air defenders who accomplish their mission,' he groused. 'How about we celebrate that?' 'Premising entire stories on biased leaks to biased publications trying to make something look bad,' Hegseth, a former Fox News personality, griped. 'How about we take a beat, recognize first the success of our warriors, hold them up, tell their stories, celebrate that, wave an American flag, be proud of what we accomplished.' The Intercept followed up with the Pentagon to ask if Hegseth would help facilitate this type of reporting. A Pentagon spokesperson instead offered the opportunity to speak with Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson off the record. When The Intercept called to set up a time to speak with Wilson, a Pentagon spokesperson refused to do so. 'Kingsley will reach out to you if she's got anything to provide you,' said the official. 'I would just stand by. That's the best thing I can offer you right now.' The Office of the Secretary of Defense refused to provide further clarification about Hegseth's views on the role of the press and how the media ought to cover him, the president, and the military. 'We have nothing more to provide,' a spokesperson said after providing nothing. Hegseth is, notably, calling on the press to celebrate a war which Americans are overwhelmingly against. Americans disapprove of the strikes on Iran 56 percent to 44 percent, according to a CNN/SSRS poll conducted after the strikes. An even greater number distrust Trump's decision-making on the use of force in Iran, with 58 percent saying the strikes will make Iran more of a threat to the U.S. and only 27 percent believing the attacks will lessen the threat. A Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday found only 39 percent of Americans approve of Trump's handling on the Israel–Iran war, while 53 percent disapprove. Hegseth's antagonism toward the news media began well before Thursday's press conference. Since his appointment, he has conducted a war on whistleblowers despite the fact that he inadvertently shared detailed attack plans — of far more import than the DIA report because they preceded military strikes — with a journalist on a messaging app. Hegseth has reportedly accused high-ranking military officers of leaks and threatened to subject them to polygraph tests. Joe Kasper, Hegseth's former chief of staff, called out 'unauthorized disclosures of national security information involving sensitive communications with principals within the Office of the Secretary of Defense' and threatened that parties found responsible would be 'referred to the appropriate criminal law enforcement entity for criminal prosecution,' in a March memo. Speaking in April with quasi-journalist Megyn Kelly, another former Fox News host, ex-Hegseth aide Colin Carroll said that the secretary and his team have been 'consumed' by his leaky Department of Defense. 'If you look at a pie chart of the secretary's day, at this point, 50 percent of it is probably a leak investigation,' Carroll said. The FBI is now investigating how the DIA report became public. 'We are doing a leak investigation with the FBI now, because this information is for internal purposes — battle damage investigation — and CNN and others are trying to spin it to try and make the president look bad when this was an overwhelming success,' Hegseth told reporters. At his Thursday press conference, Hegseth urged the media to do more to herald American exceptionalism, at least in terms of military prowess. 'How about we talk about how special America is, that we — only we — have these capabilities? I think it's too much to ask, unfortunately, for the fake news,' said Hegseth in aggrieved tones. 'So, we're used to that, but we also have an opportunity to stand at the podium and read the truth of what's really happening.'
The Intercept
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Intercept
U.S. Military Under Attack Again for Joining Israel's Wars
Iran launched an attack on an American military base in Qatar on Monday in retaliation for U.S. strikes on three critical nuclear sites. A U.S. official said that Al Udeid Air Base, the largest American installation in the Middle East, was attacked by short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles. 'At this time, there are no reports of U.S. casualties,' a U.S. defense official told The Intercept. 'We are monitoring this situation closely and will provide more information as it becomes available.' A Qatari official confirmed that no casualties occurred due to the attack. The Qatari official said that Al Udeid Air Base, which it shares with the United States, had been 'evacuated' prior to the attack and that all 'necessary measures were taken to ensure the safety of the base's personnel, including members of the Qatari Armed Forces, friendly forces, and others.' Iran said the strikes in Qatar matched the number of bombs dropped by the United States on its nuclear sites over the weekend, signaling its likely desire to save face at home and deescalate abroad. Iran announced the attack on state television. A caption on screen called it 'a mighty and successful response' to 'America's aggression,' according to The Associated Press. The Qatari official denounced the Iranian attack and blamed Israel for setting off the cycle of violence in the region. Trump joined Israel's war against Iran on Saturday, attacking Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan — a decision that experts say may lead to a new U.S. forever war in the Middle East. 'We express the State of Qatar's strong condemnation of the attack on Al Udeid Air Base by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and consider it a flagrant violation of the State of Qatar's sovereignty and airspace, as well as of international law and the United Nations Charter,' the official told The Intercept, adding that Qatar was 'among the first countries to warn against the consequences of Israeli escalation in the region.' More than 40,000 U.S. active-duty military personnel and civilians working for the Pentagon are deployed across the Middle East. In recent years, the U.S. has used more than 60 bases, garrisons, or shared foreign facilities in the region. These sites range from small combat outposts to massive air bases in 13 countries: Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. U.S. troops in the Middle East have come under attack close to 400 times, at a minimum, since October 2023 in response to the U.S.-supported Israeli war on Gaza. U.S. Navy vessels in the region have been the most frequent target, coming under attack 174 times since October 2023, Central Command told The Intercept. There have also been 'about 200' attacks on U.S. bases in the region since the Gaza war began, Pentagon spokesperson Patricia Kreuzberger told The Intercept last month. This amounted to roughly one attack every 1.5 days. This includes more than 100 attacks on U.S. outposts in Syria and a lesser number in Iraq and Jordan. A January 2024 drone attack on Tower 22, a facility in the latter country, killed three U.S. troops. Predominantly led by Iranian-backed militias and the Iranian-allied Houthi government in Yemen, the strikes include a mix of one-way attack drones, rockets, mortars, and ballistic missiles fired at fixed bases and U.S. warships across the region. Trump struck a ceasefire deal with the Houthis in May. Prior to the U.S. attacks on Saturday, the Houthis threatened to again target U.S. ships in the Red Sea if Washington joined Israel's attacks on Iran.
The Intercept
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Intercept
Trump Says Iran's Nuke Sites Are 'Obliterated.' The Military Isn't So Sure.
President Donald Trump took to social media to crow over his bombing of Iran on Saturday night. 'Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,' he wrote. Current and former Pentagon officials question Trump's certainty that three of Iran's nuclear sites were 'totally obliterated' by U.S. attacks. One current official called the post-strike assessment, offered in the immediate wake of the Saturday attacks, 'overblown.' All said the destruction at Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan was extensive, but that the full extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear capabilities was not immediately clear. 'Overblown and premature,' the defense official, commenting about Trump's claims on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation, told The Intercept by instant message. 'What else is new[?]' That assessment was echoed by a former defense official who also spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the nature of his current employment. In the wake of such criticism, Trump doubled down. 'Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!' he posted on TruthSocial on Sunday. 'The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye!!!' 'From a targeting standpoint, 'destruction' means there is absolutely nothing left. These facilities were not destroyed by formal definition. Further, there is no way to assess the full scale of damage against such targets without boots on the ground,' said Wes Bryant, a former Pentagon official who previously worked as a Special Operations joint terminal attack controller, or JTAC, and called in thousands of strikes against the Islamic State and other terrorist groups across the greater Middle East. Bryant added: 'Suffice to say that the use of these facilities has been denied for the near or considerable future, and the strikes no doubt had a psychological effect on the regime. However, to state that any potential nuclear weapons development on the part of Iran has been permanently stopped would be incredibly naive.' Six U.S. Air Force B-2 stealth bombers reportedly dropped 12 GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators — 30,000-pound bombs colloquially known as 'bunker busters' — on the heavily fortified Fordow nuclear facility, Iran's main location for enriching uranium. A seventh U.S. B‑2 bomber attacked the Natanz Nuclear Facility with two GBU‑57 bombs, while a U.S. Navy submarine also launched Tomahawk missiles, targeting both Natanz and Esfahan, as part of the mission code-named 'Operation Midnight Hammer.' Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, reiterated the IAEA's consistent message that 'armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place, and could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked,' in an address to the agency's Board of Governors on Monday. He noted that craters were now visible at the Fordow site but stated that 'no one — including the IAEA — is in a position to have fully assessed the underground damage at Fordow. He added: 'Given the explosive payload utilized, and the extreme vibration-sensitive nature of centrifuges, very significant damage is expected to have occurred.' A senior Iranian official told Reuters that most of the highly enriched uranium at Fordow had been moved to an undisclosed location ahead of the U.S. strikes. Before and after the Saturday attacks, current and former U.S. defense officials told The Intercept that this was highly likely. 'We often don't give our adversaries enough credit and underestimate their savviness. They've been planning for something like this for years. They could have planted information on Fordow as a decoy,' Bryant explained. 'It could be a major nuclear facility but might not have been as important as people think. Their nuclear warfare capabilities might be under development somewhere that we don't even know about and they could have invited the attack on this high-profile decoy. There is no reporting saying that's the case, but these are things you always have to look at when you're planning military operations — especially of this scale against a near-peer adversary.' Grossi also confirmed the damage at Natanz and said that at Esfahan, the 'affected buildings include some related to the uranium conversion process' and that entrances to tunnels used for the storage of enriched material also appear to have been attacked. U.S. Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said Sunday that there was 'severe damage and destruction' to the three facilities but did not go so far as to say that Iran's nuclear capacities had been eliminated. 'Final battle damage [assessments] will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' Caine said. When asked if Iran still retains any nuclear capability, Caine said that battle damage assessments were 'still pending, and it would be way too early for me to comment on what may or may not still be there.' The Pentagon did not offer an update on Monday. 'We have nothing additional to provide beyond the Chairman's comments at this time,' a spokesperson told The Intercept. The White House did not reply to a request for comment about the discrepancy between Caine's statement and Trump's claims. The aim of the attacks, American and Israeli officials have said, is to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb. The U.S. intelligence community says that threat was not, however, real. 'We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that [Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003, though pressure has probably built on him to do so,' reads the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment published in March. The assessment serves as the intelligence community's official evaluation of threats to 'the Homeland,' U.S. citizens, and the country's interests. Last week, Trump said Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was 'wrong' about intelligence on Iran when she testified in March before the Senate that the nation was not actively building a nuclear weapon. Photos of the Situation Room during the attack on Iran, released Saturday evening, did not show Gabbard present alongside Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and other administration officials. The White House later told Fox News that Gabbard was present. On Monday, Israel struck Evin prison, Iran's most notorious jail for political prisoners, adding it to the list of nonmilitary and nuclear sites that it has attacked, which includes energy infrastructure and Iran's government news agency. Israeli strikes have killed at least 950 people and wounded 3,450 others since its campaign began 10 days ago, according to the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed his desire for regime change in Iran and not ruled out targeting the country's supreme leader, saying 'no one in Iran should have immunity.' Israel's defense minister said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei cannot 'continue to exist.' Trump joined in on the threats, pointing out that the U.S. knows Khamenei's location and dangling the possibility of assassinating him in the future. The U.S. attacks on Saturday were incredibly complex and expensive. U.S. forces employed approximately 75 precision guided weapons, including 14 of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs, according to Caine. More than 125 U.S. aircraft participated in the mission, including the B-2 stealth bombers, fighter jets, and dozens of air refueling tankers. It was reportedly the largest B-2 strike in U.S. history and the second longest B-2 mission ever flown. Bombers launched from the continental U.S. flew east for 18 hours before they attacked Iran, while a decoy flew west over the Pacific. A guided missile submarine; a full array of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft; and hundreds of maintenance and operational military personnel also took part. Bryant lauded the tactical prowess of the strikes but questioned the aptitude of the man who ordered them. 'It was a demonstration of the unparalleled precision, global reach, and the devastating power of the U.S. military,' he said of the attack, emphasizing that such force needs to be 'tempered and guided by a level hand.' Trump, he said, was unfit for this job, increasingly seems to 'worship' military power, and that the president's sudden decision to join Israel's war 'demonstrates his increasing volatility.'
The Intercept
22-06-2025
- Politics
- The Intercept
Self-Proclaimed 'Peacemaker' Drags U.S. Into Another War
American warplanes bombed three nuclear sites in Iran on Saturday night, bringing the U.S. military directly into Israel's war with Iran. 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE,' President Donald Trump incongruously wrote in a social media post announcing the attacks. Trump campaigned on ending foreign wars during his 2024 presidential run and has cast himself as a 'peacemaker.' In his second inaugural address, he pledged to 'measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.' Trump also regularly claims to have opposed the Iraq War from its outset. (He actually supported it.) 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan,' Trump wrote on TruthSocial. 'All planes are now outside of Iran airspace. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow.' The aim of the attacks, American and Israeli officials have said, is to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb. The U.S. intelligence community says that threat is not, however, real. 'We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that [Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003, though pressure has probably built on him to do so,' reads the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment published in March. The assessment serves as the intelligence community's official evaluation of threats to 'the Homeland,' U.S. citizens, and the country's interests. Trump dismissed those and more recent assessments to the same effect. 'Just a few days ago, literally no one was talking about an imminent Iran nuclear threat,' Defense experts who spoke with The Intercept warned the United States might be entering into a new round of the Forever Wars. 'Between enabling Israel in Gaza and all of its operations across the Middle East, and now these strikes in Iran, we are setting the foundation for the next generation's 'War on Terror,'' said Wes Bryant, who served until earlier this year as the senior analyst and adviser on precision warfare, targeting, and civilian harm mitigation at the Pentagon's Civilian Protection Center of Excellence. He questioned the Trump administration's abrupt shift from negotiating with Iran about its nuclear program to bombing it. The idea of an 'imminent Iran nuclear threat,' wasn't serious a few days ago, Bryant said. 'The fact that suddenly Trump was pulled into this reactive major strike against Iran under the auspices of nuclear deterrence is, I think, among the most disturbing red flags of this administration thus far.' 'Trump's decision to strike Iranian nuclear targets is a short-sighted one that will not achieve his stated objectives, brings significant risks to the United States, and could derail his foreign policy priorities,' said Jennifer Kavanagh, the director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a think tank that advocates for measured U.S. foreign policy. 'To strike Iran while diplomacy was ongoing undermines his push for peace elsewhere including with Putin. Why would Russia or any other country negotiate with Trump going forward?' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his military's objective was to 'strike all' of Iran's nuclear facilities. He had been pressing Trump to augment Israel's attacks with weaponry his country does not possess – namely the 30,000-pound GBU-57s, known as Massive Ordnance Penetrators or 'bunker buster' bombs, that Israel says can destroy Iran's underground nuclear enrichment facility in Fordow. Former defense officials speculated that these weapons — which are so heavy they can only be carried by U.S. B-2 bombers — were used on Israel's behalf during the Saturday attacks. If Iranian leaders respond to the U.S. strikes with a major counterattack, such as striking American military bases across the Middle East, it could set off an escalatory spiral and even more aggressive U.S. involvement. 'Trump is trying to signal that he wants to get back to diplomacy but the risk of a wider war is still very real and high. Iran's retaliation will determine whether the United States can extract itself so easily,' said Kavanagh, a former senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation who served as the director of its Army Strategy program. 'There is also very little chance Iran will negotiate now because Trump has no way to provide them credible assurances that if they come to the table, they will be spared future attacks,' Kavanagh said. 'Trump has sacrificed significant diplomatic leverage for narrow military gains of uncertain duration, and in doing so, has put the United States at risk of another costly Middle East war that will further U.S. global influence and American prosperity.' More than 40,000 U.S. active-duty military personnel and civilians working for the Pentagon are deployed across the Middle East. U.S. troops in the region have come under attack close to 400 times, at a minimum, since October 2023 in response to the U.S.-supported Israeli war on Gaza . Predominantly led by Iranian-backed militias and the Iranian-allied Houthi government in Yemen, the strikes include a mix of one-way attack drones, rockets, mortars, and ballistic missiles fired at fixed bases and U.S. warships across the region. Trump struck a ceasefire deal with the Houthis in May. Prior to the U.S. attacks on Iran, the Houthis threatened to again target U.S. ships in the Red Sea if Washington joined Israel's attacks on Iran. Meanwhile, Netanyahu has expressed his desires for regime change in Iran and not ruled out targeting the country's supreme leader, saying 'no one in Iran should have immunity.' Israel's defense minister said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei cannot 'continue to exist.' Trump joined in on the threats, pointing out that the U.S. knows Khamenei's location and dangled the possibility of assassinating him in the future. 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there – we are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now,' Trump wrote on Truth Social earlier this week, before Saturday's strikes. 'Military force, by itself, is seldom effective in orchestrating regime change,' Joseph Votel, a retired four-star Army general who headed both Special Operations Command and Central Command, which oversees U.S. military efforts in the Middle East, told The Intercept before the U.S. began its attacks on Saturday. 'There will be ramifications against the U.S. and this should be discussed and addressed in detail,' Votel warned. 'There is no clean course we can take in this situation.' The U.S. had already poured billions into Israel's war machine, supplying it with advanced weaponry, from fighter aircraft and tank ammunition to tactical vehicles and air-to-air missiles. The U.S. is the primary supplier of all of Israel's combat aircraft and most of its bombs and missiles. These weapons are provided at little or no cost to Israel, with American taxpayers primarily picking up the tab. An analysis by Brown University's Costs of War Project tallied up around $18 billion in military aid to Israel in the year following the start of Israel's war on Gaza on October 7, 2023. This represented far more than any other year since the U.S began providing military aid to Israel in 1959. On Tuesday, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., introduced a bipartisan War Powers Resolution, which would prohibit the 'United States Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities in the Islamic Republic of Iran.' It currently has 43 co-sponsors, including Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-WA. 'Congress has the sole power to declare war – full stop,' she posted on X on Saturday before the attacks. 'The idea that the U.S. would potentially deploy a bunker buster bomb in Iran w/out Congressional approval not only flies in the face of our Constitution, it would also rope us into another forever war that Americans do not want.' Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., introduced similar legislation in the Senate earlier this week. After the U.S. bombed Iran on Saturday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries suggested that Trump had lied about being a peacemaker — and that Congress should have a say in whether the country goes to war. 'President Trump misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East,' Jeffries, D-NY, wrote on X. Online and in an address to the nation, Trump suggested that more attacks could be coming. 'ANY RETALIATION BY IRAN AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WILL BE MET WITH FORCE FAR GREATER THAN WHAT WAS WITNESSED TONIGHT,' the president wrote on TruthSocial.
The Intercept
20-06-2025
- Politics
- The Intercept
The Disinformation Machine After a Murder
In the wake of the political assassination of Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, prominent right-wing figures moved quickly to assign blame. Utah Sen. Mike Lee pinned the killings on 'Marxism.' Elon Musk pointed to the 'far left.' Donald Trump Jr., the president's son, said it 'seems to be a leftist.' But the facts quickly told a different story: The suspect, 57-year-old Vance Boelter is a Trump supporter who held radical anti-abortion views. 'There's an entire right-wing media machine aimed at pushing disinformation around breaking news events and specifically attributing violence to the left,' says Taylor Lorenz, independent journalist and author of 'Extremely Online: The Untold Story of Fame, Influence, and Power on the Internet.' 'You see this over and over and over again, no matter who is perpetrating the violence.' 'The reality is that the vast overwhelming majority of political violence in recent years has come from the right,' adds Akela Lacy, The Intercept's senior politics reporter. 'It basically treats that fact as if it's not real, as if it doesn't exist,' she says — a dynamic that then fails to address the root causes. This week on The Intercept Briefing, host Jordan Uhl talks with Lorenz and Lacy about how online disinformation is distorting public understanding of major events — from political violence to immigration to potential war with Iran. In this chaos-driven ecosystem, the right — and Trump especially — know how to thrive. 'There are these right-wing influencer networks that exist to amplify misinformation and shape narratives online,' says Lorenz. 'A lot of them coordinate, literally directly coordinate through group chats,' she explains. 'They receive messaging directly from leaders in the Republican Party that they immediately disseminate.' That messaging loop reinforces itself — seeping into mainstream culture, dominating social media, and driving Trump's policies. Lacy points to a striking example: Democratic Sen. Tina Smith from Minnesota confronting Lee over his false claim that the shooter was a Marxist, and his apparent surprise at being held accountable. ' There's no reason that a sitting U.S. senator is spreading these lies, should not expect to be confronted by his colleagues over something like this. And that says volumes about the environment on the Hill,' says Lacy. But this right-wing narrative war doesn't work without help to boost their legitimacy. 'These manufactured outrage campaigns are not successful unless they're laundered by the traditional media,' says Lorenz. 'If the New York Times or the BBC or NPR — which is one of the worst — don't launder those campaigns and pick those campaigns up, they kind of don't go anywhere.' You can hear the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
