When the president and his administration help Senate RINOs, they are helping senators who are sandbagging his campaign agenda.

The AP obtained a copy of an invitation to an event sponsored by President Trump’s campaign committee and the RNC to a joint fundraiser with Vice President Mike Pence and North Carolina’s junior senator, Thom Tillis, next week in Greensboro. Local media is reporting this as a signal of support from the White House for Tillis’ re-election.

Hasn’t the president learned his lesson of supporting RINOs only to have them bite him on every issue he campaigned on?

Senate Republicans are more liberal than ever before. Even if Republicans win back the House and Trump is re-elected, he will be no closer to passing any of his priorities on immigration, spending, or health care than he was during his first two years of trifecta control, because there are very few Republicans in the Senate who truly believe in his campaign promises.

Confirming conservative judges was one of the few unifying ideals of Senate Republicans, yet Mitt Romney voted against a well-qualified district judge nominee yesterday because he felt the nominee said mean things about Obama. But Trump endorsed Romney in the primary last year, thereby ending any attempt to challenge him.

This has been a broader point of frustration during Trump’s first term. He continuously endorses the very RINOs whom his party’s voters elected him to vanquish and then complains about the Senate undermining his campaign promises. Trump’s endorsement has the singular power to catapult struggling primary challengers into the lead against liberal Republican incumbents. At the very least, if Trump would remain neutral in the primaries, some challengers might have a fighting change, especially in North Carolina, where Tillis is now vulnerable to a challenge. But if Trump supports an incumbent, that is the kiss of death for any primary challenger.

Take a look at the Senate landscape this cycle. There are a number of open seats or incumbents in states where Trump won, often by large margins, in 2016.

Trump has the power to create for himself a more conservative Senate that will push for market-based health care, pass his budget proposals, back an America-first foreign policy, and codify his immigration priorities. Yet if he reflexively endorses incumbents and establishment picks, he is consigning his second term to complete doom.

Tillis has a 38% Liberty Score and is not a conservative on a single issue – social, fiscal, or national security. He has promoted amnesty from the day he set foot in the Senate. Tillis initially opposed Trump’s emergency declaration but changed course after he realized he’d face primary challengers.

At a time when House Democrats are trying to push back against Trump by codifying transgenderism into civil rights, Tillis is being honored by a “Republican” transgender group.

If you remember, Tillis refused to stand up for his former colleagues in the North Carolina legislature when they were combatting liberal cities that were allowing men into private female dressing rooms.

We are seeing the same thing with Lindsey Graham. Just because he is talking tough on Mueller and the FBI Hillary email scandal doesn’t mean he is suddenly a conservative on policy. Just because he is rhetorically cozying up to Trump doesn’t mean that the minute he is safe from a primary challenge, he will not give Trump hell on immigration and on his realist vision on foreign policy, especially since Graham is a shill for Qatar. Indeed, he is cozying up to Trump only for the purpose of avoiding a primary challenge. In fact, just yesterday, he had the nerve to say that “we need a conversation about the 11 million [illegal aliens already here]” at a time when his own policies have incentivized the current overwhelming flow.

The reality is that every Republican will come to Trump in a time of need. But they will not be there for him when he needs support in the Senate. Just the opposite: They will sandbag him with media virtue-signaling at every turn.

Every piece of leverage the president has is enmeshed in the budget process. Yet during every single budget battle since January 2017, McConnell and company have worked to give the Democrats everything they wanted on both spending and immigration. They are in the process of once again moving Trump to the Left on the disaster bill and on the budget caps and debt ceiling in September.

The president needs to think long and hard what his second term will look like if he continues supporting Republicans like Mitt Romney, Thom Tillis, and Lindsey Graham. But changing course in Senate electoral strategy will likely require a change in White House personnel.

The post For a successful second term, Trump will need a new strategy in Senate primaries appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com

A student at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill is going viral for all the wrong reasons after she was arrested on camera for stealing the sign of pro-life activists.

The unidentified student in the video, which was published to YouTube on Tuesday and occurred in April, can be seen snatching a sign from protesters that said: “Warning: Abortion Victim Photos Ahead.”

The young woman can be seen leaving with the sign as the activists pursue her. Also in pursuit: the police.

When the young woman was confronted by a police officer, who asked if she had stolen the protesters’ sign, she claimed she had “just moved it.”

“Well, you took it,” the police officer said.

TRENDING: OB-GYN Who Delivered Over 2,500 Babies Blows Lid Off Infanticide Laws: ‘I Want To Clear Something Up’

When asked why she did it, she smiled, tapped the sign and said, “Because — this restricts women’s rights.”

“He’s promoting lies on college campus,” she continued.

The flippancy ended when it became clear she wasn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

“I can’t believe y’all protect them,” she told the officer.

Warning: The Video Below Contains Language That Some Viewers May Find Offensive. Viewer Discretion Is Advised.

This is an interesting position. On Wednesday, I was reporting — in a different context, of course — on a quote from Sen. Kamala Harris, 2020 Democrat presidential candidate and perfervid abortion advocate.

“Let me just be very clear about this,” she said in response to a question about illegal immigrants being covered under “Medicare for All.”

Do you think this student should have been arrested?

0% (0 Votes)

0% (0 Votes)

“I am opposed to any policy that would deny in our country any human being from access to public safety, public education or public health,” she added.

RELATED: While AL Moves To Protect All Unborn, VT Declares Open Season on All Unborn for Any Reason

I’m sure Harris would decline to stick up for this student’s behavior, but I can also guarantee a hefty percentage of her supporters feel the same way this student does: Pro-life protesters don’t deserve access to public safety.

I don’t doubt there would be people who cheer her on despite the fact that she stole someone else’s property and openly admitted to doing the same, yet openly wondered why the officer arrested her.

The pro-life group in question, Created Equal, also had one of its members assaulted on the UNC campus in April, another incident which made national news.

Jillian Ward, a self-identified feminist and aspiring journalist, was cited for misdemeanor assault in the attack, which was also caught on video.

“F—ing terrible person,” Ward yells on the video. “You’re a terrible person. You — this is not OK. This is not okay. This is not OK. Shut the f— up right now. This is wrong. This is triggering. You’re not an innocent human being. You’re a terrible person.”

Warning: The Video Below Contains Language That Some Viewers May Find Offensive. Viewer Discretion Is Advised.

In that case, Ward wasn’t taken into custody, just cited and let go.

In this case, well, not so much. As you can see, she got hauled in. I don’t usually give into schadenfreude, but the look on her face when the cop tells her to put her hands behind her back is priceless.

You can see that she clearly didn’t think she would be arrested for stealing a sign — and, in fact, she can be heard saying: “I cannot believe this is happening. Is there something else that I can do?”

“No,” the officer responded, before calmly placing handcuffs on her.

One hopes this is representative of the university’s policy going forward. After all, Harris was right, in a way: No individual ought to be denied the right to public safety, no matter what their opinion.

“College students who interfere with our First Amendment rights by assaulting us or stealing our signs are not the victims,” Mark Harrington, president of Created Equal, told Fox News.

“Universities are failing to educate students on the basic American ideal of freedom of speech.”

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct

The post RINO rampage in the Senate will make a 2020 presidential victory moot appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com

Wednesday night on the radio, LevinTV host Mark Levin lambasted media and political speculation and overreaction to recent increased tensions between the Trump administration and the Iranian regime.

Media pundits and politicians have been speculating that recent displays of strength against the regime are a repeat of what led to the invasion of Iraq 16 years ago, but Levin pointed out that those making the claims aren’t operating with all the facts.

“Something has happened, where this president, who’s no interventionist … has great concern,” Levin explained. “And as I’ve been reading the media and trying to figure out what’s going on, all I get is a lot of opinion and pablum, that this is Iraq under George W. Bush, that this is another phony issue like weapons of mass destruction, they argue, they write.”

During the segment, Levin reminded listeners what Iran is capable of, what the nation has done in the past, and that if it is legitimately threatening us, then all this media speculation about an Iraq war redux makes no sense.

“If Iran is indeed threatening our military personnel and our military assets, if Iran is indeed planning to cut off navigable international waters to prevent 20 percent of the world from receiving oil that comes out of the Middle East, if Iran is preparing a massive provocative action, both militarily and economically, why are these newspapers attacking Donald Trump?” Levin wondered. “Is it always politics at all times? Because it seems to be.”

“But we don’t have all the facts. So why are all the knee-jerkers out there going on and on about how this is, oh, weapons of mass destruction like Iraq? … This president isn’t dragged into anything. He has a mind of his own.”

Listen:

Don’t miss an episode of LevinTV. Sign up for your FREE 30-day trial now!

Rep. Tlaib’s Bizarre Comment About the Holocaust

For more truth, get LevinTV: https://t.co/ICZsTSuMg1 pic.twitter.com/LjPfQnvcmo

— LevinTV (@LevinTV) May 14, 2019

The post Levin sets the media ‘knee-jerkers’ straight on Trump’s standoff with Iran appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com

Who says we need to wait half a century to correct bad judicial opinions? Judge Henry Hudson of Virginia had the humility to admit his error just eight days later. Will other judges learn?

Last Monday, Judge Hudson issued a preliminary injunction against Virginia’s long-standing requirement that only licensed physicians may perform abortions. As I reported last week, that ruling was a straight-up violation of Supreme Court precedent not just on abortion, but on states’ powers to require that only licensed professionals perform an array of services, whether one agrees with their determinations or not. Instead, Hudson blithely dismissed any evidence of the need for a licensed physician to perform even the most dangerous surgical abortions, such as dilation and evacuation procedures.

Well, in an extraordinary reversal, Hudson issued an order on Tuesday admitting his error and vacating the original injunction. “On further review, the Court is of the opinion that summary judgment was improvidently awarded to the parties on Count IV based on the present record,” wrote Hudson in the order, reported by the Washington Post. “Rather, on further consideration, whether the ‘Physicians-Only Law’ presents an undue burden to Virginia women who seek an abortion is a material fact that is genuinely in dispute.”

Thank God Hudson doesn’t subscribe to the rules of the ancient Persian government described in the book of Esther (9:8), “For a writ that is written in the name of the king and sealed with the king’s ring cannot be rescinded.”

This is welcoming news to those who are looking for some humility from the courts. We all understand that when legislatures pass bad laws or executives enact bad policies, there is robust public debate, and they are often forced to changes course in the face of widespread backlash. Yet we are told that somehow a single judge can flick his pen at any moment and nullify or legislate policies as even hundreds of legislators don’t have the power to do – and that somehow such an order is self-executing, universally binding, and irreversible.

Hudson should be applauded for recognizing that one man cannot substitute his judgement on a fundamentally political question for the democratically elected legislature. One can only hope he will come to the same conclusion when the trial begins next week on the underlying case.

What is so important about this turnaround is that it demonstrates that judicial opinions are just that: opinions. They frequently decide whether to convict a criminal or award judgement in civil cases, but they are not the sole and final arbiter of broadly consequential political questions when they intersect with powers of other branches of government. The public should actually investigate these opinions and examine them for truth rather than taking them as the word of God.

This was the point Abraham Lincoln kept making to Stephen Douglas during their famous Senate debates in 1858 over slavery in the territories and the Dred Scott ruling from the Supreme Court. Lincoln derided Douglas for hiding behind a court opinion, “which he adheres to it, not as being right upon the merits … but as being absolutely obligatory upon every one simply because of the source from whence it comes.”

“It marks it in this respect, that [Dred Scott] commits him to the next decision, whenever it comes, as being as obligatory as this one, since he does not investigate it, and won’t inquire whether this opinion is right or wrong,” said Lincoln of Douglas during their fifth debate at Galesburg, Illinois, on October 7, 1858. “So he takes the next one without inquiring whether it is right or wrong. He teaches men this doctrine, and in so doing prepares the public mind to take the next decision when it comes, without any inquiry.”

This is what is so important about states like Alabama reclaiming their legislative authority to regulate abortion. Roe v. Wade was a judgment – an erroneous judgment – to a specific plaintiff, not a law and not the word of God. The same holds true for courts’ crazy rulings on marriage, sexuality, election law, and immigration. It’s time we have robust policy debates over political matters and reclaim that power from the courts. It’s time we actually inquire and investigate the true meaning of our Constitution, our history, and our traditions against radical court rulings. We have known hundreds of legislatures to get policy issues wrong in the past quite often. That certainly holds true for single judges or panels of three or nine.

As Lincoln said of Douglas during their first debate, “A decision of the court is to him a ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ Lincoln expressed his frustration: “I cannot shake Judge Douglas’s teeth loose from the Dred Scott decision. Like some obstinate animal (I mean no disrespect), that will hang on when he has once got his teeth fixed; you may cut off a leg, or you may tear away an arm, still he will not relax his hold.”

Hopefully, Judge Hudson has taught the public that a federal judicial ruling is indeed not a “thus saith the Lord.” And in fact, as it relates to abortion, it’s against the word of the Lord and our Constitution and has no shred of legitimacy binding the states or other branches of the federal government to its errors.

The post Virginia judge rescinds his radical abortion ruling just 8 days after issuing it appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com

A Democratic effort to codify transgenderism into federal civil rights law has drawn the criticism of yet another prominent feminist activist.

At a Thursday Capitol Hill press conference put together by Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., Women’s Liberation Front board member Kara Dansky introduced herself as a “lifelong Democrat and a proud feminist” and said the socially conservative politicians alongside her at the event probably “profoundly disagree” with her on several issues.

“But we are here together to take a strong stand for the rights, privacy, and safety of women and girls,” Dansky continued, “all of which are threatened by the so-called ‘Equality Act.’”

H.R. 5, the so-called, “Equality Act,” is expected to go to a floor vote in House of Representatives this week. Basically, it would add sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) as protected classes to federal civil rights law.

Dansky went on to list multiple reasons why the legislation would be bad news for women, if it were enacted, because it would “reconfigure” sex based on the “ill-defined and nebulous” idea of gender identity. She explained that “there is no way both do that and also protect women’s rights” and provided three reasons why:

“One: The word woman means ‘adult human female.’ Women have been fighting for our rights as women for thousands of years,” Dansky said. “As the men who excluded us from the franchise at the dawning of the republic knew, the word ‘sex’ has meaning.”

“Two: Women and girls fought hard for sex-segregated spaces, and we’re not giving them up,” she continued. “Not so long ago, there were no such things as women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, or changing rooms. … As long as the epidemic of male violence against women continues, women have the right to demand separate spaces from males, regardless of how they identify.

“Three: The notion of defining sex to include gender identity has material consequences for women and girls,” Dansky concluded. “Over the centuries, our society has created schools, scholarships, dormitories, business loans and other concrete benefits for women and girls precisely because we had been excluded from the public sphere for so long.”

But under the provisions of the “Equality Act,” those spaces and opportunities would have to be open to biological males as well.

Dansky is not the first left-leaning feminist to voice opposition to the bill’s provisions redefining sex and gender. At a hearing on the legislation back in April, lesbian activist Julia Beck called the bill a “human rights violation.”

“If the act passes in its current form as H.R. 5, then every right that women have fought for will cease to exist,” Beck told the House Judiciary Committee. “Every person in this country will lose their right to single-sex sports, grants, shelters, and loans. The law will forbid ever distinguishing between women and men.”

At Thursday’s press conference, Republican House members also warned about the “Equality Act’s” potential affects on unborn life and conscience rights.

“It would require a universal right to abortion, up until birth,” House Freedom Caucus member Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., warned of the bill.

Lesko has introduced an amendment that seeks to create pro-life protections within the framework of the legislation by stating that nothing in the act “may be construed to grant or secure any right relating to abortion or the provision or funding thereof.”

Another House Freedom Caucus member, Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., warned that the bill’s adversarial provisions against religious liberty would have far-reaching and harmful implications for traditional believers all over the country:

Faith-based adoption agencies would have to violate their convictions of finding a mother and a father for a child or shut down. Small business owners of faith would have to violate their convictions on morality and marriage, and sexuality or close the doors. Churches and faith institutions would have to abandon the teachings of their church in order to participate in federally funded programs, so that things like Catholic schools could lose the national school lunch program. Jewish synagogues could lose grants for protection from terrorist threats. Churches could lose FEMA disaster aid. And faith-based colleges and universities could lose federal student aid.

“This is a horrifying bill,” Hice continued. “The Democrats are exposing themselves as the party willing to use the strong arm of government to oppress Americans, to demonize religion and religious liberties, and to circumvent our constitution.”

Full video of Thursday’s press conference is available here:

The post Video: ‘Lifelong Democrat and proud feminist’ joins conservatives to oppose House Dems’ transgender bill appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com

Think New York City Mayor “Red Bill” De Blasio would at least have the support of New York’s finest? Think again.

De Blasio announced Thursday that he is joining the already crowded field of 2020 Democratic presidential contenders. The leftist mayor is running on the campaign slogan “Working people first.”

Today I am proud to announce my candidacy for president of the United States of America, because it’s time to finally put working people first.https://t.co/p7LYipgAPg

Join me: https://t.co/sjKUWB2LwR #BdB2020

— Bill de Blasio (@BilldeBlasio) May 16, 2019

But the New York City Police Benevolent Association (NYCPBA), which represents about two-thirds of the 36,000 officers in the city, was ready to set the record straight on de Blasio’s supposed advocacy for blue-collar Americans.

“While the mayor of our nation’s largest city is busy running around Iowa and getting upstaged by the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, there are real problems here at home,” NYCPBA leader Patrick Lynch said in a statement shortly after de Blasio’s announcement.

“As commander-in-chief, he would be an unmitigated disaster,” the statement added.

#BREAKING Statement from PBA President Lynch on @NYCMayor @BilldeBlasio’s Presidential Run. “While the mayor of our nation’s largest city is busy running around Iowa and getting upstaged by the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, there are real problems here at home. pic.twitter.com/0HO4OQYu3u

— NYC PBA (@NYCPBA) May 16, 2019

Good morning, America! Did you know that the newest presidential daydreamer @NYCMayor @BilldeBlasio is a hypocrite & no friend of labor? @NYCPBA members are outside @GMA studios with the news. pic.twitter.com/A4wbvLJH9a

— NYC PBA (@NYCPBA) May 16, 2019

New York City police officers have regularly spoken out about the New York City mayor, who ran an anti-police mayoral campaign. During his tenure as mayor, de Blasio been openly hostile to law enforcement. During NYPD funerals, police officers have regularly turned their backs on the mayor to express their disdain for his leadership.

The de Blasio campaign is already off to a bumpy start. During his first live interview, the NYC mayor was swarmed by protesters chanting “Liar,” “Can’t run the city!” and “Can’t run the country!” the New York Post reports.

New Yorkers react to the entrance of Bill de Blasio in the 2020 race:

New Yorker: "He should’ve announced April 1."

Reporter: "Why?"

New Yorker: "It would’ve been a good April fools joke."

pic.twitter.com/RKlO0UUt6b

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) May 16, 2019

President Trump also weighed in via Twitter on the latest entry into the Democratic presidential race:

The Dems are getting another beauty to join their group. Bill de Blasio of NYC, considered the worst mayor in the U.S., will supposedly be making an announcement for president today. He is a JOKE, but if you like high taxes & crime, he’s your man. NYC HATES HIM!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 16, 2019

The post NYC Police union chief: Bill de Blasio would be ‘unmitigated disaster’ as POTUS appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com

San Francisco’s homeless are running out of room in the city, so they’re gradually moving out on to the bay, constructing makeshift boats and barges and forming floating tent cities, the Wall Street Journal reports.

The city has always had a small population of people living on self-constructed houseboats, WSJ says, but recently, the cost of housing, and San Francisco’s ensuing homelessness boom, has driven more of the city’s transient population to consider living on the city’s famous bay.

Between 100 and 200 “barges, sailboats, and other mostly decrepit vessels” now litter the landscape.

In many cities that border a body of water, houseboats are common. In fact, San Francisco, like Portland, Seattle, Vancouver, London, and Amsterdam, has a significant houseboat community, though most of the Bay Area’s floating residences are moored across the Bay Bridge in Sausalito.

These makeshift barges, however, aren’t technically houseboats. They don’t pay to moor at a dock or sit anchored in a marina, and they aren’t specially constructed for year-round living (most have no heat, electricity, or sanitary facilities). They do, however, exist in a gray area in San Francisco’s laws; technically, boats anchored off-shore in areas of the bay restricted for recreational boating are legal, they just aren’t supposed to stay anchored for more than a few hours.

For San Francisco, the dinghies and barges pose a special problem: San Francisco Bay is a major port, and shipping lanes criss-cross the bay. Boats that moor off the San Francisco coast run the risk of disturbing shipping routes or worse, getting caught in a battle for space with a much larger boat.

There’s also the concern of pollution. Most of the makeshift vessels aren’t equipped with toilets, showers, or laundry facilities, so human waste is being dumped directly into the water, just off-shore of (arguably) the nation’s most eco-friendly city. San Francisco already has a problem with poop on its sidewalks, and the city fears it may, someday soon, have issues with poop in its water.

San Francisco’s homeless problem, on land and now at sea, is out of control. At last count, they city’s homeless population hovers somewhere between 5,000 and 7,000 people, with around 3,000 of those being “chronically homeless” — that is, either uninterested or unable to find reliable, long-term housing. Up to 20,000 transients are thought to make San Francisco’s streets their home for at least part of the year.

The number of homeless in San Francisco hasn’t necessarily grown, but the city has become more tolerant of the transient population in recent years, as prices for housing have skyrocketed. Instead of aggressively policing the city’s sidewalk-dwellers, San Francisco has taken to trying to accommodate them, spending hundreds of millions on supportive housing, cleanup programs, and emergency services each year to help the homeless population on land.

The city seems ready to apply the same principles to the homeless now living on the bay. Administrators have proposed, instead of forcibly removing the unwanted seafarers, creating subsidized docks, marinas, and moorings for their makeshift vessels.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml

As The Daily Wire has reported, tensions between the United States and the jihadist mullocracy that governs the theocratic Islamic Republic of Iran have rapidly escalated, of late:

The Trump administration is sending a carrier strike group and a bomber task force to the Middle East to send a “clear and unmistakable message” in response to “a number of troubling and escalatory indications and warnings.” …

“In response to a number of troubling and escalatory indications and warnings, the United States is deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and a bomber task force to the U.S. Central Command region to send a clear and unmistakable message to the Iranian regime that any attack on United States interests or on those of our allies will be met with unrelenting force,” [National Security Advisor John] Bolton said. “The United States is not seeking war with the Iranian regime, but we are fully prepared to respond to any attack, whether by proxy, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or regular Iranian forces.”

The United States has not just militarily escalated its tensions with Iran, but has also economically escalated its efforts to isolate the world’s number one state sponsor of Islamist terrorism. As The Daily Wire noted last month, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently announced that the U.S. would phase out and end all oil sanctions waivers doled out to countries that had been importing Iranian oil.

“Almost one year ago, after withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal, President Trump implemented the strongest pressure campaign in history against the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Pompeo explained. “The goal remains simple: to deprive the outlaw regime of the funds it has used to destabilize the Middle East for four decades and incentivize Iran to behave like a normal country.”

Maximum pressure on the Iranian regime means maximum pressure. That’s why the U.S. will not issue any exceptions to Iranian oil importers. The global oil market remains well-supplied. We’re confident it will remain stable as jurisdictions transition away from Iranian crude.

— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) April 22, 2019

Amid the escalating tensions, The Daily Wire reported how Iran über-hawk Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) boasted how the U.S. could defeat Iran in war with precisely “two strikes”:

Senator @TomCottonAR tells Firing Line if it comes to war with Iran, he is confident the United States would win, and would win swiftly. “Two strikes, the first strike and the last strike,” says the Senator. pic.twitter.com/twTdrFTwHu

— Firing Line with Margaret Hoover (@FiringLineShow) May 14, 2019

Now, Iran is returning the saber-rattling. As The Times of Israel reports, the fanatical terrorist regime has now triumphantly vowed to “defeat the American-Zionist front”:

Iran’s defense minister said Wednesday his country would defeat the US-Israel alliance in the region, amid rising tensions and fears of potential war between Iran and the US.

“We will defeat the American-Zionist front,” Amir Hatami told a gathering of military intelligence officials on Wednesday, according to the official Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

Iran’s military preparedness, Hatami said, was “at its highest point,” despite “the most difficult conditions” imposed by US sanctions. “We will be the final victors” in the standoff, he insisted, and “will defeat the United States.”

Top Iranian officials routinely vow to “annihilate” both Israel and the U.S. The Iranian regime foments, exports, funds, and sponsors all manners of jihadist chaos across the broader Islamic world, included but hardly limited to its Lebanon-based Hezbollah proxy and its Gaza Strip-based Palestinian Islamic Jihad proxy. Most recently, the Trump administration vowed to formally designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml