Tag: marco rubio
Trump 'Credits' Hegseth For Iran War -- And Sets Him Up As Scapegoat

Trump 'Credits' Hegseth For Iran War -- And Sets Him Up As Scapegoat

Pete Hegseth, you in danger, girl.

President Donald Trump on Monday laid the groundwork to blame his secretary of defense for the unfolding disaster in Iran, saying that Hegseth convinced him to start the “excursion” that the administration still has yet to give a coherent rationale for.

Seated alongside Hegseth at an event in Memphis, Tennessee, Trump said that the stock market and economy were doing “fantastic” but that he had "unfortunately" called Hegseth and others to discuss whether to bomb Iran and Hegseth was "the first one" to say Trump should attack.

"You said, 'Let's do it’—because you can't let them have a nuclear weapon," Trump said of Hegseth.

Trump blames Hegseth for the war: "Pete, I think you were the first one to speak up. You said, 'Let's do it.'"

[image or embed]
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 23, 2026 at 12:58 PM

Sure sounds like Trump is laying the groundwork to can Hegseth.

Trump offered that insight into how he pulled the trigger on attacking Iran as the conflict is going off the rails. Iran has blocked a critical oil passageway and bombed other fuel infrastructure in neighboring Middle Eastern nations, leading to a spike in fuel prices that are shaking the global economy.

It's why Trump on Monday appeared to lie about negotiations with Iran to end the war. At least for the moment, it seemed to work as investors caused the stock markets to rise and oil prices to fall at the opening of the trading day. However, Iran has since said it wasn't speaking with Trump and has no plans to stop its aggressions, which may cause markets to trend back down.

Trump is clearly terrified about the chaos he unleashed—and new polling shows he has a reason to be.

A CBS/YouGov survey found 57 percent of Americans think the war is going "very" or "somewhat" poorly. Another 60 percent disapprove of Trump starting the conflict altogether.

As for Hegseth, he would be well-poised to start polishing his resume and reaching back out to his friends Fox News, where he worked before being confirmed to lead the Pentagon.

Trump has no qualms with firing officials to make them the scapegoats for his cruel and unpopular agenda. Kristi Noem found that out the hard way when she was unceremoniously fired as homeland security secretary earlier in March, after she was made the face of Trump's brutal anti-immigration actions.

In fact, Trump has toyed with axing Hegseth at least once before. Earlier in Trump’s new administration, Hegseth was embroiled in a controversy over use of an unsecured Signal chat—that inadvertently included a journalist—to discuss classified military operations. As the Signal controversy was unfolding, NPR reported that Trump's White House had begun the process of looking for Hegseth's replacement.

Nearly a year later, Trump is now publicly placing the war on Hegseth's feet, claiming Hegseth was a major advocate of the bombing operation.

Of course, the blame might not even be true.

Earlier in March, Trump said that Hegseth, Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio convinced him that an Iran attack was “imminent” and that he needed to start this war.

"Based on what Steve and Jared and Pete and others were telling me—Marco, so involved—that I thought that they were going to attack us,” Trump said on March 9.

But Trump can’t fire his family. Rubio is more popular than Hegseth. And Witkoff is a behind-the-scenes figure whose firing wouldn’t prompt the kind of news coverage that a Hegseth ouster would. Hegseth makes a better fall guy for Trump’s misguided war.

If there’s any consolation for Hegseth, though, it’s that his firing would let him unlock that liquor cabinet he claimed to have shut when he became the secretary of defense.

A scotch on the rocks may be in your future, Pete! At least you have that.

Why Trump And His Minions Cannot Articulate A Believable Reason For This War

Why Trump And His Minions Cannot Articulate A Believable Reason For This War

A striking aspect of Donald Trump’s warmaking is the contrast between the orderly deployment of American military power and the chaotic disorder of its civilian leadership. From the Joint Chiefs of Staff all the way down, US forces are executing the presidential directive to attack Iran, while defending our bases and allies, with their usual surefire efficacy.

And from the Oval Office all the way down, the Trump administration is pursuing a chaotic, contradictory, and potentially disastrous approach to this conflict, with no clear objective and no forward plan.

Discerning any strategic purpose to Trump’s actions, behind the barrage of lies, bluster, and propaganda emanating from the White House, is impossible. Indeed, the absence of any stated strategy or end point to this war -- as it blazes across the region with unpredictable consequences – raises the suspicion that the administration’s intentions are purely political, selfish, and corrupt. Its greatest success so far in this war is to drive the Epstein files off the front pages, airwaves, and internet.

But the questions provoked by this sudden conflict are proliferating, even as the president, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth refuse to offer any comprehensible answers.

If the Iranian nuclear program was obliterated during the 12-day war last summer, then why did the US and Israel need to destroy it again now? If the aim of this war is regime change, then why would Trump have chosen members of the regime to take over after he ordered the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei? If the aim is not regime change, then why would Trump and members of his war cabinet urge Iranian civilians to seize power in the wake of US bombing? If the regime does not fall, then how will it be possible for American officials to reach a ceasefire or peace settlement after killing Iran’s leaders during the last round of negotiations?

Rubio is now telling us that the United States initiated this war because Israel was about to attack Iran, regardless of American policy, and therefore we had to mount a pre-emptive strike, anticipating an Iranian response. This reckless narrative underlines the worst antisemitic conspiracy theories about our partnership with Jerusalem – and puts the lie to claims by Trump and Hegseth that our own country was in imminent danger of attack by Iran (which possessed no weapons that could reach our shores).

As a harsh critic of the 2003 Iraq invasion and its bloody, costly aftermath, Trump might have been expected to avoid another ill-founded Mideast quagmire – or at least to have ordered up a plausible scenario for when the bombing stops. Yet it is increasingly plain, as Hegseth, Rubio and his assorted minions offer up a series of inconsistent and implausible assertions, that there isn’t even a drawing board, let alone a blueprint. They can’t even tell us whether United States troops will be sent into Iran, in gross violation of Trump’s campaign promises. Their only believable prediction is that more of our airmen, soldiers and Marines will die.

In the absence of forthright and credible leadership from the White House, this is what we suspect: Trump’s success in capturing Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro induced a dangerous sense of hubris in the American president. Despite sharp warnings from his own handpicked Joint Chiefs chairman Dan Caine, who told him to expect terrible consequences if we went to war in Iran, he abruptly scuttled promising negotiations for "epic fury." And he did all this for reasons that we still do not know but can only guess.

My best guess? We have come full circle to the Iraq fiasco Trump denounced so many times-- except that the underlying motivation this time is not some lofty geopolitical dream, or even a scheme for vengeance, but merely to distract us from the emerging depravity of the man in power.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism (St. Martin's Press, 2024). The paperback version, with a new Afterword, is now available wherever books are sold.

Reprinted with permission from Creators

JD Vance

'No Rizz': Young MAGA Voters Are Repelled By JD Vance As Trump Fades

Bulwark Publisher Sarah Longwell and the site's “False Flag” editor Will Sommer have been analyzing the critical youth MAGA vote that helped put President Donald Trump over the finish line a little more than a year ago, and they report their enthusiasm is waning for Trump’s preferred replacement.

Polls suggest Trump is deep in cold water and that his lame-duck chapter may already be underway, even before the 2026 mid-terms — primarily because of the expectation that his Republican Party will be trounced and his GOP Congressional majority evaporated.

Youth helped put Trump in the White House a second time, but Bulwark surveys of young voters who swung from Biden to Trump last time feel less enthusiasm for electable Republicans and more passion for unelectable boors and white nationalist firebrands — if, indeed, they feel anything at all.

“Like, he doesn't give you all the heebie-jeebies at all?” demanded one female respondent, speaking of Vice-President JD Vance, who has already announced his intent to run for president in Trump’s absence at the next national election.

“I shouldn't judge a book by its … cover or whatever. But I just kind of like — it’s one of those, like, feelings like — eeyuck — I don't know,” said another.

“They're just creeped out by Vance or find him boring, weird, and like no rizz, no rizz,” said Longwell.

No rizz is modern slang used to describe someone who lacks charisma, charm, or appeal — particularly in romantic or social contexts. The term suggests that a person is unable to attract others or lacks the magnetism needed to impress or seduce someone.

Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio got middling to slight enthusiasm from young Biden-to-Trump voters, which looks bad for Vance. However, young MAGA men appeared to be throwing their attention to even more controversial candidates like Florida gubernatorial candidate James Fishback, who coddles white nationalism and Holocaust denialism while demanding a “ho-tax” from Only Fans users.

“I don't know if you've heard of Fishback. He's trying to run for governor of Florida. I really like what he's doing. He's young. He's very articulate in terms of what he says. And he's focusing on the people of Florida in particular,” said one survey respondent, who had not been asked about Fishback in the survey.

Other respondents echoed his enthusiasm, to the surprise of survey organizers who had not had Fishback on their radar. This, said Longwell, is unfortunate for the Republican Party because critics consider Fishback the kiss of death for centrist-minded Independent voters.

“Fishback is sending a clear message to white nationalist groups: “I’m your guy,’” Political Research Associates senior research analyst Ben Lorber told the Miami Herald.

Longwell pointed out that Fishback is “polling in the low single digits — in actual Florida, like with actual Floridians — he is not doing that well, but he's clearly getting a lot of attention online.”

“This is a guy who, in terms of actual accomplishments in life, is just about at nothing,” said Sommer, who also described Fishback as “insanely racist”. “And he has this kind of insane, twisted backstory. He was at a hedge fund. He got fired from the hedge fund because he was focusing too much on his anti-woke high school debate startup. And basically, he engaged in all this subterfuge where he had people posing as reporters or angry investors at the hedge fund. And as a result, he's ended up with what I think is going to be ... $2 million plus debt to the hedge fund over legal fees.”

“He's getting his car seized by U.S. Marshals. He's spending on all these luxury goods and he bought a Cartier watch, wore it to a deposition and the hedge fund said, ‘well, wait a minute, you know, we got to seize that.’ So … this guy is at like the very low level of success in life. And I should say also, there are these allegations in court that he had a relationship with a 17-year-old at his high school debate star.”

“It’s definitely a bad sign for where the MAGA movement is headed,” concluded Sommer.

“Yeah, it's a really bad sign,” Longwell agreed.

Watch the Bulwark podcast at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Kushner And Witkoff Secretly Consulted Kremlin In Drafting Ukraine 'Peace Plan'

Kushner And Witkoff Secretly Consulted Kremlin In Drafting Ukraine 'Peace Plan'

The peace plan that President Donald Trump's administration offered to end the ongoing war in Ukraine has been widely criticized for being overly accommodating to Russia. Now, a new report shows that Russia may have been even more intricately involved in its composition than previously known.

The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that the proposal — which Trump administration special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner (who is also the president's son-in-law) — relied heavily on input from a "Kremlin insider." Kushner, Witkoff and the Kremlin advisor huddled behind closed doors in multiple "secret meetings" in Miami, Florida, according to the Journal.

That Kremlin advisor was identified as Kirill Dmitriev, who the Journal described as an envoy of Russian President Vladimir Putin who also has ties to Kushner. Witkoff also met Dmitriev during his April trip to Moscow. The 28-point plan has been described as a "framework" to end the war, though multiple senators allege Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio described it as "essentially the wish list of the Russians." (Rubio has denied making that comment)

The three men reportedly met for three days in late October at Witkoff's home in Miami, where Dmitriev communicated multiple items the Kremlin demanded in order to agree to end hostilities with Ukraine. The Journal reported that Dmitriev called for Ukraine to never be allowed to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), pull all troops out of the eastern Donbass region and other territory Russia wanted to control (like the Crimean Peninsula, which it illegally invaded in 2014). The Kremlin also wants Ukraine's military to be capped at a much lower number than its current 900,000-member force.

Dmitriev also specifically called on the Trump administration to engage in multiple economic agreements in the areas of artificial intelligence, energy and other industries. The Journal also reported that the bulk of the plan was written by both Kushner and Witkoff before they even engaged with Russia or Ukraine.

When Witkoff and Kushner attempted to engage senior Ukrainian officials to get their input on the peace plan, one told the two Trump administration envoys that the deal was better for Russia than for Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy thanked the two men for working toward ending the war, but also said their plan needed revisions.

Trump administration officials maintain that the final version of the plan will be more accommodating to Ukraine, and suggested amending it to raise the cap on the size of the Ukrainian military beyond what Russia wanted, and that language permanently barring Ukraine's membership in NATO could be removed.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World