Tag: mark levin
Trump Says 'Watch Mark Levin' As Fox Host Urged US Troops To Seize Iran Uranium

Trump Says 'Watch Mark Levin' As Fox Host Urged US Troops To Seize Iran Uranium

Fox News host Mark Levin suggested the U.S. military should seize Iran’s uranium — a risky escalation experts say would place troops under fire on Iranian soil for days — during a Saturday night program that President Donald Trump had urged his supporters to watch for its discussion of “the importance of hitting Iran, HARD!!!"

Under normal circumstances, the nasal-voiced screeds a sycophantic Fox news host yells on his taped weekend program wouldn’t matter for much. But Trump is often persuaded by what the network’s MAGA propagandists tell him through his television, he’s previously leaned on council from Levin with regard to Iran in particular, and earlier on Saturday, the president urged his supporters to tune in to Levin’s show that evening.

“Watch Mark Levin interview of Brilliant Marc Thiessen tonight at 8:00 P.M., on FoxNews,” Trump posted to Truth Social. “Will discuss the importance of hitting Iran, HARD!!!”

Trump’s instruction for supporters to watch Fox discourse on the prospect of further escalations in Iran comes as the war approaches a flashpoint. Iran’s regime is intact and it has successfully closed the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic victory that threatens global trade. With Trump’s initial prediction of a four-to-five-week war in doubt, U.S. troops are streaming toward the region and preparing for weeks of ground operations. The Pentagon has reportedly prepared a list of purported “final blow” options that include seizing Iran’s Kharg Island oil terminal and extracting Iran’s uranium, even as Trump himself is reportedly “getting a little bored” and “wants to move on” from Iran, as a senior White House official told MS NOW.

Fox’s pro-Trump hosts are trying to influence the president’s next move. Laura Ingraham warned last week that further escalation could trigger “cascading problems for the region” and “political problems for the president,” while Sean Hannity suggested that the war is all but over and Jesse Watters said any further action would amount to a “knockout.”

Saturday’s broadcast illuminates Levin’s position among the network’s biggest hawks. And he appears to be showering Trump with praise in an effort to get the president on board with his latest escalation scheme. Levin touted Trump’s “enormous intelligence,” claimed his “victory” against Iran is “absolutely incredible,” and portrayed the war’s critics as merely Trump-haters.

The Fox-Trump feedback loop has in recent months played a role in the president’s decisions to send White House border czar Tom Homan to oversee immigration enforcement in Minnesota; prioritize the SAVE Act over all other legislation; order the deployment of ICE agents to airports; and start the war against Iran. Will it now help trigger an incredibly risky military operation?

Levin: We need ground troops in Iran because “we’ve got to get the uranium”

After spending the bulk of Saturday’s monologue praising Trump’s war and denouncing its critics (described below), Levin came to the point: He wants the president to deploy ground troops in Iran to seize Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile.

“Why would we need troops on the ground?” he explained. “Well, there's a lot of reasons, and we wouldn't need 300,000 of them.”

“We've got to get the uranium — if it cannot be destroyed, if it cannot be altered, we've got to get it,” Levin said. “That's why I am reading in the paper, we are talking about the 82nd Airborne, we're talking about these various special forces and the various military services and so forth.”

“He's not talking about sending regular Army and infantry in by the hundreds of thousands — the men he's talking about, the units he is talking about, they are specialized,” Levin continued. “And you know what else? I remember from my days in the Reagan administration, many of them are trained for a moment like this to try and secure enriched uranium. Many have been trained for moments like this.”

Thiessen, the Washington Post columnist and Fox contributor whom Trump described as “Brilliant,” likewise argued that “if we don't get that enriched uranium, and they want to get back at us for what we've done, the easiest way to do it would be to get it to al-Qaida and let them use it for a dirty bomb.”

“So we have got to get what Donald Trump correctly calls the nuclear dust before this operation is done,” Thiessen concluded.

The Wall Street Journal’s description of an operation to extract nearly 1,000 pounds of nuclear material buried in the middle of a hostile country during a shooting war does not sound as easy as Levin and Thiessen made it out to be. The paper reported:

Teams of U.S. forces would need to fly to the sites, likely under fire from Iranian surface-to-air missiles and drones. Once on site, combat troops would need to secure perimeters so that engineers with excavating equipment could search through debris and check for mines and booby traps.
The extraction of the material would likely need to be conducted by an elite special operations team specially trained to remove radioactive material from a conflict zone. The highly enriched uranium is likely contained in 40 to 50 special cylinders that resemble scuba tanks. They would need to be put into transportation casks to protect against accidents. That could fill several trucks, said Richard Nephew, a senior research scholar at Columbia University and a former nuclear negotiator with Iran.
Unless an airfield was available, a makeshift one would need to be set up to bring equipment in and take the nuclear material out. The entire operation would take days or even a week to complete, experts said.

Trump “hasn’t made a decision on whether to give the order” and is “considering the danger to U.S. troops,” but “remains generally open to the idea,” the Journal reports.

More open, perhaps, after hearing the pitch from Levin and Thiessen.

Levin: Trump has “enormous intelligence,” his Iran “victory” is “absolutely incredible”

Before urging Trump to send U.S. ground troops to invade Iran, Levin began his Saturday monologue by offering fulsome praise for the war of choice he had urged the president to start.

“I've been thinking about the war with Iran,” he began. “I like to call it a military operation. I actually like to call it a peace mission, because that's what it is, and how incredible it is, and the magnitude of this victory. It's not a final victory, but this victory up to this point is incredible, absolutely incredible.”

Levin meandered through his justification for the war, denouncing President Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which he described as “an agreement that would ensure they get a nuclear weapon,” and comparing U.S. military deaths during the Iran war with those during other U.S. conflicts dating back to the Korean War as well as fatalities from murder and fentanyl overdoses.

He ultimately claimed that Iran could have turned its enriched uranium for a “dirty bomb” and then employed terrorists to detonate it in a U.S. city. “So what the president is doing is monumental in terms of protecting the American people,” Levin explained.

The host concluded that “we're in good hands” with Trump “because he's a man with enormous intelligence, enormous common sense. He's not an ideologue. He doesn't run around with slogans. He is prudential. He looks at the facts, he looks at the challenge, and he's dealing with it.”

Thiessen likewise gushed over the president’s war.

“We're about halfway through this thing,” Thiessen claimed, “and when this is all over, this is going to go down in history as possibly the greatest military campaign the United States has waged since the American Revolution.”

Levin: War critics “aren’t serious people,” they “are people who just oppose Trump”

Levin finds his own arguments so compelling that he can’t imagine why anyone would disagree with them.

Pointing to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and recently resigned former Trump intelligence official Joe Kent, Levin commented, “These aren't serious people with serious disagreements. These aren't serious people with substantive knowledge that's different than it was before. No, no, no. These are people who just oppose Donald Trump. That's the truth.”

He later complained that Schumer, “the conga line of Democrats,” and “the woke Reich neofascist isolationists” were giving Iran “the benefit of the doubt.”

“Why would you give a terrorist regime that slaughtered Americans and is the biggest promoter of terrorism the benefit of the doubt?” he whined.

Thiessen likewise told Levin that the Democrats are “rooting for defeat,” adding, “There are people in this country who hate Donald Trump more than they hate the Iranian regime that just massacred 32,000 people in their streets.”

That’s what Trump wanted his followers to tune-in for: A totally one-sided dismissal of the Iran war’s critics in favor of continued escalation in an aimless conflict that's already spiraled out of control.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

MAGA Debate Over Iran Conflict Degenerates Into 'Micropenis' Flame War

MAGA Debate Over Iran Conflict Degenerates Into 'Micropenis' Flame War

Megyn Kelly, the former Fox News Host turned podcaster, is in the business of getting attention. This week, it worked. She got the attention of the President of the United States in her attack on fellow conservative talker Mark Levin, not to mention the support of fellow bomb thrower Marjorie Taylor Greene.

At the center of the attack is the question of the size of Mark Levin's member.

Levin is for the war with Iran, Kelly is against it. But they aren't debating the war like we teach children to do, using their words to make a point rather than calling names. No, the way you get attention is by going on the attack.

"Poor Megyn Kelly. An emotionally unhinged, lewd, and petulant wreck. She's completely revealed and destroyed herself," Levin wrote in on social media post on Sunday. "She's everything people say she is, but much worse. Never an intelligent, thoughtful, or substantive comment. Utterly toxic."

Kelly responded to Levin, calling him "micropenis Mark," writing that he "thinks he has the monopoly on lewd."

"He tweets about me obsessively in the crudest, nastiest terms possible," Kelly wrote. "Literally more than some stalkers I've had arrested. He doesn't like it when women like me fight back. Bc of his micropenis."

That's when Trump got involved. He took to social media on Sunday to defend Levin and attack Kelly.

"Mark Levin, a truly Great American Patriot, is somewhat under siege by other people with far less Intellect, Capability and Love for our Country. Mark is Tough, Strong and Brilliant. When you hear others unfairly attack Mark, remember that they are jealous and angry Human Beings, whose "sway" is much less than the Public understands, and will, now that they know where I stand, rapidly diminish."

Megyn was not cowed. I'm sure she was delighted. The exchange was getting lots of attention. So she piled on. Kelly wrote on Monday that Levin is "such a SMALL MAN he had to go beg the president for a pat on the head (in the middle of a war!) to make himself feel better about ... well, you know ... Just like all feckless, weakling bullies Micro can dish it out but he can't take it. After just one post putting the so-called 'great one' in his place, he ran crying to Daddy," she wrote.

Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), once a staunch Trump ally, offered her support to Kelly, writing: "I wholeheartedly support Megyn Kelly telling the world that Mark Levin has a micropenis. It's the most deserved insult and I don't care if it's vulgar. And Trump's gigantic defense of Levin only enraged the base more. People are DONE. MAGA destroyed by micropenis Mark Levin."

These are our opinion leaders? Our public intellectuals? The people getting all the attention in what should be a serious discussion of our goals and our mission in Iran? This is what MAGA has devolved to.

And in the midst of this, you have the president and his FCC chair complaining about how the mainstream media is covering the war and threatening broadcast licenses. The mainstream media is a model of restraint compared to the screamers on the right. The threats clearly violate the First Amendment. If the coverage comes out to be mixed, at best, that's because this administration has so completely failed at messaging this war: stating a rationale, defining the engagement, outlining the endgame. Theirs is an invitation to skeptical coverage.

The way to deal with that skeptical coverage is to answer the underlying questions about mission and duration, not to blame the people who are asking. But MAGA is too busy throwing mud at each other to answer the fundamental questions about this war that still have not been addressed. President Donald Trump has no one to blame but his own friends for the coverage he doesn't like. They deserve it.

Susan Estrich is a celebrated feminist legal scholar, the first female president of the Harvard Law Review, and the first woman to run a U.S. presidential campaign. She has written eight books.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.


Fox's Ultra-Hawkish Hosts Are Thrilled With Iran War -- And Eager To Escalate

Fox's Ultra-Hawkish Hosts Are Thrilled With Iran War -- And Eager To Escalate

Less than two weeks after President Donald Trump launched an ill-conceived, ill-planned war in Iran, the Fox News Cabinet members who urged him to launch military strikes there are either pushing him to escalate or stressing what a great job he’s done.

Zeteo’s Justin Baragona and Asawin Suebsang confirmed on Thursday that televised input from the Fox propagandists Trump trusts played a role in the president’s decision to launch a war of choice. Trump regularly shapes policy based on what he sees on the network, and hosts Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and Brian Kilmeade were loudly urging the president to attack Iran in the days before he did so.

Though U.S. and Israeli forces have successfully bombed a wide array of Iranian targets and assassinated its former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the U.S. military also appears to have killed scores of Iranian children with a Tomahawk missile strike on a school, Iran has now taken the incredibly obvious step of closing the Strait of Hormuz — the chokepoint through which about 20 percent of global crude oil and liquified natural gas flows — and it remains unclear what a strategic victory could look like.

But if Trump is watching his favorite morning show, Fox & Friends, he’s hearing Kilmeade call for an expanded mission that would require putting troops on the ground in Iran.

“We killed their commander, and we’re killing a lot more, and the Israelis’ intelligence on the ground is unbelievable,” he said on Thursday. “Hopefully, that leads to grabbing that uranium out of some of those destroyed sites, maybe that’ll be something that will be announced shortly.”

Kilmeade’s casual invocation of “grabbing that uranium” elides the difficulties involved in attempting to secure and transfer potentially over a thousand pounds of material that has likely been dispersed across a hostile foreign country and possibly outside of it.

Robert Pape, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, detailed the potential dilemmas of such an operation in a Wednesday appearance on MS NOW.

Kilmeade has also suggested U.S. forces seize Iranian territory — using language that seems carefully chosen to appeal to the president.

“I just wonder how soon until we decide to grab that Kharg Island, where 90% of all the Iranian oil is shipped,” Kilmeade offered on Wednesday.

“If we have that, you want the ultimate leverage, we have it,” he added, “I just think that that's something the president has talked about since the ‘80s, everyone knows it, and that would really get their attention.”

Kilmeade went on to say that the administration could be hesitating because if the U.S. seizes Kharg Island, there would be “a temporary uptick” in the cost of oil during the “transition.”

“But Iran can't adjust economically without it,” he added. “So if you want to create ultimate leverage on a regime that is so scared, they are afraid to put their supreme leader out in public, I think that's one way to do it.”

He concluded, appearing to address Trump directly: “If you are in control of it, you literally are doing what you did with [Venezuelan President] Delcy Rodriguez. We took all their ships and said nothing is coming in or out. We will control your oil. We flipped the government to take Maduro out, and now we’re refining their oil.”

Kharg Island “is arguably the country’s most sensitive economic target,” Dan Sabbagh, defense and security editor for The Guardian, wrote on Wednesday, but “an effort to seize the island, given its size, would be likely to require a sizeable and sustained operation, greater than a typical special forces incursion.”

He further reported that “experts say bombing or capturing the site with US forces would be likely to cause a sustained increase to already surging oil prices, as it would amount to taking the entirety of Iran’s daily crude exports offline.” That could cause a “tailspin” for global markets, even if oil shipments subsequently resumed.

Levin and Hannity can’t stop praising the “extraordinary leader” who launched the war

While Kilmeade is focused on coming up with new ways for Trump to risk the lives of American service members and undermine global financial and political stability, Hannity and Levin have been telling their viewers — which could include the president on any given night — that the war is going swimmingly and that anyone who says otherwise is lying.

“After just one week, Iran's Air Force, Army, Navy is in tatters,” Hannity said Monday. “Its radical leaders, they're all dead. A murderous regime is now a shadow of its former self.”

He went on to explain that in Iran, “a new supreme leader, ayatollah, has been announced and his days as of this hour are likely numbered” and the country “is apparently struggling to put up a fight.”

On Tuesday, Hannity praised Trump for demanding Iran remove any mines it had placed in the Strait of Hormuz, commenting: “Tonight, the message from the Trump administration and President Trump is crystal clear. Any Iranian ship that poses a threat to the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz will be obliterated without warning and sent straight to hell and the bottom of the sea in a million pieces.”

He added, “A little advice to anyone still alive in Iran's Navy, dock your vessel, head to dry land, and maybe you want to go home and join your families.”

And on Wednesday, Hannity began his nightly monologue with “the very latest figures out of Operation Epic Fury.”

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): Iranian ballistic missile attacks, they’re down by over 90%. More than 5,000 targets, now, have been eliminated.
Air dominance has been secured. More than Iranian vessels have been obliterated, including all four Soleimani-class warships. The old ayatollah, supreme leader, and all of his top deputies and the next layer of leadership are all dead.
The new ayatollah is too afraid to appear anywhere in public. In fact, we don’t even know if he’s dead or alive.
Now, all of this in less than 11 days. America and Israel are dominating the evil regime in Iran.

On Saturday, Levin lavished Trump with praise for attacking Iran, calling him “an extraordinary leader and president who spent most of his life as a captain of industry, several industries, in fact, who gave up an enormously successful career to serve his country, a country he so dearly loves.”

He went on to attack those who suggest U.S. aims in Iran are unclear.

“Now, lot of people are saying, people who know better, what's the mission? Why are we acting now and so forth and so on?” he said. “Ladies and gentlemen, it's just appalling to hear Democrats and commentators and others make these statements when they know damn well what the mission is. We've faced this for 50 years.”

Levin subsequently asked Richard Goldberg of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, “It's so important that we have this commander-in-chief when we have this commander-in-chief because literally none of this would be happening, would it?”

“Mark, I don't believe that presidents know when history is going to come knocking,” Goldberg replied. “It happens at times you can't expect. But what makes a great president is being willing to answer the call, not to shy away, not to cower, not to be deterred, as many past presidents have, and repeatedly throughout his two presidencies, when history knocks, President Trump answers the call, and that is what he just did.”

Goldberg went on to say of the war: “We are six days in, seven days in and this is moving at a pace no one could ever have imagined. We are decimating their missiles, their drones, their Navy, their ability to remake a nuclear weapons program, and soon, with the help of our allies in Israel, decapitating their ability to wage war against the Iranian people as well.”

“Understand what is at stake here for our national security. Donald Trump is delivering for the United States of America,” he concluded.

“Beautifully put, and conversely, the Democrats are trying to obstruct him every step of the way,” Levin replied.

The president was watching Levin and Goldberg wax poetic about how great he is.

“Rich Goldberg was GREAT on Mark Levin tonight,” Trump posted that night. “Two guys who really get it! Thank you both.”

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World