Victory In Iran Depends On More Than U.S. Military Dominance

American strategic power has always been a question not just of battlefield prowess but also of public opinion.

The Federalist

Since the Iran war began nearly three weeks ago, President Trump has routinely (and accurately) boasted of America’s battlefield dominance. On an almost daily basis, he recounts how Iran’s navy, missile sites, and military infrastructure have been decimated or completely destroyed. He is, with good reason, supremely confident in American arms. This week, responding to NATO allies who refused to help keep the Strait of Hormuz open, the president declared that, “we don’t need too much help, and we don’t need any help, actually.”

And so far as it goes, Trump is right. The United States is dominating the battlefield in Iran without any help from NATO allies. On Tuesday, U.S. warplanes dropped multiple 5,000-pound deep penetrator munitions on Iranian coastal missile sites near the Strait of Hormuz, the first major action in its effort to secure the strait and clear the way for the thousands of commercial vessels now trapped in the Persian Gulf.

There is no question of American battlefield dominance thus far in the war. Yet the Trump administration now faces a different sort of challenge that cannot be quantified in missile strikes or sunk ships. The paradox of U.S. strategic power is that while no nation in human history has ever been able to wield so much military might, the American democratic system of government means the deployment of that power is contingent on public opinion.

In practice, that means America’s obvious superior military capability against Iran does not necessarily guarantee what military strategists call escalation dominance. The U.S. military has better weaponry than any other country, our Armed Forces are vastly superior in every way, and our industrial base dwarfs Iran’s. On the battlefield, the American military will certainly prevail.

But one of the lessons of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars is that escalation dominance, at least for a democratic country like the U.S., depends in part on political will, which in turn depends on public opinion. If the American people turn hard enough against a conflict, the U.S. military can win every battle and America will still lose the war.

This is especially salient in a conflict like the one we have launched in Iran. The Trump administration has given multiple justifications for launching the war, which has contributed to a public atmosphere of confusion about American war aims. A recent Washington Post poll found that 65 percent of respondents don’t think President Trump and his team have clearly explained the goals of the war. As Byron York points out at The Washington Examiner, this is despite weeks of the administration saying what its goals are: Destroy Iran’s missiles and missile production, destroy its navy, destroy its ability to project power through regional proxies, and prevent it from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon.

So why do so many Americans still not think Trump has explained his war aims clearly? Writes York: “Perhaps it is because they understand the goals, as stated, but do not find them particularly persuasive or compelling.”

That could pose a problem for Trump. As the war continues into its third week, it’s becoming clear that to achieve these stated goals, the Trump administration will likely have to escalate in ways that risk widening or prolonging the conflict. And this is where public opinion could limit what the president can do precisely at the moment he needs to act.

For example, reopening the Strait of Hormuz might require the invasion and occupation of a vast swath of Iran’s southern coast, including the islands that make up Iran’s southern maritime frontier. Invading and occupying this area would require a massive deployment of U.S. ground forces, which would be just one part of an operation that would last well beyond the original four or five weeks the White House initially predicted for Operation Epic Fury. Even assembling the forces necessary for such an operation would extend that timeline out by months, and once Iran’s southern coast is occupied, it’s unclear how long U.S. forces would have to remain there.

This is just one scenario in which the Trump administration might soon be running into trouble. The war in Iran is not popular. Since the U.S. and Israel launched the war on February 28, the RCP polling average shows nearly 49 percent of Americans disapprove of the war compared to only 44 that percent that approve. Some individual polls, like a recent one from The Economist/YouGov, show a much starker divide, with 56 percent opposed and only 33 percent in support.

That’s a bad sign, even if these same polls show overwhelming support for the war among Republicans and self-identified MAGA voters. One recent NBC News poll, for example, found a whopping 90 percent approval among MAGA Republicans for military action in Iran. Yet MAGA Republicans only make up about 30 percent of the GOP. Among non-MAGA Republicans, that same poll showed that 36 percent disapprove of the Iran war.

What’s more, all the polls show huge partisan divides, with massive supermajorities of Democrats opposing the war. This matters not just for the 2026 midterms but also in the near-term, over the next three to six months. It’s unlikely that Democrat voters are going to change their views, no matter what happens on the battlefield. But among Republicans and Independents who made up the winning Trump coalition in 2024, escalation by the Trump administration — such as the deployment of thousands of ground troops to Iran’s southern coast — might well contribute to an erosion of support. Part of Trump’s appeal to disaffected Republicans and Independents, after all, was that he would avoid embroiling the U.S. in open-ended Middle East wars. If that’s what Iran turns into, Trump’s support in his own party could begin to erode — even more so if an extended war brings higher gas prices and economic pain for ordinary Americans.

There are signs that the Trump administration is not as attuned to these risks as it should be. On Tuesday, Kevin Hassett, a top economic advisor to Trump, said that if the war in Iran drags on it will hurt consumers, but that consumer pain is “the last of our concerns right now.” The economy, inflation, and the cost of living were among the first concerns of voters in 2024, and will likely be among their first concerns in 2026.

When Hassett says that a drawn out conflict with Iran “wouldn’t really disrupt the U.S. economy very much at all,” that might be true on a macro level, but on a household level it would be hugely disruptive. If war with Iran means Americans are suddenly paying $5 or $6 a gallon for gasoline, or can’t afford to pay their heating bills, it won’t matter what the macro effects are because voters are going to be angry.

All of this to say that public opinion, not military capability, is what really limits the reach of American strategic power. Given the polling so far on the Iran war, it might not be long before public opinion begins to play a role in what the Trump administration can realistically accomplish on the battlefield, and how the president decides to define what victory looks like in the end.

Israel says it will stop striking Iranian energy sites after rebuke from Trump

 The bombing of more energy facilities from both sides threatened to draw in both Gulf and European powers and exposed tensions between the U.S. and Israel

Israel said it will no longer target energy infrastructure after an attack on an Iranian gas field sparked retaliatory strikes against energy assets across the Middle East, causing oil and gas prices to surge and prompting a rebuke from President Donald Trump.

“Israel acted alone,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a press conference on Thursday, after Israeli officials previously said they had informed the U.S. about the attack.

Netanyahu also said Israeli forces would help the U.S. attempt to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and that the war would be over faster than people think, in comments that helped calm markets on a day that already-elevated energy prices spiked once again.

“I told him, ‘don’t do that.’ And he won’t do that,” Trump said Thursday at the White House, referring to Netanyahu. “We get along great. It’s coordinated. But on occasion, he’ll do something, and if I don’t like it, then — so we’re not doing that.”

The sharp escalation, with the bombing of more energy facilities from both sides, threatened to draw in both Gulf and European powers and exposed tensions between the U.S. and Israel as the war drags on.

For Washington, the costs of the Iran campaign it launched alongside Israel were becoming clearer as the war neared the end of its third week. On Thursday, Iran said its air defence “seriously damaged” a U.S. F-35 stealth fighter, with U.S. Central Command saying one of the warplanes made an emergency landing and the pilot was in stable condition.

The Pentagon also asked Congress for an additional $200 billion to pay for the war, a person familiar with the matter said. The enormous funding request suggested the U.S. was girding for a protracted conflict, though Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth downplayed concerns and said the U.S. was “on plan” with its war goals.

“It takes money to kill bad guys,” Hegseth said in a combative news conference where he denied “that we’re somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or quagmire.”

Yet it’s not clear whether the Defense Department can persuade the sharply divided U.S. Congress to provide the money. The sum is far larger than the estimated $65 billion the U.S. has spent in security assistance to Ukraine since 2022 and suggests that the administration sees a long campaign ahead against Iran. Democrats criticized the plan and Republicans were noncommittal.

“If there is any hope to get my vote, they have to come forward with a plan,” Senator Gary Peters, a Michigan Democrat told Bloomberg Television on Thursday evening. “They haven’t come through with what an end goal looks like, or what victory looks like.”

With no end to the war in sight, oil and gas prices soared once again, and bonds tumbled amid widening fears the war will fuel inflation and suppress economic growth. Equities in Asia and Europe extended losses, though U.S. stocks staged a sharp recovery late in the session as Netanyahu said his country would help the U.S. open the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi vowed in a post on X to show “ZERO restraint” if the country’s energy infrastructure was hit again.

As part of the barrage, Saudi Arabia said a drone hit its Samref refinery on the Red Sea, a vital exit route for the world’s biggest oil exporter, while the kingdom said it also shot down ballistic missiles fired toward the capital, Riyadh.

Qatar reported “extensive damage” at the world’s largest liquefied natural gas export plant, with QatarEnergy saying the attacks would cost about $20 billion a year in lost revenue and would take as long as five years to repair.

The UAE shut a major gas facility because of falling debris from missiles. Two oil refineries in Kuwait were struck by drones that caused fires, according to Kuwait Petroleum Corp. Iraq also reported a loss of power generation after Iran halted gas supplies from South Pars in the wake of the Israeli attack.

The latest attacks increased the potential for other countries to join the conflict. Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud warned overnight that the kingdom’s restraint isn’t “unlimited,” and warned it could take military action.

“It could be a day, two days, or a week,” he told reporters in Riyadh, adding the relationship between the kingdom and Tehran has “completely shattered.”

The energy strikes also frayed close ties between the U.S. and Israel, with Trump saying in a social media post late Wednesday that “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL” on South Pars. He threatened the U.S. “will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field” if Iran continued hitting Qatar.

While Netanyahu’s vow to avoid Iran’s energy infrastructure may appease Trump’s officials, the president’s spy chief Tulsi Gabbard acknowledged earlier Thursday that the U.S. and Israel had different goals in the Iran war. The U.S. was focused more on degrading Tehran’s military, while Israel was focusing on eliminating the country’s leadership.

The Israeli strikes and Iranian retaliation caused Brent crude prices to rise as high as $119 a barrel on Thursday before easing to end the session near $108 a barrel. Prices are now at the highest level since July 2022.

Now in its 20th day, the war has claimed more than 4,100 lives across the region, with about three quarters of them in Iran. Dozens have been killed across the Middle East, while the U.S. has lost 13 military personnel and numerous aircraft.

Israel has also stepped up a parallel offensive in Lebanon, where it’s fighting Hezbollah, a militia backed by Iran. Israeli strikes in the country have killed 968 people, according to the Lebanese government.

The risk of lasting damage to energy infrastructure and supply is increasing. Efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz — a chokepoint for about a fifth of global oil and LNG flows — have so far been unsuccessful, pushing energy prices higher. The fallout is spreading globally, with fuel, shipping and household costs already rising.

U.S. gasoline prices have shot up in recent weeks, rising to around $3.88 a gallon on Thursday, according to the American Automobile Association. That’s the highest level in more than three years and is piling pressure on the Trump administration before the November midterm elections.

“Gas prices are up and we know they’re up, and we know that people are hurting because of it and we’re doing everything that we can to ensure that they stay lower,” Vice President JD Vance said on Wednesday, calling the spike “a temporary blip.”

Trump temporarily waived a century-old shipping mandate to lower the cost of transporting energy goods around the U.S. in a bid to curb price rises.

The war began with the joint U.S.-Israeli bombing of Iran on Feb. 28.

Trump has since said that he started the operation to disarm a potent nuclear threat, claiming Tehran was just two weeks away from acquiring a weapon. Iran has denied pursuing atomic weapons, and nuclear experts mostly disagree it could have built weapons that quickly.

Earlier this week, a senior U.S. counter-terrorism official, Joe Kent, who had previously been supported by Trump in failed bids for Congress, resigned publicly over the war, saying Iran “posed no imminent threat to our nation.”

 https://nationalpost.com/news/israel-says-it-will-stop-striking-iranian-energy-sites

A Very Interesting Denial of FISA-702 Abuse by FBI Director Kash Patel Surrounding President Donald J Trump

Conservative Treehouse 

During congressional testimony today, Texas Representative Dan Crenshaw, a man who is leaving congress at the end of this term having lost his primary race, took the opportunity to question FBI Director Kash Patel about FISA-702.

As most are aware the reauthorization of FISA-702 has a deadline if mid-April this year, and there is a great deal of background debate surrounding it.  Apparently, Dan Crenshaw wants to ensure the renewal is successful.

Crenshaw begins his defense by asking a very specific question to FBI Director Kash Patel about President Trump’s Crossfire Hurricane targeted and whether FISA-702 was related to that investigation.  Here it is important to remember that the NSA database was exploited in 2016 (Spygate) that ended with the Title-1 FISA warrant (Russiagate).

Both are correct in that FISA-702 was not the legal underpinning for the Carter Page FISA warrant, ultimately targeting Donald Trump.  However, conveniently omitted in the questioning is the original surveillance of the 2016 GOP candidates from November 2015 through April 2016 that did involve exploitation of the database under the justification that FISA-702 creates.  WATCH:

These are not “myths” Mr Crenshaw.  You are both correct that there is no “authority granted under 702” to conduct surveillance.  However, in 2016 conducting surveillance using 702 as a justification is what took place.

The collection of American citizen metadata does factually take place. At this point no-one denies it.

That data is then stored in a searchable database, a library of U.S. citizen data colloquially known as the “NSA database”.

Within the NSA database that metadata collection creates, there is a process to search it based on “identifiers.”

The collection of data, the database itself, as well as the search functioning therein, is part of the toolbox for FISA-702 surveillance.

The historic problem is not that “authorities granted under FISA-702” were/are used to conduct surveillance; but rather the search of the NSA collection database was done, illegally and frequently, for non-authorized reasons. The capability to conduct those search queries is maintained by justifying the need for FISA-702.

The historic searches and domestic surveillance were done by exploiting the NSA database, for a reason and purpose that is not authorized and has nothing to do with FISA-702. THAT’S THE PROBLEM.

The existence of the U.S. citizen data itself creates the opportunity to search it. The legal justification to search that database is done under the auspices of FISA-702; however, that’s not the issue. The issue is that searches of the NSA database are done by government officials and government contractors for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with FISA-702.

As a consequence, it’s the collection that creates the problem. Not the legal process for searching it. As long as the database exists there will be unlawful intrusions into it for domestic and/or political surveillance.

If FISA-702 did not exist, the quasi-constitutional justification for the wholesale collection of U.S. citizen metadata no longer exists. It really is that simple.

There is ZERO justification for the capture of U.S. citizen data by the government. The capture itself violates the Fourth Amendment. The only way the government can justify the capture of U.S. Citizen data is if there is some quasi-constitutional or national security reason for it.

Take away “702”, and the data collection collapses; ANY “incidental” search of the database then loses any plausible legal justification. 702 is the camel’s nose under the tent.

Only one case has ever pushed into the sphere of challenging this unconstitutional exploitation. A 2025 decision in the U.S. v. Hasbajrami case in Brooklyn, New York, where Eastern District Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall identified the misuse of FISA-702 “backdoor searches” regarding defendant, Agron Hasbajrami.

Hasbajrami plead guilty to charges of attempting to provide material support to a terrorist organization, alleging that he intended to travel to the Federally Administered Tribal Area of Pakistan, where he expected to join a terrorist organization, receive training, and ultimately fight against U.S. forces and others in Afghanistan and Pakistan. However, after his guilty plea, while he is serving time in prison, prosecutors admitted some of the evidence against him came as a result of privacy violations, unlawful FISA-702 searches.

Hasbajrami sought to have the evidence against him thrown out on 4th amendment grounds (fruit of the poisoned tree) and withdraw his guilty plea. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied Hasbarjami’s blanket evidence suppression motion for the exclusion of all FISA Section 702 collection in his case but did not weigh in on whether the warrantless Section 702 database queries were constitutional, instead remanding the case back to Judge Hall for a review of that question.

Judge DeArchy Hall received the case again and reviewed all of the government motions against the request to suppress the evidence.  What results is a very well-constructed explanation and opinion of how FISA-702 was misused in the case [SEE 60-pg Opinion HERE].

The judge determined that U.S. government officials did factually violate the technical rules and procedures for the use of FISA-702 searches, and the DOJ should have gone to court to obtain a warrant to look at Hasbajrami’s private communication.

In essence, yes, the 4th amendment protections of Hasbajrami were violated.  However, the issue of overturning the resulting evidence becomes a matter of legal distinction.

The defendant, who admitted guilt (twice) did not claim the evidence was a result of misuse or a wrongful approach in searching the NSA’s library, from which FISA-702 search results are determined (a structural flaw in the defense motion).  Instead, the defendant filed a suppression motion on the issue of his 4th amendment rights being violated.

The judge opinion holds that the FBI’s Section 702 queries violated the Fourth Amendment; however, the court ultimately denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the resulting evidence on separate grounds.

The value in the ruling by Judge Hall, is a few fold:

First, it is an excellent review of the FISA-702 origin and all of the constitutional arguments that surround the controversial law.

Second, the ruling clearly shows that FISA-702 searches are currently being used unlawfully and continually by government officials.

Third, the ruling clearly shows how “backdoor” 702 searches are violations of the Fourth Amendment. [Albeit in this case, of no value to the argument put forth by Hasbajrami.]

[SEE CASE RULING HERE]

The ruling essentially underpins the reality that government officials are using their access to the complete library within the NSA collection and storage database to conduct searches of U.S. communication that removes the constitutional protections of the 4th amendment.

Mr Agron Hasbajrami was ensnared by this surveillance process and admitted his guilt thereafter.

However, the issue is not Hasbajrami’s intent, or even his guilt.  The issue that surrounds us is this constant surveillance state and the tens-of-millions of searches that are done on the private papers of American citizens.

In essence we have a domestic surveillance state looking for suspect people who are operating against the interests of government.

Mr. Hasbajrami was caught wanting to join a terrorist organization.  However, as we have witnessed in the cold and brutal reality of the J6 roundup, a “terrorist organization” may well be defined as your local “patriot group” or “parent’s advisory committee.”

Back to Patel’s testimony.  By obfuscating the use of FISA-702 in Crossfire Hurricane, Patel is focusing on the Title-1 surveillance warrant that created “Russiagate” and entirely ignoring the targeting of Donald Trump that took place in 2015 and 2016 through the contractor exploitation of the NSA database; that’s “Spygate.”

Patel and Crenshaw, much like the entire DC apparatus, need to ignore the Obama-era surveillance system, the political exploitation of the NSA database, in order to ensure they can hang onto the FISA-702 tool.

If the general public realized all of their data was stored on searchable government databases, they would likely reject it.  However, the rejection of the data storage would eliminate the ability to search it under the sketchy justification of 702.

DOJ Seizes Iranian Intelligence Websites Behind $250,000 Beheading Bounty on Canadian Politician

Cartel Directed to Kill Her at Ottawa Home

Goldie Ghamari posted this image to her Facebook page on March 1, 2026, alongside the death threat she received from the Islamic Republic-linked Handala Hack Team, which directed the Jalisco New Generation Cartel to kill her at her Ottawa home. Photo: Goldie Ghamari/Facebook

Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security used Mexican drug cartel as a threat against a Canadian politician. 

The Justice Department just shut the network down.

WASHINGTON/OTTAWA — The United States Department of Justice announced today the court-authorized seizure of four websites operated by Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security, dismantling a regime-run cyber and psychological operations network that issued a $250,000 bounty death threat against former Ontario Member of Provincial Parliament Goldie Ghamari, which directed the Jalisco New Generation Cartel to behead her at her Ottawa home.

The Iranian cyber operations also targeted journalists, Jewish communities, Israeli defense personnel, and Iranian dissidents across North America.

“Terrorist propaganda online can incite real-world violence,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said. “This network of Iranian-backed sites will no longer broadcast anti-American hate.”

The four seized domains were used by the Ministry of Intelligence and Security to orchestrate what the Justice Department described as “faketivist” psychological operations: claiming credit for hacking campaigns, publishing stolen personal data on targeted individuals, and issuing explicit calls for violence against dissidents, journalists, and members of Jewish communities.

Court documents filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, unsealed today, reveal the full operational scope of the network, which investigators traced through Iranian internet protocol ranges, shared infrastructure, and cryptocurrency transactions routed through a Tehran-based exchange directly to the actors behind the domains.

At the center of the Canadian dimension of the case is Ghamari, a former Progressive Conservative member of provincial parliament for Carleton who since leaving office has become one of the most prominent Iranian-Canadian voices publicly condemning the Islamic Republic.

On March 1, 2026, according to the unsealed affidavit, the Ministry of Intelligence and Security used the email account Handala_Team@outlook.com to send a death threat to two women — one located in the United States, one abroad. The Bureau has confirmed, based on Ghamari’s own public statements and her posting of the identical threat language, that she is one of the two named victims.

The subject line of the email read: “Death to [redacted victim names].” The body of the message, reproduced in full in the affidavit, stated: “We the Handala Hack team, the loyal followers of the supreme leader Ali Hosseini Khamenei, declare war on all the enemies of Islam in the West. Our partners, the CJNG [Jalisco New Generation Cartel] cartel in America and Canada have been given a list of our enemies who are responsible for our great leaders [sic] death.

You laughed like hyenas during the [redacted] show. We have hacked and revealed your home addresses in [redacted U.S. city] and [redacted] to our partners in the CJNG who are in [redacted U.S. state] and [redacted foreign country] now. Both of you will be executed soon, and we have offered a reward of $250,000 for the operatives who kills [sic] and beheads both of you. ALLAHU AKBAR.”

“By leveraging online platforms linked to the domain, MOIS sought to amplify its online threats, pressure critics, and discourage independent reporting, while creating fear among members of the Iranian diaspora critical of the regime,” a DOJ statement explained.

In a statement posted to Facebook that same day and reviewed by The Bureau, Ghamari wrote: “I just received a death threat by Islamic Regime-linked hacker group ‘Handala Hack Team’ from the e-mail address: Handala_Team@outlook.com. ‘Death to Elica le Bon and Goldie Ghamari.’”

The second target is Iranian-American lawyer and activist Elica Le Bon, based in Los Angeles.

Both women had recently appeared together on Piers Morgan Uncensored. Ghamari confirmed she filed a police report and was told by law enforcement that the threat was being taken “very seriously.”

She told the Jerusalem Post that the bounty illustrated a systemic failure: “There are at least 700 people in Canada who are known to be affiliated with the regime. Canada is basically one of the destinations for people who are affiliated with the Islamic regime. The government has not done much.”

Days before the threat was issued, Prime Minister Mark Carney stated publicly that he did not believe there were imminent terrorist threats to Canadians on Canadian soil. “Within the span of 24 hours, there have been at least two known terror incidents,” Ghamari later commented.

The network’s reach extended well beyond the threat against Ghamari.

On March 11, 2026, the group claimed responsibility for a destructive malware attack against a major American multinational medical technologies firm — with direct consequences for civilian safety.

According to court documents, the firm issued an internal memo that the hack had a direct impact on emergency medical services and hospitals throughout Maryland, forcing clinicians to abandon digital systems and rely on radio consultation and verbal communication to manage patient care.

By March 9, one of the seized domains had published the names, photographs, and sensitive personal data of approximately 190 individuals associated with the Israeli Defense Force or Israeli government, with explicit language warning that targets were being monitored and that consequences would follow.

On March 6, the group posted 851 gigabytes of data it claimed to have stolen from members of the Sanzer Hasidic Jewish community, warning: “No place is safe for you.”

Investigators also documented the targeting of a journalist at a United Kingdom-based Farsi-language news organization, who was contacted via Telegram and infected with malware that gave Iranian intelligence actors remote access to the journalist’s computer.

The three cyber personas behind the seized domains — Handala Hack, Karma Below, and Homeland Justice, operating respectively at Justicehomeland[.]org, Handala-Hack[.]to, Karmabelow80[.]org, and Handala-Redwanted[.]to — are formally attributed in the affidavit as a single Ministry of Intelligence and Security conspiracy.

The affidavit also documents an undercover Federal Bureau of Investigation operation in which an agent purchased stolen Albanian government data — including national identity card records and sensitive personal information on Albanian citizens — from the network via Telegram in March 2025, for Bitcoin, establishing that the same actors were engaged in active criminal commerce more than a year before today’s takedown.

Blockchain analysis revealed that the Litecoin used to register one of the seized domains was sourced, through intermediary cryptocurrency conversions, from Ramzinex — a prominent Iranian cryptocurrency exchange headquartered in Tehran — confirming the network’s financing traced directly to the Iranian state.

The use of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel as an execution proxy for Iranian intelligence represents a documented escalation in the operational relationship between the Islamic Republic and Latin American criminal organizations.

“There are longstanding money-laundering and trafficking ecosystems that connect Latin American cartels, Iranian state-aligned networks and global criminal finance,” this reporter told Iran International regarding broader known threats across North America earlier this month.

The Justice Department’s affidavit now provides the legal predicate for that nexus — suggesting that the Ministry of Intelligence and Security does not merely coordinate financially with cartel networks, but operationally directed them against named targets on Canadian and American soil.

https://www.thebureau.news/p/doj-seizes-iranian-intelligence-websites?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1444443&post_id=191532121&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=rd3ao&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Elise Stefanik Questions DNI Gabbard About Politically Shaped Intelligence, and Joe Kent

Representative Elise Stefanik is a strong supporter of Israel and has concerns about current narratives swirling around the politicization of Intelligence Community information to shape anti-Israel sentiments.  Part of that collective effort is a not-so-subtle effort to remove DNI Gabbard from her position by questioning her loyalties.  A considerable segment of Washington DC wants to return to a more Dan Coats style DNI.

As a tenured member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Mrs. Stefanik used her time during the congressional testimony of Gabbard, Ratcliffe and Patel to confirm the Trump administration policy toward the IC to remove all political interests.  WATCH:

In the political horse racing analogy, the stable of Peter Thiel has taken major hits recently as the stable of Larry Ellison is gaining considerable influence.  However, it’s a steeplechase and anything can happen.

Peter Thiel <-> Elon Musk <-> Larry Ellison