Quantcast
Connect with us

Trump’s far-fetched claims about his Iran decision are already crumbling

Published

on

- Commentary

President Donald Trump’s story about his decision to cancel planned airstrikes on Iran is not adding up.

Observers have noted that Trump’s claim to have stopped the airstrikes as the clock was ticking down — he claimed on Twitter that there were just 10 minutes left for him to make a decision — and that it was only then that he realized that there would be approximately 150 casualties from the strike. This, he said, would be a disproportionate response to Iran’s downing of an unmanned drone.

ADVERTISEMENT

Fox News’ Shep Smith noted, “Something is wrong here.” The network’s reporting suggested that Trump should already have been aware of the possible casualties, as common sense would suggest, far earlier than 10 minutes before the launch. National Security lawyer Bradley Moss argued that, if true, Trump’s account shows a “total breakdown in process.”

And contrary to Trump’s claims, the New York Times reported Thursday that planes were already in the sky to carry out the military operation and ships were in place when the order was withdrawn.

Finally, the Washington Post published a report Friday that said officials in the administration are disputing Trump’s public account.

Early in the day, the president said he called off the counterattack at the last minute because it would kill 150 people in retaliation for the downing of an unmanned surveillance drone. “We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die,” he tweeted.

But administration officials said Trump was told earlier Thursday how many casualties could occur if a strike on Iran was carried out, and that he had given the green light to prepare for the operation Thursday morning.

Trump’s morning tweets appeared to gloss over the fact that he was the one, as commander in chief, who had ordered the retaliation against Iran in the first place.

Trump administration officials, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national security decisions, said the president approved the strikes after Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps earlier in the day shot down the Navy RQ-4 Global Hawk, a move Trump described as a “very big mistake.”

But he later changed his mind, the officials said.

So it seems there’s good reason to think Trump isn’t being straightforward about what happened. The question is: Why won’t he tell the truth?

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Tucker Carlson sends a dangerous signal to Trump as the right-wing normalizes abject criminality

Published

on

Wednesday night's Democratic primary debate was perhaps the most anticipated of the 2020 election cycle so far, and it did not disappoint, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts demonstrating her ninja skills at eviscerating arrogant billionaires, in the form of former New York City mayor and attempted nomination-purchaser Mike Bloomberg. It was wholesome fun. It made people feel good. It dominated the cable news cycle and the headlines.

Continue Reading

Alternet 2020

Maybe Michael Bloomberg wasn’t as awful as he looked

Published

on

Call me crazy, but the media could have it wrong about Michael Bloomberg. The latest Democratic debate post-mortem came fast and furious – and from a prominent Op-Ed in The New York Times to the cover of The New York Post –and the verdict was almost unanimous.

Bloomberg was “disastrous.” His campaign had “imploded.” He “bombed.” Get the hook for “timid,” “defensive” Mini Mike, the pundits said. “Bye, Felicia” might be the only headline missing from the gleeful media pile-on of Bloomberg after he made his presidential debate debut.

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

The ‘pro-life swing voter’ some moderate Democrats chase is a myth

Published

on

A thing that I do not understand is why journalists assume that Democratic presidential candidates absolutely must respond to pro-life activists, or deal with The Abortion Problem. I sometimes think it's because they teach you in journalism school that every four years Swing Voters sprout from the earth like cicadas demanding propitiation. And if the Swing Voters are not sufficiently placated, all manner of hell will break loose, like Swing Voters clinging to God & guns or refusing to speak to responsible centrist journalists in Midwestern diners so the poor scribblers can't expense their rice pudding. Things happen!

Continue Reading
 
 
close-image