America’s enemies are done licking their wounds. They are on the move.

And now Republicans sounded the alarm of an imminent attack against the American homeland.

House Republicans Seek Answers on U.S. Drone Defense Strategy

A group of House Republicans, led by Rep. Mike Carey (R-Ohio), sent a letter late Thursday to the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), requesting detailed information on countermeasures to protect U.S. military installations, government buildings, embassies, and consulates from drone attacks.

The inquiry reflects growing concerns about the evolving threat of unmanned aerial systems (UAS), particularly in light of recent conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, where coordinated drone strikes have proven highly effective against underprepared defenses.

The lawmakers emphasized the need to adapt to a “new paradigm” of warfare, noting that “large-scale, highly coordinated mass-drone attacks can be highly effective if the defender lacks adequate counter-drone defenses.”

Citing the absence of a major coordinated attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, they stressed the importance of preparing for covert drone threats that could target critical infrastructure, including the U.S. nuclear triad. The letter comes days after a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, which followed escalating drone and missile exchanges, and a DHS warning of a “heightened threat environment” in the U.S. due to the Middle East conflict.

Specific Concerns and Trump’s Golden Dome

The Republicans’ letter, addressed to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, seeks clarity on several fronts.

It asks whether counter-drone technology is integrated into President Trump’s proposed Golden Dome defense system, a $175 billion missile defense shield inspired by Israel’s Iron Dome, designed to counter ballistic, hypersonic, and drone threats.

The lawmakers also inquired about potential risks from drones smuggled into the U.S. due to “the former administration’s open border policies” and whether the DoD and DHS are addressing threats from foreign-owned land near critical sites that could serve as launch points for drone attacks, similar to those seen in Ukraine’s strikes on Russian targets.

The inquiry follows a closed-door briefing scheduled for Friday at 9 a.m., where lawmakers will discuss the Iran situation and its implications for U.S. security.

The Republicans underscored the need for robust defenses, noting that while U.S. global military projection remains strong, domestic vulnerabilities to low-cost, weaponized drones must be addressed urgently.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the Pentagon and DHS for comment, but no responses have been received yet.

Global Context and Domestic Urgency

The letter draws on lessons from Ukraine and the Middle East, where drones have transformed modern warfare.

Ukraine’s use of modified consumer drones and “kamikaze” drones against Russian targets, and Iran’s deployment of Shahed-136 drones, highlight the growing sophistication and accessibility of UAS technology. These conflicts underscore the potential for adversaries to exploit drones for espionage, smuggling, or direct attacks on U.S. assets.

The lawmakers’ call for enhanced counter-drone measures aligns with recent executive actions by President Trump, including a June 6, 2025, order to strengthen airspace sovereignty and prioritize U.S.-made drones, reflecting concerns about foreign-manufactured systems like those from China.

The inquiry signals a broader push to ensure the U.S. is prepared for emerging threats, balancing national security with the safe integration of drone technology.

As the DoD and DHS respond, the answers could shape policies to protect critical infrastructure and address vulnerabilities exposed by global conflicts.

The Trump administration is working publicly and privately to accomplish their agenda. And it’s going better than you could even imagine.

Now the White House Press Secretary tips off Americans to this backroom negotiation.

Trump’s Decisive Strikes and Diplomacy Secure Israel-Iran Ceasefire

President Donald Trump’s bold strategy of “peace through strength” has reshaped the Middle East, with his administration’s precise strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and relentless pressure on both Israel and Iran culminating in a ceasefire that ended the “12-Day War.”

Trump’s leadership, showcased at the NATO Summit in the Netherlands this week, earned high praise from allies who hailed his ability to neutralize Iran’s nuclear threat while brokering peace.

“Nobody knows how to exert maximum pressure to deliver peace better than Donald Trump,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital, crediting his historic military and diplomatic success.

Trump’s campaign promise to prioritize strength-driven peace was realized through meticulously executed U.S. airstrikes on three key Iranian nuclear facilities, following Israel’s preemptive strike on June 13, 2025, prompted by intelligence suggesting Iran was nearing nuclear weapon capability.

Despite Iran’s retaliatory missile attack on a U.S. air base in Qatar, which caused no casualties due to advance notice, Trump’s unwavering resolve forced both nations to the table, securing a ceasefire announced Monday, June 23, 2025. His swift action prevented escalation, proving his diplomatic prowess on the global stage.

NATO Allies Laud Trump’s Leadership

At the NATO Summit, Secretary-General Mark Rutte praised Trump as a “man of strength” and a “man of peace,” commending his “decisive action” in striking Iran’s nuclear sites and brokering the ceasefire.

“The fact that you are now also successful in getting this ceasefire done between Israel and Iran—I really want to commend you for that,” Rutte said, noting on social media that Trump’s “extraordinary” actions made the world safer.

This international acclaim underscores Trump’s ability to rally allies behind his vision, strengthening NATO’s commitment to global security while advancing his agenda.

Trump’s hands-on approach was evident when he intervened to halt Israel’s planned retaliation after a shaky ceasefire start. “ISRAEL. DO NOT DROP THOSE BOMBS. IF YOU DO IT IS A MAJOR VIOLATION,” he posted on Truth Social, prompting Israel to cancel its attack. “Israel is not going to attack Iran. All planes will turn around and head home,” Trump announced, ensuring the truce held.

His direct, no-nonsense style, coupled with warnings of further U.S. strikes if Iran rebuilds its nuclear program, has kept both nations in check, cementing his reputation as a formidable dealmaker.

A Historic Blow to Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions

The U.S. and Israeli strikes, described as “monumental” by the White House, decimated Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan, with assessments from all parties confirming their success.

Despite an initial U.S. intelligence report suggesting a setback of only months, Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio forcefully disputed this, asserting the strikes crippled Iran’s nuclear ambitions for years.

Iran’s own admissions of significant damage further validate Trump’s strategy, which paired military precision with diplomatic pressure to avert a broader conflict.

By ending the war in just 12 days, Trump’s leadership has not only neutralized a major threat but also set a new standard for resolving global crises through strength and negotiation.

The highest court has been doling out some doozies. And Democrats aren’t happy about it.

Now the Supreme Court handed down an historic ruling that left Trump smiling.

Trump’s Victory Against Judicial Overreach

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a resounding win for President Donald Trump on Friday, ruling that nationwide injunctions issued by lower-court judges “likely exceed” the judiciary’s constitutional authority.

The decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. clears a path for Trump to advance his bold agenda, including his Day One executive order to end birthright citizenship, by curbing the ability of activist judges to block his policies nationwide.

Trump hailed the ruling as a “monumental victory for the Constitution,” signaling his intent to push forward with policies stalled by overzealous courts.

The Court’s majority, led by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, emphasized that “[f]ederal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch,” limiting injunctions to relief specific to plaintiffs with standing.

This ruling dismantles a tool frequently used to halt Trump’s actions—25 injunctions were issued against him from January to April, more than any other president in a similar period, per Congressional Research Service data.

Trump’s supporters see this as a critical step to restore executive authority and ensure his America-first policies can take effect.

Reining in Lower Courts’ Overreach

The case focused solely on the scope of lower courts’ power, not the merits of Trump’s birthright citizenship order. Barrett’s opinion noted that nationwide injunctions lack “a historical pedigree” under the 1789 Judiciary Act and criticized their overuse.

“When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too,” she wrote.

The decision partially stays injunctions that go beyond providing relief to specific plaintiffs, reinforcing Trump’s argument that unelected judges should not derail policies backed by the American electorate.

Conservative justices, including Samuel Alito, suggested class-action lawsuits as a more rigorous alternative for challenging executive actions, requiring thorough vetting by courts.

This approach aligns with Trump’s call for judicial restraint, ensuring his administration’s initiatives—like addressing “birth tourism” under the 14th Amendment—aren’t arbitrarily blocked by sweeping judicial fiats. The ruling strengthens Trump’s hand as he navigates legal challenges to his transformative agenda.

Liberal Dissent and Trump’s Constitutional Stand

Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, with Sotomayor warning that the ruling threatens rights like birthright citizenship and could enable future overreaches, such as seizing firearms or restricting worship.

Jackson called the decision a “request for this Court’s permission to engage in unlawful behavior,” prompting a sharp rebuke from Barrett: “Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.”

Barrett’s retort underscored Trump’s view that liberal justices prioritize ideology over constitutional limits, a stance his base sees as vindicating his fight against judicial activism.

Trump’s order, which challenges the 14th Amendment’s application to children of migrants born in the U.S., remains contentious, with critics like Sotomayor labeling it “patent[ly] unlawful.”

Yet Trump argues it addresses exploitative practices like “birth tourism,” aligning with his broader immigration reforms.

Harris has been trying to hide. But now the spotlight is back on her.

And Kamala Harris may never run for office again after a bombshell report exposed her.

Trump’s Diverse Coalition Outshines Harris’s Campaign

President Donald Trump’s 2024 election victory showcased a remarkable shift in voter demographics, with a Pew Research Center analysis revealing that 51% of foreign-born Hispanic voters backed him over former Vice President Kamala Harris.

This surge, detailed in a Thursday report, underscores Trump’s ability to build a broader, more diverse coalition than in previous campaigns, while Harris struggled to maintain the Democratic grip on key voter groups. Critics argue her campaign’s failure to resonate with diverse communities, coupled with an uninspired turnout strategy, handed Trump a historic edge.

Trump’s pledge to crack down on illegal immigration and secure the southern border resonated strongly, earning him a 3-point lead among foreign-born Hispanics and a 12-point improvement from his 2020 performance.

His near-parity with Harris among all Hispanic voters—48% to her 51%—marked a sharp contrast to his 36% share in 2020 against Joe Biden. The analysis suggests Harris’s messaging failed to counter Trump’s appeal, leaving Democrats scrambling to understand their disconnect with a once-reliable base.

Harris’s Turnout Strategy Falls Short

The Pew study, surveying nearly 9,000 voters post-election, found that Trump’s coalition was “more racially and ethnically diverse” than ever, with 15% of Black voters (up from 8% in 2020) and 40% of Asian voters (up from 30%) supporting him, alongside a steady 55% of white voters.

Meanwhile, Harris couldn’t replicate Biden’s 2020 success, with voter turnout dipping to 64% from 66%.

A higher share of Trump’s 2020 supporters returned to the polls compared to Biden’s, signaling stronger loyalty among his base and a lack of enthusiasm for Harris’s candidacy.

Even more striking, the analysis showed that Trump would have won even if every eligible voter had participated.

Among non-voters, 44% favored Trump compared to 40% for Harris, debunking the myth that higher turnout inherently benefits Democrats.

Critics point to Harris’s campaign as lackluster, failing to mobilize key demographics or counter Trump’s narrative, which ultimately widened his victory margin from 1.5 to 3 percentage points in a hypothetical full-turnout scenario.

Kamala’s Missed Opportunity in a Historic Election

Trump’s 49.7%-48.2% popular vote win over Harris—the first time he secured the national popular vote—paired with 312 Electoral College votes, cemented his landslide.

Harris’s inability to galvanize voters, particularly in diverse communities, allowed Trump to reshape the electoral map.

While Trump capitalized on economic frustrations and border security concerns, Harris’s campaign, critics argue, leaned too heavily on predictable Democratic talking points, missing the chance to connect with voters seeking bold change.

The Pew findings highlight a pivotal moment for Democrats, with Harris’s loss exposing vulnerabilities in their approach.

The entire Democrat Party has been crumbling for months now. But it’s finally given way.

And now Chris Cuomo announced the end of the Democrat Party.

Democrats Embrace Extremism in NYC Primary

Chris Cuomo, former CNN host, tore into the Democratic Party after self-proclaimed socialist Zohran Mamdani defeated his brother, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, in Tuesday’s New York City Democratic mayoral primary. Speaking on his NewsNation program Wednesday, Cuomo didn’t hold back, declaring the Democratic Party “dead” and accusing it of mirroring the extremism of MAGA Republicans.

“The party’s gone off the rails, embracing radical ideologies that alienate mainstream Americans,” he said, pointing to Mamdani’s victory as proof of a dangerous leftward lurch.

Cuomo, while expressing personal support for his brother, noted the primary’s low turnout favored “more extreme candidates” like Mamdani, a 33-year-old state assemblyman whose platform included defunding the police, expanding rent control, and pushing taxpayer-funded “gender-affirming” procedures.

“This isn’t about affordability or real change—it’s a fictional fix for real frustrations,” Cuomo said, slamming the Democrats for abandoning practical solutions in favor of divisive socialism.

A Party Adrift in Radicalism

The Democratic establishment, still stinging from Andrew Cuomo’s 2021 resignation amid sexual harassment allegations, largely shunned the former three-term governor during his campaign. Chris Cuomo argued the party’s rejection of his brother, who he insists was no “establishment guy,” reflects its surrender to fringe elements.

Mamdani’s radical stances—opposing Israel’s existence as a Jewish state, refusing to condemn calls to “globalize the intifada,” and praising convicted Hamas financiers in a rap song—highlight what Cuomo called a “fundamentalist” streak akin to the Right’s worst impulses.

“The Left’s new targets are Jews, just as the Right fixates on migrants,” he said, warning that Democrats are alienating voters with their embrace of extreme ideologies.

Cuomo criticized the closed primary system for amplifying radical voices, noting that Mamdani’s win doesn’t reflect the broader electorate’s desires.

“The Democratic Party is now officially in MAGA mode, just with a different flavor of extremism,” he said, suggesting the party’s shift toward socialism and divisive rhetoric could spell its doom.

What’s Next for New York’s Mayoral Race?

Andrew Cuomo, now 67, has not confirmed whether he’ll run as an independent for his Fight and Deliver Party in November’s general election.

If he does, he’d join a crowded five-way race alongside Mamdani, incumbent Mayor Eric Adams (running as an independent), Republican Curtis Sliwa, and independent Jim Walden.

Such a move could split the vote, potentially handing the radical Left an advantage in a city already grappling with the Democrats’ failure to address rising crime and economic woes.

Chris Cuomo’s scathing critique underscores a growing frustration with a Democratic Party that, in his view, has lost its way, prioritizing ideological purity over pragmatic governance.

As New Yorkers face a pivotal election, the question remains whether voters will reject the Left’s radical turn or double down on a path many see as disconnected from the city’s pressing needs.

Trump has had a rocky relationship with even longstanding allies. Now he’s been completely blindsided.

And the Chief of NATO’s nickname for Trump is raising everyone’s eyebrows.

Trump and Rutte Address NATO Summit Amid Middle East Tensions

The Hague, Netherlands – NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte referred to President Trump as “Daddy” during a joint press conference on Wednesday, following Trump’s use of strong language while criticizing Iran and Israel for briefly violating a cease-fire agreement.

The exchange took place ahead of the NATO summit at The Hague, where Trump likened the conflict between the two nations to a schoolyard brawl.

“They’ve had a big fight, like two kids in a schoolyard. You know, they fight like hell, you can’t stop them. Let them fight for about 2, 3 minutes, then it’s easy to stop them,” Trump said.

Rutte responded with a laugh, adding, “Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get it stopped.”

Rutte Praises Trump’s Leadership at Summit

During the press conference, Rutte highlighted Trump’s role in the summit’s success, calling him a “good friend” and crediting him with pushing European nations to increase military spending.

“When it comes to Iran, the fact that he took this decisive action, very targeted, to make sure that Iran would not be able to get his hands on a nuclear capability — I think he deserves all the praise,” Rutte said. When asked if his praise was excessive, Rutte replied, “No, I don’t think so. I think it’s a bit of a question of taste.”

The comments followed Trump’s Tuesday outburst, where he expressed frustration with both Israel and Iran. “I think they both violated it,” Trump said as he prepared for the summit.

“We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f–k they’re doing, do you understand?”

Shortly after, Trump announced the cease-fire was reinstated, posting on Truth Social, “ISRAEL is not going to attack Iran. All planes will turn around and head home, while doing a friendly ‘Plane Wave’ to Iran. Nobody will be hurt, the Ceasefire is in effect!”

Background of Rutte-Trump Rapport

Rutte’s supportive remarks built on a series of messages he sent to Trump ahead of the summit, which the president shared on Truth Social.

“Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, that was truly extraordinary, and something no one else dared to do. It makes us all safer,” Rutte wrote in one text.

In another, he noted, “It was not easy but we’ve got them all signed onto 5 percent! Donald, you have driven us to a really, really important moment for America and Europe, and the world. You will achieve something NO American president in decades could get done.”

Rutte, who previously served as Dutch prime minister, has earned the nickname “the Trump Whisperer” from some observers due to his effective communication with the president.

The Left is kicking and screaming. They can’t do anything to stop Trump’s agenda.

Now an unhinged Democrat screamed at Attorney General Pam Bondi for this ridiculous reason.

Bondi Shines in Congressional Budget Pitch

Attorney General Pam Bondi stepped into the spotlight Monday for her first congressional appearance since her January confirmation, confidently presenting the Justice Department’s 2026 budget to House appropriators.

Her steady leadership was on full display as she outlined a vision to strengthen law enforcement, but the hearing took an unexpected turn when Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) launched into a disruptive outburst. Bondi, however, handled the chaos with grace, showcasing her commitment to effective governance under pressure.

The session quickly became a one-sided shouting match as DeLauro accused Bondi of sabotaging the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) with a proposed budget cut.

Yet, Bondi’s calm demeanor and the hard data backing her plan underscored her capability, making a strong case for her leadership at the DOJ—a refreshing change from the disorder DeLauro brought to the table.

DeLauro’s Outburst Undermined by ATF Success

DeLauro’s tirade centered on a proposed 26 percent reduction in ATF funding, which she claimed would “weaken our ability to stop gun trafficking” and lead to personnel losses.

Her accusations, however, crumbled under the weight of exclusive data provided to Breitbart News by a senior DOJ official.

From January 20 to June 21, 2025, the ATF seized 14,579 firearms—a 33 percent increase over last year—including 8,670 in trafficking cases, with 2,011 headed to Mexico. The agency also nabbed 833,414 rounds of ammunition, up 41 percent from the previous year.

“Rep. DeLauro was unprepared for this hearing and clearly has little situational awareness as to what the ATF actually does,” a senior DOJ official remarked.

“She tried to make up for that lack of knowledge by screaming at the Attorney General. The data shows that the ATF is thriving—seizing illegal guns at a higher rate than under the prior administration and playing a key role in dismantling international trafficking networks.”

DeLauro pressed Bondi with pointed questions: “How can you justify such a massive cut without inevitably weakening ATF’s ability to help our state and local law enforcement fight illegal gun trafficking?” and “How many ATF law enforcement officers and industry operations investigators do you anticipate will be lost to attrition as a result of this funding reduction you are proposing?”

Her interruptions, including a demand for a “yes or no” answer, painted her as more interested in grandstanding than understanding Bondi’s strategy.

Bondi’s Vision Prevails Amid Political Noise

Undeterred by DeLauro’s interruptions, Bondi outlined a smart reorganization plan to align the ATF with the DEA, boosting street-level operations to tackle violent crime. “We will not be having ATF agents go to the doors of gun owners in the middle of the night, asking them about their guns, period,” she asserted, reassuring the public of her respect for lawful gun ownership—a stance that resonates with those tired of overreach.

“It will be attrition. We are not firing agents. They will be working,” Bondi clarified.

“They want to be doing their jobs,” highlighting her focus on efficiency and morale, a stark contrast to DeLauro’s disruptive tactics.

The Left may have gone completely off the deep end. And this latest plot proves it more than ever.

Because these five Democrat senators utterly humiliated themselves with a harebrained scheme.

Democrats Stage Political Stunt at Kennedy Center

Five Democrat Senators teamed up with a prominent Broadway producer to stage an LGBTQ Pride-themed concert at the Kennedy Center on Monday night, turning the cultural venue into a platform to jab at the Trump administration. Led by Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO), the “Love is Love” event featured Sens. Tammy Baldwin (WI), Jacky Rosen (NV), Brian Schatz (HI), and Elizabeth Warren (MA), who capitalized on congressional privileges to rent the Justice Forum, a cozy 144-seat theater. The move smacks of political opportunism, using a cultural space to push their agenda rather than foster unity.

The concert, produced by Hamilton’s Jeffrey Seller, showcased Broadway talent and The Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington D.C., but it’s hard to ignore the partisan undertone.

Seller’s involvement follows his and Lin-Manuel Miranda’s decision to scrap a 2026 Kennedy Center showcase of Hamilton, a petulant protest against Trump that raises questions about their willingness to engage with diverse audiences.

Kennedy Center Pushback Highlights Misuse of Venue

Richard Grenell, president of the Kennedy Center, didn’t mince words in calling out the event as a political ploy. “Earlier this month, Senator Hickenlooper’s staff asked to rent space at the Kennedy Center for what his team billed as a first annual Talent show,” Grenell explained.

“We were pleased to welcome them in this capacity. We were only later notified by the New York Times that Senator Hickenlooper’s event was instead an invite-only political stunt where, once again, the Kennedy Center was being used by political operatives to larp as victims of intolerance in order to get a story in the Times.”

“No one has been cancelled by the Kennedy Center; we welcome everyone who wants to celebrate the arts, including our compatriots on the other side of the political aisle,” Grenell added, emphasizing a commitment to inclusivity that the Democrats’ event seems to undermine.

Grenell’s frustration underscores a broader concern: the Kennedy Center, a haven for artistic excellence, is being hijacked for partisan games.

The Democrats’ choice to frame this as a protest rather than a genuine cultural offering highlights a troubling trend of using public spaces for political theater, sidelining those who just want to enjoy the arts.

Seller’s Boycott Draws Criticism for Intolerance

The involvement of Jeffrey Seller, a key figure behind Hamilton, adds another layer of irony to the night. Grenell took aim at Seller and Miranda, noting their boycott of the Kennedy Center over political differences.

“I cannot begin to understand what business it is of Mr. Seller or Mr. Miranda how audience members vote or how it could possibly be relevant to the sacred relationship between performers and ticket holders, but they’ve made it clear that they won’t perform for audiences that might contain Americans who disagree with them on matters irrelevant to the arts,” he said.

“We especially welcome artists and audience members who come to the Kennedy Center not for partisan political pranks but to experience excellence in the performing arts,” Grenell concluded, a subtle jab at the Democrats’ approach.

This stance exposes a hypocrisy among some liberal figures who preach tolerance yet shun those with differing views.

America systematically destroyed Iran’s nuclear capabilities. What happens to the regime?

Now Trump cemented Iran’s future with one critical decision.

Trump Signals Caution on Iran Policy

President Trump struck a measured tone Tuesday as he addressed reporters aboard Air Force One, heading to the NATO summit in the Netherlands. He made it clear that regime change in Iran isn’t on his agenda, emphasizing a desire to avoid unnecessary turmoil.

“No. If there was, there was, but no, I don’t want it. I’d like to see everything calm down as quickly as possible,” he said, reflecting a pragmatic approach to the escalating tensions.

The president’s comments come amid a flurry of military actions, with Israel launching strikes on Iran. Trump’s focus, he suggested, is on stability rather than upheaval. “Regime change takes chaos and ideally we don’t want to see so much chaos. So we’ll see how it goes,” he added, hinting at a wait-and-see strategy that prioritizes de-escalation over drastic shifts.

In a bold Truth Social post, Trump doubled down on his stance against Iran’s nuclear ambitions, declaring, “Iran will never rebuild their nuclear facilities.” The message underscores his administration’s commitment to curbing Tehran’s capabilities, a theme that has resonated with supporters who see him as a leader unafraid to tackle global threats head-on.

Trump’s Shifting Rhetoric on Iran’s Leadership

Earlier this week, Trump had stirred the pot with a provocative Truth Social post as Israel’s bombing campaign began. He mused about targeting Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, and floated the idea of regime change.

“It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!” he wrote, blending his signature bravado with a nod to his “Make America Great Again” slogan.

Yet, behind closed doors, Trump has reportedly expressed reservations about toppling Iran’s government. According to The Post, he’s been cautioning aides about the risks, citing Libya as a cautionary tale of post-regime chaos.

This private hesitation contrasts with his public flair, suggesting a leader weighing bold rhetoric against the practicalities of foreign policy—a balancing act that has defined his approach since returning to the White House.

The debate over Iran’s future gained traction as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hinted at aggressive moves. In an interview with ABC News on June 16, Netanyahu said, “We are doing what we need to do” about targeting Khamenei, adding, “It’s not going to escalate the conflict; it’s going to end the conflict.” His stance leaves room for interpretation, potentially aligning with or diverging from Trump’s current position.

Global Implications and Regional Dynamics

The U.S. strikes on Iran, backed by Trump’s firm stance, have drawn varied reactions worldwide. Analysts note that his focus on preventing nuclear proliferation aligns with a broader effort to bolster allies like Israel while avoiding the quagmire of nation-building. Recent reports from Reuters indicate that Iran’s leadership is on edge, with Tehran signaling a willingness to negotiate rather than escalate, a development that could play into Trump’s hands if he chooses diplomacy over military pressure.

Meanwhile, the Middle East Institute highlights that Iran’s reliance on proxies like Hezbollah could complicate any U.S. or Israeli strategy.

His administration has already begun reinforcing ties with NATO partners, with the summit in the Netherlands seen as a chance to solidify support against Iran’s ambitions.

Netanyahu’s openness to targeting Khamenei, however, keeps the region on tenterhooks. Sources from Al Jazeera suggest that Israel’s strikes are part of a coordinated effort with the U.S., though the extent of American involvement remains unclear.

The powder keg is ready. IT only needs a spark to go nuclear.

And now Homeland Security issued a dire warning to Americans after strikes on Iran.

New Security Bulletin: U.S. Braces for Fallout After Iranian Nuclear Strikes

The Department of Homeland Security issued a fresh terrorism advisory Sunday warning Americans of a heightened risk of retaliatory attacks, both physical and digital, in the wake of recent U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear infrastructure. The alert follows President Trump’s decision to green-light targeted strikes on three key nuclear production sites in Iran—a move made in coordination with earlier Israeli actions.

While no specific threat has been identified, the alert reflects growing concern that the strikes could provoke lone-wolf violence, cyberattacks, or broader retaliatory efforts by Iran or its proxy networks. “The likelihood of violent extremists in the Homeland independently mobilizing to violence in response to the conflict would likely increase if Iranian leadership issued a religious ruling calling for retaliatory violence against targets in the homeland,” the advisory stated.

This updated alert will remain in place for the next three months as security officials monitor evolving threats both at home and abroad.

Cyber Threats and Religious Fatwas: DHS Eyes Iranian-Linked Groups

The advisory puts a particular spotlight on the threat posed by so-called “hacktivists”—individuals or groups that operate independently but express ideological support for the Iranian regime.

These digital actors, while not officially connected to Tehran, are expected to escalate their activities during this period of heightened tensions.

Homeland Security is especially concerned about the possibility of Iranian leadership issuing a *fatwa*—a religious decree—that could encourage extremists to act violently.

The department’s warning isn’t without precedent: Iran’s Supreme Leader has issued such decrees in the past, including the infamous 1989 fatwa against author Salman Rushdie.

Some Iranian-backed groups, already designated as foreign terrorist organizations by the U.S. State Department, have publicly called for attacks on Americans following Israel’s strikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

That rhetoric intensified after the U.S. joined the campaign, hitting facilities suspected of advancing Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Protecting the Homeland and Our Allies

The Biden administration has yet to comment on the latest DHS bulletin, but military leaders have reiterated their commitment to defending American interests and allies abroad.

President Trump’s bold response, carried out with U.S. Air Force bombers, was aimed at preventing further destabilization in the region and deterring Tehran from crossing nuclear red lines.

While Israel’s role in the unfolding conflict adds complexity, the United States remains vigilant about protecting both American citizens and its Jewish communities.

DHS noted that antisemitic attacks, which spiked after Hamas’s deadly October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel, remain a concern and could escalate again as tensions rise.

Homeland Security officials are urging citizens to remain alert and report any suspicious activity, emphasizing that vigilance and unity are key in defending the nation.

In times like these, the American people have always stood strong, and this moment is no different.