War in Iran? The US Military in Aggressive Wars

Trump is apparently expanding the US military presence in the Middle East, a possible buildup to an attack on Iran. The why of this is important, since it involves nuclear capability, Israel, and quite possibly some corrupt scheme to line Trump’s pockets by either getting a payoff for stopping the attack or a payoff for executing it. All-in-all an interesting development for a President who just scammed $10B from American taxpayers for his “Board of Peace,” which itself raises interesting Constitutional questions about that whole Advise and Consent clause that requires Senate approval for treaties.

A post – or podcast episode – for another day. For now, this got me to thinking about US military leaders and how I would expect them to react if given orders to conduct offensive operations in support of an expansionist fascist regime.

We already know they will conduct offensive operations against both nation states and non-state actors given a plausible national security and moral argument, however specious (see Viet Nam and Communist expansion).

What would it take to get them on board with an openly expansionist foreign policy? To capture Greenland by force….then Cuba…Panama (the stole our canal, after all)? He’s openly spoken about invading all these countries, plus Mexico, on a “go after the cartels” pretext.

Continue reading

SCOTUS Strikes Down Trump Tariffs

The US Supreme Court just struck down the sweeping tariffs Trump imposed on a variety on nations under the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977. Barrett, Gorsuch, and Roberts joined Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor in the 6-3 ruling.

The Court ruled that Congress, not the President, has the power to impose broad tariffs on any imports from specific nations, and the Economic Powers Act does not confer this power on the President by a simple declaration. This does not affect industry-specific tariffs imposed under the Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.

Looks like SCOTUS isn’t the rubber stamp some of us thought they were, though given the effect on the stock market they may be protecting their portfolios in this case. Looking forward to reading the opinions, especially the dissent joined by Alito (who may be about to retire), Kavanaugh, and Thomas.

War with Venezuela

Early this morning, the US conducted military operations in Venezuela with the objective of capturing Venezuelan President Maduro. This operation appears to have been successful in that US agents did take the President into custody, along with his wife. Trump said in a press conference that no US servicemembers were killed, though a few were injured. The extent of Venezuelan casualties, military and civilian, is unknown.

While it seems that US military forces conducted the operations, Trump administration officials have characterized this as a law enforcement operation and execution of an arrest warrant, apparently issued under a 2022 indictment, for the President, his wife, and brother. They should be arraigned on charges by Monday morning.

Whatever the purpose and justification, this is an unprovoked act of war and almost certainly illegal under US and international law.

Trump claimed this morning that the US will control Venezuela until a stable local regime can take over, but he has no soldiers on the ground and the nation remains in the hands of Maduro’s government, legitimate or not.

This is a moving target that I am watching from an international relations theory perspective. IR theories lay out thoughts on the behavior of nations and states, and I’m interested in how the Trump regime and its actions validate, or invalidate, these theories.

There is of course also an interesting domestic political thread here inasmuch as the current divide within the MAGA movement over “America First” could be widened further by this kind of intervention. One under-discussed part of the US Presidential election in 2024 is how young people (as well as some Boomers!) on both the left and right opposed Biden policy toward Israel. On the left this was due to Biden’s support for what they see as genocide in Gaza; on the right it was about “why are we spending money to protect Israel when we have troubles of our own” with a bit of antisemitism tossed in.

Trump ran on an anti-war platform in 2024 but has unilaterally initiated military operations in the Caribbean, Middle East, and Africa.

I’ll have more to say about this as things develop, and will cover the topic on Monday during the first Monday Morning Coffee live show at 10AM Eastern.

FBL Podcast Episode 16: Hegseth and War Crimes

Last week The Washington Post published a story describing the orders giving prior to the first US military attack on alleged drug runner boats off the coast of Venezuela. According to sources, Hegseth issued an illegal order to leave no survivors after the attack. After the first missile strike, drone footage showed two survivors clinging to the wreckage. Hegseth, or someone, ordered a second strike to ensure the original “kill them all” order was carried out. This is a clear violation of the Laws of War – in other words a war crime. Scott and I discuss this development and talk over our thoughts on why Trump and Hegseth are attacking these boats in the first place.

FBL Theme Music is Partners In Crime by Alexander Nakarada. Downloaded from https://creatorchords.com. Music promoted by https://www.chosic.com/free-music/all… Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/…

Podcast Episode 2: The Rise of Authoritarianism

The Foggy Bottom Line podcast is now up on YouTube and Spotify. Scott and I discuss authoritarianism in the US and some things Americans can do in response.

Check us out on YouTube and Spotify.

Click on this link for YouTube.

Click here for Spotify.

We’re working to get up on other platforms.

Please like, comment, subscribe and all that stuff. Lots of great content is in the works.

Trump and Epstein

Just want to make sure we’re straight on the Epstein thing.

We know that the POTUS was a longtime friend with America’s most notorious child sex trafficker. Lots of happy photos and video of them partying together. 

We also know that the POTUS’ name appears many times in the files compiled during the investigation of that notorious child sex traffickers…sex trafficking. 

Now the entire Federal government, including the DOJ, is doing all it possibly can to keep the public, the media, and Congress from knowing about the nature of POTUS’ relationship to the notorious child sex trafficker.

This includes launching an investigation into the former POTUS and his administration based on absolutely no evidence of any kind.

But wait. There’s more. 

Speaker Mike Johnson adjourned Congress and sent them home because they couldn’t answer questions about the POTUS’ relationship with the notorious child sex trafficker. They were afraid to vote on disclosure of files that might include information on the president’s long-term relationship with America’s most notorious child sex trafficker. 

And now the president’s former personal defense attorney and current Deputy Attorney General has met with the notorious child sex trafficker’s co-conspirator. Interviewed her for hours and then granted her a very special favor: a move to a club-Fed type minimum security prison. Maybe to get her favorable testimony to protect the POTUS?

Who, along with the vice president, held a meeting with the Attorney General and the FBI Director to discuss withholding the files after they all spent the entire 2024 campaign promising to release them.

Which makes all this look like it’s about hypocrisy and broken campaign promises. But that’s not what this is about.

This is about child sex trafficking, and a massive government conspiracy tied to covering up information about the sitting POTUS’ role in that child sex trafficking. 

Don’t let accusations of treason against political opponents, tariff chaos, or anything else distract from this.