Latest
MORNING GLORY: Will President Trump go full Sherman in the war on Iran?
If James McPherson’s 1988 classic history of the American Civil War, Battle Cry of Freedom, has been translated into Farsi, the remaining leadership of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps may want to read it quickly, especially the chapters about General William Tecumseh Sherman’s two famous marches.
The first was the fabled “March to the Sea” from Atlanta to Savannah. The second was the less well known but longer, more difficult and far more devastating for the locals march from Savannah to North Carolina, a march that ravaged the home of secessionist fanaticism, South Carolina, and did so in a way that the state’s people did not think possible given the geography of its marshy lowlands.
Of course America has waged and won wars against tyrants before, but we do not love to wage war. We have never been a conquering empire, but when necessary, our leaders have been ruthless when it comes to concluding war.
MORNING GLORY: PRESIDENT TRUMP’S BIG SPEECH ON IRAN — WHAT WILL IT DO?
“If we can march a well appointed army right through Jefferson Davis’ territory,” Sherman appealed to a skeptical General Ulysses S. Grant and President Abraham Lincoln, it would be “a demonstration to the world, foreign and domestic, that we have a power that Davis cannot resist.”
“I can make the march and make Georgia howl,” Sherman added to the doubters Grant and Lincoln. Sherman was proposing something not done before in the long years of war to preserve the Union and free the enslaved — abandoning his lines of supply and living off the land his army would despoil.
Like Lincoln, Sherman “believed in a hard war and a soft peace,” writes McPherson, and once approved by his chain of command, Sherman delivered on the “hard” in devastating fashion.
“War is cruelty and you cannot refine it,” Sherman said.
ALL 4 IRAN WAR ASSUMPTIONS DEAD WRONG — TRUMP PROVES EXPERTS GOT FOOLED AGAIN
“It takes a simple, direct and ruthless man to wage war,” wrote a different American general in a different war.
General George Patton recorded that blunt statement in his diaries, according to another great popular historian, Rick Atkinson, in his “An Army At Dawn” about Operation Torch in WW2.
Sherman had anticipated Patton by nearly 80 years.
TRUMP SAYS IRAN ‘NO LONGER A THREAT’ AFTER 32 DAYS — OUTLINES NEXT PHASE OF US WAR
“We must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war,” Sherman argued, saying of the Confederacy’s elite that his armies would make them “so sick of war that generations would pass away before they would again appeal to it.”
“It is mercy in the end,” he concluded.
Throughout Sherman’s two marches, Lincoln was open to peace on his terms. The greatest president even took a surprise trip to Grant’s headquarters to meet the South’s peace commissioners in person on February 3, 1865.
Because Lincoln was adamant about preserving the Union and freeing the slaves, his offers were rejected by Confederate President Jefferson Davis when they were returned to him. Lincoln had even offered some level of compensation to the Southerners who would see their enslaved freed, but that was not enough for the fanatics in Richmond.
The South was already shattered at that point. The value of the confederate dollar had plummeted to 2% of its 1861 value and there was no more meat for General Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia which continued the doomed effort to save Richmond. But the leadership of the Confederacy had devolved into denial of reality.
Davis addressed the Congress of the Confederacy three days after Lincoln’s offer, and press reports at the time relayed to the North that the tone of the Confederacy’s president was one of “unconquerable defiance.”
“We will never submit to the disgrace of surrender,” Davis thundered.
But, of course, the South effectively did submit on April 9, 1865, when Lee surrendered the largest of the Confederate forces to the Union, accepting defeat. Those two unnecessary months of war that occurred between Lincoln’s offer and Appomattox saw Sherman’s “70,000 Blue avengers” ravage South Carolina where the Civil War had had its start. “I almost tremble for her fate” Sherman said, but he did not hesitate to unleash his forces.
“The war in South Carolina wasn’t pretty and hardly glorious,” concluded McPherson, “but Sherman considered it effective. ‘My aim then was to whip the rebels. To humble their pride, to follow the to their inmost recesses and make them fear and dread us.’”
TANVI RATNA: WITH ONE WAR, TRUMP IS BREAKING MIDDLE EAST’S OLD POWER STRUCTURE
Sherman did just that. As did the relentless Grant to his long time foe Lee. Presiding over the long and bloody war from Washington, D.C. was a man of supreme vision and moral clarity, the indomitable Lincoln, misjudged by almost everyone from before the beginning of the war. He had never demanded emancipation before the war was begun by secessionist fanatics who imagined an empire of slavery from the old South into Mexico and extending into Cuba.
Lincoln ordered done what had to be done to break the will of the fanatics in Richmond and spread throughout the confederacy. Like Presidents Wilson, FDR and Truman in the next century, Lincoln had his terms and would accept nothing less.
Lincoln’s price for peace grew higher as the cost in Union lives grew higher too. The 20th century presidents were far from Lincoln in wisdom and eloquence. It is arguable that Wilson was our worst president despite his vast intellect and refinement. Wilson could not win the peace after America won World War I, and in the failure was the seed of the Second World War.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
FDR of course was a deeply flawed man when it came to character but a superb leader in the Second World War, and like Churchill, ruthless when necessary. Truman did what had to be done and didn’t lose any sleep over the atomic bombs which saved tens of thousands of American lives. Presidents do what they think best in wartime. History assesses and often second-guesses them, but they are obliged to act in the moment.
Lincoln was a man of great soul and sorrow but also of indomitable spirit. Like Sherman and Grant and Lincoln’s famed “Team of Rivals,” Lincoln persevered even when a significant peace party sprang up in the North and even when he lost 25 of his 123 Republican seats in the midterms of 1862.
We have no idea what will follow President Donald Trump’s deadline to the IRGC tonight — we can dispense with the fiction that the mullahs are running Iran now — but there is a very hard core at the heart of the American experience of which we have to hope the IRGC generals are aware. If Trump taps into that and decides to do to Iran’s oil and energy and transportation infrastructure from the air what Lincoln allowed Sherman to do to the Confederacy in Georgia and South Carolina via an army on the ground, it will not be unprecedented. It could in fact eventually result in freedom for an enslaved people.
Trump’s critics are legion and they are especially enraged when he posts what they conclude to be vulgar and unnecessarily provocative posts. What the impact of those posts are on the IRGC we cannot know. Eventually we will. In the meantime, Iran’s people yearn for a freedom that only Trump can deliver and probably only through hard measures.
Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor and host of “The Hugh Hewitt Show” heard weekday afternoons from 3 PM to 6 PM ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives Americans home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable, hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6 p..m ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996, where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting. This column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
Latest
Tucker Carlson Officially Makes Shock Announcement — He’s Out
A growing divide within the conservative movement is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore, as longtime commentator Tucker Carlson declared that he no longer considers himself a Republican, citing frustration with what he sees as the party’s abandonment of its America First roots.
Carlson made the remarks during a podcast appearance with hosts Travis Dhanraj and Karman Wong, where the discussion turned to the political landscape ahead of the upcoming midterm elections and whether voters remain satisfied with the direction of the Republican Party.
While Carlson made clear that he remains aligned with many conservative principles, he argued that some Republican leaders have drifted away from the priorities that helped fuel President Donald Trump’s rise and transformed the GOP into the dominant force it is today.
“I’m out,” Carlson said during the interview.
“And if I’m out, then I think a lot of other people are out.”
Carlson’s comments came as he discussed polling data and voter sentiment ahead of the next election cycle.
“I would not support the Republican party. There’s no chance I would support the Republican party,” he said.
The former Fox News host argued that certain Republican lawmakers had betrayed their voters by supporting policies he believes put foreign interests ahead of American priorities.
“How could I or any American voter support a political party that’s not loyal to the United States? That puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens?
“It’s not possible to vote for people like that, and I’m not going to.”
Carlson’s remarks highlight a growing debate inside conservative circles over the future direction of the Republican Party.
At the center of the disagreement is not President Trump himself, but rather how some Republicans have approached foreign policy, military intervention, and America’s role overseas.
Trump built his political movement on the promise of putting American interests first, securing the border, rebuilding the economy, restoring energy independence, and avoiding the endless foreign conflicts that frustrated many voters for decades.
Many of Trump’s supporters continue to view the America First agenda as one of the defining achievements of his political movement.
Carlson suggested that some Republicans have lost sight of those principles.
“I think I’ve voted Republican my entire life,” Carlson said.
“I’ve been a consistent defender for 35 years, of the Republican party. I mean, a very consistent defender.”
“But there’s no defending this because it’s immoral and it’s exactly the opposite of what a political party in a democracy is charged with doing — which is representing its own voters, its own citizens, its own nation.”
“And they’re not doing that,” Carlson concluded.
The comments come amid an ongoing debate among conservatives regarding foreign policy, particularly following recent tensions involving Iran and the broader Middle East.
Carlson has been one of the most vocal advocates of a non-interventionist approach that emphasizes American interests above foreign entanglements. Other conservatives, including commentators and lawmakers aligned with a more traditional hawkish worldview, have argued that a strong American presence abroad remains necessary to protect national security.
The disagreement intensified after military operations involving Iran earlier this year, with Carlson and several other prominent voices warning against policies they believe could lead to deeper involvement in overseas conflicts.
Despite those disagreements, Carlson has generally continued to support many of Trump’s domestic policies, including border security, immigration enforcement, energy production, and efforts to prioritize American workers and taxpayers.
The broader divide illustrates the ongoing evolution of the Republican Party under Trump’s influence.
For decades, the GOP was largely defined by traditional establishment conservatives who favored aggressive foreign policy and intervention abroad. Trump’s rise fundamentally reshaped that coalition, bringing millions of working-class voters, independents, and populist conservatives into the party.
Today, debates like the one Carlson has raised reflect a larger question facing Republicans: how closely the party will adhere to the America First principles that helped fuel Trump’s political success.
Whether Carlson ultimately returns to the Republican fold remains to be seen. But his comments underscore a reality that many political observers have noted in recent years: the future of the conservative movement is increasingly being shaped by debates over foreign policy, national sovereignty, and what it truly means to put America first.
As those discussions continue, one thing remains clear: the America First movement that transformed Republican politics is still driving much of the conversation inside the conservative movement today.
Latest
Top Fox News Host Suffers Deranged Meltdown On LIVE TV — Doesn’t End Well…
A growing divide within the conservative movement spilled into public view this weekend as Fox News host Mark Levin launched a blistering attack on President Donald Trump’s Iran strategy, accusing the administration of pressuring Israel while pursuing a diplomatic agreement designed to permanently prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
The dispute comes as the Trump administration continues negotiations with Tehran following a series of devastating military strikes that crippled Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, eliminated key regime leaders, and left the Islamic Republic in one of the weakest positions it has faced in decades.
President Trump and Vice President JD Vance have argued that the administration is negotiating from a position of overwhelming strength after demonstrating a willingness to use military force when necessary. Their goal, they say, is simple: ensure Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon while avoiding another endless war in the Middle East.
Levin, however, remains deeply skeptical.
During a fiery monologue that lasted more than 17 minutes on Saturday, the longtime conservative commentator accused members of the administration of unfairly targeting Israel while becoming too optimistic about Iran’s intentions.
“I want to say to people in and out of the administration: stop trashing, smearing, bullying the little state of Israel. Stop cozying up to and telling us that the enemy regime in Iran is now more rational, more moderate, and a regime that we can deal with,” Levin demanded. “When just a few months ago they slaughtered 50,000 people, they’re still hanging young people today and, if they had a nuclear missile today, they’d fire it into our country as sure as I’m alive.”
Levin also rejected any suggestion that Israel should allow outside governments to dictate its security decisions.
“I don’t know what’s going on, but if people think they can bully a little country, Israel — a people that have existed 4,000 years through the Babylonians and the Persians, through the Romans and the Third Reich — into surrendering their defense and their decision on how to secure their country, they get another thing coming,” Levin continued. “I think it’s outrageous.”
The criticism did not stop there.
Levin also used social media to question several administration policies, including reports surrounding a Boeing 747 gifted by Qatar and modified for use supporting presidential airlift operations.
“If it’s legal and other countries do it so be it. Do you think wealthy countries should be able to lavish gifts on our government?” Levin wrote.
His sharpest criticism, however, focused on the administration’s efforts to secure a broader peace agreement with Iran and its proxies.
“Item #1 in the MOU provides there’s an immediate and permanent end to the war and that includes Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran is Hezbollah,” Levin posted. “What’s the enforcement mechanism? Nothing. Israel defends itself after constant attacks from Hezbollah and is admonished for it. Its interests are not aligned with ours, we’re told. It’s endangering the peace deal. This is beyond nuts.”
In another post, Levin argued that current ceasefire efforts were coming at Israel’s expense.
“Apparently as long as Israeli soldiers are killed the ceasefire is holding,” Levin claimed.
The administration has strongly rejected suggestions that it is abandoning Israel or weakening its support for America’s closest ally in the Middle East.
President Trump responded directly Sunday with a warning aimed squarely at Iran and its regional proxies.
“Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!!” Trump posted on Truth Social.
For supporters of the administration, that message demonstrates exactly why they remain confident in Trump’s approach. They argue that no modern president has shown a greater willingness to confront Iran militarily while simultaneously seeking a diplomatic resolution that serves American interests.
Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have both emphasized that any final agreement would require Iran to permanently abandon its nuclear ambitions, submit to extensive inspections, and comply with strict verification requirements before receiving any economic benefits.
Administration officials also note that no sanctions have been lifted, no frozen assets have been released, and no direct payments have been authorized.
Instead, they argue that Trump has successfully put Iran in a position where the regime must choose between compliance and continued isolation.
The disagreement highlights a broader debate that has been developing inside the Republican Party for years.
Traditional foreign-policy hawks often favor maintaining maximum military pressure and remain deeply skeptical of negotiations with hostile regimes.
Trump’s America First coalition generally supports overwhelming military strength but prefers leveraging that strength into favorable deals that avoid long-term military entanglements.
Supporters of the president argue that Trump’s strategy reflects the same formula that has defined much of his foreign policy: peace through strength.
Strike hard when necessary. Demonstrate unquestionable resolve. Negotiate from a position of power. And avoid the costly nation-building efforts and endless conflicts that frustrated many Americans for decades.
As negotiations continue, the debate between Levin and the Trump administration reflects a larger question facing conservatives: how best to secure American interests abroad while staying true to the America First principles that have reshaped the Republican Party.
For now, President Trump appears committed to proving that military strength and diplomacy are not opposing strategies—but complementary tools for achieving lasting peace and protecting America’s national security.
Latest
It’s Over! The House Votes 396-13 — Trump Just Won!
In a rare display of bipartisan cooperation, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the amended 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act this week, advancing a package of reforms designed to tackle America’s housing affordability crisis while delivering on several key priorities championed by President Donald Trump.
The legislation passed by a decisive 396-13 vote, reflecting broad agreement that soaring housing costs, rising rents, and limited inventory have pushed homeownership out of reach for millions of Americans.
Supporters say the bill addresses one of the country’s most pressing economic challenges by cutting red tape, increasing housing supply, strengthening lending opportunities, and helping ensure that American families—not large corporations—have a fair shot at buying homes.
The legislation combines elements of previous House and Senate proposals and seeks to address housing shortages that have contributed to record-high home prices in many parts of the country.
House Financial Services Committee Chairman French Hill praised the measure as a practical, results-oriented solution focused on expanding opportunities for working Americans.
“This bill prioritizes American families by expanding homeownership, enhancing affordability, reducing burdensome regulations that drive up costs, and increasing housing supply nationwide,” Chairman Hill stated.
“Importantly, it delivers on President Trump’s call to limit institutional investors from competing with the American people as they seek to purchase a home,” Hill added.
The legislation includes a variety of reforms aimed at accelerating housing construction and reducing barriers that have slowed development for years.
Among its key provisions, the bill streamlines federal permitting requirements, reduces lengthy environmental review processes for certain redevelopment and infill housing projects, and encourages innovative housing solutions such as modular and manufactured homes.
The measure also provides grants to local governments willing to modernize zoning laws and remove restrictions that limit new construction.
Supporters argue that restrictive zoning policies, excessive permitting delays, and government bureaucracy have significantly contributed to America’s housing shortage.
Rather than relying on massive new federal spending programs, the legislation focuses on empowering local communities, encouraging private-sector investment, and removing obstacles that make housing more expensive.
The bill also raises loan limits for multifamily housing developments, creating incentives for apartment construction and expanding options for renters and first-time buyers alike.
Additional provisions strengthen rural housing initiatives, expand support for veterans seeking housing, modernize financing for smaller mortgage loans, and increase the role community banks can play in local lending markets.
Community banks have long argued that excessive regulations have made it more difficult for them to serve homebuyers and construction projects in their local communities.
Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters acknowledged the seriousness of the housing crisis despite broader political disagreements.
“America is in the middle of a full-blown affordable housing and homelessness crisis, and working families are burdened by skyrocketing rents and a housing market that is pushing homeownership further out of reach,” Waters said.
One of the most notable aspects of the legislation is its effort to curb the growing influence of large institutional investors in the housing market.
For years, investment firms and corporate landlords have purchased thousands of single-family homes, often outbidding families and first-time homebuyers. Critics argue that this trend has driven up prices while transforming communities into rental markets dominated by large corporations.
The legislation includes targeted restrictions designed to discourage large institutional investors from acquiring additional single-family homes.
That approach aligns closely with President Trump’s housing agenda.
Throughout his second administration, Trump has repeatedly argued that homeownership should remain a cornerstone of the American Dream and that government policies should prioritize families over Wall Street investors.
In his National Homeownership Month proclamation earlier this month, Trump emphasized the importance of restoring affordability and expanding opportunities for future homeowners.
“During National Homeownership Month, my Administration recommits to making housing more affordable so that young Americans and hardworking families can raise children, build memories, and create a future in a home of their own,” Trump said.
The president has frequently blamed the housing crisis on “reckless spending, burdensome regulations, and failed housing policies” implemented under previous administrations, as well as “mass illegal immigration and large institutional investors” that have increased pressure on housing supply.
Trump has also taken executive actions aimed at reducing institutional ownership of single-family homes, lowering mortgage costs, and strengthening federal housing programs.
“Under my leadership, America will be a Nation where homes belong to families — not corporations,” Trump said.
At the same time, Trump has emphasized the importance of protecting the value of homes already owned by millions of Americans.
“I don’t want to drive housing prices down. I want to drive housing prices up for people that own their homes. Existing housing, people who own their homes, we’re going to keep them wealthy. We’re going to keep those prices up. We’re not going to destroy the value of their homes so that somebody that didn’t work very hard can buy a home,” Trump said during a Cabinet meeting earlier this year.
He has also repeatedly summarized his housing philosophy with a simple message:
“Homes are built for people, not for corporations, and America will not become a nation of renters.”
With overwhelming bipartisan support in the House and growing concern over affordability nationwide, supporters hope the legislation will mark a significant step toward restoring homeownership opportunities and ensuring that the American Dream remains within reach for future generations.
-
Economy4 months agoVance Leaves Meeting, Looks Straight Into Camera, Announces Stunning Arrest
-
Economy4 months agoAdam Schiff Facing 30 Years In Prison After Bank Records Leak
-
Economy4 months agoSupreme Curt Sides With Trump — He Can Remove The All
-
Economy4 months agoAll Hell Breaks Loose On Fox When Jesse Watters Asks Fetterman One Question
-
Economy2 months agoPrayers Pour In After Fox Host Dies: ‘Senseless Murder’
-
Economy4 months agoNBC Stops LIVE Broadcast — Breaks Big Trump News
-
Economy4 months agoTrump Pulls Off Miracle Of A Lifetime — It’s Permanently Open
-
Economy4 months agoSwalwell Facing Jail Time After Sickening New Video Leaks




