Senior Trump administration officials said Iran attempted to prolong nuclear talks and deceived the United States about the use of its research reactor, leading negotiators to determine the Islamic state was not acting in good faith. In a call with reporters on Tuesday, an administration official said that Iran had attempted to drag out negotiations over its nuclear program and delayed the Americans’ request for a detailed proposal, before the U.S. decided to act with Israel and strike Iranian military and political targets this weekend. During several rounds of talks between representatives of the two countries, Iran had maintained it did not intend to build a nuclear weapon, but it had enriched uranium far beyond the level needed for civilian energy use and close to the level needed for a bomb, Reuters reported. Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi, one of the diplomats involved in the talks, told CBS News last week following the third round of talks that the Iranians were willing to minimize enrichment, forgo stockpiling nuclear material, and allow IAEA inspections. However, the administration said it learned that Iranians were hiding their nuclear enrichment program underground. The regime claimed it used its Tehran Research Reactor for civil purposes, but negotiators determined Iran was stockpiling fuel to later use to create a weapon. “The claim that they were using a research reactor to do good for the Iranian people was a complete and false pretense to hide the fact that they were stockpiling there,” an official said. “If it’s really about building radio isotopes and creating medicines for their people and doing all this good stuff that they profess to be doing, then why wouldn’t they take the fuel from us when we offered it to them?” an official asked The U.S. offered the Iranians free nuclear fuel to use for their civilian nuclear program, but Iranians declined, saying enrichment is a national, “inalienable” right, an administration official said Tuesday. “We said to them that you may deem that to be your right,” the official said. “We deem our right the ability to stop that, and we’re going to stop it, and we’re not going to allow it.” Negotiators demanded that the Iranians have their facility above ground, and the Iranians shot back that it could then be bombed. “If there’s nothing nefarious being done there, then, then you shouldn’t be worried about a bomb,” an official said. “So it was one of these things where just everything was just trying to create a construct that would give them the capabilities and materials they needed into the future to produce nuclear weapons.” “It was very clear as a negotiator, what they were trying to do was to get us into a long, drawn out process with meetings and experts and something that would have taken time in order to do the third meeting,” one official said. The Iranians presented a five-page proposal in the third meeting, but it was “like Swiss cheese because there were a lot of holes that they were able to go through,” an official said. “They also gave us their needs for the next 10 years, and that was the first time that we were able to see what they plan to do with the different materials that they claim they wanted to produce,” the official continued. There was no short-term deal that would have been beneficial for the U.S. and the world, an official said. “It was very clear they were just trying to buy time in order to preserve whatever they could, to get past the term of President Trump, in order to get to a nuclear weapon,” the official said, “and if they wanted to do a peaceful nuclear program, or kind of a real deal, we offered them many ample opportunities to do that, and they kept getting in their own way, probably intentionally, in order not to do that.” According to a senior official, the Iranians are “clever people” who are motivated entirely by “consummat[ing] and bring[ing] to fruition the enrichment process.” It was the role of the negotiators to determine if a deal could be made. They came back and reported to the president that Iran was “basically playing games,” so a deal would be difficult. “We said, look, if you decide that you want to do diplomacy, we’ll push as hard as possible,” a senior official said. “We’ll get in a room. We’ll fight for every point that we can. But these guys, they just really were showing that, that they that they didn’t want to, that they weren’t willing to make the type of deal that President Trump would have been satisfied with.” The post Trump Administration Officials Reveal Why US Lost Faith in Diplomacy With Iran appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill faces an ethics complaint after she asked Garden State residents to report on Immigration and Customs Enforcement to the state government. “In a seemingly unprecedented move, Governor Sherrill is using official state resources to coordinate the potential obstruction of federal immigration enforcement activities,” Curtis Schube, director of research and policy at the Center to Advance Security in America, told The Daily Signal in a statement on the complaint Tuesday. “Her administration created an official portal for members of the public to upload personal videos of ICE officials conducting their official duties.”  “This outrageous conduct is not in accordance with the rules of the New York Bar, nor is it appropriate for any legal professional or government official,” Schube added. “CASA is filing a bar complaint today and is hopeful that an investigation into this matter will be initiated immediately.” CASA filed a complaint Tuesday with the Attorney Grievance Committee of the New York Supreme Court, which investigates potential breaches in the Rules of Professional Conduct. According to the New York State Unified Court System’s registration, Sherrill first registered in May 2009 with the number 4719522 and has no disciplinary history. The Complaint The complaint, exclusively obtained by The Daily Signal, cites portions of the Rules of Professional Conduct, which state that a lawyer may face discipline for “illegal conduct that adversely reflects on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer,” or for “conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” The letter cites 8 U.S.C. Section 1324, which imposes up to a 10-year prison sentence or a fine on anyone who “conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection,” an alien who “has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law.” Sherrill went on “The Daily Show” in January, outlining her plan to launch a portal for Garden State residents to report ICE activity. “If you see an ICE agent in the street, get your phone out,” she told the host and her audience. She announced that the state government would create a “portal” to allow people to “upload all their cell phone videos” to “alert people” to ICE’s presence. “Sherrill has taken the first step toward concealing illegal aliens in New Jersey by calling for people to video any ICE activity and to alert the New Jersey government via web portal,” the complaint states. “Alerting people can be for no other reason than to allow undocumented immigrants time to clear out of their location. The effort can be interpreted in no other way than to prevent ICE from detaining immigrants who are the subject of their search.” “This violates the explicit language of the federal criminal statute referenced above,” the complaint states. “It is ‘deceit[ful]’ to use the power of government to prevent the federal government from being able to perform their operations. Additionally, it is unbecoming of a lawyer to use her power under the law to undermine federal law.” The ICE Reporting Portal The portal, which Sherrill’s appointed Attorney General Jennifer Davenport launched last month, urges citizens to “report misconduct by federal agents.” The website presents a list of “concerning activity” including “uses of excessive force, warrantless searches or arrests, racial profiling, wrongful detentions, interference with voting, or other civil-rights violations.” The site claims that information submitted via the portal may be used as evidence in court, though it states that the attorney general may or may not take legal action based on the submissions. The attorney general’s office states that it does not intend for the portal “to replace reporting emergencies or crimes in your area to local law enforcement.” Department of Homeland Security’s Response “Alerting people to ICE operations puts the lives of the men and women of law enforcement in danger as they go after terrorists, vicious gangs and violent criminal rings,” Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Lauren Bis told The Daily Signal in a statement Tuesday. “Our law officers are facing a 1,300% increase in assaults, a 3200% in vehicle attacks, and an 8000% increase in death threats.” “Remember, New Jersey is the same state that allowed a criminal illegal alien onto American streets who killed a mother and 11-year-old daughter while drunk driving,” she added. “While Attorney General Jennifer Davenport continues to encourage agitators to obstruct law enforcement and releases pedophiles, rapists, gang members, and murderers onto New Jersey’s streets, our brave law enforcement will continue to risk their lives to arrest heinous criminals in New Jersey.” Justice Department Weighs In The Justice Department sued Sherrill last month, aiming to block her executive order directing state officials to block ICE raids on state property. “The Department has a zero-tolerance policy for violence against law enforcement and will hold offenders accountable to the fullest extent of the law,” a Justice Department spokesperson told The Daily Signal in a statement Tuesday. “Any official promoting anti-police rhetoric, encouraging reckless behavior, or obstructing lawful immigration operations should think twice before inciting further violence and putting federal agents in harm’s way.” Sherrill has labeled ICE a “Stasi-type force,” referring to the East German secret police force. Opposition to ICE ratcheted up a notch after the Department of Homeland Security ordered a surge of immigration enforcement agents to Minneapolis. Anti-ICE agitators organized to monitor immigration enforcement, with some training to directly interfere with ICE operations. In this context of heightened tensions, two activists died at the hands of ICE agents: Renee Good and Alex Pretti. Border czar Tom Homan then took charge of the efforts in Minneapolis and drew down federal forces. The Daily Signal reached out to the offices of the governor and the attorney general for comment, but did not receive a response by publication time. CASA NY Bar Complaint_Sherrill_final_2.25.26[14]Download The post Democrat Who Compared ICE to the Stasi Faces Ethics Complaint Over Program to Report Feds appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As top Trump administration officials descended on Capitol Hill Tuesday afternoon to update the Senate on Operation Epic Fury, Senators told The Daily Signal they’re considering a supplemental funding package to support U.S. military action against Iran. But some senators worry a supplemental funding fight could distract the Senate from other urgent priorities. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Oak., told the Daily Signal he would “absolutely” support a supplemental funding package to continue Operation Epic Fury after Tuesday’s closed-door briefing. ? Secretary of State Marco Rubio briefs press on the State Departments recent efforts to help Americans evacuate from the Middle East before briefing Senators in a closed door meeting. More to come… pic.twitter.com/fMzlQIOY72— Virginia Grace McKinnon (@virginiagmck) March 3, 2026 Congress recently passed the Fiscal Year 2026 Defense Appropriations Act in February which allocated over $830 billion to defense, but Congress might decide to pass more defense funding in light of the administration’s bold $1.5 trillion defense budget. Before the briefing, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., seemed uncertain about the need for supplemental funds. “Maybe yes,” Graham said. “We may need a supplemental to help our friends in Israel and to deal with the increased threats.” After the meeting, Graham seemed more certain. “I think there will be a supplemental. We’ll have to approve that,” he told reporters.   Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., told The Daily Signal, “We’ll do whatever we need to do here to make sure our military is supported.” Similarly, Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, told the Daily Signal that he would also support an Operation Epic Fury funding package, “If they need, absolutely.” Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told reporters he was almost certain Republicans would pursue a supplemental funding package. “I’m sure they’ll ask for supplemental appropriations,” said Murphy. “I don’t think they’ll get them.” “I’m more convinced now that this is going to be open ended and forever,” Murphy continued. “They clearly have no, they clearly seem fine with hard line elements being in control of the country, because they plan to permanently run air operations over the country.” Murphy claimed that behind closed doors the administration refused to take off the table ground operations. “This feels like a multi-trillion dollar open ended conflict with a very confusing and constantly shifting set of goals,” he concluded.   Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., was skeptical. He said that while he expects they [Republicans] will come forward with a request for additional funding, he is unsure if he would support it. “Before I will support additional funding, I expect us to have an open hearing,” Coons told the press coming out of the closed-door classified hearing. War Powers Showdown: Will Capitol Hill Pull the Plug on Epic Fury or Power It Through for Israel?If the war power resolutions pass, the U.S. could be required to halt Operation Epic Fury in Iran. Both chambers of Congress are set to vote this week on separate bipartisan war… pic.twitter.com/rcLlMPTUsM— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) March 3, 2026 Given the president’s repeated comments regarding America’s ability to continue the Iran campaign, however, the upper chamber might face more pressing issues than a supplemental defense funding package. The Department of Homeland Security remains shut down. Democrats are demanding reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement as a precondition for reopening the government. Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., told The Daily Signal her focus is still on funding DHS. “My focus right now is getting that funded, and then certainly I’m open to turning my attention to other things,” Britt said in reference to the DHS funding lapse. “Their mission, is to keep Americans safe, and yet this body has yet to act on that.”  “I think it’s imperative that we fund DHS now,” said Graham. “I think the likelihood of a terrorist attack against the United States is very, very high… because of the threat level coming from Iran.” But the Republican voting base, however, have their eyes on passing the SAVE America Act, an election integrity measure that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and nationwide voter ID. ?We can’t let what’s happening in Iran distract us from the need to:(1) put the SAVE America Act on the Senate floor, (2) make filibustering senators speak, and (3) stay on it until it passes Share if you agree?— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) March 2, 2026 Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, one of the Senate’s main drivers of the SAVE America Act, is warning that the operation in Iran should not distract the Senate. The post Senate Eyes Supplemental Funding for Iran, But What About SAVE America Act? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Ohio’s pro-abortion Reproductive Freedom Amendment, passed in 2023, has now been used to block a state law requiring the humane burial or cremation of aborted children. Last week, Ohio’s First District Court of Appeals upheld a ruling against Ohio’s SB 27, which mandated fetal remains be buried or cremated. The appeals court concluded “that the plain language of the Reproductive Freedom Amendment constrains the State’s ability to regulate all phases of an abortion, including conduct occurring after the procedure.” That ruling follows a 2021 decision from the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas preliminarily blocking the law, as well as a 2025 permanent injunction. Ohio Right to Life Executive Director Carrie Snyder describes that court as “the most extreme liberal court that [abortion advocates] can find.” What the Law Addressed While abortion advocates bringing suit against SB 27 focused on the 2023 ballot initiative, pro-life groups focused on the law itself. “The court’s decision to strike down Ohio’s fetal remains law removes a basic standard of human dignity from state policy,” Peter Range, a senior fellow for the Center for Christian Virtue, told The Daily Signal. “With this ruling, the remains of a child aborted at 10, 15, or even 20 weeks may now be treated under Ohio’s ‘infectious waste’ regulations—no differently than other medical waste,” he also warned. Snyder declared it “a tragedy when a human body is treated like trash,” explaining that the law was “a way to address that issue and didn’t burden a woman approaching this decision at all.” Doomed by Lawsuits From the Start Republican Gov. Mike DeWine signed SB 27 into law on Dec. 30, 2020, with lawsuits quickly coming before the law even went into effect. The February 25 ruling from the First District Court of Appeals made clear that the Reproductive Freedom Amendment factored into their decision. The decision also read that “the voters of Ohio intended to create a separate, independent state constitutional basis for protecting abortion and abortion providers from State intervention, other than that explicitly allowed by the Amendment. In this regard, the Reproductive Freedom Amendment fills the constitutional void left by Dobbs [v. Jackson]. Nothing in this history or the rationale for the Amendment suggests that the voters intended to excise post-abortion conduct from its protections. Rather, the fact that Ohio voters mobilized quickly to counteract a decision of the United States Supreme Court sends a strong message of their desire to protect reproductive rights.” A press release from the American Civil Liberties highlighted the following passage, “Ohio voters said what they meant. The state may not burden, penalize, or discriminate against those who have an abortion and those who assist them in obtaining one.” Nevertheless, concerns remain about what voters were actually considering. Snyder pointed out that the amendment was not a matter of making abortion “completely legal or completely illegal,” or about medical care for concerns such as miscarriages. “That was not what they were voting on, that was what they thought they were voting on,” Snyder said. “As the court explained, the Reproductive Freedom Amendment protects conduct that occurs before, during, and after a procedural abortion,” countered Jessie Hill, cooperating attorney for the ACLU of Ohio. “While this law has not been in effect for years, today’s ruling will allow our clients to focus on providing essential health care without further interference from the state. We celebrate this ruling as yet another testament to the power of Ohio’s new Reproductive Freedom Amendment, and the first affirmative interpretation from an appellate court.” Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, which was also involved in the case, directed The Daily Signal to a statement from their medical director, Dr. Sharon Liner. “We’re pleased that the court upheld the injunction blocking the cruel burial and cremation law. Abortion is essential healthcare and this law was nothing more than an opportunity to shame and stigmatize our patients. Our focus remains on the health, safety, and dignity of our patients,” Liner said. Reproductive Freedom Amendment Plays a Role Range shared with The Daily Signal that the decision to strike down the fetal remains law was expected. “This outcome is not surprising in light of the 2023 abortion amendment. Ohioans were told the amendment would not eliminate commonsense health and safety standards. Yet we are now seeing laws struck down that were designed to reflect basic respect for human life and to ensure accountability in the abortion industry,” he pointed out. The amendment could be used against other pro-life laws. “The abortion advocates are using this vote from 2023, basically as a two-by-four,” Snyder said. “Voters were not given a drop down list of things that they wanted or didn’t want as far as abortion law, so every single thing that comes up in the category whatsoever, they are pointing to this amendment.” “I do fear that we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg now,” Snyder added. The amendment has further ramifications beyond laws being struck down. Both Range and Snyder expressed concerns about Ohio seeing an increase in abortions in 2025. Despite passing such an amendment, Ohio remains a red state. That’s something of a silver lining, especially compared to neighboring states like Michigan. “If we compare to Michigan, which passed a similar amendment, and they have a very radical pro-abortion majority in the governor and legislature, and so they knocked down every restriction as fast as they could,” Snyder said. “So I think in Ohio, we’re fortunate that we have pro-life majority in the legislature, we have a pro-life governor, we’re able to muffle the impact at least in the short-term.” She also referred to the Ohio Supreme Court as a “much more favorable court” than the lower courts. . The post Ohio’s Abortion Amendment Used to Block Fetal Remains Law appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It is no small thing to grasp the true significance of current events, let alone their spiritual meaning. Sure, any man can tell you that the southern states seceded because Abraham Lincoln won the 1860 presidential election, and that they did so because Lincoln aimed to keep slavery out of the federal territories. Few at the time, however, understood the North’s massive economic and logistical advantage over the South, and deduced that beginning a civil war might have doomed the institution of slavery itself. It took an act of astounding genius, however—or perhaps divine inspiration—to see that God brought the Civil War upon America as judgment for the United States’ hypocrisy in denying to black people the freedom we so valiantly fought for in the Revolution. The Second Inaugural On March 4, 1865, a mere 41 days before his assassination and 36 days before the surrender at Appomattox Courthouse that ended the war, Lincoln captured the spiritual significance of an entire war in a 701-word Second Inaugural Address. With heavy poignancy, he noted that both the North and the South “read the same Bible and pray to the same God and each invokes His aid against the other.” “The prayers of both could not be answered—that of neither has been answered fully,” Lincoln noted. My favorite two sentences ring like a thunderclap. “Fondly do we hope—fervently do we pray—that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away,” the president said. “Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said, ‘The judgements of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.'” With due humility, Lincoln does not dare to state that God brought the Civil War on the United States as the just punishment for slavery, but he firmly suggests as much. He does not suggest that the North, the force fighting for freedom, is guiltless. Perhaps for this reason, Americans have agreed with Lincoln, and honored this interpretation by etching it into the wall of the Lincoln Memorial. Americans may be surprised to hear it, but Lincoln was an unwilling abolitionist. You might say that God forced his hand. Why Didn’t Lincoln Always Support Abolition? Lincoln saw slavery as an evil, yes, but he was willing to put up with it to preserve the union. It’s hard for us, who rightly abhor slavery, to understand the political circumstances at the time. Southern slaveholders had a great deal of power, and the salient political issue wasn’t whether slavery would be abolished but whether slavery would be allowed to spread west into new lands that became their own states. One of the earliest laws in American history, the Northwest Ordinance, excluded slavery from the territories that now make up Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. The Founders anticipated that slavery—which they saw as a necessary evil—would disappear because it was growing economically unprofitable. Eli Whitney’s invention of the cotton gin changed that, and by the 1820s, southerners had started defending slavery as a positive good. The 1820 Missouri Compromise drew a line, allowing slavery in territories south of the line but forbidding it in territories above the line. Yet the southern slave interests had so much power in the federal government that they kept demanding slavery north of the line. Lincoln’s political career grew from his opposition to the notion of “popular sovereignty,” which stated that territories north of the line could enter the union as slave or free states based on the votes of white men. Lincoln’s opponent for U.S. Senate in 1858, Democrat Stephen Douglas, supported popular sovereignty. Douglas played a large role in passing the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, which applied this principle to the territories of Kansas and Nebraska. The law inspired a mini-civil war in Kansas, as pro-slavery settlers battled anti-slavery settlers for the incoming state’s future. Restrainers like Lincoln didn’t advocate for abolition—abolitionists were considered fringe extremists—but they did champion a return to the older principle of limiting slavery to southern states and territories. The South’s rejection of that compromise—morally flawed though it was—spurred the secession movements. When Lincoln won the 1860 election, those who wanted to expand slavery could not abide a president who wanted to restrain it. The Crucible of War The war itself convinced Lincoln to dismantle slavery. The freedmen in the North proved their mettle on the battlefield. The Emancipation Proclamation, a war measure, only freed slaves in Confederate-held territory in order to encourage revolts there. Only with the ratification of the 13th Amendment did the United States fully abolish slavery—and the states did not ratify that amendment until Dec. 6, 1865, long after Lincoln’s death. Most of us would be foolish to attempt to divine God’s purposes in human events, but Lincoln—like the humble prophet Moses before him—spoke from his own experience what God had been doing. As the Left and the Right seem ever more divided on basic truth and morality, I pray that the Almighty would preserve us from such a fate. From killing babies in the womb to mutilating the bodies of children, I can think of more than one great sin in our country today. There are times when I tremble for my country to remember that God is just. The post Abraham Lincoln’s Greatest Speech Revealed the Civil War’s Divine Meaning appeared first on The Daily Signal.