The United States has hit hundreds of targets in Iran since the launch of Operation Epic Fury on Feb. 28, and President Donald Trump says he will not accept anything less than “unconditional surrender” from Iran. While recent polling shows significant support for the operation, some Americans fear another “forever war” in the Middle East. Fear over an extended conflict with Iran and its proxies, such as Hezbollah, is driven, at least in part, by the words “regime change,” Natalie Ecanow, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, explains. “Obviously, we would like to see regime change as an outcome of the current American and Israeli operation in Iran. As far as I know, and as far as I understand, that is not a stated objective of our campaign,” Ecanow says. U.S. actions in Iran, according to the White House, remain focused on eliminating the nuclear and missile threat Iran poses to the U.S. and its allies, a mission that reasonably falls in line with Trump’s “America First” agenda. “We can throw the door open to regime change. We can support regime change, but we’re not going in and doing the regime change ourselves,” Ecanow says on the “Problematic Women” podcast. “I think that’s a very important distinction to be made when it comes to that argument … about dragging us into another ‘forever war,’ doing another Iraq, etc. It’s really important to understand that the objectives of Operation Epic Fury are mostly military. They don’t really have to do with changing domestic politics in Iran.” Ecanow joins the show to discuss the nuclear threat Iran has posed to the United States and breaks down the reasons why she believes the operation is in line with the “America First” agenda. Also on today’s show, we discuss the feminist movement’s response, or lack of response, to the Iranian regime, which, as the European Union reports, has been responsible for the deaths of more women than any other nation in the world. The post Is the Iran Operation ‘America First’? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos. Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. Gavin Newsom, the governor of our state here in California, and the presumptive front-runner in the Democratic presidential primary for 2028—I am biased because I’ve had to live under his tenure for six years—but I think you could make the argument he had the worst February of any major want-to-be candidate in modern memory, or surely the worst record of any governor in the last 30 days. It wasn’t supposed to be that way. He has a new autobiography, and his problem there is he comes across as what he is: a child of privilege, a nepo baby, a person whose father was a close, intimate friend of Gov. Pat Brown, senior Gov. Pat Brown. He was a good friend and somewhat related to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and former Gov. Jerry Brown. And of course, he was subsidized and helped in his business venture by the Getty family and their mega-oil fortune inherited from their father, who created Getty Oil. So, he wants to dispel that image. So, when he talked about how he just ate white bread or he had all of these problems growing up—he said he had dyslexia. We’ll get to that in a minute. But the idea that Gavin Newsom was somehow parallel to former President Abraham Lincoln in a log cabin or Vice President JD Vance just doesn’t work. Then he went over to Munich, Germany, because, you know, he’s a California governor. He doesn’t have any foreign experience, and he thought he was going to impress the Europeans with their shared dislike of President Donald Trump. But it was a disaster. He said something about you shouldn’t wear knee pads. He’s a vulgarian. He really is. He can’t keep his potty mouth clean. I don’t think anybody at that type of serious discussion of foreign policy wants some upstart California governor to come over and talk about people being on their knee pads. I suppose that’s a reference for a sexual act of submission. Then he’s had this social media team, and their theory is that Donald Trump—with his capital letters, exclamation points, personal ad hominem attacks—has upped his popularity. And therefore, he’s going to imitate Donald Trump’s style with capital letters, the same format, but he’s going to use a constant level of pejoratives that are obscene, almost pornographic. And then, therefore, he will outtrump Trump. He has a fundamental failing, everybody, and you know that. You will vote for Donald Trump because of his record and his courage and breaking existing norms and taboos and trying to do things that no one ever did. Like close the border, stop crime, deal with the Left, the Department of Government Efficiency, deal with the Iranians, deal with Venezuela. And the tweets in which he describes that are attacks of Robert De Niro or—that’s something that you will tolerate despite, not because of, those tweets. Gavin Newsom got it all wrong. He thought, well, Trump is doing well because of his tweets, and I’m gonna be outtrumping Trump. And the result is he’s unleashed this unfortunate character. I think he’s called Izzy Gardon. I don’t know how you pronounce it, but my gosh, they’re full of expletives. He’s in a tweet war with Sean Hannity. He used the F-word. He used the S-word. They come out of the mouth of the governor of California like they’re nothing. He’s really debased the office. He’s got one of the most foul mouths, Gavin Newsom, and now you’re putting it, if I could use that archaic term, in print, in these social media, daily outbursts. You know, there was a simple reporter, Susan Crabtree. She has a very good reputation. She works for RealClearPolitics, and getting back to dyslexia, she says, all of a sudden, you’re emphasizing dyslexia. But we would like to know when he was officially diagnosed with this medical condition. And his social media, Gardon, Izzy, said F off to a reporter, which didn’t go down well. As far as dyslexia goes, it’s very hard to find him credible. Not that he doesn’t have it, but when he says, “I can’t read,” I can’t believe that’s true, because not too long ago, he bragged to us, I think, that he was reading a 260-page book in an hour and a half, as if he was a speed-reader. And my gosh, anybody who is a governor of a huge state like California, a governor of any state, gets page after page daily in memoranda and policy papers and speeches. So, when he says he can’t read, it wouldn’t convince most people. And why did he say that he couldn’t read? Because he’s flailing, and he wants to have some sympathy. I think that’s the reason. The same thing—he wants to be a pseudo-poor boy. When Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said you were historically illiterate, and Newsom again fired from the hip and said that Trump had no historical precedent or right to bring in federal troops, that’s happened five or six times in our history. Civil War draft riots; World War I veterans marching for their bonuses they didn’t receive; Rodney King riots, where then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell sent in, I think, 4,000 or 5,000 Marines on the order of then-President George H.W. Bush. And so, Ted Cruz said, Gavin, you’re historically illiterate. And sure enough, he says, how dare you make fun of a person with a handicap because I’m—you’re saying that I’m illiterate because I can’t read. Of course, being historically illiterate means you’re able to read, you just don’t read history, or you would’ve not made such a blunder. And he confused that. Again, the subtext was, please feel sorry for me because otherwise I have no redeeming values as a candidate. And then he made the faux pas of all mistakes. He got before an African American audience. And remember, every time a Democratic white elite gets in front of an African American audience, something happens. They either feel uncomfortable or they want to fake it like they’re somebody they’re not, or they’re condescending, or they—it just doesn’t work well. Remember former President Joe Biden, when he wanted to attack former Sen. Mitt Romney. He said to a group of highly educated, professional blacks in the audience that Mitt Romney’s “gonna put you all [back] in chains.” He kind of did the accent. “Put you all in”—as if these capable people couldn’t protect themselves without Joe Biden. As if we were gonna go back to slavery. When we had former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, remember, I tried so—“I didn’t come this far.” She was trying to imitate, I guess, the voice she thought Sojourner Truth or Harriet Tubman would’ve said, somebody like that. It was a disaster. Even former President Barack Obama, who’s half African American, always went into a different patois to condescend to his audience. And that’s exactly what Gavin Newsom did, only it was worse because it was content, not just style. He was speaking very slowly and changed his cadence. But when he said to them, I am not—I’m just like you. Basically, I am illiterate, and I had a 960, and I’m not saying I had a 960 to make you out there in the audience have 940, that was an insult because he was saying to them: You are not very bright, and therefore, you should feel empathy with me because I’m claiming that I’m not very bright, but I really don’t believe it. And they don’t believe that he really meant that either. So, it was completely racist and insulting. It’s up there with Joe Biden’s “Corn Pop” sagas, you know. Barack Obama’s the first black who’s clean and can articulate. It’s up there with his use of “boy” and “Negro.” As I said, all of these politicians have a checkered record when it comes to race, which is ironic because they pose as defenders of civil rights. Finally, what’s the elephant in the room? All of what I talked about is a camouflage, a mask for the problem. And that is 300,000 people are leaving his state per year since he’s been governor. He’s taken paradise and turned it into purgatory. Whether it’s the fires, the high-speed rail boondoggle, the highest income taxes in the nation, the recent billionaires tax—it’s already driven $1 trillion out of the state. We have the highest number of homeless people. We have one-third of all welfare recipients. We have the highest poverty rate, I think we’re 21% to 22%. We have no plans to assimilate a culture rate or integrate 27% of the population that was foreign-born. We have the highest number of illegal aliens. About one out of every three people that enters our now-bankrupt health system has diabetes. And Louisiana and Mississippi have higher test scores in their elementary schools than we do. Add it all up, and he’s got only one campaign slogan. Gavin Newsom will have to run as “I want to do to the United States what I did to California.” We’ll see how that works out. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Victor Davis Hanson: Newsom’s Rocky Month Shows the Risks of Running on Style Over Substance appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump says U.S. defense manufacturing companies have agreed to “quadruple production” of “‘Exquisite Class’ Weaponry” amid the ongoing conflict with Iran. “We just concluded a very good meeting with the largest U.S. Defense Manufacturing Companies where we discussed Production and Production Schedules. They have agreed to quadruple Production of the ‘Exquisite Class’ Weaponry in that we want to reach, as rapidly as possible, the highest levels of quantity,” Trump wrote on Truth Social Friday afternoon. “Expansion began three months prior to the meeting, and Plants and Production of many of these Weapons are already under way,” Trump said. The announcement comes just six days after the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury against Iran, targeting the nation’s military infrastructure and weapons capabilities. “We have a virtually unlimited supply of Medium and Upper Medium Grade Munitions, which we are using, as an example, in Iran, and recently used in Venezuela,” Trump said, referring to the U.S. capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro in January. “Regardless, however, we have also increased Orders at these levels,” the president continued. The manufacturing companies represented at Thursday’s meeting include “CEOs of BAE Systems, Boeing, Honeywell Aerospace, L3Harris Missile Solutions, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon,” according to Trump, who added that another meeting is scheduled to take place in two months. "We just concluded a very good meeting with the largest U.S. Defense Manufacturing Companies where we discussed Production and Production Schedules. They have agreed to quadruple Production of the “Exquisite Class” Weaponry in that we want to reach, as rapidly as possible, the… pic.twitter.com/eKFyii8duZ— The White House (@WhiteHouse) March 6, 2026 The Trump administration is focused on restoring weapons stockpiles following the launch of the operation in Iran and other recent conflicts. The president has placed pressure on manufacturing companies to produce more weapons faster, a message Secretary of War Pete Hegseth championed during his Arsenal of Freedom Tour, which concluded on the eve of the U.S. attack on Iran. “The technology that you build for our missiles, interceptors, and hypersonic weapons is what allows the War Department to achieve peace through strength,” Hegseth told about 1,500 employees of L3Harris, a major American technology and defense company that builds weapons, a week ago. “And that mission,” Hegseth said, “comes with a non-negotiable mandate from the War Department, straight from the Resolute Desk and President [Donald] Trump: Build more and build faster.” Reuters contributed to this report. The post Defense Manufacturers Agree to ‘Quadruple Production’ of Weapons, Trump Announces appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Global oil prices are on the rise in response to Operation Epic Fury, the U.S. military’s large-scale operation against Iran. While the rising energy prices could harm the American economy, conservatives are trusting President Donald Trump’s energy record as the president claims he has a plan to bring costs back down to “record lows.” The Strait of Hormuz is all but shuttered, as the conflict massively disrupts the narrow stretch of water where most of the world’s oil passes through. Some 700 oil tankers are currently trapped near the straight. Crude oil prices saw the highest single-day spike since COVID-19 on Friday, jumping nearly 9%, capping off a week of increases. GasBuddy reported the national average was $2.94 per gallon on Wednesday. By Friday, it was $3.19 per gallon. However, Trump told CNN reporter Dana Bash Friday morning that he has a plan to lower prices and that gas prices will drop to “record lows” again. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt also addressed the increasing gas prices this week, Politico reported. “The United States remains the largest crude oil and natural gas producer in the world,” Leavitt said. “President Trump’s entire energy team, from the White House to the National Energy Dominance Council to Secretaries Wright and Bessent, have a game plan to keep oil prices stable throughout Operation Epic Fury.”  She also suggested “newfound oil markets in Venezuela” could be utilized to lower energy costs. In January, a U.S. military operation seized former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, and America is now forcing the new government, led by Maduro’s former Vice President Delcy Rodriguez, to cooperate with American policymakers. Trusting Trump Conservatives, however, believe the increase in gas prices is a short-term disruption and that the Trump administration will work to lower gas prices once again. “While it is true that many Americans may have noticed a recent rise in gas prices, what we are seeing is a short-term market reaction to the conflict overseas,” Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, told the Daily Signal. “Anytime there is a disruption in global markets, prices can move quickly before supply adjusts.” “No one should be surprised that prices have risen,” Heritage Foundation Senior Research Fellow Jack Spencer told the Daily Signal. “However, the United States, thanks to President Trump’s pro-energy polices, is far better off than it would have otherwise been in this situation,” he continued.  .@PressSec : The goals of Operation Epic Fury will be a very good thing for the energy, and oil markets, and oil prices in the long-term, when you no longer have a terrorist regime that is restricting the free flow of energy through the Strait of Hormuz. pic.twitter.com/fR4kScfYzy— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 6, 2026 Pfluger claimed that, “President Trump has been clear about his objectives in the Middle East.” The president, according to Pfluger, is “focused on restoring stability and ensuring the United States leads the world in energy production so prices come back down.” “I am confident that as those policies take effect, Americans will see relief at the pump,” he concluded. Not All States Feel an Impact Some states that encourage American energy dominance, however, have been shielded from increasing prices at the pump. “North Dakota’s average gas price today is $2.96 a gallon—nearly 30 cents lower than the national average. That’s no accident,” Rep. Julie Fedorchak, R-N.D., told the Daily Signal.   “North Dakota is an energy-dominant state producing the oil and natural gas America needs. Moments like this highlight why domestic production matters,” continued Fedorchak.   “President Trump has been clear: the path to lower prices is American energy dominance. The more we produce here at home, in places like North Dakota, the less American families are exposed to geopolitical shocks abroad,” concluded Fedorchak.   We have implemented short term measures to help keep oil prices down. We are allowing our friends in India to take oil that is already on ships, refine it, and move those barrels into the market quickly. A practical way to get supply flowing and ease pressure. pic.twitter.com/Y0i5wpxkcb— Secretary Chris Wright (@SecretaryWright) March 6, 2026 Spencer said the energy dominance ushered in by Trump has been critical “because the American gas and oil industry is in a much better position to respond to market shocks, which may not stop prices from rising but will allow prices to stabilize more quickly over time.”  Fedorchak also emphasized the importance of “having the right legal, tax, and regulatory climate for energy producers to produce and a stable and predictable permitting process for the infrastructure needed to produce energy and generate power.” The post Iran War Increases Oil Prices, But Conservatives Trust Trump’s Plan for ‘Record Lows’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Last August, two women stalked an Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent near Los Angeles and then streamed themselves at his house, yelling to locals that their neighbor was an agent. Last month, they were convicted and face time in federal prison. Ironically, they wore masks and glasses to hide their identity, while invading the privacy of the federal agent. When does protest start to break the law—or even become terrorism?  I’ll define terrorism as using violence to achieve political aims. Most criminals are not terrorists. So, who is? Let’s start with some easy ones. The Irish Republican Army, Italy’s Red Brigades, and the Palestinian Liberation Organization all murdered and bombed military and civilian targets in pursuit of political goals. At the risk of over-simplifying, these were: ending British rule, establishing a Marxist-Leninist state, and creating a Palestinian state, respectively. The goals of 1960s radical youth groups such as the Weather Underground in the U.S. and the Baader-Meinhof gang in Germany were more vague; the overthrow of what they saw as the capitalist, imperialist, fascist countries they lived in; maybe world revolution. But still, terrorism. Today, the Left intentionally makes things appear fuzzier. The 2020 demonstrations, looting, and violence in the wake of the death of George Floyd were not terrorism. We saw plenty of violence, and it was clearly political, but there was not a unified, clearly articulated goal. There was no list of things which the government of Portland, or Minneapolis, or even the federal government could have conceded that would have ended the whole thing and sent everyone home. It was inchoate rage against a vague, “oppressive” system with no specific or achievable policy proposals.   Now let’s look at the recent organized demonstrations against immigration enforcement. In much of the country, ICE is going about its business of enforcing federal law. They are arresting aliens with no right to be here, many of whom have serious criminal charges or convictions. The most crucial assistance ICE needs is for local jurisdictions to honor their “detainers.” This means handing over criminal suspects or convicts, once their criminal process is complete, to ICE for immigration process. In some major jurisdictions that refuse to do this, we see street violence: Los Angeles, Portland, and most of all Minneapolis. There, a dangerous combination of dilatory politicians and trained obstructionists has resulted in two deaths and much injury. In Minneapolis, agitators have been well funded, organized, and trained  to move beyond mere speech and into highly coordinated obstruction to impede immigration enforcement. Holding up signs and speaking is not violence. However, activists have gone way beyond that. They get in the physical space of agents, block operations, set up illegal road blocks, harass officials and private citizens, throw dangerous objects, and intimidate agents through releasing their personal information. Though they demand federal agents be unmasked to reveal their identities, the obstructionists themselves are often fully concealed—like the LA ladies. Much of the conduct we have seen in Minneapolis is not “free speech” protected by the First Amendment. The protesters are not attempting to change anyone’s mind through discourse when they bang on pots at 3 in the morning. They are trying to change policy through physical means. Unfortunately, instead of clamping down on violent and illegal conduct and drawing a clear line as to what is acceptable, local politicians have vilified federal agents and encouraged dangerous activity by civilians. Activists follow ICE agents in their vehicles claiming to be “legal observers,” but they also cross into deliberate obstruction, which puts them at risk. It’s also a felony under federal law: anyone who “forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with” a federal agent can be charged and sentenced to up to 8 years—20 if they hurt an officer. What about real or self-appointed journalists? On January 18, a group of people including ex-CNN personality Don Lemon entered a Minneapolis church, uninvited, during a service. At an agreed point, they broke into protests chants. They reportedly impeded church members from worshipping, moving freely, or exiting the building. Protest leaders berated the pastor and some church members. They did not leave after being clearly told they were not welcome. The agitators were not there to worship, or to debate parishioners on agreed terms. The point was to intimidate, shame, or bully church attendees into agreeing with the protesters’ position. Churches are private property. Yes, many churches welcome strangers, to join them in worship and perhaps join their communities. Other religions follow similar traditions—if you observe their rules, you are welcome to enter their religious sites. But that welcome can be revoked. No one’s right to speak freely trumps another person’s right to private property or to worship God. If it did, then any person could enter another’s house, office, or property and stage a protest without limits. That would be absurd—and dangerous. Though he was obnoxious and unwelcome, Lemon was not violent. He is potentially liable for trespass, which is a local offence. But in woke Minneapolis, the likelihood of prosecutors charging him for that is very low. That’s a bad sign for the Republic. Prosecutors should not choose whom to prosecute based on their own politics, yet increasingly they do. Judges should rule based on the law and how it applies to given facts, not legislate from the bench. Yet, increasingly they do the latter. The Minneapolis church invaders are potentially liable for federal crimes under the Federal Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and even the Ku Klux Klan Act. The Department of Justice seems intent on prosecuting them and they should. The right of people to be secure in their homes and private spaces is one both political parties must support. A federal court will decide if Lemon and others broke the law by attempting to coerce political action through force. While the punishment need not be severe if this is their first offence, we need to lay down a national marker at the limits of acceptable behavior when we disagree with others politically. We cannot allow individuals to force others to accept their views. This is not China—or Iran. The post When Does Protest Become Crime—Or Terrorism? appeared first on The Daily Signal.