President Donald Trump said Thursday that he would be “involved” in selecting the next leader of Iran following the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a U.S.-Israeli strike.  In an interview with Axios, Trump said Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of the late supreme leader and widely seen as a likely successor, would be “unacceptable.”   “They are wasting their time. Khamenei’s son is a lightweight. I have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy [Rodriguez] in Venezuela,” Trump told Axios on Thursday. “Khamenei’s son is unacceptable to me. We want someone that will bring harmony and peace to Iran.” Trump said that if Iran selects a hardliner like Mojtaba Khamenei, the United States could be back at war with Iran “in five years.” Asked by the New York Times about Trump’s comments, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president wants U.S. input to help avoid repeated conflict.   “The president stated: ‘We want to be involved in the process of choosing the person who is going to lead Iran into the future, so we don’t have to go back every five years and do this again and again,” she said. “Somebody that’s going to be great for the people, great for the country.’” In a separate interview with NBC, Trump said he has a few names in mind for possible leaders and insisted the U.S. military was being careful to ensure those individuals were not killed during the strikes.  “We want to go in and clean out everything,” Trump said. “We want them to have a good leader. We have some people who I think would do a good job.”  Trump acknowledged he had joked about Iranian officials asking him who should be their next leader, a remark he said was “only being a little sarcastic.” Trump administration officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, have repeatedly said the United States military operation is not intended as a nation-building or “regime change war” and is focused on taking out Iranian military capabilities rather than governing the country. Trump also referenced American involvement in Venezuela’s leadership transition, saying he played a role in supporting Delcy Rodriguez after U.S. forces captured dictator Nicolás Maduro.

There are two basic ways to critique any belief system. You can critique it externally, by judging it according to standards it doesn’t accept, or you can judge it internally, by judging it according to standards it does accept. Therefore, an external critique of Islam will judge it according to standards that come from outside its own sources, whether philosophical, historical, or theological, whereas an internal critique will begin from the Quran itself and ask whether Islam can stand on its own terms.  The Islamic Dilemma is this kind of argument. It doesn’t impose Christian assumptions onto Islam. Instead, it begins with what the Quran itself says and follows those claims to their logical conclusion. One of the strongest internal critiques of Islam is what’s commonly called the Islamic Dilemma. When followed carefully, it presents Muslims with a serious problem that can’t be resolved without undermining the authority of Islam itself. The Quran repeatedly affirms that God revealed genuine Scripture before Muhammad, specifically the Torah and the Gospel. It speaks of these writings as guidance and light, given by Allah to earlier prophets. Just as importantly, the Quran commands Jews and Christians to judge by what God revealed in those Scriptures. Nowhere does the Quran clearly or explicitly teach that the Torah or the Gospel were lost, corrupted, or unreliable at the time of Muhammad. The Quran doesn’t merely acknowledge earlier Scripture in passing. Instead, it repeatedly speaks of the Torah and the Gospel as real, authoritative revelations from God that were present and functioning in the world of Muhammad. For example, Surah 5:44 states that “the Torah, in which was guidance and light,” was revealed by Allah and used for judgment. Likewise, Surah 5:46 affirms that Jesus was given the Gospel, “wherein is guidance and light,” confirming what came before it. These verses describe living Scriptures that guide God’s people, not lost or corrupted texts. More striking still, the Quran commands Jews and Christians to judge by these very writings.  Surah 5:47 instructs Christians to “judge by what Allah has revealed in the Gospel.”  Surah 5:68 tells both Jews and Christians that they have no firm standing unless they uphold the Torah and the Gospel.  These commands only make sense if those Scriptures were accessible and trustworthy in the seventh century — when the Quran was written. Finally, Surah 10:94 tells Muhammad himself that if he’s in doubt, he should ask those who read the Scripture before him. That appeal would be meaningless if those Scriptures were already corrupted or unreliable. Taken together, these passages show that the Quran affirms the Torah and the Gospel as genuine revelation, present, readable, and authoritative at the time of Muhammad. This creates a dilemma — with only two possible and mutually exclusive options. Option one: The Torah and Gospel available in the seventh century were trustworthy. If that’s true, then Islam faces a decisive contradiction. The Gospel preached in Muhammad’s time proclaims core Christian doctrines that Islam explicitly denies. It teaches that Jesus is the Son of God, that He was crucified, and that He rose from the dead. The Quran denies all three. So if the Gospel is trustworthy, then the Quran contradicts God’s prior revelation. That would mean the Quran can’t be from God. Option two: The Torah and Gospel were corrupted before Muhammad. This option also collapses Islam. If the Scriptures were corrupted, then Allah either failed to preserve his earlier revelation or allowed his followers to be misled for centuries. Worse still, the Quran commands Christians to judge by the Gospel they possess and appeals to those Scriptures as confirmation of Muhammad’s message. If those texts were already unreliable, then that doesn’t make sense. In that case, the Quran would be affirming and appealing to corrupted documents, which undermines its claim to divine wisdom. Either way, Islam is trapped. It can’t affirm the Bible without contradicting itself, and it can’t deny the Bible without undermining its own authority. Muslims often try to escape this dilemma by claiming that the original Torah and Gospel were pure but later altered. Yet that claim is historically unsupported. We possess New Testament manuscripts that predate Muhammad by hundreds of years, and they teach the same doctrines Christianity teaches today. There’s no evidence of a lost, non-Trinitarian, non-crucified version of the Gospel that Islam could appeal to. That so-called “original Gospel” exists only as a theological escape hatch. The dilemma is therefore decisive. If the Bible is true, Islam is false. And if the Bible is false, then the Quran is false for affirming it. Islam depends on earlier revelation that it can’t consistently affirm or deny. Christianity, by contrast, welcomes scrutiny of its historical claims. It stands or falls on events in history, especially the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If Christ didn’t rise from the dead, then Christianity is false. Islam avoids history by rewriting it centuries later, but in doing so, it contradicts the very Scriptures it claims to respect. The Islamic Dilemma doesn’t merely challenge Islam from the outside. Instead, it exposes an internal incoherence at the heart of its theology. And a revelation that contradicts itself can’t come from God.

With Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) being President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Department of Homeland Security, Mullin’s seat will presumably be vacated soon. Oklahoma Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt will have the opportunity to appoint a replacement until the November general election, since Mullin was already up for reelection this year. “Markwayne Mullin has been a fighter for Oklahoma and will fight to keep our nation secure. There isn’t a better choice to lead the Department of Homeland Security,” Stitt said in a statement on Thursday. Mullin’s nomination was triggered by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem being moved to a special envoy role, as the secretary is currently facing several controversies, The Daily Wire reported. “Oklahoma has been an example to the nation for smart immigration enforcement, and Markwayne will bring that common sense to DHS. I will be looking to appoint a strong, small government conservative voice to support President Trump and protect Oklahomans’ way of life,” he continued. No shortlist of names has emerged as of late Thursday afternoon. Those who want to run for a full six-year term cannot be considered for the appointment, as appointees are legally unable to run for the seat due to state law, NOTUS reported. Reps. Stephanie Bice and Kevin Hern are reportedly considering campaigning for the seat, according to the outlet. Oklahoma is a deep red state with all five congressional seats held by Republicans, including Reps. Josh Brecheen, Frank Lucas, and Tom Cole. The state government is also dominated by Republicans in the top offices, including Lt. Gov Matt Pinnell, Secretary of State Josh Cockroft, and Attorney General Gentner Drummond. As for the general election for the seat, it is currently rated as “Solid Republican” by the Cook Political Report. Trump won the 2024 presidential election in Oklahoma with over 66% of the vote. Trump recently took aim at the Oklahoma governor over a disagreement about a National Governors Association event at the White House, as Stitt chairs the group. When it comes to Mullin, Trump said that he “will work tirelessly to Keep our Border Secure, Stop Migrant Crime, Murderers, and other Criminals from illegally entering our Country, End the Scourge of Illegal Drugs and, MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN.” Many Republicans spoke out in support of the DHS shuffle, including Trump-critic Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who said in a post that the Oklahoma senator will “restore competence” to the department that’s currently facing a lapse in funding. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) also indicated that he will support Mullin’s confirmation.

The following is an edited transcript excerpt of The Michael Knowles Show. * * * A BLM chapter founder has just gone viral for getting into a brawl with his female colleague. Clyde McLemore, the executive director of BLM in Lake County, Illinois, got into a physical altercation with Nyesha Hill. It took place in a hallway, underneath the BLM banner. It’s like it was staged. According to reports, the pair — allegedly, reportedly — clashed after Hill walked into the office and demanded money from McLemore for cigarettes. You can’t make this up. If you turned this script into Hollywood, they’d say it’s too on the nose. She goes into the BLM office, which is supposed to be about social justice and defending the rights of oppressed black people, and she says: “Yeah, give me some of that BLM money. I want to go buy some menthols. I want to go buy some unfiltered Newports.” And he says he’s not going to give her the money. She says this is crazy — you’ve been blowing the BLM money not on social justice or helping people, but on gambling. Then they start punching each other. BREAKING: Black Lives Matter founder in IL, Clyde McLemore caught beating his female employee She accused him of embezzling grants pic.twitter.com/U2Tb8AN0DS — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 3, 2026 Source: @EndWokeness/X.com According to this woman’s report to police, she said, “I told him, ‘It’s not fair that I come here and I work and you running around taking care of other things that don’t got nothing to do with Black Lives Matter with Black Lives Matter money. I’m the one that make this joint work.” She says she makes it work, and he’s running around spending the money on things that have nothing to do with BLM. At least she wants to buy cigarettes. Plenty of black people smoke cigarettes. Come on — she says she makes it work. Now, I guess we’d have to define what “work” is. What work is actually being done here? What does BLM do? Even the national leaders and founders of BLM spent the money buying themselves beautiful homes in Southern California. What is the work here? The work is going out in the streets, protesting, agitating, rioting, in some cases, looting stores, stealing merchandise, and pressuring corporations and government institutions for money. Then the money ends up being used on things like cigarettes or gambling. And in this case, the argument from the woman was that at least the money should go to something like cigarettes rather than gambling. Then there’s the final twist: both of them ended up with lip injuries after punching each other, but neither wanted to press charges. Why? The woman told officers she didn’t want to see a black man go to jail. And people like Mitt Romney marched with these groups at one point. Some people posted black squares on social media or donated money, believing they were supporting a movement for justice. The smart BLM leaders used the money for personal purchases like homes, while local disputes like this one were happening inside chapters.

NASHVILLE—“You go into these positions understanding that your shelf life can be limited and you’re also always walking on eggs. We all work by the grace of somebody.”  That was the response from Errol, a law enforcement officer from New York, minutes after listening to outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem address law enforcement from around the country shortly after she was reassigned by President Donald Trump. At 1:41 p.m., Trump announced on Truth Social that he was moving Noem from head of the Department of Homeland Security to a special envoy for a new security initiative in the Western Hemisphere. He said Noem would be replaced by Oklahoma Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin.  Roughly 25 minutes later, Noem walked onto the stage in a conference room of the Grand Hyatt Hotel off Broadway to talk to law enforcement gathered for the Major Cities Conference organized by the Sergeants Benevolent Association.  During her speech to law enforcement gathered for the Major Cities Conference, Noem spoke for roughly 35 minutes about the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration, efforts to work with local law enforcement, and support for the families of law enforcement officers. She did not discuss her new role or take questions about her replacement at DHS.  “Thank you for all that you do to keep people safe and to hold your oath, to be out in our communities, protecting people from public safety threats, but also being an example to our next generation of Americans,” Noem said. Noem touted the Trump administration’s efforts to crack down on crime in cities like Memphis and its partnership with local law enforcement agencies on immigration enforcement throughout her speech. Noem just left. No questions about Trump reassigning her from being DHS secretary pic.twitter.com/tDEDp7fZlt — Leif Le Mahieu (@leif_lemahieu) March 5, 2026 Noem took a few questions after her speech from several attendees in front of the crowd of attendees and a few who were lined up by the staff. None of those who asked questions mentioned her replacement at DHS. In the minutes leading up to the speech, attendees started buzzing as the news broke. One man walked by the section where the press was delegated to in the back and excitedly asked if reporters had seen Trump’s post.  After the speech, The Daily Wire spoke with multiple attendees from coast to coast. They all praised the Trump administration’s strong support for law enforcement and said they appreciated Noem’s speech.  Joel, a police officer from Milwaukee, said he thought the speech was “very good” and said he thought Noem did a “great job” as head of DHS.  “He’s [Trump] done this with other people. I don’t necessarily think that it means that she didn’t do a good job. I just think Trump likes to shake things up,” he said. “Maybe with everything that’s going on, he just wants someone to get a different voice. I saw that he’s going to move her to another position, so it’s not like he’s firing her like people want to put out there and say, because they want to make her look bad.”  He added that he had a “lot of respect” for Noem and that she still gave the speech despite the news breaking minutes before.  Stephen, from Central California, said he saw the news break and was wondering if Noem would show up for the speech.  “I thought she was doing a good job. You get politics at that highest level, which is kind of the nature of it,” adding that it was “pretty rare” for a cabinet secretary to make it the entire presidency.  Errol from New York said he thought Noem’s speech was “excellent” and said it was nice to hear her speak.  Noem’s tenure as head of DHS comes to an end after a heated Senate hearing, in which Noem blamed Trump for approving questionable contracts worth over $200 million for deportation ads, which raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.