President Trump’s statement on Iran after the bombing of US military bases made note of their weak response. He thanked them for giving him notice before the bombings. “Iran has officially responded to our Obliteration of their Nuclear Facilities with a very weak response, which we expected, and have very effectively countered. There have been […] The post President Trump Thanked Iran for Giving Notice & Their Weak Response appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Fake Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who votes mostly with the Democrats, said she is open to leaving the GOP if they pick up three seats. Is she a plant? Her claim is that she is motivated only by what is good for Alaska. Murkowski said her problem with switching parties is she doesn’t think the […] The post Republican Sen. Murkowski Is Open to Becoming a Democrat appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to resume quick deportations of certain immigrants to countries other than their own without advance warning. The court lifted an injunction that a federal District Court judge had imposed that blocked the practice. Monday’s order by the Supreme Court will remain in effect as an appeal in the […] The post Supreme Court OKs Deportations to Countries Other Than Their Own appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

A Georgetown University professor expressed his “hope” that Iran would strike an American military base — just one day before it did so. “I’m not an expert, but I assume Iran could still get a bomb easily,” Dr. Jonathan Brown wrote in a since-deleted X post on Sunday. “I hope Iran does some symbolic strike on a base, then everyone stops.” Brown — who serves as Chair of the department of Arabic and Islamic studies and the Alwaleed bin Talal Chair of Islamic Civilization at Georgetown  — went on to lob crude insults at both the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and Reza Pahlavi, the Crown Prince of Iran. President Donald Trump announced late Saturday that the United States struck Iran’s secret, underground nuclear facility with six 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bombs. Iran retaliated on Monday, firing missiles at an American military base in Qatar. There have been no reported injuries. The Daily Wire obtained comments from Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) on the professor’s post in light of the recent attacks on the American military base in Qatar. Ernst said, “Especially after Iranian missiles were launched at American bases, it is disgusting for a professor in our homeland to wish for an attack on our brave servicemembers and call for more harm to Israel.” “Antisemitic campus crazies continue to have a shameful obsession with supporting Iran and its terrorist proxies,” Ernst continued. “Make no mistake — the American people are safer and more secure today because of President Trump’s leadership.” Brown deleted his post and shared an apology after being met with backlash. “I deleted my previous tweet because a lot of people were interpreting it as a call for violence,” Brown said. “That’s not what I intended. I have two immediate family members in the US military who’ve served abroad and wouldn’t want any harm to befall American soldiers… or anyone!” Brown’s father-in-law, Sami Al-Arian, is also a well-known academic and is convicted of aiding a terrorist group. Al-Arian, who was a professor of computer science at the University of South Florida, was sentenced to almost five years in prison for assisting the Palestinian Islamic Jihad in 2006. Al-Arian was subsequently deported to Turkey in 2015.

President Trump’s strike on Iran is a seminal turning point for American foreign policy. For years and years and years, we have been boxed into the idea that every war is the Iraq War. Critics of President Trump — of “Peace through Strength,” going all the way back to World War II, particularly on the Left but now on the horseshoe theory Right as well — have suggested that people who do advocate for American military action liken everything to the lead-up to World War II, to Neville Chamberlain and Munich. They say not everything is World War II. Not every war is the Iraq War. You might notice that the vast bevy of people who keep complaining about President Trump’s strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities keep comparing this to the Iraq War. That’s crazy. These people who keep saying that a one-off strike on a nuclear facility — which is significantly more like killing Osama Bin Laden or killing Qasem Soleimani or killing Anwar al-Awlaki — is somehow more akin to the Iraq War: a full-scale, hundreds of thousands of troops ground invasion of a country in the Middle East, followed by a 20-year effort to rebuild the country and remold the government. You have to be empty-headed to make that comparison. But there is an Iraq War syndrome that has set in the American body politic that suggests that every military action is like the Iraq War. It’s very much like the Vietnam War syndrome that set in after the end of the Vietnam War, when every military action was supposed to be exactly what America did in Vietnam. It took Ronald Reagan breaking the Soviet Union in order for that to begin to end, and it truly ended when George H. W. Bush helped win the first Gulf War. The lesson of Vietnam and Iraq is not: “Military power, or the threat of its use by the United States is bad,” or even worse, “The United States itself is bad,” which is an argument that is being made all the time by the horseshoe theory Left and the horseshoe theory Right. The real lesson here is that victory is a possibility. Victory can be achieved if the commitment is clear and if the goal is defined. President Trump had a goal. He defined that goal. He made a commitment to that goal. And then he pursued an action in pursuit of that goal. WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show The same people who are suggesting that President Trump is wrong to bomb the nuclear facilities are the same people who suggest that the United States was wrong to use the atomic bomb to end World War II, or that America has been historically evil over the course of decades. The Howard Zinn Left and the Tucker Carlson Right shake hands on this particular prospect. But that perspective is wrong. And it is not just wrong, it is a nefariously bad perspective, because it damages America. The world is better off because of American power — properly used. Of course power can be misused; anyone can misuse their power. We’re the most powerful country in the history of the world, with the most powerful military in the history of the world. But — when you use your power properly, you can effectuate good things happening. President Trump is not George W. Bush. He ran against George W. Bush’s foreign policy. President Trump has never engaged in a long-term nation building project, nor will he. He defined this mission specifically. Carlos Barria/Reuters/Bloomberg via Getty Images I do not actually think that the people warning about a “quagmire” are saying something understandable. I think they are saying something dishonest. I think they are lying to you. Israel and the United States are not talking about regime change. When President Trump says that there may be regime change in Iran, he means from the Iranian people. That’s the same thing that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said. Do you think Netanyahu, from a country of 9.7 million people, two million of whom are Arabs and two million of whom are ultra-Orthodox Jews, that tiny country is going to deploy hundreds of thousands of troops to Iran to engage in nation-building? Do you think the United States is going to do that? If Iranians don’t overthrow the regime, that’s their prerogative. But that does not mean that you allow that regime to go nuclear. All of this raises a question. What exactly is the opposition? What is the opposition here? What is the case against the strike on Iran? You can basically make three cases: the constitutional, the pragmatic, and the ideological. I think there are a lot of people who are making the constitutional and pragmatic arguments who secretly want to make the ideological argument. The ideological argument is that America is bad, that when America involves itself in foreign policy, we are doing something evil and immoral, that our enemies, our geopolitical opponents, never have their own philosophy or their own interests. They are always, in every case, driven by American blowback. The only reason people are bad in the world is because America did a bad thing to them, and then those people turn bad. That, of course, is ignorant. It is stupid. It is wrong. Civilizations have different interests. Countries have different interests. Those countries are driven by interests that are not always about America. Iran pursued regional domination in spite of what America was doing, not because America was a threat to Iran. Iran decided that it wanted to obliterate Israel, wanted to wipe Saudi Arabia from the map, and wanted to take control of Yemen, not because of America, but because that is the Iranian goal. Russia is invading Ukraine because that has been their longstanding policy, not because Ukraine was moving in a more pro-American direction. Russia decided it wanted to invade Ukraine because it has been Russian policy since the 1990s to reunify with Ukraine, or at least turn it into a proxy regime. Countries have their own rationales. The ideological case, a Howard Zinn-America-Hating-First case, has been adopted by many on the horseshoe theory Right. Then there are people masquerading as constitutionalists who are interested in the constitutionality of what Trump is doing. This idea that the War Powers Act (War Powers Resolution) somehow prevents the president of the United States from engaging in a one-off strike is absolute sheer nonsense. It is not true. First of all, there’s serious doubt as to whether the War Powers Resolution, passed by Congress in 1973, is even constitutional. It may, in fact, violate the Article II prerogatives of the President of the United States. Article II, Section II of the Constitution says, “The president shall be commander in chief of the army and navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states.” The president is the Commander-In-Chief. Only Congress has the power to declare war under Article I, Section VIII, Clause XI. But did we declare war against Iran? Is there a war against Iran? One-off airstrikes do not mean a full-scale war against a country. They don’t. If that’s true, then we’ve been at war many, many, many, many times since World War II, all across the globe. But that is not what war constitutes. The Supreme Court has said so. The War Powers Resolution states: “In the absence of the declaration of war, the president must report to Congress within 48 hours after introducing U.S. military forces in hostilities, which must end within 60 days unless Congress permits otherwise.” There’s only one problem. Do you think the United States is engaging in 60 days of on-the-ground hostilities with Iran? We barely engaged in 37 hours of hostilities with Iran. Does this amount to a War Powers Resolution violation? Then there are those people “deeply worried” about the pragmatic effect of this, who were not worried a few years ago when President Trump killed Qasem Soleimani, and who didn’t seem particularly worried five minutes ago, before this all happened, when Iran had terror cells throughout the West, but now they’re very, very worried. Iran has been pursuing terror attacks, including an attempted assassination of the current President of the United States, for decades. At this point, they have planted terror cells all throughout the world. If the idea is that planting terror cells buys Iran impunity and Iran can now act with complete impunity all over the globe, pursuing nuclear weapons, and that means you can’t do anything about it, then what is the purpose of American foreign policy? What is the purpose? I’m not saying there isn’t a risk when you take action. I’m saying that the greater risk would be a nuclear-armed Iran with terrorist cells all across the West. That’s the bigger risk. This “pragmatic concern” is, in reality, something else. It is a belief that America’s foreign policy is inherently bad, that America is the nefarious actor in the world. It’s wrong and it’s stupid. President Trump knew exactly what he was doing when he ordered the strike on Iran.  And he was absolutely correct.

The Supreme Court paused an order from a lower court judge preventing the Trump administration from deporting illegal aliens to so-called “third countries” that are willing to accept aliens from other nations. The 6-3 Supreme Court ruling is a victory for the Trump administration, which previously had to allow illegal aliens the opportunity to contest their deportation to nations other than their country of origin. The ruling gives the administration the ability to deport those whose nations of origin are unwilling to accept them, potentially paving the way for thousands of deportations. The decision comes after the Trump administration deported eight violent criminal illegal aliens, including Cuban and Vietnamese nationals, to South Sudan after the African nation agreed to accept them. The illegal aliens’ home nations were not willing to accept the criminals, whose crimes include homicide, kidnapping, and the sexual assault of children. The deportation flight was quickly challenged in court, with one federal judge ruling that the Trump administration must maintain custody of the criminal illegal aliens in case their deportation to the African nation was found to be unlawful, also stating that illegal aliens must be given the opportunity to contest their removal to third countries. The Trump administration called on the Supreme Court to weigh in on the case, while Solicitor General John Sauer asserted that the federal ruling exacerbated the illegal immigration crisis. “The United States is facing a crisis of illegal immigration, in no small part because many aliens most deserving of removal are often the hardest to remove,” Sauer wrote in the appeal. The ruling could also allow the Trump administration to deport one illegal alien, a convicted murderer named Alexander Alfredo Palacios Guevara, who received a special deportation protection preventing him from being sent back to his country of origin. The Salvadoran national, who also has a conviction for sexual abuse and is believed to be a member of the Surenos gang, is expected to be deported to a willing third country.

Ever since Dubai Chocolate appeared on social media, pistachio has become the star of the show. The little green nut is having quite a moment as fans clamor to see if it lives up to the hype. People flock for pistachio-flavored treats, and Shake Shack created a Dubai Chocolate Pistachio Shake that went viral in its Middle Eastern restaurants. In April, they brought the treat to the United States for a limited run, and folks fell in love. But it didn’t last long, leaving fans fiending for a fix. Well, friends, the wait is nearly over. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Shake Shack (@shakeshack) Shake Shack Will Bring The Dubai Chocolate Pistachio Shake Back This Summer Shake Shack shared the exciting news about the Dubai Chocolate Pistachio Shake in a statement obtained by Parade. “As Shake Shack continues to grow globally, we’re always looking for ways to bring exciting, internationally inspired flavors to our menu,” Shake Shack’s director of culinary & commercialization, Jim Frisch, shared. “This shake was originally created for the UAE, inspired by the viral chocolate pistachio trend in Dubai. We used premium ingredients to give it a signature Shack spin, and when we introduced it in New York, LA, and Miami, the response was incredible.” The Dubai Chocolate Pistachio Shake will likely sell out fast, so don’t hesitate if you want one. Due to the premium ingredients, participating Shake Shack locations will be limited to a set number for sale each day. They can only be purchased in the restaurant; no delivery apps allowed. The last time we saw The Dubai Chocolate Pistachio Shake Back stateside, fans went crazy. They shared their excitement on Instagram. “Crashing out, this has to come to Orlando!!” “Clutching my pistachios,” a fan joked. This person had a cautionary tale about the Shake Shack favorite. “I was able to snag one, but like someone else mentioned, the chocolate was melty and didn’t crackle in the cup, all the toppings sunk straight to the bottom, and the shake was sooo melty/liquidy when it was handed to me! I had to toss it in the freezer so it would firm up a little.” This story’s featured image is by Joseph Hendrickson via Shutterstock. The post Shake Shack Is Bringing Back A Cult Favorite Shake This Summer appeared first on InspireMore.

We will not be lectured

'Don't insult me publicly'

'ASSAULTED'