Trump's dumb blondes - Ingraham and Kelly - don't like the way their idol Trump is running the Iran war into a monumental debacle.
==============================================
Megyn Kelly Worries Everything Trump Built ‘Will Be Ruined’ If Iran War Continues | Video
"We cannot send five to 17,000 troops into Iran and ever win a Republican election again for the next 10 to 20 years," the host adds
On Friday’s episode of “The Megyn Kelly Show,” the host fretted over the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. Kelly lamented that Trump’s poll numbers continue to plummet with each passing day as those who are not ride or die MAGA grow increasingly annoyed at the U.S.’ involvement with Iran. Per Kelly, Trump’s struggles to find allies to help safeguard the Strait of Hormuz only shows how dire things are becoming for the president.
“We seem to have a new goal in ending this war, which is, we need to open the Strait of Hormuz,” Kelly said. “You mean the strait that was open before we began the bombing campaign? It was open. There was no problem with the Strait of Hormuz. It was fine. The reason it’s closed is because we decided to start a war, and this is the only thing these guys can control, and they know it, and they’re doing it rather effectively.”
Kelly added that despite Trump trying to guilt and persuade NATO and other allies to help defend the Strait, it is not working. The president’s doubling down on the war is continuing to tank his numbers — and talk of a major ground invasion is only making them fall further. It’s gotten so bad Kelly worries the Republicans could struggle for years.
“We cannot send five to 17,000 troops into Iran and ever win a Republican election again for the next 10 to 20 years,” she said. “He cannot do that. Everything he built, the entire coalition we were all part of, will be ruined.”
Kelly has been a vocal opponent of the newest war with Iran from the very beginning. The first show she did after the attacks at the beginning of March called out the operation and, despite being a prominent Trump supporter, she’s stayed adamant that the war remains a bad idea.
“My own feeling is no one should have to die for a foreign country. I don’t think those four service members died for the United States. I think they died for Iran or for Israel,” Kelly said at the time. “I understand how this helps Iran perfectly well. They seem rather jubilant, 80% of the country does not support the Ayatollah. He was a terrible, terrible man. No one is crying that he’s dead, no normal person, but our government’s job is not to look out for Iran or for Israel. It’s to look out for us. And this feels very much to me like it is clearly Israel’s war. Mark Levin wanted it, it’s his war, Ben Shapiro, Lindsey Graham, Miriam Adelson, that’s obvious. They’re the ones who have been pushing us into this.”
===============================================
Fox News Host Predicts Iran Awakening for Trump
Leigh Kimmins
Fri, March 27, 2026 at 1:42 PM GMT+2
Fox News host Laura Ingraham is apparently nudging President Trump to wrap up his messy conflict in the Middle East.
Trump, 79, launched the war on Feb. 28 on the promise that U.S. involvement in the region would only last a few weeks, though a quick exit began to seem increasingly unlikely amid a flurry of contradictory claims about negotiations to end the conflict.
The impasse has left the global economy in a state of flux, as calls for clarity from both sides of the political fault line in the U.S. grow louder. Polling suggests that the war has eroded Trump’s favorability, and, with the midterms approaching, Fox News star Laura Ingraham has suggested that Trump will soon retreat from the region.
Laura Ingraham/X [She thinks Trump's brain is normal. Alas, it's more like The Young Franskenstein's monster's brain: Abnormal]
“At some point soon, Pres. Trump will decide that he’s spent enough political capital on this conflict,” she said on X.
Her skepticism marks a departure from the usual White House line her Fox News colleagues dole out. Ingraham regularly shares her unabashed take on the war, despite her network’s clear pro-Trump slant.
On her show, The Ingraham Angle, on Wednesday, she said the Trump administration is getting drawn further into the quagmire of war.
“Iran knows it cannot win militarily, so it’s using the leverage it has by prolonging the conflict,” she said. “Now, what do they want to do? They want to inflict maximum economic pain on the region, on the U.S., [on] the global economy as much as possible until they think Trump relents. But the White House doesn’t seem to be blinking.”
The host played a clip of White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt cautioning during her briefing that “President Trump does not bluff, and he is prepared to unleash hell.”
Ingraham appeared unconvinced by the warning.
“Well, the problem is obviously unleashing hell means destroying infrastructure, which itself causes a series of cascading problems for the region, including maybe outside the region—political problems for the president in a midterm election year,” she said.
Trump, for his part, has repeatedly suggested the war is won. However, reports suggest he is plotting to send 10,000 additional ground troops to the Middle East. Also, after oil jumped to its highest level this week, and the S&P 500 had its biggest daily decline since January, he said he would extend a deadline for negotiations by 10 days.
The extension follows a warning last Saturday when he threatened to strike Iranian power plants “one by one” if the regime did not open up the Strait of Hormuz, a strategically important shipping lane that connects Gulf energy to the rest of the world.
As Ingraham suggested, Iran is using the narrow passage as leverage in negotiations.
Iran has effectively blocked the Strait of Hormuz and is using it as leverage. / JONATHAN WALTER / AFP via Getty Images
Earlier this month, Ingraham grilled Trump’s hand-picked energy secretary, Chris Wright, on the issue. “So, Mr Secretary, three ships near the strait were hit by projectiles over the past 24 hours. What now?” she asked.
Wright immediately danced away from the question, instead launching into White House talking points about Iran’s history of hostage-taking, terrorism, and regional destabilization.
Ingraham wasn’t having it.
“Well, Mr Secretary, we know that,” she interjected. “But, I’m sorry to interrupt. Yeah, well, I said that in the Angle, I couldn’t agree more. And we understand that history. It’s murderous. But what now?”
She went on to try to preempt any more evasive answers as Wright continued to dodge. “We will end their ability to impede traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, and ships will flow again,” he eventually spluttered, offering no specifics.
=================================================
Ignore the bombast – the Iran war is only likely to end one way
Analysis by Nick Paton Walsh, CNN
Fri, March 27, 2026
Strip away the bombast and superlatives. Let the apocalyptic, threat-laden deadlines slide. The dynamics of President Donald Trump’s war on Iran suggest it is likely to end with a whimper not a bang.
Trump has stumbled into the trap of many presidents before him: the illusion of a swiftly executed military operation, bringing enduring political change. But war and peace is never that binary. And as Trump gives his negotiators more time to make headway, the stage is increasingly set for the vague greyness that usually ends conflicts, to limp this one to a close: talks.
Wartime leaders tend to speak in absolutes, and Trump has been keen to exude many. But his most grandiose ambitions for Iran will likely stay out of reach. He cannot guarantee Iran will never have a nuclear weapon – just heavily degrade and delay their chances of doing so. Similarly, he cannot permanently alter an Iranian missile program that was rebuilt quickly after the damage of Israel’s 12-day war last year.
Likewise, Iran will not get the guarantee it seeks of all hostilities ending, forever, and its desire for reparations seems remote outside of possible sanctions relief.
And Israel will not be able to “disarm” Hezbollah – its spoken goal at the start of the conflict, but elusive for decades, as the group remains a stubbornly resilient political and military force in Lebanon. Indeed, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday the goal was to “fundamentally change” the situation in Lebanon – an arguably reduced aim. The conflict between Israel and Hezbollah never truly stopped, and may continue to- perhaps at a lower ebb, with Lebanese lands occupied as leverage - regardless of Trump’s war in Iran.
As Trump’s deadline for a deal vaults over this weekend into the next, unsettled stock markets close, and reports of new, madcap US military options proliferate, the Middle East is still dealing with the same set of problems it had when the war began.
Iran’s brutal regime retains a solid grip in Tehran, in Iraq through proxies, and in Lebanese society through Hezbollah. Little violence has been able to dislodge Iran as – to some Shia – a sponsor or protector of sorts.
It is a role Iran loses through political and economic change, not through 2000 lb. bombs and targeted assassinations.
In Lebanon, a shift in dynamics has occurred, where the Lebanese government now openly shares – in terminology at least - Israel’s goal of “disarming” Hezbollah. But they lack the means, and the Iranian backed militants retain the very “monopoly of force” the government seeks to take from them. It is much easier to declare a policy than enact it.
Trump’s diplomatic approach is chaotic and relies on forging a reality that may – or may not – actually gain traction with the facts on the ground. But the current leadership vacuum inside Tehran helps. Iran does not speak with a singular public voice, allowing Trump to try and speak for it.
Iranian state media seemed to reject a reported US 15-point proposal, that the White House later added was not entirely accurate. Given we do not publicly know what the United States’ true red lines or demands are, or what Iran is willing to concede privately, Trump can pluck ideas from the ether and construct a diplomatic triumph of his own liking.
Provided the violence ebbs in some form, energy markets calm, and the Strait of Hormuz opens up enough, Trump can, and will, claim a win.
Despite Iran’s remarkably ferocious response across the region – attacking neighbors like Oman who days earlier mediated between Tehran and Washington - weeks of intense airstrikes against its cities and military has not magically left it a hundred feet tall. It has lost one Supreme Leader, has another yet to emerge in public, and has seen its top brass decimated. An end to hostilities now is vastly in its favor, provided it comes with some sense of deterrent intact.
The United States is also slowly lacking good military options. Its military has bombed 10,000 targets, but the first thousand were likely more valuable than the tenth. The Pentagon is sending a relatively tiny number of Marines and other troops to the region – enough to make a small-scale military operation viable, but nothing like the volume needed for any sort of serious land incursion, or perhaps even the much discussed seizing of Kharg Island or Iran’s enriched uranium. Both options would be prohibitively perilous, even before they had been telegraphed for over a week.
Trump preferred Thursday to speak of the war in the past tense, as “not the big one.” He prefers to call it an operation. He has long searched for an off-ramp, while polishing his veneer of invincibility and military might. But his reality mirrors that of Tehran: neither can blink first, nor hide the damage this month of violence has done to it and its allies.
Both sides need this to stop, and the seminal role information plays in warfare – tightly policed, the propaganda stakes fought over as much today as land and concrete itself – helps both sides define the reality in which they make a deal.
Trump is little bothered by the constraints reality places on what he declares. It is unlikely that will change in the fog of his first war, where arguably truth was never enough of a consideration to be the first casualty.
Diplomacy doesn’t have to yield absolute victory, or “unconditional surrender,” just enough of a slowdown to let the avaricious news cycle move on.
For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com
No comments:
Post a Comment