Trump Plots Diverting Weapons From Ukraine to Iran to Expand War

It appears that the war on Iran—the one President Trump keeps saying is already over—is so costly that the Pentagon is weighing taking weapons and resources from Ukraine to use in the Middle East.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that the U.S. may divert air defense interceptor missiles specifically from Ukraine while their stockpile depletes—something European leaders have expressed concern over.

“They are really burning through munitions, so there are questions now about how much they will keep providing through the deal,” an anonymous diplomat told the Post.

While this has yet to occur, the fact that shifting weapons is even an option does not inspire any kind of confidence in the successful end of the war in Iran. Thousands of Iranian and Lebanese civilians have been either killed or displaced, the Strait of Hormuz is still closed, and rumors of a boots on the ground initiative grow stronger by the day. Meanwhile, the war and the man who started it are becoming less and less popular. From Ukraine’s perspective, Russia has not eased up in any way on its attacks, and won’t anytime soon. The air defense interceptors will be sorely missed.

President Donald Trump raged against the filibuster and his fellow Republicans Thursday morning.

In a series of posts on Truth Social, Trump urged Republican lawmakers to eliminate the dastardly filibuster once and for all. Republicans have previously fought to maintain the filibuster, which grants significant power to the Senate’s minority, but Trump has repeatedly demanded they get rid of it as part of a deal to end the ongoing partial government shutdown.

Trump shared an op-ed written by Senator Ron Johnson for the Daily Wire in which the Wisconsin Republican argued that he’d seen enough of the dysfunctional Senate to know that they needed a “paradigm shift.”

“In light of the profound dysfunction described above, I’m not sure how things could get much worse by ending the filibuster,” Johnson wrote. It was a half-hearted argument, but clearly, Trump was inspired.

“When is ‘enough, enough’ for our Republican Senators,” Trump wrote in a separate post. “There comes a time when you must do what should have been done a long time ago, and something which the Lunatic Democrats will do on day one, if they ever get the chance.

“TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER, and get our airports, and everything else, moving again. Also, add the complete, all five items, SAVE AMERICA ACT items,” Trump added.

“TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER!” he wrote in another post.

In yet another post, Trump wrote: “Chuck Schumer, a desperate, crippled politician, who has lost control of the Radical Left Democrats, will make a deal now because he thinks that if he doesn’t, Republicans will TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER, something which they should do whether he makes a deal or not!!!”

The Justice Department has reached an agreement to pay President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn about $1.2 million, after he sued the Department of Justice for what he claimed was an unlawful prosecution.

The brief two-page settlement filed Wednesday does not include how much the settlement is worth, or any details of the agreement, but AP and ABC sources report the sum is roughly $1.2 million.  

In 2023, Flynn sued the DOJ for $50 million despite being charged in 2017 with providing false information to the FBI during its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The former army general claimed he was “unlawfully and politically” targeted during the investigation because of his association with Trump. 

Flynn’s own actions say otherwise. In 2017, he admitted to lying to the FBI, and twice pleaded guilty to the charges against him. He withdrew the plea in 2020, however, citing the government’s “vindictiveness” and “bad faith.” 

Along with lying to the FBI, Flynn is known for pleading the Fifth in court when asked if the violence on January 6, 2021, was justified, and if he believes in a peaceful transfer of power. 

Less than a year after Flynn withdrew his guilty plea, Trump quietly granted him clemency. It was one of many astonishingly corrupt pardons that have come to define the president’s time in office, and one that showed that if you commit a felony on his behalf, you’ll likely be protected from all consequences.

As if protection from prosecution wasn’t enough, Flynn will now be compensated with taxpayer dollars for his unwavering loyalty to Trump. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement lied about having the authority to arrest hundreds of lawful asylum-seekers and individuals seeking citizenship at immigration courts.

In a court filing late Tuesday evening, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Oestericher of the Southern District of New York revealed that a memo the government had relied on to support the arrest of hundreds of immigrants appearing at immigration courts “does not and has never authorized” civil immigration enforcement actions at those courts.

The revelation was part of a lawsuit brought by the New York Civil Liberties Union and various other civil rights groups, challenging the government’s practice of dismissing asylum and citizenship cases and snatching law-abiding immigrants en masse at 26 Federal Plaza in New York City, as well as other immigration courts across the country.

The prosecutor wrote that the government would withdraw several briefs that had relied on the memo, as well as certain statements made in oral arguments in federal court in September. Oestreicher wrote that a previous order from U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel would likely need to be “reconsidered and re-briefed.” In September, Castel ruled that ICE could make arrests in courthouses and also made it harder for judges to dismiss cases.

Oestericher claimed that the mistake came from ICE, not the Department of Justice, which has made more than a few immigration law gaffes in the past several months.

“The undersigned were specifically informed by ICE that the 2025 ICE Guidance applied to immigration courthouse arrests. In addition, we discussed with and obtained the approval of assigned ICE counsel before filing every brief in this case and making any oral representations to the Court and Plaintiffs,” Oestericher wrote.

Former New York City comptroller and current congressional candidate Brad Lander, who was brutally detained by ICE in June during his campaign for New York City mayor, while attempting to escort an immigrant out of a courthouse in lower Manhattan, slammed ICE for misleading the courts.

“According to documents filed this morning by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of NY, ICE has been lying for a year—not only to the public, but to the courts and to prosecutors—about being authorized to make arrests at 26 Federal Plaza and other immigration courts,” Lander wrote on X Wednesday.

“This is genuinely a bombshell. All courthouse arrests should cease immediately. There should be a Congressional investigation & civil rights actions for every illegal abduction of immigrants trying to follow the rules and appear in court.”

Republican Senate leaders are attempting to use the budget reconciliation process to force their warmongering and President Trump’s SAVE Act through Congress without any Democratic votes.

“The purpose of the second reconciliation bill is to make sure there is adequate funding to secure our homeland and to support our men and women in the military who are fighting so bravely. More funding will mean they can complete the task assigned and keep America safe—which is money well spent,” Senator Lindsey Graham wrote on X Wednesday morning, referring to the lengthy process in which only 51 votes are needed to pass budget-related legislation. “During President Trump’s second term, the murder rate marked the largest single-year drop in recorded history and illegal border crossings are at the lowest level since the 1970’s. Imagine what will happen when we fully invest in President Trump’s public safety mission. I also think we have many opportunities to improve voter integrity through reconciliation.”

However, many on the right do not agree that reconciliation is a viable way to pass the SAVE Act, which would institute extreme voter ID requirements only months before the midterm elections.

“It’s hard to imagine how the SAVE America Act could be passed through reconciliation,” Senator Mike Lee, a co-sponsor of the SAVE Act, wrote on X Tuesday. “And by ‘hard’ I mean ‘essentially impossible.’

“It can’t pass through budget reconciliation because it’s a policy, it is not budgetary,” Lee continued in a video post Tuesday evening. “Do not be fooled into thinking that we can set down the SAVE Act and just pick it up on budget reconciliation. That’s not going to work.”

Lee is not alone among Republicans in Congress, and other members don’t see the SAVE Act passing through the reconciliation process. Leading Democrats confirmed as such Wednesday on the Senate floor.

“If you want to shove the SAVE Act into reconciliation, then have at it. We’re going to fight you tooth and nail throughout the reconciliation process, every step of the way,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. “You’re going to find it very difficult to jam massive changes to the American election system ... by using a process that was never designed for that purpose.”

Graham also faces criticism for the legislation’s hawkish priorities.

“Just to recap—we couldn’t have a second budget reconciliation bill focused on family affordability because it would cost too much and prove too difficult to get across the finish line,” Patrick T. Brown of the Ethics and Public Policy Center wrote on X Wednesday. “But we *can* have one so long as it focuses on spending $200b on a war we elected to start.”

Amid a rising number of unlawful kidnappings and deportations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, New Jersey has banned all law enforcement officers, including federal immigration agents, from wearing masks.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed a bill Wednesday that prevents officers from concealing their identity while engaging with the public in any official capacity. It also requires agents to identify themselves before making an arrest. (It includes exceptions for officers working undercover.)

It was one of three pieces of legislation signed by Sherrill to protect immigrant rights across the state and push back against Trump’s unlawful immigration agenda, a promise she campaigned on before taking office in January. A nearly identical bill was vetoed by former Governor Bill Murphy in his final day of office.

“As we’ve seen across the country, Donald Trump’s untrained, unaccountable, masked ICE agents are putting people in danger,” Sherrill said in a statement. “That’s why in New Jersey, we are protecting our communities—strengthening our protections, banning ICE agents from wearing masks, and protecting residents’ privacy from federal overreach.”

The bill comes as ICE ramps up violence, kidnappings, and deportations across the country. Following Trump’s orders, federal officers have mostly recently taken to arresting people at airports without identifying themselves, plummeting public approval of the agency to an all-time low. Recent polling from YouGov shows that a record-high 50 percent of Americans either somewhat or strongly support abolishing ICE entirely.

The Trump administration has been harshly critical of mask bans, claiming without justification that they are unconstitutional. In February, a federal judge blocked a similar law passed in California that prevents federal agents from wearing masks.

But Sherrill offers a rare glimmer of hope for those in the Garden State, which is home to one of the highest immigrant populations in the U.S. Along with the mask ban, the Democratic governor also passed legislation that bars health care facilities from requesting a person’s confidential information like their address and immigration status, as well as a bill that limits when local and state law enforcement have to comply with federal immigration enforcement.

“I can’t believe we have to say this, but in the United States of America, we’re not going to tolerate masked, roving militias pretending to be well-trained law enforcement agents,” she said at a bill-signing ceremony Wednesday.

Prominent Republicans are bristling at the Trump administration’s opaque Iran war plans, particularly after a closed-door briefing of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees on Wednesday.

Alabama Representative Mike Rogers, the Republican chair of the House committee, told reporters after the briefing that the Pentagon wasn’t providing sufficient information about its aims in the Middle East.

“We want to know more about what’s going on, what the options are, and why they’re being considered,” Rogers said. “We’re just not getting enough on those questions.”

Rogers added that the Pentagon did not answer general questions about the additional 3,000 troops and over 2,000 Marines that the administration is sending to Iran. There are already roughly 50,000 U.S. troops in the area, despite Trump telling reporters last week that he’s “not putting troops anywhere.”

“We just wanted them to tell us what’s the plan, and we didn’t get any answers,” Rogers said. “I understand they can’t give us—they shouldn’t give us—specific operational details. But generally, we should be able to get more texture than we’re receiving from them.… This is a consistent pattern of tagging the base and saying, ‘We came over and briefed you.’ But they’re not telling us things, substantive things.”

Politico’s Connor O’Brien asked the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Republican Roger Wicker, what he thought of Rogers’s remarks.

“Let me put it this way, I can see why he might have said that,” Wicker replied.

But the always-vocal Nancy Mace was the most furious Republican after the briefing. Mace wrote a number of posts on X criticizing both the war and the government’s unclear objectives.

“Just walked out of a House Armed Services briefing on Iran,” read one post. “Let me repeat: I will not support troops on the ground in Iran, even more so after this briefing.”

Another of Mace’s posts elaborated: “The justifications presented to the American public for the war in Iran were not the same military objectives we were briefed on today in the House Armed Services Committee. This gap is deeply troubling. The longer this war continues, the faster it will lose the support of Congress and the American people.”

The comments are a welcome turn against an illegal, unpopular war. But let’s not forget that all three lawmakers were supportive of Trump’s decision to strike Iran in February.

“History will record this night,” Mace wrote after the first U.S. missiles fell. “America and Israel did not flinch and did not negotiate with darkness.”

The next time White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wants to double down on one of Donald Trump’s dubious claims, she should really consult a dictionary first.

During a press briefing Wednesday, Leavitt was asked about Trump’s comments the day before when he claimed that regime change had been achieved in Iran.

“I mean, has it not?” Leavitt replied, smirking. “Their entire leadership has been killed. And nobody has really seen, or legitimately heard from this alleged new leader. So, wouldn’t you say there has been a change in the regime?”

“There has been a change in the leadership,” the reporter replied.

“There’s been a change in the regime leadership, which is what the president said. So, thank you for confirming he was right,” Leavitt said.

Former national security adviser John Bolton—and everyone else with a high school education—disagrees with that assessment.

“The faces may change, but the ideology remains the same,” Bolton told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Tuesday. “The regime will change when the ayatollahs and the Revolutionary Guard are gone, and we’re not at that point yet, quite obviously. But it’s another way for him to say that we have won the objective and therefore are victorious and can leave.”

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has only consolidated power after the U.S. and Israel launched a series of brutal airstrikes that killed members of the Iranian regime, The Washington Post reported last week.

After Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed earlier this month, his son Mojtaba Khamenei, a hard-line cleric, was tapped to replace him. Trump has claimed that Khamenei is not an acceptable replacement but admitted he would be open to working with another religious leader. His own remarks revealed what was already clear: that his administration has no plan for a postwar Iran.

President Trump claimed on Wednesday that “the public is loving ICE.” In reality, Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s approval ratings are actually the lowest they’ve ever been.

“I am so proud of our ICE Patriots! They were unfairly maligned by the Lunatic Democrats for years, and now, at the Airports, in addition to what they are supposed to be doing, they are helping people with bags, even picking up and cleaning areas. They are so proud to be there!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “The Public is loving ICE, so the Democrats, unwittingly, did us a favor—They are Great American Patriots, they just happen to have much larger, and harder, muscles than most—which is what they’re supposed to have.”

The public is not loving ICE. Recent polling from YouGov shows that a record-high 50 percent of Americans either somewhat or strongly support abolishing the agency entirely.

Opposition to abolishing ICE is now at its lowest levels ever, dropping from 45 to 39 percent since January. The majority of Americans still think of masked men banging down doors and killing Renee Good and Alex Pretti in the street when they think of ICE.

It’s also hard to ignore this strange comment on “larger” and “harder” muscles, something that is clearly more fantasy for Trump than reality.

“Great. Ok @realDonaldTrump, I’m game. Let’s make the November election a referendum on this issue, and ONLY this issue—If you love ICE and love what ICE is doing, vote Republican,” wrote “Never Trump” Republican and former Representative Joe Walsh on X. “If you don’t love ICE and don’t love what ICE is doing, vote Democrat. Simple. I like our odds …”

In a landmark ruling that could affect thousands of future cases, Google and Meta were found liable Wednesday for inducing depression and anxiety in a woman who obsessively used social media as a child. It was the first jury trial in which tech companies were sued over the addictive nature of their social media apps. Google and Meta own the apps YouTube and Instagram, respectively.

The California jury ruled that the companies should award the woman a total of $3 million in damages, with Meta paying 70 percent of the fee.

The plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman identified as Kaley, said she began using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 11. Her lawyers contended that the social media apps were intentionally addicting, and that both companies knew they were creating mental health issues in children. They presented an internal memo from Meta that detailed how 11-year-olds were four times more likely to use Instagram than rival apps. This contradicts Instagram’s own terms, which require users to be at least 13.

Lawyers for Google and Meta argued that their apps were being unfairly blamed for broader mental health problems in adolescents. Both companies are expected to appeal the decision.

The owners of Snapchat and TikTok, two more popular social media apps, reached pretrial settlements with the plaintiff back in January.

The ruling will likely impact roughly 2,000 ongoing lawsuits against social media companies. The suits, filed by parents and school districts around the country, similarly allege that the tech behemoths should be punished for getting children addicted to their services.

This story has been updated.