作者： root

Social media believed to be tied to Austin shooter is full of antisemitic, anti-Christian, misogynistic posts

March 3, 2026 / 2:01 PM EST / CBS News

The attacker who gunned down revelers at a bar in Austin, Texas, over the weekend appears to have posted vile antisemitic, anti-Christian and misogynistic posts in the year and a half leading up to the deadly shooting, according to law enforcement sources in Texas. Three people were killed and more than a dozen others wounded in the rampage early Sunday, one day after the U.S. and Israel struck Iran.

The X account investigators believe is linked to the gunman was created in October 2024 and its most recent post is from December.

Last April, when tensions between Israel and Iran were spiking, one post read: “THE ISLAMIC REVOLUTION IS ETERNAL … you Zionist and islamophobes can be angry all you want but you can’t do a damn thing about it no matter what.”

The post was a reply to an April 28 post by the Islamic Republic of Iran’s foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghi, in which he criticized President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The gunman, identified as 53-year-old Ndiaga Diagne, was killed by police in a shootout. Sources familiar with the investigation told CBS News the war in Iran, at least in part, appeared to have been a factor in his attack.

At the time of the shooting, he was wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with a design similar to the Iranian flag and a hoodie that said “Property of Allah.” A Quran was found in the SUV he was driving during the attack, law enforcement sources told CBS News.

Photo at left shows the gunman in the Austin, Texas bar shooting wearing a “Property of Allah” hoodie. At right, a photo obtained by CBS News shows the Iranian flag shirt he was wearing underneath, after he was killed by police. Left: Fox News; Right: Obtained by CBS News

During a search of his Austin apartment on Sunday, investigators found an Islamic Republic of Iran flag and pictures of Iranian regime leaders, according to an official with direct knowledge of the investigation.

Sources familiar with the investigation also said Diagne had a history of mental health issues. In one encounter with police in Texas, officers responded because he was suicidal, according law enforcement sources.

U.S. officials say he was an immigrant from Senegal who came to the U.S. in 2000 and became an American citizen in 2013.

While living in New York, he was sued for severely injuring a woman in a vehicle crash. His response to the lawsuit and its conclusion remain unclear. He was arrested four times between 2001 and 2016, records show. The 2001 arrest, the only one which is unsealed, was for illegally selling sunglasses..

There are multiple social media accounts on several platforms with a username that matches the gunman’s name. This X account, which sources said appears to be linked to the shooter, stood out for its inflammatory posts.

There was a post that referred to President Trump as “A shameless clown,” and another that described Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as “Evil.”

In December, in response to a meme that said, “Women produce babies. What do men produce?,” the account linked to the gunman said: “SPERM and have built everything in this world.”

Many of the posts disparage Christianity, like one calling the religion “fake,” and others using vulgar language for foundational figures in Christianity, including Jesus’ mother Mary.

One post from October said “Muslims worship THE ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD,” in a reply to a post from another X user that said “Muslims and Christians don’t worship the same God.”

Several posts replied to Trump supporter and right-wing influencer Laura Loomer, who has called herself a “proud Islamophobe.” One said, “you and your Israel first acolytes fake Jews know it, so melt down all you want you ugly [b—-].”

Rhona Tarrant, Camilo Montoya-Galvez and Pat Milton contributed to this report.

Kristi Noem says DHS is working with intelligence agencies to identify potential threats

By Stephen Sorace | Fox News

Published March 3, 2026 1:48pm EST

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday said the department is reviewing interviews with some individuals who crossed the border under former President Joe Biden to identify potential threats following the conflict with Iran.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Listen to this article

2 min

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday said the department is reviewing interviews with some individuals who crossed the border under former President Joe Biden to identify potential threats following the conflict with Iran.

Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, questioned Noem during a DHS oversight hearing, asking about the “millions of people” who entered the U.S. under Biden’s “open border policy” and what steps Homeland Security has taken to protect against potential Iranian sleeper cells and related terrorism.

Noem replied that DHS works with intelligence agencies and law enforcement to investigate and find any threats on U.S. soil.

“Not only that, we go back and we are getting some of the individuals in some of the programs that we may have concerns about looking at social media, also going through those interviews that are necessary for some of our programs that the Biden administration abused and perverted under their time there as well,” Noem said.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, testifies during a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Tuesday, March 3, 2026.(AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

“We know that we have many dangerous individuals that came in unvetted, and we are working every single day to find them and to make sure that we’re preventing the next attack and preventing the next crime they may perpetuate against the American people,” the secretary continued.

The comments come after the joint U.S.–Israel strikes on Iran on Saturday morning that officials say targeted Iranian leadership and key military installations.

A map showing the joint U.S.-Israel strikes against Iran, which began on Saturday.(Fox News)

FROM HOSTAGE CRISIS TO ASSASSINATION PLOTS: IRAN’S NEAR HALF-CENTURY WAR ON AMERICANS

The conflict has led American counterterrorism agencies to quietly monitor suspected sleeper cells on U.S. soil, stepping up surveillance amid heightened fears of possible retaliation from Iran-linked operatives or sympathizers, Fox News Digital previously reported.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is sworn in before she testifies during a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Tuesday, March 3, 2026.(AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

The sleeper cell concerns came into full focus over the weekend when authorities say a Senegalese man opened fire at patrons of an Austin, Texas, bar while wearing a sweatshirt that read “Property of Allah.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News also learned Monday that a DHS memo was sent out over the weekend to various law enforcement agencies nationwide warning of potential cyberattacks and lone wolf physical attacks as a result of the U.S.-Israel bombing in Iran.

Fox News Digital’s Amanda Macias and Charles Creitz contributed to this report.

A protester was escorted out of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing after she interrupted Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s opening remarks on Tuesday, shouting “Abolish ICE” and “Kristi Noem, you should be ashamed of yourself!” before being forcibly removed from the room.

“I’m a former FEMA employee,” the heckler said as Noem was slated to begin addressing the panel, adding: “You have disgraced our agency.”

“FEMA employees… should be responding to disasters, not ICE agents,” she said.

The heckler appeared to trip or fall to the ground as she was being escorted from the hearing, as could be seen in video footage of the exchange.

The exchange occurred during a Senate Judiciary Committee DHS oversight hearing — a long-awaited hearing that comes after the fatal January shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by immigration officials.

Congress has for weeks remained deadlocked over how to proceed with fully funding DHS, after Democrats outlined a series of steps the agency would need to take before it would agree to fully fund the agency. Republicans and Noem have warned the shutdown has knockdown effects on myriad federal departments and agencies housed under DHS’s sprawling umbrella — among them, the Secret Service, Transportation Security Administration, FEMA and U.S. Coast Guard.

After the heckler was removed, Noem continued with her opening remarks, unfazed, though she did comment on the general behavior of protesters later on after several groups and individuals were escorted from the room.

“This is what happens when people can’t handle the truth about the border,” Noem said. “We will not be intimidated.”

DHS’ handling of the Minnesota unrest has placed Noem and DHS’ immigration officers under fresh scrutiny in recent months, prompting some Democrats — and two Senate Republicans, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — to call for her resignation.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, previously stressed that lawmakers from across the aisle intend to use Tuesday’s hearing to focus on the violence.

“Let me be clear, one death is too many,” he told Fox News.

“But officers should never be threatened or harmed while enforcing our laws, and there is a clear difference between the conduct protected by the First Amendment and unlawful obstruction,” he added. “From my perspective, I believe immigration enforcement and dignity aren’t mutually exclusive.”

DHS did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for confirmation on the identity of the heckler in question.

Trump admin asked a court to drop court fights against law firms tied to Democrats. Now it’s changing its mind

Updated Mar 3, 2026, 1:43 PM ET | Published Mar 3, 2026, 12:23 PM ET | CNN Politics

By Katelyn Polantz, Kaitlan Collins

The Justice Department has told four large law firms targeted by President Donald Trump that its decision to withdraw from court fights with them is being reversed, according to people familiar with the change on Tuesday morning.

That decision came after the announcement about dropping the cases against the firms drew the ire of Trump and his top aide Stephen Miller, according to a person familiar with the situation.

The reversal appears to re-up Trump’s attempts to try to block the firms from federal government access over their ties to Democrats.

Trump had attempted to use the powers of the presidency to prevent the firms’ lawyers from accessing federal buildings, securing classified information and meeting with federal agencies — all mainstays of Washington-based legal work.

The firms had challenged the executive orders and have so far won in court.

The Justice Department was appealing the judges’ rulings striking down executive orders placed on the four firms — Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr; Perkins Coie; Jenner & Block; and Susman Godfrey — last year.

On Monday night, however, the Trump administration retreated in full, telling the DC US Circuit Court of Appeals it agreed to drop the cases.

Yet the firms were told Tuesday morning the department was changing its mind and filings reflecting the change of plans would be sent to the DC Circuit soon after, people familiar with the plan told CNN.

The Justice Department notified the DC Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday it was withdrawing its willingness to end the fight.

Lawyers for the law firms hit back, however, telling the court, “Under no circumstances should the government’s unexplained about-face provide a basis for an extension of its brief.”

Judges from the circuit haven’t yet responded.

The free speech advocacy group the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression condemned the Justice Department digging in on its executive orders on Tuesday, and capturing the broader concern over the targeting of the firms.

“Today’s reversal is an embarrassment,” Will Creeley, FIRE’s legal director, said. “Like we said yesterday: This is the president going after his political opponents, a plain and simple violation of our nation’s commitment to justice and individual rights. That’s still true 24 hours later.”

On Monday night, all four law firms issued lengthy statements celebrating their wins.

They also reiterated their opposition to the administration as part of a broader effort to protect the rule of law, and noted four federal judges in DC had called the restrictions that the Trump administration tried to place on the firms’ Washington lawyers unconstitutional.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment Tuesday.

Trump vs Big Law

---

The administration’s fight to change the business approach of major law firms has included some of the most shocking attempts at retribution by Trump for his own past legal issues.

The firms that had faced executive orders were singled out by the White House as being in opposition to Trump himself or national security threats.

Each of the firms, Trump said, had employed lawyers who had investigated or opposed him, especially in the special counsel investigation of Robert Mueller after the 2016 election and after the 2020 election.

The executive orders were part of a larger pressure campaign the Trump White House waged against several large and well-known law firms with dozens of prominent lawyers.

Many were threatened with the loss of security clearances for its lawyers, blocked access to federal buildings and canceled meetings with executive branch agencies that the firms had on behalf of their clients, which are largely corporations. Those points of access to the federal government are all mainstays of Washington-based legal work.

Some — including Perkins Coie, which had sued to fight the executive order — made clear Trump’s opposition to a firm was an existential threat. Perkins Coie had long represented the Democratic Party and years ago backed a now-discredited dossier on Russian ties to the 2016 Trump campaign.

The firms argued that the executive orders, if they had survived in court challenges, had the potential to zap the firms’ client bases, force out business-generating partners and potentially shudder the businesses.

The four firms that sued had one thing in common: well-known work in Washington, especially in litigation.

Yet other national law firms under threat of similar Trump executive orders cut deals with the administration to stave off punishing executive orders.

Many agreed to change their approach to the clients they would take, especially by shifting the political leanings in the pro bono work they were willing to do, from liberal causes to more conservative ones.

Several prominent firms, including Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and Kirkland & Ellis, became known as “the capitulating firms” across the industry, after publicly announcing deals with the Trump administration.

Susman Godfrey’s statement Monday night hinting at this dynamic, saying “The Government has capitulated, which is a fitting end to its plainly unconstitutional attack.”

Boris Epshteyn, an outside adviser to Trump, who previously negotiated with several law firms that cut deals, flew with the president on Air Force One on Sunday from Palm Beach to Washington, DC.

Ephsteyn’s involvement in the deals has recently prompted inquiries on Capitol Hill from Democrats, which could continue for months, especially now with the reversal on the appeals.

Statements from the law firms Monday cheered what they believed were unequivocal wins. Some of the firms said Tuesday morning they would continue to defend themselves in court.

“Of course we defended ourselves when the President sought to punish and intimidate us because of the clients we represent and the values we hold,” the firm Susman Godfrey said in its statement Monday night.

Susman Godfrey had sued Trump contacts and Fox News after the 2020 election on behalf of the voting machine company Dominion. The Fox News defamation lawsuit resulted in a landmark settlement where the right-wing media outlet agreed to pay $787 million.

The four firms that chose to sue had to quickly recast themselves last year as adversaries to the administration, rather than continuing to hold themselves out as the types of firms with insider ties to the executive branch.

“The government’s decision to dismiss its appeal is clearly the right one,” Wilmer Hale, the largest of the four firms, said in a statement Monday night.

The firm had employed members of Mueller’s office that investigated Trump. “As we said from the outset, our challenge to the unlawful Executive Order was about defending our clients’ constitutional right to retain the counsel of their choosing and defending the rule of law. We are pleased these foundational principles were vindicated,” Wilmer Hale’s statement said.

Jenner & Block, a Chicago-founded firm with large Washington regulatory and litigation practices and a former partner who had worked on the Mueller investigation, noted in a statement on Monday that four different judges in DC’s district court ruled the executive orders unconstitutional.

Though the executive orders haven’t survived in court, they have widely curtailed large American law firms’ willingness to oppose the administration and represent progressive causes publicly.

Effects on small firms

---

Top Justice Department lawyers from the Biden and Obama administrations, for instance, have also found more difficulty in landing or staying at large law firms, as would be typical after prior administration changeovers in Washington, with some starting their own small white collar firms instead.

Despite the approach to the large law firms, the Justice Department has been unwavering in court seeking the ability to pull the security clearance of lawyer Mark Zaid, who runs a small self-named firm and regularly represents government whistleblowers. Zaid won a case at the lower court in DC challenging a Trump executive action targeting him, but the Justice Department appealed.

Zaid, noting the Justice Department dropping the cases against the four larger law firms, said on Monday, “My role is no different. I’m a lawyer representing clients yet I’ve been targeted for just doing my job protecting the rule of law.”

Zaid’s case still is set to be heard by the DC Circuit in the coming weeks.

“No president is permitted to broadly target or punish groups without appropriate due process, even under the guise of national security,” Zaid’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement on Monday.

This story has been updated with additional details.

Last year, small US firms faced notable tariff price pressures, Fed report finds

March 3, 2026 4:05 PM UTC / Reuters

By Michael S. Derby

节点运行失败

A large number of empty workstations fill the wire shop area at Pathfinder Manufacturing, near Boeing’s Everett widebody jet plant, at a factory in Everett, Washington, U.S., September 25, 2024. REUTERS/David Ryder/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

• Summary

• Tariffs and inflation increased costs for small businesses in 2025
• Retail and manufacturing firms most affected by tariff-related costs
• AI adoption rising among small firms, boosting productivity without job loss

March 3 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s regime of ​large-scale tax increases on imports as well as generalized inflation gains created headwinds for U.S. ‌small businesses last year, a Federal Reserve report released on Tuesday said.

“The most common challenge” faced by these smaller firms in 2025 was the rising cost of goods, services and wages, the 12 regional Fed banks collectively said as part of the 2025 ​Small Business Credit Survey.

The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.

More than four-in-10 firms in the poll said “that increased costs associated with tariffs were ​a financial challenge,” with retail and manufacturing firms feeling that pressure most acutely. Among ⁠firms facing higher costs related to the president’s tax increases, 76% of respondents passed on some of the ​higher costs and 60% absorbed some of the expense.

“Nearly half of firms said they source at least some inputs ​from outside the United States, and a large majority of those firms reported that foreign inputs increased in price from 2024 to 2025,” the report said.

Firms did not on balance respond to the higher costs by changing suppliers or moving activity back inside ​U.S. borders.

Trump’s tariff system was a notable driver of inflation in 2025, with Fed officials attributing much of ​the overshoot of their 2% target last year to the tax hikes. Most Fed officials expect the impact of the tariffs ‌to fade ⁠this year.

The Trump administration has repeatedly argued that tariffs are borne by foreigners, and are designed to both bring industry back to American shores while creating revenues for the government. The tariffs also have been repeatedly used as a coercive foreign policy tool.

Recent reports from the New York Fed and the Congressional Budget Office have both found ​that contrary to the president’s ​view on tariffs, they ⁠are almost entirely borne by those inside U.S. borders. The outlook for the tariff system has been clouded by a Supreme Court ruling that Trump’s sweeping levies exceeded his ​authority, although Trump followed that decision with the imposition of even more tariffs on goods ​coming into ⁠the U.S.

The regional Fed report also looked at usage of artificial intelligence technology by small firms last year and found rising adoption and little job market displacement.

Just shy of half of small firms are using AI and 15% plan to ⁠add ​it to their operation in the next year, the report said. The ​Fed survey said the main use for AI so far is writing and marketing followed by individual productivity.

AI did not change labor costs ​but it did enhance productivity for many firms, the report said.

Reporting by Michael S. Derby; Editing by Andrea Ricci

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Trump Iran military strikes get mixed approval from Americans in new polls | Fox News

By Paul Steinhauser | Fox News

Published March 3, 2026 11:30am EST

The findings of two new national polls conducted in the hours after President Donald Trump launched strikes on Iran are clear — only a minority of Americans approve of the operation and Democrats and Republicans don’t see eye to eye over the attacks.

Twenty-seven percent of those questioned in a Reuters/Ipsos national survey conducted Saturday and Sunday after the start of “Operation Epic Fury” by American and Israeli forces on Iran that resulted in the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said they approved of the strikes.

A plurality, 43%, said they disapproved, with nearly three in 10 not sure.

There were similar findings in a CNN poll conducted by SSRS that was also in the field this past weekend.

Fifty-nine percent of Americans surveyed in the poll said they disapproved of the initial decision to strike Iran, with 41% giving a thumbs up.

As expected, there’s a wide divide between Democrats and Republicans.

Republicans questioned in the Reuters/Ipsos poll, by a 55%-32% margin, were supportive of the military action. The vast majority of Democrats, 73%, disapproved of the strikes, with only 7% saying they approved. A plurality of independents, 44%, disapproved of the military attack, with 19% supportive and nearly four in 10 unsure.

The partisan gap was even wider in the CNN poll.

More than three-quarters of Republican respondents, 77%, approved, compared to 32% of independents and 18% of Democrats.

According to the CNN poll, 83% of Republicans said Trump has a clear plan for handling the attacks on Iran, while 70% of independents and 88% of Democrats disagreed.

Overall, six in 10 said they don’t think the president has a clear plan for dealing with the situation, and 62% said Trump should get congressional approval before any further military action.

Both polls were conducted before the U.S. military announced on Sunday the first U.S. casualties in the operation — six service members killed.

The joint U.S.-Israeli assault on Iran is now in its fourth day as of Tuesday, with Trump saying the plan is ahead of schedule thanks to the early elimination of Iran’s top leaders.

Trump has said Iran is seeking talks with the U.S. as the military operations continue, but the president indicated he believes the opportunity for negotiations has passed.

The U.S. has urged Americans to leave 14 countries across the Middle East as Iran’s counterattacks intensify. The U.S. State Department has also closed embassies in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile, the Gulf Cooperation Council warned Iran it will take “all necessary measures,” including possible military action, in response to Tehran’s missile and drone attacks.

Paul Steinhauser is a politics reporter based in the swing state of New Hampshire. He covers the campaign trail from coast to coast.

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6390312505112
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6390319401112

What tonight’s Texas Senate primaries could mean for the Senate majority in 2027 | CNN Politics

By Dana Bash, CNN
Published 2:02 PM EST, Tue March 3, 2026

Texas voters go to the polls today to select the Democratic and Republican nominees for Senate. CNN’s Dana Bash and the “Inside Politics” panel break down the fascinating, close races on both sides and explain the stakes for the midterms.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/03/politics/video/inside-politics-texas-senate-race

Why strike Iran now? Inside the Trump administration’s shifting reasons. | CNN Politics

Published 1:13 PM EST, Tue March 3, 2026 / CNN

President Trump said the U.S. “forced Israel’s hand” to attack Iran just one day after Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Iran was going to “come after” the U.S. if “Israel attacked them”. CNN’s David Chalian tells the Inside Politics panel, “in the Oval Office, Donald Trump is course correcting here.”

2:55 • Source: CNN

Anthropic’s Claude AI being used in Iran war by U.S. military, sources say

March 3, 2026 / 1:04 PM EST / CBS News

Two sources familiar with the U.S. military’s use of artificial intelligence confirm that the U.S. used Anthropic’s Claude AI model over weekend for the attack on Iran — and is still using it.

The Pentagon has not said exactly how the AI tool is being deployed, but it’s being used despite a government-wide ban on the technology after a dispute last week with the Pentagon. The conflict centered around Anthropic’s push for guardrails that would explicitly prevent the military from using Claude to conduct mass surveillance on Americans or to power fully autonomous weapons.

The Pentagon demanded the ability to use Claude for “all lawful purposes” and contended that Anthropic’s usage concerns were not material because it’s already illegal for the Pentagon to conduct mass surveillance of Americans, and internal policies restrict the military from using fully autonomous weapons.

And beyond those laws, “At some level, you have to trust your military to do the right thing,” the Pentagon’s chief technology officer, Emil Michael, said in an interview with CBS News Friday.

Anthropic CEO DarioAmodei told CBS News that Anthropic had sought to draw “red lines” in the government’s use of its technology because “we believe that crossing those lines is contrary to American values, and we wanted to stand up for American values.”

“Disagreeing with the government is the most American thing in the world,” Amodei said. “And we are patriots. In everything we have done here, we have stood up for the values of this country.”

President Trump announced Friday that he’s ordering federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s technology, allowing them six months to phase it out, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has declared the company a supply chain risk.

National security news site Defense One, citing multiple sources familiar with the DoD’s spat with Anthropic, reported it could take three months or longer for the Pentagon to replace Claude’s capabilities with another AI platform.

Pentagon chief technology officer Michael told CBS News the Defense Department uses Claude for synthesizing documents and making logistics and supply chains more efficient, among other tasks.

Jennifer Jacobs and Jo Ling Kent contributed to this report.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/anthropic-ceo-says-conflict-with-government-is-about-standing-up-for-whats-right/

Trump once warned ‘lives will be wasted’ in Iran war. Now he’s leading one

Updated Mar 3, 2026, 2:29 PM ET | Published Mar 3, 2026, 2:29 PM ET | By Andrew Kaczynski

In this handout image, US President Donald Trump oversees “Operation Epic Fury” with, from left, Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles at Mar-a-Lago on February 28, 2026 in Palm Beach, Florida.

Daniel Torok/White House/Handout/Getty Images

As US forces carry out bombing operations inside Iran, President Donald Trump and several of his top national security officials are now presiding over a war they once warned would be costly, destabilizing and against American interests.

More than a decade ago, Trump repeatedly (and wrongly) predicted that then-President Barack Obama would start a war with Iran for political benefit — warning that “lives will be wasted for no reason.”

Throughout 2011 and 2012, Trump returned again and again to the idea that a confrontation with Iran would be politically motivated, strategically unnecessary and likely lead to US casualties.

He was not alone. Several of his current top national security officials previously voiced opposition to the idea of US military action against Iran. Vice President J.D. Vance, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent have each been sharply critical of the kind of campaign the administration has now launched.

Their past skepticism underscored a broader theme that has defined Trump’s political rise and which has been a key pillar of his MAGA movement for more than a decade: promises to avoid what Trump and his allies have described as “endless” or “stupid” wars in the Middle East and beyond.

US President Donald Trump speaks at the Port of Corpus Christi on February 27, 2026 in Corpus Christi, Texas. Trump visited Texas to deliver remarks on affordability and economic issues less than a week before the state’s midterm primary elections on March 3rd.

Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images

Despite campaigning on a promise to avoid “endless wars” and costly foreign interventions, Trump’s two terms have seen a series of military operations abroad — including the 2020 assassination of Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani, strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2025, and the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicholas Maduro earlier this year.

His open-ended war with Iran is by far the largest military operation he has initiated and the one that most directly contradicts his past rhetoric against US intervention abroad.

Anna Kelly, a spokesperson for the White House, said President Trump’s stance on stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon has been consistently shared by his predecessors in the White House. Kelly also provided an on-record statement from press secretary Karoline Leavitt.

“President Trump’s courageous decision to launch Operation Epic Fury is grounded in a truth that presidents for nearly 50 years have been talking about, but no president had the courage to confront: Iran poses a direct and imminent threat to the United States of America and our troops in the Middle East. The rogue Iranian Regime under the evil hand of the Ayatollah has killed and maimed thousands of American citizens and soldiers over the years – and that ends with President Trump.”

Smoke plumes rise following missile strikes in Tehran on March 1, 2026.

Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images

‘He’ll start a war’

As the Trump-Vance ticket campaigned in 2024, Vance brushed aside criticism of Trump’s combative style, arguing that while his rhetoric was provocative, his actions were less combative and more peaceful.

“Mean tweets and world peace has a pretty nice ring to it,” Vance said.

That anti-interventionalist message was central to Trump’s own rhetoric even before his first campaign for the presidency.

“I say that he starts a war in Iran before the election, which will make it very hard for the Republican to win,” Trump said of then-President Barack Obama in January 2012 on the Sean Hannity radio program. “He’ll start a war, you know, lives will be wasted for no reason.”

The 2012 comment from Trump, who was then making early forays into conservative politics with appearances at CPAC and on Fox News, prompted Hannity to call the notion of bombing Iran “the most chilling abuse of power, is what you’re describing, in American history.”

“Yeah, I think it’s going to happen,” Trump responded. “There’ll be some kind of a war started. Instead of working it out, which you can do very easily. And not from weakness, hey look, you know, it’s called be a tough negotiator. You have a lot of strength. But you know, rather than doing that, I predict that he will start some kind of a war/ skirmish or conflict.”

Trump offered no evidence for his prediction, and there was no public indication the Obama administration was planning a war with Iran. No such conflict ever occurred during Obama’s presidency.

Hannity now says past American presidents “didn’t have the political courage” to attack Iran.

The Trump administration has confirmed that at least six US service members have been killed and several others seriously wounded during the operations,

Trump, speaking in a video address on Sunday, acknowledged the casualties and warned that more US deaths were likely as the campaign continues.

Graves are being prepared for the victims following an Israeli strike on a school in Minab, Iran, on March 2, 2026.

Iranian Foreign Media Department/Wana News Agency/Reuters

In 2011 and 2012, Trump returned repeatedly to the baseless claim that Obama would start a war with Iran.

“I think that he would do it. I do believe he will do it, whether he does it under the guise of Israel or not, but I do believe he would do it,” Trump said in another interview with Fox Host Jeannine Pirro in April 2012 about war with Iran.

In a 2011 video blog that has since been deleted, he said: “Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He’s weak, and he’s ineffective. So the only way he figures that he’s going to get reelected — as sure as you’re sitting there — is to start a war with Iran.”

Speaking on “The Laura Ingraham Show” in April 2012, Trump again forecast conflict.

“I happen to think that the president is going to start a war with Iran,” Trump said. “I think it’ll be a short-term popular thing to do. And I think he’s going to do that for political reasons.”

A person holds a picture of Iran’s deceased supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as people mourn in Tehran, on Sunday.

Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images

Other administration officials critical of Iran strikes

In 2024, then-Senator Vance argued that such a conflict would not serve American interests and would drain US resources.

“Our interest I think very much is in not going to war with Iran,” Vance said in an interview with comedian Tim Dillon in October 2024. “It would be a huge distraction of resources it would be massively expensive to our country.

“I don’t want America to be the policeman of the world,” he added.

In photographs released by the White House, Vance and Gabbard were seated in the Situation Room as the strikes unfolded — part of the team monitoring and coordinating the operation.

This photo provided by the White House, which has been partially blurred, shows Vice President JD Vance listening with Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in the White House Situation Room during Operation Epic Fury on Saturday, February 28.

The White House/Handout/AP

Gabbard, who now serves as Director of National Intelligence, built much of her political identity on vehement opposition to US wars of intervention — including against Iran.

As a Democratic candidate for Congress in 2018, Gabbard, an Iraq War veteran, warned that, “Every dollar spent on interventionist regime-change wars is a dollar not spent on education, health care, infrastructure and a myriad of other needs so desperately needed right here at home.”

Gabbard maintained her anti-interventionalist stances as a congresswoman, telling Fox News in 2019, “Currently, Iran does not pose a direct threat to the United States.”

After the 2020 killing of Soleimani, Gabbard, by then a presidential candidate, warned the strike would push the US toward a catastrophic conflict and called for an immediate end to escalation.

She posted “No War With Iran” across her social media platforms and sold merchandise bearing the slogan, including T-shirts emblazoned with the words “NO WAR WITH IRAN.”

“War with Iran would make Iraq/Afghanistan wars seem like a picnic. #StandWIthTulsi #NoWarWithIran,” she said in a Jan. 7, 2020 tweet linking to a Fox News appearance that month.

“It will be far more costly in lives, American lives, and American taxpayer dollars,” she said.

A missile launched from Iran is pictured in the sky from the Bureij camp for Palestinian refugees in the central Gaza Strip on March 1, 2026.

Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images

Last year, before the US bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities, Gabbard drew Trump’s ire over a video she posted warning that the world is “closer to the brink of nuclear annihilation than ever before.” As CNN reported at the time, Trump viewed the video as a thinly veiled criticism of his consideration to allow Israel to strike Iran.

Not unlike Gabbard, Joe Kent entered politics by staking out a staunchly anti-war stance.

Kent, a former Green Beret, said he turned to politics after witnessing “the failures of the government establishment keeping us at war in the Middle East” and watching officials “lie about regime-change wars.”

In interviews, he railed against the “military industrial complex” and argued that Washington had trapped the country in “endless wars” disconnected from the national interest.

“Let’s not start a new war with Iran,” Kent said in 2021 radio interview in which he also praised Trump.