Posted on 06/23/2025 8:59:55 AM PDT by Red Badger
American Democrats and leftists in general were already divided and uncertain over who to support in the various Middle East conflicts. But when he ordered the bombing of nuclear facilities in Iran, President Trump kicked a proverbial hornets’ nest of progressive outrage – and confusion. Reactions from the left range from wholehearted support to calls for impeachment and accusations of war crimes – and not everyone seems to hold the same position they did just days ago.
Israel vs Iran – Democrats ‘All Over the Map’
Well before the fighting broke out between Israel and Iran, everyone seemed to have an opinion on the “situation” in the Middle East. And, while neither major political party – nor the American population as a whole – is a monolith, one could guess with some degree of accuracy a person’s political affiliation by their position on the issue. Stand with Israel? You’re probably a Republican, or at least something of a conservative. Support Palestine (or even Hamas)? There’s a good chance you voted for Kamala Harris and call yourself progressive.
But one thing that long united most lawmakers and voters regardless of party affiliation was a general dislike for and distrust of the world’s number one state sponsor of terror, Iran. If there’s one statement that most Americans across the political spectrum can agree on, it’s that Iran’s support of terrorism is bad, and that the rogue state achieving nuclear capability would be even worse.
But what happens when two groups you hate go to war against each other? Worse, what happens when your presidential nemesis then takes a side? Ideological chaos, apparently. The cognitive dissonance must be excruciating.
Some prominent Democrats, like outspoken Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), expressed outrage at President Trump’s decision, demanding impeachment. Others, like Reps. Josh Gottheimer, Ritchie Torres, and Jared Moskowitz (all Democrats from New Jersey), said the world is a safer place after Operation Midnight Hammer, even if they also felt Congress should have approve the strikes first.
“It’s all over the map,” Democratic Party strategist Brad Bannon told New York Post. “It’s never a good thing when messaging is all over the map. Democrats have to find a way to unite against Trump’s provocations. The implications are mind-numbing.”
Changing Chuck and More Fetterman Fallout
Some Democratic lawmakers shifted their stance as soon as Trump took action. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was one of the loudest and first congressional voices to denounce the president’s decision to bomb Iran. “No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,” Schumer said. He and others in his party want an immediate vote on a resolution under the War Powers Act to restrain the commander-in-chief.
But it wasn’t that long ago that Schumer was critical of Trump’s calls for diplomacy, suggesting he was taking a much softer approach to Iran’s enrichment of uranium. “If TACO Trump is already folding on Iran, the American people need to know about it,” the New York lawmaker said on X on June 2. “No side deals.” TACO is short for “Trump Always Chickens Out,” though now it’s quite clear he did not, in fact, chicken out, and it seems Schumer doesn’t quite know what to do with the fact that his political archenemy has seemingly taken his advice.
One Senate Democrat who hasn’t changed his stance, however, is John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. Recall how quickly he condemned Hamas for the October 7, 2023, raid into Israel to capture civilian hostages and how he continued to support Israel in that matter even when so many in his party lambasted the Israeli efforts.
“As I’ve long maintained, this was the correct move,” Sen. Fetterman declared on social media shortly after Trump’s Saturday night announcement. “Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I’m grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.”
No doubt he’ll take flak from his more progressive colleagues. But one is once again reminded of his support for Israel against Hamas, flying the Israeli flag from his roof and giving enraged protesters the finger.
Does This Mean War?
As for claims that Trump left Congress in the dark, thus falling short of his War Powers Act responsibility to consult with them, the administration calls them “fake news.” After numerous media outlets claimed top Republicans were consulted but Democrats weren’t, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on X: “The White House made bipartisan courtesy calls to Congressional leadership and spoke to @senSchumer before the strike. @RepJeffries could not be reached until after, but he was briefed. Please retract.”
The War Powers Act requires a president alert Congress before launching hostilities (which the administration claims was done) and report to the legislature at least once every six months after the fact until hostile action ends. It also allows lawmakers to pass a resolution commanding the president to cease hostilities and withdraw American military assets, but with most of the GOP and even some Democrats supporting the strike on Iran, it’s highly unlikely such a resolution would pass.
In any case, the ball is in Iran’s court now, and what will be, will be. President Trump warned that any retaliation would result in far worse than the late-night bombing raid. On the other hand, he also promised that no further attacks are coming if Iran chooses negotiation instead. Schumer’s call for a War Powers Act resolution, then, seems moot.
~ Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.
The US is in no position to enact regime change in Iran. We can’t afford another war, there’s no public support for one, we don’t have sufficient ground troops in place, and Russia & China have suggested that they won’t allow this to happen. It would also be the end of Trump’s presidency if he decides to go that route. I mean this is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he promised during his campaign. It’s like if he came out and said “well deporting all these illegals is too much of a hassle and we will just arrest a few criminal illegals instead”. It’s bait and switch and most of MAGA ain’t falling for it.
In every 80 / 20 situation, Trump takes the 80 position and the Rats automatically, with no thought at all, always take the 20 position. Fantastic. I appreciate the Rats always willing to blindly take the 20 position every single time.
To be fair, he was was insinuating that Putin is “The Boss” of Russia and not Medvedev.
>> Ya know, if I was a Democrat I probably would just support America and call it good
That’s how it was done, “back in the day”. Democrats believed in American exceptionality and stood by her in time of crisis. R and D disagreed about many things, but not about that very important thing.
Democrats (and weak Republicans) since Reagan trashed AIG (”America Is Great”). At their core, they were misguided cowards ashamed of America and they set out to destroy her, some subconsciously, but many, explicitly.
Hence the need and rousing success of MAGA (”Make America Great AGAIN”). Thank you GOD for raising up President Trump “for a time such as this”!
Agreed.
How odd that the anti-gun left wants Iran to have ‘em.
And the Anti-Nuke crowd....................
I think he was also slamming Springsteen, which, fair. But I don’t get all the N-word stuff, that’s not funny.
Do you find a distinction between
1) enacting regime change (boots on ground) and
2) supporting regime change (ie. supporting Israel who clearly wants regime change) ?
Or, dropping flyers advising Iranian support for regime change. Or monetarily, or other means short of troops in country.
If the prison that was bombed results in the jailed freedom-loving revolutionaries who could lead regime change its another genius move by Israel.
Iran poses no danger to the US (or even Israel for that matter). Israel has 300+ nukes. Even if Iran manages to acquire a handful themselves it would be suicidal for Iran to attack Israel with them. Israel basically wants regional hegemony and intends to use the US armed forces to achieve that goal if possible. Russia and China have indicated that they don’t intend to stand idly by if we go to war with Iran. Sorry but I’m not interested in starting WW3 to placate the Israelis.
Salient point!
Do you think that the country that revolutionized the use of suicide vests through their proxies in Hesbollah and Hamas cares about a "suicidal" attack against Israel?
-PJ
I’ve yet to see a mullah in a suicide vest and they are the ones in charge.
They are fine with using their own people as weapons and using their own people as human shields.
I think their leaders believe that they have getaway plans once they launch a successful nuclear attack on Israel, so that they personally won't feel the retaliation, but they don't care what happens to the people of Iran once they attain their ultimate goal.
-PJ
“That would be a very one-sided war.............”
____________________________________________________________
Only the conventional part. Iran has many of its minions still available around the world.
This is also the same thing pro-war people say every single time we get into a war somewhere. It never turns out as tidy as your statement suggests.
Think how much you must hate the President to root for people whose sole goal in life is to kill you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.