President Donald Trump said Thursday that retaliatory strikes by
American forces against Iran were just a "love tap" and that the
ceasefire in effect since April 7 remains intact.
The U.S. military said it carried out retaliatory strikes on Iran
earlier Thursday, targeting sites it said were behind attacks on three
Navy warships in what it called unprovoked hostilities by Tehran.
"U.S. forces intercepted unprovoked Iranian attacks and responded
with self-defense strikes as U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyers
transited the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf of Oman," U.S. Central
Command wrote on X.
"Iranian forces launched multiple missiles, drones and small boats as
USS Truxtun, USS Rafael Peralta, and USS Mason transited the
international sea passage. No U.S. assets were struck."
ABC News senior political correspondent Rachel Scott wrote on X that Trump told her during a phone call the retaliatory strikes against Iranian targets were just a "love tap."
Scott wrote that when she asked whether the strikes meant the
ceasefire was over, Trump replied: "No, no, the ceasefire is going. It's
in effect."
In a Truth Social post
later Thursday, Trump said the three destroyers transited the Strait of
Hormuz "very successfully" while under fire and claimed the Iranian
attackers were "completely destroyed."
Iran accused the U.S. on Thursday of violating the ceasefire by targeting two ships in the Strait of Hormuz and attacking civilian areas.
A spokesperson for Iran's Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters said
in a statement reported by state media that the U.S. targeted "an
Iranian oil tanker traveling from Iran's coastal waters near Jask toward
the Strait of Hormuz," as well as another vessel entering the strait
near the Emirati port of Fujairah.
"At the same time, with the cooperation of some regional countries,
they carried out air attacks on civilian areas along the coasts of
Bandar Khamir, Sirik, and Qeshm Island."
CENTCOM said it eliminated inbound threats and targeted Iranian
military facilities responsible for attacking U.S. forces, including
missile and drone launch sites, command-and-control locations, and
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance nodes.
"CENTCOM does not seek escalation but remains positioned and ready to protect American forces," CENTCOM said.
Trump also warned in his Truth Social post that if Iran "doesn't get
their Deal signed, FAST," the U.S. would respond "a lot harder, and a
lot more violently" in the future.
Trump has been pushing Iran to accept a U.S.-backed peace proposal.
"They are led by LUNATICS, and if they had the chance to use a
Nuclear Weapon, they would do it, without question," Trump wrote. "But
they'll never have that opportunity and, just like we knocked them out
again today, we'll knock them out a lot harder, and a lot more
violently, in the future, if they don't get their Deal signed, FAST!"
After the Palisades and Eaton fires in January 2025, a FireAid
concert raised hundreds of millions of dollars that were to go
(allegedly) directly to the victims for rebuilding. We know through
multiple audits and grant documentation that not much of it actually
made its way to those individuals; instead, a significant portion has
been awarded to nonprofits that allegedly were going to then distribute
it to victims or that offered services needed for recovery, such as
mental health resources to assist survivors in healing from the trauma
of those days and grieving what they lost.
So it's really insulting to know that a $1 million FireAid grant to the Los Angeles Parks Foundation
was used to rebuild a playground at the Palisades Recreation Center
featuring a "first responder" theme, complete with a fire truck equipped
with a blaring siren that will undoubtedly bring back horrible memories
for the children and parents for whom that noise was the soundtrack
playing as they ran from the fast-moving flames that day.
The fire
broke out around 10:30 AM on what was, until then, a perfect, if
blustery, California day, so school was in session, and students waited
on playgrounds for their parents to pick them up.
And then many of them were stuck in traffic on Palisades Drive attempting to escape.
It was a day none of them want to remember, but can't forget.
Palisades
fire victim Spencer Pratt, who's now running for Los Angeles mayor,
highlighted the insanity of the theme and demonstrated how loud that
siren is.
Pratt said:
"You wanna see one of the more insane things you could possibly see?
"This
is the Palisades park that didn't burn down, and that the city took
FireAid money to rebuild and redesign in a fire truck, fire station,
fire-themed frickin...like, what? These kids all had to run out of
school, flames coming down at them, crying moms, and now their park that
they have to come back to is just this triggering troll park?
"Watch
this. What? What are they thinking? This is what kids wanna hear after
their town burned down? Let's put sirens in their park? Who are you
people making these decisions? I think you're sick in the head."
Getting
that playground completed was a big deal for Bass, who partnered with
her former opponent Rick Caruso's nonprofit, Steadfast LA, on the
project. Caruso engaged a private firefighting company to save his
shopping center, Palisades Village, so perhaps he doesn't have the same
terrible memories of the fire as those who lost everything.
The nearly 40-year-old playground was slated for renovation before the fire; in July 2024 three themes and accompanying design documents
were presented to the Park Advisory Board for community input and
collaboration: ocean, desert, or forest. At the time of the fire, a
final theme had not yet been decided upon, and the LA Recreation and
Parks Board and the LA Parks Foundation thought it was best to ditch the
three themes for which they already had designs and leave the community
out of the discussion, with the rationale that
"if parents have not weighed in before, to do so now would delay the
project." And the last thing Karen Bass wanted was to have the project
delayed.
Once the playground opened on July 31, 2025 (less than a month behind
schedule - imagine that!) residents started voicing concerns. Local
newspaper Palisadian-Post
ran an informal poll asking whether the theme should be changed, and
nearly 77 percent of respondents said yes. On August 28, Nathan Younker
of GameTime, the vendor that donated the playground equipment, explained
that they could swap out the first responder themed paneling and change
the appearance of the vehicles to create a "Pacific Coast Highway"
theme:
What is “themed” now,
Younker explained, are a fire truck, an ambulance and a fire station
structure, small and midsize rocking toys, and play panels, including a
“police climber.”
“With so many vehicles, we can make use of the
structural elements of the playground and changing the appearance of
vehicles to a [‘peace wagon’-style] bus, a station wagon, a lifeguard
buggy, etc.,” Younker said, which would create a “Pacific Coast Highway”
theme.
Things like the fire station playhouse could be replaced with a “nature discovery playhouse,” Younker said.
Likely
due to the fact that people haven't started to move back to the
Palisades yet, the playground theme hasn't changed. It's just another
reminder of how little Mayor Bass cares about the challenges facing
residents of her city.
Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy has become somewhat of a comedy legend,
at least among conservatives. Liberals, not so much, because he
regularly shreds them with his easy homespun humor and exposes their
hypocrisy with such wicked effectiveness.
Former President Barack Obama and the toxic Stephen Colbert (who’s
somehow supposed to be a comedian?) are anything but funny, and so if
you put them in a room together, what would you get?
Maximum cringe.
That’s
just what happened Tuesday when Barack sat for an interview with the
soon-to-be-jettisoned CBS late-night talk show host. As RedState’s Nick
Arama reported,
Obama, as usual, put on his “I’m a saint and bring peace and unity
wherever I go” act, pretending that he is somehow ascendant and above it
all. Of course, anyone who pays attention to politics knows that it is
and always was a perversion of the truth, and that he remains one of the
most divisive figures in the country. He ended his eight-year run as
commander in chief by leaving behind a nation far more racially polarized than when he took office.
Colbert, of course, acted like a little lap dog, gushing and fawning over Michelle’s husband. He certainly seemed to have ye olde “thrill up the leg.”
But Kennedy wasn’t about to let them get away with it:
Oh
my, this was some good stuff. If Colbert, Jimmy Fallon, or whatever the
other jerk's name is were half this funny, you wouldn’t see shows
losing millions of dollars and tanking in the ratings. What I especially
love about Kennedy is something that GOP LA Mayoral Candidate Spencer Pratt
seems to have quickly mastered, as he proved in Wednesday night’s
debate against incumbent Karen Bass and a wooden democratic socialist:
you can savage your opponents without coming across as venal and nasty.
Kennedy:
I also got a kick out of Mr. Colbert.
He and President Obama are obviously best buds. Maybe they ought to get a motel room or something.
They
were just fawning all over each other. I don't have anything against
Mr. Colbert. I've always thought that he was, he was, um, shallow as a
puddle.
Now, he doesn't believe that. He thinks he's one of the
smartest people on the planet. If you don't take my word for it, ask
him.
His personal vanity has always been unshakable. But his
problem is not his vanity or his intelligence, it's his numbers. He was
losing CBS $40 million a year, 'cause nobody was watching, so CBS told
him to sit his 50-cent ass down. And they said, well, you're fired.
Now
I am a deeply serious, solemn political writer, so I of course didn’t
laugh at any of that. If you did, however, I certainly wouldn’t fault
you.
But Kennedy had bigger targets to hit than a failed far-left extremist
late-night talk show host; he also took the ex-president to task for
piously droning on about the politicization of the Justice Department.
And who made an art form out of that? Kennedy asked. The answer: YOU, Mr. Obama:
🚨 BOOM: Sen. John Kennedy MIC DROPS Hussein Obama whining "the president shouldn't tell the Attorney General who to prosecute!"
"I wish that President Obama had talked to Attorney General MERRICK GARLAND and President Biden about that point!"
"They prosecuted a former president of the United States, then Donald Trump, now President Trump!"
"And
not only was he a former president of the United States, he was a
current candidate for president running against Attorney General
Garland's own BOSS."
Kennedy is the gift that keeps
on giving, not only because he’s funny, but because he has a
deeply-seated sense of how to quickly get to the heart of the matter,
reveal the true failures of progressive policies, and expose the endless
gaslighting by the duplicitous Democrats.
For the past century, the agendas of the Democratic Party were
predictable. They professed concern for working Americans and supported
blue-collar unions.
Unemployment insurance, a 40-hour work week,
disability insurance, and Social Security were their trademarks -- often
rapidly achieved by growing government bureaucracies and continually
raising taxes. Still, many Democrats were socially conservative.
By the 1970s, Democrats still deplored antisemitism. Party officials
had rejected their own segregationists to champion civil rights.
Presidents like Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and John F. Kennedy all supported strong defense and military deterrence.
All that is now passe.
The only vestigial Democrat left in Congress is Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman,
himself roundly despised by Democrat leaders.
Today, supporting Israel and calling for campuses to stop their institutionalized antisemitism is Democratic political suicide.
Forty
years ago, any Democrat with a Nazi tattoo was political toast; today,
he can become the party's nominee for the Maine Senate race.
So,
the current Democrat Party is no longer truly democratic at all. Its new
spirit and methods resemble the radical Jacobin Party of the French
Revolution.
Today, Democrats claim that if any opponent gives a Roman
salute, he is a Nazi -- while insisting that one of their own with a
Nazi tattoo is not.
Jacobinism rejects Martin Luther King Jr.'s
emphasis on the "content of . . . character." It instead prefers
fixating on "the color of . . . skin."
It aims to divide the nation arbitrarily between the noble oppressed and the toxic oppressors.
So
these new Jacobins have institutionalized racially separate college
dorms and graduation ceremonies, along with hiring and promoting on the
basis of race.
The new Jacobins destroyed the southern border and
welcomed in 10-12 million illegal aliens, seen as a future proletariat
constituency. Today's Jacobins would now ridicule Bill Clinton's 1990s
calls for secure borders and an end to illegal immigration as "fascist"
and "racist."
The most recent nihilist developments in American society can be
attributed to these Jacobin "Democrats": biological men competing in
women's sports; critical legal theory that normalizes cashless bail;
race-based reparations; violent felons arrested and back on the street
hours later; radical abortion on demand until birth; attacks on the
concept of the cultural "melting pot"; and opposition to organized
Christianity.
These agendas lack broad majority support. So street
theater and violence focus on Tesla dealerships, ICE officers,
conservative campus speakers, and, at times, any journalists covering
the unrest.
Jacobins make excuses for pro-Hamas campus violence,
which often targets Jewish students. The often violent and corrupt Black
Lives Matter movement was a Jacobin ancillary.
Free speech is
labeled "disinformation" and "misinformation" – synonyms for not toeing
the Jacobin Party line. Until recent pushbacks, near-religious radical
green agendas warred against fossil fuels and cost the working classes
billions of dollars for sky-high fuel and electricity costs.
Like
the Robespierre brothers of old, the most radical Jacobins are so often
to be found among the wealthiest and most privileged Americans. Radical
New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani grew up as a rich Ugandan. Radical,
self-described communist Maine senatorial candidate Graham Platner
attended one of the most elite and expensive prep schools in the United
States.
When avowed socialists Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and
Sen. Bernie Sanders barnstormed the country, they did so via private
jets.
Radical "Squad" member Rep. Ilhan Omar cannot decide whether she is
worth $30 million or nothing. Hard-left California billionaire,
gubernatorial candidate, and radical environmentalist Tom Steyer is a
billionaire who jump-started his fortune by investing in coal plants
overseas and offshoring profits to avoid taxes.
At least 10 states
are drafting laws to tax the net worth, as well as the income, of
"billionaires and millionaires," apparently for their "social" crimes.
Mayor Mamdani taps on the window of philanthropist Ken Griffin as a
warning to get out of town. The mayor of Seattle scoffs at the rich
leaving her state with their billions due to new punitive taxes,
offering a sarcastic "bye."
In the old days, Democrats were
embarrassed by their radicals and distanced themselves from the Weather
Underground, Students for a Democratic Society, and the Black Panthers.
Today, left-wing bomb throwers are the Democrat Party.
Hasan Piker, another multimillionaire, $200,000 Porsche-driving communist, has openly supported "social murder."
So Piker praised Luigi Mangione's targeted murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.
Meanwhile,
Jacobins on social media expressed disappointment that all three
assassination attempts on Donald Trump failed. The arsonist who burned
down Pacific Palisades was a Mangione acolyte and saw his destruction as
a revolutionary act, perhaps a form of mass "social murder."
Jacobin
politicians call for Trump to be "eliminated," label him as a
"fascist," and call for "any means necessary" to end his presidency. The
aim is to lower the social and psychological barrier to violence.
The Jacobin Democrats of today are systematically destroying the legacy of the Democratic Party. And why not?
Their model is not the American Founding, but the radical mandated equality – and violence – of the French Revolution.
Victor
Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American
Greatness. He is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution,
Stanford University, and the author of "The Second World Wars: How the
First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won," from Basic Books. You can
reach him by emailing authorvdh@gmail.com.
We win, you lose, so please be quiet. That’s all.
We don’t need to engage with these people. Tennessee approved a new map
that eliminated the last remaining Democratic seat held by Rep. Steve
Cohen.
The circus was in town yesterday, with leftists shouting that
this move was racist—Cohen is white. The map has been set, so
throw a tantrum all you want, guys. You still lost. State Rep. Todd
Warner did a victory lap, wearing a MAGA flag like a cape and strolling
around the Capitol.
It was total pandemonium. Folks, Tennessee Democrats were calling for secession—just grossly irresponsible and unserious people:
If you’re on the right you’ve seen this playbook a thousand times.
Show
up, raise hell, scream obscenities, blast bullhorns, and generally make
yourself a nuisance as much as possible in the hopes that your
incessant public wailing will intimidate the very people you hate.… https://t.co/MCylVcDE6W
— Christian Heiens 🏛 (@ChristianHeiens) May 7, 2026
If Tennessee’s redistricting is racist, why is it about to elect a Black Republican woman to Congress? pic.twitter.com/xm2ka17uA2
A group of disgruntled former FBI agents have filed a federal
class-action lawsuit alleging that Iowa GOP Senator Chuck Grassley and
high-ranking officials within the FBI, including Director Kash Patel,
engaged in an “improper and retaliatory” campaign to fire career
employees.
The fired plaintiffs, which include agents Michelle Ball, Jamie
Garman, and Blaire Toleman, claim they were purged from the Bureau not
for performance issues, but as retribution for their involvement in
“Arctic Frost,” the investigation into alleged efforts to overturn the
2020 presidential election.
The lawsuit, filed in Washington, D.C., contends that the
terminations were part of a broader “feedback loop” where Grassley’s
office utilized unredacted whistleblower documents to identify and
publicize the names of agents perceived as politically biased,
effectively signaling for their immediate removal.
The legal filings argue that there was a highly coordinated effort
between the Senate Judiciary Committee and the FBI’s Office of
Congressional Affairs. According to the plaintiffs, Senator Grassley
(R-Iowa) — the committee’s chairman — released internal Justice
Department records and unredacted emails that exposed the identities of
street-level agents.
The lawsuit also alleges that shortly after these public disclosures,
Patel and then-Attorney General Pam Bondi moved to terminate the named
individuals — without providing a formal explanation or adhering to
standard disciplinary procedures.
One agent recounted allegedly being summoned to the Washington Field
Office to receive a termination notice on Halloween while preparing to
go trick-or-treating with his children, despite a twenty-year career
“marked by a Medal of Excellence” and “exemplary” performance ratings.
Meanwhile, Grassley has fiercely defended his actions, describing his
role as essential “good government oversight.” In a February 2026 floor
speech, Grassley argued that the records he made public were provided
by “patriotic whistleblowers” and he exposed the political weaponization
of the Biden administration’s FBI.
He also maintained that the agents involved in Arctic Frost and other
investigations into Republican figures had demonstrated clear
partisanship toward the left, and he asserted that making such records
public was his duty to inform the American people.
Grassley dismissed the allegations of improper coordination as
“left-leaning media smears” intended to discredit legitimate oversight
of the Bureau’s leadership. Conversely, the former agents argue that the
criteria for their firing was a “perceived lack of political support”
for the administration, which they claim is a “violation of
Constitutional protections” for federal employees.
By naming these individuals in public letters and reports, the
plaintiffs argue that Senator Grassley bypassed the FBI’s internal
employee protections and “punched all the way down” to target staff.
The class-action suit now seeks reinstatement for the affected agents
and a court declaration that the personnel purge was an unlawful act of
political retribution.
The headlines are blunt: federal agents recently raided dozens of
Minneapolis day-care businesses and the Vice President has added
Columbus to a national fraud task force after a bombshell report about
Medicaid rip-offs. Those moves were sparked by dogged citizen
journalists who knocked on doors and followed the money. Yet instead of
congratulating accountability, many blue-state lawmakers seem more
interested in shuffling deck chairs — and shielding the people who may
have stolen from taxpayers.
Federal raids and new pressure on fraud investigations
The
FBI’s sweep of 22 day-care locations in Minneapolis and the Vice
President JD Vance’s decision to put Columbus on the fraud task force
send a clear message: the federal government is treating welfare and
Medicaid fraud as a real problem. These are not small scuffles.
Independent reporting suggests the schemes could reach into the
billions. When journalists like Nick Shirley and Luke Rosiak knock on
doors, ask questions, and expose patterns, federal investigators often
follow — and that’s how real corruption gets uncovered.
Blue states rushing to shield fraud?
Why this matters for taxpayers and transparency
And
yet, in a twist that would make any law-abiding citizen sigh, several
Democratic-run states are moving in the opposite direction. Instead of
making it easier to catch scammers, some lawmakers are proposing rules
that would make reporting and verification harder — changes that can
bury tips, slow audits, and protect bad actors. Call it compassion for
crooks: new privacy rules, licensing hurdles, and limits on who can
access records all sound noble until you remember whose wallets are
being emptied.
Consequences for accountability and the press
When
you make it tougher for journalists and citizens to investigate, the
only winners are the fraudsters. The losers are taxpayers, honest small
businesses, and families who depend on a fair system. Independent
journalism is often the first alarm bell in fraud cases. If blue states
keep building legal walls around their welfare systems, that bell will
be silenced while the theft continues. That’s not progress — it’s
protection money by another name.
Fix the system — don’t hide it
Lawmakers
who claim to care about the vulnerable should stop defending fraud and
start defending transparency. The federal raids and the Vice President’s
task force show what real enforcement looks like. States should
cooperate with federal investigators, protect sources and
whistleblowers, and make it easier — not harder — for watchdogs to do
their job. If politicians truly want to help low-income families, the
first step is stopping billions from flowing into fake day-care centers
and sham health firms. Anything less is a photo op for compassion, with
taxpayers picking up the bill.
There was a scary scene near the Washington Monument this week when U.S.
Secret Service officers shot a man after he allegedly fired at agents.
The incident happened shortly after the motorcade of Vice President J.D.
Vance passed through the area. Officials say there is no current
evidence the suspect was trying to target the vice president, but the
questions this episode raises about White House security and media hype
are real and worth asking.
What happened near the Washington Monument: facts, not headlines
Plainclothes
Secret Service agents spotted what they called a suspicious man who
appeared to have a gun. Uniformed officers moved in, the man ran, and,
according to Secret Service Deputy Director Matthew Quinn, the man fired
toward officers. The agents returned fire and struck the suspect, who
was taken to a hospital. A juvenile bystander was also hit but suffered
non‑life‑threatening injuries. Law enforcement identified the suspect in
media reports as Michael Marx, and U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro said
prosecutors plan to charge him with assault on a federal officer and
discharging a firearm during a crime of violence.
Don’t let social media turn danger into a conspiracy
Within
minutes, social feeds were treating the shooting like a Hollywood
assassination. Let’s be blunt: speculation is cheap and dangerous.
Deputy Director Matthew Quinn told reporters the motorcade had passed
“not long before” the exchange and that investigators have found no
indication the suspect intended to target Vice President J.D. Vance. If
evidence changes, we’ll see it in charging papers and official
statements. Until then, sensible people should let investigators do
their jobs and leave the conjecture to the clickbait industry.
Legitimate questions for White House security and the Secret Service
Praise
for the officers who stopped a possible violent actor should not end
debate about policy and procedure. This incident comes during a period
of heightened concern about security around the White House complex. The
Secret Service and local police are doing a criminal and administrative
probe, and the country deserves transparency. Release the briefing
transcripts, share the surveillance video that investigators rely on,
and let the internal review evaluate whether procedures worked or need
fixing. We should demand rigorous oversight without making every scare
into a political snipe hunt.
Final take: support the agents, demand the facts
Bottom
line: agents acted to protect the public and officials. That response
deserves support. But support does not mean shutting off scrutiny. The
American people should expect clear answers about motive, timing, and
whether any gaps in White House security need fixing. And the media
should stop treating rumor as front‑page news. We want safety, not
theater — and we want the truth, not a feed full of wild guesses dressed
up as breaking news.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio opened a visit to the Vatican on
Thursday after recent disagreements between President Donald Trump and
Pope Leo XIV over immigration policy and the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran
strained relations with the Holy See.
Rubio, a practicing Catholic, was scheduled to have an audience with
Leo on Thursday, shortly after Trump renewed criticism of the
Chicago-born pope. Leo responded by rejecting Trump’s characterization
of his views on Iran and nuclear weapons and said he was preaching the
biblical message of peace.
Meetings Friday with Premier Giorgia Meloni
and Foreign Minister
Antonio Tajani
also come amid differences over the Iran war. Both
Italian leaders have defended Leo following Trump’s criticisms and have
voiced concerns about the legality of the conflict.
Rubio said this week that the visit had been planned for some time
but acknowledged that “obviously we had some stuff that happened.”
The tensions escalated last month when Trump criticized Leo on social
media over comments about the administration’s immigration policies,
deportations and the Iran war. Leo later said God doesn’t listen to the
prayers of those who wage war.
Later, Trump posted a social media image that critics said appeared
to liken himself to Jesus Christ. The image was later deleted after
backlash. Trump has not apologized to Leo and said he believed the image
portrayed him as a doctor.
Rubio said Trump’s criticisms of Leo were rooted in concerns about
Iran potentially obtaining a nuclear weapon, which he said could
threaten millions of Catholics and other Christians.
Trump “doesn’t understand why anybody — leave aside the pope — the
president and I, for that matter, I think most people, I cannot
understand why anyone would think that it’s a good idea for Iran to ever
have a nuclear weapon,” Rubio told reporters Tuesday at the White
House.
Leo has not said Iran should obtain nuclear weapons, and the Catholic Church has long opposed nuclear weapons.
“The mission of the church is to preach the Gospel, to preach peace.
If someone wants to criticize me for announcing the Gospel, let him do
it with the truth,” Leo said late Tuesday, after Trump again accused him
of being “OK” with Iran having a nuclear weapon.
Leo noted that the Catholic Church has always permitted countries to
act in self-defense and acknowledged the church's “just war” tradition.
But with the advance of the age of nuclear weapons, “the whole
concept of war has to be reevaluated in terms today," he said. “And I
always believe that it’s much better to enter into dialogue than to look
for arms.”
Rubio has frequently responded to questions about Trump’s rhetoric
and foreign policy positions. Trump also has criticized Meloni and other
NATO allies over support for the Iran war and recently announced plans
to withdraw thousands of troops from Germany in the coming months.
Giampiero Gramaglia, former head of the ANSA news agency and its
onetime Washington correspondent, said some Italian observers viewed
Rubio’s visit as an effort to improve relations with the Vatican while
also navigating broader Republican political dynamics ahead of future
elections.
“I doubt Rubio has the role of conciliator for Trump,” he told
Italy's Foreign Press Association. “I have the perception that Rubio’s
mission is more about himself” and his political ambitions as a
prominent Catholic Republican.
The Rev. Antonio Spadaro, undersecretary in the Vatican’s culture
office, said Rubio’s mission wasn’t to “convert” the pope to Trump’s
side. Rather, Washington “has come to acknowledge — implicitly but
legibly — that (Leo’s) voice carries weight in the world that cannot
simply be dismissed.”
“The situation created by President Trump’s remarks required a
high-level, direct intervention, conducted in the proper language of
diplomacy: a semantic corrective to a narrative of frontal conflict with
the church,” he wrote in an essay this week.
Journalist Massimo Franco, writing in the Corriere della Sera
newspaper, said the Vatican’s decision not to cancel the pope’s audience
with Rubio after Trump’s latest criticism reflected its willingness to
maintain dialogue.
But relations with the Meloni government, which faces significant
public opposition in Italy to the Iran war, remain complicated. “Keeping
the alliance with the United States firm while criticizing the
president is showing itself to be increasingly difficult,” Franco wrote
Wednesday.
Farian Sabahi, a professor of contemporary history at the University
of Insubria who is of Iranian descent, said Meloni could face pressure
to more strongly criticize the war because of Italy’s economic ties with
Iran. Italy is the No. 2 European Union trading partner with Iran,
after Germany, working within EU sanctions.
“From a purely opportunistic standpoint, it would actually be
advisable to condemn the Israeli-U.S. aggression precisely to give
Italian companies the opportunity to do business, given that there are
many other players on the international stage ready to enter the Iranian
market,” she said.
Rubio said topics other than the Iran war were on the agenda for the
Vatican visit, including Cuba. The Holy See has expressed concern about
Trump administration statements regarding potential military action
there following its January ouster of Venezuelan President Nicolás
Maduro.
Trump has said frequently that Cuba could be “next” and suggested
that once the war with Iran is over, naval assets deployed in the Middle
East could return to the United States by way of Cuba.
Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants and a longtime Cuba hawk.
“We gave Cuba $6 million of humanitarian aid, but obviously they
won’t let us distribute it," Rubio said. “We distributed it through the
church. We’d like to do more.”
