"Fanboy Moment": When Shubhanshu Shukla Ran Into Artemis II Crew Member

04/01/26 7:27 PM

Group Captain Shubhanshu Shukla is the only Indian astronaut who has flown on a NASA-linked mission and trained within the American astronaut ecosystem, interacting closely with members of the Artemis II crew.

'I want my vote back!' Disgusted viewers crush MAGA TV network with anti-Trump mail

03/30/26 8:23 PM

Conservative viewers unhappy about the war in Iran overwhelmed the pro-MAGA Real America's Voice network with emails opposing President Donald Trump.During the Human Events show on Monday, host Jack Posobiec spent nearly 10 minutes reading mail from people who had voted for Trump.While a minority supported the war in Iran, the vast majority of viewers expressed concerns about Operation Epic Fury."Cannot dispute the fact that the U.S. and Israel have clearly won this operation," a viewer named Chuck said. "However, if there is a regime change that excludes the Ayatollahs and basically returns Iran to pre-1979, it will have been a loss. We can't continue bombing campaigns every two years, wasting tax dollars."Ted, 78, called the war "a necessary step for the gospel to be presented before the rapture."Many commenters noted that Republicans were in danger of losing midterm elections because of the war. Others pointed out that prices were rising.Read some of the remarks from viewers below."Wasting tax dollars.""Diesel prices are sky high.""Halting our likelihood of success in the midterms.""This war is the stupidest thing ever.""A complete betrayal and flip-flop of the no new wars policy.""A trap that will last months, if not years.""Hate this war.""It is destroying MAGA.""The Dems will win the House.""The worst thing Trump has done.""Hurting the very people that Trump has fought for.""Gas is $4 a gallon.""This economy will tank.""Don't feel this was America first.""Very disappointing.""Not what he promised.""Fearful for our nation's future.""Not happy at all.""Trump has not been true to his word.""We're going to lose the House and Senate.""I voted for Trump, and I want my vote back.""The most infuriating one to two months.""Completely at my wits' end.""The opposite of what I voted for""Unnecessary side quest.""The potential to wreck the trump presidency.""Disgusted by this war.""I'm going independent, but will likely never vote again.""Feel like it's useless.""I'm done voting, period.""A straight con job.""War should be a last resort."

'It was a test': Trump moves against NATO as members 'weren't there for us'

04/01/26 11:21 AM

Donald Trump has suggested he has no interest in continuing with NATO and may even pull the United States out of the intergovernmental organization. The president has done much to anger the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's members this year, strongly implying he would take Greenland by force if necessary. His administration's strikes on Iran last month marked another contentious point for the president and his relationship with NATO, as he called on member nations to back the war. Speaking to The Telegraph, Trump said, “Oh yes, I would say [it’s] beyond reconsideration. I was never swayed by NATO. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and Putin knows that too, by the way."Trump went on to use the war in Ukraine as an example of where he felt the US had been let down by NATO members and other governments. Trump added, "Beyond not being there, it was actually hard to believe. And I didn’t do a big sale. I just said, ‘Hey’, you know, I didn’t insist too much. I just think it should be automatic."We’ve been there automatically, including Ukraine. Ukraine wasn’t our problem. It was a test, and we were there for them, and we would always have been there for them. They weren’t there for us."The president's comments on NATO follow on from Secretary of State Marco Rubio denouncing the intergovernmental organization. In an interview with Hashem Ahelbarra of Al Jazeera, the Donald Trump appointee criticized the NATO alliance for not backing the US war on Iran, and then stated, “I think it was very disappointing. You have this – and again, look, the President and our country will have to reexamine all of this after this operation is over.""But one of the reasons why NATO is beneficial to the United States is it gives us basing rights for contingencies. It allows us to station troops and aircraft and weapons in parts of the world that we wouldn’t normally have bases, and that includes in much of Europe.”

'Look, I don't understand': Tom Homan unable to defend why Trump stalled on TSA pay

03/29/26 2:21 PM

Donald Trump’s border czar, who oversaw the president's demands to deploy ICE agents to the nation’s overwhelmed airports, was at a loss for words on CNN on Sunday morning as to why the president just didn’t pay TSA agents from the start when funding ran out.With the country’s airports in chaos due to TSA no-showing at their jobs since they were not being paid, Tom Homan filled in the gaps to a slight degree with ICE agents pulled from their jobs, rounding up immigrants off the streets to help out overwhelmed TSA agents and harried travelers.On “State of the Union,” host Jake Tapper had to ask Homan twice why Trump didn’t alleviate the problem weeks ago.On his second try, Tapper asked, “But if if President Trump had the power to pay TSA agents this whole time, why only start doing it now?” After a pause, Homan admitted, “Look, I don't understand. Look, I'm a cop, I don't understand the whole, you know, appropriations language, appropriations law. I just, you know, I'm just glad that President Trump is able to pay the TSA agents –– at least that's a start. But again, there's a lot more, many more, thousands more, tens of thousands of more DHS employees who are not being paid that need to be paid.”The CNN host pressed, “Once TSA agents start getting paid, will ICE agents leave the airports?”“We'll see,” the Trump official replied. “You know, it depends how many TSA agents come back to work, how many TSA agents have actually quit and have no plan coming back to work. I'm working very closely with the TSA administrator and the director to decide what airport needs what. But you know, God bless the men and women, right? So they're doing the job, they're plugging those holes or they're keeping the security airport at a high level, again, because of heightened threat.” - YouTube youtu.be

'Lust for violence': Nobel winner 'horrified' as Pentagon drags US into endless quagmire

03/30/26 6:08 PM

Economist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman criticized Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon over their lack of direction and obsession with violence amid the Iran war. In his Substack post, Krugman tore into Hegseth's beliefs of applying further damage to Iran as the war now enters its 30th day and talks swirl of a ground war, which President Donald Trump has not yet ruled out. Krugman was doubtful that 10,000 troops could secure the Persian Gulf or prompt oil tankers to pass through the Strait of Hormuz again. "A month into the war, and now they’re talking about pointless ground action and/or war crimes," Krugman wrote. He pointed to Hegseth's troubling focus on lethality. "In this case, our Secretary of Defense, which is his legal title, although he calls himself the Secretary of War, continually argues that if only we get even more violent, if only we do even more damage, that this will somehow translate into success in Iran," Krugman wrote. "He clearly relishes the thought of violence himself. He’s now holding prayer breakfasts, and in his prayer breakfast, he called upon the Lord to support us in 'overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.'""I think this is deeply un-American, but anyway, aside from the evilness — I don’t think there’s any other way to put it — of the world view, how is this supposed to work?" Krugman asked. "If you look at the plans or ideas that are being bruited for using ground forces now, and that’s clearly very much sort the next step here, for using ground forces against Iran, well, yeah, you can seize Kharg Island, although hanging onto it could be very expensive, but then what?"It's unclear at this point whether negotiations were actually underway — and what the administration's objectives were. "Other presidents have been accused of negotiating with themselves," Krugman wrote. "Trump is negotiating with his imaginary friends. There’s no reason at all to believe that these talks are actually happening. But he then pivots midway through the post, to saying, and if we don’t get this, then we’re going to start bombing civilian power plants and water supplies."Trump's thought process could lead to further harm, the economist argued. "So give us what we want or we’ll commit a massive, massive war crime, which I hope is not going to happen," Krugman wrote. "But even if it did, why would you think this would open up the Strait of Hormuz? So it’s this lust for violence with no actual coherent story about how that violence is going to produce results. It’s horrifying.""I really don’t know how this ends, except that it does feel as if this is a quagmire largely in the minds of top Trump officials, Trump himself and Hegseth, who having this utterly unshakable belief that hurting people will produce great results, respond to each failure of violence to produce results by getting even more destructive with no end game in sight," Krugman added. Pete Hegseth Believes in the Lethality Fairy by Paul Krugman"Overwhelming violence of action" as the solution to all problemsRead on Substack

'No going back' for next president as Trump makes US reversal 'impossible': analyst

03/28/26 11:37 AM

Donald Trump has made life harder for his Oval Office successor with a series of changes that will likely be impossible to undo, an analyst claimed.The president's tough stance on geopolitical relations during his second term has hindered the chance of reconciliation under the 48th President of the United States, Salon writer Mike Lofgren argued. The political analyst suggested that Trump's team was undermining steps taken by previous administrations to improve international relations. Lofgren claims that Trump has pressed the US into a position where there is "no going back to the status quo ante" of previous administrations. Actions taken against Venezuela and Iran, as well as a period of time where the president appeared set on subsuming Greenland into US territory has seemingly worn international relations thin. This, Lofgren suggests, is a point of no return that a future president from either party would struggle to navigate. He wrote, "Yet another future president might have retraced a path toward more balanced economic or security policies once the disadvantages of trade wars or diplomatic and military isolation became obvious."But Trump, in large part through his feral nastiness and adolescent vulgarity, has made that sort of reversal all but impossible. A hypothetical president might have distanced himself from NATO, but it’s inconceivable that he would covet an alliance partner’s territory to the point where that government made plans to blow up the airfields in the coveted territory in case of invasion."Lofgren went on to suggest that longstanding treaties and decades-old friendships between the US and other countries had been ground down slowly, and that Trump had simply sped up the process of a breakdown. "Trump hates reading, as his spotty education and lack of general knowledge testify," Lofgren wrote. "That reflects his profound lack of intellectual curiosity. "He attempts to disguise this deficiency with endless boasting about himself and endless denigration of others. He is obsessed with popular media and showbiz and the shabby values they embody."It is almost certain, to this observer anyway, that after the last hanging chad in Florida, after the rubble of the World Trade Center had cooled, after the first improvised roadside bomb exploded in Iraq, and after Lehman Brothers collapsed, Trump, or someone like him, was inevitable."

'Remarkably vague and impulsive': Tapper obliterates Trump's supposed '4-D chess'

03/30/26 10:03 PM

CNN anchor Jake Tapper questioned President Donald Trump's ultimate game plan in Iran, calling out the president and his administration for mixed messaging. Tapper was responding to Secretary of State Marco Rubio's claims about objectives in the war and what the United States had aimed to achieve in its military strikes that first launched on Feb. 28. Now weeks into the war, Americans were unsure what the actual objectives were following confusing communications over what prompted the military action in the Middle East."If the mission is just as Secretary Rubio noted, the destruction of the air force and the navy and missiles and missile-making capability, it would seem that the U.S. would be close to accomplishing that," Tapper said. "But according to reports in The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, the Trump administration is preparing for more. The Pentagon is preparing for weeks of ground operations in Iran, troops on the ground. President Trump is weighing deploying another 10,000 more ground troops to the Middle East region in general. And they are also considering a complex operation to extract with boots on the ground."Trump hasn't made clear what his next decision will be — and that has left Americans confused, Tapper explained. "Again, one can want a denuclearized and democratic Iran and still wonder if President Trump is kind of making some of this up as he goes along," Tapper said. "One can support President Trump and wonder if he's fully aware of how often wars spiral out of control little by little, with unanticipated responses by the enemy requiring increasing commitment." "President Trump said he would end the Iran war when he, 'feels it in his bones,' when so many lives are on the line. That is a remarkably vague and impulsive metric... Some people believe Trump's constant back and forth is street strategic, four-dimensional chess," Tapper added.

'Shell-shocked' CEOs are done staying quiet as Trump torches their bottom lines: report

03/30/26 6:23 PM

Donald Trump's Iran war is testing the limits of corporate America's tolerance — and the only thing keeping CEOs from publicly attacking the president is fear of retribution, according to Fortune's Diane Brady reporting from CERAWeek in Houston.But that restraint may be ending. As the economic damage mounts, business leaders are signaling they may finally be willing to risk Trump's wrath and speak out against policies they view as catastrophic for their bottom lines.The stakes are becoming impossible to ignore. Economists warn recession odds are now high. Oil prices have surged more than 50 percent. The war is costing U.S. taxpayers approximately $1 billion a day while destroying 10,000 jobs from the economic shockwave alone.Energy sector CEOs are particularly alarmed. At CERAWeek, leaders from Dow and Chevron warned of dire consequences if the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked to shipping. The blockade has forced Asia to scramble for alternative energy sources, while Russia gains little thanks to its own war with Ukraine.Signs of CEO defection are mounting. Chubb CEO Evan Greenberg told Brady that "democracy is so fragile." Citadel's Ken Griffin revealed that he and his CEO peers find the Trump administration's favoritism "extremely distasteful."More than 60 corporate leaders — including CEOs from 3M, Best Buy, Cargill, General Mills, Land O'Lakes, Target, Xcel Energy, and UnitedHealth Group — have already signed a letter of protest against the administration's ICE enforcement actions in Minnesota.One CEO admitted to Brady that they are "shell-shocked" by administration policies but feel constrained by fiduciary duty to avoid putting their companies in Trump's crosshairs by speaking publicly.That calculus could shift dramatically. If the war begins to seriously impact stock prices and corporate profits, business leaders may conclude that the financial damage outweighs the political danger of breaking ranks with the president.

'That is such garbage': Marco Rubio pummeled on MS NOW for NATO threat

03/31/26 11:54 AM

Comments made by Secretary of State Marco Rubio about the future relationship between the US and NATO that hint at a break with the peace-keeping coalition received a thorough –– and critical –– examination on MS NOW early Tuesday morning.In an interview with Hashem Ahelbarra of Al Jazeera, the Donald Trump appointee criticized the NATO alliance for not backing the US war on Iran, and then stated, “I think it was very disappointing. You have this – and again, look, the President and our country will have to reexamine all of this after this operation is over. But one of the reasons why NATO is beneficial to the United States is it gives us basing rights for contingencies. It allows us to station troops and aircraft and weapons in parts of the world that we wouldn’t normally have bases, and that includes in much of Europe.”He later added, “But if NATO is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked but then denying us basic rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement. That’s a hard one to stay engaged in and say this is good for the United States. So all of that is going to have to be reexamined. All of it’s going to have to be reexamined.”After the clip was shown on “Morning Joe,“ co-host Joe Scarborough quickly snapped, “That is such garbage.”“Wait a minute, where is Marco Rubio?” co-host Mika Brzezinski interjected.“That was Marco Rubio attacking NATO,” Scarborough continued. “And it's just a reminder, it's just a reminder that this is also the same guy –– I mean, Jonathan Lemire, this is the same guy that went to Hungary and praised [Viktor] Orban, a guy who is proudly anti-west. He's illiberal, he's an autocrat, he's running in an election for his political life. And Rubio goes there and puts –– I mean, this is a guy who is anti-communist anti-authoritarian for a good reason and now he's completely compromised everything that he believes on these issues.”“Yeah,” Lemire replied. “In fact, new reporting this morning about Hungary's shedding further light on Hungary's close ties with Moscow.”“And let's remember Secretary Rubio's comments there about NATO,” he added. “And I wrote last week, there's real fear in the alliance that President Trump is going to, if not abandon it entirely, but pull back U.S. troop presence in Europe, which of course, would be a gift to Russia." - YouTube youtu.be

'The world is watching': Analyst warns Trump against destroying American Dream ideals

03/28/26 2:19 PM

Donald Trump could be judged harshly by the world if he breaks a promise at the heart of the American Dream, an analyst has claimed. The president and his administration have cracked down hard on immigration in a way that could undermine the "credibility" of the country, Brent McKenzie argued. The Hill columnist considered the crackdown on immigration as a move that could shatter the American Dream in the eyes of the world. "The process might be long and complicated, but immigrants who followed the rules would eventually find opportunity," McKenzie wrote. "The U.S. was not only a place where people could succeed; it also openly welcomed those willing to work, contribute and build a life. Increasingly, people outside the U.S. are beginning to wonder whether that promise still holds."McKenzie went on to argue that the "cultural confidence" of the United States depends on immigration, and that the Trump administration is actively undermining the future of the country. He added, "But recent policy decisions are testing that narrative. When lawful permanent residents are excluded from government programs designed to help small businesses grow, or when people deep in the legal immigration process are suddenly caught in policy pauses and reversals, the message is larger than any single rule."In recent years, that confidence has eroded. Immigration has become a central point of political conflict. Today, immigration is no longer just a policy debate. It has become a cultural and political dividing line. And for people watching from outside the U.S., that shift is impossible to miss."The question facing the U.S. today is not whether immigration policy should evolve. Every country revises its policies over time. The question is whether the larger promise that once defined the American experience still holds."Trump's changes to immigration policy in the US could, McKenzie argues, change the tide in countries across the world. This, he believes, is the reason there is such a close eye on the president. "How the U.S. answers that question will shape not only immigration policy but the country’s place in the world," he wrote. "If the U.S. wants the next generation of innovators, entrepreneurs and builders to continue choosing America, it must do more than defend its borders. "It must also defend the promise that’s drawn them here for generations. The world is watching to see whether that promise still stands."