Tuesday, July 21, 2026

Iran moved thousands of uranium centrifuges into fortified Pickaxe Mountain - WSJ - Idan Kweller

 

by Idan Kweller

The movement of nuclear equipment deep inside Pickaxe Mountain increases concerns that Tehran is working to ensure continued production of uranium enrichment.

 

A satellite view shows vehicles at an entrance to Pickaxe Mountain tunnels, of the of the Natanz nuclear facility, near Natanz, Iran, June 21, 2026.
A satellite view shows vehicles at an entrance to Pickaxe Mountain tunnels, of the of the Natanz nuclear facility, near Natanz, Iran, June 21, 2026.
(photo credit: VANTOR/HANDOUT VIA REUTERS)

 

Iran transferred thousands of uranium enrichment centrifuges to underground facilities deep inside Natanz's Pickaxe Mountain last fall, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday, citing Israeli and US officials.

The centrifuges were transferred to the mountain following the 12-day war in June 2025.

During the war, American and Israeli strikes pummeled three of Iran’s main nuclear sites, in an operation the US called "Midnight Hammer."

US and Israeli officials noted that the transfer of sensitive equipment inside the mountain increases concerns that Tehran is working to ensure continued uranium enrichment, even in the event of a large-scale military attack on its soil.

Pickaxe Mountain is located south of the Natanz nuclear complex, the site of two of Iran’s uranium enrichment plants bombed in June 2025.

A satellite view shows tunnel entrances at Pickaxe Mountain, of the Natanz nuclear facility, near Natanz, Iran, June 30, 2026.
A satellite view shows tunnel entrances at Pickaxe Mountain, of the Natanz nuclear facility, near Natanz, Iran, June 30, 2026. (credit: VANTOR/HANDOUT VIA REUTERS)

The tunnel facility under construction at Pickaxe Mountain wasn't targeted in either of the wars, according to the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), a US-based think-tank focused on nuclear non-proliferation.

Satellite imagery shows that the complex was carved to a depth of more than 100 meters below bedrock, making it deeper and more fortified than the Fordow enrichment facility, a highly fortified, underground uranium enrichment facility.

Reaching depths in a mountain is a complex task

Reaching these depths is considered a complex task, even for the most advanced bunker-penetrating bombs in the US arsenal.

Tehran claimed that the site is intended solely as a factory for the production and assembly of advanced centrifuges, not as an active enrichment facility. Iranian authorities, however, are preventing International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors from entering the site.

IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi demanded that Iran provide answers regarding its activities at the site. However, Iran failed to give answers that would allow the Iranian statements to be verified or the presence of nuclear material inside the mountain to be ruled out.

The relative immunity afforded by the rock's depth has made the site one of the main targets in the confrontation with the United States.

US President Donald Trump threatened to eliminate the site, adding that his administration was closely monitoring activity surrounding the tunnel’s entrances. 

Reuters contributed to this report.  


Idan Kweller 

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-903128?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=July212026

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The United Nations Has Run Out of Alibis - Pierre Rehov

 

by Pierre Rehov

The pattern is old: during the oil-for-food scandal, a mid-level program director faced US prosecution while the officials who managed the program from above kept their positions. When UN failures surface, line staff absorb the exposure. The people who set the policy rarely do.

 

  • For the United Nations, voting patterns, internal investigations and its own decisions this year no longer support the fiction of neutrality. An UNRWA school in Gaza sat above a Hamas tunnel shaft and three anti-tank positions, and its own principal was on the payroll of both institutions at once -- a fact that American investigators, not the UN, brought to light.

  • The pattern is old: during the oil-for-food scandal, a mid-level program director faced US prosecution while the officials who managed the program from above kept their positions. When UN failures surface, line staff absorb the exposure. The people who set the policy rarely do.

  • The arithmetic alone dismantles the pretense of balance. In 2025 the UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted 15 resolutions targeting Israel, and only 11 addressing the rest of the planet combined -- a tally covering North Korea, Iran, Myanmar, Russia and the United States together. From 2015 through 2024, the total reached 173 resolutions against Israel, compared to 80 for all other member states combined.

  • On November 20, 2025, the UNGA's Fourth Committee passed six resolutions condemning Israel while producing not a single resolution on Sudan, where fighting has killed more than 150,000 people and driven 12 million from their homes. The bloc that commands the UNGA's automatic majority sets these priorities; the scale of actual human suffering has nothing to do with it.

  • The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) supplies the starkest illustration. After October 7, the agency's own internal review found that nine employees may have taken part in the massacre -- a figure American investigators have since made look negligible.

  • "The USAID Office of Inspector General (USAID OIG), a statutorily independent law enforcement and oversight entity, has referred for suspension/debarment consideration the names of 101 current or former staff at the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) for participation in the October 7, 2023, terrorist attacks and/or affiliation with the military wing (al-Qassam Brigades) of Hamas. Among the individuals referred were UNRWA school principals, teachers, security personnel, attendants, psychosocial counselors, and medical professionals..." — USAID, June 5, 2026.

  • Groups tracking UNRWA's personnel put the true scale of Hamas penetration considerably higher, closer to 1,500 employees still drawing a UN salary.

  • [T]he "Board of Peace," the body now overseeing Gaza's postwar administration, announced that UNRWA "has no place in the new Gaza" and described continued dependence on the agency as an obstacle to recovery rather than a form of relief.

  • The UN's largest financial scandal, the oil-for-food program, saw then Iraqi President Saddam Hussein extract $1.8 billion in kickbacks starting in 1996, with help from more than 2,000 companies... The program's own director was later indicted in the United States for bribery; senior UN officials mostly walked away untouched.

  • Sexual exploitation by peacekeepers followed an identical script, with nearly 2,000 allegations accumulated over 12 years and only a fraction of the accused ever serving prison time.

  • The historical ledger is worse than the bureaucratic one. In 1994, UN representatives and peacekeepers watched as more than 800,000 people were murdered in Rwanda over roughly 100 days, while its own commander in the field begged for reinforcements and was refused.

  • Rwanda, Bosnia, Haiti and Gaza share the same organizational reflex: investigate quietly, discipline the lowest-ranking staff available, and leave the people who set policy in place.

  • UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the Security Council after October 7 that the Hamas attacks "did not happen in a vacuum," a formulation he has since echoed on UNRWA's failures -- careful language built to avoid naming the agency's own culpability.

  • The United Nations was founded to make atrocities costly for those who commit or enable them. It has instead built a machine that absorbs those costs internally, so long as the people responsible sit inside the institution or represent the states that control its votes.

  • The record speaks plainly enough on its own. What remains open is how much longer the rest of the world intends to keep paying for it.

An UNRWA school in Gaza sat above a Hamas tunnel shaft and three anti-tank positions, and its own principal was on the payroll of both institutions at once -- a fact that American investigators, not the UN, brought to light. Pictured: Israeli soldiers inspect the entrance to a Hamas terror tunnel directly outside an UNRWA compound in Gaza City, on February 8, 2024. (Photo by Jack Guez/AFP via Getty Images)

Institutions built to prevent atrocities eventually face the question of what they actually protect. For the United Nations, voting patterns, internal investigations and its own decisions this year no longer support the fiction of neutrality. An UNRWA school in Gaza sat above a Hamas tunnel shaft and three anti-tank positions, and its own principal was on the payroll of both institutions at once -- a fact that American investigators, not the UN, brought to light.

The pattern is old: during the oil-for-food scandal, a mid-level program director faced US prosecution while the officials who managed the program from above kept their positions. When UN failures surface, line staff absorb the exposure. The people who set the policy rarely do.

The arithmetic alone dismantles the pretense of balance. In 2025 the UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted 15 resolutions targeting Israel, and only 11 addressing the rest of the planet combined -- a tally covering North Korea, Iran, Myanmar, Russia and the United States together. From 2015 through 2024, the total reached 173 resolutions against Israel, compared to 80 for all other member states combined. The UN Human Rights Council has run comparable numbers since 2006, adopting 112 resolutions against Israel compared to 45 against Syria, despite a civil war there that killed hundreds of thousands.

On November 20, 2025, the UNGA's Fourth Committee passed six resolutions condemning Israel while producing not a single resolution on Sudan, where fighting has killed more than 150,000 people and driven 12 million from their homes. The bloc that commands the UNGA's automatic majority sets these priorities; the scale of actual human suffering has nothing to do with it.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) supplies the starkest illustration. After October 7, the agency's own internal review found that nine employees may have taken part in the massacre -- a figure that American investigators have since made look negligible. According to USAID:

"The USAID Office of Inspector General (USAID OIG), a statutorily independent law enforcement and oversight entity, has referred for suspension/debarment consideration the names of 101 current or former staff at the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) for participation in the October 7, 2023, terrorist attacks and/or affiliation with the military wing (al-Qassam Brigades) of Hamas. Among the individuals referred were UNRWA school principals, teachers, security personnel, attendants, psychosocial counselors, and medical professionals, including:

  • A deputy school principal serving as an al-Qassam deputy company commander in the Ain Gallout/5th infantry battalion.
  • A deputy school principal serving as squad leader for the Khan Younis Brigade/2nd infantry battalion.
  • A teacher serving as squad leader in Hamas' military security department/intelligence unit who tracked assignment of explosive devices.
  • A teacher serving as a platoon commander of the Central Brigade/Al Quds 2nd Battalion.
  • A math & computer teacher with ties to an al-Qassam intelligence squad.
  • A teacher with expertise as a sniper for Hamas.
  • A teacher and Hamas soldier with orders to bring two anti-tank missiles to a prescribed location during the October 7 terror attacks.
  • A deputy school principal serving as a platoon commander in Hamas' Nuseirat battalion with communications responsibilities on October 7th.
  • A school principal assigned to the chemical department of a Hamas military manufacturing unit whose school had three anti-tank positions and a tunnel shaft located under the facility."

One of those referred, Hafez Mousa Mohammed Mousa, coordinated with fellow operatives during the October 7 massacre while running an UNRWA school, and became the first person affiliated with a UN humanitarian agency ever debarred by the US government for terrorism. Under mounting pressure, UNRWA itself dismissed 70 staff linked to terrorist organizations in Gaza in the weeks before the referral was published, an admission that followed the release of evidence rather than the agency's own vetting. Groups tracking UNRWA's personnel put the true scale of Hamas penetration considerably higher, closer to 1,500 employees still drawing a UN salary.

The reckoning caught up with the agency in public on July 1, 2026, when the "Board of Peace," the body now overseeing Gaza's postwar administration, announced that UNRWA "has no place in the new Gaza" and described continued dependence on the agency as an obstacle to recovery rather than a form of relief.

Washington's ambassador for UN reform, Jeff Bartos, told the annual pledging conference the same day that member states funding UNRWA had spent years choosing incitement, terrorism and stagnation over an alternative, and warned that history would remember the choice. Within hours, the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League rejected the announcement and insisted that UNRWA's mandate cannot be dissolved by an administrative statement.

Whatever the outcome of this dispute, an institution long marketed as irreplaceable is being dismantled in real time by the very coalition managing the territory it was built to serve.

This state of affairs is not new behavior wearing new language. The UN's largest financial scandal, the oil-for-food program, saw then Iraqi President Saddam Hussein extract $1.8 billion in kickbacks starting in 1996, with help from more than 2,000 companies, while the Volcker inquiry found that weak UN oversight and Security Council paralysis had made the scheme possible. The program's own director was later indicted in the United States for bribery; senior UN officials mostly walked away untouched.

UN peacekeeping missions have produced a smaller, steadier version of the same pattern: a procurement task force documented more than $630 million in tainted contracts and two dozen confirmed corruption schemes, only to be shut down in 2008 after member states with implicated nationals refused to renew its mandate.

Sexual exploitation by peacekeepers followed an identical script, with nearly 2,000 allegations accumulated over 12 years and only a fraction of the accused ever serving prison time.

The historical ledger is worse than the bureaucratic one. In 1994, UN representatives and peacekeepers watched as more than 800,000 people were murdered in Rwanda over roughly 100 days, while its own commander in the field begged for reinforcements and was refused. A year later, the UN declared the Bosnian town of Srebrenica a protected zone, then denied the air support its peacekeepers requested as 8,000 men and boys were murdered under the UN flag. In Haiti, UN peacekeepers introduced cholera into a country that had been free of the disease for a century; nearly 10,000 people died before the organization admitted any responsibility --- six years after the outbreak began. The zero-tolerance policies announced afterward changed little about how missions were run or how misconduct was punished.

Rwanda, Bosnia, Haiti and Gaza share the same organizational reflex: investigate quietly, discipline the lowest-ranking staff available, and leave the people who set policy in place.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the Security Council after October 7 that the Hamas attacks "did not happen in a vacuum," a formulation he has since echoed on UNRWA's failures -- careful language built to avoid naming the agency's own culpability.

The United Nations was founded to make atrocities costly for those who commit or enable them. It has instead built a machine that absorbs those costs internally, so long as the people responsible sit inside the institution or represent the states that control its votes.

Even the coalition now running Gaza's transition has concluded that one of the UN's flagship agencies does not belong there. This verdict came from the "Board of Peace," the body tasked with cleaning up what the war left behind -- not from Jerusalem or from Washington's harshest critics of the UN. The record speaks plainly enough on its own. What remains open is how much longer the rest of the world intends to keep paying for it.


Pierre Rehov, who holds a law degree from Paris-Assas, is a French reporter, novelist and documentary filmmaker. He is the author of six novels, including "Beyond Red Lines", "The Third Testament" and "Red Eden", translated from French. His latest essay on the aftermath of the October 7 massacre " 7 octobre - La riposte " became a bestseller in France. As a filmmaker, he has produced and directed 17 documentaries, many photographed at high risk in Middle Eastern war zones, and focusing on terrorism, media bias, and the persecution of Christians. His latest documentary, "Pogrom(s)" highlights the context of ancient Jew hatred within Muslim civilization as the main force behind the October 7 massacre.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22692/united-nations-alibis

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Left-Wing Unicorn Hunt for the White Male Working-Class Voter - Victor Davis Hanson

 

by Victor Davis Hanson

Democrats can't win back the white working class with staged populism while embracing the policies and elites that drove those voters away.

 

The last Democratic candidate to appeal to the white working-class voter was Bill Clinton. He needed every one of those voters in his 1992 and 1996 races. Yet he still failed to win 50 percent of the popular vote because of Ross Perot’s third-party candidacy.

Hunting for the Left-Wing Blue-Collar American

Since then, the Democratic brand has lost the white working-class vote in nearly every presidential election. Yet this demographic still makes up 40 percent of the electorate and registers and votes at much higher rates than non-white groups.

Apparently, during the Biden-era influx of 10 million illegal aliens, Democrats really believed their own slogans about an “Emerging Democratic Majority” and how “Demography is destiny.” They therefore confidently abandoned most efforts to recruit white working-class voters.

In 2017, the then-neocon—and now leftist Mamdani supporter—Bill Kristol (who has advocated abolishing ICE altogether) spoke of the need to open the borders to replace the “lazy” American worker: “Look, to be totally honest, if things are so bad as you say with the white working class, don’t you want to get new Americans in?”

Kristol then characterized this apparently dispensable group as “decadent, lazy, spoiled.”

And yet, until the novelty of Barack Obama’s candidacy and the demographic overconfidence it inspired, Democrats regularly lamented that, aside from the moderate Bill Clinton interlude, their steady leftward turn was becoming both irreversible and electorally costly.

Indeed, Obama aside, conventional Democratic wisdom apparently held that a presidential nominee, regardless of his politics, should have a Southern accent to project authenticity and appeal to working-class whites. Thus, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore all won the popular vote.

By contrast, Northern liberals, who lacked Obama’s singular advantage of being the first black president, only confirmed that Democrats had lost the support of working-class whites. Witness the defeats of Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and even Kamala Harris.

The charismatic Barack Obama, as the first black president, and the wax-museum blue-collar construct of “good old Joe Biden from Scranton” are merely the exceptions that prove the rule.

Toxic Agendas

These trends have only accelerated with the top-down takeover of the Democratic Party by hardcore leftists, socialists, and even the occasional communist.

Their agendas are boutique and have little appeal outside blue-city and blue-state echo chambers.

In the proverbial real world, voters have little patience with redefining what a woman is, biological men showering with teen girls, or males masquerading as female athletes stealing girls’ medals. Open borders, mass amnesties, defunding ICE and the police, and romanticizing illegal aliens are likewise 30–70 losing issues.

Working people do not understand the banning of natural gas stoves or the subsidizing of wind and solar power while phasing out fossil fuels. Nor do they like the idea of losers suddenly wishing to change the system through 70 percent mail-in voting, no-ID voting, packing the court, destroying the Electoral College, and ending the filibuster—much less socialist talk of abolishing the Senate and the presidency.

No-cash bail, revolving-door arrests and releases, early prison releases, abortion on demand until the moment of birth, and climate-change fanaticism are equally mystifying to the working class.

Democrat Oligarchs, Millionaires, and Billionaires

Working-class voters are not stupid, as left-wing elites assume. They know that the Left, for all its bombast about oligarchs, millionaires, and billionaires, is the party of precisely those groups—big-money interests from Hollywood, Silicon Valley, the legal profession, the media, and Wall Street.

Lavish giving to the left has been exemplified by MacKenzie Scott, Jeffrey Epstein, Sam Bankman-Fried, Melinda Gates, Laurene Powell Jobs, Reid Hoffman, Neville Roy Singham, and, of course, George Soros in his many manifestations. It is no accident that none of these left-wing billionaires made their fortunes by building tangible products but rather through divorce settlements, financial speculation, or social media.

The rise of the new socialists has only added another layer of hypocrisy to the Left’s preexisting elitism and dependence on big money, creating what Andrew Stiles has characterized as “Trust-Fund Socialism.”

What the new hard-left redistributionists Ro Khanna, Zohran Mamdani, Hasan Piker, and Graham Platner share are privileged upbringings, subsidized lifestyles, and prolonged adolescence sustained by parental support—all of which make their supposedly populist appeals to “fairness” ring hollow.

When Mamdani talks of “calloused hands,” we know he knows little about physical labor as the privileged child of “settler colonialists” in Uganda. Indeed, although his Indian immigrant community makes up less than 1 percent of the population, it accounts for 65 percent of that African nation’s total tax revenue, and the Mamdani family enjoys a getaway estate on Lake Victoria.

Pajama Boys and DEI

The new socialists do not employ any volatile, cranky Southern populist advisors like James Carville or seasoned campaign strategists like Mark Penn or Doug Schoen, who sought to win over the working class.

Instead, the new Democratic socialists seem to gravitate to nepo-baby handlers and silver-spoon nerds who oddly seem to speak through their noses as would-be kingmakers—as the recent clips of the trust-funded pajama boys Morris Katz and Daniel Moraff attest.

But the Democrats’ unicorn hunt for the lost—and now almost mythical—white working-class male voter is stymied not only by the off-putting Democratic socialist agenda but also by the top-down, talk-down elitism of its emissaries.

DEI plays a considerable role as well.

The Obama administration’s creation of a new “oppressed” class comprising roughly 30 percent of the nation, set against a supposedly 70-percent white “oppressor” class, infuriated the white working class.

Suddenly, the old black-white racial binary of affirmative action disappeared, along with the idea of helping statistically poorer blacks. It was replaced by a new, much broader category of “non-white,” which had nothing to do with class.

Those classified as the victimized DEI 30 percent were often wealthy, privileged, and drawn from ethnic groups whose per capita incomes exceeded those of whites.

Whiteness on the Brain

Indeed, to normal people, the four-mansion-owning, private-jet-flying Obamas dropping in to lecture Americans about “equity” and “fairness,” or to complain about “raising the bar,” seemed absurd. It reaffirmed Obama’s infamous “clingers” remark. That slur foreshadowed a cascade of Democratic insults aimed at white working-class Trump voters, who were variously branded as irredeemables, deplorables, dregs, chumps, semi-fascists, and garbage.

Whether it was the prep-schooled prima donna Jasmine Crockett spouting off about “white men,” the lavishly living Zohran Mamdani talking about going after “whiter neighborhoods,” or the multimillionaires Whoopi Goldberg and Sunny Hostin on The View lecturing America on systemic racism, DEI became a Democratic IED. It seemed to detonate whenever a privileged “person of color” launched into the accustomed anti-white racial rant without “checking their own privilege” first.

The new batch of socialist candidates only confirms how deeply embedded this racially fueled hostility toward the white working class has become within the Democratic Party.

Darializa Avila Chevalier, the New York congressional nominee, blasted white women as “ugly colonizer women.”

Aber Kawas, a New York State Senate candidate, blamed 9/11 on “capitalism and racism and white supremacy.”

Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico, shortly before the George Floyd riots, declared, “White skin gives me and every white American immunity from the virus [of racism]. But we spread it wherever we go.”

Melat Kiros warned that “we were never really going to be able to tackle white supremacy in the way that we need to without reparations.”

So spoke the Colorado Democrat congressional candidate and Ethiopian immigrant to the United States, who ascended into elite circles as a corporate lawyer and now as a perpetual PhD gadfly.

Working-Class Cutouts

So here are the Democrats’ dilemmas:

  1. White working-class voters without college degrees still comprise nearly 40 percent of all registered voters. In 2024, they backed Trump by a 66–34 margin. That reality means that any further Democratic hemorrhaging among Hispanic and black middle-class voters will be fatal—as it was in 2024.
  2. The mainstream Democratic agenda alienates the white working class because it is tailored to affluent urban voters, with its emphasis on climate change, trans issues, illegal immigration, radically expansive abortion rights, anti-military sentiment, DEI, and defunding law enforcement.
  3. The new socialists are most comfortable among wealthy leftist leaders who wish to take over the Democratic Party, talk down to the white working class, and pontificate about how awful the United States is.

So, since Democrats need the white working class to regain power, yet both loathe and mock it, what is the radical Left to do?

Presto: invent a white working-class leftist.

So Democrats produced the unvetted madman, Graham Platner, complete with a Nazi tattoo, a violently misogynistic past, antisemitism, and a phony working-class oysterman persona.

Then came James Talarico, the “next Beto O’Rourke,” supposedly destined to win a Texas Senate seat. The hard Left’s “good” evangelical Christian was likewise expected to win over the once-despised churchgoing Southern white voter.

Except Talarico is also inauthentic. His past quotes and social media posts portray a curiosity whose earlier record is apparently off-limits and who seems obsessed with justice for gays and trans people—but from whom?

Of course—from the allegedly illiberal, wicked white working class he now courts.

And does anyone remember the roly-poly, hyperactive “working man,” Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (who just pardoned a serial child rapist)? He was picked as the Democrats’ vice presidential nominee not because he empowered Somali welfare fraud, disparaged the white working class, or embellished his résumé, but because he could supposedly change the oil in his pickup and had a shotgun.

In 2024, we heard ad nauseam the efforts of his running mate, Kamala Harris—the privileged child of two PhDs, former companion of political fixer Willie Brown, and longtime Brentwood resident—to portray herself as “middle-class.”

We were told the unverifiable tale that she had worked at McDonald’s (asking where or when was taboo) and owned a Glock semi-automatic pistol (when and where she bought it remained a mystery). The Berkeleyite was soon reborn as a longtime resident of the nearby but decidedly less upper-middle-class Oakland.

Looking ahead to 2028, will the socialists try to recast the upper-middle-class professional Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as a working-class sister to the white working class? Or reboot Kamala, this time perhaps with a Smith & Wesson revolver and a previous stint at Wendy’s?

There are even fewer plausible candidates for the Great Leftist Working-Class Hope. Pete Buttigieg—the homosexual former South Bend, Indiana, mayor, ex-Wall Street consultant, and failed presidential candidate—came across in the 2020 primaries and later as transportation secretary in the Biden administration as arrogant, sanctimonious, self-referential, and contrived.

But now he sports a beard and stops in at workingmen’s cafés, achieving precisely the opposite effect of what was intended.

Then there is Gavin Newsom, the nepo-baby populist, with his $9 million estate, boutique businesses, and lifelong subsidies from oil heir Gordon Getty.

Without a hair out of place, wearing an Abercrombie & Fitch vest while shoveling cinders after the latest trademark California wildfire, even he is trying to convince voters in Akron and Grand Rapids that Gavin is one with the working man as he declares capitalism a failure.

It’s the Message, Not the Medium

The question is not ultimately one of class, but of authenticity.

Whatever the Left may say about Trump, it consistently attacks his “crass” tastes and appearance—his chrysophilia, love of mixed martial arts and professional wrestling, comb-over, orange complexion, and Queens accent—but not the authenticity of any of those preferences. Trump’s takeout meals from McDonald’s are not staged but a long-standing habit.

Billionaire Trump wears his customary blue suit, red tie, and wingtips in every setting, on every occasion, and in every kind of weather. He does not perch on straw bales wearing a John Deere cap, affect a regional accent à la Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, or don blue jeans and work boots to “bond” with farmers. He is as out of place walking an assembly line as he is genuinely appealing to those who work there.

Why? His agenda is tailored to working-class tastes. He doesn’t care about race. In our 2026 America, that opposition to tribalism takes the form of refusing to gratuitously pander to the DEI industry.

The final paradox?

The Left needs to win a lot more white working-class Trump voters. Yet in their astroturf efforts, they ridicule Trump for his very tastes and appeal, which they try in vain to inauthentically emulate. 


Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He is an American military historian, columnist, a former classics professor, and scholar of ancient warfare. He has been a visiting professor at Hillsdale College since 2004, and is the 2023 Giles O'Malley Distinguished Visiting Professor at the School of Public Policy, Pepperdine University. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007 by President George W. Bush, and the Bradley Prize in 2008. Hanson is also a farmer (growing almonds on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author of the just released New York Times best seller, The End of Everything: How Wars Descend into Annihilation, published by Basic Books on May 7, 2024, as well as the recent  The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won, The Case for Trump, and The Dying Citizen.

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/07/21/the-left-wing-unicorn-hunt-for-the-white-male-working-class-voter/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

A Dangerous Miscalculation: Underestimating American Resolve - Lawrence Kadish

 

by Lawrence Kadish

Time and again, adversaries have looked at the United States — loud, divided, seemingly distracted — and concluded that it lacked the stamina or strength for a prolonged fight. Time and again, they have been proven wrong — very wrong.

 

Imperial Japan during WW II offers one example of adversaries underestimating American resolve. Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, who knew America well, reportedly feared that Pearl Harbor would "awaken a sleeping giant." His warning went unheeded by Tokyo. Pictured: Yamamoto in 1942. (Image source: National Museum of Taiwan History/Wikimedia Commons)

 

Published reports suggest that China is inundating its citizens with stories that America is on the decline, inferring that the rest of this century is China's for the taking.

It would be wise for China to read up on global history: those who have mistaken America's raucous domestic debates for weakness often find themselves shocked and defeated.

Time and again, adversaries have looked at the United States — loud, divided, seemingly distracted — and concluded that it lacked the stamina or strength for a prolonged fight. Time and again, they have been proven wrong — very wrong.

Imperial Japan during WW II offers one example. Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, who knew America well, reportedly feared that the attack on Pearl Harbor would "awaken a sleeping giant." His warning went unheeded by Tokyo, whose leaders believed a decadent, isolationist democracy would sue for peace after a knockout blow. Instead, the attack unified a fractured nation overnight. Within four years, American industry would be completing more than 70 new warships every week and Japanese cities would be unrecognizable.

Nazi Germany made the same error, dismissing Americans as little more than racially inferior citizens of a nation incapable of sacrifice. Hitler declared war on the United States almost casually in December 1941, confident that our military potential was inconsequential. He failed to grasp that America's true weapon was not its standing army — modest at the time — but its capacity to convert automobile factories into bomber plants and boys from Brooklyn to the Bay Area into liberators.

Enter the Cold War. The Soviet Union assumed that a capitalist democracy could never sustain decades of confronting the Bolsheviks' efforts to expand their empire across Europe. Instead, the United States outlasted and outspent its rival across 45 years, and it was the Berlin Wall — not American resolve — that fell.

Even Osama bin Laden built his strategy on the belief the United States lacked sufficient resolve to confront his brand of radical Islamic terrorism. The plume from the fallen Twin Towers and fires at the Pentagon had not even dissipated as America planned its revenge following 9/11.

Now Communist China is confusing America's noisy democracy with paralysis and our debate over Iran, voter fraud, and the economy with the inability to focus on the strategic threat that China presents to America's future. They see our domestic arguments and miss the underlying fact that Americans unite to face a threat; they see an open society that will call out its own faults, while they miss the industrial, financial, and human depth upon which our society is built.

American democracy remains inexplicable to the Chinese communist leadership — so it assumes America is weak, divided and in decline.

The ghost of Mao may want to check in with Hitler, Tojo, and Khrushchev and ask, "So how did that work out for you?"


Lawrence Kadish
serves on the Board of Governors of Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22719/underestimating-american-resolve

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran secretly submitted proposal for 10-day ceasefire while under intense US strikes - exclusive - Amichai Stein

 

by Amichai Stein

The mediators, including senior Qatari, Egyptian, Omani, and Pakistani officials, have presented the proposal to the United States.

 

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi speaks during a joint press conference with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan (not pictured) in Tehran, Iran, November 30, 2025.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi speaks during a joint press conference with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan (not pictured) in Tehran, Iran, November 30, 2025.
(photo credit: MAJID ASGARIPOUR/WANA)

 

It was Tehran that initiated the proposal now being advanced by mediators for a 10-day ceasefire between the United States and Iran, two sources familiar with the negotiations told The Jerusalem Post.

The fact that Iran proposed the initiative underscores how urgently Tehran is seeking a ceasefire as US strikes continue to expand and US President Donald Trump weighs a return to a full-scale military campaign against Iran.

According to the two sources, the purpose of the proposed ceasefire is to find a solution regarding the Strait of Hormuz, the issue that triggered the crisis over the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed last month, after which both Tehran and Washington effectively declared that the agreement was no longer in force.

The mediators, including senior Qatari, Egyptian, Omani, and Pakistani officials, have presented the proposal to the United States and have added further elements during discussions with both Washington and Tehran. One such idea is the creation of a “middle corridor” through the Strait of Hormuz, located between Omani-controlled and Iranian-controlled waters, through which commercial vessels could safely transit.

US forces operating in the Strait of Hormuz, July 17, 2026.
US forces operating in the Strait of Hormuz, July 17, 2026. (credit: Screenshot/X/@PeteHegseth)

Two sources told the Post that, at this stage, the United States is demanding a longer ceasefire. They added that Washington also insists on reaching at least a partial understanding regarding freedom of navigation through the strait before any ceasefire takes effect, with the remaining details to be finalized during the proposed 10-day pause.

One of the sources said that at least some officials within the Trump administration have described the Iranian proposal as "absurd" and "illogical."

Trump focused on making sure Iran 'pays a price'

A US official told the Post that Trump is focused on ensuring Iran “pays a price” for its violations of the MoU and for the deaths of American service members.

"The president will also ensure that Iran pays for the recent deaths of US soldiers. These devastating blows will continue until the president decides otherwise, but talks between our countries are continuing," the official said.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday convened a security consultation that lasted over five and a half hours, ending at 1:30 a.m. on Tuesday morning.

After the long discussion, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that “the State of Israel has no interest in joining the conflict between Iran and the US; maintaining the status quo is our best option.”


Amichai Stein

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-903154?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=July212026

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran's Araghchi admits six-member committee led nuclear talks, says he never met Khamenei - Danielle Greyman-Kennard

 

by Danielle Greyman-Kennard

Experts have frequently called into question the role of Khamenei, who has not been seen since being injured in the same attack that killed his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

 

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference alongside Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein (not pictured), in Baghdad, Iraq, June 28, 2026.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference alongside Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein (not pictured), in Baghdad, Iraq, June 28, 2026.
(photo credit: REUTERS/THAIER AL-SUDANI)

 

A six-person subcommittee in the Supreme National Security Council was behind the “on the spot” decisions made while negotiating the now-defunct Memorandum of Understanding with the United States, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Asriran, admitting that he has never met Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

Experts have frequently called into question the role of Khamenei, who has not been seen since being injured in the same attack that killed his predecessor, his father Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in February. 

In the new Khamenei’s absence, global analysts and commentators have increasingly looked toward Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and IRGC Commander Ahmad Vahidi as the minds behind Tehran’s trajectory.

“There was a six-member committee consisting of people like the president, Ghalibaf, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, and myself, who made decisions for the negotiations on the spot, because it was difficult to communicate with the top,” Araghchi admitted.

The committee, which does not include all 11 members of the SNSC, reportedly includes only Araghchi, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Ghalibaf, and SNSC Secretary Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr and two other unnamed persons.

Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran, Seyyed Abbas Araghchi, centre, at the Buergenstock resort in Obbuergen, near Lucerne, Switzerland, Sunday, June 20, 2026.
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran, Seyyed Abbas Araghchi, centre, at the Buergenstock resort in Obbuergen, near Lucerne, Switzerland, Sunday, June 20, 2026. (credit: Urs Flueeler/Pool via REUTERS)

Iranian nuclear committee evolved into negotiation committee

Araghchi said the committee was formed after the 12 Day War and was initially headed by Shahid Shamkhani, a longtime figure in Iran’s IRGC, and was initially considered a nuclear committee before evolving into a negotiating committee under the chairmanship of Ali Larijani.

“All discussions related to the negotiations took place in this committee, and its approvals followed exactly the same procedure as those of the Supreme National Security Council. There, interesting expressions were used about the negotiators,” Araghchi said.

The foreign minister added, “I have not seen Mr. Mojtaba so far, and I don’t think anyone else has seen him in the current era, except for a few people. He was always considered one of the most worthy leaders, and the final decision was made by the Assembly of Experts. His election showed the world that there has been no change in the ideals and principles of the Islamic Republic and there will be no change.”

The Institute for the Study of War published in an analysis of Araghchi’s comments that it displayed the limited role Khamenei has played in decision-making over the past few months, though some members of the SNSC maintain they have met with the supreme leader.

Dr. Menahem Merhavi, a researcher specializing in modern Iran and Shia Islam, told The Jerusalem Post he thought Araghchi’s comments were like an attempt to garner support for his line of negotiations “and direct more criticism at the IRGC, by implying they unknowingly serve foreign interests.”

The minister stressed during the interview that Iran was winning the war, but defended the pursuit of negotiations to end or pause the conflict. The comments came after the Wall Street Journal reported that Vahidi pushed for harder lines in the talks in Pakistan, overruling Araghchi and Pezeshkian.

“The war must end at the point of victory. Wars end either with absolute military victory or with negotiations. Absolute military victory means that the other side raises its hands and surrenders, like what happened to Saddam. When we are not able to do this, negotiations must be held,” Araghchi said.

“Negotiations must be held when we have the upper hand on the military front. Continuing the war was a risk, and we cannot take risks with the lives of the people and the fate of the country.

“Our strategic achievements were completed in the first two weeks of the war, although we suffered losses. If we had accepted the ceasefire 10 days earlier, our achievements would still be in place. We must calculate whether the war will further strengthen our position in the negotiations or weaken our position due to the additional losses. If our infrastructure is in a situation where we are crippled for gas and electricity for the people, can we become stronger in the negotiation field? Therefore, it is very important to recognize the point of negotiation.”

Merhavi said he thought that the comments were an indication of that the ongoing power struggle in Iran has “entered a new phase” and the absence of an effective supreme leader is leaving that struggle more “exposed” now than before.  I think it’s a power struggle that has entered a new phase after the death of Khamenei senior, but not all that different. However, due to the absence of an effective supreme leader, it is somewhat more exposed

“Bottom line: Vahidi et al are the ones who call the shots, giving the negotiators room for maneuver to lull the US,” he concluded. 


Danielle Greyman-Kennard

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-903180?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=July212026#google_vignette

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump meets with president of Lebanon as Iran war continues - Ben Whedon

 

by Ben Whedon

Lebanon has been the site of fierce fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, which controls much of the country's southern portion.

 

President Donald Trump on Tuesday met with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun at the White House amid efforts to end fighting in the country and the renewal of hostilities with Iran.

Lebanon has been the site of fierce fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, which controls much of the country's southern portion. Hezbollah is an Iran-backed organization and much of the conflict has coincided with the Iran war.

The meeting was cordial and included a humorous moment, in which Aoun referred to Trump as a "great president."

"See? He knows how to get to me! Now, he can have anything," Trump quipped.

 

Ben Whedon is the Chief Political Correspondent for Just the News. Follow him on X.

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/trump-meets-president-lebanon-iran-war-continues

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

U.S. intel views targeting of voter data as election interference just like Trump said, memos show - John Solomon

 

by John Solomon

President Trump presented evidence last Thursday night that China had compromised and obtained 220 million American voter registration files but media have been downplaying it ever since.

 

When the Biden Justice Department announced that Chinese hackers had gotten their hands on Great Britain's publicly available voter files in 2024, American news media clamored with stories claiming it was a "dangerous" breach. The same, too, when U.S. officials announced Russia and Iran had hacked small numbers of U.S. voter files in 2020 and 2021.

The reason was simple: U.S. intelligence agencies believe the targeting and acquisition of voter registration files is an act of election interference. “Election interference is a subset of election influence targeted at the technical aspects of the election, including voter registration, casting and counting of ballots and reporting of results," an October 2020 National intelligence Council report on election interference explains.

In other words, the compromising of election voter registration data, is, by the definition of intelligence agencies, an act of election interference.

Nothing to see here, move along, legacy media now says

When President Donald Trump presented confirmed evidence last Thursday night that China had compromised and obtained 220 million American voter registration files, the news media swung 180 degrees in the opposite direction. They argued it was old news (it was not) and not a big deal because you can buy limited data in America related to voter registration commercially. According to security experts, that limited data accessibility is not the same thing.

The intelligence agencies in the very documents that Trump declassified and made public for his announcement show the voting integrity and security concerns.

In 2022, the National Security Agency became especially concerned that China had escalated its exploitation of voter data by assigning a "CNE." That's a person or unit who are hackers and cyberthieves. Legacy news media have ignored this fact, while center-right-leaning publications were not as quick to dismiss the accuracy or impact of the data breach. 

The Washington Times reported that "Trump said during his primetime address on Thursday that the People’s Republic of China acquired 220 million U.S. voter files containing names, addresses, phone numbers, political party preferences, and other sensitive information. Shortly after the speech, the White House released to the public dozens of declassified documents containing partially redacted findings, including data showing nearly 278,000 noncitizens who are registered to vote in federal elections and details over a “slow-walked” 2020 FBI investigation in Michigan."

Great Britain’s voter files are commercially available in limited form like America's. But China got versions of the British that caused the Biden administration to indict China for hacking 40 million British voter files. According to the BBC, the British government called it “malicious” interference in their election.

In 2021, the Biden Justice Department indicted two Iranian hackers for accessing just 100,000 voter files from a single state where it is also commercially available. They were charged with criminally interfering in the 2020 election even though voter files are commercially available in limited form.

If China’s acquisition of 40 million files in Great Britain and Iran’s acquisition of 100,000 files in America were both charged as criminal election interference, it would seem the acquisition of 220 million voter files almost certainly would be considered by the intelligence community to be an act of interference.

At this point, what difference does it make?

Whether the data breach would have or could have flipped the election is beside the point. Experts interviewed by Just the News agreed. Former CIA operations officer Rick de la Torre called the news media's dismissal of Trump's claims "absurd." 

"Of course, this is election interference," he added. "With that information, with that data, you know the Chinese government can exploit it. They can target specific individuals. They can do all kinds of things. They could request ballots. They could change people's identifications. They know now how they vote. They know what their political parties are. They know how often they vote."

"Imagine if China hacked into the Pentagon and stole every military service member's personnel file," he told Just the News. "You know, you wouldn't say, 'Oh well, that's not really a big deal. That's not a threat from a national security standpoint.' You know, that's absurd. 

Mike Davis, a former top lawyer for the Senate Judiciary Committee, which dealt with major data breaches in the past, said the media is disserving the public by downplaying or ignoring what Trump reported and that the intelligence analysts who hid the data breaches from Trump and Congress years back could be prosecuted.

"They obstructed, and they conspired to provide doctored evidence to the President of the United States about a foreign invasion of our elections, and they must be held accountable. They must be arrested. They must be charged," Davis said.

Rep. Laurel Lee, R-Fla., was Secretary of State of Florida from 2019 to 2022 and said she was never notified as the election chief in one of the largest battleground states about China's acquisition of voter files. She said Trump's revelation was "a big deal."

"There are a number of different components to conducting good elections," she told the Just the News, No Noise television show on Monday evening. "Of course, we have our voting tabulation systems, but we also have to maintain voter rolls, public information, public-facing websites. And all of these things are things that can be targeted by our foreign adversaries in their attempt to either interfere with our process and procedure or affect voter belief and confidence in our system."

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., agreed and said Trump's rush to better secure voter data is essential.

Restoring confidence in an honest democratic process

"There is still a lot of work to be done. Passing the Save Act would certainly make a big difference," he told Just the News. "At the end of the day, there will be no question at all elections, the outcome, will be in doubt unless we pass it.

"And I think the other half of it is there's the actual corruption, where we found example after example, including China stealing registered voter names and other manipulation, but it's more than that. It's the confidence of the American people. That's why the president's pushing to get a verifiable system through the Save Act, and we're still hoping to get it done for this election," he added. 

The president made no allegation in his Thursday speech that votes were flipped by machines. The intelligence memos he released back that up. But you don’t need flipped votes to have election interference. The illicit acquisition of voter files meets the textbook definition.

The suppression by intelligence officials for years of the voter file breaches and other Chinese malign actions is captured in documents showing FBI officials boasting they created a "shadow government" and NSA officials "massaged" the president's intelligence briefing to hide the evidence.

By 2021, after Trump left office, intelligence community officials marveled at the complete 180-degree pivot the Biden spy agencies did by suddenly suggesting China might be interfering in elections.

Nothing had changed. The voter data was known by frontline analysts to have been compromised the year before and was continuing. But all of a sudden, the language changed, a dynamic captured in this gem of an email from a top intelligence expert on election cyberactivities.

"Take a minute a read through this report," an intelligence officer wrote on Dec. 23, 2021. "It cites some of the same intel and logic used in 2020 to say that these same units were not engaged in election influence but were instead only issue focused, to now argue that China IS influencing the [redacted election."]

The intelligence community knew in 2020 that China had illicitly obtained voter files. They knew such an act met the definition of "election interference." They just suppressed it. 


John Solomon
is the CEO of Just the News but has taken a brief leave of absence as the Editor-in-Chief so he can assist as an unpaid special government employee identifying documents the Trump White House can declassify for the American public.

Source: https://justthenews.com/accountability/media/us-intel-views-targeting-voter-data-election-interference-trump-claimed-memos

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Rand Paul discloses bombshell evidence that FBI blocked CBP interview of Fauci ally - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

The latest documents come just over a week before former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci is set to testify in front the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

 

Senate Homeland Security Chairman Rand Paul released new documents Monday that he said revealed the FBI stopped Customs and Border Patrol from searching and questioning Peter Daszak upon his return to the United States from China. 

The latest documents come just over a week before former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci is set to testify in front his panel on whether he lied to Congress during the pandemic about whether his office had funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

Paul said that CBP was prepared to stop Daszak, who was the president of EcoHealth Alliance at the time, when he landed in New York in February 2021, but was told by the FBI days before Daszak landed not to question him and the inspection never took place. 

CBP was reportedly expected to ask Daszak about his contacts at the Wuhan lab, whether he collected or transported biological samples, and what happened during his trip to China. 

Paul said the documents can be found on a new database his team has put together called the "Reading Room," which is now accessible to the public so they can review the documents themselves. The database will be updated as the investigation continues.


Misty Severi
is a news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage. 

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/congress/rand-paul-releases-database-records-related-his-covid-19-pandemic-origin-probe

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Across the nation, Trump’s long-predicted high-tax exodus has a Midwest sequel - Amanda Head

 

by Amanda Head

Capital flight: Illinois has now become Taxifornia 2.0, where, like California and New York, businesses are voting with their U-Hauls and heading to Texas, and Florida. Trump has said "Job-producing people and companies are being forced to flee at levels never seen before. Remember, once people and companies leave, they are never coming back."

 

With the most recent departure of True Value Hardware headquarters, Illinois appears to be mimicking California's business-repellent formula, bolstering President Donald Trump's warnings to blue states that higher taxes equate to higher exits. 

"Job-producing people and companies are being forced to flee at levels never seen before. Remember, once people and companies leave, they are never coming back," Trump posted to his Truth Social account in April. 

True Value joins the ranks of other longtime Illinois companies like Boeing, Tyson Foods, Morton Salt and Caterpillar, the latter of which pointedly cautioned that the state's inability to balance the budget and lower taxes would drive out businesses. 

Founded in Illinois in 1948, the hardware wholesaler is relocating to Fort Wayne, Indiana, following its 2024 bankruptcy and acquisition by rival Do It Best. The company cited long-term stability and a need for a more business-friendly environment, resulting in the loss of hundreds of headquarters jobs and associated revenue for the state. 

The "U-Haul Growth Index" is a leading indicator of where people and companies are moving from and to. The latest data shows an overwhelming number of entrepreneurs and workers ditching Illinois and California for the greener pastures of Texas and Florida. Other states acting as refuges from high taxes and regulatory strangulation include North Carolina, Tennessee and Arizona.

Even the Chicago Bears NFL franchise announced in June that it would be relocating to Hammond, Indiana

In a particularly harsh blow to the Prairie State, the Chicago Bears, the NFL franchise that called Chicago home for over 100 years, announced in June that it would be relocating to Hammond, Indiana.  

Soldier Field, home to the Bears, is the smallest in the league by capacity, is exposed to weather in a harsh climate, and despite purchasing 326 acres at the nearby Arlington Park racetrack in 2021 for a potential new site, the business climate was too uncertain for the legacy team to survive. Furthermore, in order to build a new facility with help from the fan base, it would require tax relief to make it feasible, even after a $2 billion private investment.  

California: the original pack-your-bags tax climate

The Golden State has its own set of high-profile businesses that have said goodbye to high taxes, burdensome regulations and a punishing business climate. Charles Schwab was one of the first to jump ship in 2019, announcing its move from San Francisco to Westlake, Texas.

Hewlett-Packard called it quits a year later, moving from San Jose, California, to Houston. Tesla bailed in 2021, Chevron and Space X in 2024, and Public Storage this year. 

It could take a while for these departures to hurt Democrats. In both California and Illinois, Democrats continue to win statewide and in urban centers. 

Despite what detrimental effects may come for these states, their leaders appear to merely be following the will of their constituents. A March 2025 Pew Research Center survey found that 81% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents favor raising taxes on large businesses and corporations. Seventy-four percent support increases on households earning over $400,000 annually and support is even higher among liberal Democrats (90% for businesses, 83% for high earners). 

This aligns with earlier 2024 Navigator Research findings showing 94% of Democrats backing taxes on the rich. 

More recent 2026 polling from the Bipartisan Policy Center and Data for Progress reinforces the pattern, with Democrats preferring targeted hikes on millionaires and large corporations as a way to address debt or fund priorities.


Amanda Head
is White House Correspondent for Just The News. You can follow her here

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/white-house/california-illinois-trumps-predicted-tax-apocalypse-has-midwest-sequel

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter