Donald J. Trump: “A year ago the United States of America attacked, very powerfully, the Houth…

Trump's Truth – Latest Posts — 2026-07-23 07:16:00 — trumpstruth.org

Trump Threatens Iran Over Houthi Attacks, Makes Dubious Claims About U.S. Military Action

President Donald J. Trump issued a stern warning regarding renewed Houthi attacks on shipping, directly threatening Iran with “major military punishment” if such incidents continue. In his statement, Trump declared, “A year ago the United States of America attacked, very powerfully, the Houthis, for their interference with commerce and trade, by shooting at ships. Since that time, and during our conflict with Iran, they have acted very responsibly. Unfortunately, now they are starting up again, shooting at two Saudi Arabian ships last night. Please let this TRUTH serve to represent that if they do this again, the U.S. will hold Iran responsible, in that the Houthis are a Surrogate and/or Proxy of Iran, and major military punishment will be inflicted upon Iran and, of course, the Houthis, themselves, who I am very disappointed with in that they have, until now, acted very professionally and smart.”

Questionable Claims About U.S. Military Action

Trump’s assertion that the United States “attacked, very powerfully, the Houthis” a year ago for interfering with commerce and trade is not supported by public records of direct U.S. military strikes specifically targeting the Houthis in the manner described. While the U.S. has conducted limited strikes in response to specific threats or attacks, there is no evidence of a broad, powerful U.S. attack on the Houthis as characterized by Trump. This exaggeration is consistent with a pattern of overstating U.S. military actions for rhetorical effect.

Linking Iran to Houthi Actions

Trump also claimed that the Houthis are a “Surrogate and/or Proxy of Iran,” a position that reflects longstanding U.S. policy concerns but simplifies a complex relationship. While Iran provides support to the Houthis, experts have noted that the group maintains significant autonomy and does not operate as a direct Iranian proxy in all cases. By threatening Iran with “major military punishment” for Houthi actions, Trump blurs the distinction between the two and raises the stakes of regional conflict.

Disparagement and Shifting Tone

In his statement, Trump expressed disappointment with the Houthis, saying he was “very disappointed with in that they have, until now, acted very professionally and smart.” This shift from praise to condemnation highlights Trump’s tendency to alternate between flattery and threats, depending on the immediate political or military context.

Conclusion

President Trump’s latest statement on the Houthis and Iran contains several questionable claims and exaggerations about past U.S. military actions and the nature of the Houthi-Iran relationship. By issuing sweeping threats and overstating American responses, Trump continues a pattern of rhetoric that often departs from established facts. As tensions in the region remain high, clear and accurate communication is essential to avoid unnecessary escalation and to inform the public about the realities of U.S. foreign policy.

Source article

Source: https://trumpstruth.org/statuses/40219

Rep. Jim Jordan refers Jack Smith for possible prosecution, saying he have have misled on Trump probe

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-07-23 11:49:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump Urged Prosecution of Special Counsel Jack Smith, Called Him “Deranged” Amid Ongoing Investigations

A new political battle has erupted in Washington as House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan referred special counsel Jack Smith to the Justice Department for possible prosecution, alleging Smith made misleading statements to Congress during testimony about his investigation into Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

The referral comes amid a broader context in which Trump has repeatedly attacked Smith, labeling him “deranged” and publicly urging his prosecution. These personal attacks are part of Trump’s ongoing campaign to discredit the special counsel, who charged Trump with conspiring to undo his election loss to Joe Biden and with hoarding classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

Trump’s Public Attacks and Calls for Prosecution

Throughout the investigation, Trump has not only denied wrongdoing but has also escalated his rhetoric against Smith. According to the report, Trump called Smith “deranged” and demanded his prosecution, a move that underscores the former president’s pattern of disparaging officials involved in legal proceedings against him.

Fact-Checking the Referral and Testimony

The controversy centers on whether Smith misled Congress about obtaining the contents of lawmakers’ communications. Smith’s lawyers maintain that his answers were “unimpeachably truthful,” explaining that he was specifically asked about toll records, which do not include message content. The referral from Jordan does not contest the truthfulness of Smith’s answers regarding toll records but faults him for not volunteering information about separate subpoenas.

Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin criticized the referral as baseless, noting that Republicans never asked Smith about presidential records during his testimony. Raskin argued that wishing different questions had been asked is not grounds for criminal prosecution.

Trump’s Record of Disparagement

Trump’s attacks on Smith are consistent with his broader approach to adversaries in the justice system. The article notes that the Justice Department, during Trump’s administration, was “eager to investigate and in some cases prosecute foes of the president,” highlighting a pattern of using public office to target critics.

Conclusion

As the Justice Department reviews the referral, the episode highlights Trump’s ongoing efforts to undermine investigations into his conduct by attacking the credibility of those involved. His public disparagement of Jack Smith and calls for prosecution fit into a larger narrative of false claims and personal attacks that have characterized his response to legal scrutiny. The outcome of the referral remains uncertain, but the political and legal implications are likely to reverberate as Trump continues to face questions about his actions during and after his presidency.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/rep-jim-jordan-refers-jack-smith-for-possible-prosecution-saying-he-have-have-misled-on-trump-probe

Trump threatens retaliatory strikes on key Iranian infrastructure as conflict escalates

Donald Trump — 2026-07-22 09:17:00 — www.politico.com

Trump Threatens Retaliatory Strikes Against Iran Over Waterway Attacks

President Trump has declared that any Iranian attack on vessels traveling through a key waterway would prompt a direct American military response targeting critical Iranian infrastructure. This proclamation underscores the administration’s hardline stance amid ongoing tensions in the region.

Trump’s Warning

According to the excerpt, the president proclaimed that “any type of Iranian attack on vessels traveling through the waterway would trigger a corresponding American strike on key infrastructure.” This statement signals a clear threat of escalation, with Trump positioning the United States as ready to respond forcefully to any perceived aggression by Iran.

Context and Implications

Trump’s warning comes at a time when the security of international shipping lanes has been a flashpoint in U.S.-Iran relations. By vowing to retaliate against any Iranian action, the president is drawing a red line and raising the stakes for both countries. Such rhetoric is consistent with Trump’s previous approach to foreign policy, which often features public threats and a willingness to use military force as leverage.

Fact-Check and Analysis

The excerpt does not contain any specific false claims or exaggerations by Trump but does highlight his willingness to make sweeping threats of military action. This approach has been a hallmark of his presidency, with similar statements made in other international crises. While the president’s statement is clear, the lack of detail about what constitutes an “attack” or what infrastructure would be targeted leaves significant ambiguity.

Conclusion

President Trump’s proclamation that any Iranian attack on vessels in a key waterway would result in American strikes on Iranian infrastructure marks another instance of his administration’s aggressive posture toward Iran. While the statement is unambiguous in its threat, the broader implications and potential consequences of such a policy remain uncertain. As tensions persist, Trump’s words continue to shape the volatile dynamics between the United States and Iran.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/22/trump-iran-war-infrastructure-strikes-01007558

What is Pickaxe Mountain?

Administration News — 2026-07-22 09:28:00 — thehill.com

Trump Threatens to Bomb Iranian Nuclear Facility, Claims “There’s Not a Thing They Can Do About It”

President Trump’s recent threats to bomb an underground Iranian nuclear facility known as Pickaxe Mountain have sparked renewed focus on the heavily fortified site. As his administration signals it is considering further military action against Iran, Trump declared, “We’ll be hitting that area very probably pretty soon. And there’s not a thing they can do about it.”

Renewed Tensions Over Iranian Nuclear Program

Trump’s remarks have drawn attention to the ongoing tensions between the United States and Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The president’s public threats to target a specific underground facility represent a significant escalation in rhetoric, highlighting the administration’s willingness to consider military options.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Assertions

In his statement, Trump asserted that the U.S. could strike the Iranian site imminently and without opposition from Iran. This claim is notable for its sweeping certainty, suggesting that Iran would be powerless to respond. However, the heavily fortified nature of the Pickaxe Mountain facility and Iran’s history of military and diplomatic responses to U.S. actions complicate this assertion. While the president’s statement is intended to project strength, it glosses over the potential for significant retaliation or broader regional consequences.

Conclusion

President Trump’s threats against the Iranian nuclear facility at Pickaxe Mountain and his claim that “there’s not a thing they can do about it” underscore his administration’s confrontational approach to Iran’s nuclear program. The president’s statements, marked by bold predictions and dismissive language, continue to raise questions about the accuracy and implications of his rhetoric on international security and stability.

Source article

Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5983210-trump-threatens-pickaxe-mountain-strike/

6 Takeaways From Arizona’s Tense, Trump-Dominated Primaries

NYT > U.S. > Politics — 2026-07-22 04:17:00 — www.nytimes.com

Donald Trump’s Endorsements Shape Arizona’s Republican Primaries

Donald Trump’s influence was on full display in Arizona’s Republican primaries, as candidates he endorsed scored key victories across the state. Trump’s involvement ranged from direct requests to candidates to switch districts, to public endorsements that helped propel his preferred contenders to the top of crowded fields.

Trump’s Direct Involvement in House Race

Jay Feely, a former NFL kicker, won the Republican primary in a battleground House district after Trump personally asked him to switch races. Feely, who said he was inspired to run by the 2024 assassination attempt against Trump, had originally planned to run in a different district. Trump’s intervention moved Feely into what is expected to be one of the most expensive House races in the country. Trump worked to lift Feely’s profile, describing him as “a friend of mine.”

Trump’s Endorsements Drive Gubernatorial and Congressional Races

Trump’s endorsement also powered Representative Andy Biggs to a decisive victory in the Republican primary for governor. Biggs, a hard-line Trump loyalist and former leader of the House Freedom Caucus, downplayed his vote to overturn the 2020 presidential election and emphasized bipartisan cooperation as he looked ahead to the general election.

In another race, Mark Lamb, a Trump-endorsed former sheriff, overcame allegations of sexual impropriety to win his primary. Despite accusations and denials from his campaign, Lamb’s association with Trump did not appear to hurt his standing with voters.

Election Denialism Remains a Trump-Aligned Theme

Trump’s influence extended to the race for Arizona’s top election official. Alexander Kolodin, who worked alongside Trump’s legal team in 2020 to challenge the presidential election results with baseless claims of fraud, won the Republican primary for secretary of state. Kolodin’s efforts to overturn the election were rejected by a federal judge as “baseless claims,” and he was later penalized by the Arizona state bar. Nevertheless, his campaign was buoyed by support from conservative groups aligned with Trump’s movement.

Conclusion

The Arizona primaries underscore Trump’s continued grip on the Republican Party, particularly in key battleground states. His endorsements and direct interventions have shaped the field, elevating loyalists and candidates who echo his positions on issues ranging from the economy to election integrity. As the general election approaches, Trump’s influence is likely to remain a defining factor in Arizona’s most competitive races.

Source article

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/22/us/politics/arizona-primary-takeaways.html

The top of Arizona’s GOP ticket is littered with 2020 election deniers

Politics — 2026-07-22 00:15:00 — www.politico.com

Trump Doubles Down on False Election Claims as Arizona GOP Embraces Election Denialism

Donald Trump continues to refuse to acknowledge his loss in the 2020 presidential election, maintaining a central role in pushing false claims about election integrity. In a recent primetime speech, Trump announced his administration would declassify documents he alleged show Chinese interference in the 2020 race, stating, “Our elections were left vulnerable to being rigged and stolen, and the trust of the American people was lost. This cannot be allowed to continue.”

Arizona GOP Candidates Align with Trump’s Election Denial

The influence of Trump’s persistent falsehoods is evident in Arizona’s Republican primaries, where candidates who supported efforts to overturn the 2020 election results have emerged victorious. The party’s litmus test remains loyalty to the narrative that the election was stolen from Trump. This has propelled figures like Rep. Andy Biggs, a staunch Trump ally, to the gubernatorial nomination, and state Rep. Alexander Kolodin, who represented fake electors and filed lawsuits to overturn election results, to the secretary of state nomination.

State Senate President Warren Petersen, another election denier, led the attorney general primary after launching a taxpayer-funded audit into Maricopa County’s election system, echoing Trump’s baseless claims of widespread fraud.

False Narratives and Their Consequences

Trump’s repeated promotion of the stalled SAVE America Act and his ongoing rhetoric about election integrity have kept false narratives alive in the Arizona GOP. Despite multiple investigations and audits finding no evidence of widespread fraud in Arizona’s 2020 election, Trump and his allies have continued to pressure state officials and promote conspiracy theories. Trump’s refusal to accept the certified results, along with his push for dramatic changes to election law, has shaped the party’s direction.

Election Denialism: A Risk in the General Election

While Trump’s stance has proven beneficial in Republican primaries, it has been a losing strategy in general elections. In 2022, Arizona Republicans who ran on hardline election denialism lost key races for governor, U.S. Senate, and secretary of state, even as the party performed well nationally. In 2024, Kari Lake lost her Senate bid, despite Trump winning the state by more than five percentage points.

Strategists warn that candidates like Biggs and Kolodin will be “saddled with election denialism” heading into November, a position that has historically alienated independents and moderate Republicans.

Conclusion

Trump’s ongoing refusal to accept the 2020 election results and his promotion of unfounded claims about election fraud continue to shape the Arizona GOP. As the state remains a critical battleground, the embrace of election denialism may energize the party’s base but poses significant risks in the general election, where voters have repeatedly rejected these falsehoods. The coming months will test whether Trump’s influence can overcome the broader electorate’s demand for truth and confidence in the democratic process.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/22/arizona-republicans-elect-2020-deniers-trump-01007511

Mamdani says New York City can’t arrest Netanyahu : NPR

NPR Topics: Politics — 2026-07-22 01:04:00 — www.npr.org

President Trump Vows Netanyahu “Will Not Be Arrested” in U.S. Amid ICC Warrant

President Donald Trump publicly assured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he “will not be arrested, in any way, shape, or form, while in the United States of America.” This statement, made in a social media post on Monday, comes as international scrutiny intensifies over the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrant for Netanyahu, who faces accusations of crimes against humanity related to the war in Gaza.

Background: ICC Warrant and New York’s Response

The ICC issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and others in 2024, alleging the use of “starvation as a method of warfare” and intentional targeting of civilians in Gaza—charges Israeli officials deny. New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani recently stated that the city lacks the legal authority to enforce the ICC warrant but called on the federal government to join the ICC and execute the warrant if Netanyahu visits the U.S., particularly for the upcoming U.N. General Assembly.

Trump’s Intervention

Trump’s unequivocal statement was directed at Netanyahu, promising protection from arrest while on U.S. soil. The post did not mention Mayor Mamdani or the city’s deliberations, but it directly contradicts Mamdani’s calls for federal action and underscores Trump’s ongoing support for the Israeli leader, regardless of international legal proceedings.

No Evidence or Fact-Check of False Claims

Within the excerpt, Trump’s statement is a clear assertion of his position but does not contain a verifiable falsehood or disparagement of individuals beyond his sweeping guarantee to Netanyahu. The excerpt does not provide evidence or context to fact-check Trump’s claim, nor does it address the legal complexities of enforcing international warrants in the U.S.

Conclusion

Trump’s public assurance to Netanyahu highlights the political divide over the ICC’s actions and the U.S. government’s stance on international law. As calls mount for accountability in the Gaza conflict, Trump’s intervention signals a continued willingness to shield allies from international prosecution, setting up a potential clash between federal and local authorities should Netanyahu travel to the United States.

Source article

Source: https://www.npr.org/2026/07/22/g-s1-134880/mamdani-nyc-netanyahu

Federal civil rights agency moves to stop requiring demographic data collection after 60 years

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-07-21 19:08:00 — www.pbs.org

The Trump Administration Moves to End Decades-Old Workforce Demographic Reporting

The Trump administration has taken significant steps to limit public access to information about the gender and racial makeup of executive and lower-paid positions at major U.S. companies. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), under a Republican majority, voted 2-1 to rescind a 60-year-old requirement for private sector employers to submit annual workforce demographic reports. This move, submitted for a 30-day public commentary period before final approval, marks a major shift in civil rights enforcement and ends a practice that has persisted through ten Republican and Democratic administrations.

Trump’s Position on Civil Rights Enforcement

The proposal to end the reporting requirement is described as part of President Donald Trump’s broader shake-up of civil rights enforcement. The administration’s posture has been to make it more difficult for the public to access data that tracks the progress of women and minorities in the workplace. The EEOC, which receives more than 88,000 worker complaints each year, has historically used this data to guide enforcement priorities and inform investigations into workplace discrimination.

The administration’s move aligns with recommendations from Project 2025, a conservative Heritage Foundation blueprint that has influenced many Trump-era policies. The rationale, as articulated by EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, is that the reporting requirements impose “hundreds of millions of dollars” in costs on employers and are unnecessary without “any allegation, indication, or evidence of discrimination.” Lucas, a vocal critic of diversity and inclusion efforts, has argued that collecting demographic data may actually encourage discrimination and racial stereotyping at work.

Fact-Checking the Administration’s Claims

Former Democratic EEOC commissioners and civil rights organizations have strongly disputed the Trump administration’s justification for ending the data collection. They argue there is little evidence that companies use employment data to engage in quotas or race-based hiring, calling such claims “simply inaccurate and unsupported speculation.” Instead, they emphasize that tracking demographic data helps companies proactively identify and address potential barriers to equal opportunity.

The data, which covers more than 50 million employees and 73,000 employers, has shown persistent underrepresentation of women and minorities in executive roles, despite some progress in recent years. For example, women now make up nearly half the workforce but held only 34.5% of executive and senior manager roles in 2023. White men, by contrast, are overrepresented in senior roles relative to their share of the workforce.

Impact and Backlash

The Trump administration’s move has been widely criticized by civil rights advocates, who warn that it will deprive the EEOC of a critical tool for uncovering discrimination patterns and tracking progress since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal, the sole Democrat on the EEOC after Trump’s appointments, voted against the proposal and warned that it would “kneecap” the agency’s ability to protect workers.

While some companies have voluntarily released their demographic data in recent years, that trend has reversed as conservative advocates and the Trump administration have argued that diversity efforts may themselves be discriminatory. Despite the proposed end of mandatory reporting, companies are still likely to keep demographic records due to ongoing legal requirements and the potential for future investigations.

Conclusion

The Trump administration’s decision to end mandatory workforce demographic reporting represents a significant retreat from decades of bipartisan efforts to promote transparency and combat workplace discrimination. Critics argue that the move is based on unsupported claims and undermines the EEOC’s ability to enforce civil rights protections. As the proposal moves through the public commentary period, the debate highlights the ongoing struggle over how best to ensure equal opportunity in the American workplace.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/federal-civil-rights-agency-moves-to-stop-requiring-demographic-data-collection-after-60-years

Saudis Reach Deal With U.S. That Could Let Them Enrich Nuclear Fuel

NYT > U.S. > Politics — 2026-07-21 22:44:00 — www.nytimes.com

Trump Administration Finalizes Nuclear Deal with Saudi Arabia, Easing Key Restrictions

President Trump has approved a sweeping nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia that could allow the kingdom to enrich uranium and reprocess plutonium on its own soil, according to U.S. officials. This move marks a significant departure from previous U.S. policy, which had imposed much stricter nonproliferation conditions on similar deals, notably with the United Arab Emirates.

Key Concessions and Congressional Review

To secure the deal with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Mr. Trump agreed to terms that may restrict international inspectors from accessing certain sites in Saudi Arabia that could be used to divert nuclear fuel for weapons purposes. The agreement also includes provisions that, after a joint economic study, would permit the Saudis to produce their own nuclear fuel—an allowance not granted in the so-called “gold standard” agreement with the UAE.

The Trump administration plans to formally sign and announce the agreement, known as a 123 Agreement, on Wednesday, with details to be sent to Congress soon after. While the deal is expected to face fierce debate, it would likely pass unless Congress can muster a veto-proof majority to override Trump’s initiative.

Separation from Israel Recognition and Secret Side Letters

Unlike previous negotiations under the Biden administration, which tied U.S.-Saudi nuclear cooperation to Saudi diplomatic recognition of Israel, President Trump separated the nuclear proposal from any such demand. The agreement also includes two secret side letters with the Saudis, which the administration claims contain proprietary business and sensitive national security information. Some lawmakers are demanding these letters be made public before any vote.

Retreat from Nonproliferation Standards

Mr. Trump’s concessions represent a retreat from the restrictions negotiated by the Bush and Obama administrations. The UAE agreement, finalized in 2009, included stringent inspections and a commitment to forgo domestic fuel production, minimizing proliferation risks. In contrast, the new Saudi deal loosens these safeguards, raising concerns among U.S. lawmakers and Israeli officials that the kingdom could eventually use its civilian nuclear program to develop nuclear weapons.

Strategic and Regional Implications

The Trump administration estimates the agreement will generate billions for the U.S. nuclear industry, starting with Westinghouse. The deal is also intended to strengthen U.S.-Saudi ties as the ongoing war with Iran strains the relationship. However, the agreement’s relaxed restrictions and secretive elements have sparked bipartisan opposition and heightened fears about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.

Conclusion

President Trump’s approval of the Saudi nuclear agreement marks a major shift in U.S. nonproliferation policy, easing key restrictions and separating the deal from broader diplomatic goals. As Congress prepares to review the accord, the debate will center on whether these concessions compromise long-standing efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons in a volatile region.

Source article

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/21/us/politics/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal.html

Trump-backed Jay Feely wins GOP primary in Arizona’s battleground 1st District

Politics — 2026-07-21 22:16:00 — www.politico.com

Trump’s Endorsement Shapes Arizona Battleground as Feely Secures GOP Nomination

Donald Trump’s influence in Arizona’s 1st Congressional District was on full display as he issued a dual endorsement for Jay Feely and Gina Swoboda, calling them “both fierce advocates of Make America Great Again” and stating that “either one would be an incredible Representative.” This public backing played a decisive role in Feely’s victory over former state Rep. Joseph Chaplik, highlighting how Trump’s support continues to shape Republican primaries in key battlegrounds.

Trump’s Role in the Race

Feely, a close ally and occasional golf partner of Trump, made his connection to the former president a central theme of his campaign. During a primary debate, Feely emphasized his direct line to Trump, claiming, “Who can call [Trump] and who can get him to answer? That’s me. He will take my call and he will listen. I have the ability to have the ear of the president.” This assertion underscored Feely’s strategy of leveraging Trump’s endorsement and personal relationship to secure GOP support.

Strategic Endorsements and Shifting Races

Initially, Feely announced his candidacy for a different congressional seat, but after Trump endorsed another candidate in that race, Feely pivoted to the 1st District. Trump’s subsequent dual endorsement of Feely and Swoboda in January, delivered via Truth Social, was a pivotal moment. When Swoboda exited the race to pursue the secretary of state position, Feely became the clear Trump-backed candidate, further solidifying the former president’s sway over the district’s Republican politics.

No Evidence of False Claims or Disparagements

Within the provided excerpt, Trump’s statements and endorsements are presented as straightforward support for his preferred candidates. There are no documented false claims, distortions, or disparagements made by Trump in this context. His comments focus on praising Feely and Swoboda as loyal advocates of his “Make America Great Again” agenda.

Conclusion

Trump’s endorsement remains a powerful force in Republican primaries, as evidenced by Jay Feely’s victory in Arizona’s 1st District. While Trump’s public statements in this instance are limited to expressions of support and praise, his influence over candidate selection and campaign dynamics is unmistakable. As the district heads toward a competitive general election, the impact of Trump’s backing will continue to be a central storyline in the battle for control of the House.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/21/feely-wins-arizona-house-primary-01007468