Tucker Carlson DESTROYED Ted Cruz! MAGA Eating Itself As Trump Teases US Iran Strike & Adriana Smith
PDS Published 06/18/2025
-
Tucker Carlson just absolutely DESTROYED Ted Cruz in a conversation about Iran, and the internet is divided.
Right, as we talked about yesterday, Carlson has been adamantly opposed to the U.S. getting involved in a potential war between Iran and Israel.
So much so that he has split from Trump on the issue, arguing that Trump is “complicit” in Israeli strikes.
With Carlson also pointing out that Trump previously vowed to stop “all wars” and claiming that getting drawn into another foreign war in the Middle East is not “America First,”
And while the former Fox News host has gotten a ton of backlash for his remarks — including from Trump himself — there are also many MAGA conservatives who have come to his defense, creating a major rift in the party.
But throughout all this, Cruz has become one of Trump’s strongest defenders.
Which is not at all surprising because he has long been known as one of the most vocal anti-Iran lawmakers in D.C.
And last night, Carlson posted a clip from an interview he did with Cruz set to air in full later today, and oh boy did it get heated:
CARLSON: “How many people live in Iran, by the way?”
CRUZ: “I don’t know the population.”
CARLSON: “At all?”
CRUZ: “No, I don’t know the population.”
CARLSON: “You don’t know the population in the country you seek to topple?”
CRUZ: “I — how many people live in Iran?”
CARLSON: “92 million.”
CRUZ: “Okay.”
CARLSON: “How could you not know that?”
CRUZ: “I don’t sit around memorizing population tables.”
CARLSON: “Well it’s kind of relevant because you’re calling for the overthrow of the government.”
CRUZ: “Why is it relevant whether it’s 90 million or 80 million or 100 million? Why is that relevant?”
CARLSON: “Well, if you don’t know anything about the country —”
CRUZ:“I didn’t say I don’t know anything about the country.”
CARLSON: “Okay, what’s the ethnic mix of Iran?”
CRUZ:“They are Persians and predominantly Shia.”
CARLSON: “What percent?”
CRUZ: “Okay, this is —”
CARLSON: “No, no, you don’t know anything about Iran!”
CRUZ: “Okay, I am not the Tucker Carlson expert on Iran, who says —”
CARLSON: “You’re a senator who is calling for the overthrow of the government and you don’t know anything about the country!”
CRUZ: “You’re the one who claims — you’re the one who claims — no you don’t know anything about the country! You’re the one who claims they’re not trying to murder Donald Trump.”
CARLSON: “No, I’m not saying that.”
CRUZ: “You’re the one who can’t figure out if it was a good idea to kill General Soleimani, and you said it was bad.”
CARLSON: “I’m just saying you don’t believe — you don’t believe they’re trying to murder Trump —”
CRUZ: “Yes I do!”
CARLSON: “Because you’re not calling for military strikes against them in retaliation. If you really believe that —”
CRUZ: “We’re carrying out military strikes today.”
CARLSON: “You said Israel was?”
CRUZ: “Right, with our help. I said ‘we.’ Israel is leading them, but we’re supporting them.”
CARLSON: “Well this — you’re breaking news here, because the U.S. government last night denied — the National Security Council spokesman Alex Pfeiffer denied, on behalf of Trump, that we were acting on Israel’s behalf in any offensive capacity.”
CRUZ: “No, we’re not bombing them, Israel’s bombing them.”
CARLSON: “You just said we were?”
CRUZ: “We are supporting Israel —”
CARLSON: “This is high stakes. You’re a Senator. If you’re saying the United States government is — if we’re at war with Iran right now, people are listening!”
Okay, so a few things to unpack here.
First of all, Carlson is correct that the White House and Trump himself have previously denied having any involvement in Israel’s strikes on Iran.[][]
With Trump even vaguely reiterating that denial again today.
So it appears that Cruz is just factually wrong here.
But I also want to hit on this whole debate they have about Iran trying to murder Trump.
Right, so for some background here, shortly after the election, federal prosecutors brought charges against an Afghan national, alleging that he had plotted to assassinate Trump at the direction of Iran.
Allegations that Iran’s president has repeatedly denied.
But then, just a few days ago, Benjamin Netanyahu told Fox News that Israel had intel that Iran was behind the two attempts to assassinate Trump last year.
Though, notably here, you even had conservative outlets like The New York Post noting that “American security agencies have never tied the two assassination attempts” to Iran.
And Carlson himself has explicitly said that Netanyahu is lying about this.
Right, and I bring that up because it has been a main element of how Cruz has responded to this now-viral clip, posting about it repeatedly on X, and writing in one tweet:[]
“Did a long interview w/ Tucker. He released a snippet playing a “gotcha” on the population of Iran. I declined to play that silly game. WATCH the full 2-hr interview, where Tucker ATTACKS Trump, attacks the ‘AIPAC lobby,’ & falsely claims Iran is NOT trying to assassinate Trump.” []
With Cruz also making another post accusing Carlson of refusing “to acknowledge indisputable truth” and sharing this recent clip from Steve Bannon’s podcast:[]
“No, Iran did not try to assassinate the president during the last election. And by the way, if Iran did try to assassinate Trump, and we know that, then why are we not at war with Iran?” 00:02 - 00:11
Okay, so again, there are a few different things going on here that I want to address.
First of all, it is not, in fact, an “indisputable truth” that Iran tried to assassinate Trump.
The federal government has charged but not convicted one man with plotting to kill Trump on behalf of Iran, and the country has denied the allegations.
And despite Netanyahu’s claim that Iran was behind two assassination attempts last year, he hasn’t produced any evidence to prove that — nor anyone else, for that matter.
Additionally, when you go and look at the full context of that clip, Carlson is clearly talking about Netanyahu’s allegations specifically, not the federal charges.
With him arguing that if there was indeed credible evidence that Iran was behind two serious, close assassination attempts, the U.S. would have acted against them.
Okay, so by this point, you might be thinking: “my God, is Tucker Carlson actually making some decent points?”
To which I’ll respond 1) broken clock — famously still right twice a day, and 2) you’re not alone — that’s exactly what a lot of conversation online has been.
With many people torn about their newfound feelings for Tucker Carlson, writing things like:
“Is it possible to absolutely loathe Tucker Carlson and enjoy the fuck out of watching him destroy Ted Cruz at the same time? Asking for a friend.”[]
Others echoing that, saying that Carlson absolutely “demolished” Cruz and highlighted Cruz’s total lack of knowledge on this issue.[]
We also saw Hasan Piker chiming in, writing:
“why is tucker carlson capable of conducting an adversarial interview about the dangers of american intervention in iran with ted cruz better than everyone else in legacy media? shame.”[]
But, of course, there were also plenty of people who defended Cruz and criticized Carlson.
Some accusing Carlson of “disrespecting” a sitting Senator.[]
Others also arguing that Carlson was asking “gotcha” questions, writing things like:
“99 out of 100 interviewees will not know the exact population of any country, but may know a lot of other things about it.”
But that’s also not where this story ends, because while I was recording, as promised, Tucker released the full 2-hour interview with Cruz.
And while obviously I can’t cover everything, there were a few wild bytes I wanted to highlight.
Including this clip that the Tucker Carlson Network tweeted with the caption: “Sen. Ted Cruz tries (and fails) to use the Bible to justify his support for Israel’s bombing of Iran”:[]
Cruz: Growing up in Sunday school I was taught from the Bible those who bless Israel will be blessed. And those who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective, I wanna be on the blessed side of things.
Carlson: Of the- those who bless the government of Israel?
Cruz: Those who bless Israel. It doesn’t say the government of... It says the nation of Israel. So that’s in the Bible, as a Christian, I believe that.
Carlson: Where is that?
Cruz: I can find it for you, I don’t the scripture off the tip of my- you you pull out the phone and use the Google.
Carlson: Genesis, it’s in Genesis. But… So you're quoting a Bible phrase you don’t have context for and you don’t know where it is, but that’s like your theology? I’m confused. What does that even mean?
Cruz: Tucker…
Carlson: I’m a Christian, I wanna know what you’re talking about. (0:00-0:41)
Carlson: Hold on, you’re a Senator and you’re throwing out theology. And I am a Christian and I am allowed to weigh in on this, we are commanded as Christians to support the government of Israel?
Cruz: We are commanded to support Israel. We’re told those who bless Israel will be blessed.
Carlson: But hold on, define Israel. This is important. Are you kidding? This is a majority Christian country.
Cruz: Define Israel? Do you not know what Israel is? That would be the country you’ve asked like 49 questions about. (0:52-1:14)
Carlson: Is the nation God is referring to in Genesis, is that the same as the country run by Benjamin Netanyahu right now?
Cruz: Yes, yes
Carlson: It is? (1:28-1:36)
With Cruz then going on to try to clarify:
“That is for me a personal motivation, but also what I was about to say, I don’t believe my personal faith – not everyone who I represent is Christian – it’s not an argument for me to give that we should do this because of my faith. And so as an elected official, I don’t give that as the reason we should support Israel. That is a personal motivation for me, the reason I believe in defending Israel is because they’re our strongest ally in the middle east in an incredibly troubled part of the world and supporting Israel benefits America.” (53:30-54:03)
And honestly, these two stay at each other’s throats the rest of the interview:
Cruz: “Be a little less snarky.”
Carlson: “I know, you’re right. That is a problem I have. I’m sorry.” (1:04:27-1:04:32)
But, again, those are just a few key moments from a VERY long interview that covered a lot of different topics, and I’ll be sure to link to the full thing down below.
But, with all that said, given what you’ve seen and heard here, I’d love to know what you make of this whole situation.
-
A brain-dead woman was kept alive for months—not to save her, but to avoid breaking Georgia’s abortion law.
At least until this week, when Adriana Smith’slife support ended following a C-section last Friday.
We actually talked about Smith’s case a few weeks ago.
But here's a quick recap:
Smith worked as a nurse at Emory University Hospital and had to be admitted in February, which is when doctors discovered blood clots in her brain.[]
Shortly afterwards she was declared braindead and her family wanted to take her off life support considering she had no hope of recovery,
But the staff at Emory University Hospital wouldn’t allow it because Smith was eight-weeks pregnant, fearing that in a roundabout way they could be accused of causing an abortion by removing her from life support.
Georgia’s law bans all abortions if ANY cardiac activity is detected… which can be as early as six weeks.
That’s so early that many women may not even realize they’re pregnant.
And the entire situation was seen as a prime example of how anti-abortion laws often have tragic and unforeseen consequences.
Which brings us to Friday, when Chance was born via C-section and was just 1 pound 13 ounces.[]
Obviously that’s extremely small for a baby -- even a premature one -- and Chance is now in the neonatal intensive care unit.
Fortunately, his grandmother says that "He's expected to be OK.”
"He's just fighting. We just want prayers for him. Just keep praying for him. He's here now." @0:14
And as you can imagine, this is a bittersweet moment for her because after Chance’s birth she spoke to the hospital about removing Smith’s life support.
All of which led her to say:
One thing that we don’t know is why Emory decided to deliver the baby at this moment,[]
One possible reason is that they wanted to strike a balance between removing Smith from life support as soon as possible in accordance with her family’s wishes while also avoiding Georgia’s anti-abortion law.
So as soon as her baby was potentially viable they did the C-section.
But understandably the hospital isn’t saying much.
It’s also not like Smith’s family has much love for the hospital following them allegedly bungling Smith’s diagnosis.
Right, because she had initially gone to the hospital due to headaches and then was sent home before needing to return the next day, with Smith’s mother saying: @1:03
“Oh, she would say that they failed her. She would say that ‘Mommy, they failed me. If the shoe was on the other foot and I would have made recommendations.’”
And while women -- and especially black women -- getting their health concerns ignored is unfortunately nothing new,
That entire conversation is overshadowed by the debate surrounding Georgia’s abortion law.
The law itself is fairly vague about what to do in a case like this, which is what makes Emory to be extremely cautious.
But Georgia officials claim it wasn't even necessary in this case, with state Attorney General Chris Carr saying back in May that removing Smith’s support wasn’t against the law because:
“There is nothing in the LIFE Act that requires medical professionals to keep a woman on life support after brain death,”
“Removing life support is not an action ‘with the purpose to terminate a pregnancy.’”
When laws are vague like that it’s usually up to whether an Attorney General actually wants to enforce it and whether the courts agree.
So it’s possible that we won’t have a definitive answer for a very long time, unless lawmakers act sooner.
-
The Trump administration just arrested one of the people running for mayor in New York City.
Right, the city’s Comptroller [Cum-troller], Brad Lander, who’s one of 11 Democratic primary candidates, spent yesterday observing immigration court hearings in lower Manhattan. [Image]
But then, as he accompanied a migrant down the hall to leave the courthouse, several plain-clothed federal agents wearing masks shoved through the crowd and tried to grab the man. [B roll, 00:10]
With Lander then locking arms with him, and refusing to let go. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:10 - 00:14] Caption: [Brad Lander:] “I will let go when you show me the judicial warrant. Where is it?”
With this going on for more than 40 seconds as agents struggled to pry Lander and the immigrant apart, pulling them down the hallway while reporters snapped photographs. [Continue B roll]
But eventually, they separated the men. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:24 - 00:32] Caption: [Brad Lander:] “I would like to see the warrant, and then I will let go. I would like to see the warrant, and then I will let go!”
Then, an agent grabbed Lander’s arms, pulled them behind his back, and handcuffed him, telling him he was obstructing. [Continue B roll]
[Clip, 00:47 - 00:51, 00:55 - 01:00] Caption: [Brad Lander:] “I’m not obstructing. I’m standing right here in the hallway. I asked to see the judicial warrant. … You don’t have the authority to arrest U.S. citizens asking for a judicial warrant.”
So of course the immigrant was arrested, but so was Brad Lander, and DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin [Mick-lock-lin] said his arrest was “for assaulting law enforcement and impeding a federal officer.” [Continue B roll and Quote]
Adding, “Our heroic ICE law enforcement officers face a 413 percent increase in assaults against them. It is wrong that politicians seeking higher office undermine law enforcement safety to get a viral moment. No one is above the law, and if you lay a hand on a law enforcement officer, you will face consequences.” [Quote]
Though with that said, the U.S. attorney’s office clarified it was still investigating his actions and would decide later whether to charge him with a crime. [Quote, find “decide later”]
So in the meantime, Lander was released after a few hours in custody. [B roll, 00:00]
With him exiting the building accompanied by his wife and New York Governor Kathy Hochul [Pronounce 00:07]. [Same B roll, include light audio of cheering]
[Clip, 00:13 - 00:19, 00:24 - 00:28, 00:37 - 01:01] Caption: “I’m New York City Comptroller Brad Lander and I’m happy to report I am just fine. I lost a button. … I’m gonna sleep in my bed tonight, safe with my family. … At that elevator, I was separated from someone named Edgardo, who I had just met a couple of minutes earlier. Edgardo is in ICE detention, and he’s not gonna sleep in his bed tonight. So far as I know, he has no lawyer. He has been stripped of his due process rights by a government and a judge that owe him a credible fear hearing before they deport him.”
With him going on to say that he’s come to the courthouse for the past three weekends and had walked four families out who were afraid of being snatched by ICE, without incident until now. [Continue B roll]
Also adding that he did not assault a federal agent, as DHS alleged, but that he’s ready to defend himself if they press charges. [Same B roll]
Though about that, Governor Hochul also said this: [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:48 - 00:54] Caption: “To my knowledge, the charges, there are no charges. Charges have been dropped.”
And she wasn’t the only one who demanded Lander’s release; right, hundreds of protesters gathered outside the courthouse as well. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:55 - 00:57]
And even some of his rivals in the Democratic primary, which is coming up next week, either released statements condemning his arrest or personally went down there to show support.
[Clip, 11:09 - 11:13] Caption: “Was one of them Andrew Cuomo?” *Laughs* “Imagine that.”
With the second-place candidate, Zohran Mamdani [Zor-on Mom-donny], who recently endorsed and was endorsed by Brad Lander, saying: [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:06 - 00:21] Caption: “He showed us what leadership can look like, and for that he was arrested. And we have to be clear about this. This is not about an election. This is about ensuring that we protect the city and the country that we love.”
But Lander is actually the fifth elected Democrat to be arrested or manhandled by federal agents in the past couple of months.
With the first being Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan [Pronounce 00:29], who in April was arrested by the FBI for obstruction by allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant evade ICE agents. [Image and headline]
Then, in May, federal agents arrested Ras Baraka [Pronounce 00:38], the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, for trespassing as he protested outside a new immigration detention center. [Headline and B roll, 00:32]
With U.S. Representative LaMonica McIver [Pronounce] also getting arrested and charged with assaulting and impeding federal agents after she tried to stop them from arresting the mayor. [Headline and B roll, 00:09]
And then, last week federal agents forcibly removed U.S. Senator Alex Padilla [Puh-dee-uh] from a news conference in Los Angeles after he approached DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to ask her a question. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:05 - 00:19]
With him giving an impassioned speech about what happened on the Senate floor yesterday, and breaking down in tears. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 08:13 - 08:19, 08:25 - 08:56; Clip, 05:41 - 05:52] Caption: “I was pushed and pulled, struggled to maintain my balance. … I was forced to the ground, first on my knees, and then flat on my chest. And as I was handcuffed, and marched down a hallway, repeatedly asking, ‘why am I being detained?’ not once did they tell me why. … Throughout this country’s history, we have had conflict. We have had tumult. But we’ve never had a tyrant as a commander in chief.”
Go to Sundays for Dogs to get 50% off your first order of Sundays for Dogs!
-
But then, beyond all that, this situation is still developing in real time.
And we still can’t say for sure what side of the debate about US military involvement in Iran Trump will end up on.
Right, with him saying today:
“I may do it. I may not do it. I mean nobody knows what I’m gonna do.””
“Iran’s got a lot of trouble, and they want to negotiate. And I said, ‘Why didn’t you negotiate with me before all this death and destruction?” (BYTE: 0:03-0:07; 0:09-0:17)
Now, with that, I will say, Iran has negotiated.
Right, I mean, for one, reaching a deal in 2015 with the US and five other world powers to accept strict limits on its nuclear program.
But Trump then withdrew from that agreement in 2018, ordering a strike that killed a top Iranian commander in 2020, and later threatening to launch a massive attack on the country.
Though, of course, after campaigning last year as the “anti-war” candidate, you had him supporting a diplomatic solution once back in the Oval Office.
And again, Iran? It agreed to negotiate– though it rejected Trump’s demand that it stop enriching uranium and put forward a counterproposal instead.
With a sixth round of talks scheduled to take place in Oman last weekend – that is, until Israel attacked.
And from there, Trump’s own interest in talking has seemingly gone down day after day.
With him actually straight-up saying yesterday he wasn’t “too much in the mood to negotiate.”
And then threatening Iran’s Supreme Leader on social media, writing:
“We know exactly where [he] is hiding.”
Adding: “Our patience is wearing thin.” []
And, in a separate post, calling for Iran’s “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”[]
With him then answering a question today about what he meant by that by saying:
“"Two very simple words. It's very simple -- unconditional surrender."
"That means I've had it, okay? I've had it. I give up, no more, we go and blow up all the nuclear stuff that's all over the place.” []
Though, with that, notably, when asked whether it was now too late, he said “Nothing’s too late.”
And so Iran has reportedly asked other countries in the region to pressure Trump to push Israel toward a ceasefire – signaling it’d be “flexible” in the nuclear talks if a ceasefire is reached.
But also making it clear that it won’t negotiate while under attack.
With Iran's supreme leader claiming today his country would never surrender, adding:
"Any form of US military intervention will undoubtedly be met with irreparable harm.”
And then saying in another post in Farsi: “...the battle begins.”
But of course, more accurately, the battle? It continues.
With some of the latest being that more than 50 Israeli fighter jets struck targets in Iran overnight according to the IDF – including a centrifuge facility, a missile production facility near Tehran, and a university linked to the Revolutionary Guard Corps.
With one rights group claiming the death toll has risen to at least 585 people across Iran – including at least 239 civilians.
In Israel, however, as of recording, no new deaths have been reported beyond the 24 civilians killed in the first few days.
And notably, the country is now lifting some restrictions on civilians – allowing more people to return to work and gather in small groups.
With this seeming to signal that the Israeli military believes the threat from Iran — whose attacks have waned over the past two days — may be subsiding. []
Although with that said, Iran may also be conserving resources in case the US gets involved –
With the New York Times reporting that it’s getting missiles and other military equipment ready to attack American bases in the region.
Right, with a key thing to know there being that the US has more than 40,000 troops deployed in the Middle East.[]
And you also have officials warning that if the US attacks Iran, it will not only be the regime retaliating, but also Iranian-backed militias in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. []
With others further noting that Iran could start setting up mines in the Strait of Hormuz, which would be meant to pin American warships in the Persian Gulf. []
And with that, notably, more warships are reportedly on their way to the region right now.
And there, something else worth noting is that according to Politico, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has given an unusual level of authority to a single general:
U.S. Central Command chief Erik Kurilla (RHYMES WITH GORILLA) – someone who is reportedly pushing for a strong military response against Iran.
With one one former official telling the outlet:
“If the senior military guys come across as tough and warfighters, Hegseth is easily persuaded to their point of view.”
And adding: Kurilla “has been very good at getting what he wants.” []
While you have other officials noting that nearly nearly all of the general’s requests for sending ships and jets to the Middle East have been approved – even as other high-ranking officials have urged caution. []
But while we wait to see what happens, we should also talk more about what the justification would be for attacking Iran: nuclear weapons.
Right, Netanyahu claimed that there was an “imminent” threat of Iran producing nuclear weapons requiring a “pre-emptive” strike from Israel. []
And Trump has repeatedly and emphatically declared that “IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON.”
But the reality is, even if the Iranian government is a brutal, repressive regime that says a lot of crazy shit, the consensus among U.S. intelligence agencies has long been that Iran hasn’t made a decision to move forward on building a bomb.
In fact, in March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified that the intelligence community continued to assess that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. []
But this week, when asked about that, Trump replied: "I don't care what she said” –
Saying he thinks they were very close to having a nuclear weapon.[]
Right, which isn’t necessarily wrong.
I mean, Iran has actually carried out research that could make it easier to produce a nuclear weapon.
And according to Gabbard’s testimony:
“Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.” []
And so while Iran may not be building a nuclear weapon, it may have enough highly enriched uranium to do so relatively quickly – how quickly, however, is unclear.
Right, some experts have suggested it would take them only one week to get weapons-grade uranium, and then another few months to fashion a crude nuclear explosive device. []
But you’ve also had CNN reporting that US intelligence assessments have concluded that if Iran began actively developing a nuclear weapon – which, as far as we know, it hasn’t – it would need up to three years to have one ready to go.
And in either case, you also have the Wall Street Journal now reporting that the new intelligence Israel shared with the US ahead of its attack still didn’t show that Iran had plans to build a bomb.
And because of all that, Israel’s initial attack may not meet the threshold for the type of “preemptive attack” actually allowed by international law.
Right, instead, based on the information available, it might be considered an illegal preventive attack, which is taken well in advance of a potential threat.[]
With one professor of international law at a university in the UK, claiming:
“The legal argument Russia made [for invading Ukraine] is also actually very similar to this Israeli argument,"
“...it basically said that at some point in the future Ukraine and NATO are going to attack us and that's why we're doing this. But that's really not about self-defense.” []
Now that said, some argue that the Iranian nuclear threat is so serious there should be some wiggle room with the idea of self-defense
And others? They say that self-defense doesn’t apply here, at least from a legal perspective, claiming the conflict didn’t start last Friday, but on October 7, 2023, when Iran-backed Hamas attacked Israel.
With people in this camp also noting that Iran has directly attacked Israel on two occasions (1, 2) since then –
Although, notably, both were to retaliate against attacks on Iranian officials or on Iranian soil.
But that said, beyond the legality question, there’s also a question about effectiveness.
Right, you have some pointing out that if Israel doesn’t succeed, it may have actually given Iran an incentive to develop a nuclear weapon.
And one expert claiming that the incentive would “multiply dramatically if the United States joins the war.” []
And with that, many have the sense that Israel’s ultimate goal to eliminate the perceived threat is regime change, especially as you have people like the Israeli defense minister saying:
“Symbols of government are bombed and destroyed — from the Broadcasting Authority and soon other targets, and masses of residents flee.”
“This is how dictatorships collapse.” []
But ultimately, there's just so many layers to this, where I’ll end it is to take another step back.
Right, because while all eyes are on Iran at the moment, one thing to keep in mind is that the death toll is still mounting in Gaza.
In fact, yesterday? It was one of the deadliest days in weeks.
With local health officials reporting this morning that Israeli gunfire and strikes had killed at least 140 people over the previous 24 hours – including 59 people in trying to get food.
With deaths like this becoming a near-daily occurrence ever since the US and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation took over aid distribution.
So we can only hope we don’t soon have another full-blow war on our hands.
-
We could be looking at a potential cure for lupus!
Right, if you don’t know what lupus is, it’s an autoimmune condition in which the body develops antibodies against its own DNA and other cellular material.
Meaning that the body is attacking its own healthy tissue. []
People can experience joint pain, rashes, severe fatigue, inflammation in organs and it typically appears between the ages of 15 and 44 and overwhelmingly in women. []
With Dr. April Barnado, a rheumatologist and assistant professor of medicine at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, saying that lupus often shows up when women are raising families or getting promoted at work - adding,
“They wake up and feel like they have the flu or a viral infection a few days a week every week. That’s pretty debilitating.” []
And one of those women is Jennifer Le - a 36 year old woman who was diagnosed back in 2016.
Every few months, Jennifer would wind up in the emergency room with a severe rash or joint pain and swelling or sores in her mouth or even after passing out from exhaustion. []
With her saying she would often have to take medical leave from work and it would take 2 months for her to feel healthy again.
And she is also among the 50% of lupus patients to experience inflammation in their kidneys. []
Which can often result in the need for dialysis or even a kidney transplant.
Now, currently, severe forms of lupus can, at best, be managed with medications like steroids and immunosuppressants and the patient has to just deal with this lifelong condition. []
At worst, if the disease resists treatment, it can lead to organ failure and death.
Now, Jennifer tried all the conventional treatments, hoping that she could get her symptoms to stabilize and maybe she could have a baby. []
But the medications she had to take meant that pregnancy wasn’t an option and it was too dangerous to be pregnant with uncontrolled lupus.
And by last fall, she had run out of conventional treatment options.
So her physician offered her a chance to participate in a clinical trial that was testing a new therapy borrowed from cancer research called CAR T-cell therapy. []
CAR T-cell therapy is a kind of “living drug” - it modifies patients’ immune cells to help them attack misbehaving ones.
And it’s had significant success in treating certain types of cancer, particularly blood cancers. []
But there’s also a growing body of evidence that suggests that it can be used to treat severe forms of lupus.
Back in 2021, a medical student from Germany was among the first to get this treatment for her lupus and within days, her symptoms dissipated and they haven’t made an appearance since. []
Since then, dozens of lupus patients around the world have been successfully treated with CAR T-cell therapy. []
But everything isn’t said and done here - the FDA has yet to approve this treatment for lupus in the US.
And it’s prohibitively expensive - with one-time costs for approved cancer therapies coming with a price tag of $500,000 or more. []
Not to mention researchers still have a lot of unanswered questions - like how long does it last and are these patients really cured? []
But, as of now, we know the patients that have gotten this treatment are able to live their lives more freely - with Jennifer being able to return to her factory job and she can now get a good night’s sleep. []
She’s pain-free, energetic, and she’s hoping to start trying to conceive later this year.
And while this isn’t our usual brand of good news, it’s always good to know that we are pushing forward to find treatment and cures for diseases that countless people are forced to live with every day.
So we’ll be sure to keep an eye on this as it develops further but I would love to know your thoughts in those comments down below.
o to Vessi for 15% off your first order.
