The MAGA Civil War Just Got CRAZY As Europe Refuses To Help Trump’s Iran War & Republicans Quit
PDS Published 03/16/2026
-
We’re now more than two weeks into the US and Israel’s war on Iran.
The death toll is rising, the fallout is growing, and Donald Trump is asking for help from allies that he has repeatedly insulted, bullied, and threatened.
And as he continues to make threats, at least some are refusing to get roped in, and the president may be considering another option: boots on the ground.
And let’s start there….because it’s believed that any potential ground operation is likely to target a place called Kharg Island.
And the military actually just attacked it for the first time during this war on Friday—with Trump announcing the operation on social media and claiming:
…the United States Central Command executed one of the most powerful bombing raids in the History of the Middle East” — adding:
“...for reasons of decency, I have chosen NOT to wipe out the Oil Infrastructure on the Island. However, should Iran, or anyone else, do anything to interfere with the Free and Safe Passage of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz, I will immediately reconsider this decision.”
And with that, the next day, CENTCOM confirmed what was described as a “a large-scale precision strike”—saying:
“U.S. forces successfully struck more than 90 Iranian military targets…while preserving the oil infrastructure.” (BROLL)
And that last part is key because Kharg Island—which is located roughly fifteen miles off the coast of Iran—is home to facilities that export ninety percent of the country’s oil
So taking out that infrastructure would be a massive blow to the regime but it would also throw the markets into even more chaos;
cripple whatever hypothetical new government might emerge if the current one were to fall;
and make it far harder for the US to benefit from Iran’s oil in a Venezuela-style scenario that Trump has reportedly pushed for (BROLL: 0:01-0:10).
But with all that, you still had Trump telling NBC on Saturday that the strikes there had “totally demolished” most of the island and that the US “may hit it a few more times just for fun.” []
With a senior White House official then telling Axios that “No one should read into anything more than what the president announced” and that “The president has made no decisions on Kharg Island." []
But this official also said "that could change" if the effort to clear the strait drags on—saying "The president is not going to wait around and let the Iranians dictate the pace of the conflict." []
And with that, we’re seeing reports that Trump is seriously considering an operation to seize Kharg Island.
And he’s reportedly drawn to the idea because it would constitute "an economic knockout of the regime" — essentially defunding the Iranian government without all the downsides of destroying the oil infrastructure there []
But, of course, there are still downsides:
1) the move would also require boots on the ground;
and 2) it could still push Iran to launch even more aggressive strikes against oil facilities and pipelines across the region—especially in Saudi Arabia. []
But despite the risks, the US is now deploying 2,500 Marines to the Middle East—adding to the 50,000 already there.
And while officials declined to say what their mission is, they're reportedly equipped to join a potential operation to seize the Island.
And, notably, that’s not the only boots on the ground scenario being considered.
The US and Israel have also reportedly discussed sending special forces into Iran to secure its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
And two American officials told NBC News last week that Trump has privately expressed a serious interest in deploying troops inside Iran.
Either for an operation like that or one aimed at enabling the US to benefit from Iran’s oil production like what came out of the operation in Venezuela.
Trump also claimed in that NBC interview this weekend that Iran is ready to negotiate a ceasefire but he's not ready to make a deal.
But Iran’s foreign minister then told CBS News that his country was “ready to defend ourselves as long as it takes” and denied Trump’s claim that Iran wanted to make a deal—saying:
“We never asked for a cease-fire, and we have never asked even for negotiation.”
And with that, despite Trump’s threats, he insisted that Iran would continue to lock down the Strait of Hormuz as long as necessary— saying:
The Strait “is open, but closed to our enemies, to those who carried out this cowardly aggression against us and to their allies.”
And with that, you’ve now had several non-Iranian oil tankers—including from India, Pakistan, and Turkey—getting permission to go through the strait.
Which is notable because until now Iran has been fully blocking Gulf countries from exporting their oil while only allowing tankers picking up Iranian oil to pass freely—keeping its own supply flowing to American adversaries including China, which is the biggest buyer of Iranian oil.
With many experts saying that as long as the blockade holds Trump may not be able to end the war even if he wanted.
And Iran starting to pick and choose who gets through may only give it more leverage, especially if traditional US allies decide negotiating with Iran is better than working with Trump.
Right, and on that note, you had Trump claiming in a social media post over the weekend that the US and several other countries will send warships to the Gulf to reopen commercial shipping.
With him also calling on China, France, Japan, South Korea the UK and others “to send ships “so that the Hormuz Strait will no longer be a threat by a Nation that has been totally decapitated”—adding:
“In the meantime, the United States will be bombing the hell out of the shoreline, and continually shooting Iranian Boats and Ships out of the water. One way or the other, we will soon get the Hormuz Strait OPEN, SAFE, and FREE!”
With him following up a few hours later—saying:
“....the Countries of the World that receive Oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage, and we will help — A LOT!”
“The U.S. will also coordinate with those Countries so that everything goes quickly, smoothly, and well. This should have always been a team effort, and now it will be — It will bring the World together toward Harmony, Security, and Everlasting Peace!”
You then had Trump “demanding" that NATO countries help the US secure the strait while telling the Financial Times “it will be very bad for the future of NATO” if they refuse—words seen by many as a threat.
And with that, while claimed he was getting a “good response”, so far, no country has publicly committed yet —and some have outright rejected the idea.
With Germany’s defense minister, for example, saying:
“This is not our war; we did not start it.”
“What does Donald Trump expect from, say, a handful or two of European frigates in the Strait of Hormuz?” He needs them to achieve what the mighty US Navy cannot manage on its own there, is that it? That’s the question I’m asking myself.”
You also had a spokesperson for the government confirming there would be no German involvement and pointing out that Trump started this war without them, saying:
"I would also like to remind you that the U.S. and Israel did not consult us before the war, and that Washington explicitly stated at the start of the war that European assistance was neither necessary nor desired.”
Now, with all that, the UK is apparently considering sending ships and mine-hunting drones to help out.
But you also had prime minister Keir Starmer saying he urged a “swift resolution” to the conflict and insisting his country would not be “drawn into wider war.”
And while France has previously said it would be willing to escort once the security situation stabilizes—that doesn’t seem to be the case yet.
And you’ve actually had the country, along with Italy, asking to talk with Iran about allowing their ships to pass through the strait.
Showing some countries are looking for ways to protect their shipping and energy supplies without Trump, just like he started this war without them.
But, of course, in the meantime, the war continues.
Overall, more than 2,100 people have been reported killed so far—including 1,3000 Iranian civilians, 850 people in Lebanon, 13 American service members, and at least 12 people in Israel. []
And today, US and Israeli forces have continued to bombard Iran, while Iranian counterattacks across the region have kept up as well.
And notably, you had an Israeli spokesperson telling reporters there are detailed operational plans for the war with Iran for the next three weeks along with additional plans extending further.
Although what the timeline actually ends up being is unknown—with Trump most saying the war will end when he “feels it in his bones” as experts warn he’s risking getting traped in a cycle of escalation that might not end anytime soon.
And regardless of what happens with Iran, Israel’s war in Lebanon might continue indepdently.
Right, today, officials said they were yet again expanding their offensive against Hezbollah there—saying the military was moving into “new areas” without giving details.
Although there are fears that it’s laying the groundwork for occupying large parts of the country.
And, also, as we’ve talked about before, the near-perpetual violence in Palestinian territories has not let up during all of this either.
Just over the past few days, Israeli forces killed at least 12 Palestinians between the West Bank and Gaza.
Right, first, you had troops shooting and killing four members of the same family, including two young children, in the West Bank— with Israeli authorities claiming the vehicle had accelerated toward the troops, who feared for their safety and opened fire.
And then, in Gaza, an airstrike killed eight police officers affiliated with the Hamas-controlled government, according to the Gazan interior ministry.
-
And while the growing fallout from Trump's war in Iran continues to take more lives, the war within his own party is growing too, and it’s getting messier.
With Trump now weighing in on a heated feud involving micropenis allegations.
And the two main players here are Megyn Kelly and Mark Levin.
Right, you know Megyn Kelly as the former Fox News host turned independent conservative commentator who really cares about the nuance in the definition of “pedophile.”
And Mark Levin is a conservative radio host and Fox News host, and Trump actually appointed him to the Homeland Security Advisory Council last year.
But Mark and Megyn have very different thoughts about the war.
Right, Megyn has been very critical of it, claiming we are fighting this war for Israel, that U.S. troops are dying for foreign interests.
But on the first day of the war, Mark praised Trump and “our wonderful Israeli allies” for:[]
“fighting a righteous and monumentally important battle for freedom, security, and humanity.”
And while this is notably not the first issue they have publicly clashed over, things really took a turn over the weekend when Mark took issue with some of the content Megyn was reposting,
Including one tweet claiming the man who attacked a Michigan synagogue had lost family members in a recent Israeli attack in Lebanon.[]
And just for context’s sake the New York Times has since backed that up, saying the man’s brother was a Hezbollah commander killed in an airstrike, []
And three other relatives were reportedly killed in that attack, too.
But Mark was still not pleased with Megyn’s choice to retweet the message.
So he shared a post condemning Megyn, claiming she was using her platform to imply that the Michigan attack was excusable or justified. []
With Mark then calling himself her “Evil. Diabolical. [and] Gone.”[]
To which Megyn shot back:
“I’m sorry you have a micro penis [Mark,] but don’t drag the rest of us into your drama.”[]
And things only devolved from there, with Mark calling Megyn an “emotionally unhinged, lewd, and petulant wreck” who has:
“completely revealed and destroyed herself. She’s everything people say she is, but much worse.”[]
So Megyn then doubled down on her insult, dubbing him “Micropenis Mark,” and claiming he:[]
“tweets about me obsessively in the crudest, nastiest terms possible. Literally more than some stalkers I’ve had arrested. He doesn’t like it when women like me fight back. Bc of his micropenis.”[]
With her going on to claim that Mark has shitposted about her over 100 times since November, but she has only responded six times, at first asking him to tone it down before he “gets someone killed.” []
Then you also had Mark calling her a “harlot” who wakes up and has micropenises on her mind. []
And so you had a ton of other people responding to all this, weighing in, but the biggest name to drop his two cents was the president himself. [][]
With Trump coming to the defense of Mark Levin, calling him “a truly Great American Patriot” who is:[]
“somewhat under siege by other people with far less Intellect, Capability, and Love for our Country.”
And Trump then adding:
“He is a true Conservative, and Intellect, far smarter than those who criticize him …When you hear others unfairly attack Mark, remember that they are jealous and angry Human Beings, whose “sway” is much less than the Public understands, and will, now that they know where I stand, rapidly diminish.”
“Those that speak ill of Mark will quickly fall by the wayside, as do the people whose ideas, policies, and footings are not sound. THEY ARE NOT MAGA, I AM, and MAGA includes not allowing Iran, a Sick, Demented, and Violent Terrorist Regime, to have a Nuclear Weapon to blow up the United States of America.”
And so Mark thanked Trump for the post, saying he was “humbled” and “honored” by the message.[]
But Megyn did not believe it was authentic, writing that:[]
“Micro penis [Mark] is such a SMALL MAN he had to go beg the president for a pat on the head (in the middle of a war!) to make himself feel better about … well, you know.”
“Just like all feckless, weakling bullies Micro can dish it out but he can’t take it…he ran crying to Daddy.”
And while Mark of course denied that he asked Trump to make that post, the post itself has still generated a ton of discourse.
Because it showed Trump weighing in on the MAGA civil war, and acknowledging the power he has within it.
Right, he basically said now that I am coming out against critics of Mark Levin, which in some ways means any critics of the war, those critics will have less reach and less power.
He was really using this to send a message to those who oppose him here.
And this is not the only time Trump has made a move like this in recent days.
Right, just over a week ago he slammed Tucker Carlson, who has been a focal point of the MAGA civil war and a critic of the war in Iran.
With Trump telling an ABC News reporter that:[]
"Tucker has lost his way…he's not MAGA. MAGA is saving our country. MAGA is making our country great again. MAGA is America first, and Tucker is none of those things. And Tucker is really not smart enough to understand that."
And now, Tucker is making headlines for claiming that his stance on the war has proven so controversial that the CIA has been reading his texts to frame him for a crime.
“So the other day, I found out that the CIA is preparing some kind of referral against me, a crime report, the DOJ, on the basis of a supposed crime I committed. What’s that crime? Well, talking to people in Iran before the war. They read my texts. So the crime under consideration would be foreign agent act, or something like that, acting as an agent of a foreign power.” (0:00-0:27)
Obviously he did not provide any evidence to prove there is any investigation or any pending charges.
But he did deny that he is an agent of a foreign power, and suggested any alleged investigation into him would be politically motivated.
“Countries tend to become more authoritarian in war time, it’s just the nature of war.” (1:27-1:31)
“There is much less tolerance for any kind of dissent in the homeland.” (1:40-1:46)
And he of course had people on his side supporting him, right, with Candace Owens saying that:
“If they come for Tucker, we ride at dawn. Really nothing else to say here.”
But we will have to see how far Trump’s words go amid this MAGA infighting.
Right, does him condemning a personality actually hurt them? Are most members of MAGA that loyal to Trump?
Or is there somewhere they draw the line? Is he losing some of his base to more extreme factions of the party?
Just go to Zocdoc and download the Zocdoc app for FREE. Then find and book a top-rated doctor today!
-
And then getting back into the news, we’ve got Trump and his lackeys going full censorship mode.
Right, over the weekend, the FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatened to revoke the licenses from broadcasters the agency deems as “fake news” or those operating with a “liberal bias.”
Saying in a post on X,
“Broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions - also known as the fake news - have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up.”
“The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not.” []
Now, he was specifically responding to a post on Truth Social by Trump complaining about the coverage of the war in Iran.
As well as Pete Hegseth’s open criticism of CNN and their coverage - with Hegseth calling CNN, quote, “fundamentally unserious” and adding,
“The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better.”
Right, there referring to the attempted takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery - including CNN - by Paramount, which Trump’s billionaire ally David Ellison owns.
Now, the issue of bias in the media has been a major Trump talking point for years and years.
Right, the “fake news” “unfair coverage” thing has been around for a WHILE.
But the concerning part is that, since coming back into office, it’s moved from rhetoric to action.
In fact, Trump’s Truth Social post that Carr was responding to was a part of a wider posting spree about the media and the impact his administration has had on it since coming back into office.
Right, at one point he shared an infographic titled, “President Trump is Reshaping the Media.”
Which highlights the defunding of PBS and NPR, the doing away with fact checking on Meta platforms, and the mass layoffs at the Washington Post.
In the case of the FCC and Carr, however, this seems unlikely to develop very far past threats.
Right, the FCC hasn’t denied a license renewal in decades - with CNN saying any government action against someone holding a license would likely result in a lengthy, First Amendment-centered legal battle. []
With esports saying things like,
“Chairman Carr’s threats are hollow. He poses no genuine danger to any broadcasters’ licenses based on his unhappiness with their content.” []
And that was echoed by the only Democratic commissioner on the FCC, Anna Gomez, who said,
“The FCC can issue threats all day long, but it is powerless to carry them out. Such threats violate the First Amendment and will go nowhere. Broadcasters should continue covering the news, fiercely and independently, without fear of government pressure.” []
That isn’t to say these are empty threats that should be shrugged off, however - there are still places where the FCC holds a considerable amount of sway.
Particularly when acquiring or transferring a license - which is why companies are uniquely vulnerable to government pressure while trying to complete a merger. []
And media advocacy groups have argued that the threat itself holds a lot of power - saying Carr’s goal is more about pressuring news outlets into submission and self-censorship. []
With legal director at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression saying in a statement,
“Again and again, Carr’s tenure as FCC chairman has been marked by his shameless willingness to bully and threaten our free press.”
And that is part of the reason his latest comments have raised such alarm among elected officials on both sides of the aisle.
Right, even as Trump is applauding Carr’s move here, other Republicans are trying to pump the brakes.
With Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin saying that he’s not a fan of the government trying to exert control over a private enterprise or meddle with freedom of speech.
Adding,
“I’m in big support of the first amendment. I do not like the heavy hand of government, no matter who’s wielding it. So no, I would rather the federal government stay out of the private sector as much as possible.”
“The federal government’s role is to protect our freedoms, protect our constitutional rights.” []
Though obviously Democrats are taking a much stronger stance.
California Governor Gavin Newsom called Carr’s threats, quote, “flagrantly unconstitutional” and Senator Elizabeth Warren said it is, quote, “straight out of the authoritarian playbook.”
And adding,
“It’s illegal for the government to censor free speech it just doesn’t like about Trump’s Iran war.” []
Though Senator Chris Murphy had an even stronger response - writing on X,
“We aren't on the verge of a totalitarian takeover. WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT. Act like it.” []
Right, it seems like with every insane, out of pocket choice the Trump administration makes, they’re pushing even their allies in Congress further and further away.
-
But Trump is also a big reason that Lawmakers — and specifically Republicans — are now leaving Congress at a record-setting pace.
You know shit’s bad when even Congress can’t stand Congress…
Right, according to NPR's tracker, 1 in 8 members now say they plan to leave their post this year — that’s the second-highest amount in the last century.
And specifically, per the most recent count, there are 13 senators and 56 representatives who are either retiring or running for a different office.
Though, notably here, it looks like NPR’s count includes three senators who are running for governorships but will only resign if they win.
Right, their senate seats aren’t up for election this year, so they can remain in their current positions if they lose their gubernatorial races.
So, as of right now, there are 10 senators leaving for sure, but if those other three do end up going the same way, 2026 would be tied with 1996 for the highest number of Senate retirements ever recorded.[]
And that would also put the combined total departures in Congress at 69 — which is VERY close to the previous record of 72 back in 1992.[]
But one thing that’s SUPER significant here is that we’re seeing a disproportionate number of Republicans leaving — in fact, GOP leaders make up 60% of the departees in both chambers.[][]
And in the House specifically, those numbers are record-breaking — we’ve NEVER seen this many Republicans leaving in a given cycle.
But, very interestingly, this does follow a trend we’ve seen in recent years where the party in power actually ends up seeing MORE retirements ahead of the midterms because the president’s party usually loses seats in those elections.
Right, during Trump’s first term in 2018, 34 House Republicans chose not to run for reelection — that’s nearly double the 18 Democrats who left ahead of an election where the House flipped blue.
And it was almost the exact opposite under Biden in 2022 — ahead of the GOP takeover, 31 Democrats retired, compared to 18 Republicans.
Now, as far as why we’re seeing so many exits this year, it’s a real mixed bag, but a big reason is simply that many lawmakers are taking a swing at other offices.
Right, in total, 15 are running for governorships in their states, 16 are trying to move from the House to the Senate, and one rep is running for attorney general in Texas because even that job is better than doing Congress.
But a majority of departing officials — 37 of the 56 — they are simply leaving public office altogether.
And one of the big reasons that lawmakers are choosing that path is simply because they’re just fucking old.
Right, nearly half of the Congress members who are in their 80s are taking their leave, with the most prominent names, of course, being former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Though, on the flip-side, that also means that MORE than half of the electeds who are 80+ are staying in office — including 3 who will be 90+ if they make it to the end of the year… which is just… yikes…
But we’ve also seen plenty of leaders who are older — but not quite at the level of walking corpse — announcing that they will take their leave before they start rotting on the floor, with many saying it’s time to pass the torch to a younger generation.
But, of course, age isn’t the only factor — plenty have cited health reasons or the desire to spend more time with family, and there are also many on both sides of the aisle who are leaving because the job fucking sucks.
Right, experts say the big exodus this year indicates a deeper trend as lawmakers face a toxic environment of increasing partisan gridlock, polarization, and safety threats, to name a few.
But for Republicans specifically, it appears that many of them just see the writing on the wall and want to get the fuck out before they lose their race or their party loses power ahead of an election where Democrats are widely expected to absolutely dominate.
And Trump also seems to be a driving factor here — right, in the last election, he was a major boon for the many members who rode his coattails to victory, but now that he’s so poisonously unpopular, he could have the opposite effect.
Which also helps explain why we’re seeing nearly twice as many Republicans leaving this year compared to 2024.
But, that said, it can also be just as deadly for Republicans to distance themselves from Trump — a good chunk of the departing GOP lawmakers have publicly split with the president, including moderates who have refused to fall in line with Regime Daddy and now-former MAGA heads like Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Beyond that, another element at play here is the gerrymandering arms race that Trump’s kicked off by forcing several red states to undergo unprecedented mid-decade redistricting to gain more GOP seats, which prompted blue states to counter.
With the result being that some Congress members are now in districts they barely recognize and no longer think they can win.
But, with all this, the big question that actually matters most is: how will these retirements impact the midterms?
And the answer there is: it will certainly make them more interesting.
Right, there are a handful of departing officials who hold seats in competitive districts, and most of them are Republicans.
So that means that Democrats are even MORE likely to pick up those seats because they don’t have to contend with GOP incumbents who have the advantage of name recognition, institutional fundraising, and deeper networks.
What’s more, experts also say that many OTHER seats that normally WOULDN’T be competitive suddenly come into play when members retire and the incumbency advantage is taken out of the equation.
And because the retiring lawmakers are disproportionately Republican, they’re basically creating more red seats that Democrats could potentially flip.
And these exits can actively determine the outcome of the election, with a political scientist explaining that when members leave over concerns that their party will lose in midterm elections, “it creates a little bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
But, of course, there’s a lot of time between now and Novemeber — I mean that’s basically an eternity in Trump years.
But it’ll be really interesting to see how these retirements impact the outcome of the election, as well as if we see more lawmakers deciding to leave in the coming months.
-
If you’re flying in the U.S. anytime soon, I've got some bad news for you: airport disruptions are going to get worse as the partial government shutdown drags on past the one-month mark, with hundreds of TSA workers taking time off or quitting entirely after missing their first paycheck.
Right, travelers have already been experiencing long security lines and delays at multiple major airports around the country as TSA agents have called out of work at higher rates.
And on Friday, the Department of Homeland Security announced that more than 300 of these TSA agents have quit their jobs, noting that this is “the third time in nearly six months” that the employees are being forced to work without pay. []
Right, and to that point, the timing here is key — union representatives say the latest funding battle has disproportionately impacted workers who are still struggling to recover financially from the longest shutdown in history last fall.
And even though the federal employees received back pay once the 43-day-long shutdown ended, it was too little, too late for many TSA workers.
Right, TSA agents make an average of $50,000 annually, meaning that many are functionally living paycheck-to-paycheck as the cost-of-living continues to rise.
And for some, waiting for backpay once this latest shutdown ends — that’s not a viable option.
With union officials telling reporters that a lot of agents had to take on second jobs to cover basic living expenses during the last shutdown, and many also depleting their savings or surviving on credit card debt that they’re still paying off.
And, unsurprisingly, that led to a mass exodus, with TSA data showing that around 1,110 officers left the agency in October and November.
And the 300 who have left this time around, that’s likely just the start.
Right, in addition to the fact that so many employees are still reeling from the last shutdown, union reps also say that TSA workers don’t have the same resources they did last fall.
Right, some agents were given short-term, no-interest loans from their banks, and multiple non-profit groups hosted events to provide groceries and household supplies.
Now, notably here, some airports have started requesting donations for impacted workers — this including major hubs like Denver, Seattle, and Las Vegas.
But employees have told reporters that they aren’t getting as much support this time around, with some saying they have had to withdraw thousands of dollars from their retirement accounts or borrow money from family and friends.
And even though most agents won’t quit entirely, the security disruptions are still going to get worse because more and more agents have to call out as they take on second jobs and cancel childcare.
And while some industry experts say we are still a few weeks away from the point of crisis, there also doesn’t appear to be an end in sight.
Right, on Thursday, Senate Democrats blocked legislation to fund DHS for the fourth time since the shutdown began.
With Democrats arguing that Republicans are still refusing to agree to strong enough restrictions to rein in ICE, and noting that GOP leaders shut down a proposal to fund TSA alone while negotiations continue.
But meanwhile, on the other side, we’ve seen Republican leaders accusing their counterparts of refusing to negotiate in good faith.
But the longer Congress continues its standoff, tens of thousands of TSA workers will continue to suffer, and millions of American travelers will continue to experience disruptions.
