by Steve Benen | Apr 9, 2026 | Congress, Iran Tensions, Maddowblog, News, Politics
Roughly 40 days after the U.S. war in Iran began, the Republican-led Congress still hasn’t held a single hearing about the deadly and costly military offensive. Common sense might suggest that lawmakers might at least want to ask some questions — about the war, its merits, its cost, its objectives, the way in which it’s been executed, etc. — but to date, the grand total of public hearings remains at zero, despite Democratic appeals for Congress to do its job.
It’s emblematic of a larger problem: Against a backdrop of war, GOP lawmakers are embracing their own irrelevance.
On Wednesday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries sent a letter to colleagues, which read in part, “A two-week ceasefire is woefully insufficient. Accordingly, we have demanded that the House come back into session immediately in order to vote on our resolution to permanently end the war in the Middle East.” Those demands have gone ignored.
The New York Democrat also made related plans to attempt passage of a War Powers Resolution during a pro forma session on Thursday, as part of an effort to limit the president’s authority to continue military operations in Iran without explicit congressional approval.
Those efforts are all but certain to fail, but they are born of desperation: Democratic leaders and the vast majority of their members want to do something — to exert congressional authority, to limit Trump’s powers, or preferably both — even as Republicans agree to leave questions over war and peace in the hands of a scandal-plagued and unpopular president who doesn’t appear to have any idea what he’s doing.
The New York Times highlighted GOP leaders’ scandalous indifference:
The
by Steve Benen | Apr 9, 2026 | Iran Tensions, Maddowblog, News, Politics
During the Cold War, it was common to hear American political figures condemn “Godless communists” in the then-Soviet Union. In fact, the conflict led the United States to go out of its way to create a contrast with our foes: If Russia was going to be atheistic, many American politicians said, it was incumbent on us to become less secular.
As a result, in 1954, Congress officially changed the Pledge of Allegiance to include the phrase “under God.” Three years later, federal lawmakers kept going, adding “In God We Trust” to all paper currency.
Seven decades later, the United States is at war with a literal theocracy run by radical religious clerics — but instead of moving in the opposite direction, key American officials are using faith-based war messaging that sounds awfully similar to the kind of language Iranians use all the time.
On Monday, the day before the tenuous ceasefire was announced, Donald Trump not only insisted that God supports U.S. actions in Iran, the president also claimed he was in a position to convey God’s wishes to the public. Around the same time, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth explicitly likened the rescue of a missing American airman shot down over Iran to the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The day after the ceasefire was announced, we heard more of the same. MS NOW reported as part of the network’s liveblog coverage:
Hegseth invoked God throughout [his Pentagon press conference], again tying his Christian faith to U.S. military endeavors.
Referring to the war with Iran, Hegseth said, ‘Our troops, our American warriors, deserve the credit for this day, but God deserves all the glory.’
The beleaguered Pentagon chief
by Steve Benen | Apr 8, 2026 | Iran Tensions, Maddowblog, News, Politics
As a tenuous two-week ceasefire in Iran begins, it’s easy to breathe a sigh of relief. Whether or not the pause endures, the suspension of combat operations means less death and bloodshed, less destruction and reduced odds of Donald Trump committing deliberate war crimes.
But as the dust settles on the agreement and highly relevant details start to come into focus, the American president would have the public believe the unnecessary war he launched is a triumph. “Total and complete victory, 100%,” the Republican told AFP. “No question about it.”
In reality, there are plenty of questions about it.
To begin with, did this war actually achieve anything?
On Feb. 28, when Trump announced the start of the U.S. offensive in a prerecorded video filmed at his glorified country club in Florida, the president didn’t explain why he’d decided to launch the war, but he did present the public with five objectives:
1. Destroy Iran’s missiles and missile industry.
2. Annihilate the Iranian navy.
3. Sever the ties between Tehran and its proxies in the Middle East.
4. Prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
5. Create the conditions necessary for regime change.
The White House’s stated objectives in Iran then evolved as the war continued — a problem that was itself emblematic of the administration’s incompetence and misguided policymaking — but roughly 39 days after Trump’s remarks, if the U.S. mission were in fact a “total and complete victory,” we’d expect to see check marks alongside each of those five goals.
But that’s simply not the case. Iran’s navy has certainly been decimated, but the other four objectives have plainly not been met.
What’s more, just a few days into the
by Steve Benen | Apr 7, 2026 | Iran Tensions, Maddowblog, News, Politics
It’s not exactly a secret that most Americans oppose the U.S. war in Iran. Donald Trump tends to claim that polls that fail to tell him what he wants to hear are part of an elaborate media conspiracy that only he understands, but in this case even he seems to realize that the military offensive he ordered is not popular.
When a reporter asked Monday, “What do you say to Americans who are not a fan of the war?” the Republican president replied, “They’re foolish, because the war is about one thing: Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”
Speaking of foolishness, Trump’s comment didn’t make a lot of sense. For one thing, it’s generally not a good idea for a president to scold his fellow Americans. For another, given that Iran does not have, has never had and was not close to building a nuclear weapon, his latest rationale for the deadly conflict fell far short of coherence.
But as it turned out, this wasn’t his only complaint about public attitudes in the country he ostensibly leads. Politico reported:
President Donald Trump on Monday said he would like to ‘take’ Iran’s oil — but that he hasn’t because Americans want to see the war brought to a close.
‘If I had my choice, I’d keep the oil. But I also want to make the people of our country happy,’ Trump told reporters at the annual White House Easter egg roll.
As part of the same exchange, the president said: “Unfortunately, the American people would like to see us come home. If it were up to me, I’d take the oil, I’d keep the oil, it would
by Steve Benen | Apr 7, 2026 | Iran Tensions, Maddowblog, News, Politics
After months of rhetoric about possible war crimes in Iran, Donald Trump upped the ante on Sunday morning, publishing an unhinged threat to his social media platform in which the president explicitly vowed to target Iranian power plants and bridges. As Easter Sunday progressed, he did brief interviews with several media outlets to echo that point.
The New York Times reported soon after that, according to legal experts, historians and former U.S. officials, “No other recent American president has talked so openly about committing potential war crimes.”
A day later, Trump fielded questions from reporters — first at a White House Easter Egg Roll event, then at a White House press conference — who pressed the Republican on his willingness to target Iranian infrastructure, in defiance of international law.
It didn’t go well.
The president, who must’ve realized he’d face these questions and had plenty of time to huddle with his aides and prepare coherent answers, peddled three distinct responses to the line of inquiry.
1. Refuse to talk about his plans for possible war crimes. MS NOW’s Lindsey Pipia asked, “Are you committed to committing a war crime in this war with Iran?” Trump heard the question but refused to answer it. “What else?” he said to no one in particular, as if the question wasn’t worth his time or consideration.
Q: Are you committing a war crime?TRUMP: *refuses to answer* What else?— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-04-06T15:42:40.701Z
2. Change the definition of “war crime.” As part of a separate exchange, Trump was asked whether he considered hitting civilian infrastructure to be a war crime. “You know what’s a war crime?” he responded. “Having a nuclear weapon,
by Steve Benen | Apr 6, 2026 | Iran Tensions, Maddowblog, News, Politics
As many Americans woke up on Sunday morning, they were greeted with heartening news worth celebrating: A missing American airman who’d been shot down over Iran had been rescued as part of a successful military operation. Common sense might’ve suggested that Donald Trump, on Easter morning, would want the public to focus on the breakthrough developments.
The Republican president, however, appeared eager to change the conversation. MS NOW reported:
Fresh off the daring nighttime rescue of the U.S. airman shot down in Iran on Friday, President Donald Trump warned Iran Sunday morning, “Open the F*****’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH!”
The president then set a new deadline of 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday for Iran to reach a deal with the U.S., making yet another extension.
As difficult as it was to believe, this was the exact wording of the message Trump published to his social media platform on Sunday morning: “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the F*****’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.”
If the president’s goal was to generate attention and spark some conversation, the missive was a remarkable success.
Over the course of just four sentences, Trump managed to breathe new life into the discussion about whether he has the mental stability to serve as the chief executive of a global superpower. He opened the door to plans for apparent war crimes. He peddled juvenile Islamophobia. He renewed questions about why there’s no one at the
