Trump Says Some Republicans Want to ‘Obliterate’ Iran While Others Prefer a Nice Little Chat First

U.S. airstrikes carried out a day earlier, on July 17, 2026,
in Iran's Hormozgan Province did this.

Apparently the Grand Old Party is having its usual family meeting about Iran, and the options on the table range from “please pass the nukes” to “maybe we should text them first.” 

President Donald Trump explained this morning on “Fox & Friends” that some elected Republicans are begging the U.S. to hit Iran “harder” than ever before, while the more refined members of the party would rather try sweet-talking Tehran into a deal before anyone starts rearranging the country’s infrastructure with high explosives.

Steve Doocy, ever the calm adult in the room, asked where the Republican coalition currently stands on the Iran situation, especially with midterms lurking in November like an unpaid bill.

"Some Republicans said, 'well, why don't we hit them harder?'" Trump said, adding, "You have a group of people that want it to be obliterated in the truest sense of the word. Then you have a group that says, this is actually a good time to make a deal for them."

The deal-loving Republicans, Trump helpfully clarified, still keep a backup plan in their back pocket: if the Iranians refuse to play nice, just “finish the job.” Finishing the job, in this particular vocabulary, means turning Iran’s bridges, power plants, and other inconvenient pieces of modern life into modern art via airstrikes.

"I think about 91 million people without power, without bridges," Trump added. "So I think we have a very strong position right now. They know I'm going to do that. If they don't make a deal, the bridges are going to be gone literally in less than . . . two hours."

Now that is a "strong negotiating position." 

I want to thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

The proverbial chickens come home in Austin, TX

The Austin PD is hundreds of cops short of a safe city as crime rises to dramatic heights. Of course, this was predictable after the city had undergone and felt the aftershocks of the  "Defund the Police" movement which predictably created staff shortages and thus leaving 911 callers on hold. 

Thomas Villarreal, president of the Austin Police Association, says the city council is to blame as they neglected law enforcement in the name of wokeness. On Monday, Villarreal told "Fox & Friends" the alleged screwups have created a larger problem.

"We just continue to have a city council that doesn't show its police officers that cares about them," he explained.

"Back in December 2017, we had a city council vote down a police contract for the first time in the history of negotiating contracts. And, you know, we pushed forward to 2018, tried to get back under contract. Our city decided to go through what they called reimagining police oversight. And then, you know, we got back under contract."

Well residents of Austin can now reimagine a knife held to their throat or their stores being mob-robbed.

That was before the 2020 summer riots that followed the death of the sainted thug George Floyd, Villarreal noted, adding that 20 officers were then indicted for "doing their jobs" during the chaos.

Fox News' Steve Doocy reported that WalletHub data shows Austin as 15th in the nation of the most homicides in the U.S. and notes that more than 800 cops left the force in the last six years. The hemorrhaging of officers also came as the Austin PD suffered $150 million budget cut – roughly a third – in 2020.

"We just have a backward slide. You know, we're we're a growing city, a city that should be up around 2,000 officers and growing right now," Villarreal said.

"I've got about 1,475 officers in our police department and, you know, we're moving in the wrong direction. There's less and less and less resources to go out and do the job. I've got detectives who are pulled away from their caseload to just help answer 911 calls because we just don't have the resources to adequately police the city."

Democratic Mayor of Austin Kirk Watson said last month that the city was suspending its partnership with the Texas Department of Safety, an agency whose officers respond to emergency calls to assist the police. To a visitor from another planet, this has all the trappings of a person who wants his city to fail. 

Well, at least the city has finally gotten what they voted for and they got it good and hard.

Tweet

Democrats and their wacky weed want 80-seat House gain

Pelosi thinking about tearing down
the Capitol because it was built
for slave-holders

Orange County, Calif. -- The midterm elections are just down the road and the Democrats may be smoking wacky weed. They are hallucinating about winning 80 House seats and the Republicans are not going to take it sitting down or lighting up.

"We are building the largest battlefield in a decade," Tyler Law, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesman bragged.

With people like Nancy Pelosi, Anthony Weiner, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz in the party, what could possibly go wrong?

Wasserman Schultz, who looks like a spokeswoman for the now defunct "Poofume" has her own troubles, and Pelosi may be completely senile by the time the midterms roll around.

The Democratic organizers believe they have a good chance in no less than 80 districts across America, and they might, if they can get more illegal immigrants to vote. But the truth is, they lost all four of this year's special election bids for seats held by Republicans and they will likely have a similar showing.

According to Steve Doocy of Fox News Network, the Democrats' best chances at picking up seats could happen in the 23 districts  where voters split their tickets last year by picking Hillary Clinton for president and a GOP lawmaker for the House.

The Democrats, historically seen as the party of slavery, are trying to place emphasis on recruiting candidates who have actually served in the military--a rare bird for them indeed.

"Veterans obviously have a huge amount of credibility," Law told Fox News. "Credibility with Democrats, with independents, and with Republicans."

But just because someone is a veteran, it doesn't make them politically astute or competent.

So the GOP is going on offense.

"Just three weeks before Election Day in 2016, [Democratic House Minority Leader] Nancy Pelosi was on TV saying they'd take the House back, win 30 seats," said Matt Gorman, the communications director at the National Republican Congressional Committee. "We're still in the majority."

"We're going to expand the map into Trump country," Gorman said and the GOP is going to zero in on those 12 districts where voters split between Trump and Democratic lawmakers on the ticket.

Real Clear Politics election analyst David Byler believes the Democrats may be at a disadvantage. "The math is slanted against them in terms of how the districts are drawn," he said, referring to gerrymandering.

Hopefully, the Democrats are totally off base with their hopes to take so many seats back in the House and hopefully, as an aside, Michael Moore will move to another country and take up the Communist cause.  



Tweet