First Draft: Israel First, America Second
Trump’s madman war with Iran has led to Democrats finally coalescing around a new anti-war, Israel-critical stance, while Republicans flounder with no idea what they’re supposed to say.
🚨 Breaking: As it continued to strike Beirut, the Israeli military advanced into more areas of southern Lebanon, seizing new positions, and forcibly displacing thousands of Lebanese – marking a major escalation in the war with Iran and raising fears Israel may be considering a broad, full-scale invasion of Lebanon. Hezbollah, which launched missiles toward Israel for a second day, said Israel wanted an “open war, which it has not stopped since the ceasefire agreement…So let it be an open war.”
Good morning! Prem here, coming at you fresh off another day walking around Capitol Hill. And boy oh boy, do we have a lot to talk about…
In today’s ‘First Draft:’ Donald Trump’s administration says the quiet part loud on Iran and Israel – causing Democrats across previous ideological spectrums to coalesce around a new anti-war stance and Republicans to flounder; local officials are investigating Border Patrol leader Greg Bovino, the disgraced face of Trump’s occupation of Minneapolis; more from the Epstein files; and we have the latest from the US and Israel’s illegal war with Iran.
‘So Much For America First’
On Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio made the subtext the text: The US launched its already devastating war on Iran for… the sake of Israel.
After meeting with lawmakers on Capitol Hill, Rubio told reporters that “it was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, the United States or Israel or anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States.”
He added: “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action, we knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties and perhaps even higher those killed, and then we would all be here answering questions about why we knew that and didn’t act.”
The Trump administration has maintained that it launched its war on Iran because of some “imminent threat” Iran was posing. An argument already tenuous, given that months ago, the administration claimed to have “obliterated” Iran’s looming nuclear facilities (which was since proven wrong); and given there was actually more proof that, instead of posing a threat, Iran had been approaching a possible deal with the US.
But now, Rubio has said the truth, clearly. The “imminent threat” was that they knew Israel was about to attack Iran. And thus, Iran would surely retaliate by attacking US bases. And so, the logic goes, the US had to attack Iran first – completely abandoning ongoing negotiations. Notably, the US stopping Israel from attacking Iran wasn’t apparently on the menu.
Republicans on Capitol Hill were hesitant to respond, sometimes giving puzzling answers. Senator Lisa Murkowski, for example, when asked about the secretary of state’s comments, said she wasn’t going to speak on “any of these comments.” Instead, she said, she was going to have a “unique opportunity” alongside her Senate colleagues “to hear from the secretary of state, the secretary of defense, and others” and listen to what’s presented to them.
The perennially evolving statements from the administration are tying Republicans in knots. “This is not a so-called regime change war, but the regime sure did change,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Sunday.
On Monday, Senator Tim Sheehy was asked about his own description of the war as “regime change,” versus Hegseth’s comments. The Montana Republican settled on: “I think the reason you’re hearing so many varied reasons is the varied threats this regime presents.”
As Republicans stumble, rank-and-file Democrats seem to be finding meaningful consensus.