Congressman Massie Leads Bipartisan Push to Prevent U.S. Intervention in Iran-Israel War
In a rare display of bipartisanship, Representatives Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) have introduced a concurrent War Powers Resolution directing President Trump to withdraw U.S. armed forces from hostilities involving Iran unless expressly authorized by Congress. The measure comes in the wake of Operation Rising Lion — the name given by Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu for its attack on Iranian nuclear facilities on June 13, which quickly escalated into a tit-for-tat exchange of missiles between the two nations.
The resolution invokes the War Powers Resolution of 1973, asserting that the president must terminate any ongoing U.S. military engagement in or against Iran unless there is a formal declaration of war or a specific statutory authorization for the use of force from Congress, neither of which has occurred as of the writing of this article. The proposed legislation explicitly prohibits U.S. hostilities against Iran’s government or military, while preserving the president’s authority to respond to imminent threats and allowing continued intelligence cooperation where necessary.
“The Constitution does not permit the executive branch to unilaterally commit an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn’t attacked the United States,” said Massie in a press release. “Congress has the sole power to declare war against Iran. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution.”
Khanna added, “No president should be able to bypass Congress’s constitutional authority over matters of war. The American people do not want to be dragged into another disastrous conflict in the Middle East. I’m proud to lead this bipartisan War Powers Resolution with Rep. Massie to reassert that any military action against Iran must be authorized by Congress.”
The resolution stresses that only “Congress has the sole power to declare war under article 1, section 8, clause 11 of the United States Constitution,” and further notes that “Congress has not declared war with respect to, or provided a specific statutory authorization for, hostilities involving United States Armed Forces against the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
The Massie-Khanna resolution also reinforces the provisions of the War Powers Resolution, which requires the president to withdraw U.S. forces from unauthorized hostilities upon congressional directive. According to Section 5(c) of the 1973 War Powers Resolution, “at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if Congress so directs.”
Additionally, the Massie-Khanna resolution carefully limits its scope. While directing an end to unauthorized military intervention, it makes it clear that it does not prohibit or restrict the United States from “defending itself from imminent attack.” Nor does it impede intelligence U.S. intelligence gathering and sharing operations with allies:
Nothing in this joint resolution may be construed to influence or disrupt any intelligence, counterintelligence, or investigative activities relating to threats in or emanating from Iran conducted by, or in conjunction with, the United States Government involving —
(1) the collection of intelligence;
(2) the analysis of intelligence; or
(3) the sharing of intelligence between the United States and any coalition partner if the President determines such sharing is appropriate and in the national security interests of the United States.
Furthermore, Section 4 of the resolution explicitly states that “nothing in this concurrent resolution may be construed as authorizing the use of military force.”
The list of original sponsors include: Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). In the Senate, companion legislation has been introduced by Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who has previously advocated for restoring congressional war powers.
The resolution could, at the very least, force a debate and possibly a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives within 15 days, regardless of any committee action. Massie’s resolution marks a serious legislative effort and opportunity for Congress to reclaim and reassert its constitutional authority over war-making decisions. Many MAGA supporters have expressed that a key reason why they voted for President Trump in November 2024 was to keep the United States out of war — whether it be against Russia over Ukraine or in the Middle East against Iran.
In fact, Trump repeatedly criticized President Obama’s interventionist foreign policy, accusing him of wanting to start a war with Iran.
On November 29, 2011, Trump tweeted:
On January 17, 2012, he tweeted:
On October 9, 2012, he tweeted:
On September 16, 2013, he then tweeted:
Nine days later, Trump followed up, tweeting:
And on November 10, 2013, he further tweeted:
The question remains whether Trump will remain consistent and avoid U.S. involvement in a war against Iran or if he will heed the interventionist voices of those calling for war, such as Mark Levin and other neoconservatives.
As for Massie and Khanna’s attempt to rein in the president’s ability to drag the country into a new war, their concurrent resolution represents a critical step in restoring the constitutional boundaries of American war powers that the Founding Fathers originally intended.
Americans and the current president would do well to heed the advice of the country’s first president under the Constitution. In his Farewell Address in 1796, President George Washington wrote: “The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign Nations is in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible.” — Christian Gomez
LA’s Communist Riots: When the Reds Run a City
Is Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass merely super-incompetent? Is she an idiot, as her critics suggest? Or just a radical “progressive,” as others aver? Or is there more to it than that?
The American public might have a clue from her background — if, that is, her subversive past was not being so assiduously covered up by her comrades in the media. To anyone familiar with communist revolutions worldwide throughout the past century and with riots in this country since the 1960s, it is obvious that the current Los Angeles riots are a communist operation. The pretext today is stopping ICE deportations of illegal aliens, but any pretext will do: President Trump’s election, alleged police brutality, racism, the Vietnam War, the Iraq War, the Israel-Gaza War, etc.
The important thing about successfully running “mostly peaceful” riots, or “demonstrations” as the Reds prefer to call them, is to follow the “pressure from above and pressure from below” formula laid out by communist theoretician Jan Kozak. Mayor Bass (along with Governor Gavin Newsom and state legislators) provides “pressure from above” while the communist agitators in the street provide “pressure from below,” following the Kozak playbook.
Not familiar with Kozak or his manual for revolutionaries? Well, it is vitally important to the survival of our nation and our liberties that we be very familiar with it, since it is being employed against us every day — at the international, national, state, and local levels. The objective? To transform us into a communist dictatorship by gradually — step by step — centralizing and concentrating more and more power in government.
Kozak explains how that is done. In a presentation at the Communist Party’s university in Prague in 1957, Jan Kozak explained how the communists succeeded in taking over Czechoslovakia following World War II. Kozak knew what he was talking about because he was a leading theoretician and official of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia and a participant in the treachery that brought them to power. He titled his speech, “How Parliament Can Play a Revolutionary Part in the Transition to Socialism and the Role of the Popular Masses.” A copy was obtained and reprinted by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Un-American Activities on December 30, 1961. It was subsequently reprinted commercially by The Long House, Inc., in 1962, and was widely disseminated throughout America by The John Birch Society. After the Long House edition went out of print, the Society reprinted it under the title And Not a Shot Is Fired, which is available here.
Back to Mayor Bass. We do not know whether Comrade Bass ever officially became a member of the Communist Party USA, but she has been very closely aligned with an assortment of communist organizations and regimes for most of her life. Foremost among these ties is her 50-year connection to Communist Cuba and the Venceremos Brigade. She first went to Fidel Castro’s “paradise” in 1973 as a 19-year-old member of the Brigade. She has been back many times since and, as a member of Congress, was one of the chief lobbyists for the regime. (Worth mentioning here is that during her six terms in Congress, 2011-2022, she earned an abysmal lifetime score of 20 percent on our Freedom Index. She also has extensive ties with Line of March, a hardline Maoist communist organization. These and a host of additional communist connections, including her “mentor,” Oneil Cannon, can be found here on Trevor Loudon’s Keywiki website.
There’s more, especially her ties to Communist China. A Daily Caller News Foundation story quotes China expert and author Gordon Chang on Bass and the CCP’s United Front Work Department (UFWD).
“The Communist Party’s UFWD has, in fact, penetrated Karen Bass’s office,” Gordon Chang told the DCNF. “There is a high probability that, wittingly or unwittingly, she is implementing Chinese Communist plans to take down our country. She may be a loyal American, but she has almost certainly become a danger to America.”
Pressure from above, pressure from below; the revolution continues. — William F. Jasper
Schara v. Ascension Health Trial Reaches Dramatic Climax
Jurors deliberated for less than two hours on Thursday, June 19, in Schara v. Ascension Health, the medical freedom trial of the century in Appleton, Wisconsin. They handed the defense a clean slate, with no guilty verdicts and zero damages awarded.
Schara v. Ascension Health began June 2, and The New American magazine has been livestreaming it in partnership with Children’s Health Defense. Charges included wrongful death, lack of informed consent, medical malpractice and breach of standard of care in the case of Grace Schara, a 19-year-old woman with Down syndrome who lost her life in a Covid hospital in 2021.
Hundreds of thousands have viewed proceedings.
Thursday morning, jurors received an 18-page packet containing jury instructions and the verdict form, which accounted for 10 pages of the packet. Below is a summary of the eight questions included:
1. Was Dr. Gavin Shokar negligent with regard to care and treatment provided to Grace?
2. Was Grace’s condition aggravated by Dr. Shokar’s treatment?
3. Was Dr. Gavin Shokar negligent in informing Grace or her Power of Attorney about the availability of alternate modes and treatments for her condition?
4. Was such negligence by Dr. Shokar a cause of injury or death to Grace?
5. Were one or more of the nurses negligent with regard to care and treatment provided to Grace?
6. Was negligence by nurse(s) a cause of injury or death to Grace Schara?
Questions 7 and 8 deal with damages incurred by care and treatment at St. Elizabeth Hospital.
The Scharas and their legal team held a press conference Friday, June 20 at 9:00 a.m. Central.
For most of the past week, defense witnesses took the stand. The well-paid expert witnesses showed off their talents in equivocation and loyalty to the Covid party line.
Who would have doubted their bias when looking at their resumes? Dr. Brian Garibaldi is a member of the Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. In sworn testimony he told the jury that the ventilator was Grace’s only chance of survival, but her parents prevented her from being intubated. His implicit accusation: their refusal killed their daughter. In cross examination it was revealed that Garibaldi received $12,000 a day in consultation fees from the defense.
Also speaking for the defense was Mary Beach, M.D., a medical ethicist with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Hers is the same organization that has hosted several prescient tabletop exercises for the reputed purpose of pandemic preparedness, such as the infamous “Event 201,” which was a Covid-19 dry run that included a hypothetical novel Chinese coronavirus, global lockdowns, and implementation of a globally coordinated health policy. She justified all actions of the hospital staff during Grace’s treatment, even stating her opinion that it was appropriate to continue administering the sedative Precedex in increasing doses to a patient who had already experienced two adverse reactions to it.
Eyewitnesses were no better than their expert counterparts. Alison Barkholtz, the registered nurse who evicted Scott Schara (Grace’s father, patient advocate, and power-of-attorney) from the hospital a few days before his daughter’s death, repeatedly referred to him as a mere visitor. She flatly refused to acknowledge her employer’s written visitor policy, which exempted patient advocates from their strict Covid visitation restrictions. When a defense attorney asked her about visitation exemptions, she answered by casting a slur at Scott: “Like, they get to be an a**hole?” Curiously, the judge did not reprimand her, nor did any attorneys object.
Dr. Gavin Shokar and nurse Hollee McInnis, the staffers in charge of Grace’s care the day she died, rounded out defense witnesses, and finally Scott Schara took the stand in rebuttal as the last witness to present evidence. Most questions focused on the issue of informed consent, the DNR (do not resuscitate) order placed on Grace, and the sedative/anxiolytic/opioid medications administered in her last hours.
Afterward, the judge dismissed the jury so he and attorneys could compose the verdict form, a tool that helps jurors understand specific charges and their options for decisions (see above). Incredibly, the defense requested a question to be included on the form: “Was Scott Schara negligent with respect to his decision-making as power of attorney for Grace Schara?” At first, the judge entertained the possibility, but the next day, he denied the request, defending Scott’s decisions and care of his daughter.
The judge did strike one blow at the plaintiff, however: He granted a defense motion to dismiss a common-law battery charge, one of the four main charges in the case. A guilty verdict on this would have taken the case outside of state statute monetary caps; punitive damages would have been associated with that claim. Not only is that no longer a possibility, but by throwing out the claim, nurse Hollee McInnis was removed as a defendant. (Afterward, someone shamefully posted a message on the Children’s Health Defense livestream chat, trying to provoke people in the area to “get rid” of nurse McInnis. CHD countered by closing down the chat.)
— Rebecca Terrell
UN “Financing for Development” Summit: Just Give Us $4 Trillion!
Coming up fast, June 30-July 3, is the UN’s Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4). The UN’s announcement tells us the confab “provides a unique opportunity to reform financing at all levels, including to support reform of the international financial architecture and addressing financing challenges preventing the urgently needed investment push for the SDGs.” The four-day event will take place at the FIBES Sevilla Exhibition and Conference Centre in Seville, Spain. And, naturally, the “global servants” will be emoting on the desperate plight of the world’s poor while they clink champagne glasses at Seville’s swankiest luxury hotels. It’s SOH (Standard Operating Hypocrisy) for the UN “bleeding hearts.”
“According to UN estimates, the world is facing an annual financing gap of about $4 trillion to achieve sustainable development, leaving countries with hardly any resources to invest in better education, healthcare, renewable energy or social protection,” declares a UN press release. That’s $4 trillion PER YEAR!
“The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are hanging by a thread, and with them, the hopes and dreams of billions of people around the world,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres said, undoubtedly between gulps of champagne and caviar.
In particular, the UN chief urged countries to push for the SDG Stimulus of $500 billion annually in affordable long-term financing for developing countries, which he proposed in February 2023. Again, that’s annually!
We told you this was coming a decade ago, in 2015, following the 3rd International Conference on Financing for Development. (“From Billions to Trillions” — UN Demands Huge “Sustainability” Splurge). And we warned again last November (UN Demands Tyranny & Trillions From US Middle Class for “Climate”).
Ah, you say, but the UN kleptocrats are always bleating for more money, nothing new there. It doesn’t mean we’ll cough up the funds, right? Well, there’ve been some developments. Huge developments. As we’ve reported, the UN is on the fast track to obtaining global taxing authority, with the first tax being an IMO (International Maritime Organization) carbon levy on global shipping (see here, here, and here). Even if the United States doesn’t sign onto this scheme we could still be on the hook for hundreds of billions annually as consumers since we would be paying for the add-on shipping tax in the higher prices of goods from other countries that have caved in to the UN tax.
“Historically, the UN’s inability to impose taxes has served as one of the most powerful restraints on its power,” TNA Senior Editor Alex Newman noted. “Once it has direct access to money without being forced to beg its member governments, it can fund armies, police, courts, bureaucracy, social-engineering, propaganda, and more, essentially without limit.”
Yes, that has been a key element of the globalist/ communist plan all along.
— William F. Jasper
Bilderberg: Depopulation, Migration, AI, Ukraine, Middle East, and More
The 2025 Bilderberg Meeting took place June 12-15 in Stockholm, Sweden. “Depopulation, Artificial Intelligence, and mass migration were just some of the uber-creepy items being discussed this year at the secretive Bilderberg meetings, according to the group’s own release,” TNA Senior Editor Alex Newman reported.
“Every year, roughly 120-150 elites from media, politics, business, and banking gather with some potential recruits to their cause for the annual Meeting. And contrary to their public claims, they discuss global plans for ‘progress’ and advancing a future that you get no vote or voice in,” Newman notes.
Leading the official list (alphabetically) of attendees is Stacey Abrams. As we pointed out in 2019 (Stacey Abrams Joins Globalist Elite, Anointed by CFR, Bilderberg Group), Abrams has been, and is being, groomed and promoted by the powers that be. More on Abrams here, here, and here.
The “Great and Good” who assembled for the 2025 Bilderberg confab include:
World Economic Forum President Børge Brende;
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte;
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella;
Pfizer CEO and Chair Albert Bourla;
Goldman Sachs International Chair Jose Barroso;
Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (KKR) Chair Henry Kravis;
Bloomberg Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait;
The Economist Editor-in-Chief Zanny Minton Beddoes;
Financial Times commentator Gideon Rachman;
German Bundestag President Julia Klockner; and
Canadian Minister of Transport Chrystia Freeland.
Trump-connected attendees included White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios, Thiel Capital LLC CEO and Trump-Vance ally Peter Thiel, and Palantir Technologies CEO Alex Karp.
For more on Bilderberg, see:
Truth About Bilderberg — Behind the Deep State
Deep State Behind the Deep State: CFR, Trilaterals, Bilderberg
Covering (Up) Bilderberg: The Washington Post Leads the Wall of Silence on the Globalist Confab
Bilderberg Post Mortem: What Is the Trump-Pompeo-Kushner-Bilderberg Connection All About?
Media Spotlight Shines on Bilderberg; Agenda Still Secret
— William F. Jasper
[END]