Patricia Coughlin

I SUPPORT PRESIDENT TRUMP 100%.
AMERICA FIRST. AND FOREVER.
#MAGA. #KeepAmericaGreat.
Please NO DMs.

[SaltyGoat @SaltyGoat17]

Thank you ABC, NBC and CBS for proving without a shadow of a doubt that censorship is ALIVE AND WELL

And our corporate media is NOT TO BE TRUSTED!!

[Matt Devitt @MattDevittWX]

One of the most incredible storm damage pictures I’ve ever seen happened this morning in South Dakota. A 131 mph wind gust in the city of Highmore split the roof of the Catholic Church perfectly illuminating the crucifix. This is not AI, it’s been confirmed real by locals. Truly amazing. Credit: Joseph Mat @stormhour

[HSD Together On Tour @hsdtogethertour]

Harry running to make his cue on stage at Wembley Stadium in London, UK - 23 June (via @tayslondongirl)

[HSD Together On Tour @hsdtogethertour]

“Where’d you find the confidence to call me baby 👀😏” - Harry being silly after doing a double take during Taste Back on stage at Wembley Stadium in London, UK, 23 June (via the_lifeofaconcertgirl)

[DK🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸 @1Nicdar]

FIRE John Thune.

[Janna Deplorable Part 2 @JannaPart2]

@Mr_Husky1 @aflynn01 George can suck a bag of dicks 😠😠

[GᵀᴴᴱOᴿᴵᴳᴵᴺᴬᴸ 🇺🇸 @GtheOriginal]

@Simi28_ If you vote red ❤️ let’s connect! 🇺🇸

[Afshine Emrani MD FACC @afshineemrani]

1/5
I'm a cardiologist. I've been telling you for months that GLP-1 drugs are rewriting medicine far beyond weight loss.
44% less depression. 47% less substance use disorder. 28.7% weight loss. 86% liver fat clearance.
Now add this.
Cleveland Clinic researchers are presenting data at ASCO next week — the biggest cancer conference in the world — showing that GLP-1 medications may cut cancer progression to metastatic disease by up to 50%.
12,112 patients. Seven obesity-related tumor types. Stages 1 through 3.
This class of drugs keeps getting bigger. And the old walls between metabolic medicine, cardiovascular medicine, and oncology keep coming down.

[Bryster Hulzini (Hulsey) @bryster3413]

Make AOC bartend again.

[Lara Logan @laralogan]

What she said.

[Dustin @r0ck3t23]

Elon Musk just defended America better than every politician in Washington combined.

Musk: “After World War 2, the US could have basically taken over the world and any country. Like we got nukes, nobody else got nukes. We don’t even have to lose soldiers. Which country do you want?”

One nation on earth held a weapon nobody else had.

Total dominance. Zero competition. No risk of retaliation.

Every empire in history that held that kind of advantage used it.

Rome. The Mongols. The British. The Ottomans.

They conquered until they collapsed.

America had a bigger advantage than all of them combined.

And it rebuilt the countries it just defeated.

Musk: “The United States actually helped rebuild countries. So it helped rebuild Europe, it helped rebuild Japan. This is very unusual behavior, almost unprecedented.”

Almost unprecedented?

It had never happened before. Not once in 5,000 years of recorded history.

The Marshall Plan wasn’t foreign aid.

It was the most radical act of restraint any superpower ever committed.

America turned its enemies into allies. Turned rubble into economies. Turned surrender into partnership.

Germany went from ashes to the economic engine of Europe in a generation.

Japan went from unconditional surrender to the third largest economy on earth.

Three years after the war, America was flying food into Berlin.

A city in the heart of the nation that just tried to destroy it.

That’s not policy.

That’s a civilization deciding what it is at the exact moment it has the power to be anything.

You’re being told a story right now.

That America is the villain of history.

You hear it everywhere. Media. Universities. Social platforms.

Musk: “There’s always like, well America’s done bad things. Well of course America’s done bad things, but one needs to look at the whole track record.”

Every nation on earth has dark chapters. Every single one.

The difference is what a country does when nobody can stop it.

And when nobody could stop America, it fed its enemies and rebuilt their cities.

Musk: “The history of China suggests that China is not acquisitive. Meaning they’re not going to go out and invade a whole bunch of countries.”

Probably right.

China has historically built walls, not fleets.

But the real question isn’t about borders anymore.

We’re approaching a moment that mirrors 1945 in ways nobody has fully processed yet.

AI is going to give a handful of people a power advantage that makes nuclear monopoly look quaint.

If someone is going to hold that kind of power, who do you want it to be?

The country that conquered when it could? Or the one that rebuilt when it didn’t have to?

Every alliance. Every trade route. Every economy.

Billions lifted out of poverty.

All of it traces back to one act of restraint that had never been done before.

And carries no guarantee of being repeated.

The most powerful thing America ever did wasn’t building the bomb.

It was what it didn’t do after.

[Foreign Affairs @ForeignAffairs]

The U.S.-Israeli assault on Iran inadvertently “strengthened the position of hard-line actors” in Tehran, writes @citrinowicz. The Islamic Republic “may be weaker on paper in the wake of the attacks, but it is much more resilient.” https://t.co/LhKm2CtS3F

[Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش @citrinowicz]

Before Striking Iran: Defining Achievable and realistic Objectives

Before considering a military strike against Iran, it is essential to be realistic about what such a campaign can actually accomplish.
There is little doubt that Iran is not a peer competitor to the United States militarily. The U.S. retains overwhelming conventional superiority and operational dominance across domains. However, Iran should not be underestimated. As demonstrated in previous limited confrontations, particularly in missile warfare, Tehran possesses meaningful asymmetric capabilities — especially in its ballistic missile arsenal and regional proxy network.
The core question, therefore, is not whether the United States can inflict damage. It is: What strategic objective is realistically achievable?

1. Regime Change
Even senior U.S. officials have acknowledged that regime change would be extraordinarily difficult to achieve.
There is no unified, viable opposition inside Iran capable of stepping in and governing. Moreover, regime change would almost certainly require a prolonged campaign, potentially including ground forces — something the American public and policymakers have shown little appetite for after Iraq and Afghanistan.
Absent a willingness to commit to a large-scale, long-term stabilization effort, regime change is not a credible objective.

2. Destabilizing the Regime to Trigger Internal Uprising
A military campaign could weaken the regime and create internal pressure. However, Iran’s leadership — particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) — has no exit option. The regime’s survival is existential for its core leadership.
History suggests they would respond to internal unrest with overwhelming force. For destabilization to translate into meaningful political change, a sustained and prolonged campaign would likely be required. Even then, the most probable outcome may not be democratic transition, but internal chaos — potentially pushing Iran toward civil conflict.
That scenario carries significant regional and global risks.

3. Destroying Iran’s Nuclear Program
A military strike could significantly damage nuclear facilities. Precision strikes may delay progress and degrade infrastructure.
But strikes cannot eliminate scientific knowledge, human capital, or political will. Nor is it certain that all highly enriched material could be located and destroyed.
At best, military action may delay the program. It is unlikely to eliminate it permanently. Iran would almost certainly attempt reconstruction — potentially with greater determination and fewer constraints.

4. Eliminating Iran’s Missile Capabilities
A broad campaign could substantially degrade Iran’s missile inventory and production infrastructure.
However, Iran’s missile program is domestically based and central to its defense doctrine. It is viewed as a pillar of deterrence against superior conventional forces. Even after heavy losses, Tehran would likely prioritize rebuilding these capabilities.
The result may be temporary degradation rather than permanent removal.

5. Forcing Iran Back to Negotiations on Better Terms
There is an assumption that military pressure could coerce Tehran into accepting a more favorable agreement.
Yet past confrontations suggest that the Iranian leadership may choose endurance over capitulation. The regime may calculate that time increases political pressure on Washington to de-escalate, particularly if the conflict becomes prolonged or regionally destabilizing.
Rather than producing immediate concessions, military action could harden Iran’s negotiating position — or eliminate diplomatic channels entirely.

6. Targeting Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei
Some might argue that removing the Supreme Leader could fundamentally alter Iran’s trajectory.
However, decapitation strikes often produce unpredictable outcomes. Iran’s political system is institutionalized, not purely personalist. Removing Khamenei could trigger retaliation from Iran and its regional proxies and potentially force the United States into a much broader conflict.
It is also unclear whether such a move would moderate Iranian policy. It could just as easily radicalize it.

The Strategic Bottom Line
There is no question about U.S. military superiority in a direct confrontation. The real issue is strategic clarity.
For the first time in decades, the possibility of direct U.S.–Iran military confrontation raises the prospect of open interstate war rather than proxy conflict. That demands disciplined thinking about ends, ways, and means.
No available objective appears easily attainable. All carry significant second- and third-order effects. Many outcomes could be unpredictable — and not necessarily favorable to U.S. interests.

Thus, before initiating military action, policymakers must clearly define what “success” looks like — and whether the likely costs, duration, escalation risks, and regional consequences align with America’s broader strategic priorities.
Military capability is not the same as strategic advantage.

#IranRevolution2026
#Iran

[ScienceInFocus @SciInFocus]

Forget killing cancer cells. South Korea just figured out how to talk them back into being normal.

Scientists at KAIST in Daejeon have done something the world has been chasing for decades.

They found a molecular switch that flips cancer cells back into healthy cells.

No chemo. No radiation. No destroying anything.

Just… reversal.

Professor Kwang-Hyun Cho and his team caught cancer in the act. That tiny window where a normal cell is on the edge of turning malignant but hasn't fully crossed over yet. They call it the "critical transition" — the same kind of jump that happens when water hits 100°C and becomes steam.

In that split-second window, the cell is unstable. Normal and cancerous at the same time.

And that's exactly where they hit the switch.

In colon cancer trials, they targeted three master genes — MYB, HDAC2, and FOXA2 — and the cancer cells didn't die.

They went back to being healthy intestinal cells. Like nothing ever happened.

The team built a digital twin of the gene network to map every move a cell makes on its way to becoming cancerous. Then they reverse-engineered the path home.

Their paper landed in Advanced Science, published by Wiley.

It's still early. Lab trials and mice. Human treatment is years away.

But the idea of curing cancer without killing a single cell is no longer science fiction.

Source: KAIST (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology), published in Advanced Science journal

[Amjad Taha أمجد طه @amjadt25]

This is why Europe stands against America: The Islamic regime in Iran has built networks of influence across Europe. In England, around 300,000 people are linked to nearly 150 organizations associated with the regime. In France, around 400,000 people are connected to organizations tied to the regime.

The regime did not only export terrorism to the Middle East it built networks of influence, intimidation, and ideological lobbying across Europe. Britain and France now face growing pressure from Iran-linked groups, organisations, and extremist networks operating inside their societies.

Europe ignored the fire until the flames reached its own streets. The world cannot negotiate forever with a regime that weaponises ideology, fear, proxies, and chaos.

Europe ignored the fire for too long. Now the smoke fills its own streets.

[Clay Travis @ClayTravis]

10 of the 11 guards weren’t paying attention when the guy with the gun came running at them attempting to kill the president. And the one guy who was watching fired multiple shots from this close without hitting the would be assassin.

[Catturd ™ @catturd2]

But we were told by the doomer grifters that MAGA was dead.

[Byron York @ByronYork]

Really need to talk to the dog handler.

[Patricia Coughlin @PatCough]

@Catheri69664306 Yes.

[George Paruch @george_paruch]

Strange that the Pope,first American Pope, declined Trump's invitation to America's 250th Independence celabration but would meet with Axelrod, Obama's handler. Obviously he needs to reevaluate his priorities if he is going to be the spiritual leader of the Roman Catholic Church and who also represents American Catholics both Democrats and Republicans.