Would you believe me if I told you Hillary Clinton and her lawyers paid for the Steel Dossier and the Russia Russia hoax. Or the FBI would lie about Hunters laptop? Or that Kamala Harris would be the Democrat nominee for President—without getting a single Primary vote? I could go on, but you get the point—in this era, anything is possible.
So, when you read this article, it may seem way out there. Instead, in these times almost nothing is impossible. Read it, put your thoughts in the comment section. Is this possible?
WAR
By Richard Colman, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views, 12/3/24 www.capoliticalnewsandviews.com
The United States will attack Iran between Dec. 3, 2024, and 12 noon, Eastern Standard Time, January 20, 2025, according to anonymous sources.
On Jan. 20, 2025, the presidential term of Joe Biden will end, and the term of President-elect Donald Trump will begin. Trump was president from 2017 to 2021.
Israel may –- or may not –- be involved.
Israeli intelligence probably knows how close Iran is to having a nuclear weapon. Such intelligence is probably being shared with the U.S.
The purpose of the American attack on Iran will be to destroy Iran’s ability to deploy a nuclear weapon.
In view of the possible American attack, Trump may be forced to withdraw the nomination of Pete Hegseth to be secretary of defense.
Trump might also have to withdraw his nomination of Tulsi Gabbard to the director of national intelligence.
Neither Hegseth nor Gabbard has any significant experience running an important government department.
Trump, as president, beginning on Jan. 20, 2025, will have to decide whether or not to continue or abandon any American military action against Iran, assuming the American action is incomplete on inauguration day in 2025.
Americans are likely to be supportive of an American effort to deprive Iran of nuclear weapons. Does Trump want to be against a unified American population that endorses military action against Iran?
A war against Iran could easily drive American gasoline prices to $10 per gallon or higher.
There is precedent for American-Iranian action on the day a new American president is sworn in.
On Jan. 20, 1981, Iran released 52 American hostages being held in Iran. Iranians seized the hostages on Nov. 4, 1979. The hostages were held in Iran for 444 days. At the moment that the hostages were released, Ronald Reagan was sworn in -– for the first time — as president of the United States. Four years later, Reagan was sworn in for a second term.
Biden’s attack on Iran could occur on two dates that are significant in American history: December 7 and January 6.
On Dec. 7, 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, drawing America into World War II.
On Jan. 6, 2021, pro-Trump forces attacked the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C.
By attacking Iran, Biden may have set a trap for Trump, forcing Trump to decide if he (Trump) wants to support or neglect a war with Iran.
Interesting logic puzzle! Maybe to solve decouple “in this era anything is possible” from politicians’ perceptions of what helps or hinders their re-election. Logically, voters would wonder why pick a shooting war with Iran, when Iran seems interested in containing Israel, not attacking the U.S. So, logically, why would Americans be “supportive” of messing with Iran’s desire to have whatever weapons they perceive as needed. Logically, voters would see as relevant only precedents that directly involved American lives (Iran hostages and Pearl Harbor) or credible global dangers (like 1939 Nazi expansion). True, Hegseth and Gabbard have zero qualifications for the job they were nominated. But maybe Trump’s strategy might be to let their innocence see clear bare logic in stuff. However, yes, “anything is possible.” Congress might remain MIA regarding foreign conflicts, and Biden might be addled enough to stick Trump with a massive Iranian mess.
Hegseth and Gabbard cannot do any worse than the ones running those departments now. Common sense goes a long way.