There was a bit of a narrative shift on display in Congress as back-to-back hearings on Capitol Hill with top defense and Trump admin officials played out Tuesday, with Secretary of War Pete Hegseth repeatedly on the defensive as he and the administration face intensified scrutiny over the Iran war.
And the growing frustration vented in Congress is not just being sounded by Democrats. As Washington Post's Tuesday headline aptly described: Hegseth, Caine encounter intense bipartisan frustration with Iran war. It seems President Trump has been made keenly aware of potential growing rebellion among GOP ranks, and biting criticisms over how the conflict and Strait of Hormuz standoff is going, given he decided to level the word "treason" in an afternoon Truth Social Post. It seemed also aimed at a series of apparent recent sensitive or classified info leaks within the administration and Pentagon to the media, related to the conflict...
Trump stated while en route to China: "When the Fake News says that the Iranian enemy is doing well, Militarily, against us, it's virtual TREASON" - and he went on to charge that "they are aiding and abetting the enemy!"
"Only Losers, Ingrates, and Fools are able to make a case against America!" he also wrote.
This moment might remind the American public of another key turning point in US history when past president cast all criticisms of wars of choice in the Middle East: When President George W. Bush was gearing up to launch new forever wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the wake of the September 11 attacks, he declared, "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists."
This week also saw arch-neoconservative Robert Kagan break from Trump's Iran War in the the pages of the generally pro-war Atlantic:
It’s hard to think of a time when the United States suffered a total defeat in a conflict, a setback so decisive that the strategic loss could be neither repaired nor ignored.
Defeat in the present confrontation with Iran will be of an entirely different character. It can neither be repaired nor ignored. There will be no return to the status quo ante, no ultimate American triumph that will undo or overcome the harm done. The Strait of Hormuz will not be “open,” as it once was. With control of the strait, Iran emerges as the key player in the region and one of the key players in the world. The roles of China and Russia, as Iran’s allies, are strengthened; the role of the United States, substantially diminished. Far from demonstrating American prowess, as supporters of the war have repeatedly claimed, the conflict has revealed an America that is unreliable and incapable of finishing what it started. That is going to set off a chain reaction around the world as friends and foes adjust to America’s failure.
Kagan doesn't hold back:
Even if Trump were to carry out his threat to destroy Iran’s “civilization” through more bombing, Iran would still be able to launch many missiles and drones before its regime went down—assuming it did go down. Just a few successful strikes could cripple the region’s oil and gas infrastructure for years if not decades, throwing the world, and the United States, into a prolonged economic crisis. Even if Trump wanted to bomb Iran as part of an exit strategy—looking tough as a way of masking his retreat—he can’t do that without risking this catastrophe.
If this isn’t checkmate, it’s close.
But what might Trump also be responding to in his fresh Truth Social Post? Along with some media leaks, he also may have caught a glimpse of his top Pentagon officials and general in the hot seat all day.
Below are some highlights at a moment of growing bipartisan anger related to Iran operations. Most of the fireworks below involved Democrats' line of questioning. As a reminder, Wednesday will mark day 75 of a conflict that the White House initially said would take a matter of 'days' or weeks at most.
* * *
Pentagon Struggles to Articulate Strategic Vision & End-GameSen. Coons: "What is your plan for reopening the Strait of Hormuz?"
Hegseth: "I would just note that the majority of your question was highly disingenuous and loaded with suggestions that I very much don't agree with." pic.twitter.com/Mh9Q8Yu2N8
DURBIN: Could you explain to the American people why with the vast investment we've made in national defense and military, how Iran after they are attacked by us is still capable of stopping the traffic in the Strait of Hormuz?
CAINE: It's a complex situation
DURBIN: As we… pic.twitter.com/tzncZCEYKj
Reed's line of questioning exposes how Pentagon officials have been full of it when talking about how much Trump's Iran war has actually cost pic.twitter.com/Cu2gQR9dQo
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 12, 2026 Trump Was 'Forced' To Lift Sanctions on Russian/Iranian Oil At SeaHEGSETH: We know Russia is a nefarious actor and account for tha--
SHAHEEN: All evidence to the contrary. We're not accounting for that if we're giving Russia the opportunity to earn $4 billion a month by leaving sanctions lifted pic.twitter.com/Z0OoSUpOLn
Massive humiliation for Trump. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirms Donald Trump was forced to halt a major naval operation Project Freedom.
He accidentally exposes absolute weakness, admitting the administration abruptly suspended it merely because Pakistan demanded it. pic.twitter.com/SCv0B69x3e
Pete Hegseth on Iran:
We have a plan to escalate, if necessary. We have a plan to retrograde, if necessary. pic.twitter.com/qOuCjU5bm6
* * *
President Trump before leaving to China issued a message which is definitely not going to sit well with much of the American public. The midterms will get here fast, after all...
Trump on Iran War:
Reporter: What extent are Americans’ financial situation motivating you to make a deal?
Trump: Not even a little bit. I don't think about Americans’ financial situation pic.twitter.com/TJ94pGpqD8
Authored by Sundance via The Conservative Treehouse,
Appearing on MSNBC to talk to Lawfare ally Nicole Wallace, wife of New York Times narrative engineer Michael Schmidt – the guy who received leaks from FBI Director James Comey via Daniel Richman, former CIA Director John Brennan notes there are “legions” of operatives still embedded within the DOJ, FBI and CIA who are working against President Donald Trump.
This is not a surprise as we have noted the Trump administration continues to take apart the tentacles of Lawfare and Intelligence operatives in Main Justice, various U.S. Attorney offices, FBI Headquarters, FBI field offices and various Intelligence Community silos.
Marco Rubio has been working to clean up the National Security Council as well as the State Department operations, including USAID. Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe have been working on the NSA and CIA collaboratively, and Todd Blanche has been working through the Dept of Justice. FBI Director Kash Patel has removed about ten percent of the problem in his agency.
Unbelievable. Former CIA Director John Brennan just said the quiet part out LOUD, that there are still a "legion" of bureaucrats within the intel and justice communities who are actively sabotaging the executive authority of President Trump:
"There's still a legion of… pic.twitter.com/XhBLzhy7s2
The core problem goes back to what we outlined on these pages {GO DEEP} and is not limited to those operatives who remain from the Obama/Biden era. Some of the problems surface as a result of ‘republican’ voices recommending “sleeper cell” staff and sketchy personnel for positions in the administration. [I’ll put an example below]
One way to tell if the agency head or leader understands the challenge is by paying attention to how they talk about the agency’s mission objective.
Leaders like Marco Rubio and Tulsi Gabbard have openly acknowledged the problem and are actively tackling corruption within their ranks. Even John Ratcliffe has admitted his agency was politically weaponized and has taken steps to address it. There’s still a lot of work ahead, but their actions show visible progress.
People like Pam Bondi and Kash Patel have praised the institutional embeds without drawing attention to the corruption beneath them. Thankfully, Acting AG Todd Blanche seems to be taking a more confrontational approach internally, so maybe Kash Patel will follow suit. This isn’t about style—it’s about results, and there’s an urgent need for action.
To give an example of “sketchy” recommendations and predictable outcomes, I would draw attention to the lesser visible appointment of Morgan Ortagus. Do you remember this very weirdly worded announcement, two weeks prior to the inauguration?
Via Truth SocialI have no idea who “them” is referencing in the announcement.
[…] “I’m not doing this for me, I doing it for them”There were always three options for “them”: (1) the strong republican support people; or (2) people in the Middle East who would be dealing with her; or (3) Stephen Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Regardless, of who “them” was, it was obvious President Trump was not thrilled by “their” request.
Mrs. Morgan Ortagus is a long time Deep State operative with roots in the U.S. intelligence community and USAID {citation}. It was very predictable that she would undermine the goals of President Trump and she only lasted six months in the job. Ortagus was quietly dispatched from her position in June 2025.
CTH predicted {SEE HERE} Mrs. Ortagus would be a big mistake because she was, quite frankly, one of the “legion” insiders referenced by former CIA Director John Brennan. Ortagus’s entire career profile was/is textbook intelligence operative, likely legacy CIA.
Not coincidentally, former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was removed from his position only a month before Ortagus lost hers.
On the day he was announced CTH said National Security Advisor Mike Waltz would be the first administration member to get the boot, because in the non-pretending world Waltz was a horrible choice just like Ortagus. Mike Waltz was removed as National Security Advisor in May 2025, {citation} Ortagus was removed as Middle East envoy in June {citation}.
If the goal was to eliminate the Deep State, President Trump couldn’t take on a deeply corrupt Intelligence Community while also appointing its allies. Their close ties to the Intelligence Community made the failures of both Waltz and Ortagus predictable.
That said, behind the veneer of John Brennan’s statement on MSNBC is a guy who realizes the Trump administration has changed the dynamic and the agency systems Brennan is talking about no longer exist; at least they no longer have the same capabilities.
The need for control is a reaction to fear, and Brennan’s fear is both visible and very well founded.
The DOJ and FBI operate under the influence of the Intelligence Community, which ultimately holds the reins. The key figures leading the IC have made changes to the institutions that have significantly reduced the impact of bad actors within the DOJ and FBI.
The key positions are the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of State, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratcliffe are the people to watch, and we can tell by the counsel(s) they have put into place that each of them has clear eyes and a steady hand on those critical institutions.
Since mid-year 2025, around the same time Waltz and Ortagus were dispatched, you will note significant changes began surfacing in the National Security Council, the State Dept, the DNI and importantly the CIA. Some of the changes make headlines, many do not; however, each is important and builds on a larger goal of dismantling a highly weaponized and political intelligence apparatus.
Internationally, what we see in the reaction of allied -or oppositional- governments and their intelligence agencies, is in large part a geopolitical reaction to the consequential changes being made by Rubio, Gabbard and Ratcliffe. Each building upon a system that fundamentally changes U.S. policy to be in alignment with President Trump. Each of them should be commended.
Domestically, the accountability developments involving James Comey, John Brennan, John Bolton, Michael Atkinson, Eric Ciaramella and others yet to emerge, stem from the transparency brought by the same trio working upstream from Main Justice and the FBI. The combined intelligence apparatus of the U.S. can cut through the chaff and countermeasures of Lawfare operatives, and I feel optimistic watching them in action.
Again, it’s not just the silo heads that are making a positive impact, it is the personnel decisions they are surrounding themselves with. The amount of sunlight now coming over the horizon is toxic to the interests of those who organized shadow operations.
As long as Rubio, Ratcliffe and especially Gabbard, keep pushing the truth to the surface; as long as they keep exposing all the corruption that was used to manipulate and weaponize our government; as long as they keep strategizing on ways to declassify evidence former officials buried under false pretenses; then the DOJ, FBI and more importantly We The People, will have information we can use to make decisions.
Ultimately, it is the truth which makes evil enterprise retreat.
Tyler Durden Tue, 05/12/2026 - 19:15Confirming our report from last Friday, Reuters reports that some independent refiners in China (also known as "teapots") are slashing their production rates as margins plummet to unprecedented negative levels, and demand weakens amid the continued paralysis of tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz.
China refiner margins (when Beijing tells you you can't raise prices, you don't raise prices). pic.twitter.com/DzZQoXqs5a
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 8, 2026Citing unnamed trade and industry sources, Reuters reported today that the average operating rates at so-called teapots in Shandong had fallen to 50%, from 55% in April. What’s more, the operating rates of independent refiners are likely to fall further as the war drags on, and refiners swing into losses that the Reuters sources estimate at between $74 and $88 per ton of processed crude oil.
As a reminder, on Friday we reported that Chinese authorities ordered private refiners to maintain high levels of gasoline and diesel supply, even at a loss, or risk their crude import quotas being slashed if they reduce run rates. If the private refiners move to cut processing rates to preserve margins amid soaring crude prices, they would see their import quotas – handed out by the government in quarterly or semi-annual installments – reduced in the coming years, the officials warned. Instead, they appear to have aggressively reduced their import demands, leading to a big drop in Chinese oil imports.
Reuters confirms that it now appears teapots have run out of options and are risking lower quotas to manage their losses. “Without cutting output, the losses are unbearable,” one of the Reuters sources said.
Asia, the biggest oil demand center globally, is facing the greatest pain from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Overall, the war could force up to 6 million bpd cuts to crude runs across Asia in April, as refineries face severe supply disruption with 65% dependency on Middle East crude.
China is better insulated than its neighbous thanks to a stockpile of an estimated 1.4 billion barrels that has been accumulated over the past couple of years. Yet as OilPrice notes, this supply cushion is limited, so China is doing a fine balancing act of keeping the domestic market well supplied to avoid sharp price spikes, especially since China's economy is increasingly dependent on the well-being of its Pacific rim neighbors (and trading partners) who are far less insulated from surging oil prices.
Tyler Durden Tue, 05/12/2026 - 18:50