JUST IN: JD Vance’s Trip to Pakistan for Iran Peace Talks Delayed
Vice President JD Vance’s flight to Pakistan for fresh peace talks on the Iran war has reportedly not taken off as scheduled on Tuesday, raising new speculation over a peace deal with the regime.
CNN’s Alayna Treene reported that Vance will attend policy meetings at the White House on Tuesday, and will not travel to Islamabad as scheduled.
It’s currently unclear whether Vance’s trip will happen at all, sources told Treene.
“We don’t know if this trip is definitely off,” she told The Situation Room anchors Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown. “All we do know is that it is definitely delayed and that we should expect to see now the vice president at the White House for meetings today, not leaving this morning on that plane as we had previously reported.”
Vance flew to Pakistan earlier this month to lead talks in Islamabad along with special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner. The VP said the Iranians refused to agree to the main point the Americans were seeking — an “affirmative commitment” the country will not pursue nuclear weapons.
The meeting failed to result in a deal being made.
“The bad news is that we have not reached an agreement,” Vance said at the time. “And I think that’s bad news for Iran, much more than it’s bad news for the United States of America.”
Well, besides the fact that even MSN aggregated reports and expressed broad skepticism, many outlets have since reported that there wasn't even an emergency meeting scheduled or conducted on that date.
In other news, Biden and Kamala were having an affair. One dude said it so.....
Unverified claims circulating online allege that President Donald Trump attempted to "use nuclear codes" during a meeting on the war with Iran, but there is no evidence to support the allegation and no confirmation from U.S. officials.
The claim originates from comments made by former CIA officer Larry Johnson during an appearance on Judging Freedom, a podcast and YouTube talk show hosted by former Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano. Johnson did not provide evidence, did not identify any sources for his account and did not clarify what he meant by “nuclear codes.” Newsweek has found no independent corroboration for the claim.
What Larry Johnson Said During the April 20 episode of Judging Freedom, Johnson claimed that an emergency White House meeting took place on Saturday night amid escalating tensions with Iran.
“One report coming out of that meeting at the White House is that Trump wanted to use the nuclear, so‑called, use the nuclear codes, and General Dan Caine stood up and said 'no," Johnson said. He described the exchange as “apparently quite a blowup.”
Johnson did not name his source, explain how the information was obtained, or provide any details about what actions Trump was alleged to have taken. He did not clarify whether he was referring to a nuclear strike, a briefing, or any formal command process.
Johnson also cited images he said showed Caine, who is chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, leaving the meeting “with his head down." Later in the episode Napolitano shows footage of the general walking outside on the White House grounds with his head down. Newsweek has not been able to independently verify when the footage was taken or whether it is connected to the alleged incident.
What We Know and Don’t Know There is no public evidence that Trump attempted to initiate a nuclear strike or access nuclear launch authority. Newsweek has reached out to the White House and the Pentagon for comment outside normal working hours.
Johnson used the phrase “nuclear codes” colloquially and did not describe how U.S. nuclear command-and-control procedures function. Under established protocol, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff does not have unilateral authority to block a presidential nuclear order.
No credible news organization has independently reported that Trump sought to access nuclear launch authority or that such an exchange occurred.
You know, with all of the bluster from the right, none of you have been willing to address this question or address this set of facts. But I'm not going to stop trying to get you to.
On the campaign trail trump said he wouldn't start any new wars. Now you may say "This isn't a war" but trump has referred to it as a war several times. yes he has called it other things as well but he keeps slipping up and calling it a war. He plainly said there were no wars in his first term and there wouldn't be any in his second term either.
Six months after he was inaugurated, in June of 2025, He attacked Iran's nuclear program and stockpile. Immediately after he claimed he had set their nuclear program back many years if not decades by "obliterating it".
Then, just eight months later he said Iran was less than a month away from having a nuclear weapon.
So we know he lied about not starting a war. Something people voted for at the time.
Now all you have to do is decide if he was lying to you in June of 2025 or in March of 2026.
Since he told you two opposite things what makes you think we really needed to attack Iran when we did? And remember, it's been Netanyahu who has been telling the lie that Iran was on the verge of having a nuclear weapon since the 1990's.
No matter if you agree or disagree this is a good and interesting discussion.
I think Piers is an absolute butthole - and I don't like the dude who talks over the interview giving his opinion... but the Greek dude is worth listening to even if you don't agree with all his viewpoints.
Dems Press Trump On Where Millions Of Dollars Went For Now-Dissolved Library Fund
Democrats are pressing President Donald Trump for answers on what happened to tens of millions of dollars in settlements that were supposed to go toward his presidential library fund, but are now missing.
Four Big Tech companies – Paramount, ABC, Meta and X – paid out millions of dollars in settlements in late 2024 and early 2025 after Trump sued them, and that money was supposed to go toward The Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Fund, Inc. But the president dissolved the fund in December, and in subsequent letters to lawmakers, none of those four companies could or would say where their money went.
In a new letter sent to Trump on Monday, lawmakers said as much as $63 million is now missing, all of which is required by law to go toward charitable purposes.
“The companies do not know or are unwilling to share their information about what happened to the millions of dollars given to the Fund,” reads the letter, signed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.).
“This leaves the public completely in the dark about what happened to the Fund, whether there was any money in it when it was dissolved, what happened to that money upon the Fund’s dissolution, and why a second entity with the same purpose as the Fund was created in the first place,” they wrote. “This is a deeply troubling set of questions, particularly given the vast tide of corruption and self-enrichment that has occurred during your Administration."
The lawmakers give Trump until May 1 to answer a series of questions about where that money is and why he launched a second nonprofit, the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation, Inc., with the same stated purpose as his now-defunct fund.
Just wondering out loud here. If spending money on cow fart capturing assistance for farmers is better than spending on research .... I wonder if the scope of the study actually includes research into the best and most efficient way to capture cow farts? Because who else is going to do it? Industry drives innovation ... but there is no great demand for cow fart capturing services/devices. Spending money helping farmers capture cow farts inefficiently or ineffectively helps no-one in the long run.
Just an idle thought reading the back and forth. Bottom line is I would bet that a miniscule fraction of the budget was anything related to cow farts. But it sure does make a nice headline.
Hendrickson was coming off back surgery. Plus hes 32 years old. Hes not at Myles Garrett level, so why pay him all that $$$. ? DEs are important to a team , but how many wins Have the Browns had in Garrett's tenure ...? 54 , 55. When your DE is your teams highest paid player, you aren't wining alot .
You say a lot of things. Try reminding yourself that I don't take orders from you. And that whole "humping your leg" thing? Like I said, I won't be fulfilling any of your sexual fantasies and I don't really take me being a part of them in a positive light. This is how you act when the evidence proves you are wrong. Ignore it and attack the messenger. How trumpian of you.
Exactly. It's impossible to tell what is a lie and what is the truth. Now the consequences of that when he lies about every day things isn't so bad yet still undermines whether we can trust anything he says. But when the topic is war those lies can result in some terrible consequences. We're already at the point that the entire globe doesn't trust anything that comes out of his mouth. And the long term impact of that is even more severe.
What they have learned is no long term deal or agreement with the U.S. can be trusted. Here is at least a partial list of agreements the U.S. had made that trump has broken...............
[Paris Climate Agreement]: Trump withdrew the U.S. from the global climate accord for a second time in 2025.
[United Nations Entities]: A directive was signed in early 2026 to withdraw from 66 international organizations, including 31 UN entities and 35 other organizations, in a move to cease funding and involvement in entities seen as counter to U.S. interests.
[World Health Organization (WHO)]: The U.S. withdrew from the WHO.
[UN Human Rights Council and UNESCO]: The U.S. formally exited these bodies.
[UNRWA (Palestinian Refugee Aid)]: Funding was halted for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees.
Trade and Regional Deals Modified or Terminated
[Tariffs and Trade Deals]: Trump initiated a 90-day pause on trade negotiations in mid-2025, substituting them with new tariff rates for major partners including the E.U., Canada, Japan, and South Korea, after the Supreme Court struck down earlier IEEPA tariffs.
[UK Technology and Prosperity Deal]: This deal was suspended in December 2025.
[USAID Activities]: The administration has moved to dissolve or severely curtail the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
The entire globe has learned that the word of the U.S. can never be trusted again because with a single election it can all be broken.
That's a lot more than a little "short term discomfort."
Good post, Oober. I agree with a lot of what you posted. I think some of it is a little overboard, I mean, I'm not sure we could target a mosquito in the region without it affecting the world oil market so it's silly to think we didn't see that coming.
I was speaking specifically to his statement "That whole thing in Iran has been bungled from the start." Meaning, mission has started, for whatever reason you have decided, everything from that point forward. I was hoping he would respond but knew that probably wouldn't happen before everyone else did. I don't not agree with Daman, but I'm not sure I ever have. If he saw a headline that says Trump eats babies, he would 100% believe that and repeat it without reading another word.
I just think, whether war or football, it's always easy to armchair it after the fact. I see the necessity of dealing with this bully a lot differently than most here, I'm basically sitting shotgun with 'Peen in that respect.
I won't bother arguing about it though. It's mostly futile. It baffles me that we can talk about the possibility of Iran having a nuke and many people think (me included) that would be the direst situation, read: threat to humanity by humans, that this planet has ever faced... others think it's a nothingburger. There's not really much reason for those people to try to talk it out.
I was definitely writing with a bit of snark, so yes some was a bit overboard.
Personally, I don't mind a bit of short-term discomfort (price of oil and it's effect on other prices) if the reasoning and long-term benefit is there. So, to me, the issue is 100% why this whole thing was kicked off, and no amount of tactical execution can make up for an unclear or nonexistent objective. I agree with you on armchairing conflicts... except for the 'why'. And in this case critics don't even have to use the benefit of hindsight to question why we're attacking... it's been mixed messages since the aftermath of the first strikes on the nuclear sites.
