Karoline Leavitt draft comments ignite outrage as mothers fear children could be pulled into foreign wars

 

Public anger erupted online after comments linked to Karoline Leavitt appeared to leave open the possibility of a military draft, fuelling fears among American parents that their children could be sent to fight in new foreign wars. The controversy intensified after Republican politician Marjorie Taylor Greene shared a post on X reacting to remarks connected to the White House press secretary, accusing political leaders of betraying campaign promises about avoiding new conflicts abroad.

Greene wrote that voters had been promised a different approach to global military involvement. 'How about the answer is NO DRAFT AND NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND because we campaigned on NO MORE FOREIGN WARS OR REGIME CHANGE!!!' she wrote. Her post spread rapidly across social media, drawing tens of thousands of reactions and igniting intense debate among supporters and critics alike.

The Draft Debate Returns to the Spotlight

At the centre of the controversy is the perception that Leavitt did not definitively rule out the possibility of a draft during discussions about potential US military involvement abroad. While no official policy announcement has been made regarding compulsory military service, the lack of a clear rejection has been enough to trigger alarm among some voters.

The United States has not used a military draft since the Vietnam War era, when the policy sparked nationwide protests and deeply divided the country. Today, voluntary enlistment forms the backbone of the US military, but speculation about future conflicts and expanding geopolitical tensions has periodically revived discussions about whether a draft could ever return.

Mothers Voice Fear and Anger Online

Much of the public reaction has come from parents, particularly mothers, who fear that any escalation in foreign wars could ultimately place their children in harm's way. 'Not my son, over my dead body,' one viral comment read, capturing the emotional tone that has spread across online discussions. Other posts warned that campaign promises about avoiding foreign wars were a major factor in how many voters chose their candidates, with critics arguing that even entertaining the possibility of a draft contradicts those promises. Supporters of the administration, however, insist that speculation is being exaggerated and that no such policy shift has been announced.

Karoline Leavitt Under Intensifying Scrutiny

As the youngest White House press secretary in modern history, Leavitt has already become a prominent figure in the administration's communications strategy, and her statements are often closely analysed by both supporters and critics, particularly when discussing military policy or foreign affairs. Political observers say the controversy highlights how sensitive the subject of military conscription remains in the United States, where even a perceived hesitation to reject the idea outright can rapidly ignite public anxiety.

Underlying the backlash is a broader debate about America's role in global conflicts. Over the past two decades, US involvement in overseas military operations has been a central issue in domestic politics, and many voters across the political spectrum have grown weary of prolonged foreign wars, particularly in the Middle East. That frustration has shaped campaign messaging for years, with candidates frequently promising to avoid new overseas military entanglements. For that reason, even rumours of a draft can trigger a powerful emotional reaction among voters who believed such policies were firmly off the table. 

Karoline Leavitt draft comments ignite outrage as mothers fear children could be pulled into foreign wars   Story by Marty Vergel Baes

Britain unveils 'world's best tank' despite lukewarm response to Trump Iran attacks

 

Britain has a brand new ­battle tank blasting into action - and it is deadlier than we've ever had before. The terrifying Challenger 3 has been unleashed in Scotland in tests and is the biggest and best tanker the country has ever had in its arsenal.

The arrival of a new beast of a machine being unveiled comes as fears increase of the UK having to join World War 3 at any moment.

Only a handful of Challenger 3s have been built so far and they are undergoing rigorous tests before entering service as early as next year.

The massive machine boasts a 120mm main gun — which can unleash higher velocity and more lethal strikes than its predecessor at a much faster speed and with higher precision than ever.

Ministry of Defence bosses have hailed the world-beating tank as a 66-ton “sniper” that can regularly hit targets over three miles and now troops who have been involved of the testing of the first tank of its kind say it offers a power that is "second to none".

Warrant Officer Max Belton, from the Royal Tank Regiment, told The Sun: “Best tank in the world? Without a doubt. I’ll back that 100 per cent.”

There will be a total of 148 of the new tanks in time, with each costing a whopping £6 million each.

The monsters are being built by BAE Systems Land and are made by converting the older Challenger 2s they are replacing. The total cost of the new fleet is expected to reach just under £1billion.

The Challenger 3s can travel at up to 37mph on roads and its 1,200hp diesel engine means it can travel just over 300 miles without needing refuelling.

As well as these bonus features it also has a raft of upgrades, including better suspension, more armour, laser threat detectors and Israeli-made Active Protection Systems, providing 360-degree protection from missiles and grenades.

The biggest change is the tank’s new German-made gun — the smoothbore Rheinmetall L55A1 gun which can unleash high-speed NATO darts which can pierce other enemy tanks at nearly five times the speed of sound.

The ammo has also been updated. Unlike old-fashioned tank rounds that have separate shell cases and explosive charges, the Challenger 3 will fire “one-piece ammo”.

All that remains once they have been blasted is a metal plate-sized drawing pin.

Engineering lead Jude Priestley said: “The trials have been a massive success.

“Our aim is to put this vehicle through its paces so that we can address those issues, and by the time the Army receives the tank, it will stand up to what they want to put it through.”

Major Colin Macintyre, who has served for 44 years on tanks and fought in both Iraq wars, said: “We’re providing the country with a world-class tank.”

Troops due to use the Challenger 3 said they would feel safer inside a tank than fighting as an infantryman.

Lieutenant James Harding, a tank troop leader in the Queen’s Royal Hussars, said: “As long as our enemies have tanks, we will have tanks. We will have better tanks.”

“The Challenger 3 trials are not only on schedule, but we’ve been shocked, looking downrange, at the accuracy of the gun.

“It’s actually caused us a few issues in terms of having to manage the environment out there. The same round is going to ­pinpoint the same place, so the gun is more accurate than we thought.”

Marc Slade, one of very few people to command both a Challenger 2 and 3, said all the new technology — including extra thermal sights and a reversing camera — were designed to “reduce the burden on the crew”.

Marc, a soldier turned contractor, said: “It means you can fire quicker, further, faster and deliver more lethal capability.”

Britain unveils 'world's best tank' despite lukewarm response to Trump Iran attacks

Story by Sian Hewitt

New supreme leader shows folly of Trump’s war

 

Few Iranians have more intense personal reasons to loathe America and resist any surrender or compromise than Mojtaba Khamenei, who has been named the Islamic Republic’s new supreme leader.

The opening air strikes of this war on Feb 28 killed not only Mr Khamenei’s father and predecessor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but also his mother, Mansoureh, his wife, Zahra, and probably one of his children.

Having assumed the leadership in personally tragic circumstances, it seems unlikely that Mr Khamenei will be prepared to do America’s bidding or retreat in any way. Donald Trump described Mr Khamenei last week as “unacceptable to me”, adding: “We want someone that will bring harmony and peace to Iran.”

Instead, Iran’s Assembly of Experts, the group of senior clerics charged with selecting supreme leaders, has sent a message of defiance by choosing the supposedly “unacceptable” candidate.

The crucial test will be whether ordinary Iranians now come on to the streets to demonstrate against the elevation of the younger Mr Khamenei.

If the transfer of power takes place without a popular uprising, then the outcome of Mr Trump’s war may be that Iran’s regime survives under a still more extreme and obdurate leadership that could, for example, decide that only a nuclear weapon would assure its grip on power.

But first, Mr Khamenei, 56, will have to consolidate his position. He will be encumbered by the fact that he is not an ayatollah, which means that he lacks religious authority, and his elevation will appear to be a dynastic succession in a country that calls itself a republic.

During his father’s lifetime, Mr Khamenei was often mentioned as the next supreme leader, but when many thousands of Iranians were marching in the streets against the regime, senior figures feared that a hereditary transfer of power would be too provocative and inflammatory.

Now everything is different. The Islamic Republic is fighting for its life against a combined onslaught from America and Israel, and Mr Khamenei’s promotion suggests that the regime judges that this is no time for flexibility and compromise, either with domestic opponents or foreign enemies.

Just naming Mr Khamenei as the new supreme leader raises the possibility that he, too, could be assassinated. But this decision also ends a nine-day power vacuum created by his father’s killing. The new leader will have no thought except to defy Mr Trump.

New supreme leader shows folly of Trump’s war

Story by David Blair

Gavin Newsom labels Donald Trump 'disgusting little man' after Dover ceremony

 

Gavin Newsom accused Donald Trump of being a 'disgusting little man' on Saturday at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware after the US president attended a dignified transfer wearing a white USA baseball cap as the remains of six American service members killed in the Middle East were brought home. The remark, issued through the California governor's office, immediately became the sharpest political reaction to Trump's appearance at the ceremony.

Dignified transfers are among the most solemn responsibilities of the presidency because they mark the return of fallen troops to American soil. Trump himself once described these moments during his first term as the hardest part of the job. That history is why the image of him standing beside the flag covered caskets with his cap still on spread so widely and so fast. The focus was not on his presence. It was on the way he carried it.

Why The Comment Landed So Forcefully

The criticism began almost at once. Newsom's team posted a short message on X, 'Take your hat off, you disgusting little man', alongside video of the transfer. The sentiment was blunt and for many unavoidable. The customs surrounding military rites are well known and removing a hat is one of the simplest gestures of respect expected at such events. Trump kept his on as the caskets passed.

The criticism moved beyond California within minutes. Mary Trump, the president's niece and a frequent commentator on her uncle's conduct, called him an unspeakable disgrace. Other users on X repeated the same point in more muted ways. They argued it looked wrong for a president to arrive in casual attire at a ritual that centres on silence and formality and grief.

It would be easy to dismiss the row as another episode in the endless churn of outrage that defines American political life. Yet this was not a rally or a roadside stop where informality might slide by. A dignified transfer is a structured military ritual. The symbolism is woven into each movement. That is why the hat turned into the story. Small choices can overwhelm the larger setting.

Gavin Newsom labels Donald Trump 'disgusting little man' after Dover ceremony

Story by Francis Louie C. Añiga

 

'Everybody’s afraid not to wear them': Trump buys shoes for admin officials

 

President Donald Trump is buying expensive shoes for his advisors, and people are scared of not wearing them.

According to a bizarre Wall Street Journal report, during meetings, the 79-year-old president starts guessing people's shoe size and then orders them $145 pair of loafers known as Florsheims.

“Marco, JD, you guys have s—y shoes,” Trump told his vice president and Secretary of State. He then grabbed a catalogue. The report said that they were "deep in conversation," though it didn't say what was being discussed. Rubio was an 11.5 and Vance is a 13. A third person in the room, whom Vance wouldn't identify, wore a 7.

“The president kind of leans back in his chair and says, ‘You know you can tell a lot about a man by his shoe size,’ ” Vance recalled.

“It helps to be tall,” Trump told the men. “I don’t know, they’re big heels. They’re big heels. I mean, those were really up there.”

Rubio was mocked in New Hampshire in 2016 when he was caught wearing the Florsheims, which boast a nice heel giving some height to the wearer. Rubio is 5-foot-10 and the shoe "scandal" became known as "Bootgate." Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) faced his own "Bootgate" when he was spotted in 2023 wearing a heal on his shoe. Politico reported at the time that three expert shoemakers said that he was likely wearing "height boosters."

There have been at least four instances in which Trump lied about his height. He has long claimed to be 6-foot-3. But when he stands next to people who also say they are 6'3", he is shorter. Lawyer Christine Pelosi, daughter of former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.), spotted Trump in a "kitten heel" in 2020 while he was viewing hurricane damage.

At least one Cabinet official is annoyed to slum it with the Florsheims, one person who heard his complaint told the Wall Street Journal that he was forced to shelve his Louis Vuittons, which typically run over $1,000, unless there is a sale.

“All the boys have them,” a female White House official remarked.

One joked, “It’s hysterical because everybody’s afraid not to wear them.”

The report said that the "shoe-salesman-in-chief is paying attention."

Menswear writer Derek Guy suggested that Trump try a higher-end brand, Alden Shoe Co., and be properly fitted. Trump's fashion has been mocked over the years, with suits that are too big, shoulder pads, and his signature red tie that is abnormally long. While Trump frequently wears a blue suit, he pairs it with black shoes, whereas most would pair blue with brown shoes.

“I don’t think it’s extravagant—for a billionaire," he quipped.

In a previous thread on X, Guy questioned some of Trump's fashion choices.

"Trump's tailoring is done in a way to conceal his weight. His shoulders are relatively narrow compared to his waist, which gives his body a somewhat rectangular shape," said Guy at the time. "As I've mentioned many times, the platonic male silhouette in classic Western aesthetic is a shoulder line that's broader than the waist, which creates a V-shaped figure. Since Trump doesn't naturally have this silhouette, his suits have an extended shoulder."

It causes a problem because you can only extend a shoulder so far, he explained.

The Journal didn't explain whether or not Trump was paying for the shoes himself or if these were taxpayer-funded shoes.

'Everybody’s afraid not to wear them': Trump buys shoes for admin officials

Story by Sarah K. Burris

Epstein files interest crashes 95% as war escalation dominates global attention

 

Interest in the Jeffrey Epstein files has plummeted by 95% since the US and Israel launched military strikes against Iran in late February, according to Google Trends data. The sharp Epstein files interest drop coincides with the war's escalation dominating global headlines, shifting public focus from the scandal's revelations to geopolitical turmoil.

Analysts note that searches for Epstein documents and related subpoenas peaked just before the conflict intensified, only to fall dramatically as missile exchanges and airstrikes captured attention.

The Decline in Public Attention

Google Trends indicates a near-total eclipse of interest in the Epstein case following the war's outbreak. Searches tied to the files, which include allegations of sexual abuse against prominent figures, dropped to what one expert called a 'statistical dead zone'.

This shift occurred almost immediately after 27 February, when initial US-led bombings began. Prior to that, queries had surged amid the Department of Justice's phased release of over six million pages.

The data measures relative interest, but the pattern is clear: war-related terms like 'Iran conflict' spiked by over 1,200%, overshadowing everything else. Media coverage has followed suit, with major outlets pivoting to live updates on the Middle East crisis.

Before the strikes, the files' disclosures—detailing Epstein's network spanning Silicon Valley to royal circles—had fuelled widespread speculation and calls for accountability. Now, social media discussions reflect the change, with hashtags like #EpsteinFiles yielding far fewer engagements.

War Escalation Takes Centre Stage

The conflict erupted on 28 February with joint US-Israeli operations that assassinated Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and targeted key military sites. Iran retaliated with ballistic missiles aimed at Israel, US bases, and Gulf states, killing dozens and prompting further strikes.

By 8 March, explosions rocked Tehran's oil depots for the first time, while Iran named Khamenei's son, Mojtaba, as the new supreme leader amid vows of continued resistance. The war has spread, affecting 16 countries with nearly 1,000 deaths reported in Iran alone, plus casualties in Lebanon and Israel. US President Donald Trump signalled intensified attacks over the weekend, as Israeli forces claimed kills of Iranian commanders in Beirut.

Regional allies like Saudi Arabia have suffered strikes, with two killed in one incident. The UN has warned of a dangerous spiral, urging de-escalation as civilian airspace shuts down and health systems strain under the pressure. China expressed growing concern, fearing wider flames of war.

Ongoing Revelations in the Epstein Files

Despite the distraction, the Justice Department continues releasing Epstein documents. Recent batches include FBI interviews alleging Trump assaulted a minor introduced by Epstein, summarising claims from when the accuser was aged 13 to 15. Oversight Democrats criticised the White House for an alleged cover-up, as some files vanished temporarily before reappearing. NPR reported 37 pages still missing, including key notes.

The files have led to fallout, with resignations and investigations across sectors. A congressional bill seeks an independent commission for oversight. On Instagram, a post from Reich-Wing Watch highlighted the 95% Epstein files interest drop, linking it directly to the bombings.

As of 9 March 2026, the Epstein files interest drop persists amid the war's ninth day, with analysts warning of outrage fatigue eroding public scrutiny. Yet demands for full transparency linger, as the documents' implications remain unresolved.

Epstein files interest crashes 95% as war escalation dominates global attention

Story by Rohit David

SNL mocks Noem firing and Iran as Hegseth calls war a ‘situationship’

 

Elsewhere in the sketch, Colin Jost’s bro-ified Pete Hegseth performed a keg stand, or as he called it, a ‘Hegstand’ (Saturday Night Live)

Saturday Night Live brutally mocked the Trump administration’s handling of war with Iran, with star Colin Jost reprising his impression of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as an amped-up frat boy.

The cold open began with Hegseth performing a keg stand — a “Hegstand” as he bragged from the podium — then chiding a reporter for labelling the U.S. conflict with Iran as a war.

“This isn’t a war, OK?” Jost said.

“It’s a situationship,” he added, a slang term for an ambiguous relationship.

The joke played on how Republican allies of the president have been reluctant to describe the ongoing conflict as a war, given that the White House bypassed Congress and started the conflict unilaterally, even though only lawmakers can formally declare a war.

As the cold open went on, Jost continued to roast the White House strategy, claiming the ambiguity around the mission — is it about regime change? Stopping state-sponsored terror? preempting a strike on the U.S.? — is all part of a secret Trump administration strategy.

“If we don’t know what we’re doing, then Iran definitely doesn’t know what we’re doing,” Jost said.

“You’re all playing chess — I’m playingGrand Theft Auto,” he added, a nod to the administration’s use of footage from the violent video game in recent Iran-related promotional videos.

The U.S. strategy, he insisted, was about going “wild,” just like actor Shia LaBeouf, who was recently arrested after a partying spree in New Orleans.

In the cold open, Hegseth then ceded the stage to recently-fired DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, played by Ashley Padilla, who Hegesth said had been reassigned to a new role, “under the bus.”

“I didn’t get fired,” Padilla insisted. “I self-deported.”

She then joked about some controversies that helped bring the real Noem down, including the aggressive immigration operation in Minneapolis, as well as allegations she was having an affair with her adviser Corey Lewandowski and that DHS spent government funds on luxury jets for top staff.

“I think I really nailed it, and by it, I mean my married coworker in a big, beautiful flying bedroom 30,000 feet over Minneapolis,” Padilla said.

The sketch also mocked Noem’s new post, serving as a special envoy to the Trump administration’s “Shield of the Americas” initiative.

“As I told my plastic surgeon, the work is never done,” Padilla said.

Back in the real world, Noem remains under scrutiny even as her tenure leading DHS is set to conclude at the end of March.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is demanding that the remaining funds spent by “Kosplay Kristi” Noem on a controversial $220 million “vanity” ad campaign be rerouted to help victims of last year’s devastating Los Angeles wildfires.

“While Kristi Noem poured $220 million of taxpayer money into a political ad campaign featuring herself on horseback, more than $500 million in FEMA funding for LA fire recovery sat stalled on her desk,” Newsom, a Democrat, wrote in a statement. “Families in Los Angeles shouldn’t have to wait while she and Donald Trump play politics. Release the funding now and redirect those dollars to help communities rebuild.”

During her time overseeing homeland security operations, Noem was widely mocked for dressing up in tactical gear for various photo ops and press conferences, leading to derisive nicknames like “Kosplay Kristi” and “ICE Barbie.”

SNL mocks Noem firing and Iran as Hegseth calls war a ‘situationship’

Story by Josh Marcus