Fact Checker: The Week in Review
June 22, 2025 edition
BREAKING: The United States Enters War With Iran
How a week of systematic lies led to military strikes
In the most consequential military action of Trump's presidency, U.S. forces struck three Iranian nuclear sites Saturday night, marking America's first direct attack on Iran since 1979. The strikes—targeting Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan—came after a week of systematic administration lies about U.S. involvement, from "we are not involved" to claiming "complete control of Iranian skies" to full military engagement.
This Week's Summary
The most militarily significant week of the Trump presidency ended with U.S. B-2 bombers dropping "bunker-buster" bombs on Iran's most fortified nuclear facilities. The path to war was paved with systematic dishonesty: the administration went from denying involvement to boasting about controlling Iranian airspace to launching the largest U.S. military action in the Middle East since Iraq. Meanwhile, Trump's contradictory statements about everything from G7 diplomacy to domestic GDP data revealed an administration where Fox News coverage appears to drive foreign policy decisions more than intelligence briefings.
The week also featured Trump's early departure from the G7 after praising Putin hours before Putin launched the deadliest attack on Kyiv this year, the launch of a "Made in America" phone that industry experts say is impossible at the claimed price point, and continued $200+ million military deployment in Los Angeles despite no protest arrests since Saturday. The pattern throughout: when reality conflicts with political messaging, reality gets discarded—even when it leads to acts of war.
BREAKING: From "Not Involved" to Bombing Iran—A Week of Systematic War Lies
BREAKING: From "Not Involved" to Bombing Iran—A Week of Systematic War Lies
How the administration's dishonesty about military involvement escalated to actual warfare
The Escalation Timeline: A Study in Systematic Dishonesty
Saturday night's U.S. bombing of Iran represents the culmination of a week-long pattern of systematic lies about American military involvement. The administration's statements evolved from outright denial to claims of control to actual warfare—all while claiming to seek diplomatic solutions.
June 13: The "Not Involved" Lie
Secretary of State Marco Rubio's statement: "Tonight, Israel took unilateral action against Iran. We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region"
The positioning: Clear distance between U.S. and Israeli military action
June 17: The "Complete Control" Boast
Trump's social media claim: "We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran"
The contradiction: From "not involved" to claiming military control of Iranian airspace in four days
June 21: The Full Military Engagement
Trump's announcement: "We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan... A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow"
The reality: U.S. B-2 bombers used 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs—the first direct U.S. attack on Iran since 1979
The Fox News Foreign Policy Problem
The most dangerous aspect of this escalation was how easily Trump's position was manipulated by television coverage.
The Real-Time Policy Shift
O'Donnell documented how Trump's Iran stance changed based on Fox News coverage:
Initial Position: Seeking diplomatic deal with Iran through negotiations
Fox Coverage: "Wall to wall imagery" celebrating Israeli military success
Changed Position: Claiming credit for strikes, escalating to full U.S. military involvement
The TV-Driven Warfare
Quote: "His favorite TV channel, Fox News, was broadcasting wall to wall imagery of what it was portraying as Israel's military genius, and Mr. Trump could not resist claiming some credit for himself"
The escalation: Within days of Fox celebrating Israeli "success," Trump went from diplomatic restraint to full military strikes on Iran
The Congressional Bypass Crisis
This Week's Timeline:
Tuesday: Rep. Thomas Massie introduced bipartisan War Powers Resolution to prevent unauthorized Iran involvement
Wednesday: Bipartisan Congressional support for preventing military action without authorization
Saturday: Trump launched major military strikes without Congressional approval
The Constitutional Violation
Sen. Mark Warner complaint: Even intelligence committee members "have no foggy idea what this administration's plans are" on Iran
The reality: Trump launched acts of war while Congress was actively trying to prevent unauthorized military involvement
The Ultimate Self-Contradiction: Trump vs. Trump
In perhaps the most stunning example of systematic hypocrisy in presidential history, Trump's own words from 2013 perfectly condemn his military action from Saturday night.
November 10, 2013 Trump tweet: "Remember that I predicted a long time ago that President Obama will attack Iran because of his inability to negotiate properly—not skilled!"
June 21, 2025 reality: Trump bombs Iran's nuclear facilities after failed negotiations
The perfect contradiction: Trump literally criticized Obama for the exact same action he just took, using almost identical reasoning (failed negotiations leading to military strikes)
The Hypocrisy Documentation
Critics immediately surfaced Trump's own 2013 tweet, showing his condemnation of the precise military action he had just authorized
The principle abandoned: Presidents who attack Iran due to "inability to negotiate properly" were "not skilled" according to Trump's own standard
The Negotiation Admission
Trump's own 2013 logic: Presidents attack Iran "because of inability to negotiate properly"
The 2025 application: Trump's attack came after weeks of claiming Iran wouldn't negotiate, admitting his own diplomatic failure by his own standards
The Pattern of Partisan Hypocrisy
When Obama might attack Iran: "inability to negotiate properly—not skilled!"
When Trump attacks Iran: "spectacular military success" and "great American warriors"
The same action judged entirely differently based on who takes it
June 21, 10 PM: The Victory Speech Contradictions
Even in his address to the nation announcing military success, Trump couldn't resist systematic dishonesty about basic facts:
The "Complete Obliteration" Exaggeration
Trump's claim: "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated"
Technical reality: Underground nuclear facilities are heavily fortified and hardened—complete destruction from single strikes is unlikely even with bunker-busters
The pattern: Overstating military success for political effect
The "40 Years" Historical Lie
Trump's claim: "For 40 years, Iran has been saying death to America, death to Israel"
Mathematical reality: Islamic Revolution was 1979—that's 46 years ago, and the regime change created the policy, not a continuous 40-year timeline
The error type: Basic arithmetic failure in prepared presidential address
The Soleimani Credit Grab
Trump's claim: "So many were killed by their general, Qasem Soleimani"
The timeline manipulation: Trump killed Soleimani in 2020 during his first term, now using it to justify 2025 bombing
The pattern: Recycling old military actions to justify new wars
The "Success" and "More Targets" Contradiction
Simultaneous claims: "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated" AND "Remember, there are many targets left... if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets"
The logical failure: Can't claim total success while threatening more attacks in the same speech
The Military Supremacy Boast
Trump's claim: "There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight, not even close"
Reality check: Multiple militaries possess bunker-buster capabilities and precision strike abilities
The pattern: Standard Trump hyperbole even during acts of war
The Anti-Interventionist Who Started a War
Campaign Position: Trump was "propelled to victory in part by interventionist skeptics who applauded him for condemning the war in Iraq"
Saturday Reality: Authorized the largest U.S. military action in the Middle East since the Iraq invasion
The Contradiction: The candidate who promised to avoid "forever wars" just launched direct military strikes on a nuclear-armed adversary
MAIN ANALYSIS: Diplomatic Disasters—When G7 Lies Meet Global Reality
How Trump's Putin sympathy undermined peace efforts before launching war
The G7 Debacle: Leaving Early to Start a War
Trump's early departure from the G7 summit now takes on new meaning—he left international diplomacy to prepare for military action, after a week of praising Putin and avoiding Ukraine's leader.
The Putin Praise vs. War Preparation
Trump's G7 claims: "Putin speaks to me. He doesn't speak to anybody else... I agree with him" about being expelled from G8
The timeline: Hours after Trump's praise, Putin ordered the year's deadliest attack on Kyiv, killing 15 people including an American citizen
The irony: Trump praised Putin while preparing to bomb Putin's ally Iran
The "Mistake" Lie About Russia's G8 Expulsion
Trump's version: "This was a big mistake" to expel Russia after Crimea annexation
Historical fact: Russia was expelled in 2014 for annexing Crimea—the exact same behavior Trump claims wouldn't have happened without the expulsion
The current context: Trump defended Putin's territorial aggression while preparing his own military strikes
The Zelenskyy Avoidance Strategy
Documented reality: NATO leaders deliberately shortened next week's summit to 2.5 hours and carefully avoided scheduling Trump-Zelenskyy meetings
Administration spin: No acknowledgment of the systematic effort to prevent diplomatic engagement with Ukraine's leader
The pattern: Avoiding diplomatic solutions while preparing military ones
G7 Early Departure—The Real Reason
Official claim: Left early due to Middle East crisis requiring urgent attention
The reality: "Much was accomplished, but because of what's going on in the Middle East, President Trump will be leaving tonight after dinner"
What we now know: He left to authorize bombing Iran, making this the most consequential early summit departure in modern history
MAIN ANALYSIS: Travel Ban Math—Manufacturing Crises Through Selective Geography
The Boulder Bombing Contradiction
The administration's latest travel ban expansion reveals their systematic approach to dishonesty through geographic manipulation, now taking on new urgency given military action against Iran.
The Geographic Logic Failure:
Justification: Trump cited an incident where an Egyptian national tossed a gasoline bomb into a crowd in Boulder, Colorado
Reality: Egypt isn't on the banned list
Proposed expansion: 36 additional countries being considered, targeting 25 African nations including Egypt and Djibouti—significant U.S. partners
The war context: Banning countries while bombing others shows arbitrary targeting
The Scale of Expansion During War
Current reality: 19 countries currently face full or partial restrictions
Proposed expansion: 36 additional countries, which would nearly triple the ban
The timing: Expanding travel restrictions while launching military strikes shows escalating authoritarianism
MAIN ANALYSIS: Los Angeles Math—The $200 Million Theater Production Continues
How military deployment became rehearsal for wartime authoritarianism
The Ever-Escalating Numbers Game
This week's continued military deployment in Los Angeles takes on new meaning given Saturday's Iran strikes—the administration appears to view military force as the solution to all problems.
Current Deployment Reality:
Total forces: 2,100 National Guard soldiers plus 700 Marines = 2,800 troops for local protests
Additional deployment: 2,000 more National Guard troops announced this week
Cost estimate: Over $200 million for deployment
Arrest reality: Los Angeles Police Department spokesperson told CNBC Wednesday there had not been any arrests related to protests since Saturday night
The "De-escalation" Through Force Lie
Trump's claim: "By having the military, it de-escalates"
The pattern: The same logic applied domestically (deploy troops against protesters) and internationally (bomb Iran for peace)
The Constitutional Crisis Precedent
The LA deployment involved: Federal agents physically removing and handcuffing U.S. Senator Alex Padilla during a Homeland Security press conference
The Iran parallel: Launching military strikes while Congress actively tried to prevent unauthorized war
The pattern: Using force against both domestic oversight and international law
QUICK HITS: The Week in Administrative Contradictions
🚀 The Ultimate Military Flip-Flop
June 13: "We are not involved in strikes against Iran" (Rubio)
June 17: "We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran" (Trump)
June 21: "We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran" (Trump)
🔄 The 2020 Election Investigation Flip-Flop
December 2024 position: Told NBC "I'm not interested in that" when asked about directing Justice Department to investigate the 2020 election he lost
June 21, 2025 reality: Posts on social media calling for a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election
The pattern: Say what sounds reasonable in interviews, do the opposite when convenient
💰 The GDP Blame Game Revival
Trump's June 21 deflection: "You probably saw some numbers today. I have to start off by saying that's Biden, not Trump. Because we came in on January -- these are quarterly numbers"
The timeline lie: Q1 2025 covers January-March 2025—Trump was president for the entire period
The causation reality: The -0.3% GDP contraction was directly caused by Trump's tariff policies, with businesses importing 41-53% more goods to get ahead of his tariffs
📊 The Peace Promise vs. War Reality
Campaign promise: End wars, avoid "forever wars," bring troops home
June 21 reality: Launched first U.S. military strikes on Iran since 1979
🌍 The Congressional War Powers Bypass
Tuesday: Bipartisan War Powers Resolution introduced to prevent unauthorized Iran involvement
Saturday: Trump launched military strikes without Congressional authorization
The constitutional crisis: Acts of war launched while Congress actively tried to prevent them
BACKGROUND: The Musk Meltdown Aftermath
How last week's alliance collapse was overshadowed by war
The Continuing Fallout from June 5th
While the explosive Trump-Musk feud from two weeks ago was overshadowed by this week's march to war, its effects continue to ripple through Republican politics. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" that Musk called a "disgusting abomination" now faces an uncertain Senate path as Republicans focus on war authorization questions.
The Political Realignment During Wartime
Musk's poll to his 220 million X followers: "Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?" received 80% support
The war context: Anti-interventionist Republicans now face a president who just bombed Iran
The electoral impact: The coalition that elected Trump included many opposed to Middle East wars
CONSEQUENCES AND IMPLICATIONS
From Political Theater to Acts of War
International Military Escalation:
First U.S. direct attack on Iran since 1979
Potential for Iranian retaliation against U.S. forces and allies
Regional war now involving American military directly
Nuclear facilities bombed—unknown impact on weapons development timeline
Constitutional Crisis Deepening:
Military strikes launched without Congressional authorization
War Powers Resolution bypassed entirely
Federal agents suppressing congressional oversight (Padilla incident)
Pattern of using force against both domestic and international law
Domestic Authoritarianism Escalating:
$200+ million military deployment for domestic protest management
Justice Department weaponization for 2020 election investigations
Travel ban expansion targeting allies while bombing adversaries
Republican Coalition Fracturing:
Anti-interventionist base confronts president who started Iran war
Congressional Republicans bypassed on war authorization
Musk coalition increasingly distant from military escalation
LOOKING AHEAD: Critical Developments to Monitor
Immediate War Consequences:
Iranian retaliation potential against U.S. forces and allies
Regional escalation involving other Middle East powers
Congressional response to unauthorized acts of war
International allied reaction to unilateral U.S. military action
Constitutional and Legal Challenges:
War Powers Act violations and Congressional response
International law implications of unprovoked nuclear facility bombing
Domestic military deployment constitutional challenges
Political Realignment:
Anti-interventionist Republican response to Iran war
2026 midterm implications for war authorization
Musk coalition's response to military escalation
Military and Strategic Questions:
Iranian nuclear program damage assessment
U.S. military positioning for potential expanded conflict
Regional ally coordination and support
On a Lighter Note
After a week featuring the first U.S. bombing of Iran since 1979, presidents praising Putin hours before starting wars, and NATO summits shortened for attention span issues, there's something almost quaint about basic business reality.
The Trump family announced Trump Mobile this week, claiming their $499 T1 phone will be "proudly designed and built in the United States." Industry experts immediately called this "classic vaporware," noting that if Apple made iPhones in America, they'd cost $3,500+ due to manufacturing costs. The only U.S. smartphone manufacturer, Purism, sells phones for $1,999.
While Trump attacks China with tariffs and demands domestic manufacturing, his family business appears to be planning standard overseas production while claiming American manufacturing. The website even disclaims that products "are not designed, developed, manufactured, distributed or sold by The Trump Organization"—despite family members making manufacturing claims at the launch.
But hey, at least the pricing is honest about one thing: $47.45 monthly plans reference Trump being the 45th and 47th president. Finally, some truth in advertising—it really is all about him.
Sometimes the most effective fact-check comes from industry experts who won't lie about basic economics: $499 ≠ $3,500, and you can't have "Made in America" smartphones at Chinese manufacturing prices. Unlike foreign policy, math doesn't change based on what you see on Fox News.
In a week when systematic lying led to acts of war, at least the family business is just lying about phone manufacturing costs. Relatively speaking, that's progress.
METHODOLOGY NOTE
This analysis combines real-time reporting from multiple verified sources including The New York Times, Reuters, AP, CNN, NPR, ABC News, Fox News, and official government statements. All claims are verified against documented evidence, press briefings, social media posts from principals, and court filings.
The Iran military action coverage required tracking rapidly changing statements and comparing official positions across multiple agencies and timeframes, culminating in Saturday night's unprecedented military strikes. Special attention was paid to contradictory statements about U.S. involvement, with timestamps documented to show the escalation from denial to full military engagement.
The G7 summit coverage takes on new significance given Trump's early departure to authorize military action. Manufacturing claims were verified through industry expert interviews and comparative analysis with existing U.S. smartphone production costs.
Military deployment numbers required reconciling conflicting reports and official corrections. The constitutional implications of launching military strikes while Congress actively sought to prevent them are documented through official Congressional records.
Given the rapidly evolving military situation, this analysis focuses on documented statements and actions through Saturday night, June 21, 2025.
Next edition: We'll examine Iranian retaliation, Congressional response to unauthorized war, international allied reactions, and the domestic political consequences of the president's most consequential military decision.