The US-Israeli war on Iran has now ground on for two weeks. And guess what’s the most jaw-dropping part of this entire conflict? Trump decided to go to war on pure gut instinct, consulting only a handful of advisers — chief among them his son-in-law Jared Kushner — with apparently zero contingency plan for Iran's response.
The Strait of Hormuz blockade is case in point: Trump has been completely paralyzed, leaving the war effort in shambles. Facing this disaster, he's doing what he always does — refusing to own it. Instead, he's throwing Kushner under the bus, saying "based on what he told me, I thought Iran was going to attack the United States." The implication is stark: his son-in-law may have fed him bad intelligence that dragged America into war.
Trump’s Iran war is falling apart. He now blames son-in-law Kushner (right), saying Kushner’s intel pushed him to strike.
The reality: Kushner, Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, and the rest of the White House's so-called "Jewish clique" were the key architects of this conflict — openly siding with Israel while dragging the rest of the world into the wreckage.
When the war kicked off, Trump was riding high. He was convinced that America's overwhelming military firepower would bring Iran to its knees within days.
Envoy Witkoff (left) is also in his sights — another key player in the White House “Jewish clique” driving Middle East policy.
He badly miscalculated. Iran did way more than just holding the line — it hit back hard and relentlessly, pushing the situation to the edge of Trump's control. The Strait of Hormuz remains firmly in Iranian military hands, and Washington has no answer. Reports say shipping companies have begged the US Navy for warship escorts, only to be flatly turned down — too few navy ships, risks too high. It is a humiliating display of impotence.
With the strait sealed shut, global oil and gas supply chains are in chaos and prices keep climbing. US allies are seething, and it's only a matter of time before that anger boils over at home too. Caught in a catastrophe of his own making, Trump is working two angles at once — engineering a face-saving exit while furiously offloading blame. This time, the scapegoats he has chosen are Kushner and Witkoff.
A few days ago, Trump told reporters his decision to go to war was built on what Kushner and Witkoff had told him — intelligence that made him believe "I thought [Iran] was going to attack us", and something needed to be done. Translation: if their advice was wrong, the blood is on their hands, not his.
What Kushner Actually Told Trump
So what exactly did Kushner and Witkoff tell him? The picture is coming into focus. Shortly before hostilities began, the two men flew to Geneva to negotiate with Iranian representatives. On their return, they briefed Trump, reporting that Iran had claimed to possess enough enriched uranium to build 11 nuclear warheads — and that both men believed Iran could use those weapons to strike the United States. Trump later told Fox News the US had no choice but to act pre-emptively. His analogy: in a gunfight, the gunman has to draw first.
Now that the war has sunk into a quagmire, Trump is leaning on that same briefing to explain why he "felt" Iran was about to strike — and to justify his rush to war. The subtext is impossible to miss: they may have fed him bad intelligence, and he would never have acted so recklessly on his own.
Whether or not Kushner actually misled his father-in-law, the fact that Trump launched a war on his son-in-law's word alone is breathtaking in its recklessness. Democratic lawmakers have said so bluntly: a president who bypasses the CIA, the NSA, and the entire US intelligence apparatus — choosing instead to act on the advice of a family member and a tight inner circle — and then drags the country into a costly, deadly war that harms innocents and devastates allies, has a serious problem of judgement.
There's another layer of absurdity that demands scrutiny. Kushner is Jewish, and his family business carries deep, entangled financial ties to Israel. His father is a close personal friend of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.
There is every reason to believe that the intelligence and advice Kushner delivers to Trump tilts in Israel's favour — and that he may be actively steering Trump's decision-making toward Israeli objectives. Whose interests he puts first is not a difficult question to answer.
The "Jewish Clique" at the Core
Chinese Mainland commentator "Chairman Tu" has written a sharp exposé of the White House "Jewish clique" and its stranglehold on American policy. Kushner tops the list — a five-star inner-circle figure in terms of proximity to Trump. Second is Middle East envoy Witkoff, also Jewish, a real estate magnate with equally tight financial ties to Israel. Third is Commerce Secretary Lutnick, who also wields meaningful influence over Trump's Middle East agenda.
This "Jewish clique" at the heart of American power is the single greatest force behind Trump's decision to go to war with Iran. They have covertly helped Israel pursue its goal of destroying Iran, while dragging the rest of the world into the wreckage — forcing everyone to pay an enormous price for a war that was reckless, absurd, and entirely avoidable.
Lai Ting-yiu
What Say You?
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Trump is a master of staging a "television reality show," and his nationwide address this morning was filled with theatrical flair. His chief aim was to impress the American public with a sense that the US military wields overwhelming power—decimating a longtime foe threatening the nation—and that he alone leads this victorious force.
Yet the specifics—actual battlefield gains, ceasefire timing, negotiation progress, next steps, or reopening the Strait of Hormuz—were all vague or glossed over. Trump carefully crafted narrative designed to build a grand finale for his imminent exit.
Trump’s war speech sold a big win. US media saw big gaps.
The New York Times, ever sharp, reviewed the string of dazzling claims he made and found several numbers heavily exaggerated. Reuters also noted that on several unresolved issues, Trump skimmed past or ignored them altogether, apparently trying to avoid the impression of unfinished or failed efforts.
Trump’s message selection was clearly intentional. He emphasized the war lasted about 30 days and culminated in a massive victory, contrasting this with the long, grueling Vietnam and Iraq Wars—to showcase strength and efficiency. Yet whether the US actually won remains mostly rhetoric. The New York Times compared his cited achievements with reality and found stark contradictions.
Negotiation Claims vs. Reality
First, Trump claimed negotiations with Iran were ongoing and had earlier said Iran was "begging" for a ceasefire. The New York Times reported that Iran’s government clearly stated it had no intention of substantive talks and denied requesting a ceasefire. Trump’s claim that "progress has been made in talks" was false. The paper cited US intelligence officials who assessed that Iran is not currently ready to reach an agreement.
Iran’s tough negotiating stance reflects its belief that it holds the upper hand in the conflict and is in no hurry for peace. It also deeply distrusts the United States, viewing Trump as unpredictable and lacking sincerity in negotiations.
Military Impact on Iran Questioned
Second, Trump asserted that the US military has severely weakened Iran's missile and drone launch capabilities, destroying large missile stockpiles and production facilities, thereby dismantling the military threat.
However, The New York Times reported that Iran still maintains a substantial arsenal of missiles and a significant number of drones. This enables Iran to continue recent attacks against Israel and Gulf countries. Earlier, Reuters cited US internal assessments showing that the US-Israel coalition has destroyed only about 30% of Iran's missiles. Another 30% have unknown status, while the remaining missiles remain intact—indicating Iran retains a considerable missile inventory.
Trump said Iran was crippled. Its missile stocks say otherwise.
Third, Trump claims that US military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities have achieved "great success," eliminating the nuclear threat to the United States.
The New York Times however, cites sources revealing that a stock of enriched uranium remains stored in tunnels and was not destroyed. The effectiveness of the June airstrike on the nuclear site last year remains unclear. As a result, the claim of " Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated" cannot be verified.
False Regime Change Claims
Fourth, Trump claimed that Iran's original leaders have all been eliminated and replaced by a new group of moderates, signaling that a "regime change" has taken place. Although he no longer names regime overthrow as a goal, by emphasizing this point he clearly implies "that objective has also been accomplished."
The New York Times strongly contradicted this, noting that the current government still wields significant authority and maintains full control over the country. Its "anti-American" stance remains unshaken as it continues to lead the "resistance against America." Trump also boasted that "the command structure of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is being weakened", another exaggerated claim of a major victory.
Ignored Issues and Vagueness
Beyond boasting about major achievements, Trump glosses over unresolved issues and brushes them aside with vague assurances.
Reuters noted that while he had previously pressured Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz—threatening warship escorts and even deployment of ground forces—this time he omits that from stated objectives, merely saying that once the conflict ends, Iran will naturally reopen the strait.
Moreover, Trump offers no concrete plan for handling Iran's enriched uranium. The so-called elimination of the nuclear threat remains empty rhetoric—talk that sounds like action but delivers nothing.
US media also highlight that Trump fails to clarify what comes next, including whether ground troops will be sent, leaving these questions unanswered. His bluster about "bombing Iran back to the Stone Age" reads as mere bravado aimed at strengthening his negotiation position. Having dealt with him repeatedly, Iran sees through these tactics and remains calm and unfazed.
In his nationwide address today, Trump listed a series of "brilliant achievements" against Iran to showcase the "great victories" the United States has won under his leadership—victories unseen in years. However, as several media outlets have pointed out, many of these claims are blown out of proportion. It’s like a struggling CEO who inflates the company’s results to reassure shareholders—here, the audience being the public.
What he’s doing is easy to understand: this war is teetering on the edge of collapse, and he has to set up a way to exit with some grace.
Lai Ting-yiu
