______________________________________________________
Ariel
@Prolotario1
The Leader Of The Free World
World Freedom
World Liberation
World Peace
What else do you want?
Israel is next up to be dealt with.
For Those Who Are Misleading You: Donald Trump History Of Anti Nuclear Weapons Comments
November 4, 2011: During a speech at the National Press Club, Trump stated, “We can’t allow Iran to go nuclear. It’s a disaster waiting to happen if they get the bomb.” This reflects his early concern about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, predating his political campaigns.
February 4, 2015: In a Fox News interview, Trump declared, “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It’s very simple you don’t have to go too deep into it. They just can’t have it.” This reinforced his consistent opposition during the Obama-era nuclear negotiations.
May 15, 2017: As President, Trump told a joint session of Congress, “I want them to end up being a great country, frankly, but they can’t have a nuclear weapon.” This balances diplomatic intent with a firm security stance.
June 17, 2025: In a White House address, Trump reiterated, “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It’s very simple they just can’t have it,” aligning with his June 21 action.
Advertisement
______________________________________________________
Why are people trying to portray him as never saying these statements before he got into office?
Do you see him as being the only consistent one in this argument?
Now they are trying to gaslight you into thinking he is like George Bush who never showed any real evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction”.
But here we are today with actual video footage of the nuclear sites being taken out and they are saying he entered a war under false pretenses.
1. Trump’s action falls within his constitutional Commander-in-Chief powers, reinforced by the 2001 AUMF, negating the need for new congressional approval.
2. The strike is a preemptive measure against Iran’s advanced nuclear program, not a outright war declaration.
3. Congressional war votes, tainted by past deception, underscore the reliability of executive action in this instance.
Advertisement
______________________________________________________
4. The strike eliminated Iran’s nuclear threat, aligning with decades of U.S. policy, without triggering global conflict.
Vladimir Putin
Xi Jinping
Both know Donald Trump has the legal authority to carry this out. As it was not done under any false pretense.
Do you remember this?
Trump’s drone attack on Qasem Soleimani, authorized under the 2001 AUMF, was deemed constitutional by the 6th Circuit Court in 2021, reinforcing executive discretion.
Did this start WW3?
Do people not realize how powerful Qasem Soleimani was?
Ask yourself why there was no retaliation when Donald Trump took him out vs the nuclear strikes?
Representative Thomas Massie, in his June 21, 2025, statement argued the strike required congressional approval under Article I, Section 8, calling it an unconstitutional overreach and implying war initiation.
The strike was a targeted operation, not a war declaration. The War Powers Resolution (1973) allows 60 days of military action without congressional approval if the President certifies an imminent threat, which Trump did via a classified memo to Congress.
Advertisement
______________________________________________________
Why don’t you hear any of this from Thomas Massie?
Beware Of The Information War Tactics
This focus on off-site levels ignores on-site potential, where enriched uranium (60% purity, IAEA 2025) could remain intact or be concealed.
Asserting safety without on-site inspection data, hours after strikes, is a bold overreach, undermining Trump’s claims of targeting active nuclear material without evidence to contradict.
The IAEA’s silence on pre-strike stockpiles 18.7 kg above JCPOA limits suggests a deliberate minimization of Iran’s nuclear capacity. So these reports should be heavily scrutinized. Because it is being used in a fraudulent way to sway opinion to support Iran.
The IAEA’s rush to counter Trump contrasts with its 2023 delay in reporting Iran’s centrifuge expansion, suggesting a pattern of shielding Tehran to maintain diplomatic leverage. This aligns with U.S. State Department pressure to avoid escalation.
Read Full Article:
https://x.com/Prolotario1/status/1936579986728931355
https://x.com/Prolotario1/status/1936603072014266574
https://x.com/Prolotario1/status/1936608515289657752
https://x.com/Prolotario1/status/1936696610097856882
______________________________________________________
Contact Author
If you wish to contact the author of this article. Please email us at [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.] and we’ll forward your email to the author.
______________________________________________________
Guest Posting
If you wish to write and/or publish an article on Operation Disclosure all you need to do is send your entry to [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.] applying these following rules.
The subject of your email entry should be: “Entry Post | (Title of your post) | Operation Disclosure”
– Must be in text format
– Proper Grammar
– No foul language
– Your signature/name/username at the top
______________________________________________________
Newsletter
If you wish to receive the daily Operation Disclosure Newsletter, you can subscribe via the PayPal “Subscribe” button located at the bottom.
______________________________________________________
Our mission at Operation Disclosure is to get you up-to-date on the latest conspiracies and geopolitics. We also aim to provide raw unvetted information about world events from various sources and user submitted research on topics such as exopolitics, extraterrestrial and UFO/UAP sightings, secret space programs, and the lost or ancient origins and history of humanity.
Disclaimer: All articles, videos, and images posted on Operation Disclosure were submitted by readers and/or handpicked by the site itself for informational and/or entertainment purposes. All statements, claims, views, and opinions that appear on this site are always presented as unverified and should be discerned by the reader. We do not endorse any opinions expressed on this website and we do not support, represent or guarantee the completeness, truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any content posted on this website.
Copyright © Operation Disclosure
Source link