🎭 The Liars’ Club: 10 Politicians Who Declared Iran the Victor
If you already know what their conclusion will be — then it is not an opinion.
🎭 The Liars’ Club: 10 Politicians Who Declared Iran the Victor
By Jim Reynolds | www.reynolds.com
June 20, 2026
Here they are — the elected officials and national representatives who looked at the smoldering remains of Iran’s navy, air force, missile program, nuclear infrastructure, and decapitated leadership, and concluded that the side missing those things won.
The Dirty Dozen (Minus Two)
1. Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf — Speaker, Iranian Parliament & Chief Negotiator
The headliner. Ghalibaf declared on Iranian state television that Iran “won the war against the United States and Israel,” framing it as a clash “between the front of truth and falsehood.” He insisted Iran thwarted “the nine goals” the U.S. and Israel set at the war’s outset. His signature line: “When I talk about negotiation and diplomacy, I mean the diplomacy of power.”
This is the guy whose country just got its military erased, and he’s lecturing the world about the diplomacy of power. Baghdad Bob would be proud.
My brother Jerry would say: “This guy deserves the horse laugh. Where’s Mr Ed when we need him?”
2. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut)
Not content with merely criticizing the deal, Murphy went full surrender narrative: “It’s essentially a surrender to Iran on Iran’s terms.” He then added, with the self-awareness of a brick: “Iran gets everything they want out of this — sanctions relief, implicit control of the Strait of Hormuz, no commitments on nuclear program.”
Iran gets everything it wants. The navy at the bottom of the Persian Gulf? Irrelevant. The destroyed missile factories? Doesn’t count. The dead Supreme Leader? A rounding error. Murphy also called the war “disastrous” and the deal “humiliating” — because nothing says humiliation like achieving all four of your stated military objectives.
3. Sen. Chris Coons (D-Delaware)
A member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Coons called the deal “pathetic” and a “failure” — the “inevitable conclusion of a combination of never making the case to the American people, flawed strategic vision, lack of grasp of the regional dynamics.”
Never making the case. The administration that recited its four objectives from every podium, in every briefing, across multiple months, somehow never made the case. What Coons means is: the case was made, but he didn’t like who was making it.
Independent observers may differ. Some of them would call this guy a fool.
4. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire)
The ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee went nuclear: “Not one of the president’s objectives has been achieved.“ She called the reported terms “a full capitulation to Iran.”
Not one objective achieved. The missiles destroyed? Didn’t happen. The navy sunk? Hallucination. The nuclear program set back? Fantasy. When you’re the top Democrat on Foreign Relations and you’re making claims that would fail a fifth-grade current events quiz, you’ve left analysis behind and entered performance art.
5. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-California)
The man who spent four years promising evidence of Russian collusion that never materialized now brings his reality-bending talents to foreign policy: “Hard to imagine a more thorough capitulation.”
Hard to imagine. The guy who imagined Trump was a Russian asset for half a decade now finds it hard to imagine something. The deal that destroyed Iran’s conventional military capabilities is a capitulation — to Iran. The logic is so inverted it needs its own coordinate system.
6. Sen. Cory Booker (D-New Jersey)
Booker called the deal a “dangerous giveaway” to “this enemy.” A giveaway. The United States gave Iran... the destruction of its navy? The elimination of its missile production? The death of its Supreme Leader? Some giveaway. Where can I sign up for this kind of losing?
7. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York)
Gillibrand declared that the ceasefire “can’t paper over a failed strategy that delivered on not one of his promises. Not one.”
Not one promise delivered. The four objectives — destroy missiles, annihilate navy, prevent nuclear weapon, sever proxies — were all promises. All four were substantially achieved. But Gillibrand says “not one.” This is not disagreement. This is the denial of observable reality.
8. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Virginia)
Kaine, who never met a war he couldn’t Monday-morning-quarterback, said the deal got America “to a place that’s probably worse off than where we were on February 27.”
Worse off. Before February 27, Iran had a navy, an air force, ballistic missiles, air defenses, a nuclear enrichment program, a living Supreme Leader, and functional proxy networks across the Middle East. After the war, it has none of those things at the same level. But Kaine says we’re worse off. The man was Hillary Clinton’s running mate. The logic tracks.
The remaining question is who had the loonier running mate? Hillary or Kamala?
9. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut)
Blumenthal joined the pile-on, prompting even left-wing foreign policy hands to push back. Matt Duss, former Sanders adviser, publicly asked him: “Would you rather go back to war?”
When the Bernie Sanders wing of the party thinks you’ve lost the plot on war criticism, you’ve entered uncharted territory. Blumenthal’s objection wasn’t that the U.S. failed — it’s that Trump succeeded, and that’s unacceptable under any framing.
10. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington)
Jayapal released a video demanding answers on the MOU, declaring: “The Strait of Hormuz apparently is now going to be open after 30 days. Well, guess what? It was open before the war started... We are literally going back to a position that is worse than when we started.”
The Strait was open before the war. Yes. And then Iran closed it. And then the U.S. military forced it back open. And now the deal locks in that reopening. Jayapal’s argument is that getting back to the pre-war status quo on shipping — while having destroyed Iran’s military in the process — is somehow worse. The Strait is open, Iran’s navy is gone, and this is a loss. The math is fascinating.
The Pattern
What unites this list — beyond the obvious partisan alignment — is the complete refusal to engage with the stated-goals-versus-results framework. Every single one of these politicians ignores the four objectives the administration articulated and the observable evidence that they were achieved. Instead, they substitute:
Goalpost migration (the real objective was regime change)
Concession alchemy (any economic relief = surrender)
Survival-as-victory (the regime still exists = we lost)
Process criticism (the war was unauthorized, the deal is messy)
Not one of them can look at the destruction of Iran’s navy, missile program, and nuclear infrastructure and say: “The military objectives were achieved, but I have concerns about the diplomatic framework.” That would require acknowledging a Trump success. And that is structurally impossible.
Bob:🅱️ “They didn’t redefine victory because Iran won. They redefined victory because Trump did.”
The Liars’ Club doesn’t have membership cards. It has Senate floor privileges, committee gavels, and cable news bookings. And its members are working overtime to convince you that the side that lost everything actually won — because the alternative is admitting that the man they’ve spent a decade trying to destroy just delivered the most decisive American military victory in a generation.
And that they cannot do.
These people are all obvious liars. They see the same reality we do but refuse to admit it. They apparently have no place in their world for the truth.
Never bother believing a word they say.
Ever.