The useful idiots over at The Washington Post just inadvertently revealed to the world who Iran is pulling for in the 2026 midterms, and how the regime is interfering to shuffle the political deck in their favor.
Post global affairs reporter Susannah George published an absurd piece of Tehran propaganda October 20, headlined, “Tehran seeks to punish Trump in midterms with oil price pain, Iranian officials say.”
Sounds like a press release for "Iranian officials," that is, Islamist autocrats.
The lede for her story said it all, “For Iran’s leadership, the next few weeks are a critical window.” Anticipating that President Donald Trump will be "sensitive" to energy prices after November, per George, "Tehran is scrambling to inflict maximum pain now by escalating attacks in the Strait of Hormuz, according to Iranian officials and diplomats in the region.”
Here’s the kicker: George doesn’t mention “Democrat(s)” at all in her piece.
It only got worse with George effectively regurgitating the sanctimonious spin from the top state sponsor of terrorism to cast the Trump administration as villainous. “Iranian officials have described the expanded U.S. operations as ‘smuggling,’” George belched. She continued: “In an interview with ultraconservative newspaper Kayhan, Iranian lawmaker Fada Hossein Maleki said such traffic had made the situation in the strait very complicated.’”
“Ultraconservative?” Really? Is that how we’re identifying Islamist propaganda loyal to the Ayatollahs now? "Ultraconservative," like congressional Republicans?
According to State Media Monitor, Kayhan’s editor-in-chief Hossein Shariatmadari is “[w]idely identified as ‘the Supreme Leader’s official representative at Kayhan Publications.’” That’s a lot more damning than George’s half-baked usage of the colloquial term “ultraconservative” would reveal to readers.
It’s not even until the 14th paragraph that George tips her hand and specifically mentions “Republicans” and how Iranian state media is dissecting how GOP losses could hamper Trump’s efforts in the Strait of Hormuz. Then George let the cat out of the bag by all but admitting that Democrats are effectively going to be the unwitting agents of the Iranian regime’s scheme, without directly saying about them of course:
Some voices in Iranian media have argued that a defeat for the Republicans in November will benefit Iran by constraining Trump, threatening him with impeachment and making it more difficult for him to execute the war.
Even more obnoxious was that George allowed her supposed Iranian regime sources to speak “on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy” despite them being enemy operatives openly revealing how their government plans to interfere in U.S. elections. She merely dismissed any critiques by writing that she granted them anonymity “Like other officials and diplomats interviewed for this story.” But what more could we expect from the same newspaper that dubbed ISIS chief Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi an “austere religious scholar” in his obituary?
What George did in turn was basically make the case that Democrats should report Iran’s interference on their behalf as an in-kind contribution, but whatever.
