In the wake of the killing of Iranian Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani, the sheer number of lefty voices hoarsely defending the brute is astounding. Responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans, thousands of others, and hated by Iraqi and Iranian citizens, Soleimani is no one's candidate for man of the year.

Listen to American liberals screech. So much nonsense has spewed from the mouths of politicians and the corrupt media in the past 24 hours, it's hard to keep up. Let's look at the flat-out lies first.

Party-line Reactions

Nancy Pelosi has demanded Congressional pre-approval for war with Iran for a long time. Here she is in May, and again in June, culminating in a vote calling for express consent to declare war. However, as the Intercept reported, "The bill contains an exception for emergency situations in which U.S. armed forces are under attack." It's a moot point--the bill never stood a chance of passing the Senate--but the provision is worth noting, as our forces were under just such duress.

Never mind that we have forces on the ground already. Never mind that we have been attacked by Iranian forces repeatedly. Pelosi wants right of refusal on individual strikes.

Most other Dem poster children followed suit--AOC, Ilhan Omar, Adam Schiff, etc.--their standard line a variation of: Soleimani did some bad things, but we can't assassinate someone and risk World War III. Which is of course hyperbole. What the Trump administration pulled off yesterday was not an act of war, but of retribution. Standing by while Americans are attacked is not leadership, it's an invitation to further attacks.

In fact, in the primitive eye-for-an-eye mentality of extremist Islam, what Trump did was the only logical response. Anything less would have smacked of Obama's windswept lines in the desert sand.

What's more, Trump did notify Congress--the right ones, anyway. Lindsey Graham knew--and the plan wasn't leaked. Leaky Democrat Party leaders have earned their limited rights: national secrets must stay national secrets. When personages like John Kerry (not in office, but still a DNC hitter) have secret meetings with Iranians over the course of several years, meetings which Defense Secretary Mike Pompeo went out of his way to call "very, very inappropriate," a discrete problem exists.

Kerry claimed to have been engaged in the extra-governmental talks to "salvage" the ridiculously lax Iran nuclear deal, or JPCOA, an Obama legacy cake-topper that allowed Iran up to a year between inspections--inspections to which Iran had refused compliance as recently as 2017. It was a stupid deal made by a cunning man. Obama had a stake in Iran gaining a seat at the nuclear table, and Kerry was his intermediary.

Joe Biden, for his part, has famously opposed virtually any action to thwart known terrorists. He was against the bin Laden raid, stating, "Mr. President [Obama], don't go." Chum in the presidential debate waters, should Quid Pro Joe make it that far.

So why is Democratic leadership--the same crew involved in the plunder of Ukraine (Biden/Pelosi, Kerry) so shamelessly loyal to Iran? Why do they look the other way on terrorism? I suspect Attorney General Bill Barr is increasingly curious about this unfolding matter as well.

The Corrupt Press Does Its Scraping Duty

And the press, surely they didn't take sides, but clearly reported the facts? Ha! Today, New York Times reporter Farnaz Fassihi praised Soleimani as a friend and a poet...

...and then had the gall to tweet about unconfirmed rumors based on a Telegram feed. Not exactly the finest hour for the disgraced Gray Lady. Hundreds of her followers apparently believed the report that missiles had hit an Iraq-based U.S. military facility. She didn't bother to correct or delete the erroneous tweet.

Other outlets piled on, with CNN "reporting" that President Trump ate ice cream during the attack on Soleimani. Quite the, er, scoop, CNN. There was no confirmation of the number of scoops the president consumed.

The Washington Post added to its growing list of tone-deaf Soleimani accolades when it proclaimed that he was Iran's "most revered military leader", a headline trashed by the internet. Twitter celebrity Buck Sexton summed it up nicely when he pointed out the questionable allegiance of mass media.

The genuine surprise here is not the reaction of leftist politicians and press. It's a larger picture that's taking shape: if an area of the globe is highly corrupt, expect to find Democratic leadership there. If a longtime enemy in the Middle East begins to seek and find succor among American politicians, expect to find Democrats providing it.

And when an event takes place on the national or global stage, expect to find an abundance of leftist-owned media to paint a far different picture than what is apparent to the naked eye.

Bye-bye, Soleimani. Next up, his replacement, Esmail Gha'ani, who said in 2017, "We have buried many...like Trump, and know how to fight against America.”

To be determined.

• The Ayatollah’s Dilemma
• Turkish Parliament OKs Libyan Troop Deployment