John Daniel Davidson continues his anti-war agenda by whitewashing Pope Leo

Federalist editor John Daniel Davidson continues his atrocious efforts to undermine the war against Iran by citing a source who's actually done more harm than good to America. First, let's see what Davidson says about Donald Trump's threat that a "whole civilization was going to die":

What does seem clear amid the fog of war, however, is that Trump’s maximalist, annihilationist rhetoric — talk of destroying Iranian “civilization,” “never to be brought back again,” taking out “the entire country,” bombing it “into the stone age,” targeting critical civilian infrastructure like power plants — has already gravely damaged the United States.

Why? Because America should only wage just wars, and waging a just war means being subject to certain restraints. Just war precludes immoral means — like the mass killing of civilians — to achieve victory. Even threatening such means, as Trump has done, damages the moral conscience of a people as much as it degrades the moral standing of a nation. Simply put, threatening to do something intrinsically immoral, even if you don’t actually do it, is wrong.

Yes, it was in poor taste for Trump to say that, and just because Iran's savages running the asylum chanted "death to America/Israel" and "great/little satan" over past decades doesn't justify what Trump said, considering there are some decent civilians there. But is Davidson, with his stealthy anti-war propaganda, suited to make the points? Because, and here now is the troubling part, Davidson obscured the positions of a certain recently instated Catholic pope:

That said, what should most concern Americans in this war is not the conduct of Iran’s leaders but the conduct of our own. Pope Leo, who has been a vocal critic of the war, spoke with moral clarity and authority on Tuesday when he said, “This is truly not acceptable. Here there are certainly questions of international law, but even more than this a question of morality for the good of people … attacks on civilian infrastructure are against international law, but it is also a sign of the hatred and division and destruction that human beings are capable of.”

Amid the tumult of world events in recent days, the pope’s words stand out in part because they offer such a contrast to the naked bloodlust and rumblings of annihilation coming from the Trump administration. Whatever happens, we cannot lose sight of the moral dimension here. In both word and deed, if we do not hold ourselves to a high moral standard then we risk, in a very real sense, becoming the villains in an unjust war.

Well! Is he subtly implying the war on Iran is unjust, despite all the rockets that were fired that even cost several USA soldiers their lives over in Kuwait? Until that can be figured out, however, what's also eyebrow raising is that Davidson touted a pope who acted as apologist for illegal Muslim immigrants in Europe as a just, sage voice. Yes, the same pope Leo who also signaled support for Islam. Leo also voiced support for illegal immigrants in the USA. This is whom Davidson considers a voice of reason? Wow, and to think he has such a problem with Mark Levin, whom the Federalist writers even had the gall to smear as a "neoconservative". I don't know if the term was considered negative years before, but I realize that in the past decade, it certainly took on a negative meaning since. But while there are valid disagreements to be had with Levin, citing somebody as awful as Pope Leo turned out to be does nothing to improve on the issues at hand. "Clarity and authority" my foot. Davidson's insinuation that the Trump administration is one dimensionally bloodthirsty is also disturbing, and hurts the mission of the war terribly.

And if Davidson's coming within even miles of stealthily implying the war against Iran's jihadists is not a just war, despite all the damage caused by Iran's rockets in the past month, which have cost a number of lives locally, then all Davidson's done is make clear why the Federalist is past its sell-by-date, as the British could say. Garbage like this "op-ed" is exactly why I came to find them increasingly repellent instead of the perceptive site I once thought they were. Now, under anti-war propaganda like what Davidson's now stealthily turning out, they're a train wreck, and are doing the conservative movement a horrible disservice.

Update: it's now being reported there's serious tension between the Trump administration and Pope Leo:

Relations between Pope Leo XIV, the first American pope, and the White House have sunk to a new low since the outbreak of the Iran War, as the Trump administration wrapped its military messaging in deeply religious language, particularly in briefings by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

[...] The turning point came with the pope's "state of the world" address on Jan. 9 to the Vatican's diplomatic corps. Leo XIV said that "war is back in fashion" and that the international order built after World War II had been "completely broken." The Pentagon interpreted the speech as a direct attack on Trump's policies, especially the pope's statement that "diplomacy that promotes dialogue and seeks consensus is being replaced by a diplomacy based on power, whether of individuals or groups of states."

[...] According to the report, the meeting contributed to the cancellation of a planned papal visit to the US. In May 2025, just two weeks after Leo XIV was elected, Vance invited him to celebrate the 250th anniversary of US independence. The Vatican considered the invitation, but according to the report declined it for three reasons: foreign policy disagreements, growing opposition among American bishops to Trump's immigration policies, and concern that the visit would be seen as political support for the administration on the eve of the midterm elections.

And this is who Davidson's supporting, right? What an embarrassment indeed. All this makes clear something is terribly broken in the religious system, and no telling if it'll improve for the better.