While the US remains the top destination for Indian students wanting to pursue Undergraduate-level courses abroad, there has been a 10 per cent decline in Indian student applications to the country between 2024-26, SAT entrance exam data shows. "Three years ago, about 80 to 85percent of Indian students' SAT scores were heading to the United States. Now in 2026, that 80 to 85percent is closer to 70 to 75 per cent. So within three years, a 10percent drop, which to us is significant," Mr Rushi Sheth, Vice President, College Board, highlighted in a conversation with this author. College Board has been conducting the SAT exam for 100years.When this author asked Rushi about the reasons he assigned for this US-specific decline, he cited "changing geopolitical conditions." Different countries create or remove policies, which send different signals. As a result of this, families take time to reflect and re-assess, adjust accordingly, he reasoned.Interestingly, the 2024-26 period broadly coincides with the ongoing Trump Presidency 2.0. Donald Trump and his officials and supporters have repeatedly made hostile speeches and blatantly racist public remarks against India and its people, while the policies of the Trump administration have further cemented this animosity towards India. It is widely acknowledged that hateful and racist content targeting Indians has been spreading rampantly on controversial US tech mogul Elon Musk's social media platform X(formerly Twitter). Several accounts linked with Elon Musk and Trump's MAGA political movement are known to be creating and spreading such content targeting Indians.Queried if such a decline in Indian student applications to the US was unprecedented, College Board's VP told this author that similar trends were seen during the 2008-10 economic slowdown and the COVID-19 pandemic, both of which were major global disruptions and crises.Asked if he saw this US-aversion among a section of Indian students as a temporary or a long-term trend, Sheth replied that he was not a politician and that he did not have a qualified opinion on future policies or geopolitical conditions. "About one generation ago, I imagine most Indian students thought of the SAT as a one-way ticket to the United States. And today, that is no longer true. The SAT is more of a global passport, and I don't think that will ever reverse," he added.<h2>Amid decline in US applications, where are Indian students heading?</h2>Referring to the 2024-26 period, Rushi mentioned that the number of Indian students taking the SAT had risen during the period. While there has been a drop in applications going to the US, Indian students are applying in larger numbers to Universities in the UK, European Union, Canada, Singapore, among other destinations, he added."The one country that's really surprising us with how fast it's growing is Australia... For Indian student applications, Australia has now replaced Canada as the number two destination after the United States. Within the Group of Eight, which are some of the most selective and highly prestigious universities in Australia, six of eight universities give unconditional offers to students based on their SAT scores. That's among the reasons driving this spike in applications heading for Australia," shared Rushi.Further, he expressed surprise to see Japan as a trending destination among Indian students. He explained that the Japanese government is welcoming talented young men and young women from India to attend university, to learn, to help build jobs that are in high demand and to enter the workforce in Japan. We are seeing more SAT scores heading to Japan than we'd ever seen historically, he said.When asked about the growth of the SAT exam globally, he said that they are seeing huge uptake in China, India, Vietnam, Egypt, and Uzbekistan.<h2>SAT scores are accepted in a few Indian Universities</h2>According to data from College Board, there has been a rise in the number of Indian students taking the SAT, and a small number of those students are sending their applications to Indian universities that are accepting SAT score-based admission. "There are now 70 universities in India which are accepting the SAT score. Flame and Ashoka are among the Indian universities accepting SAT scores", Rushi added.Asked specifically if the $111 fee for taking the SAT, plus the associated coaching charges, is affordable for a vast majority of Indian students who wish to apply to Indian universities that accept SAT, Rushi said that SAT has created some partnerships in India to give fee waivers for the SAT registration for students who can demonstrate financial need. "Generally, students who can demonstrate family income of less than 8 lakh rupees are eligible for a reduced fee waiver or a full fee waiver. Students can also access free SAT practice tests online, based on the results of which they can decide their approach towards taking the SAT," he said.Further, he mentioned that SAT has more than 200 Test centres in India presently, compared to barely 50 metrocity-centric centres about two decades ago.&nbsp;<h2>In the era of all-pervasive AI, is SAT using AI to assess students?</h2>According to Vice President Rushi Sheth, College Board, like any company, is experimenting with AI, but SAT still very much has human design at the centre. "Being a multiple-choice test, machines can score a multiple-choice test, not only for our SAT, but just about any assessment company. With AI, we are still looking into what it can do in terms of evaluation or insights. And these are very exciting technologies. There's nothing that we have even come close to perfecting. And so we will not deploy anything to a student unless it has evidence-based research that supports the value. But we do think, hopefully, AI will allow us to deliver more value to students in terms of insights, career readiness mechanisms, or just new and novel ways of testing. So it's early for us, as I imagine it is for most people, but we're excited to experiment," he elaborated.&nbsp;

According to data from College Board, there has been a rise in the number of Indian students taking the SAT, and a small number of those students are sending their applications to Indian universities that are accepting SAT score-based admission.

While the US remains the top destination for Indian students wanting to pursue Undergraduate-level courses abroad, there has been a 10 per cent decline in Indian student applications to the country between 2024-26, SAT entrance exam data shows. "Three years ago, about 80 to 85percent of Indian students' SAT scores were heading to the United States. Now in 2026, that 80 to 85percent is closer to 70 to 75 per cent. So within three years, a 10percent drop, which to us is significant," Mr Rushi Sheth, Vice President, College Board, highlighted in a conversation with this author. College Board has been conducting the SAT exam for 100years. When this author asked Rushi about the reasons he assigned for this US-specific decline, he cited "changing geopolitical conditions." Different countries create or remove policies, which send different signals. As a result of this, families take time to reflect and re-assess, adjust accordingly, he reasoned. Interestingly, the 2024-26 period broadly coincides with the ongoing Trump Presidency 2.0. Donald Trump and his officials and supporters have repeatedly made hostile speeches and blatantly racist public remarks against India and its people, while the policies of the Trump administration have further cemented this animosity towards India. It is widely acknowledged that hateful and racist content targeting Indians has been spreading rampantly on controversial US tech mogul Elon Musk's social media platform X(formerly Twitter). Several accounts linked with Elon Musk and Trump's MAGA political movement are known to be creating and spreading such content targeting Indians. Queried if such a decline in Indian student applications to the US was unprecedented, College Board's VP told this author that similar trends were seen during the 2008-10 economic slowdown and the COVID-19 pandemic, both of which were major global disruptions and crises. Asked if he saw this US-aversion among a section of Indian students as a temporary or a long-term trend, Sheth replied that he was not a politician and that he did not have a qualified opinion on future policies or geopolitical conditions. "About one generation ago, I imagine most Indian students thought of the SAT as a one-way ticket to the United States. And today, that is no longer true. The SAT is more of a global passport, and I don't think that will ever reverse," he added. Amid decline in US applications, where are Indian students heading? Referring to the 2024-26 period, Rushi mentioned that the number of Indian students taking the SAT had risen during the period. While there has been a drop in applications going to the US, Indian students are applying in larger numbers to Universities in the UK, European Union, Canada, Singapore, among other destinations, he added. "The one country that's really surprising us with how fast it's growing is Australia... For Indian student applications, Australia has now replaced Canada as the number two destination after the United States. Within the Group of Eight, which are some of the most selective and highly prestigious universities in Australia, six of eight universities give unconditional offers to students based on their SAT scores. That's among the reasons driving this spike in applications heading for Australia," shared Rushi. Further, he expressed surprise to see Japan as a trending destination among Indian students. He explained that the Japanese government is welcoming talented young men and young women from India to attend university, to learn, to help build jobs that are in high demand and to enter the workforce in Japan. We are seeing more SAT scores heading to Japan than we'd ever seen historically, he said. When asked about the growth of the SAT exam globally, he said that they are seeing huge uptake in China, India, Vietnam, Egypt, and Uzbekistan. SAT scores are accepted in a few Indian Universities According to data from College Board, there has been a rise in the number of Indian students taking the SAT, and a small number of those students are sending their applications to Indian universities that are accepting SAT score-based admission. "There are now 70 universities in India which are accepting the SAT score. Flame and Ashoka are among the Indian universities accepting SAT scores", Rushi added. Asked specifically if the $111 fee for taking the SAT, plus the associated coaching charges, is affordable for a vast majority of Indian students who wish to apply to Indian universities that accept SAT, Rushi said that SAT has created some partnerships in India to give fee waivers for the SAT registration for students who can demonstrate financial need. "Generally, students who can demonstrate family income of less than 8 lakh rupees are eligible for a reduced fee waiver or a full fee waiver. Students can also access free SAT practice tests online, based on the results of which they can decide their approach towards taking the SAT," he said. Further, he mentioned that SAT has more than 200 Test centres in India presently, compared to barely 50 metrocity-centric centres about two decades ago. In the era of all-pervasive AI, is SAT using AI to assess students? According to Vice President Rushi Sheth, College Board, like any company, is experimenting with AI, but SAT still very much has human design at the centre. "Being a multiple-choice test, machines can score a multiple-choice test, not only for our SAT, but just about any assessment company. With AI, we are still looking into what it can do in terms of evaluation or insights. And these are very exciting technologies. There's nothing that we have even come close to perfecting. And so we will not deploy anything to a student unless it has evidence-based research that supports the value. But we do think, hopefully, AI will allow us to deliver more value to students in terms of insights, career readiness mechanisms, or just new and novel ways of testing. So it's early for us, as I imagine it is for most people, but we're excited to experiment," he elaborated.

According to data from College Board, there has been a rise in the number of Indian students taking the SAT, and a small number of those students are sending their applications to Indian universities that are accepting SAT score-based admission.

Trump's racism? 10% drop in Indian applications to US Universities in 3 yrs

US President Donald Trump on Sunday (Oct 11) claimed that Russia and Ukraine have agreed to an “energy ceasefire” that would halt strikes on each other’s energy infrastructure. He also warned both sides to “not break it”. However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appeared completely unaware of any agreement between Russia and Ukraine. Minutes after Trump’s announcement, Zelensky told Axios that the agreement was “news” for him.In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote, “Effective immediately, there is an ENERGY CEASEFIRE in the War between Russia and Ukraine. Both parties have agreed. Do not break it! Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

<h2>Trump’s ‘energy ceasefire’ claim news for Zelensky</h2>Shortly after, Zelensky told Axios that Trump’s announcement “was news for me. But if Russians agree to an energy ceasefire, Ukraine will agree. If president Trump negotiated it with Putin – please tell us when the ceasefire begins – we are ready and we will accept it.”Earlier today, Zelensky reiterated that Ukraine would be ready to stop strikes on Russian oil refineries if Moscow also agreed to stop attacks on Kyiv’s energy infrastructure.Later, the Ukrainian president said on social media, “Ukraine supports the ceasefire, and it is important that Russia support it as well.”“We are awaiting details from the American side. For our part, Ukraine always FULLY supports steps toward de-escalation, the protection of lives, and the decisions needed to end the war and guarantee lasting peace,” he added.<h2>Trump-Zelensky tensions</h2>The developments come as tensions escalated between Washington and Kyiv over Ukrainian attacks on Russian oil refineries amid rising fuel prices in the United States ahead of the November 3 US midterm elections. Trump has announced a US-Russia agreement on diesel, which Zelensky described as a “weak decision”.Earlier on Saturday (Oct 10), Trump called for Ukraine to elect a new president willing to agree to a peace deal, criticising Volodymyr Zelensky over Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries. “He better damn well stop,” Trump said, adding that he believed “it's time for Ukraine to get a new president” who would agree to end the war.In response, Zelensky said that it was up to the people of Ukraine to choose their leader. He added that if the Trump administration really wanted Ukraine to hold elections, they should tell Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree to a 60-day ceasefire, and “we will organise elections”.

US President Donald Trump announced that Russia and Ukraine have agreed to an immediate “energy ceasefire”, urging both sides to honour the agreement amid the ongoing war.

US President Donald Trump on Sunday (Oct 11) claimed that Russia and Ukraine have agreed to an “energy ceasefire” that would halt strikes on each other’s energy infrastructure. He also warned both sides to “not break it”. However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appeared completely unaware of any agreement between Russia and Ukraine. Minutes after Trump’s announcement, Zelensky told Axios that the agreement was “news” for him. In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote, “Effective immediately, there is an ENERGY CEASEFIRE in the War between Russia and Ukraine. Both parties have agreed. Do not break it! Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

US President Donald Trump announced that Russia and Ukraine have agreed to an immediate “energy ceasefire”, urging both sides to honour the agreement amid the ongoing war.

Trump claims ‘energy ceasefire’ between Russia and Ukraine; Zelensky says ‘news for me’

As Democrats look to make gains in the November 3 US midterm elections, two phrases have become part of the political conversation: a “blue wave” and a “blue tsunami”. Both point to the same possibility – a strong Democratic performance – but they suggest very different scales of victory.For President Donald Trump and Republicans, the difference could be crucial. A Democratic victory could shift control of Congress and make the remaining two years of Trump’s term considerably harder.<h2>A ‘blue wave’ is more than a routine win</h2>In US politics, blue is associated with the Democratic Party. A “blue wave” describes an election in which Democrats win seats in significant numbers, often overturning Republican-held districts and gaining ground beyond their traditional strongholds.The phrase does not have a fixed numerical definition. Its meaning depends on the scale of the gains and what they deliver. If Democrats win control of the House of Representatives, for instance, they could gain the power to block Republican legislation, scrutinise the administration and launch congressional investigations.That would leave Trump facing a Congress less willing to back his agenda.<h2>When does a wave become a tsunami?</h2>A “blue tsunami” suggests a much bigger electoral swing. It is used when Democratic gains are so extensive that they go well beyond what political observers expected, potentially putting even relatively safe Republican seats at risk.There is no official seat count that turns a blue wave into a blue tsunami. The distinction is largely rhetorical, with “tsunami” conveying the scale and force of an unexpected political backlash.Such an outcome would be particularly damaging for Republicans if Democrats captured both chambers of Congress rather than just the House.<h2>What is at stake for Trump?</h2>All 435 seats in the House are up for election, alongside 35 Senate seats in 2026. The two contests will determine whether Republicans retain control of Congress or Democrats gain the power to challenge the president more directly.The economy, particularly the cost of living, could weigh on voters’ decisions. Midterm elections often serve as a referendum on the party occupying the White House, although local candidates and issues also matter.For Democrats, a wave would mean a substantial breakthrough. A tsunami would signal something bigger: a rejection of Republicans on a scale that could reshape the balance of power in Washington.

A ‘blue wave’ or ‘blue tsunami’ could reshape the US Congress in November. The terms describe the scale of potential Democratic gains and the political challenge they could pose for Trump.

As Democrats look to make gains in the November 3 US midterm elections, two phrases have become part of the political conversation: a “blue wave” and a “blue tsunami”. Both point to the same possibility – a strong Democratic performance – but they suggest very different scales of victory. For President Donald Trump and Republicans, the difference could be crucial. A Democratic victory could shift control of Congress and make the remaining two years of Trump’s term considerably harder. A ‘blue wave’ is more than a routine win In US politics, blue is associated with the Democratic Party. A “blue wave” describes an election in which Democrats win seats in significant numbers, often overturning Republican-held districts and gaining ground beyond their traditional strongholds. The phrase does not have a fixed numerical definition. Its meaning depends on the scale of the gains and what they deliver. If Democrats win control of the House of Representatives, for instance, they could gain the power to block Republican legislation, scrutinise the administration and launch congressional investigations. That would leave Trump facing a Congress less willing to back his agenda. When does a wave become a tsunami? A “blue tsunami” suggests a much bigger electoral swing. It is used when Democratic gains are so extensive that they go well beyond what political observers expected, potentially putting even relatively safe Republican seats at risk. There is no official seat count that turns a blue wave into a blue tsunami. The distinction is largely rhetorical, with “tsunami” conveying the scale and force of an unexpected political backlash. Such an outcome would be particularly damaging for Republicans if Democrats captured both chambers of Congress rather than just the House. What is at stake for Trump? All 435 seats in the House are up for election, alongside 35 Senate seats in 2026. The two contests will determine whether Republicans retain control of Congress or Democrats gain the power to challenge the president more directly. The economy, particularly the cost of living, could weigh on voters’ decisions. Midterm elections often serve as a referendum on the party occupying the White House, although local candidates and issues also matter. For Democrats, a wave would mean a substantial breakthrough. A tsunami would signal something bigger: a rejection of Republicans on a scale that could reshape the balance of power in Washington.

A ‘blue wave’ or ‘blue tsunami’ could reshape the US Congress in November. The terms describe the scale of potential Democratic gains and the political challenge they could pose for Trump.

US midterm elections 2026: What a blue wave or blue tsunami could mean for Trump

US President Donald Trump said on Monday that he personally believes Iran was responsible for last week's attempted attack aboard a Flydubai flight from Dubai to Tel Aviv, though he did not provide evidence to support the assessment. Asked whether he believed Iran was behind the incident, Trump responded, “I do. I personally do.” Trump did not elaborate on how he reached that conclusion.&nbsp;Meanwhile, US Vice President JD Vance said earlier on Monday that he had not seen conclusive evidence linking Iran to the attack. Israeli security officials have so far been assessing that the Omani co-pilot who allegedly attempted to hijack the aircraft and crash it while carrying Israeli passengers may have acted alone. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also said repeatedly that it is too early to determine whether Iran was involved. Trump was also asked by reporters outside the White House whether he remained open to direct talks with Iran. “Yeah, always. We’re always diplomatic,” he said.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-b-1-bombers-moved-from-uk-over-some-threats-offers-to-help-russia-over-plague-scare-1791229958471">Trump says B-1 bombers moved from UK over 'some threats'; offers to help Russia over plague scare</a><h2>New details emerge about Omani co-pilot of Flydubai flight</h2>New details have emerged about Hamam al-Hammami, the Omani co-pilot accused of attacking the Indian pilot aboard the Flydubai flight. Israel and Oman previously confirmed that al-Hammami is an Omani national. Oman said he was born in the United Arab Emirates and had spent significant periods of his life outside the country, including in the UAE, Syria and abroad for his education.&nbsp;According to Oman, al-Hammami briefly worked as a trainee at an Omani airline but was later barred after authorities discovered that he had accessed extremist websites online. He subsequently left Oman. Oman also said his mother is of Syrian origin and that he spent part of his childhood and later life outside Oman because of his father's employment and his studies. The Omani authorities said they had never received requests from other countries to conduct background checks on al-Hammami for employment. Oman added that it would have provided the information it had about him had such a request been made.

Trump says he believes Iran was behind the Flydubai attack, while investigators probe Omani co-pilot Hamam al-Hammami and aviation security failures

US President Donald Trump said on Monday that he personally believes Iran was responsible for last week's attempted attack aboard a Flydubai flight from Dubai to Tel Aviv, though he did not provide evidence to support the assessment. Asked whether he believed Iran was behind the incident, Trump responded, “I do. I personally do.” Trump did not elaborate on how he reached that conclusion. Meanwhile, US Vice President JD Vance said earlier on Monday that he had not seen conclusive evidence linking Iran to the attack. Israeli security officials have so far been assessing that the Omani co-pilot who allegedly attempted to hijack the aircraft and crash it while carrying Israeli passengers may have acted alone. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also said repeatedly that it is too early to determine whether Iran was involved. Trump was also asked by reporters outside the White House whether he remained open to direct talks with Iran. “Yeah, always. We’re always diplomatic,” he said. Also Read: Trump says B-1 bombers moved from UK over 'some threats'; offers to help Russia over plague scare New details emerge about Omani co-pilot of Flydubai flight New details have emerged about Hamam al-Hammami, the Omani co-pilot accused of attacking the Indian pilot aboard the Flydubai flight. Israel and Oman previously confirmed that al-Hammami is an Omani national. Oman said he was born in the United Arab Emirates and had spent significant periods of his life outside the country, including in the UAE, Syria and abroad for his education. According to Oman, al-Hammami briefly worked as a trainee at an Omani airline but was later barred after authorities discovered that he had accessed extremist websites online. He subsequently left Oman. Oman also said his mother is of Syrian origin and that he spent part of his childhood and later life outside Oman because of his father's employment and his studies. The Omani authorities said they had never received requests from other countries to conduct background checks on al-Hammami for employment. Oman added that it would have provided the information it had about him had such a request been made.

Trump says he believes Iran was behind the Flydubai attack but offers no evidence, while investigators probe the Omani co-pilot's background

'I do. I personally do': Trump says Iran responsible for Flydubai attack as investigation continues

Donald Trump says the midterms do not dictate his decisions. Benjamin Netanyahu insists Israel faces genuine security threats as his country approaches an election. Both propositions may be tested very soon. The United States votes in its midterm elections on November 3, while Israelis head to the polls on October 27. The political circumstances are different, but both leaders are confronting an uncomfortable reality: elections approaching amid significant domestic pressure. For Trump, the warning lights are increasingly economic. An AP-NORC poll published October 1 found 65% of American adults saying unusually high prices were the result of Trump's policies. More strikingly, 52% of Republicans said his handling of the cost of living had been worse than they expected. Trump acknowledged this week that he had done a “very bad job” communicating what he considers a strong economic record. Republicans, meanwhile, are fighting increasingly competitive races, and Trump and Vice-President JD Vance have begun an intensive campaign push, including in territory that ordinarily should be comfortable for the GOP. That creates a contradiction. Trump has repeatedly projected indifference towards electoral pressure. Yet the Republican political machine is behaving like an organisation acutely aware of it. Trump-linked political groups are spending heavily. The president is campaigning aggressively. Republican officials are publicly stressing turnout and money. Perhaps the midterms do matter after all.<h2>Netanyahu and the politics of security</h2>Thousands of kilometres away, Benjamin Netanyahu is confronting another electoral test. Israel votes on October 27, and Netanyahu is again presenting himself as the leader best equipped to protect the country. Reuters described it as a familiar electoral strategy: Netanyahu projecting himself as Israel's indispensable security guardian even as the failures surrounding the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack remain central to the political debate. Then came Flydubai flight FZ1073. According to Israeli officials, a co-pilot stabbed the captain and attempted to crash the Dubai-to-Tel Aviv aircraft. Passengers and crew intervened before the aircraft was eventually landed safely in Saudi Arabia. It was an extraordinary and frightening incident. It also demands extraordinary caution. The motive remains under investigation. Flydubai has explicitly urged against premature speculation. Netanyahu himself subsequently acknowledged that it was too early to determine who ultimately stood behind the incident.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><a href="https://x.com/hashtag/RaceToPower?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RaceToPower</a> | Political slugfest over FlyDubai incident Israel&#39;s opposition leader slams Netanyahu Bibi&#39;s &#39;attack warning&#39; a day before incident Elijah J. Magnier, War Correspondent &amp; Analyst discusses more with <a href="https://x.com/eriknjoka?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@eriknjoka</a> and <a href="https://x.com/ShreyaOpines?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ShreyaOpines</a> <a href="https://t.co/5Au561hK7S">pic.twitter.com/5Au561hK7S</a>&mdash; WION (@WIONews) <a href="https://x.com/WIONews/status/2105696450214834588?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 1, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Yet Netanyahu went on American television and raised questions about possible accomplices and whether Iran might have been involved. No evidence establishing Iranian involvement had been made public at the time. That matters because only a day earlier Netanyahu had warned that Israel's enemies could attempt attacks ahead of the election. Opposition leader Yair Lapid subsequently said that nothing resembling the Flydubai incident had been mentioned during the security briefing he received from Netanyahu the previous evening. Netanyahu's allies, however, argued that the incident demonstrated why his warnings should have been taken seriously. That disagreement deserves scrutiny rather than assumption.<h2>When crisis meets an election</h2>There is no evidence that either Trump or Netanyahu manufactured these crises. That is not the point. The more important democratic question is what politicians do with crises once they arrive. Every government has an obligation to protect its citizens. Every leader has the right to defend a security policy and every president has the right to campaign for his party. But the line between informing citizens and politically exploiting their anxieties becomes especially important during an election. Netanyahu's critics accuse him of using security warnings to reinforce his longstanding image as Israel's protector. His supporters argue that the threats Israel faces are real and that dismissing his warnings would itself be irresponsible. Trump faces a different problem: voters worried about affordability, the economy and an overseas conflict while Republicans fight to retain congressional power. Different countries. Different crises. Different political systems. But one common temptation. When domestic questions become uncomfortable, external danger can become politically powerful. Fear simplifies politics. It turns economic arguments into security arguments. It can transform criticism into questions of loyalty. And it can encourage voters to ask not “Are you better off?” but “Who will protect you?” That is precisely why leaders must be challenged most rigorously when an election and a security crisis collide. Investigate the Flydubai incident. Establish the motive. Determine whether accomplices existed. Follow the evidence wherever it leads. But do not allow speculation to outrun evidence simply because an election is approaching. And in America, Republicans ultimately must answer voters on prices, policy and performance — not merely personality, rallies or campaign spectacle. Democracy works best when citizens vote on records rather than anxieties. Because fear may be one of politics' oldest campaign tools. That does not mean voters have to surrender to it.

The more important democratic question is what politicians do with crises once they arrive. Every government has an obligation to protect its citizens. Every leader has the right to defend a security policy and every president has the right to campaign for his party.

Donald Trump says the midterms do not dictate his decisions. Benjamin Netanyahu insists Israel faces genuine security threats as his country approaches an election. Both propositions may be tested very soon. The United States votes in its midterm elections on November 3, while Israelis head to the polls on October 27. The political circumstances are different, but both leaders are confronting an uncomfortable reality: elections approaching amid significant domestic pressure. For Trump, the warning lights are increasingly economic. An AP-NORC poll published October 1 found 65% of American adults saying unusually high prices were the result of Trump's policies. More strikingly, 52% of Republicans said his handling of the cost of living had been worse than they expected. Trump acknowledged this week that he had done a “very bad job” communicating what he considers a strong economic record. Republicans, meanwhile, are fighting increasingly competitive races, and Trump and Vice-President JD Vance have begun an intensive campaign push, including in territory that ordinarily should be comfortable for the GOP. That creates a contradiction. Trump has repeatedly projected indifference towards electoral pressure. Yet the Republican political machine is behaving like an organisation acutely aware of it. Trump-linked political groups are spending heavily. The president is campaigning aggressively. Republican officials are publicly stressing turnout and money. Perhaps the midterms do matter after all. Netanyahu and the politics of security Thousands of kilometres away, Benjamin Netanyahu is confronting another electoral test. Israel votes on October 27, and Netanyahu is again presenting himself as the leader best equipped to protect the country. Reuters described it as a familiar electoral strategy: Netanyahu projecting himself as Israel's indispensable security guardian even as the failures surrounding the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack remain central to the political debate. Then came Flydubai flight FZ1073. According to Israeli officials, a co-pilot stabbed the captain and attempted to crash the Dubai-to-Tel Aviv aircraft. Passengers and crew intervened before the aircraft was eventually landed safely in Saudi Arabia. It was an extraordinary and frightening incident. It also demands extraordinary caution. The motive remains under investigation. Flydubai has explicitly urged against premature speculation. Netanyahu himself subsequently acknowledged that it was too early to determine who ultimately stood behind the incident.

The more important democratic question is what politicians do with crises once they arrive. Every government has an obligation to protect its citizens. Every leader has the right to defend a security policy and every president has the right to campaign for his party.

The politics of fear: Trump, Netanyahu and the election-time power of crisis | The Verdict

One country has nuclear weapons. Another is told it must never have them. One leader faces pressure and military confrontation. The other is called a “friend.”Donald Trump has once again put the contradictions of American nuclear diplomacy under the spotlight.Asked why North Korea can possess nuclear weapons while Iran cannot, the US president offered an extraordinary response.Trump blamed previous American presidents for failing to stop Pyongyang's nuclear programme before turning to his personal relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.“He happens to be a friend of mine,” Trump said, adding that Kim likes and respects him. Trump acknowledged that North Korea possesses a “pretty large” nuclear capability, although one smaller than that of the United States.The contrast is difficult to ignore.Trump has maintained an uncompromising position that Iran must not acquire a nuclear weapon. Tehran, meanwhile, has consistently denied that it seeks one.North Korea presents the opposite reality: it already possesses nuclear weapons.South Korean Defence Minister Ahn Gyu-back recently estimated Pyongyang's arsenal at between 80 and 120 nuclear warheads. Trump himself previously put the figure at 57. Whatever the precise number, North Korea is no longer merely suspected of pursuing a bomb; it is an established nuclear-armed state.And therein lies Washington's uncomfortable dilemma.Is American nuclear policy based on principle — or on the realities created once a country successfully crosses the nuclear threshold?<h2>Friendship is not a nuclear doctrine</h2>There is an important distinction that cannot be ignored. Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, under which it has committed not to acquire nuclear weapons. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and subsequently conducted nuclear tests.Washington therefore confronts two very different nuclear realities.But Trump's explanation was striking because instead of focusing primarily on treaties, proliferation law or regional security, he repeatedly invoked his relationship with Kim.The president has argued that getting along with the North Korean leader is an asset rather than a weakness. He has also said North Korea should never have been allowed to obtain nuclear weapons in the first place.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><a href="https://x.com/hashtag/WIONRaceToPower?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WIONRaceToPower</a> | Trump&#39;s doublespeak on nuclear debate US nuke hypocrisy exposed as Trump slams Iran, praises North Korea Trump: Kim Jong Un is a friend of mine <a href="https://x.com/ShreyaOpines?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ShreyaOpines</a> and <a href="https://x.com/eriknjoka?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@eriknjoka</a> speak to John Erath, Policy Director at Center for Arms Control for more <a href="https://t.co/RqXGxMBksL">pic.twitter.com/RqXGxMBksL</a>&mdash; WION (@WIONews) <a href="https://x.com/WIONews/status/2105326156014821620?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

That may explain Trump's diplomacy.It does not eliminate the larger question.If possessing nuclear weapons eventually forces Washington to accept a country as a nuclear reality, while countries that have not crossed that threshold remain vulnerable to overwhelming pressure, what message does that send to other governments contemplating their own security?The danger is obvious.A non-proliferation strategy must convince countries that not building nuclear weapons makes them safer, not that possessing them eventually earns greater strategic caution from Washington.<h2>From ‘fire and fury’ to friendship</h2>Trump's relationship with Kim has itself undergone an extraordinary transformation.During his first presidency, Trump threatened North Korea with “fire and fury” before embarking on unprecedented personal diplomacy with Kim.The two men subsequently met three times — Singapore in 2018, Hanoi in 2019 and the Korean Demilitarised Zone later that year.Yet those meetings failed to produce an agreement eliminating North Korea's nuclear arsenal. Pyongyang's capabilities have instead expanded substantially since their first summit.Trump nevertheless continues to argue that his personal relationship with Kim reduces the danger.That creates another uncomfortable contrast with Iran.The same American president who presents personal diplomacy as a mechanism for managing an already nuclear-armed North Korea has pursued a dramatically harder approach towards preventing Iran from ever reaching that position.Strategically, Washington can argue that prevention is easier than disarmament.Politically, however, the optics are considerably harder.<h2>The nuclear club’s uncomfortable truth</h2>This debate extends beyond Trump.The global nuclear order has always contained contradictions.The United States, Russia, China, France and Britain are recognised nuclear-weapon states under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons outside that framework. Israel maintains a policy of nuclear ambiguity. North Korea withdrew from the NPT and built its arsenal.Iran remains inside the treaty framework while facing intense international scrutiny over its nuclear activities.That does not make every nuclear programme equivalent. Their histories, treaty obligations, security environments and relationships with the international community differ significantly.But Trump's latest remarks expose the fundamental challenge confronting global non-proliferation:What happens after deterrence succeeds?Once a state possesses a credible nuclear arsenal, the cost of forcing it to surrender those weapons becomes dramatically higher.North Korea may be the clearest example.Washington spent decades demanding denuclearisation. Today, Trump is publicly acknowledging Kim's nuclear capacity while arguing that his personal relationship can keep the situation under control.For Iran — and indeed every country watching — that distinction matters.Because the lesson emerging from the world's nuclear confrontations cannot be allowed to become this:Build the bomb and eventually the world learns to live with you. Don't build it, and the world retains the option of stopping you.That would not strengthen nuclear non-proliferation.It could become one of its greatest weaknesses.

Trump’s contrasting approaches to nuclear-armed North Korea and non-nuclear Iran have raised questions over consistency in US non-proliferation policy and the role of personal diplomacy in managing nuclear threats.

One country has nuclear weapons. Another is told it must never have them. One leader faces pressure and military confrontation. The other is called a “friend.” Donald Trump has once again put the contradictions of American nuclear diplomacy under the spotlight. Asked why North Korea can possess nuclear weapons while Iran cannot, the US president offered an extraordinary response. Trump blamed previous American presidents for failing to stop Pyongyang's nuclear programme before turning to his personal relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. “He happens to be a friend of mine,” Trump said, adding that Kim likes and respects him. Trump acknowledged that North Korea possesses a “pretty large” nuclear capability, although one smaller than that of the United States. The contrast is difficult to ignore. Trump has maintained an uncompromising position that Iran must not acquire a nuclear weapon. Tehran, meanwhile, has consistently denied that it seeks one. North Korea presents the opposite reality: it already possesses nuclear weapons. South Korean Defence Minister Ahn Gyu-back recently estimated Pyongyang's arsenal at between 80 and 120 nuclear warheads. Trump himself previously put the figure at 57. Whatever the precise number, North Korea is no longer merely suspected of pursuing a bomb; it is an established nuclear-armed state. And therein lies Washington's uncomfortable dilemma. Is American nuclear policy based on principle — or on the realities created once a country successfully crosses the nuclear threshold? Friendship is not a nuclear doctrine There is an important distinction that cannot be ignored. Iran is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, under which it has committed not to acquire nuclear weapons. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and subsequently conducted nuclear tests. Washington therefore confronts two very different nuclear realities. But Trump's explanation was striking because instead of focusing primarily on treaties, proliferation law or regional security, he repeatedly invoked his relationship with Kim. The president has argued that getting along with the North Korean leader is an asset rather than a weakness. He has also said North Korea should never have been allowed to obtain nuclear weapons in the first place.

Trump’s contrasting approaches to nuclear-armed North Korea and non-nuclear Iran have raised questions over consistency in US non-proliferation policy and the role of personal diplomacy in managing nuclear threats.

US nuclear double standard? Trump’s ‘friend’ Kim exposes the Iran contradiction

US President Donald Trump on Friday (Sep 18) signed into law a sweeping Russia sanctions package that gives Washington new authority to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on major buyers of Russian oil and gas, putting India among the countries that could face fresh trade pressure.The Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 was signed by Trump shortly after it cleared both chambers of Congress. The House passed the measure 262-159 on Wednesday (Sep 16), following an 86-11 vote in the Senate in August. The White House said the law expands sanctions, tariffs and other restrictions on Russia while extending existing sanctions on Iran.<h2>Why it matters for India</h2>For India, the bill brings a threat of tariffs. A key provision of the bill gives Trump the authority to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on imports from countries that meet specified criteria linked to purchases of Russian crude oil or natural gas and sanctions evasion.The law does not automatically impose a 100 per cent tariff on Indian goods. Instead, it creates a statutory route for the Trump administration to impose such duties on countries among the five largest importers of Russian crude oil or natural gas, subject to the law's conditions.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-breaks-silence-on-us-russia-sanctions-bill-100-tariff-threat-committed-to-energy-security-for-1-4-billion-1789619754941">India breaks silence on US Russia sanctions bill, 100% tariff threat: ‘Committed to energy security’ for 1.4 billion</a><h2>India says energy security remains priority</h2>India had previously reacted to the passage of the bill in the Senate, before Trump signed it. New Delhi reaffirmed that its energy policy would continue to be guided by the needs of its population and changing market conditions.“The Government of India has noted the passage of the Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act in the US Congress. We are monitoring further developments on this matter,” the Ministry of External Affairs said on Thursday.“As stated on several earlier occasions, India remains firmly committed to ensuring energy security for its 1.4 billion people. It will continue to do so through diversified sourcing and on the basis of evolving market dynamics,” the ministry added.New Delhi also said it had discussed the issue with senior US interlocutors in recent months and had clearly outlined the possible implications for both bilateral ties and the international energy market.“The Indian side has also made clear its determination to take all necessary measures to protect its trade and economic interests,” the MEA said, adding that the government would work with Indian trade and industry bodies to deal with the consequences.<h2>What the new US law means for India</h2>India is one of the world's major buyers of Russian crude. Reuters reported on Friday that Russian oil accounted for more than 40 per cent of India's overall oil supplies and that Indian refiners had already secured September and October supplies that include Russian crude.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-russia-sanctions-bill-trump-100-percent-tariff-india-china-1789610901670">Trump gets new power to hit India, China with up to 100% tariffs as US Senate clears Russia sanctions bill</a>The new law gives Trump considerable discretion over whether and how to use the tariff authority. It also contains waiver provisions under specified conditions, meaning the signing of the legislation does not by itself establish a new tariff rate on Indian imports.The measure simultaneously targets Russian officials, financial institutions, defence networks and vessels associated with Moscow's so-called shadow fleet, which is used to transport Russian energy while circumventing Western restrictions. It also extends the Iran Sanctions Act for five years.<h2>Washington's pressure on Russian oil buyers</h2>The legislation is part of the US effort to restrict revenue flowing to Moscow from its energy exports and increase economic pressure over the war in Ukraine.India's continued Russian oil purchases have already been a point of friction with Washington. The White House had previously imposed an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian imports in 2025 over Russian oil purchases, before removing that additional duty in February 2026 after saying India had committed to stop purchasing Russian oil.Reuters reported that Indian purchases of Russian crude subsequently increased again, particularly following disruptions to Middle Eastern energy supplies.

Donald Trump has signed a sweeping Russia sanctions law that gives his administration new authority to impose tariffs of up to 100% on major Russian energy buyers. India, a major purchaser of Russian crude, could be affected. All you need to know.

US President Donald Trump on Friday (Sep 18) signed into law a sweeping Russia sanctions package that gives Washington new authority to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on major buyers of Russian oil and gas, putting India among the countries that could face fresh trade pressure. The Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 was signed by Trump shortly after it cleared both chambers of Congress. The House passed the measure 262-159 on Wednesday (Sep 16), following an 86-11 vote in the Senate in August. The White House said the law expands sanctions, tariffs and other restrictions on Russia while extending existing sanctions on Iran. Why it matters for India For India, the bill brings a threat of tariffs. A key provision of the bill gives Trump the authority to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on imports from countries that meet specified criteria linked to purchases of Russian crude oil or natural gas and sanctions evasion. The law does not automatically impose a 100 per cent tariff on Indian goods. Instead, it creates a statutory route for the Trump administration to impose such duties on countries among the five largest importers of Russian crude oil or natural gas, subject to the law's conditions. Also read | India breaks silence on US Russia sanctions bill, 100% tariff threat: ‘Committed to energy security’ for 1.4 billion India says energy security remains priority India had previously reacted to the passage of the bill in the Senate, before Trump signed it. New Delhi reaffirmed that its energy policy would continue to be guided by the needs of its population and changing market conditions. “The Government of India has noted the passage of the Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act in the US Congress. We are monitoring further developments on this matter,” the Ministry of External Affairs said on Thursday. “As stated on several earlier occasions, India remains firmly committed to ensuring energy security for its 1.4 billion people. It will continue to do so through diversified sourcing and on the basis of evolving market dynamics,” the ministry added. New Delhi also said it had discussed the issue with senior US interlocutors in recent months and had clearly outlined the possible implications for both bilateral ties and the international energy market. “The Indian side has also made clear its determination to take all necessary measures to protect its trade and economic interests,” the MEA said, adding that the government would work with Indian trade and industry bodies to deal with the consequences. What the new US law means for India India is one of the world's major buyers of Russian crude. Reuters reported on Friday that Russian oil accounted for more than 40 per cent of India's overall oil supplies and that Indian refiners had already secured September and October supplies that include Russian crude. Also read | Trump gets new power to hit India, China with up to 100% tariffs as US Senate clears Russia sanctions bill The new law gives Trump considerable discretion over whether and how to use the tariff authority. It also contains waiver provisions under specified conditions, meaning the signing of the legislation does not by itself establish a new tariff rate on Indian imports. The measure simultaneously targets Russian officials, financial institutions, defence networks and vessels associated with Moscow's so-called shadow fleet, which is used to transport Russian energy while circumventing Western restrictions. It also extends the Iran Sanctions Act for five years. Washington's pressure on Russian oil buyers The legislation is part of the US effort to restrict revenue flowing to Moscow from its energy exports and increase economic pressure over the war in Ukraine. India's continued Russian oil purchases have already been a point of friction with Washington. The White House had previously imposed an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian imports in 2025 over Russian oil purchases, before removing that additional duty in February 2026 after saying India had committed to stop purchasing Russian oil. Reuters reported that Indian purchases of Russian crude subsequently increased again, particularly following disruptions to Middle Eastern energy supplies.

Donald Trump has signed a sweeping Russia sanctions law that gives his administration new authority to impose tariffs of up to 100% on major Russian energy buyers. India, a major purchaser of Russian crude, could be affected. All you need to know.

Trump signs Russia sanctions law: India faces fresh 100% tariff threat over Russian oil

US President Donald Trump on Sunday (Sept 13) criticised those calling for a slowdown in artificial intelligence (AI) development, describing them as “negative” forces. Speaking to reporters during a visit to Ireland, Trump said some critics were raising concerns about developments that he believed would not actually happen.&nbsp;“I think you have a lot of negative” forces “that are bringing it up that shouldn't be bringing it up, and they're bringing up things that won't happen,” he said.&nbsp;Trump said the US currently has an advantage over China in AI and stressed that maintaining that lead was crucial. He was responding to questions from reporters about whether the AI sector should face tighter regulations or slow its development.&nbsp;“We're leading China in AI. We're the most sophisticated country in the world, and frankly I want to keep it that way because whoever wins AI wins,” Trump told reporters, according to Reuters.&nbsp;His comments came a day after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei called on AI companies to slow the development of increasingly powerful systems and strengthen safeguards.&nbsp;Amodei on Saturday proposed a three-part plan aimed at controlling the pace of frontier AI development. He argued that AI systems are becoming capable of helping create more advanced models, raising concerns about how quickly the technology could progress.&nbsp;“We must pace the frontier,” Amodei wrote in an essay outlining his proposals.&nbsp;As part of his first proposal, Amodei called for independent third-party evaluators to receive permanent, employee-level access to frontier AI systems. He said these experts should be able to assess safety measures, report incidents and check whether models remain aligned with their intended goals during training.&nbsp;Amodei said AI companies should also work together on common safety standards and agree on limits to unchecked development. His third proposal called for greater international cooperation on advanced AI safety.&nbsp;He also urged democratic governments, including the US, to engage with authoritarian countries on AI safety, while recognising the difficulty of ensuring compliance with international agreements.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-takes-brics-chair-wars-trade-disruptions-and-local-currency-trade-in-focus-1789298580586">China takes BRICS chair: Wars, trade disruptions and local-currency trade in focus</a><h3>Sam Altman, Elon Musk back Amodei</h3>OpenAI CEO Sam Altman supported Amodei’s call for a more measured approach to frontier AI development.&nbsp;“I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier,” Altman wrote on X.&nbsp;Altman also backed the proposal for independent evaluators to have employee-like access to AI systems and said OpenAI would adopt a similar approach.&nbsp;Tesla CEO Elon Musk also endorsed Amodei’s position, writing, “Dario is right.”&nbsp;The debate comes as AI companies race to develop increasingly capable systems, while researchers and industry leaders remain divided over how quickly the technology should advance and what safeguards are needed to manage potential risks.

Trump dismissed concerns over the rapid development of AI and rejected calls from industry leaders, including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, to slow its progress and strengthen safeguards.

US President Donald Trump on Sunday (Sept 13) criticised those calling for a slowdown in artificial intelligence (AI) development, describing them as “negative” forces. Speaking to reporters during a visit to Ireland, Trump said some critics were raising concerns about developments that he believed would not actually happen. “I think you have a lot of negative” forces “that are bringing it up that shouldn't be bringing it up, and they're bringing up things that won't happen,” he said. Trump said the US currently has an advantage over China in AI and stressed that maintaining that lead was crucial. He was responding to questions from reporters about whether the AI sector should face tighter regulations or slow its development. “We're leading China in AI. We're the most sophisticated country in the world, and frankly I want to keep it that way because whoever wins AI wins,” Trump told reporters, according to Reuters. His comments came a day after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei called on AI companies to slow the development of increasingly powerful systems and strengthen safeguards. Amodei on Saturday proposed a three-part plan aimed at controlling the pace of frontier AI development. He argued that AI systems are becoming capable of helping create more advanced models, raising concerns about how quickly the technology could progress. “We must pace the frontier,” Amodei wrote in an essay outlining his proposals. As part of his first proposal, Amodei called for independent third-party evaluators to receive permanent, employee-level access to frontier AI systems. He said these experts should be able to assess safety measures, report incidents and check whether models remain aligned with their intended goals during training. Amodei said AI companies should also work together on common safety standards and agree on limits to unchecked development. His third proposal called for greater international cooperation on advanced AI safety. He also urged democratic governments, including the US, to engage with authoritarian countries on AI safety, while recognising the difficulty of ensuring compliance with international agreements. Also Read: China takes BRICS chair: Wars, trade disruptions and local-currency trade in focus Sam Altman, Elon Musk back Amodei OpenAI CEO Sam Altman supported Amodei’s call for a more measured approach to frontier AI development. “I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier,” Altman wrote on X. Altman also backed the proposal for independent evaluators to have employee-like access to AI systems and said OpenAI would adopt a similar approach. Tesla CEO Elon Musk also endorsed Amodei’s position, writing, “Dario is right.” The debate comes as AI companies race to develop increasingly capable systems, while researchers and industry leaders remain divided over how quickly the technology should advance and what safeguards are needed to manage potential risks.

Trump dismissed concerns over the rapid development of AI and rejected calls from industry leaders, including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, to slow its progress and strengthen safeguards.

‘Whoever wins AI wins’: Trump brushes off fears, rejects AI bosses’ calls to slow development

Donald Trump wants Americans to believe several things at once.The Iran war — or “military conflict,” as he has also called it — will end immediately after the November midterms. Iran cannot hold out much longer. Republicans must retain Congress. And if they do, every American adult could receive a $5,000 “Trump dividend.”There is only one problem.The arithmetic, the battlefield and even some of Trump's own advisers appear to be telling a different story.A war with two deadlinesTrump says Iran will not be able to sustain its resistance beyond the midterm elections.Yet the Wall Street Journal reports that senior advisers including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have privately discussed with Trump the possibility that Tehran could withstand American pressure through the remainder of his presidency — potentially beyond January 2029.That is not a minor difference.It is the difference between weeks and years.It also exposes the strange ambiguity surrounding America's confrontation with Iran. Trump himself has played down the terminology, describing it as a “military conflict” and “small potatoes” for the United States.But terminology cannot alter consequences.Americans are dead. Military assets are deployed. Oil markets have been disrupted. Fuel prices have become a political liability. And Washington is threatening further strikes against Iran.Call it a war or call it a military conflict. Americans ultimately experience its consequences through lives, prices and public money.Welcome to the Trump showThen came Dallas.Republicans staged their first-ever midterm convention, an unusual spectacle designed to energise a party facing a difficult November election.Trump made clear who the central character was.“I’m asking you to pretend that I’m on the ballot,” he told supporters.The convention became so centred on the president that Republican National Committee Chairman Joe Gruters informally called it “Trumpapalooza.”But the spectacle also exposed the risk of building an entire congressional election around one man.Several Republicans facing difficult races stayed away. Trump described the arena as packed, although reporters observed largely empty sections in the upper levels. Online viewership was modest.The show was enormous.Whether the enthusiasm matched it is another question.$5,000 for a Republican victoryThen came Trump's biggest promise.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><a href="https://x.com/hashtag/RaceToPower?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RaceToPower</a> | A war that ends after an election. A $5,000 cheque if Republicans win. A bill that could hit $1.35 TRILLION. Trump says: pretend he&#39;s on the ballot. But who pays for the promises? Tonight&#39;s <a href="https://x.com/hashtag/TheVerdict?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TheVerdict</a> with <a href="https://x.com/eriknjoka?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@eriknjoka</a> <a href="https://t.co/JZTgjHxqHB">pic.twitter.com/JZTgjHxqHB</a>&mdash; WION (@WIONews) <a href="https://x.com/WIONews/status/2098081923126141031?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

If Republicans retain the House and Senate, Trump says he will issue a $5,000 dividend to every American adult.It is an extraordinary proposition.With roughly 270 million American adults, distributing $5,000 to each would cost approximately $1.35 trillion.And that follows Trump's earlier proposal for a $2,000 tariff dividend — another cash promise that never materialised.Critics immediately asked the obvious question: is promising voters money if your party wins effectively buying political support?Legally, the answer is more complicated than the accusation. The proposed payment is not directly conditioned on an individual casting a Republican vote, and any actual distribution would require congressional approval.Politically, however, the optics are extraordinary.Vote Republican, Trump says, and there could be $5,000 waiting on the other side.But where does $1.35 trillion come from?That is the question the spectacle could not answer.The United States is already running enormous annual deficits and carrying a colossal national debt.American households remain concerned about affordability. The Iran conflict has put additional pressure on energy prices. Tariffs have created their own costs.Trump's answer to economic anxiety is now another enormous cheque.But governments cannot create $1.35 trillion without consequences.Either the money must come from additional revenue, spending cuts, borrowing — or some combination of all three.A dividend without a credible funding mechanism is not an economic programme.It is a promise.The Democrat at the Republican conventionThere was another extraordinary moment in Dallas.Democratic Senator John Fetterman appeared by video to introduce Republican Senator Dave McCormick, describing him as a friend and promising cooperation with Trump to protect Pennsylvania's steel industry.For Democrats, the optics were uncomfortable.But suggestions that Fetterman had somehow been “bought” go beyond the available evidence. He subsequently reaffirmed that he remains a Democrat.What his appearance demonstrated instead was something more politically interesting: the ideological fractures inside America's parties are becoming increasingly difficult to conceal.And then there is VenezuelaBehind the spectacle and the cheques sits another extraordinary economic gamble.Washington has taken a 35% position, structured through warrants, in a Venezuelan oil venture as the Trump administration attempts to turn access to Venezuela's enormous petroleum reserves into an American strategic asset.Trump has promoted the Venezuelan arrangement as a route toward greater energy security and lower fuel prices.The attraction is obvious.A prolonged confrontation with Iran threatens energy flows through the Gulf. Venezuela possesses the world's largest proven oil reserves. Washington therefore has powerful incentives to diversify where its energy security comes from.But this too raises questions.The Venezuelan arrangement has already attracted scrutiny over its structure, legality and the extraordinary involvement of the Pentagon in a commercial oil venture.America is therefore fighting — or conducting a “military conflict” — against one major oil power while simultaneously deepening its economic leverage over another.That may prove strategic foresight.It may also demonstrate just how complicated and expensive America's new geopolitical order is becoming.Reality versus spectacleThis was ultimately the contradiction running through Dallas.Trump spoke about American greatness while voters worry about affordability.He promised $5,000 cheques while the government is already deeply in deficit.He predicted an imminent end to the Iran conflict while his own advisers reportedly contemplate a struggle lasting years.He asked Americans to pretend that his name is on the ballot.Perhaps that was the most revealing statement of the convention.Because November increasingly appears to be about Donald Trump — his war, his economy, his promises and his political survival.But Americans cannot pay grocery bills with political theatre.They cannot fill their tanks with applause.And before Washington writes a $1.35 trillion cheque, voters are entitled to ask the simplest question of all:Who is going to pay for it?

Republicans staged their first-ever midterm convention, an unusual spectacle designed to energise a party facing a difficult November election. Trump made clear who the central character was.

Donald Trump wants Americans to believe several things at once. The Iran war — or “military conflict,” as he has also called it — will end immediately after the November midterms. Iran cannot hold out much longer. Republicans must retain Congress. And if they do, every American adult could receive a $5,000 “Trump dividend.” There is only one problem. The arithmetic, the battlefield and even some of Trump's own advisers appear to be telling a different story. A war with two deadlines Trump says Iran will not be able to sustain its resistance beyond the midterm elections. Yet the Wall Street Journal reports that senior advisers including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have privately discussed with Trump the possibility that Tehran could withstand American pressure through the remainder of his presidency — potentially beyond January 2029. That is not a minor difference. It is the difference between weeks and years. It also exposes the strange ambiguity surrounding America's confrontation with Iran. Trump himself has played down the terminology, describing it as a “military conflict” and “small potatoes” for the United States. But terminology cannot alter consequences. Americans are dead. Military assets are deployed. Oil markets have been disrupted. Fuel prices have become a political liability. And Washington is threatening further strikes against Iran. Call it a war or call it a military conflict. Americans ultimately experience its consequences through lives, prices and public money. Welcome to the Trump show Then came Dallas. Republicans staged their first-ever midterm convention, an unusual spectacle designed to energise a party facing a difficult November election. Trump made clear who the central character was. “I’m asking you to pretend that I’m on the ballot,” he told supporters. The convention became so centred on the president that Republican National Committee Chairman Joe Gruters informally called it “Trumpapalooza.” But the spectacle also exposed the risk of building an entire congressional election around one man. Several Republicans facing difficult races stayed away. Trump described the arena as packed, although reporters observed largely empty sections in the upper levels. Online viewership was modest. The show was enormous. Whether the enthusiasm matched it is another question. $5,000 for a Republican victory Then came Trump's biggest promise.

Republicans staged their first-ever midterm convention, an unusual spectacle designed to energise a party facing a difficult November election. Trump made clear who the central character was.

The Trump Show: A $5,000 promise, a war without an end and a trillion-dollar question | The Verdict

For decades, regime change in Iran was the ambition nobody in Washington or Jerusalem quite wanted to admit openly.Not anymore.Donald Trump is again asking when Iranians will “rise up and fight.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared toppling Iran's government a “central mission” and says the objective is “within reach.” US Senator Ted Cruz has gone further, advocating that Iranian opponents of the government be armed to overthrow it themselves.The message is unmistakable: the Islamic Republic is wounded. Now, its enemies want Iranians to finish the job.But revolutions cannot simply be commissioned from abroad.Iran has already suffered something approaching political and military decapitation. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is gone. Senior commanders and political figures have been eliminated. The old hierarchy has been ripped apart.And yet, the Islamic Republic remains.That may be the greatest problem confronting the regime-change strategy.Destroying leaders is not the same as destroying institutions.Iran's political system was constructed precisely to withstand enormous pressure. The Revolutionary Guards, clerical establishment, security apparatus and overlapping centres of authority mean that when one powerful figure disappears, another can occupy the space.And the replacements are not necessarily moderates.Iran has elevated veteran hardliner Mohsen Rezaei to a crucial national-security position. Meanwhile, President Masoud Pezeshkian may favour negotiations and de-escalation, but Iran's presidency has never possessed absolute authority over the country's military-security establishment.That leaves Washington confronting an uncomfortable possibility: it can decapitate Iran's leadership without liberalising Iran.There is no denying the fury inside the country.Economic pressure is enormous. Oil exports have collapsed under the American blockade. Inflation and economic isolation are squeezing ordinary Iranians. Years of demonstrations have already exposed deep frustration with clerical rule.But asking Iranians to revolt from Washington is very different from Iranians deciding independently to revolt.Every call from an American president or Israeli prime minister risks handing Tehran another propaganda weapon: the argument that dissent is not an indigenous demand for freedom but a foreign-backed attempt to dismantle the Iranian state.And there is another question Washington cannot escape.What happens the morning after?Ted Cruz says the objective should be regime collapse and has argued for giving opponents of Tehran the weapons to achieve it.But collapse is not a political settlement.Iraq should have permanently buried the assumption that removing a hated government automatically produces a stable successor. Saddam Hussein's government was destroyed rapidly. The political, sectarian and security consequences outlived the invasion itself.Iran — with more than 90 million people, powerful security institutions, ethnic and regional fault lines and an enormous strategic footprint — would present an even more consequential challenge.None of this absolves Tehran.The Islamic Republic has brutally suppressed opposition. Iranians have repeatedly risked imprisonment and death demanding political and social change. Their grievances are real, and their right to determine their government belongs to them.That is precisely why their future cannot simply become another strategic objective written in Washington or Jerusalem.Trump can call for an uprising.Netanyahu can declare regime change within reach.Cruz can advocate putting weapons into Iranian hands.But none of them can manufacture the legitimacy required to govern Iran the day after the Islamic Republic falls.<h2>The Verdict</h2>America and Israel may have succeeded in changing many of the men who rule Iran.They have not yet changed the system that rules Iran.And perhaps that is the lesson being forgotten amid all the talk of imminent victory.You can bomb a command centre. You can eliminate a commander. You can even decapitate a government.But a revolution belongs to the people who must live with what replaces it.And if Washington and Jerusalem confuse regime destruction with nation-building, Iran could become another brutal reminder that in the Middle East, removing the old order is sometimes the beginning of the war — not the end of it.

The Islamic Republic has brutally suppressed opposition. Iranians have repeatedly risked imprisonment and death demanding political and social change. Their grievances are real, and their right to determine their government belongs to them.

For decades, regime change in Iran was the ambition nobody in Washington or Jerusalem quite wanted to admit openly. Not anymore. Donald Trump is again asking when Iranians will “rise up and fight.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared toppling Iran's government a “central mission” and says the objective is “within reach.” US Senator Ted Cruz has gone further, advocating that Iranian opponents of the government be armed to overthrow it themselves. The message is unmistakable: the Islamic Republic is wounded. Now, its enemies want Iranians to finish the job. But revolutions cannot simply be commissioned from abroad. Iran has already suffered something approaching political and military decapitation. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is gone. Senior commanders and political figures have been eliminated. The old hierarchy has been ripped apart. And yet, the Islamic Republic remains. That may be the greatest problem confronting the regime-change strategy. Destroying leaders is not the same as destroying institutions. Iran's political system was constructed precisely to withstand enormous pressure. The Revolutionary Guards, clerical establishment, security apparatus and overlapping centres of authority mean that when one powerful figure disappears, another can occupy the space. And the replacements are not necessarily moderates. Iran has elevated veteran hardliner Mohsen Rezaei to a crucial national-security position. Meanwhile, President Masoud Pezeshkian may favour negotiations and de-escalation, but Iran's presidency has never possessed absolute authority over the country's military-security establishment. That leaves Washington confronting an uncomfortable possibility: it can decapitate Iran's leadership without liberalising Iran. There is no denying the fury inside the country. Economic pressure is enormous. Oil exports have collapsed under the American blockade. Inflation and economic isolation are squeezing ordinary Iranians. Years of demonstrations have already exposed deep frustration with clerical rule. But asking Iranians to revolt from Washington is very different from Iranians deciding independently to revolt. Every call from an American president or Israeli prime minister risks handing Tehran another propaganda weapon: the argument that dissent is not an indigenous demand for freedom but a foreign-backed attempt to dismantle the Iranian state. And there is another question Washington cannot escape. What happens the morning after? Ted Cruz says the objective should be regime collapse and has argued for giving opponents of Tehran the weapons to achieve it. But collapse is not a political settlement. Iraq should have permanently buried the assumption that removing a hated government automatically produces a stable successor. Saddam Hussein's government was destroyed rapidly. The political, sectarian and security consequences outlived the invasion itself. Iran — with more than 90 million people, powerful security institutions, ethnic and regional fault lines and an enormous strategic footprint — would present an even more consequential challenge. None of this absolves Tehran. The Islamic Republic has brutally suppressed opposition. Iranians have repeatedly risked imprisonment and death demanding political and social change. Their grievances are real, and their right to determine their government belongs to them. That is precisely why their future cannot simply become another strategic objective written in Washington or Jerusalem. Trump can call for an uprising. Netanyahu can declare regime change within reach. Cruz can advocate putting weapons into Iranian hands. But none of them can manufacture the legitimacy required to govern Iran the day after the Islamic Republic falls. The Verdict America and Israel may have succeeded in changing many of the men who rule Iran. They have not yet changed the system that rules Iran. And perhaps that is the lesson being forgotten amid all the talk of imminent victory. You can bomb a command centre. You can eliminate a commander. You can even decapitate a government. But a revolution belongs to the people who must live with what replaces it. And if Washington and Jerusalem confuse regime destruction with nation-building, Iran could become another brutal reminder that in the Middle East, removing the old order is sometimes the beginning of the war — not the end of it.

The Islamic Republic has brutally suppressed opposition. Iranians have repeatedly risked imprisonment and death demanding political and social change. Their grievances are real, and their right to determine their government belongs to them.

The Verdict | Kill the leaders, save the regime? Why Iran refuses to fall

X, formerly known as Twitter, says it has uncovered a massive suspected Chinese bot farm that was allegedly conducting influence operations in the United States, including efforts to amplify criticism of artificial intelligence and data centers. The disclosure comes amid an increasingly heated national debate over the costs and benefits of rapidly expanding AI infrastructure. The issue has significant political implications, with Republicans increasingly divided over AI development and the construction of the massive data centers needed to support the technology.&nbsp;X’s Global Government Affairs account said the platform’s safety team identified a bot farm consisting of approximately 200,000 inauthentic Chinese accounts that were ‘involved in influence operations’. According to X, about 200 accounts within the network were identified as posting “in a manner that could manipulate a legitimate debate about American AI and energy policy.” The platform said posts from the accounts promoted claims that AI data centers are increasing household electricity bills and putting additional pressure on the US power grid.&nbsp;Other accounts allegedly shared AI-generated cartoons portraying data center developers as benefiting financially while ordinary Americans bear the costs. One image showed concerned citizens facing data center developers carrying bags of cash, accompanied by the caption, “Data centers get subsidized while we foot the bill!” Another image stated that “the AI industry is booming, but the costs are being borne by ordinary people.” The findings come after OpenAI announced earlier this summer that it had banned a "cluster of ChatGPT accounts that likely originated in China" that were allegedly being used to conduct a "covert influence operation" primarily aimed at US audiences.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/judge-throws-out-9-11-attack-mastermind-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-s-fbi-confession-over-torture-concerns-1787985338771">Judge throws out 9/11 attack mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's FBI confession over torture concerns</a>&nbsp;OpenAI said those accounts generated short comments and images that similarly promoted claims that AI development and data centers were increasing electricity demand and contributing to higher costs. The alleged influence campaigns emerged as the United States continues to debate the rapid expansion of AI infrastructure. Critics argue that the data centers needed to power AI systems can place additional pressure on electricity supplies, raise energy costs, create environmental concerns and potentially affect nearby property values.&nbsp;Supporters, however, argue that expanding AI data center capacity is important for U.S. national security and technological competitiveness. They also point to job creation, investment and increased tax revenue for communities hosting the facilities.The political debate intensified this week when President Donald Trump suggested at the White House that the AI industry needs “a little public relations help.” Trump pointed to a May Gallup poll showing that a majority of Americans oppose data centers being constructed in their communities.&nbsp;He argued that states and local communities should welcome data center projects because “the jobs are enormous, and the money paid, the taxes paid are just enormous.” "And if you don't take it, you're going to be left behind because there are plenty of places that want it," he added. At the same time, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., has argued that China could benefit from excessive US concerns about AI development.&nbsp;Fetterman warned that China benefits from "overreaction" to "AI doomsdaying" as Washington and Beijing compete for leadership in artificial intelligence. Fetterman wrote that “AI supremacy and energy dominance underpins our national security.” Following the discovery of the suspected Chinese influence campaign, X’s Global Government Affairs team said the platform would continue taking action against accounts that violate its policies.&nbsp;“We take seriously any attempts to undermine the integrity of the global town square and suspend accounts that violate our Authenticity policy.” &nbsp;The platform added that it remains “committed to maintaining an open and authentic platform where people debate topics of public interest.” The allegations add another layer to the growing US debate over AI, energy consumption and data center expansion, while also highlighting concerns about foreign influence operations shaping online political discussions.

X says it uncovered a suspected Chinese bot farm pushing anti-AI and anti-data center narratives as the US debates energy costs and AI growth

X, formerly known as Twitter, says it has uncovered a massive suspected Chinese bot farm that was allegedly conducting influence operations in the United States, including efforts to amplify criticism of artificial intelligence and data centers. The disclosure comes amid an increasingly heated national debate over the costs and benefits of rapidly expanding AI infrastructure. The issue has significant political implications, with Republicans increasingly divided over AI development and the construction of the massive data centers needed to support the technology. X’s Global Government Affairs account said the platform’s safety team identified a bot farm consisting of approximately 200,000 inauthentic Chinese accounts that were ‘involved in influence operations’. According to X, about 200 accounts within the network were identified as posting “in a manner that could manipulate a legitimate debate about American AI and energy policy.” The platform said posts from the accounts promoted claims that AI data centers are increasing household electricity bills and putting additional pressure on the US power grid. Other accounts allegedly shared AI-generated cartoons portraying data center developers as benefiting financially while ordinary Americans bear the costs. One image showed concerned citizens facing data center developers carrying bags of cash, accompanied by the caption, “Data centers get subsidized while we foot the bill!” Another image stated that “the AI industry is booming, but the costs are being borne by ordinary people.” The findings come after OpenAI announced earlier this summer that it had banned a "cluster of ChatGPT accounts that likely originated in China" that were allegedly being used to conduct a "covert influence operation" primarily aimed at US audiences. Also Read: Judge throws out 9/11 attack mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's FBI confession over torture concerns OpenAI said those accounts generated short comments and images that similarly promoted claims that AI development and data centers were increasing electricity demand and contributing to higher costs. The alleged influence campaigns emerged as the United States continues to debate the rapid expansion of AI infrastructure. Critics argue that the data centers needed to power AI systems can place additional pressure on electricity supplies, raise energy costs, create environmental concerns and potentially affect nearby property values. Supporters, however, argue that expanding AI data center capacity is important for U.S. national security and technological competitiveness. They also point to job creation, investment and increased tax revenue for communities hosting the facilities. The political debate intensified this week when President Donald Trump suggested at the White House that the AI industry needs “a little public relations help.” Trump pointed to a May Gallup poll showing that a majority of Americans oppose data centers being constructed in their communities. He argued that states and local communities should welcome data center projects because “the jobs are enormous, and the money paid, the taxes paid are just enormous.” "And if you don't take it, you're going to be left behind because there are plenty of places that want it," he added. At the same time, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., has argued that China could benefit from excessive US concerns about AI development. Fetterman warned that China benefits from "overreaction" to "AI doomsdaying" as Washington and Beijing compete for leadership in artificial intelligence. Fetterman wrote that “AI supremacy and energy dominance underpins our national security.” Following the discovery of the suspected Chinese influence campaign, X’s Global Government Affairs team said the platform would continue taking action against accounts that violate its policies. “We take seriously any attempts to undermine the integrity of the global town square and suspend accounts that violate our Authenticity policy.” The platform added that it remains “committed to maintaining an open and authentic platform where people debate topics of public interest.” The allegations add another layer to the growing US debate over AI, energy consumption and data center expansion, while also highlighting concerns about foreign influence operations shaping online political discussions.

X says it uncovered a suspected Chinese bot farm targeting US debate over artificial intelligence, data centers, electricity costs and energy policy

X exposes suspected Chinese influence campaign over AI, energy and data centers

The upcoming midterm elections in the US are turning out to be a high-stakes race, not only for diplomatic ramifications, but also for domestic issues and influence.&nbsp;According to a report in The Wall Street Journal, major US firms are already preparing for a possible turnaround in congressional control this November.&nbsp;Companies with close ties to US President Donald Trump in particular are reportedly taking measures to gain favour with the opposing camp, the Democrats.&nbsp;The steps come amid a possible chance that the blue camp may flip the House of Representatives and claim the majority, which the Republicans currently control.&nbsp;Several companies that donated vast sums of money to Trump's projects are now preparing for possible congressional and even potential criminal investigations. So, how are these companies trying to wade through this uncertain political landscape?&nbsp;Well, the report says that major corporate organisations are trying to balance out the money given to the red camp by now donating millions to Democratic lawmakers ahead of the midterms.&nbsp;Executives and board members from some large public companies across sectors are reportedly discussing how to stay out of Democratic crosshairs and how to stay as neutral as possible to evade formal subpoenas and investigations if the House flips in the next three months.&nbsp;The change in strategy also comes amid statements from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who said that the Democratic Party is focused on affordability, as well as holding companies accountable.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/xi-consolidates-power-china-s-top-military-body-left-with-just-two-after-generals-purged-1787923218445">Xi consolidates power: China’s top military body left with just two after generals purged</a>&nbsp;Jeffries is likely to become the House Speaker in the scenario that the Democrats do cross the simple majority mark.&nbsp;This is what the existing makeup of the House of Representatives looks like. Out of a total of 435 seats, Republicans currently have 219, while Democrats represent 212 of the seats.&nbsp;The halfway mark is at 218, and this is where it gets interesting. There are currently four vacant seats in the House. These seats are only filled by a special election or the next approaching election cycle.The four vacancies are from the following parts of America: the 14th District of California, the 23rd District of Texas, the 20th District of Florida and the 13th District of Georgia.&nbsp;The midterms are turning out to be a high-stakes battle for all stakeholders, but more so for the incumbent president and his Republican Party, especially if popularity polls are anything to go by.&nbsp;The past few polls have shown a steady decline in Trump's popularity overall, but the biggest trigger has been voters' unhappiness with the long-drawn Iran war and Trump's handling of the economy.It appears that companies that contributed millions to the president's legacy projects are also looking at how the numbers stack up in popularity polls.&nbsp;Hence, the decision to regroup and strategise on a potential change in the power structure at Capitol Hill.&nbsp;The question is: Will their early outreach to the Democrats help them evade scrutiny?

Major US companies with close ties to Donald Trump are reportedly reaching out to Democrats and hedging their political bets as they prepare for a possible Democratic takeover of the House in the 2026 midterm elections.

The upcoming midterm elections in the US are turning out to be a high-stakes race, not only for diplomatic ramifications, but also for domestic issues and influence. According to a report in The Wall Street Journal, major US firms are already preparing for a possible turnaround in congressional control this November. Companies with close ties to US President Donald Trump in particular are reportedly taking measures to gain favour with the opposing camp, the Democrats. The steps come amid a possible chance that the blue camp may flip the House of Representatives and claim the majority, which the Republicans currently control. Several companies that donated vast sums of money to Trump's projects are now preparing for possible congressional and even potential criminal investigations. So, how are these companies trying to wade through this uncertain political landscape? Well, the report says that major corporate organisations are trying to balance out the money given to the red camp by now donating millions to Democratic lawmakers ahead of the midterms. Executives and board members from some large public companies across sectors are reportedly discussing how to stay out of Democratic crosshairs and how to stay as neutral as possible to evade formal subpoenas and investigations if the House flips in the next three months. The change in strategy also comes amid statements from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who said that the Democratic Party is focused on affordability, as well as holding companies accountable. Also Read: Xi consolidates power: China’s top military body left with just two after generals purged Jeffries is likely to become the House Speaker in the scenario that the Democrats do cross the simple majority mark. This is what the existing makeup of the House of Representatives looks like. Out of a total of 435 seats, Republicans currently have 219, while Democrats represent 212 of the seats. The halfway mark is at 218, and this is where it gets interesting. There are currently four vacant seats in the House. These seats are only filled by a special election or the next approaching election cycle. The four vacancies are from the following parts of America: the 14th District of California, the 23rd District of Texas, the 20th District of Florida and the 13th District of Georgia. The midterms are turning out to be a high-stakes battle for all stakeholders, but more so for the incumbent president and his Republican Party, especially if popularity polls are anything to go by. The past few polls have shown a steady decline in Trump's popularity overall, but the biggest trigger has been voters' unhappiness with the long-drawn Iran war and Trump's handling of the economy. It appears that companies that contributed millions to the president's legacy projects are also looking at how the numbers stack up in popularity polls. Hence, the decision to regroup and strategise on a potential change in the power structure at Capitol Hill. The question is: Will their early outreach to the Democrats help them evade scrutiny?

Major US companies with close ties to Donald Trump are reportedly reaching out to Democrats and hedging their political bets as they prepare for a possible Democratic takeover of the House in the 2026 midterm elections.

US midterms: Companies close to Trump prepare for possible Democratic takeover of House | Race to Power

US President Donald Trump was reportedly warned against launching attack on Iran in February by US intelligence chiefs, who cautioned him that the American military operation could backfire, strengthen hard-line forces in Tehran and trigger a wider regional crisis. According to a report, then-US intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard told Trump in February that killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could lead to an even more authoritarian government, one potentially more determined to pursue weapons of mass destruction.<h2>What did Gabbard say?</h2>The Wall Street Journal reported that Gabbard was summoned to the Oval Office before the US-Israel strikes began on February 28. Trump was reportedly seeking her assessment after being encouraged by the previous summer’s Operation Midnight Hammer, which targeted Iranian nuclear facilities, and strikes on Venezuela’s Caracas that led to capture of Nicolas Maduro.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had pushed for military action, arguing that Iran was at its weakest and that its nuclear ambitions could finally be extinguished, the report added.However, according to WSJ, Gabbard warned Trump that Tehran would likely retaliate. She warned that Iran could shut the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices higher, while striking US allies across the Middle East – which is exactly what happened.<h2>What did US military leaders say?</h2>US military leaders also cautioned that the conflict would cost American lives, consume dwindling stocks of munitions and stretch US forces already deployed across the region.Vice President JD Vance was also reportedly against entering the war but assured Trump he would support him if the president chose to proceed.Trump ultimately followed the recommendations of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine and Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of US Central Command. They presented detailed plans for disabling Iran with Israeli assistance.Operation Epic Fury began on February 28, and Khamenei was killed on the first day. Trump initially celebrated the result, but the situation soon became more complicated as the consequences predicted by Gabbard began unfolding.<h2>Trump’s Iran war drags on</h2>The war has now entered its sixth month, despite Trump initially saying it would take six weeks. Gulf allies including Saudi Arabia and Qatar have pressed Washington to end the fighting, while Republicans have grown concerned about its impact ahead of the midterm elections.The 60-day negotiating period under the June 17 peace framework has also expired. Trump has since turned to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to intensify economic pressure on Tehran through Operation Economic Outcast.The conflict has killed 3,000 Iranians and 18 US service members, while another 756 American troops have been injured.White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales defended Trump’s approach, saying: “He will never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. It would be wise for Iran to reach a deal. Otherwise, they know what could happen.”

US President Donald Trump was warned by Tulsi Gabbard and US intelligence against striking Iran. Despite warnings that the consequences could backfire, Trump launched Operation Epic Fury in February—and many of those risks materialised.

US President Donald Trump was reportedly warned against launching attack on Iran in February by US intelligence chiefs, who cautioned him that the American military operation could backfire, strengthen hard-line forces in Tehran and trigger a wider regional crisis. According to a report, then-US intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard told Trump in February that killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could lead to an even more authoritarian government, one potentially more determined to pursue weapons of mass destruction. What did Gabbard say? The Wall Street Journal reported that Gabbard was summoned to the Oval Office before the US-Israel strikes began on February 28. Trump was reportedly seeking her assessment after being encouraged by the previous summer’s Operation Midnight Hammer, which targeted Iranian nuclear facilities, and strikes on Venezuela’s Caracas that led to capture of Nicolas Maduro. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had pushed for military action, arguing that Iran was at its weakest and that its nuclear ambitions could finally be extinguished, the report added. However, according to WSJ, Gabbard warned Trump that Tehran would likely retaliate. She warned that Iran could shut the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices higher, while striking US allies across the Middle East – which is exactly what happened. What did US military leaders say? US military leaders also cautioned that the conflict would cost American lives, consume dwindling stocks of munitions and stretch US forces already deployed across the region. Vice President JD Vance was also reportedly against entering the war but assured Trump he would support him if the president chose to proceed. Trump ultimately followed the recommendations of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine and Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of US Central Command. They presented detailed plans for disabling Iran with Israeli assistance. Operation Epic Fury began on February 28, and Khamenei was killed on the first day. Trump initially celebrated the result, but the situation soon became more complicated as the consequences predicted by Gabbard began unfolding. Trump’s Iran war drags on The war has now entered its sixth month, despite Trump initially saying it would take six weeks. Gulf allies including Saudi Arabia and Qatar have pressed Washington to end the fighting, while Republicans have grown concerned about its impact ahead of the midterm elections. The 60-day negotiating period under the June 17 peace framework has also expired. Trump has since turned to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to intensify economic pressure on Tehran through Operation Economic Outcast. The conflict has killed 3,000 Iranians and 18 US service members, while another 756 American troops have been injured. White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales defended Trump’s approach, saying: “He will never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. It would be wise for Iran to reach a deal. Otherwise, they know what could happen.”

US President Donald Trump was warned by Tulsi Gabbard and US intel against launching strikes on Iran. Despite the likely consequences being pointed out, all of which came true, the US military launched Operation Epic Fury in February.

Did Tulsi Gabbard warn Trump Iran war could backfire? What US intel got right

Donald Trump is considering a provocative new name for Lake Ontario, suggesting it could be renamed ‘Lake America’ as trade tensions between the United States and Canada continue to escalate. The US president made the remark on Tuesday as Canada prepared to announce retaliatory measures after Washington imposed 50 per cent tariffs on USD 20 billion worth of Canadian goods over the weekend. The move followed the collapse of trade negotiations between the two countries.&nbsp;In a social media post, Trump said, “The United States is giving serious consideration to changing the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America in that we don't expect to doing much business with Ontario any longer.” The proposal would mirror Trump's decision last year to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America through an executive order. Ontario, Canada's most populous province, is also a major centre of the country's automotive industry.<h2>US-Canada trade tensions intensify</h2>The latest comments come as rhetoric between Washington and Ottawa becomes increasingly confrontational. Trump told Canadian leaders on Monday to "fall in line" or face consequences "far WORSE" than the tariffs already imposed. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, meanwhile, accused the United States of seeking to subordinate Canada.&nbsp;Trump has also threatened an additional 50 per cent tariff on Canadian vehicles, auto parts and steel. Carney responded that US trade demands demonstrated an effort to undermine Canada's major industries. Canada and the United States maintain one of the world's largest trading relationships, with deeply integrated supply chains spanning automobiles, energy, agriculture and manufacturing. A prolonged tariff battle could therefore create significant costs for companies and workers in both countries while increasing uncertainty for consumers over potential price increases.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-diplomats-set-to-return-to-middle-east-embassies-despite-stalled-iran-talks-report-1787660811871">US diplomats set to return to Middle East embassies despite stalled Iran talks: Report</a><h2>Businesses warn of impact</h2>Michael Howard II, who owns a furniture business in Warren, Michigan, outside Detroit, said the tariffs could have a direct impact on his family's finances and the wider community. "The ability for us to put food on the table for our family, but also impacts the ability for us to give back to our community," Howard said.&nbsp;Howard and his wife launched the business about a decade ago, producing and selling items including dining tables and bookcases. He argued that the close economic relationship between the two countries makes cutting ties unrealistic. "To say that we don't need Canada is just disingenuous. It's dishonest. And it's just absolutely not truthful. We need our neighbor, but also they need us."<h2>Canada prepares response</h2>Canadian Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne and three other Cabinet ministers were expected to outline measures on Tuesday to support workers affected by the tariffs. Carney had previously indicated that Canada could shift away from responding to US tariffs dollar for dollar. Instead, Ottawa may pursue more targeted measures designed to shield Canadian workers and businesses from the impact of the trade dispute.&nbsp;"An attitude at the negotiation table that Canada is a subsidiary of the United States" is "not something we're going to accept," Carney said. Speaking in French, Carney delivered an even stronger criticism of the US position. "We learned during the negotiations that the Americans want to destroy our major industries, including autos, steel and aluminum. That was one of the main reasons we said no. It was a bad deal."&nbsp;The latest developments highlight the widening rift between two economies whose industries and supply chains are closely interconnected. New tariffs, threats of additional measures and Canadian retaliation are increasing pressure on businesses, workers and consumers on both sides of the border.

Donald Trump considers renaming Lake Ontario 'Lake America' as US-Canada trade tensions escalate over tariffs, retaliation and auto industry threats

Donald Trump is considering a provocative new name for Lake Ontario, suggesting it could be renamed ‘Lake America’ as trade tensions between the United States and Canada continue to escalate. The US president made the remark on Tuesday as Canada prepared to announce retaliatory measures after Washington imposed 50 per cent tariffs on USD 20 billion worth of Canadian goods over the weekend. The move followed the collapse of trade negotiations between the two countries. In a social media post, Trump said, “The United States is giving serious consideration to changing the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America in that we don't expect to doing much business with Ontario any longer.” The proposal would mirror Trump's decision last year to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America through an executive order. Ontario, Canada's most populous province, is also a major centre of the country's automotive industry. US-Canada trade tensions intensify The latest comments come as rhetoric between Washington and Ottawa becomes increasingly confrontational. Trump told Canadian leaders on Monday to "fall in line" or face consequences "far WORSE" than the tariffs already imposed. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, meanwhile, accused the United States of seeking to subordinate Canada. Trump has also threatened an additional 50 per cent tariff on Canadian vehicles, auto parts and steel. Carney responded that US trade demands demonstrated an effort to undermine Canada's major industries. Canada and the United States maintain one of the world's largest trading relationships, with deeply integrated supply chains spanning automobiles, energy, agriculture and manufacturing. A prolonged tariff battle could therefore create significant costs for companies and workers in both countries while increasing uncertainty for consumers over potential price increases. Also Read: US diplomats set to return to Middle East embassies despite stalled Iran talks: Report Businesses warn of impact Michael Howard II, who owns a furniture business in Warren, Michigan, outside Detroit, said the tariffs could have a direct impact on his family's finances and the wider community. "The ability for us to put food on the table for our family, but also impacts the ability for us to give back to our community," Howard said. Howard and his wife launched the business about a decade ago, producing and selling items including dining tables and bookcases. He argued that the close economic relationship between the two countries makes cutting ties unrealistic. "To say that we don't need Canada is just disingenuous. It's dishonest. And it's just absolutely not truthful. We need our neighbor, but also they need us." Canada prepares response Canadian Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne and three other Cabinet ministers were expected to outline measures on Tuesday to support workers affected by the tariffs. Carney had previously indicated that Canada could shift away from responding to US tariffs dollar for dollar. Instead, Ottawa may pursue more targeted measures designed to shield Canadian workers and businesses from the impact of the trade dispute. "An attitude at the negotiation table that Canada is a subsidiary of the United States" is "not something we're going to accept," Carney said. Speaking in French, Carney delivered an even stronger criticism of the US position. "We learned during the negotiations that the Americans want to destroy our major industries, including autos, steel and aluminum. That was one of the main reasons we said no. It was a bad deal." The latest developments highlight the widening rift between two economies whose industries and supply chains are closely interconnected. New tariffs, threats of additional measures and Canadian retaliation are increasing pressure on businesses, workers and consumers on both sides of the border.

Donald Trump considers renaming Lake Ontario ‘Lake America’ as US-Canada trade tensions rise over tariffs, retaliation and threats to key industries

Donald Trump floats ‘Lake America’ name for Lake Ontario amid US-Canada trade war

US President Donald Trump on Tuesday (Aug 11) confirmed that he switched from Air Force One to a different plane during a recent summit in Turkey due to a "threat", saying that he does whatever Secret Service and the military advise him to do. The confirmation from Trump came just a day after reports about how the US President switched from the Qatar-gifted Boeing 747-8 to an older Air Force One, and then again made a secret switch to a smaller C-32A aircraft.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-wants-new-pm-for-israel-us-president-calls-netanyahu-wartime-pm-but-does-not-endorse-him-1781056588263">Trump wants new PM for Israel? US president calls Netanyahu 'wartime PM', but does not endorse him</a><h2>What Trump said about plane swap?</h2>Despite the absence of an official statement from the White House or Trump about the switching of planes, the US President has now confirmed the move. Speaking to reporters after returning from Ohio, the US President said, “I go by Secret Service and the military. They wanted me to go on a different flight, a different plane... I do what they say... I guess there was a threat out there. I didn't really ask too much about it. I get a lot of threats.” Trump further said that he has several threats that the public does not know about, adding that any “consequential President has a lot of threats.” "Non-consequential Presidents don't get threatened, and I think I'm maybe the most consequential President." Regarding the threats, the US President said he doesn't worry about anything. "Whatever it is, you know my attitude? Whatever."&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-gives-bizarre-explanation-on-if-he-would-wear-bulletproof-vest-following-whca-shooting-i-don-t-know-if-1777615772252">Trump gives bizarre explanation on if he would wear bulletproof vest following WHCA shooting: 'I don't know if...'</a>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">.<a href="https://x.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a>: &quot;I have a lot of threats that you don&#39;t know about. Any consequential President has a lot of threats. Non-consequential Presidents don&#39;t get threatened — and I think that I&#39;m maybe the most consequential President.&quot; 🔥 <a href="https://t.co/UBAPgiR4P8">https://t.co/UBAPgiR4P8</a> <a href="https://t.co/YKFQjmxN3V">pic.twitter.com/YKFQjmxN3V</a>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2087346298403832235?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 12, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Last month, it was reported that Trump had to swap the Qatar-gifted jet for an older Boeing due to an alleged threat. However, a recent Washington Post report said that the US President switched planes once again, having been discreetly moved out of the older Air Force One in a catering container, which then transferred him to a smaller C-32A aircraft. The latest plane swap happened after the US and Israeli intelligence agencies detected a credible, imminent threat from Iranian-linked military forces or proxies planning to target Trump's aircraft. Specifically, there were concerns about a missile strike or an attack on his newly customized aircraft, which lacked advanced defense systems. In full view of media cameras, Trump boarded the Air Force One jet. However, according to a report by The Washington Post, minutes later, he was secretly moved via an airport catering truck to a smaller, unmarked C-32A military aircraft to fly to the UK. Iran's leadership, including Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, has vowed to avenge the killing of former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by killing Trump. &nbsp;

US President Donald Trump confirmed he switched planes during his recent Turkey summit after the Secret Service and military advised him to do so due to a suspected threat. Trump said he routinely follows security advice and receives numerous threats.

US President Donald Trump on Tuesday (Aug 11) confirmed that he switched from Air Force One to a different plane during a recent summit in Turkey due to a "threat", saying that he does whatever Secret Service and the military advise him to do. The confirmation from Trump came just a day after reports about how the US President switched from the Qatar-gifted Boeing 747-8 to an older Air Force One, and then again made a secret switch to a smaller C-32A aircraft. Also Read: Trump wants new PM for Israel? US president calls Netanyahu 'wartime PM', but does not endorse him What Trump said about plane swap? Despite the absence of an official statement from the White House or Trump about the switching of planes, the US President has now confirmed the move. Speaking to reporters after returning from Ohio, the US President said, “I go by Secret Service and the military. They wanted me to go on a different flight, a different plane... I do what they say... I guess there was a threat out there. I didn't really ask too much about it. I get a lot of threats.” Trump further said that he has several threats that the public does not know about, adding that any “consequential President has a lot of threats.” "Non-consequential Presidents don't get threatened, and I think I'm maybe the most consequential President." Regarding the threats, the US President said he doesn't worry about anything. "Whatever it is, you know my attitude? Whatever." Also Read: Trump gives bizarre explanation on if he would wear bulletproof vest following WHCA shooting: 'I don't know if...'

US President Donald Trump confirmed he switched planes during his recent Turkey summit after the Secret Service and military advised him to do so due to a suspected threat. Trump said he routinely follows security advice and receives numerous threats.

'Whatever it is, you know my attitude...': Trump CONFIRMS switching to secret flight after leaving Turkey

In a latest development, the US officials on Sunday (Aug 9) intercepted at least three general aviation aircraft citing that they violated the temporary flight restrictions near Bedminster, New Jersey, as the country's President Donald Trump spent the weekend at his golf club. The North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) said its F-16 fighter jets intercepted two general aviation aircraft. It also said that a third plane triggered an alert while Trump was preparing to depart the area, where the four-day LIV Golf New York tournament was being held.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-low-keying-iran-war-hormuz-demands-1786295909319">Trump calls Iran standoff a 'chess game' claims US is 'low-keying' war</a>&nbsp;The situation turned into a chaos and US Secret Service agents rushed to action in order to keep the US President Trump safe. Emergency SUVs and law enforcement officers were also seen moving. Following the incident, officials noted that the first two general aviation aircraft were safely escorted out of the restricted area by NORAD aircraft. Meanwhile, the aircraft "reestablished communications and became compliant before Norad intervention was required." Videos now circulating online captured the interceptions of the first two aircraft. It shows the dramatic moment an F-16 fighter jet closed in on what appeared to be a small Cessna aircraft near Jefferson Township, outside Bedminster.<h2>WATCH THE DRAMATIC VIDEO HERE</h2>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">WATCH: US F-16 jet intercepts aircraft over Bedminster, New Jersey, where President Trump is present <a href="https://t.co/gS4gTP9Lbo">pic.twitter.com/gS4gTP9Lbo</a>&mdash; Rapid Report (@RapidReport2025) <a href="https://x.com/RapidReport2025/status/2086524153348104470?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 9, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/100-fake-news-trump-confronted-hegseth-over-us-munitions-shortages-claims-report-here-s-why-wh-says-1785993835957">‘100% fake news’: WH denies report claiming Trump confronted Hegseth</a><h2>All restrictions were in place</h2>It is pertinent to note that, ahead of Trump's landing in New Jersey, NORAD said that it would enforce multiple FAA-established temporary flight restrictions over the region this weekend. Both pilots and the public were told that the US Army ground-based defence assets may be present in the area, operating under the Continental US Norad Region as part of the command’s routine, layered defence. "These systems are operating under Norad authorities, constitute a routine component of the command’s layered defence posture and work in tandem with the command’s airborne assets to monitor and protect the airspace," information published by the Defence Visual Information Distribution Service said. Therefore, according to rule F16s intercepted the civilian planes and no laws were voilated.&nbsp;

Three general aviation aircraft violated temporary flight restrictions near Donald Trump's Bedminster golf club, prompting NORAD to intercept two with F-16 fighter jets. A third aircraft triggered an alert as Trump prepared to leave, reportedly delaying his departure by about 13 minutes.

In a latest development, the US officials on Sunday (Aug 9) intercepted at least three general aviation aircraft citing that they violated the temporary flight restrictions near Bedminster, New Jersey, as the country's President Donald Trump spent the weekend at his golf club. The North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) said its F-16 fighter jets intercepted two general aviation aircraft. It also said that a third plane triggered an alert while Trump was preparing to depart the area, where the four-day LIV Golf New York tournament was being held. Also Read: Trump calls Iran standoff a 'chess game' claims US is 'low-keying' war The situation turned into a chaos and US Secret Service agents rushed to action in order to keep the US President Trump safe. Emergency SUVs and law enforcement officers were also seen moving. Following the incident, officials noted that the first two general aviation aircraft were safely escorted out of the restricted area by NORAD aircraft. Meanwhile, the aircraft "reestablished communications and became compliant before Norad intervention was required." Videos now circulating online captured the interceptions of the first two aircraft. It shows the dramatic moment an F-16 fighter jet closed in on what appeared to be a small Cessna aircraft near Jefferson Township, outside Bedminster. WATCH THE DRAMATIC VIDEO HERE

Three general aviation aircraft violated temporary flight restrictions near Donald Trump's Bedminster golf club, prompting NORAD to intercept two with F-16 fighter jets. A third aircraft triggered an alert as Trump prepared to leave, reportedly delaying his departure by about 13 minutes.

US F16s intercept civilian planes near Trump’s New Jersey golf club, dramatic video surfaces | WATCH

Todd Blanche was confirmed as US attorney general on Saturday (Aug 8) after a razor-thin Senate vote that put him in charge of the Justice Department despite unified Democratic opposition and unease among a handful of Republicans. Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s personal lawyer and had been acting attorney general in recent months, was confirmed by a 50-49 vote. Republicans hold a slim Senate majority, and the nomination passed despite opposition from Republican senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who joined Democrats in voting against him.Following his confirmation, Blanche thanked Trump for the appointment and expressed gratitude to the Senate. In a post on X, he said, “I am deeply honoured by the trust and confidence President Trump has placed in me to lead the Department of Justice as our great nation’s 88th Attorney General. I am grateful to the Senate for staying late to complete this process.”“To the dedicated public servants of the Department of Justice, thank you for your work each day to uphold the law and keep our country safe,” he added.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/certain-munitions-are-unlimited-others-did-trump-admit-some-us-munitions-supplies-were-limited-1786072145799">‘Certain munitions are unlimited, others...’: Did Trump admit some US weapons supplies were limited?</a>The confirmation gives Trump a loyal ally at the helm of the Justice Department at a time when the administration has faced sustained criticism over the role of federal law enforcement. Democrats argued that Blanche’s close personal and professional relationship with the president raised serious concerns about the department’s independence.Senator Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said earlier this week that the attorney general should serve the public rather than the president, accusing Blanche of continuing to act as Trump’s personal lawyer.Blanche’s nomination also drew scrutiny from within Republican ranks. Concerns had emerged over proposals linked to a fund for alleged victims of politicised prosecutions and a tax-related arrangement involving Trump and his business interests. Those concerns eased after Blanche withdrew the proposed fund and limited the tax agreement to past filings.Before joining the administration, Blanche represented Trump in several high-profile criminal cases, including the New York hush-money trial and two federal investigations led by special counsel Jack Smith. Those federal cases were dropped after Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election.

US President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Todd Blanche was confirmed as US Attorney General on Saturday (Aug 8) by the US Senate.



Todd Blanche was confirmed as US attorney general on Saturday (Aug 8) after a razor-thin Senate vote that put him in charge of the Justice Department despite unified Democratic opposition and unease among a handful of Republicans. Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s personal lawyer and had been acting attorney general in recent months, was confirmed by a 50-49 vote. Republicans hold a slim Senate majority, and the nomination passed despite opposition from Republican senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who joined Democrats in voting against him. Following his confirmation, Blanche thanked Trump for the appointment and expressed gratitude to the Senate. In a post on X, he said, “I am deeply honoured by the trust and confidence President Trump has placed in me to lead the Department of Justice as our great nation’s 88th Attorney General. I am grateful to the Senate for staying late to complete this process.” “To the dedicated public servants of the Department of Justice, thank you for your work each day to uphold the law and keep our country safe,” he added. Also read | ‘Certain munitions are unlimited, others...’: Did Trump admit some US weapons supplies were limited? The confirmation gives Trump a loyal ally at the helm of the Justice Department at a time when the administration has faced sustained criticism over the role of federal law enforcement. Democrats argued that Blanche’s close personal and professional relationship with the president raised serious concerns about the department’s independence. Senator Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said earlier this week that the attorney general should serve the public rather than the president, accusing Blanche of continuing to act as Trump’s personal lawyer. Blanche’s nomination also drew scrutiny from within Republican ranks. Concerns had emerged over proposals linked to a fund for alleged victims of politicised prosecutions and a tax-related arrangement involving Trump and his business interests. Those concerns eased after Blanche withdrew the proposed fund and limited the tax agreement to past filings. Before joining the administration, Blanche represented Trump in several high-profile criminal cases, including the New York hush-money trial and two federal investigations led by special counsel Jack Smith. Those federal cases were dropped after Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election.

US President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Todd Blanche was confirmed as US Attorney General on Saturday (Aug 8) by the US Senate.

Trump’s ex lawyer Todd Blanche confirmed as US Attorney General

US President Donald Trump on Thursday (Aug 6) said that he believes that the war with Iran, which has been going on for over 5 months, will be over “pretty soon”. Trump also admitted that some munitions were experiencing a “little bit tighter” supply. His remarks come amid reports suggesting that the American forces were running out of supplies of some weapons.“I think it’s going to end pretty soon. I don’t think they can go much longer,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office in a reference to Iran.<h2>Is US running out of munitions?</h2>Earlier on Tuesday (Aug 4), Reuters reported that the US Army had used up “virtually all” of its global stockpile of highly accurate long-range missiles during the conflict in the Middle East. It added that much of the US Army’s surface-to-surface weapons, Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM), had been used up.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iranian-hackers-behind-cyberattack-on-minnesota-water-systems-what-we-know-1785484942363">Iranian hackers behind cyberattack on Minnesota water systems? What we know</a>When asked about the supply of munitions stockpiles, Trump said that the United States had an “unlimited supply” of certain weapons. However, the US president admitted that other inventories were limited.“We have certain types of munitions that are very powerful, that we have unlimited, virtual unlimited supply. We have others where it’s a little bit tighter,” Trump said.He added that US defence firms were setting up more production plants, including facilities for Patriot and Tomahawk missiles.ATACMS and PrSM are long-range munitions that cost more than $1 million each and are an integral part of the US military’s arsenal. The US-supplied ATACMS have also been used by Ukraine to strike targets inside Russia during the war.Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.

Trump said the Iran war could end soon and admitted some US munitions supplies were “a little bit tighter.” His remarks followed reports that stocks of key long-range missiles had been heavily depleted.

US President Donald Trump on Thursday (Aug 6) said that he believes that the war with Iran, which has been going on for over 5 months, will be over “pretty soon”. Trump also admitted that some munitions were experiencing a “little bit tighter” supply. His remarks come amid reports suggesting that the American forces were running out of supplies of some weapons. “I think it’s going to end pretty soon. I don’t think they can go much longer,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office in a reference to Iran. Is US running out of munitions? Earlier on Tuesday (Aug 4), Reuters reported that the US Army had used up “virtually all” of its global stockpile of highly accurate long-range missiles during the conflict in the Middle East. It added that much of the US Army’s surface-to-surface weapons, Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM), had been used up. Also read | Iranian hackers behind cyberattack on Minnesota water systems? What we know When asked about the supply of munitions stockpiles, Trump said that the United States had an “unlimited supply” of certain weapons. However, the US president admitted that other inventories were limited. “We have certain types of munitions that are very powerful, that we have unlimited, virtual unlimited supply. We have others where it’s a little bit tighter,” Trump said. He added that US defence firms were setting up more production plants, including facilities for Patriot and Tomahawk missiles. ATACMS and PrSM are long-range munitions that cost more than $1 million each and are an integral part of the US military’s arsenal. The US-supplied ATACMS have also been used by Ukraine to strike targets inside Russia during the war. Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.

Trump said the Iran war could end soon and admitted some US munitions supplies were “a little bit tighter.” His remarks followed reports that stocks of key long-range missiles had been heavily depleted.

‘Certain munitions are unlimited, others...’: Did Trump admit some US weapons supplies were limited?

India is likely to seek a sunset clause in its proposed interim trade agreement with the United States, mirroring a provision included in the recent trade arrangement between the European Union and the US. The move comes as countries negotiating trade deals with Washington increasingly seek safeguards against future policy changes.&nbsp;The discussion follows a recent decision by the European Parliament to include a sunset clause in legislation implementing the tariff provisions of the EU-US trade arrangement. Under the provision, the agreement will automatically expire on December 31, 2029, unless both sides agree to extend it.&nbsp;A sunset clause is a provision in an international trade agreement that sets an automatic expiry date unless all participating countries explicitly agree to renew it. While free trade agreements have traditionally remained in force indefinitely, countries negotiating with the administration of US President Donald Trump are increasingly insisting on such clauses as a protective mechanism.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-us-trade-deal-in-final-stages-us-envoy-says-talks-are-down-to-the-last-1-or-2-1782777789367">India-US trade deal in final stages: US envoy says talks are down to the last 1 or 2%</a><h2>Why are countries seeking sunset clauses?</h2>Countries negotiating trade agreements with the United States say they face uncertainty because of Washington's frequent use of unilateral tariffs, including Section 301 and Section 232 measures, as well as changing trade policies. Instead of committing to a permanent arrangement, governments are seeking a sunset clause that provides an automatic exit if the agreement is no longer beneficial.&nbsp;The provision is intended to prevent a situation where trading partners reduce their own trade barriers while continuing to face new tariffs imposed by the United States. It also creates an opportunity to reassess the agreement after a fixed period instead of requiring a politically difficult termination process.&nbsp;Supporters of the approach describe it as a defensive safeguard that allows governments to protect their domestic industries while maintaining flexibility in future trade negotiations.<h2>EU and USMCA offer recent examples</h2>The European Parliament recently incorporated the Turnberry trade framework with the United States into law and attached a sunset clause covering tariff concessions on industrial and agricultural goods. The provision requires those concessions to expire on December 31, 2029, unless both sides decide to renew the arrangement.&nbsp;The European Union said that because Trump's trade policies are fluid, it "makes no sense to have legislation based on an unfair deal forever." The legislation also requires a comprehensive review by the middle of 2029 before any extension can be approved.&nbsp;A similar mechanism was introduced by the Trump administration during the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The resulting United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement included a 16-year sunset clause along with a mandatory joint review every six years.&nbsp;Supporters say sunset clauses offer three main advantages. They give countries leverage by preventing the United States from securing long-term market access while imposing separate tariffs, provide a safety mechanism if domestic industries are hurt by American imports, and allow a review of the agreement in 2029 at the end of the current political cycle in Washington.

The European Parliament approved the Turnberry trade framework with the United States, including a sunset clause that expires tariff concessions on December 31, 2029, unless renewed by both sides.

India is likely to seek a sunset clause in its proposed interim trade agreement with the United States, mirroring a provision included in the recent trade arrangement between the European Union and the US. The move comes as countries negotiating trade deals with Washington increasingly seek safeguards against future policy changes. The discussion follows a recent decision by the European Parliament to include a sunset clause in legislation implementing the tariff provisions of the EU-US trade arrangement. Under the provision, the agreement will automatically expire on December 31, 2029, unless both sides agree to extend it. A sunset clause is a provision in an international trade agreement that sets an automatic expiry date unless all participating countries explicitly agree to renew it. While free trade agreements have traditionally remained in force indefinitely, countries negotiating with the administration of US President Donald Trump are increasingly insisting on such clauses as a protective mechanism. Also Read: India-US trade deal in final stages: US envoy says talks are down to the last 1 or 2% Why are countries seeking sunset clauses? Countries negotiating trade agreements with the United States say they face uncertainty because of Washington's frequent use of unilateral tariffs, including Section 301 and Section 232 measures, as well as changing trade policies. Instead of committing to a permanent arrangement, governments are seeking a sunset clause that provides an automatic exit if the agreement is no longer beneficial. The provision is intended to prevent a situation where trading partners reduce their own trade barriers while continuing to face new tariffs imposed by the United States. It also creates an opportunity to reassess the agreement after a fixed period instead of requiring a politically difficult termination process. Supporters of the approach describe it as a defensive safeguard that allows governments to protect their domestic industries while maintaining flexibility in future trade negotiations. EU and USMCA offer recent examples The European Parliament recently incorporated the Turnberry trade framework with the United States into law and attached a sunset clause covering tariff concessions on industrial and agricultural goods. The provision requires those concessions to expire on December 31, 2029, unless both sides decide to renew the arrangement. The European Union said that because Trump's trade policies are fluid, it "makes no sense to have legislation based on an unfair deal forever." The legislation also requires a comprehensive review by the middle of 2029 before any extension can be approved. A similar mechanism was introduced by the Trump administration during the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The resulting United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement included a 16-year sunset clause along with a mandatory joint review every six years. Supporters say sunset clauses offer three main advantages. They give countries leverage by preventing the United States from securing long-term market access while imposing separate tariffs, provide a safety mechanism if domestic industries are hurt by American imports, and allow a review of the agreement in 2029 at the end of the current political cycle in Washington.

The European Parliament approved the Turnberry trade framework with the United States, including a sunset clause that expires tariff concessions on December 31, 2029, unless renewed by both sides.

What is the sunset clause in international trade that countries seek in deals with Trump's America?

Iran on Monday said an expert delegation will travel to Doha later this week to discuss the implementation of the memorandum of understanding signed with the United States earlier this month. However, Tehran firmly denied that any meeting with US officials was scheduled.&nbsp;Foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said the delegation would focus only on implementing the clauses of the memorandum signed on June 17 between Tehran and Washington.&nbsp;"An expert delegation from the Islamic Republic of Iran will travel to Doha later this week" to discuss the implementation of clauses of the memorandum, foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said.&nbsp;He stressed that negotiations on a final agreement had not yet begun.&nbsp;"We have not yet entered the stage of negotiating a final agreement," he said, noting that "over the coming days, we will not have any negotiation meetings with the US side at any level".&nbsp;The statement came hours after US President Donald Trump claimed Iran had sought a meeting in Doha on Tuesday.&nbsp;"IRAN HAS REQUESTED A MEETING. IT WILL TAKE PLACE TOMORROW IN DOHA!" Trump posted on his Truth Social platform on Monday, without specifying the participants.&nbsp;Later, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told Fox News that US envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner "will be flying to Doha for high-level meetings this week".&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/desperate-acts-of-violence-india-strongly-condemns-pakistan-air-strikes-on-afghanistan-killing-civilians-1782764622490">'Desperate acts of violence': India strongly condemns Pakistan air strikes on Afghanistan killing civilians</a><h2>Iran and Oman discuss the Strait of Hormuz</h2>Meanwhile, Iran's foreign ministry said it held its first meeting with Oman on Monday to discuss the management of the Strait of Hormuz after Tehran and Washington signed their preliminary agreement aimed at ending the Middle East war.&nbsp;Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said the Joint Hormuz Committee met during his visit to Muscat.&nbsp;"During a trip to Muscat, the first meeting of the Joint Hormuz Committee was held," said Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi on X.&nbsp;"While reviewing the current issues related to the strait, we exchanged views on the future management," he added.&nbsp;The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway separating Iran and Oman, has remained a major issue in discussions between Tehran and Washington. Iran is considering introducing service fees that did not exist before the war, while the United States opposes such charges, arguing the strait is an international waterway.&nbsp;Separately, France and Oman said in a joint statement issued after a meeting between French President Emmanuel Macron and Omani Sultan Haitham bin Tariq that they would conduct joint demining operations.&nbsp;Responding to the announcement, Gharibabadi insisted that only Iran would carry out demining activities under the agreement.&nbsp;"The situation is sensitive and complex. We strongly advise France not to complicate it further with its provocations," Gharibabadi wrote.

Iranian Foreign Ministry said the expert delegation would travel to Doha this week to discuss the implementation of the memorandum signed on June 17, while stressing that no negotiations on a final agreement or meetings with US officials were scheduled.

Iran on Monday said an expert delegation will travel to Doha later this week to discuss the implementation of the memorandum of understanding signed with the United States earlier this month. However, Tehran firmly denied that any meeting with US officials was scheduled. Foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said the delegation would focus only on implementing the clauses of the memorandum signed on June 17 between Tehran and Washington. "An expert delegation from the Islamic Republic of Iran will travel to Doha later this week" to discuss the implementation of clauses of the memorandum, foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said. He stressed that negotiations on a final agreement had not yet begun. "We have not yet entered the stage of negotiating a final agreement," he said, noting that "over the coming days, we will not have any negotiation meetings with the US side at any level". The statement came hours after US President Donald Trump claimed Iran had sought a meeting in Doha on Tuesday. "IRAN HAS REQUESTED A MEETING. IT WILL TAKE PLACE TOMORROW IN DOHA!" Trump posted on his Truth Social platform on Monday, without specifying the participants. Later, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told Fox News that US envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner "will be flying to Doha for high-level meetings this week". Also Read: 'Desperate acts of violence': India strongly condemns Pakistan air strikes on Afghanistan killing civilians Iran and Oman discuss the Strait of Hormuz Meanwhile, Iran's foreign ministry said it held its first meeting with Oman on Monday to discuss the management of the Strait of Hormuz after Tehran and Washington signed their preliminary agreement aimed at ending the Middle East war. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said the Joint Hormuz Committee met during his visit to Muscat. "During a trip to Muscat, the first meeting of the Joint Hormuz Committee was held," said Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi on X. "While reviewing the current issues related to the strait, we exchanged views on the future management," he added. The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway separating Iran and Oman, has remained a major issue in discussions between Tehran and Washington. Iran is considering introducing service fees that did not exist before the war, while the United States opposes such charges, arguing the strait is an international waterway. Separately, France and Oman said in a joint statement issued after a meeting between French President Emmanuel Macron and Omani Sultan Haitham bin Tariq that they would conduct joint demining operations. Responding to the announcement, Gharibabadi insisted that only Iran would carry out demining activities under the agreement. "The situation is sensitive and complex. We strongly advise France not to complicate it further with its provocations," Gharibabadi wrote.

Iranian Foreign Ministry said the expert delegation would travel to Doha this week to discuss the implementation of the memorandum signed on June 17, while stressing that no negotiations on a final agreement or meetings with US officials were scheduled.

Iran says 'expert delegation' heads to Qatar this week, rejects Trump's claim of US talks

The US Supreme Court on Monday (June 29) refused to hear President Donald Trump's appeal against a jury verdict that found him liable for sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll, leaving the $5 million judgment against him in place.&nbsp;The court declined to take up Trump's challenge as part of a series of rulings and did not provide any reason for its decision.<h2>What is the case?</h2>The case began with a federal lawsuit filed by Carroll in Manhattan, where she alleged that Trump sexually assaulted her inside the dressing room of a New York department store in 1996. Her defamation claims were linked to statements Trump made after completing his first term in office, when he dismissed her allegations as a "con job" and "hoax."&nbsp;On May 9, 2023, a federal civil court in Manhattan found Trump liable for sexually assaulting the former newspaper columnist and awarded Carroll $5 million in damages.&nbsp;Carroll, now 82, first made the allegation public in a book published in 2019. In it, she described what she considered to be a rape that took place 23 years earlier in a fitting room. Trump rejected the accusation at the time and called her a "nut job."&nbsp;Trump responded sharply after the Supreme Court declined to reconsider the jury's verdict.&nbsp;"Surprisingly, the Supreme Court declined to 'review' a Fake Case brought against me by a woman I never met (Decades-old celebrity photo line, standing with her husband, does not count!)," Trump wrote on social media.&nbsp;Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, welcomed the Supreme Court's decision.&nbsp;"Today's Supreme Court decision affirms once and for all the jury's unanimous verdict that President Donald J. Trump sexually assaulted and defamed E. Jean Carroll," said Kaplan.&nbsp;"His multiple efforts to appeal that verdict have all failed, and today's ruling ends his quest to avoid accountability for his actions."&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-has-requested-a-meeting-trump-claims-meeting-in-doha-on-june-30-despite-denial-from-tehran-1782747856814">‘Iran has requested a meeting’: Trump claims meeting in Doha on June 30, despite denial from Tehran</a>&nbsp; The jury ordered Trump to pay $2 million in damages for sexual assault and another $3 million for defamatory remarks he made in 2022. An appeals court upheld that ruling in December 2024.&nbsp;In a separate defamation case before the federal civil court in New York, another jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million. That decision was also upheld on appeal.Several US media outlets reported at the end of May that the US Department of Justice had opened a criminal investigation targeting Carroll.

A federal jury in Manhattan found Trump liable for sexually assaulting former newspaper columnist E. Jean Carroll on May 9, 2023, and awarded her $5 million in damages.

The US Supreme Court on Monday (June 29) refused to hear President Donald Trump's appeal against a jury verdict that found him liable for sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll, leaving the $5 million judgment against him in place. The court declined to take up Trump's challenge as part of a series of rulings and did not provide any reason for its decision. What is the case? The case began with a federal lawsuit filed by Carroll in Manhattan, where she alleged that Trump sexually assaulted her inside the dressing room of a New York department store in 1996. Her defamation claims were linked to statements Trump made after completing his first term in office, when he dismissed her allegations as a "con job" and "hoax." On May 9, 2023, a federal civil court in Manhattan found Trump liable for sexually assaulting the former newspaper columnist and awarded Carroll $5 million in damages. Carroll, now 82, first made the allegation public in a book published in 2019. In it, she described what she considered to be a rape that took place 23 years earlier in a fitting room. Trump rejected the accusation at the time and called her a "nut job." Trump responded sharply after the Supreme Court declined to reconsider the jury's verdict. "Surprisingly, the Supreme Court declined to 'review' a Fake Case brought against me by a woman I never met (Decades-old celebrity photo line, standing with her husband, does not count!)," Trump wrote on social media. Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, welcomed the Supreme Court's decision. "Today's Supreme Court decision affirms once and for all the jury's unanimous verdict that President Donald J. Trump sexually assaulted and defamed E. Jean Carroll," said Kaplan. "His multiple efforts to appeal that verdict have all failed, and today's ruling ends his quest to avoid accountability for his actions." Also Read: ‘Iran has requested a meeting’: Trump claims meeting in Doha on June 30, despite denial from Tehran The jury ordered Trump to pay $2 million in damages for sexual assault and another $3 million for defamatory remarks he made in 2022. An appeals court upheld that ruling in December 2024. In a separate defamation case before the federal civil court in New York, another jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million. That decision was also upheld on appeal. Several US media outlets reported at the end of May that the US Department of Justice had opened a criminal investigation targeting Carroll.

A federal jury in Manhattan found Trump liable for sexually assaulting former newspaper columnist E. Jean Carroll on May 9, 2023, and awarded her $5 million in damages.

Trump loses top Court bid to overturn $5 million sexual assault verdict: What is the E. Jean Carroll case?

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he would be prepared to "cancel meetings" related to technical talks with Iran if Tehran refuses to allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), maintaining that the United States has already secured commitments on inspection access.&nbsp;Speaking to reporters after arriving in Pennsylvania for a visit to the Mack Trucks facility in Lehigh County, Trump brushed aside concerns about Iran's position on nuclear inspections.&nbsp;Responding to questions about whether inspectors from the UN nuclear watchdog would be allowed under a future agreement, Trump insisted that Tehran had already accepted the principle.&nbsp;"They're wrong. They're wrong. They're wrong. They know they're wrong. They told us inside, and we have it down 100 per cent for inspections. And if they were right, I'd cancel the meetings right now," Trump said.&nbsp;Asked when inspections could begin, he replied: "At the appropriate time. There's no rush, but they'll be on the ground at the appropriate time."&nbsp;Earlier in the day, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told reporters in Tehran that UN inspectors were not expected to visit nuclear facilities targeted by US strikes last year, rejecting remarks made a day earlier by US Vice President JD Vance.&nbsp;Trump's remarks came as differences between Washington and Tehran emerged over several issues, including access for inspectors, Iran's missile programme and the future management of the Strait of Hormuz.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/train-services-halted-across-germany-after-communication-system-failure-1782253198112">Train services resume across Germany after system failure brought network to standstill</a><h2>Rubio rejects Iranian tolls on the Strait of Hormuz</h2>Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington would oppose any attempt by Iran to impose tolls or fees on vessels using the strategic waterway.&nbsp;The United States and Iran recently signed a preliminary agreement aimed at ending the conflict and completed an initial round of negotiations in Switzerland. The two sides are now engaged in a 60-day period of talks focused on sanctions relief, Tehran's nuclear activities and the future of the Strait of Hormuz.&nbsp;Shipping through the waterway was severely disrupted after Iran imposed a blockade during the early stages of the war, pushing global oil prices higher. Traffic has since started recovering following the signing of the agreement.&nbsp;Iran has repeatedly maintained that it will retain authority over the strait.&nbsp;&nbsp;On Tuesday, Iran and Oman said in a joint statement that they would examine the management of the trade route and consider service charges, while reaffirming their sovereignty over the waterway.&nbsp;Speaking during a visit to the United Arab Emirates, Rubio rejected the idea of any fees on vessels using the route.&nbsp;"It's an international waterway. No country is allowed to charge tolls or fees on an international waterway," he said, adding that he believed "all the countries in this region would agree".&nbsp;Earlier, Iran's chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said the Strait of Hormuz "will never return" to the pre-war status quo, despite both sides agreeing to establish communication channels to keep the route open.

Tehran has rejected claims that discussions on its nuclear programme are underway and said it has not agreed to readmit International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors.

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he would be prepared to "cancel meetings" related to technical talks with Iran if Tehran refuses to allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), maintaining that the United States has already secured commitments on inspection access. Speaking to reporters after arriving in Pennsylvania for a visit to the Mack Trucks facility in Lehigh County, Trump brushed aside concerns about Iran's position on nuclear inspections. Responding to questions about whether inspectors from the UN nuclear watchdog would be allowed under a future agreement, Trump insisted that Tehran had already accepted the principle. "They're wrong. They're wrong. They're wrong. They know they're wrong. They told us inside, and we have it down 100 per cent for inspections. And if they were right, I'd cancel the meetings right now," Trump said. Asked when inspections could begin, he replied: "At the appropriate time. There's no rush, but they'll be on the ground at the appropriate time." Earlier in the day, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told reporters in Tehran that UN inspectors were not expected to visit nuclear facilities targeted by US strikes last year, rejecting remarks made a day earlier by US Vice President JD Vance. Trump's remarks came as differences between Washington and Tehran emerged over several issues, including access for inspectors, Iran's missile programme and the future management of the Strait of Hormuz. Also Read: Train services resume across Germany after system failure brought network to standstill Rubio rejects Iranian tolls on the Strait of Hormuz Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington would oppose any attempt by Iran to impose tolls or fees on vessels using the strategic waterway. The United States and Iran recently signed a preliminary agreement aimed at ending the conflict and completed an initial round of negotiations in Switzerland. The two sides are now engaged in a 60-day period of talks focused on sanctions relief, Tehran's nuclear activities and the future of the Strait of Hormuz. Shipping through the waterway was severely disrupted after Iran imposed a blockade during the early stages of the war, pushing global oil prices higher. Traffic has since started recovering following the signing of the agreement. Iran has repeatedly maintained that it will retain authority over the strait. On Tuesday, Iran and Oman said in a joint statement that they would examine the management of the trade route and consider service charges, while reaffirming their sovereignty over the waterway. Speaking during a visit to the United Arab Emirates, Rubio rejected the idea of any fees on vessels using the route. "It's an international waterway. No country is allowed to charge tolls or fees on an international waterway," he said, adding that he believed "all the countries in this region would agree". Earlier, Iran's chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said the Strait of Hormuz "will never return" to the pre-war status quo, despite both sides agreeing to establish communication channels to keep the route open.

Tehran has rejected claims that discussions on its nuclear programme are underway and said it has not agreed to readmit International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors.

Despite Iran's denial, Trump says Tehran agreed to nuclear inspections; Rubio rejects Hormuz tolls

A new book examining US President Donald Trump's second term claims that Vice President JD Vance once suggested India could take part in a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine, an idea that reportedly received a dismissive response from Trump.&nbsp;The claim appears in Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump, written by New York Times journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan. The book describes a January 30 meeting in the Oval Office, held just 10 days after Trump's inauguration, where senior officials discussed options for ending the Russia-Ukraine war.&nbsp;According to the authors, retired Army Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg, Trump's special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, presented a proposal titled “An America First Plan: Trump's Historic Peace Deal for Russia-Ukraine War.”&nbsp;Those attending the meeting included Trump, Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller.&nbsp;The proposal reportedly stated that while Washington would not formally recognise Russia's claims over occupied Ukrainian territory, Kyiv would also avoid trying to reclaim those areas through military action. It further suggested deploying peacekeeping personnel from France, Britain and the Netherlands to oversee a ceasefire.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/train-services-halted-across-germany-after-communication-system-failure-1782253198112">Train services halted across Germany after communication system failure</a>&nbsp;Vance reportedly questioned the wisdom of sending troops from NATO countries, arguing that such a move could provoke Russia and increase the risk of deeper US involvement in the conflict.&nbsp;When he asked whether countries outside Europe could take on that role, Waltz reportedly responded that support from non-European nations would be preferable.&nbsp;According to the book, “Vance suggested Saudi Arabia or India. Trump chuckled.”Trump reportedly dismissed the idea, saying, “The Indians won’t do that. They won’t pay for something like that.”&nbsp;The authors further claim that Trump mentioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi's positive relationship with him and his desire to visit, before adding that “the Indians do not ever pay for anything.”

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">So VP JD Vance Suggested Indian troops could be deployed in Ukraine as peace keeping mission &amp; President Trump then quipped that PM MODI really liked him, but Indians dont ever pay for anything. (This snippet is from a White House meeting in early 2025 - From Latest Book… <a href="https://t.co/UsW7lCfjOh">pic.twitter.com/UsW7lCfjOh</a>&mdash; Navroop Singh (@TheNavroopSingh) <a href="https://x.com/TheNavroopSingh/status/2069316718036713512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 23, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The discussion also touched on concerns about Moscow's response to foreign troops in Ukraine. The book says that a month later, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Rubio that Russia would regard troops from NATO countries in Ukraine as “unacceptable,” even if they operated under another banner.&nbsp;The authors also write that Trump repeatedly criticised Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during the meeting.&nbsp;“He’s a bad negotiator,” Trump reportedly said. “And he’s destroyed his country. But he was really good at getting stuff from the Biden administration.”

The book claims Trump spoke about his cordial ties with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the latter's desire to visit, then remarked that “the Indians do not ever pay for anything,” referring to troop deployment.

A new book examining US President Donald Trump's second term claims that Vice President JD Vance once suggested India could take part in a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine, an idea that reportedly received a dismissive response from Trump. The claim appears in Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump, written by New York Times journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan. The book describes a January 30 meeting in the Oval Office, held just 10 days after Trump's inauguration, where senior officials discussed options for ending the Russia-Ukraine war. According to the authors, retired Army Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg, Trump's special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, presented a proposal titled “An America First Plan: Trump's Historic Peace Deal for Russia-Ukraine War.” Those attending the meeting included Trump, Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller. The proposal reportedly stated that while Washington would not formally recognise Russia's claims over occupied Ukrainian territory, Kyiv would also avoid trying to reclaim those areas through military action. It further suggested deploying peacekeeping personnel from France, Britain and the Netherlands to oversee a ceasefire. Also Read: Train services halted across Germany after communication system failure Vance reportedly questioned the wisdom of sending troops from NATO countries, arguing that such a move could provoke Russia and increase the risk of deeper US involvement in the conflict. When he asked whether countries outside Europe could take on that role, Waltz reportedly responded that support from non-European nations would be preferable. According to the book, “Vance suggested Saudi Arabia or India. Trump chuckled.” Trump reportedly dismissed the idea, saying, “The Indians won’t do that. They won’t pay for something like that.” The authors further claim that Trump mentioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi's positive relationship with him and his desire to visit, before adding that “the Indians do not ever pay for anything.”

The book claims Trump spoke about his cordial ties with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the latter's desire to visit, then remarked that “the Indians do not ever pay for anything,” referring to troop deployment.

Vance proposed Indian troops for Ukraine, Trump replied ‘Indians won’t do that’: New book claims

US President Donald Trump on Monday congratulated Colombia's president-elect, Abelardo de la Espriella, following his narrow election victory, saying he looked forward to strengthening ties between the two countries.&nbsp;In a post on Truth Social, Trump highlighted his support for the conservative politician and expressed optimism about future cooperation.&nbsp;"It was my Great Honor to endorse him, and I look forward to working together to build a powerful relationship between Colombia and the United States of America, which will bring new levels of Greatness for both of our Countries!" Trump wrote.&nbsp;De la Espriella secured a tight victory in Sunday's runoff election, defeating leftist Senator Ivan Cepeda. He won 49.66 per cent of the vote against Cepeda's 48.70 per cent, bringing an end to Colombia's first left-wing government.<h2>De la Espriella promises tougher security policies</h2>The millionaire lawyer turned politician is set to take office in August and has pledged to move Colombia sharply to the right. His agenda includes building "mega-prisons," strengthening cooperation with the United States and adopting a tougher approach against drug trafficking and armed groups.&nbsp;"We are beginning a new era!" he said in his victory speech on Sunday night.De la Espriella has also proposed reducing the size of the state, reviewing Colombia's participation in international organisations, including the United Nations, and launching a bombing campaign against armed groups operating across the country.&nbsp;The president-elect, who holds dual US-Colombian citizenship and describes himself as a "Republican," has vowed to deepen security cooperation with Washington. He has pledged to bomb drug trafficking organisations, use herbicides to eradicate coca crops and allow US military bases on Colombian territory.&nbsp;His proposed "Plan Colombia II" takes its name from the multimillion-dollar agreement between Colombia and the United States in the 2000s that focused on combating drug cartels and leftist groups.&nbsp;"There will be no off-limits areas for the State, no criminals enjoying impunity," De la Espriella said.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-senate-passes-housing-affordability-bill-with-bipartisan-support-what-s-in-it-1782171803211">US Senate passes housing affordability bill with bipartisan support; what's in it?</a><h2>Relations are strained under Gustavo Petro</h2>Relations between Bogota and Washington became increasingly strained during the presidency of leftist leader Gustavo Petro. Petro engaged in public disputes with Trump and chose not to participate in the US president's "Shield of the Americas" anti-crime coalition.&nbsp;According to the report, the Trump administration applied both public and legal pressure on Petro's government. Measures included personal sanctions against Petro, the revocation of his US visa and scrutiny of the growing territorial influence of organised crime groups during his presidency.&nbsp;Tensions reached a new level during Colombia's 2026 presidential election when Trump publicly backed De la Espriella, issuing what was described as a "Complete and Total Endorsement" of the conservative candidate.

President-elect Abelardo de la Espriella, a dual US-Colombian citizen who identifies as a "Republican," has pledged closer security cooperation with Washington, including tougher measures against drug trafficking, coca cultivation and greater US military involvement.

US President Donald Trump on Monday congratulated Colombia's president-elect, Abelardo de la Espriella, following his narrow election victory, saying he looked forward to strengthening ties between the two countries. In a post on Truth Social, Trump highlighted his support for the conservative politician and expressed optimism about future cooperation. "It was my Great Honor to endorse him, and I look forward to working together to build a powerful relationship between Colombia and the United States of America, which will bring new levels of Greatness for both of our Countries!" Trump wrote. De la Espriella secured a tight victory in Sunday's runoff election, defeating leftist Senator Ivan Cepeda. He won 49.66 per cent of the vote against Cepeda's 48.70 per cent, bringing an end to Colombia's first left-wing government. De la Espriella promises tougher security policies The millionaire lawyer turned politician is set to take office in August and has pledged to move Colombia sharply to the right. His agenda includes building "mega-prisons," strengthening cooperation with the United States and adopting a tougher approach against drug trafficking and armed groups. "We are beginning a new era!" he said in his victory speech on Sunday night. De la Espriella has also proposed reducing the size of the state, reviewing Colombia's participation in international organisations, including the United Nations, and launching a bombing campaign against armed groups operating across the country. The president-elect, who holds dual US-Colombian citizenship and describes himself as a "Republican," has vowed to deepen security cooperation with Washington. He has pledged to bomb drug trafficking organisations, use herbicides to eradicate coca crops and allow US military bases on Colombian territory. His proposed "Plan Colombia II" takes its name from the multimillion-dollar agreement between Colombia and the United States in the 2000s that focused on combating drug cartels and leftist groups. "There will be no off-limits areas for the State, no criminals enjoying impunity," De la Espriella said. Also Read: US Senate passes housing affordability bill with bipartisan support; what's in it? Relations are strained under Gustavo Petro Relations between Bogota and Washington became increasingly strained during the presidency of leftist leader Gustavo Petro. Petro engaged in public disputes with Trump and chose not to participate in the US president's "Shield of the Americas" anti-crime coalition. According to the report, the Trump administration applied both public and legal pressure on Petro's government. Measures included personal sanctions against Petro, the revocation of his US visa and scrutiny of the growing territorial influence of organised crime groups during his presidency. Tensions reached a new level during Colombia's 2026 presidential election when Trump publicly backed De la Espriella, issuing what was described as a "Complete and Total Endorsement" of the conservative candidate.

President-elect Abelardo de la Espriella, a dual US-Colombian citizen who identifies as a "Republican," has pledged closer security cooperation with Washington, including tougher measures against drug trafficking, coca cultivation and greater US military involvement.

After months of tensions with Colombia, Trump welcomes his endorsed candidate as new president

The US Senate on Monday (June 22) approved a bipartisan housing bill aimed at reducing housing costs by encouraging new construction, easing permitting requirements and limiting the role of large investors in the housing market.&nbsp;The measure, known as the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, passed by an overwhelming 85 to 5 vote and now moves to the House of Representatives. If approved there, it will be sent to President Donald Trump for his signature.&nbsp;The legislation arrives as Democrats and Republicans prepare for the November midterm elections, with housing affordability expected to remain a major concern for voters. Several senators missed the vote because severe thunderstorms in the Washington area disrupted flights and led to a ground stop at Ronald Reagan National Airport.<h3>Limiting institutional investors</h3>One of the bill's most prominent provisions seeks to curb purchases of single-family homes by large institutional investors. Under the proposal, corporate investors that already own 350 or more properties would be barred from buying additional single-family houses.&nbsp;A key section of the legislation titled “Homes Are For People, Not Corporations” is designed to prevent families from being outbid by large investment firms in the housing market.&nbsp;The final agreement emerged after months of negotiations. The Senate had passed one version in March, while the House approved a different version in May. Lawmakers eventually reached a compromise after the Senate accepted several House-backed provisions and dropped a proposal requiring major investors owning or building at least 350 single-family homes to sell them after seven years.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/five-arrested-after-trump-threatens-10-year-jail-term-over-alleged-reflecting-pool-vandalism-1782170152541">Five arrested after Trump threatens 10-year jail term over alleged Reflecting Pool vandalism</a><h3>Incentives to build more homes</h3>The legislation also focuses on increasing housing supply through grants and funding programmes. It creates a competitive grant programme worth $200 million annually to reward cities and local governments that expand housing construction or reform restrictive zoning policies.&nbsp;The bill allows Community Development Block Grant funding to be used directly for building affordable housing and requires recipients to maintain a database of undeveloped publicly owned land.&nbsp;It also establishes a pilot grant programme to help local governments convert vacant commercial and industrial buildings into affordable homes.&nbsp;Another provision removes the federal "chassis rule" for manufactured housing. The requirement previously mandated that manufactured homes remain permanently attached to a steel frame with wheels and an axle. Supporters believe eliminating the rule could reduce construction costs for a new manufactured housing unit by as much as $10,000.&nbsp;The legislation also streamlines environmental reviews to accelerate construction projects and raises the Public Welfare Investment cap for banks from 15 per cent to 20 per cent, allowing greater investment in affordable housing and community development initiatives. In addition, it increases private financing limits under Section 8 to support the rehabilitation of older public housing properties.

One of the bill's most prominent provisions seeks to curb purchases of single-family homes by large institutional investors. Under the proposal, corporate investors that already own 350 or more properties would be barred from buying additional single-family houses.



The US Senate on Monday (June 22) approved a bipartisan housing bill aimed at reducing housing costs by encouraging new construction, easing permitting requirements and limiting the role of large investors in the housing market. The measure, known as the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, passed by an overwhelming 85 to 5 vote and now moves to the House of Representatives. If approved there, it will be sent to President Donald Trump for his signature. The legislation arrives as Democrats and Republicans prepare for the November midterm elections, with housing affordability expected to remain a major concern for voters. Several senators missed the vote because severe thunderstorms in the Washington area disrupted flights and led to a ground stop at Ronald Reagan National Airport. Limiting institutional investors One of the bill's most prominent provisions seeks to curb purchases of single-family homes by large institutional investors. Under the proposal, corporate investors that already own 350 or more properties would be barred from buying additional single-family houses. A key section of the legislation titled “Homes Are For People, Not Corporations” is designed to prevent families from being outbid by large investment firms in the housing market. The final agreement emerged after months of negotiations. The Senate had passed one version in March, while the House approved a different version in May. Lawmakers eventually reached a compromise after the Senate accepted several House-backed provisions and dropped a proposal requiring major investors owning or building at least 350 single-family homes to sell them after seven years. Also Read: Five arrested after Trump threatens 10-year jail term over alleged Reflecting Pool vandalism Incentives to build more homes The legislation also focuses on increasing housing supply through grants and funding programmes. It creates a competitive grant programme worth $200 million annually to reward cities and local governments that expand housing construction or reform restrictive zoning policies. The bill allows Community Development Block Grant funding to be used directly for building affordable housing and requires recipients to maintain a database of undeveloped publicly owned land. It also establishes a pilot grant programme to help local governments convert vacant commercial and industrial buildings into affordable homes. Another provision removes the federal "chassis rule" for manufactured housing. The requirement previously mandated that manufactured homes remain permanently attached to a steel frame with wheels and an axle. Supporters believe eliminating the rule could reduce construction costs for a new manufactured housing unit by as much as $10,000. The legislation also streamlines environmental reviews to accelerate construction projects and raises the Public Welfare Investment cap for banks from 15 per cent to 20 per cent, allowing greater investment in affordable housing and community development initiatives. In addition, it increases private financing limits under Section 8 to support the rehabilitation of older public housing properties.

One of the bill's most prominent provisions seeks to curb purchases of single-family homes by large institutional investors. Under the proposal, corporate investors that already own 350 or more properties would be barred from buying additional single-family houses.

US Senate passes housing affordability bill with bipartisan support; what's in it?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday (Jun 21) addressed his relationship with US President Donald Trump. Rejecting the claims suggesting that US President Donald Trump influences his decisions or that he controls the Republican, he insisted that both leaders independently make decisions in the interest of their nations. This comes amid speculations about whether they influence each other’s decisions over the Iran war.Speaking at the JNS Summit in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said, “In the United States, they say that President Trump does everything that I ask him to do. And in Israel, they say that I do everything he wants me to do. Well, neither is true.”“We’re leaders of independent and proud countries. We stand for our interests. I stand for the interests of Israel and for its security,” he added.The Israeli leader acknowledged that while Trump and he have the same view on most issues, they sometimes have disagreements. Despite this, they respect each other’s sovereignty and leadership, he stressed.“Often we see eye to eye. Sometimes we don’t. But we respect each other’s sovereignty and leadership and commitment to our people,” he said.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/lebanon-will-be-main-topic-of-discussion-tehran-says-ahead-of-us-iran-talks-in-switzerland-1782034242381">‘Lebanon will be main topic of discussion’: Tehran says ahead of US-Iran talks in Switzerland</a><h2>Troops in Lebanon to remain ‘as long as necessary’</h2>Speaking about the conflict in Lebanon, Netanyahu said that Israeli troops will stay in southern Lebanon as long as needed, despite the ceasefire reached under the US-Iran deal. He also vowed that he would not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.“We will remain in the security zone in southern Lebanon for as long as necessary to protect the cherished residents of the north and all the citizens of Israel... Nothing will alter that commitment,” he said.He continued, “And with regard to Iran: whatever political developments may unfold, I will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. As long as I serve as prime minister of Israel, that will not happen.”Watch | US-Iran Peace Talks: US Vice President On His Connection With India &amp; Pakistan<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-peace-talks-us-vice-president-on-his-connection-with-india-pakistan-1782096108504/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-peace-talks-us-vice-president-on-his-connection-with-india-pakistan-1782096108504/embed</a>Netanyahu also reiterated that the war in the Middle East had achieved Israel’s key goal of preventing Iran from possessing a nuclear weapon.“We prevented Iran from carrying out a plan to annihilate us and today they would have had an atomic bomb to do so,” the Israeli leader said. “We prevented that from happening. We removed the existential danger. Had we not acted... Iran would have had atomic bombs and let me tell you something, they would have used them.”“That’s what we prevented,” he said.Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.

Israeli PM Netanyahu rejected claims that US President Donald Trump influences his decisions, saying both leaders act independently. He also vowed to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and keep troops in Lebanon.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday (Jun 21) addressed his relationship with US President Donald Trump. Rejecting the claims suggesting that US President Donald Trump influences his decisions or that he controls the Republican, he insisted that both leaders independently make decisions in the interest of their nations. This comes amid speculations about whether they influence each other’s decisions over the Iran war. Speaking at the JNS Summit in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said, “In the United States, they say that President Trump does everything that I ask him to do. And in Israel, they say that I do everything he wants me to do. Well, neither is true.” “We’re leaders of independent and proud countries. We stand for our interests. I stand for the interests of Israel and for its security,” he added. The Israeli leader acknowledged that while Trump and he have the same view on most issues, they sometimes have disagreements. Despite this, they respect each other’s sovereignty and leadership, he stressed. “Often we see eye to eye. Sometimes we don’t. But we respect each other’s sovereignty and leadership and commitment to our people,” he said. Also read | ‘Lebanon will be main topic of discussion’: Tehran says ahead of US-Iran talks in Switzerland Troops in Lebanon to remain ‘as long as necessary’ Speaking about the conflict in Lebanon, Netanyahu said that Israeli troops will stay in southern Lebanon as long as needed, despite the ceasefire reached under the US-Iran deal. He also vowed that he would not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. “We will remain in the security zone in southern Lebanon for as long as necessary to protect the cherished residents of the north and all the citizens of Israel... Nothing will alter that commitment,” he said. He continued, “And with regard to Iran: whatever political developments may unfold, I will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. As long as I serve as prime minister of Israel, that will not happen.” Watch | US-Iran Peace Talks: US Vice President On His Connection With India & Pakistan https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-peace-talks-us-vice-president-on-his-connection-with-india-pakistan-1782096108504/embed Netanyahu also reiterated that the war in the Middle East had achieved Israel’s key goal of preventing Iran from possessing a nuclear weapon. “We prevented Iran from carrying out a plan to annihilate us and today they would have had an atomic bomb to do so,” the Israeli leader said. “We prevented that from happening. We removed the existential danger. Had we not acted... Iran would have had atomic bombs and let me tell you something, they would have used them.” “That’s what we prevented,” he said. Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.

Israeli PM Netanyahu rejected claims that US President Donald Trump influences his decisions, saying both leaders act independently. He also vowed to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and keep troops in Lebanon.

‘I stand for interests of Israel’: Netanyahu rejects claims Trump influences his decisions amid Iran war

California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday accused US President Donald Trump of using the Justice Department to pursue what he described as a politically motivated investigation against him and his family.&nbsp;Newsom, a Democrat widely seen as a potential contender for the White House in 2028, claimed federal investigators had been examining his personal and financial affairs despite finding no evidence of wrongdoing.&nbsp;According to Newsom, federal agents have questioned friends and associates linked to him and his wife and reviewed years of documents as part of the inquiry.&nbsp;In a post on X, Newsom said, "Today, my wife &amp; I joined Donald Trump's hit list. He has directed his Department of Justice to investigate us. They have not found a crime they are simply trying to find one".

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Today, my wife &amp; I joined Donald Trump’s hit list. He has directed his Department of Justice to investigate us. They have not found a crime - they are simply trying to find one. He isn&#39;t coming after me because of mean tweets, but because I am considering running for President.… <a href="https://t.co/tVYk3WUvO8">pic.twitter.com/tVYk3WUvO8</a>&mdash; Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) <a href="https://x.com/GavinNewsom/status/2066585778982166808?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 15, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The California governor alleged that the investigation was driven by political considerations rather than any criminal conduct.&nbsp;"He isn't coming after me because of mean tweets, but because I am considering running for President," Newsom said.&nbsp;The accusations came after reports that multiple investigations involving Newsom are underway, including one focused on the finances of his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom.<h2>Newsom links probe to possible presidential bid</h2>Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-claims-strait-of-hormuz-will-be-toll-free-iran-says-ships-will-pay-maritime-service-fees-what-s-really-in-the-peace-deal-1781573888112">US claims Strait of Hormuz will be toll-free. Iran says ships will pay maritime service fees. What's really in the peace deal?</a>&nbsp;Newsom has emerged as one of Trump's most vocal critics and has frequently targeted the president through social media posts and public statements.&nbsp;In a video message, he repeated his allegation that the investigation was connected to speculation about a possible presidential campaign.&nbsp;"Donald Trump isn't just coming after me because of my mean tweets," Newsom said in the video. "He's coming after me because I am considering running for president."&nbsp;He further claimed that individuals who publicly challenge Trump often become targets of political retaliation.&nbsp;"One by one, anyone who has challenged Donald Trump has ended up on his hit list, the governor said. Without providing further details, Newsom accused Trump of misusing government institutions against political opponents.&nbsp;He also launched a sharp attack on the president, calling him "the most corrupt President in American history."&nbsp;According to Newsom, Trump resents being publicly challenged and criticised.&nbsp;

Newsom alleged that Trump targeted him and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, with a probe because he is considering running for president.

California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday accused US President Donald Trump of using the Justice Department to pursue what he described as a politically motivated investigation against him and his family. Newsom, a Democrat widely seen as a potential contender for the White House in 2028, claimed federal investigators had been examining his personal and financial affairs despite finding no evidence of wrongdoing. According to Newsom, federal agents have questioned friends and associates linked to him and his wife and reviewed years of documents as part of the inquiry. In a post on X, Newsom said, "Today, my wife & I joined Donald Trump's hit list. He has directed his Department of Justice to investigate us. They have not found a crime they are simply trying to find one".

Newsom alleged that Trump targeted him and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, with a probe because he is considering running for president.

California Governor accuses Trump of ordering 'politically motivated' DOJ probe against him and his wife

US President Donald Trump is celebrating his 80th birthday on Sunday (June 14) and he has made sure that he makes it a spectacle. A UFC-style cage fighting event has been organised on the South Lawn of the White House. Thousands of spectators will take part in the celebration as it comes as America's oldest president faces political pressure over several major issues, including the Iran war, inflation concerns and questions around his age and health. Stating that he would sign the peace agreement with Iran on Sunday, Trump has already hinted that he would give the world a birthday gift by ending the war he himself started in February 2026. Earlier, he also said that Gulf nations would have to be a part of the Abraham Accords if he signs a peace deal with Iran. As Trump turns 80, and turns the pages of his presidency, he appears determined to cement his place in West Asia's history.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/modi-trump-meet-will-g7-pave-the-way-for-an-india-us-trade-breakthrough-1781420074420">Modi-Trump meet: Will G7 pave the way for an India-US trade breakthrough?</a><h2>The Iran war</h2>After coming to power, Trump made it clear that Iran was his enemy and within six months, he launched an attack on the country, claiming to have “obliterated” the nuclear sites within the country. He has maintained that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. As he completed a year in office, he launched a war against Iran alongside Israel, killing Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The war has continued for more than 100 days, leading to global energy crisis. As the world stares at the uncertainty of the war, Trump has now said that he has ended the war and peace deal will be signed on Sunday. Whether or not he has achieved his war goals remains to be seen, but for now, he has put the world in mess and is attempting hard to portray it as a victory - right on his birthday.&nbsp;&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/we-ended-the-war-today-trump-s-big-declaration-after-halting-iran-strikes-what-s-really-happening-1781229576328">'We ended the war today': Trump's BIG declaration after halting Iran strikes</a><h2>The Israel bonhomie&nbsp;</h2>The US and Israel bonhomie dates back to the very founding of Israel in 1948. With Trump, the relationship has just gotten better. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have been touted as a team, united by a shared hardline stance on Iran, strong support for Israel's security priorities, and a willingness to challenge longstanding diplomatic conventions in the region. At an individual level, both leaders, for their own political goals in their countries, have attempted to show that it is they who call the shots. They have been successful in pressuring each other in several matters, including the war in Iran. More recently, Trump has even made an expletive-filled call to Netanyahu, while the Israeli PM has vowed not to stop his war on Hezbollah even if the US signs a peace deal with Iran. Recent differences aside, Trump and Netanyahu have largely been on the same page, with Trump using the Iran war in favour of Israel to pressure Muslim nations to normalise ties with Israel and officially recognise the nation. Muslim nations have been at loggerheads with Israel due to the Palestine issue.<h2>The Syrian truce&nbsp;</h2>In what can be easily termed as the most unprecedented diplomatic alliance, Trump has forged a bond with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa after the Syrian civil war ended, leading to the flight of Bashar al-Assad. The United States not only removed al-Sharaa from its terrorism blacklist and but the country also extended waivers on punitive enforcement of the 2019 Caesar Act and lifted heavy economic sanctions against Syria. Sharaa became first Syrian leader to visit the White House as Trump hosted him and called him a ‘tough attractive guy.’<h2>The Qatari connection&nbsp;</h2>Trump's Qatar links have been under scrutiny as the leader undertook a trip throughout West Asia few months into his second term. During that trip, the Qatari royal family gifted the Trump administration an ultra-luxurious Boeing 747-8 jetliner valued at $400 million. Trump accepted the aircraft as an interim or temporary replacement for the aging 40-year-old Air Force One. The gift ignited a political furor. Democrats and some Republicans flagged it as a potential violation of the US Constitution's Emoluments Clause, calling it a massive foreign “bribe.” Trump defended the transaction on Truth Social, calling it a "great gesture" that saves American taxpayers money. Qatar continues to serve as the key diplomatic bridge between Washington and regional actors and hosts the vital Al Udeid Air Base— the forward command center for U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). Additionally, Trump secured a massive $96 billion defense and commercial deal with Qatar for over 200 Boeing aircraft. Several media reports also point at links between Qatar and Trump's family business deals.<h2>Trump's bond with Bahrain and Kuwait&nbsp;</h2>For Trump, Kuwait and Bahrain represented both steadfast security partners and increasingly independent Gulf states. Following Iranian retaliatory attacks that struck targets in both countries, Trump publicly thanked Kuwait and Bahrain—along with Saudi Arabia and the UAE—and pledged that the United States "will not let them get hurt." Yet the limits of Washington's influence were also on display when Kuwait and Bahrain joined Qatar and Saudi Arabia in refusing to grant US forces access to their airspace and military bases for a regional military initiative known as "Project Freedom." The move underscored a growing willingness among Gulf nations to assert their sovereignty and avoid being drawn into broader regional conflicts without a clear regional consensus.

US President Donald Trump is celebrating his 80th birthday with a UFC-style cage fighting event on the White House South Lawn. The unusual spectacle comes as he faces scrutiny over Iran tensions, inflation concerns, and questions about his age and health.

US President Donald Trump is celebrating his 80th birthday on Sunday (June 14) and he has made sure that he makes it a spectacle. A UFC-style cage fighting event has been organised on the South Lawn of the White House. Thousands of spectators will take part in the celebration as it comes as America's oldest president faces political pressure over several major issues, including the Iran war, inflation concerns and questions around his age and health. Stating that he would sign the peace agreement with Iran on Sunday, Trump has already hinted that he would give the world a birthday gift by ending the war he himself started in February 2026. Earlier, he also said that Gulf nations would have to be a part of the Abraham Accords if he signs a peace deal with Iran. As Trump turns 80, and turns the pages of his presidency, he appears determined to cement his place in West Asia's history. Also Read: Modi-Trump meet: Will G7 pave the way for an India-US trade breakthrough? The Iran war After coming to power, Trump made it clear that Iran was his enemy and within six months, he launched an attack on the country, claiming to have “obliterated” the nuclear sites within the country. He has maintained that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. As he completed a year in office, he launched a war against Iran alongside Israel, killing Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The war has continued for more than 100 days, leading to global energy crisis. As the world stares at the uncertainty of the war, Trump has now said that he has ended the war and peace deal will be signed on Sunday. Whether or not he has achieved his war goals remains to be seen, but for now, he has put the world in mess and is attempting hard to portray it as a victory - right on his birthday. Also Read: 'We ended the war today': Trump's BIG declaration after halting Iran strikes The Israel bonhomie The US and Israel bonhomie dates back to the very founding of Israel in 1948. With Trump, the relationship has just gotten better. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have been touted as a team, united by a shared hardline stance on Iran, strong support for Israel's security priorities, and a willingness to challenge longstanding diplomatic conventions in the region. At an individual level, both leaders, for their own political goals in their countries, have attempted to show that it is they who call the shots. They have been successful in pressuring each other in several matters, including the war in Iran. More recently, Trump has even made an expletive-filled call to Netanyahu, while the Israeli PM has vowed not to stop his war on Hezbollah even if the US signs a peace deal with Iran. Recent differences aside, Trump and Netanyahu have largely been on the same page, with Trump using the Iran war in favour of Israel to pressure Muslim nations to normalise ties with Israel and officially recognise the nation. Muslim nations have been at loggerheads with Israel due to the Palestine issue. The Syrian truce In what can be easily termed as the most unprecedented diplomatic alliance, Trump has forged a bond with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa after the Syrian civil war ended, leading to the flight of Bashar al-Assad. The United States not only removed al-Sharaa from its terrorism blacklist and but the country also extended waivers on punitive enforcement of the 2019 Caesar Act and lifted heavy economic sanctions against Syria. Sharaa became first Syrian leader to visit the White House as Trump hosted him and called him a ‘tough attractive guy.’ The Qatari connection Trump's Qatar links have been under scrutiny as the leader undertook a trip throughout West Asia few months into his second term. During that trip, the Qatari royal family gifted the Trump administration an ultra-luxurious Boeing 747-8 jetliner valued at $400 million. Trump accepted the aircraft as an interim or temporary replacement for the aging 40-year-old Air Force One. The gift ignited a political furor. Democrats and some Republicans flagged it as a potential violation of the US Constitution's Emoluments Clause, calling it a massive foreign “bribe.” Trump defended the transaction on Truth Social, calling it a "great gesture" that saves American taxpayers money. Qatar continues to serve as the key diplomatic bridge between Washington and regional actors and hosts the vital Al Udeid Air Base— the forward command center for U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). Additionally, Trump secured a massive $96 billion defense and commercial deal with Qatar for over 200 Boeing aircraft. Several media reports also point at links between Qatar and Trump's family business deals. Trump's bond with Bahrain and Kuwait For Trump, Kuwait and Bahrain represented both steadfast security partners and increasingly independent Gulf states. Following Iranian retaliatory attacks that struck targets in both countries, Trump publicly thanked Kuwait and Bahrain—along with Saudi Arabia and the UAE—and pledged that the United States "will not let them get hurt." Yet the limits of Washington's influence were also on display when Kuwait and Bahrain joined Qatar and Saudi Arabia in refusing to grant US forces access to their airspace and military bases for a regional military initiative known as "Project Freedom." The move underscored a growing willingness among Gulf nations to assert their sovereignty and avoid being drawn into broader regional conflicts without a clear regional consensus.

US President Donald Trump is celebrating his 80th birthday with a UFC-style cage fighting event on the White House South Lawn. The unusual spectacle comes as he faces scrutiny over Iran tensions, inflation concerns, and questions about his age and health.

Trump turns 80: From Iran war to Syrian truce - how the US president wants West Asia to remember him | WION Decodes

US President Donald Trump on Monday nominated his former personal lawyer, Todd Blanche, to serve as attorney general on a permanent basis, setting the stage for what could be a contentious confirmation process in the Senate.&nbsp;Blanche, 51, has been serving as acting attorney general since Pam Bondi left the position in April. During his tenure, he has overseen several indictments targeting individuals viewed as political opponents of Trump.&nbsp;The White House confirmed on Monday that Blanche's nomination had been formally sent to the Senate. The move follows Trump's remarks at a White House Rose Garden dinner last week, where he informed guests of his intention to nominate Blanche for the role.<h2>Senate approval remains uncertain</h2>Despite the nomination, it remains unclear whether Blanche can secure enough support in the Senate, which must approve senior administration appointments, including the attorney general.&nbsp;His nomination comes at a politically sensitive time for the Trump administration. Republicans have recently faced a series of setbacks as Trump's approval ratings have come under pressure over economic concerns and the Iran war, with midterm elections approaching in five months.&nbsp;Lawmakers have also raised concerns over Blanche's support for a proposed $1.8 billion fund that was intended to compensate Trump allies who faced prosecution during former President Joe Biden's administration. The administration later abandoned the proposal.&nbsp;The initiative drew criticism from both Republicans and Democrats. Among the most vocal critics was Senator Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/bibi-you-will-be-on-your-own-trump-s-stern-warning-to-netanyahu-against-renewed-iran-conflict-1780954671256">'Bibi, you will be on your own': Trump's stern warning to Netanyahu against renewed Iran conflict</a>&nbsp;"Donald Trump has been engaged in the most corrupt enterprise in the history of the Presidency. Todd Blanche apparently has not noticed," Durbin said.&nbsp;Before joining the administration, Blanche was a member of Trump's legal team during the New York criminal trial involving allegations of hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.&nbsp;He also represented Trump in two federal cases brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith involving allegations related to classified documents and efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.&nbsp;Blanche's nomination comes months after Trump removed former attorney general Pam Bondi following tensions over her handling of Justice Department files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Blanche's nomination follows the departure of former attorney general Pam Bondi, whom Trump removed after disagreements over her handling of Justice Department records linked to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

US President Donald Trump on Monday nominated his former personal lawyer, Todd Blanche, to serve as attorney general on a permanent basis, setting the stage for what could be a contentious confirmation process in the Senate. Blanche, 51, has been serving as acting attorney general since Pam Bondi left the position in April. During his tenure, he has overseen several indictments targeting individuals viewed as political opponents of Trump. The White House confirmed on Monday that Blanche's nomination had been formally sent to the Senate. The move follows Trump's remarks at a White House Rose Garden dinner last week, where he informed guests of his intention to nominate Blanche for the role. Senate approval remains uncertain Despite the nomination, it remains unclear whether Blanche can secure enough support in the Senate, which must approve senior administration appointments, including the attorney general. His nomination comes at a politically sensitive time for the Trump administration. Republicans have recently faced a series of setbacks as Trump's approval ratings have come under pressure over economic concerns and the Iran war, with midterm elections approaching in five months. Lawmakers have also raised concerns over Blanche's support for a proposed $1.8 billion fund that was intended to compensate Trump allies who faced prosecution during former President Joe Biden's administration. The administration later abandoned the proposal. The initiative drew criticism from both Republicans and Democrats. Among the most vocal critics was Senator Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Also Read: 'Bibi, you will be on your own': Trump's stern warning to Netanyahu against renewed Iran conflict "Donald Trump has been engaged in the most corrupt enterprise in the history of the Presidency. Todd Blanche apparently has not noticed," Durbin said. Before joining the administration, Blanche was a member of Trump's legal team during the New York criminal trial involving allegations of hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. He also represented Trump in two federal cases brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith involving allegations related to classified documents and efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Blanche's nomination comes months after Trump removed former attorney general Pam Bondi following tensions over her handling of Justice Department files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Blanche's nomination follows the departure of former attorney general Pam Bondi, whom Trump removed after disagreements over her handling of Justice Department records linked to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump nominates his former lawyer Todd Blanche as US attorney general, Senate fight looms

US President Donald Trump warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against reigniting conflict with Iran, cautioning that Israel could find itself isolated if it returned to war.&nbsp;"I said, 'Bibi, you better be careful, or you will be on your own very soon,'" Axios quoted Trump as saying in an interview.&nbsp;Trump said several countries in the region had urged Washington to prevent further escalation and push Israel towards restraint.&nbsp;"These countries were very concerned. They love the deal that we have been negotiating," Trump said, adding that five regional nations had contacted him on the issue.&nbsp;&nbsp;He also claimed that Iran had conveyed through messages on Monday morning that it was prepared to halt attacks if Israel did the same.&nbsp;"They called us and said that they are not doing any more attacks and asked us to tell Israel not to do any more attacks," Trump told Axios.&nbsp;The US President said his conversation with Netanyahu played a key role in stopping a planned Israeli strike against Iran. Referring to Sunday's developments, he claimed Israel had informed Washington only at the last moment.&nbsp;"They were already on their way. But eventually I had [the Israeli strike] limited," Trump said.&nbsp;He further reiterated that Tehran remains interested in reaching an agreement with Washington and suggested a deal could be concluded soon.&nbsp;"It is going to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and stop enrichment. It is a phenomenal deal. We are getting everything we wanted," Trump claimed.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-threatens-to-turn-naval-blockade-into-another-defeat-for-us-1780950778198">Iran threatens to turn naval blockade into ‘another defeat’ for US</a>&nbsp;Iran's parliamentary speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, pushed back against Trump's remarks, saying the US President's recent comments regarding the draft memorandum of understanding did not reflect what had been agreed upon.&nbsp;"We have no trust in the other side," Ghalibaf said.<h2>Events leading up to the ceasefire</h2>The statements come after a two-day military escalation disrupted a fragile regional truce. The crisis began with an Israeli airstrike in Beirut that killed Hezbollah operatives and was followed by large-scale ballistic missile attacks launched by Iran against Israel.&nbsp;Despite Trump's public calls for restraint, Israel carried out retaliatory strikes inside Iran early on Monday, targeting air defence systems, missile production facilities and the Karun petrochemical plant.&nbsp;The confrontation ended later on Monday after intensive US efforts helped secure a conditional ceasefire. Iran halted what it described as warning strikes, while Netanyahu agreed to suspend further operations, while warning that any future Iranian aggression would be met with overwhelming force.&nbsp;(Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.)

Trump said five countries in the region urged Washington to prevent further escalation, as they supported the deal being negotiated.

US President Donald Trump warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against reigniting conflict with Iran, cautioning that Israel could find itself isolated if it returned to war. "I said, 'Bibi, you better be careful, or you will be on your own very soon,'" Axios quoted Trump as saying in an interview. Trump said several countries in the region had urged Washington to prevent further escalation and push Israel towards restraint. "These countries were very concerned. They love the deal that we have been negotiating," Trump said, adding that five regional nations had contacted him on the issue. He also claimed that Iran had conveyed through messages on Monday morning that it was prepared to halt attacks if Israel did the same. "They called us and said that they are not doing any more attacks and asked us to tell Israel not to do any more attacks," Trump told Axios. The US President said his conversation with Netanyahu played a key role in stopping a planned Israeli strike against Iran. Referring to Sunday's developments, he claimed Israel had informed Washington only at the last moment. "They were already on their way. But eventually I had [the Israeli strike] limited," Trump said. He further reiterated that Tehran remains interested in reaching an agreement with Washington and suggested a deal could be concluded soon. "It is going to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and stop enrichment. It is a phenomenal deal. We are getting everything we wanted," Trump claimed. Also Read: Iran threatens to turn naval blockade into ‘another defeat’ for US Iran's parliamentary speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, pushed back against Trump's remarks, saying the US President's recent comments regarding the draft memorandum of understanding did not reflect what had been agreed upon. "We have no trust in the other side," Ghalibaf said. Events leading up to the ceasefire The statements come after a two-day military escalation disrupted a fragile regional truce. The crisis began with an Israeli airstrike in Beirut that killed Hezbollah operatives and was followed by large-scale ballistic missile attacks launched by Iran against Israel. Despite Trump's public calls for restraint, Israel carried out retaliatory strikes inside Iran early on Monday, targeting air defence systems, missile production facilities and the Karun petrochemical plant. The confrontation ended later on Monday after intensive US efforts helped secure a conditional ceasefire. Iran halted what it described as warning strikes, while Netanyahu agreed to suspend further operations, while warning that any future Iranian aggression would be met with overwhelming force. (Disclaimer: WION takes utmost care to accurately and responsibly report ongoing conflicts in West Asia involving Israel, Iran, the US, Gulf nations and non-state actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Islamic State, and others. Claims and counterclaims, disinformation and misinformation are being made online and offline. Given this context, WION cannot independently verify the authenticity of all statements, social media posts, photos and videos.)

Trump said five countries in the region urged Washington to prevent further escalation, as they supported the deal being negotiated.

'Bibi, you will be on your own': Trump's stern warning to Netanyahu against renewed Iran conflict

A federal judge on Monday struck down the $100,000 fee that US President Donald Trump had imposed last year on new H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers, concluding that it constituted an unlawful tax that Congress never authorised.&nbsp;US District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston issued the ruling in a lawsuit filed by 20 Democratic state attorneys general challenging a fee Trump announced in September that dramatically raised the cost of obtaining H-1B visas.&nbsp;The ⁠H-1B programme offers 65,000 visas annually, with another 20,000 visas for workers with advanced degrees, approved for three to six years. Earlier, employers seeking a visa for a foreign worker typically paid about $2,000 to $5,000 in fees depending on various factors.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/israeli-strikes-made-iran-stop-attacks-fight-against-tehran-hezbollah-not-over-netanyahu-1780939147844">Israeli strikes made Iran stop attacks, fight against Tehran, Hezbollah ‘not over’: Netanyahu</a>&nbsp;The fees hike has discouraged H-1B visa requests, according to court filings. As of February 15, US Citizenship and Immigration Services had received just 85 payments ⁠of the $100,000 fee, the administration said in a March filing.&nbsp;However, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary, Markwayne Mullin, told a Senate panel recently that more than 200,000 applicants seeking H-1B visas to work in the US paid $100,000 for expedited processing during fiscal year 2026.&nbsp;The administration argued that the fee constituted a monetary penalty that the president had lawful authority to impose under federal immigration law to restrict the entry of ⁠certain foreign nationals. Trump administration officials projected it as an initiative to encourage companies to hire Americans instead.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/eu-sanctions-irgc-navy-unit-2-iranians-over-crippling-strait-of-hormuz-blockade-1780933198425">EU sanctions IRGC Navy unit, 2 Iranians over crippling Strait of Hormuz blockade</a>&nbsp;The Trump administration contended that the judge had no authority to get involved in the visa fee dispute. The Justice Department claimed Trump’s action was unreviewable for multiple reasons and the judge should toss the states’ case.&nbsp;But Sorokin, who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama, concluded that the fee was not a penalty but a tax that ⁠the Republican president lacked any authorisation from Congress to issue.“Here, the substance and application of the $100,000 payment reveal that it is ⁠a tax, regardless of what the payment is called,” he wrote.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-announces-end-of-military-operations-against-israel-warns-harsher-action-if-lebanon-attacked-again-1780925146328">Iran announces end of military operations against Israel, warns ‘harsher’ action if Lebanon attacked again</a>&nbsp;The president had dramatically raised the cost of visas for highly skilled workers in an executive order last year.&nbsp;On June 3, Mullin said the DHS has the authority to waive a new $100,000 H-1B visa fee in certain cases, offering potential relief to employers facing high recruitment costs.&nbsp;&nbsp;Speaking at his first Senate budget hearing as DHS secretary, Mullin also said the department can consider fee waivers on a case-by-case basis after Senator Susan Collins of Maine pointed out that a rural hospital had to pay the fee to hire a surgeon from abroad after failing to find a qualified US candidate. “We do have some authority and flexibility to be able to waive some of this on a case by case,” Mullin said.

US District Judge Leo Sorokin, who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama, concluded that the $100,000 fee for H1-B visa was not a penalty but a tax that ⁠the Republican president lacked any authorisation from Congress to issue.

A federal judge on Monday struck down the $100,000 fee that US President Donald Trump had imposed last year on new H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers, concluding that it constituted an unlawful tax that Congress never authorised. US District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston issued the ruling in a lawsuit filed by 20 Democratic state attorneys general challenging a fee Trump announced in September that dramatically raised the cost of obtaining H-1B visas. The ⁠H-1B programme offers 65,000 visas annually, with another 20,000 visas for workers with advanced degrees, approved for three to six years. Earlier, employers seeking a visa for a foreign worker typically paid about $2,000 to $5,000 in fees depending on various factors. Also Read: Israeli strikes made Iran stop attacks, fight against Tehran, Hezbollah ‘not over’: Netanyahu The fees hike has discouraged H-1B visa requests, according to court filings. As of February 15, US Citizenship and Immigration Services had received just 85 payments ⁠of the $100,000 fee, the administration said in a March filing. However, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary, Markwayne Mullin, told a Senate panel recently that more than 200,000 applicants seeking H-1B visas to work in the US paid $100,000 for expedited processing during fiscal year 2026. The administration argued that the fee constituted a monetary penalty that the president had lawful authority to impose under federal immigration law to restrict the entry of ⁠certain foreign nationals. Trump administration officials projected it as an initiative to encourage companies to hire Americans instead. Also Read: EU sanctions IRGC Navy unit, 2 Iranians over crippling Strait of Hormuz blockade The Trump administration contended that the judge had no authority to get involved in the visa fee dispute. The Justice Department claimed Trump’s action was unreviewable for multiple reasons and the judge should toss the states’ case. But Sorokin, who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama, concluded that the fee was not a penalty but a tax that ⁠the Republican president lacked any authorisation from Congress to issue. “Here, the substance and application of the $100,000 payment reveal that it is ⁠a tax, regardless of what the payment is called,” he wrote. Also Read: Iran announces end of military operations against Israel, warns ‘harsher’ action if Lebanon attacked again The president had dramatically raised the cost of visas for highly skilled workers in an executive order last year. On June 3, Mullin said the DHS has the authority to waive a new $100,000 H-1B visa fee in certain cases, offering potential relief to employers facing high recruitment costs. Speaking at his first Senate budget hearing as DHS secretary, Mullin also said the department can consider fee waivers on a case-by-case basis after Senator Susan Collins of Maine pointed out that a rural hospital had to pay the fee to hire a surgeon from abroad after failing to find a qualified US candidate. “We do have some authority and flexibility to be able to waive some of this on a case by case,” Mullin said.

US District Judge Leo Sorokin, who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama, concluded that the $100,000 fee for H1-B visa was not a penalty but a tax that ⁠the Republican president lacked any authorisation from Congress to issue.

Federal judge rules Trump’s $100,000 fee for H-1B visas unlawful, strikes it down