White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller raised eyebrows this week after telling Latin American military leaders they effectively have permission to ignore legal advice while confronting drug cartels.

Speaking Thursday at the Americas Counter-Cartel Conference, Miller argued that criminal justice tools alone cannot defeat powerful trafficking organizations and instead called for beefing up military force.

“[What] we have learned after decades of effort is that there is not a criminal justice solution to the cartel problem,” Miller said. While acknowledging that law enforcement is required in some situations, he added, “But just as we fought al-Qaida and fought ISIS with the tip of a very lethal sphere, the reason why this is a conference with military leadership, and not a conference of lawyers, is because these organizations can only be defeated with military power.”

Speaking to a group of Latin American military leaders, the senior Trump adviser then took aim at lawyers in their own governments.

“I see some heads nodding up front because they understand you’re dealing with a lot of lawyers in your own country, I’m sure,” he said. “You have my permission not to listen to them.”

The comments drew criticism from legal and political observers who blasted Miller’s “strongman’s” worldview.

“At the heart of Miller’s pitch was the idea that it was necessary to combat drug cartels, not through law enforcement techniques or border control, but rather by using deadly military force,” MS Now producer and political commentator Steve Benen wrote in a blog post Friday.

“When Donald Trump’s most controversial aide starts advising officials not to listen too much to attorneys, it’s best not to look away,” he concluded.

Prior to Donald Trump's attack on Iran, which has grown into a war with no end in sight, there is no indication that the White House alerted the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which, since its founding, has been tasked with preventing retaliatory attacks in the US.

Appearing on MS NOW with host Anna Cabrera, former DHS chief of staff Miles Taylor claimed that, from what he has heard from staffers at the agency under now-fired DHS head Kristi Noem, they all were kept in the dark.

Brought on to talk about Noem’s ouster and the selection of Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Ok) to replace her, Taylor instead warned that the county is now at risk after the way Noem, with Trump’s blessing, has changed the emphasis at DHS from national security to immigration enforcement.

According to Taylor, the failure to bring all stakeholders in and explain what was about to transpire in Iran was, and is, dangerous.

“When we are in a war that's a really, really big deal,” he told the host. “And you don't have to play the violin for Kristi Noem to say that’s a reckless and irresponsible thing to do.”

“There's a bigger question here, too,” he emphasized, “which is, did the Department of Homeland Security even know strikes were going to happen against Iran? Was Kristi Noem or her team even brought in to conversations to prepare for this? I have seen no indication; no one at DHS has told me that has happened.”

“That, in and of itself, is reckless,” he warned. “So Markwayne Mullin, if he does get confirmed, is coming into a department unlike any other secretary of Homeland Security ever before. We've never had a new secretary confirmed in the middle of a war where the possibility of imminent attack is happening. That's very, very serious.”

- YouTube youtu.be

Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV) suggested that James Talarico, a Democrat running for U.S. Senate in Texas, was possessed by demons.

The West Virginia Republican attacked the Texas hopeful during a Friday interview with MAGA influencer Benny Johnson.

"You're fighting for light," Johnson said while introducing Moore. "Christians throughout the world, quite frankly, under persecution. Christians always are the ones who get persecuted, beheaded, slaughtered."

"They're always the ones who get trod under and nobody ever talks about them and it's evil," he continued. "You're a man of faith yourself that is actually talking about it."

For his part, Moore claimed that protesters had demonstrated outside of his church in West Virginia, but did not allege they broke the law.

"I had people protesting me outside of my church. My family and I going on," he explained. "They showed up from wherever the hell they're from. And, you know, me and my family were just trying to go to Mass. And here they are. You know, I mean, no, no space is sacred to them."

"Now we just got to make sure that James Talarico doesn't get into the Senate," Johnson said before ending the interview. "I mean, that guy saying that Jesus loves abortion and loves transing of the kids and that God is non-binary. I feel dirty, Congressman, just repeating his blasphemes and heresy on my show. I'm telling you what he says. It is antithetical to the Bible. It's actually anti-Christian. It's actually Antichrist's ideology."

"I think he is demonic," Moore remarked. "And I think we need to keep an eye on that and watchful eye because there are other forces of work in my view."

Johnson replied: "It's a defiling of God's order. It's a defiling of God's nature. Yeah. And it's pretty simple. It's nice. Even a even a, even a community college graduate like me can get it, Congressman."

Talarico, a 36-year-old part-time Presbyterian seminarian and former middle school teacher, has built a political platform rooted in Christian theology and social justice. Talarico uses scripture to champion the poor and vulnerable, relying on Christ's teachings to challenge corporate interests and political divisions. He has gained national attention for using his theological background to criticize Christian nationalism, condemning it as a "betrayal of Jesus of Nazareth" that "worships power in the name of Christ."

On his campaign website, Talarico references "a barefoot rabbi" who issued two overriding commandments: love God and love your neighbor, "because there is no love of God without love of neighbor." He writes that "every single person bears the image of the sacred; every single person is holy — not just the neighbors who look like me or pray like me or vote like me," and calls for followers to adopt the spirit of that rabbi who "walked into the seat of power and flipped over the tables of injustice," arguing it is time to "start flipping tables."

His opposition to a Ten Commandments bill went viral when he declared: "Maybe they should try following the Ten Commandments before mandating them," demonstrating his conviction that genuine faith should guide political action rather than serve as political theater.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth spent his confirmation hearings promising senators he’d stop drinking. Based on his news conference about the Iran war on Wednesday, that might not be such a great idea.

Reporting on dead American soldiers, Hegseth suggested, is becoming the “narrative.” The public, he said, should “cut through the noise” and focus on the mission.

The “noise,” in this case, is six American lives.

On Sunday, an Iranian drone struck a U.S. facility in Kuwait. The victims were Army reservists assigned to a logistics command. Their names, ranks, and ages:

• Sgt. Declan Coady, 20
• Sgt. 1st Class Nicole Amor, 39
• Capt. Cody Khork, 35
• Sgt. 1st Class Noah Tietjens, 42
• Maj. Jeffrey O’Brien, 45
• CW3 Robert Marzan, 54.

Hegseth’s complaint was that their deaths were dominating coverage of the war. During Wednesday’s White House briefing, when CNN’s Kaitlan Collins read Hegseth’s words back to White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Leavitt didn’t flinch.

“The press does only want to make the president look bad,” she said. “That’s a fact.”

To this administration, a dead sergeant from West Des Moines is not a tragedy. He’s a political liability. News reporting on his demise is evidence of bias.

Consider the source. According to a sworn affidavit submitted to the Senate under penalty of perjury by a former sister-in-law, Hegseth once had to be carried out of a Minneapolis strip club by his own brother — drunk, in uniform, during a National Guard drill weekend. Wearing a uniform while intoxicated is a violation of military law.

NBC News also reported that 10 current and former Fox News colleagues said they had to “babysit” Hegseth before appearances because he smelled of alcohol. And a whistleblower complaint from his tenure at the veterans nonprofit Concerned Veterans for America described multiple occasions when he had to be removed from events after drinking to incapacitation.

It is some new pinnacle of irony that a man who required his own “babysitters” at Fox News is now lecturing the press on professional conduct and what is worthy of the front page. It would be more defensible had his diatribe been attributable to an altered state.

But this is a very recent discovery. Travel back to January 2024. Three American soldiers were killed in a drone attack in Jordan while Joe Biden was president. Republicans didn’t tell reporters to ignore the story. They blasted it across every microphone they could find.

Donald Trump called the deaths “the consequence of Joe Biden’s weakness.” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) demanded “devastating retaliation.” No one complained the coverage was unfair to the commander in chief.

Go back to August 2021. After the suicide bombing at Abbey Gate in Kabul, Republicans spent years invoking those 13 deaths. They held hearings. They issued subpoenas. They put Gold Star families on stage at the Republican National Convention. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said the loss of life was grounds for impeachment.

The political rule seemed simple: When American troops die, the president must answer for it.

That rule apparently changed on Inauguration Day.

Trump launched a war with Iran that already has American casualties and, by his own admission, will produce more.

“Sadly, there will likely be more, before it ends,” Trump said Sunday. “That’s the way it is.”

For the White House, that may be a strategic reality. For the family of Nicole Amor — a Minnesota mother of two who was days away from returning home — it is not simply “the way it is.” It is the destruction of their world.

The American press has reported every U.S. combat death for decades, under Republicans and Democrats alike. Those stories are not a partisan narrative. They are the public record of war.

The six names this week are Declan, Nicole, Cody, Noah, Jeffrey and Robert. Reporting them is not an attempt to make a president look bad, no matter how much Trump’s shameless sycophants whine.

It’s journalism.

• Click here to subscribe to Ray Hartmann's Soapbox

Early Friday morning Donald Trump set aside the turmoil he created by firing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and the release of a new damning Jeffrey Epstein files on Thursday to menace Iran with a demand for “unconditional surrender!”

On Truth Social, the president is now using ‘MIGA,” (Make Iran Great Again) as he directed the US military to ramp up military assaults, leaving death and rubble behind.

The president wrote, “There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER! After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.”

He added, “IRAN WILL HAVE A GREAT FUTURE. “MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN (MIGA!),” before signing off with his now-customary, “Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

You can see his post here.

Jared Kushner grew up sleeping in Benjamin Netanyahu’s bed.

That isn’t a metaphor or hyperbole. Netanyahu, during his visits to New York over the decades, was close enough to the Kushner family that, as the New York Times reported, he slept in Jared’s childhood bedroom. Jared Kushner didn’t grow up watching Netanyahu on the news the way the rest of us did. He grew up knowing the man as something close to a family institution.

And that man, who has said publicly that he has “yearned” to destroy Iran’s military and political leadership “for 40 years,” is the same man whose government may have been coordinating directly with Kushner in the days before the most consequential American military action since the invasion of Iraq or the Vietnam War.

We need to ask the question that official Washington is too timid, too compromised, or too captured by the moment’s war fever to ask: “Was Jared Kushner sitting across from Iranian negotiators in good faith? Or was he trying to get the Iranian leadership to meet together so Netanyahu could kill them all in one single decapitating strike?”

Here’s what we know. The third round of nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran wrapped up in Geneva on Feb. 26th and 27th. The Omani foreign minister, who’d been mediating the talks for months, told CBS News on the eve of the bombing that a deal was “within our reach” and that Iran had fully given in to American demands and agreed it would never produce nuclear material for a bomb, or an ICBM capable of striking the United States.

A fourth round had already been scheduled for Vienna the following week to work through the technical details following final discussions in Tehran. The Iranian foreign minister told reporters his team was ready to stay and keep talking for as long as it took.

And then, less than 48 hours after those talks in Switzerland concluded, the bombs began to fall.

On the morning of Feb. 28th, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council was gathered together in their offices for meetings. That body, the one that manages Iran’s nuclear dossier and makes the regime’s most consequential decisions, is exactly where you would expect the Iranian leadership to be sitting after a round of talks with America that their own foreign minister was calling “historic.”

They were almost certainly deliberating whether to accept or reject Kushner's American proposal. And according to the Wall Street Journal, American and Israeli intelligence had verified that senior Iranian leaders would be gathered at three locations that could be struck simultaneously. How they knew that is, as the Journal carefully noted, still unknown.

In other words, Iran’s entire decision-making apparatus was assembled in one place most likely because they were in the middle of an active negotiation with Jared Kushner. The talks had created a predictable, intelligenceable window.

Diplomats who were part of the earlier rounds of talks now tell reporters that the Iranian side has come to believe they’d been misled, and that Tehran now views the Witkoff-Kushner negotiations as, in their words, “a ruse designed to keep Iran from expecting and preparing for the surprise strikes.”

That’s not the assessment of Iranian state media spinning a narrative after a military defeat; it’s the conclusion of people who were in the room, speaking to American journalists, on the record.

Now layer on top of that what we know about who Witkoff was meeting with in the days before they sat down with the Iranians. He flew to Israel and was briefed directly by Netanyahu and senior Israeli defense officials and then, with Kushner, flew to Oman and Geneva and sat across the table from the Iranian negotiators.

The man who briefed Kushner’s partner (Witkoff) before those talks — Netanyahu — is the same man who said on the night the bombs fell that “this coalition of forces allows us to do what I have yearned to do for 40 years.” He wasn’t even remotely subdued or reluctant about the possibility of the Middle East going up in flames, perhaps even igniting World War III. He was, instead, triumphant that he finally got an American president to do something he’d been unsuccessfully pushing for decades.

We also know that the Trump regime’s explanations for why the attacks happened when they did have collapsed into open contradiction. Secretary of State Marco Rubio initially told reporters the US struck because Israel was going to attack anyway and Iran would have retaliated against American forces. Trump then went on television and flipped the scenario upside-down, saying he might’ve “forced Israel’s hand.”

The two most senior officials in the administration told two diametrically opposite stories within 48 hours of each other, and neither story explains why the diplomacy that the Omani mediator called substantively successful — that essentially got America everything we said we wanted — was abandoned without the final round.

None of this proves that Kushner was running a deliberate double-cross operation designed to concentrate Iranian leadership in a killable location. What it does prove, though, is that the question is entirely legitimate and demands an answer under oath.

This is not the first time in American history that such a question has had to be asked, or that it damaged America’s reputation on the world stage. In October of 1972, Henry Kissinger stood before the cameras and told the world that “peace is at hand” in Vietnam. The Paris negotiations, he assured everyone, were on the verge of ending the war.

But it was a lie: two months later, Nixon ordered Operation Linebacker II, the most intensive bombing campaign of the entire war, dropping more tonnage on North Vietnam in twelve days than had been dropped in all of 1969 and 1970 combined.

The Paris Peace Accords were signed in January 1973 on terms that serious historians have long argued were not meaningfully different from what had been on the table long before the bombing. Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize for those negotiations. His North Vietnamese counterpart, Le Duc Tho, however, refused to accept his share of the prize, saying that peace had not actually been achieved and the Vietnamese had been deceived because the negotiations were a sham. And he was right: the war dragged on for two more years and was ended by Jerry Ford with the fall of Saigon.

The question that has haunted the world since those 1973 negotiations is the same question hanging over Kushner’s Geneva talks today: were the talks ever meant to succeed on their own terms, or were they simply a setup to destroy the Iranian leadership even if they gave us everything we wanted?

There’s also the Ronald Reagan precedent. His campaign was credibly accused of running a back-channel to Iran to delay the release of American hostages held in Tehran so that Jimmy Carter couldn’t get a pre-election boost from securing their freedom. It took decades for anything close to a full picture to emerge, but now we know that the Reagan campaign successfully committed that treason just to get him into the White House in 1980.

We don’t have decades this time. A war is under way and Americans are already dying. The leadership of a modern, developed country of ninety million people has been decapitated. And every foreign ministry on Earth is watching and drawing conclusions about whether they’ll ever again trust American diplomacy.

If the Iranians were right that they were “negotiated” into a kill box, no government facing an existential American ultimatum will ever be able to assume our good faith again.

The damage this administration is doing to American credibility isn’t abstract or temporary: when a country uses the negotiating table as a targeting opportunity, it poisons the well for every administration that comes after it.

North Korea is watching. Iran’s neighbors are watching. China is watching. The next time an American president sends an envoy somewhere with a genuine offer of peace, why would anyone believe it? Le Duc Tho knew the answer to that question when Kissinger betrayed his Vietnamese negotiating partners in 1973. The world is apparently relearning it now.

Congress has the constitutional power and the institutional obligation to call Kushner and Witkoff before investigative committees and ask them directly: What did you know about Israeli targeting plans during the Geneva talks? When did you know it? What were you instructed to accomplish or delay? Did you communicate with Netanyahu’s government during the negotiations themselves?

The man at the center of this diplomacy grew up treating Benjamin Netanyahu like a member of the family. That’s not a reason to assume guilt, but it sure as hell is a reason to demand answers, loudly, now, before the war makes the asking impossible.

• Thom Hartmann is a New York Times best-selling author and SiriusXM talk show host. His Substack can be found here.

WASHINGTON — Republicans are happy to criticize President Donald Trump’s war on Iran behind closed doors but “willing to give up congressional power” when given chances to actually rein him in, a prominent Democrat charged, shortly before the House of Representatives rejected a bipartisan attempt to assert its constitutional powers.

“There is an incredible sense in the Congress in the last year that so many Republicans have been willing to give up congressional power,” Rep. Becca Balint (D-VT) told Raw Story at the Capitol.

Republicans, Balint said, “all tell you behind closed doors a whole variety of things they don't like about what's happening.

“If you pick your head up and all of a sudden your power is gone, don't whine about it because you gave it away.”

‘I’m not stupid’

Under Article One of the U.S. Constitution — and the 1973 War Powers Resolution — only Congress can declare war.

In reality, presidents have long ignored such strictures.

Balint was speaking shortly before the House considered a war powers resolution that would have forced the Trump administration to pause strikes on Iran.

“I'm not stupid,” Balint, a member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government, said.

“I can count. I don't think we're going to have the votes, but I think in every opportunity we have to assert our Article I powers, we have to keep doing these actions that show that we understand that every time we don't stand up to [Trump], legislative powers are slipping away.”

Another Democrat, Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA), said such votes were important, to “get people on the record.”

The record for the ensuing vote showed the resolution was rejected 219-212, with Republican Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Warren Davidson (R-OH) voting yes, while four Democrats voted no.

Massie co-sponsored the resolution with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), his partner in pressuring the Trump administration over the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his links to powerful figures, prominently including the president himself.

Davidson, a former military officer, is usually a loyal supporter of the Republican line.

On the floor of the House, he said, “Make no mistake, Iran is an enemy of the United States. As our military engages them, they do so justly. Unfortunately, they are not yet doing so constitutionally.

“For some, this debate will be about whether we should even be fighting in Iran. For me, the debate is more fundamental: is the president of the United States, regardless of the person holding the office, empowered to do whatever he wants?

“That’s not what our constitution says.”

‘Whatever it takes to win’

Amid continued confusion over Trump’s aims in attacking Iran — currently by air and at sea and at the cost of six American lives and more than 1,000 Iranians killed — it was reported on Thursday that strikes could extend until September.

Raw Story asked one senior Republican if that bothered him.

“Not worried at all,”Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) replied “Trump knows what he’s doing.”

Raw Story pressed: Was Norman really saying he would be okay with such a lengthy campaign, with all its attendant dangers for wider conflict through the Middle East and the world?

“Whatever it takes to win,” Norman said.

'Spiraling out of control'

Balint considered another pressing issue: Republicans’ reluctance to even say Trump has taken America to war, despite the president’s own use of the word.

“You can't call it a ‘military action,’ that it has a very short timeline, when this is the chatter,” Balint said, of the reports of a possible September end date.

“We knew that it's spiraling out of control … and again, like, where's the opposition within his own party?”

There is so much chaotic news coming out of this White House that it’s tough to focus on the urgency of any single story.

But nothing jolted me quite like this week’s Iran War revelation that a combat unit commander urged noncommissioned officers to motivate U.S. troops by telling them Donald Trump had been “anointed by Jesus,” and that the conflict was “all part of God’s divine plan” to bring about Armageddon and Biblical End Times.

I’d assumed the other guys were the fundamentalists here.

Thankfully, the above disclosure sparked hundreds of complaints from service members across all branches of the armed forces to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) — a group I hadn’t known existed.

Extremist Christian rhetoric is utterly incompatible with any sound judgment, much less strategic conduct of warfare. It is the precise opposite. It’s how you get kamikaze combatants eager to die for the cause and send body counts soaring. It’s how you generate fighters operating out of crazed zealotry rather than tactical reason.

It's also how you destroy any semblance of a chance for a diplomatic solution. To religion-driven radicals fighting a war framed as a defense of God’s will, negotiation itself can feel like a betrayal of the cause.

If you’re fighting for sacred dominance — for “My god is cooler than your god” belief — anything less than complete annihilation of the infidel enemy is unthinkable. You don’t attempt to converse with evil itself.

If you’re talking about Armageddon and the End Times, you’re referring to termination of the world, as cited in the Book of Revelation, and a renewed Creation while welcoming the return of Christ.

Let me add here that while I accept and appreciate everyone’s religious freedom and work hard to disparage none of it, even though it’s not my thing, I’m not terribly keen on this whole planet destruction deal. That kind of infringes on my right to continue living on earth. So, I have to push back.

Here is what I believe with all of my heart and soul: you can fight people and do battle with their beliefs and principles but you can’t effectively go to war against (or with) a spirit. It gets tricky when you start using dogma to inspire. That whole separation of church and state idea comes into play, and those who defend the division are branded as antagonists.

I’ve long believed that more monstrous behavior and immorality has been perpetrated in the name of religion than any other factor, since the dawn of time.

What’s undeniable is that a religious war is much tougher — if not outright impossible — to limit. You can use it to justify any and all atrocities, because if the war effort is framed as a holy mission, the opponent is reduced to being less than human.

How do you fight people who are attaching their virtue to the return of an immortal being, of God’s purported chosen son?

You don’t.

In this clash, the adversary isn’t merely on the other side of a theological divide but fully dehumanized. In that scenario, restraint and understanding collapse. Rivals become demonic. All bets are off.

The obvious issue here is that we have a Secretary of “War,” the execrable Pete Hegseth, who is a rabid evangelical Christian and raging alcoholic who has no understanding of limits. He proudly integrates faith into his identity, not to mention his government job. His relationship with Jesus Christ is personal. The man has a Jerusalem Cross tattooed on his chest.

Again, it wouldn’t matter what Hegseth’s beliefs were if they didn’t so profoundly impinge on the rest of us. He’s far more devoted to his concept of God than he is to the human population. He opens Pentagon events by giving “all glory to God,” which is so far over the line for a public servant that it leaves one speechless.

Hegseth appears to truly believe that any war he fights is about eternal destiny and maintains that God commands his actions. But of course, in this perception, “God” is simply what Hegseth calls his thoughts. He couldn’t go out and mow down 30 people with an AR-15 and justify it by saying, “God told me to do it” … though some have tried.

It’s simply a fact that when God enters into the military conversation, nothing anyone else insists upon can diverge from such pious certainty. Excessive brutality becomes almost inevitable because purported faith rationalizes your basest instincts and rages.

To bring it back to our soldiers being told they’re carrying out “God’s divine plan,” the biggest problem is that it plants the idea in their heads that rules of combat no longer exist, and the spiritual ends justify any means.

You can defend dishonorable conduct because you’re backed by a deeper calling that invites martyrdom, deepening conviction further. Volatility is guaranteed to ratchet up.

Referring to Armageddon with such lustful excitement is the kind of bombast that inspires thoughts of nuclear options. It has no business being used to motivate our fighting forces.

Once we cross that line of fanaticism, there’s really no turning back.

• Ray Richmond is a longtime journalist/author and an adjunct professor at Chapman University in Orange, CA.

Political analysts and observers were outraged on Thursday after the White House posted its most recent "propaganda" video about the Iran war.

The White House published a montage of strikes against Iranian targets interspersed with clips from popular action movies and television shows. The video was captioned, "JUSTICE THE AMERICAN WAY," on X.

It was posted at a time when the Trump administration is facing growing scrutiny for its actions in Iran. On Thursday, the New York Times published an investigation determining that the U.S. had bombed a girls's chool in Iran and killed 175 civilians in the process. A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers is also challenging the president's reasons for conducting the bombing campaign in the first place.

Political analysts and observers shared their reactions on social media.

"A deep embarrassment to us all," The Tennessee Holler posted on X.

"The entire Trump Cabinet is made up of people play acting actual leaders and now they do videos confirming it," political commentator Neera Tanden posted on X.

"Confirming all suspicions of propaganda," journalist Natali Morris posted on X.

"This is a f------ disgrace," Ron Filipkowski, editor-in-chief of MeidasTouch, posted on X.

"There is something in this that seems a poor reflection on people losing their children, sisters, and brothers. They should hire adults," physician David Bell posted on X.

CNN's Abby Phillip delivered a brutal fact-check on Thursday over President Donald Trump's "regime change" ambitions in Iran.

Trump gave an exclusive interview to Axios on Thursday, where he claimed that he should play a role in picking Iran's next leader. Those comments seem to follow in line with one of his stated ambitions for striking Iran in the first place, which he said was to create the conditions for the Iranian people to rise up and take over their government.

Jason Rantz, host of the conservative radio news show "Seattle Red," argued on CNN's "NewsNight" that Trump was not "directly calling for" regime change in Iran, which caused the panel to erupt.

"Let's be honest!" host Abby Phillip said. She read back Trump's quote to Rantz.

Rantz said that

"The administration has not just said they want regime change, they've actually carried out an operation that has killed the Ayatollah," she argued.

On Saturday, U.S. and Israeli forces coordinated bombing strikes across more than 100 sites in Iran, which killed many of the country's top military and political leaders. Even some of the poeple Trump was considering to replace the Ayatollah were killed in the strike, the White House said.

A former GOP speechwriter flagged a "bigger risk" that President Donald Trump just created after he fired Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

On Thursday morning, Trump posted on Truth Social that he was replacing Noem with Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), effective on March 31. Noem was given another position, Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas, for an initiative that Trump said he will announce more details on later.

The decision happened at a time when the Trump administration had launched direct strikes against Iran, an operation that killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several of the country's top military and political leaders. Trump has said there is a chance that Iran may strike the U.S. in retaliation for the strikes.

David Frum, a former speechwriter for George W. Bush and a staff writer at The Atlantic, told CNN's Kaitlan Collins on Thursday night that the decision to remove Noem was alarming.

"The United States is now engaged in a big global war against the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism," Frum said. "There is, of course, a real risk that a state sponsor of terrorism could commit terrorism inside the United States, and an even bigger risk that the administration could claim that their acts of terrorism are coming."

"It has never been more vital to have professional, responsible, competent honest, trustworthy leadership of the Department of Homeland Security that is committed to respecting the freedom of americans and not in any way allowing that department to be used to tamper with the 2020 elections but that's notthe leadership it's had, and that's not the leadership that the president would like it to have," he continued.

Political analysts and observers were outraged on Thursday after an investigation determined that the U.S. was likely responsible for a Feb. 28 strike on a girls' school in Iran that killed 175 civilians, many of whom were children.

The New York Times reported on Thursday that the strike on the girls' school in Minab was "severely damaged" around the same time that U.S. forces were conducting an attack against an "adjacent naval base operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps." The Times added that "official statements ... suggest they were most likely to have carried out the strike."

"In the several days since the attack, U.S. officials have neither confirmed nor denied responsibility," according to the report. "Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Wednesday that an investigation was underway. Nadav Shoshani, an Israeli military spokesman, told reporters on Sunday that 'as of now,' he was not aware of any Israeli military operation 'in that area' at the time."

"U.S. officials in public statements have indicated that on the day in question, U.S. planes were conducting operations in the region where the school was located," it added.

Political analysts and observers expressed outrage on social media.

"It is unconscionable that there has still been no attempt by either the US or Israel to account, let alone apologise, for the killing last Saturday of more than 150 people at the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls' school in Minab, southern Iran," Peter Westmacott, former British Ambassador to Turkey, posted on X.

"Simply heartbreaking," activist Amy Siskind posted on X.

"It seems like the most obvious thing to say in the world, but people need to be held accountable for the murder of children during an illegal war," Benjamin McKean, associate professor of political science at Ohio State University, posted on Bluesky. "Yet any real accountability for this will clearly require a radical political break."

"When Pete Hegseth starts flexing in front of American flags and talking about 'death and destruction from the sky,' this is what he’s talking about: dozens of little girls murdered," Stephen Cohen, managing editor at The Atlantic, posted on Bluesky.

"Investigate it, be open about it, hold folks accountable to why it happened, be public what action is taken," writer Andrew Donaldson posted on X. " [The] argument 'we are the good guys' depends on such things when things go horribly wrong, like it appears it did here."

Special government employee Corey Lewandowski is expected to leave the Department of Homeland Security when Secretary Kristi Noem departs later this month.

Sources told Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich that Lewandowski's departure became evident soon after President Donald Trump said he was firing Noem.

"I'm told the president spoke with Kristy Noem just before that Truth Social post went out," Heinrich reported on Thursday afternoon. "I'm further told that Corey Lewandowski is expected to leave with her. Of course, the rumors of an affair between the two were one of the factors that I'm told compelled the president to remove her as DHS secretary. Both of them are married, and she had faced questions about her alleged affair during testimony on the Hill this week under oath, she did not deny it as she called the reports garbage, but she never denied sexual relations with Cory Lewandowski."

"And I'm told that he's expected to leave his post as a special government employee and advisor to her when she departs the Department of Homeland Security," she added. "Unclear so far, I'm trying to still get information on whether 'leave with her' means go with her to this new role that we are still fleshing out what exactly that entails."

"But the president was unhappy, I'm told, with, quote, 'many of her unfortunate leadership failures,' which included Minnesota, her public statements in the fallout to that deportation campaign there, also the ad campaign, the $200 million in spending, and these rumors of an affair [with] Corey Lewandowski."

An analyst on Thursday described the White House's recent video game-style hype videos as "distasteful" following the recent deaths of six American service members in the war against Iran.

The videos, which have a similar presentation and style to the popular game "Call of Duty," have been posted on the White House and Department of Defense's social media accounts and have been produced to "set the narrative" and appeal to President Donald Trump's base, which includes gamers, CNN anchor Dana Bash reported.

CNN senior political analyst Nia-Malika Henderson described why the videos might have instead raised questions after the first American casualties since the military strikes started Saturday in Iran, plus the estimated 1,100 Iranians who have died.

"I think this is in keeping with the way Pete Hegseth is also talking about the war," Henderson explained. "He of course, had a press conference yesterday talking about utter dominance, talking about the war, likening it to a football game, I think was one of the analogies that he used. And it's part of the sort of the bro culture that Donald Trump used to win. It's part of Pete Hegseth, why he's the secretary of war and why it's not the you know, the Department of Defense anymore. So it's part of the selling of the war, and we'll see if it's effective."

How Americans actually view the war is not yet clear, she said.

"The shock and awe part of it is always part of the initial selling of it — the utter dominance of the American military," Henderson said. "'Best military ever in the history of the world.' We get that right. And you also could see that the White House obviously understands media, understands social media. This is a president who is watching the coverage of this war on his television set every day and trying to program it right. And so I think that that's part of it, it's part of why they were so high on the sinking of that naval vessel, which apparently was just sort of a ceremonial vessel and hyping it up. So listen, this is a White House that is good at the hype."

But that hype could be insensitive to military families, Henderson argued.

"I think listen, if you were part of the families who have lost Americans — six Americans have died — this is quite distasteful to liken war to a video game because, you know, these are soldiers' lives who are at risk," Henderson added. "And so to liken them to a football game or a video game, I think is offensive to a lot of people."

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) again insisted that he would refuse to drop out of the race for U.S. Senate after President Donald Trump suggested he would endorse his opponent, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), in retaliation for threatening to disobey the commander-in-chief's demands.

In a post to Truth Social this week, Trump said he would make his endorsement in the Texas Senate race "soon," adding that the candidate whom he did not endorse would be ordered to "immediately DROP OUT OF THE RACE!"

Paxton responded on Wednesday by saying he would stay in the race against the president's wishes.

"I'm staying in this race," the candidate asserted. "I owe it to the people of Texas."

"Well, that's bad for him to say," Trump said on Thursday. "That is bad for him. So maybe, maybe that leads me to go the other direction."

The threat, however, did not change Paxton's mind when he was asked about it on Thursday.

"No, I'm going to give people in Texas a choice," he told MAGA influencer Benny Johnson. "The people in Washington can have their own opinion. The president can have his own opinion, but I've been in this race for almost a year, and we're going to win this race in the runoff."

"So, do you have any indication that President Trump might endorse you?" Johnson wondered.

"Well, I know that John Cornyn has suggested that Susie Wiles, as [Trump's] chief of staff, is behind this. I don't know what's true or not true," Paxton replied.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), the top-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, warned Thursday about what President Donald Trump's next moves in the war against Iran could be.

Himes told CNN anchors Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown that after the Senate rejected a resolution to limit Trump's war powers without congressional permission—a measure also expected to fail Thursday in the House—lawmakers were now in a difficult position regarding military action against Iran, with few options remaining.

"There's a really kind of dark answer to that question, which and the answer to that is, and I hate to be this blunt and honest with the American people, but it's true. The answer to that question is nothing," Himes said. "Even if the war powers resolution were to have passed the Senate and to have passed the House, there is no reason to believe that Donald Trump would have taken that into account."

Himes argued that Trump would have vetoed the resolution regardless of what lawmakers said. He predicted what Trump would do.

"And so what eventually is going to end this war is what we're beginning to see already, just in the fourth or fifth day of this war, gasoline prices are already up $0.22 a gallon on average across the country," Himes said. "They are now higher than they were when Donald Trump took office the stock market is stumbling today. And by the way, I should have put this first. But most tragically and most importantly, there are now six Americans dead in this war. Eventually the pressure of those losses in the context of the administration's inability to tell us how this ends, you know how or when this ends, eventually the American people are going to be even more sour on this war than they already are now. And I suspect what happens then is that Donald Trump just pulls the plug, declares victory, and walks away."

And despite reports that Iranian military forces have weakened, that doesn't mean they're done fighting, Himes explained.

"There's no question that the Iranians are being very badly hit right now most of their navy is gone," Himes said. "There's lots of almost MTV-quality videos that you can watch on an hourly basis being released by the White House and by the Department of Defense. The reality is that the Iranians maintain pretty shocking military capability and asymmetric capability. That's what we, you know, the fancy term for the terrorists that they have for generations now been planting in the region, and scarily outside of the region."

He also described another troubling concern for American intelligence involved in the strikes against Iran — and how a move by the FBI could be putting troops at potential risk.

"As this regime gets increasingly desperate, they are going to reach for those tools at a time, by the way, when the FBI has fired the people who are Iran counterterrorism experts and whatnot," Himes said. "So it is a very, very real danger. And I just pray that this administration sobers up, takes their eye off of their constant need to praise this president, and actually gets into the business of defending and standing for the security of the American people."

President Donald Trump insisted that he be "involved" in picking the next leader of Iran after the United States assassinated Ali Khamenei in Operation Epic Fury.

In an interview with Axios on Thursday, Trump revealed that he would not accept Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the former supreme leader.

"They are wasting their time," the U.S. president said. "Khamenei's son is a lightweight."

"I have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy [Rodriguez] in Venezuela," he added.

Trump also said he would not accept a leader who would force the U.S. to strike Iran again "in five years."

"Khamenei's son is unacceptable to me. We want someone that will bring harmony and peace to Iran," he insisted.

When pressed about a new Iranian leader earlier this week, Trump was unable to come up with a name.

"Most of the people we had in mind are dead," he said.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has come under fire over an explosive whistleblower complaint and allegations that she is protecting the Trump family — and that she even planted a mole to obstruct the investigation, according to an analyst Thursday.

Salon's Jesselyn Radack described multiple problems and conflicts of interest that have surfaced around Gabbard's alleged mismanagement of the complaint, which are tied to claims that President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner influenced the president over Iran. The complaint itself was apparently "locked in a safe," according to a Wall Street Journal report last month.

"We don’t know the substance of the intelligence report underlying the whistleblower complaint, but the government claims it is 'exquisitely' classified, which raises an immediate problem: That’s not a real classification level," Radack wrote. "The report apparently involves an intelligence service intercepting a conversation between two foreign nationals about Iran and Jared Kushner’s influence on his father-in-law, the president. At the time, the Trump administration was considering a strike on Iran, which in fact occurred at the end of June 2025."

Gabbard reportedly delayed investigating the complaint amid "ongoing rumors concerning the state of her relationship with Trump, which has appeared to be in constant flux," Radack explained.

"Instead of providing guidance, Gabbard — the former champion of whistleblowers — apparently sat on the complaint for eight months and stonewalled the whistleblower and their lawyer," Radack wrote.

She also reportedly made potentially "sinister" moves, "rather than innocent, bureaucratic snafus."

"And worse, during this delay, she reportedly planted a mole in the ICIG’s office to snitch about the situation directly to her — obviously compromising the office’s independence," Radack wrote.

Gabbard has appeared to be acting as a protector of the Trump family — instead of focusing on national intelligence concerns.

"We don’t know why Gabbard continues to aggressively obstruct this whistleblower complaint," Radack added. "It sounds like she’s more concerned with protecting Jared Kushner, and perhaps Trump himself, than the public she’s supposed to serve. But we do know this: The ICWPA system for intelligence community whistleblowers depends on the knowledge, trust, credibility and good faith of the director of national intelligence. It’s a fatal flaw to make that person an intermediary, much less a gatekeeper, on a whistleblower’s path to congressional oversight."

Donald Trump's reasoning that he had no choice but to start a war with Iran because Iranian missiles could hit the American mainland “soon” was undercut by a report from MS NOW’s Jackie Alemany on Thursday morning.

During a military medal ceremony on Monday at the White House, the president told the audience, “The regime already had missiles capable of hitting Europe and our bases, both local and overseas, and would soon have had missiles capable of reaching our beautiful America.”

Alemany, the co-host of MS NOW’s “The Weekend,” broke the news on “Morning Joe” that one of her sources in the White House claimed Trump has been champing at the bit to get the war started for some time.

Speaking with the “Morning Joe” co-hosts, she swerved away from a question from Joe Scarborough to state, “I do want to address something that Jonathan [Lemire] said, because I've had this reporting that just came to me. But the personal nature of Trump's position on Iran: I have a source who had lunch with Trump at Mar-a-Lago a month and a half ago, who said essentially that Trump was itching to strike Iran.”

"And I think it does really get to this idea that so little of this is based on actual substance and primarily on settling a score against Iran, wanting to legacy build and, again, a lack of a real justification here,” she pointed out. “And there are lots of members of Congress in a bipartisan manner who are taking issue with this, although not enough for this to pass in the Senate and likely to fail in the House today.”

- YouTube youtu.be

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed that Spain has already agreed to cooperate with the United States on any war with Iran — but almost immediately, the Spanish government contradicted this.

As CNBC noted, when Leavitt was pressed by reporters on Wednesday about Spain's refusal to allow U.S. use of its military bases for staging such an operation, she replied, “With respect to Spain, I think they heard the president’s message yesterday loud and clear, and it’s my understanding, over the past several hours, they’ve agreed to cooperate with the U.S. military. The president expects all of our European allies, of course, to cooperate in this long sought-after mission, not just for the United States but also for Europe, to crush the rogue Iranian regime.”

However, Madrid swiftly disagreed, with Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares telling a local outlet that, “The Spanish government’s position on the war in the Middle East ... and the use of our bases has not changed at all.”

Spain is one of the member states of the NATO alliance, which would compel the Spanish government to protect the United States if it were attacked; but they aren't obliged to give unlimited cooperation to the U.S. to help them invade another country.

Already, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has condemned President Donald Trump's move to strike Iran, saying, “You can’t play Russian roulette with the destiny of millions ... Nobody knows for sure what will happen now. Even the objectives of those who launched the first attack are unclear. But we must be prepared, as the proponents say, for the possibility that this will be a long war, with numerous casualties and, therefore, with serious economic consequences on a global scale.”

Trump, for his part, has threatened to "cut off all dealings" with Spain if they do not commit to stand behind U.S. military objectives.

A Democratic Party representative who served in the Iraq war has issued a statement denouncing the rhetoric around the ongoing strikes on Iran.

Donald Trump approved a bombing campaign against Iran earlier this week, with veterans now serving in government airing their concerns. New York Democrat Rep. Pat Ryan, a veteran who twice served in Iraq, issued a statement to CNN expressing his concern over the current Iran situation.

He said, "If I hear one more chicken hawk who’s never served a single day in uniform sitting in a gold-plated office in DC or Mar-a-Lago or anywhere else, try to talk tough having never seen what war is about, I’m going to lose my mind."

Fellow representatives backed Ryan's comments, with Rep. Eugene Vindman calling the conflict with Iran an unnecessary use of US resources.

He said, "I will not be shedding a tear for the Iranian regime and the Ayatollah. I understand the threat but I also understand that wars are easy to start and hard to finish.

"This is a commitment of American blood and treasure to a conflict that we didn’t need to be engaged in."

Donald Trump has said the U.S. will stay in the fight for as long as it takes to achieve the country's objectives, although his administration has not yet laid out a compelling case for the operation, according to some lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

John Bolton, the president's national security advisor during his first administration, told Joanna Coles on a new episode of "The Daily Beast Podcast" on Wednesday that he is concerned that Trump hasn't thought through the implications of the strikes. He added that the president's lack of a decision-making process "magnifies the risk" that something could go wrong.

“As long as things are going successfully, he’ll stick with it," Bolton said. "If we run into real difficulty, and I hope we don’t, and we shouldn’t at this point, but if we do, because anything is possible, that would be the testing time to see whether he was able to stick it out."

Donald Trump has reportedly scrambled energy experts to find an alternative source of energy following the strikes on Iran.

While some experts believe a hold-up in the Strait of Hormuz supply line will be temporary, other insiders are concerned there could be longer-term consequences at play. Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman suggested the route, which has been used by the US and other Western nations as a supply line through the Persian Gulf, could be cut off for longer than the few days industry experts were predicting.

Ben Lefebvre, writing in Politico, noted two energy industry insiders had been asked by the president's team to find a solution - and fast.

Trump's chief of staff, Susie Wiles, reportedly asked advisers to bring the president ideas on how to tackle the rising oil price and the subsequent effect this will have on gasoline prices.

One insider said the administration had been "looking under every rock for ideas on improving energy prices, especially gasoline prices" for a solution. The unnamed executive went on to say that current energy heads of staff are being "screamed at to find some good news" on the situation.

"Folks are scrambling for announcements and messaging to counter the narrative," they added.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, "I think it speaks to why this action was so necessary that ultimately the energy industry is going to benefit from the president’s actions with respect to Iran, because Iran will no longer be controlling the Strait of Hormuz and restricting the free flow of energy."

Insiders also confirmed a handful of ideas had been pitched to the president or members of his team, but that none were considered viable at this time.

Lefebvre wrote, "Some of the ideas the administration is considering include a temporary holiday on the gasoline tax, people familiar with the discussions said. But that might not bring immediate relief since it would require action from Congress. And there’s no guarantee oil refiners and gas stations would pass the savings along to drivers.

"Some administration officials have also floated using the U.S. military to defend energy infrastructure in the Middle East. But that idea isn’t likely to win over Saudi Arabian officials, who are cool on it given the sensitivities around American boots on the kingdom’s soil."

As of this writing, six American troops are dead. Donald Trump says there will be more. More than 1,000 Iranians are dead, and there will certainly be many more. The map of the Middle East is a sea of fire under “Operation Epic Fury,” and only 27 percent of the U.S. public is onboard.

So the real question isn’t whether “we” can win this war. It’s how fast Trump will claim he already has.

Trump has been crowing that while Iran allegedly tried to kill him three times, he “got Khamenei on the first try.” Secretary of “War” Pete Hegseth called that “guts.” It isn’t guts. It’s the reckless bragging of a man treating a potential world war like the season finale of a reality series: blow everything up, grab the ratings, cancel the show before the numbers tank and the shark is jumped.

But in Iran, the shark is taking a big bite out of the truth about why the war began.

The trap Trump has walked into is staggering. He explicitly demanded regime change. Every historian and military strategist will tell you regime change has never happened without boots on the ground. Trump ruled that out. Sort of. It depends on the day.

Utterly distasteful and offensive, Trump said he doesn’t get “the yips” about troops on the ground. The reason his predecessors, like anyone with a soul, got the yips was because they were risking American lives. What a heartless jerk.

The most dishonest person in the world keeps making half-assed promises. As each falls apart, he makes another.

We are almost a week in, and the reasons America went to war remain embarrassingly murky. Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed it was to neutralize an imminent threat to Israel. Trump said he was the one who pushed Benjamin Netanyahu, not the other way around. Hegseth, equally untruthful and idiotic, has his own theories.

Americans were disillusioned and confused from day one. Now they’re getting angrier by the hour. There is no justification for this war. There never was. There never will be. And that’s becoming horrifically obvious.

Meanwhile, the dominoes are falling. Gas prices are spiking. Economists warn that petroleum-linked inflation is just getting started. Refineries are destroyed. The Dow is spooked.

Trump built his entire political identity on economic and no-war braggadocio: “best economy ever,” “I alone can fix it,” “no World War III,” “no forever wars.” Now he owns an oil shock and a war he started that has the makings of World War III.

In May 2003, just six weeks into the Iraq War, George W. Bush famously strutted onto the USS Abraham Lincoln under a “Mission Accomplished” banner. He wanted to project strength, declare an end to major combat operations, and pivot to domestic politics before a long, bloody insurgency exposed the whole enterprise as a catastrophe built on lies.

The same false premises are in play now: imminent threat, weapons of mass destruction, regime change, a grateful population to welcome Americans as liberators. Those premises collapsed. Wars started on false pretenses never end well.

Trump is too ill-informed, and too reckless, to understand.

There can be little doubt he is preparing his own “Mission Accomplished” moment — except he is more selfish, less humble, and has even less patience than Bush. To be clear, Bush was never known for humility. But compared to Trump, he looks like a pussycat.

Trump will surely declare “victory” soon, not because the threat is eliminated but because the markets are screaming, the oil industry is hemorrhaging, and Trump sees giant losses on the horizon, along with the prospect of getting tied down trying to fix a country he broke.

The only difference is that Trump won’t bother with a flight suit. He’ll do it in front of those flimsy black curtains that doubled as a Situation Room at Mar-a-Lago.

Fresh off his attack on Venezuela, Trump wants the world to see him as the man who makes strongmen disappear, the most imperial of imperialists.

But just as the Iraq justifications shape-shifted from WMDs to spreading democracy when the WMDs turned out not to exist, so “Operation Epic Fury” has mutated in real time from stopping an “imminent nuclear threat” to personal score-settling by a president who treats foreign policy like a drive-by shooting.

Trump will simply “kill you,” as Hegseth might say. Make a mess, speed away, let someone else clean it up.

Trump didn’t go to war for America. He went to war for Trump. And now he has to get out fast — for Trump.

After September 11, Bush had the benefit of 90 percent public approval. He had goodwill. Trump is starting his war in the basement, with an approval rating at a record low, 36-39 percent, and 60 percent disapproval.

With his war, he barely has a quarter of Americans behind him.

Rising body counts will not move Trump the way they would move a normal president. What will move him are the Dow and oil futures. When the financial fallout becomes intolerable, he will declare victory and bolt, leaving a destabilized Middle East to deal with the wreckage he made.

Trump has zero patience. He cannot stand to be associated with losing. A grinding, inconclusive Middle East war is the definition of losing — slowly, expensively, in public.

When his lies grow old and the polls get even worse, Trump will sprint for his “Mission Accomplished” banner. He will announce that he has eliminated Iran’s nuclear program, degraded its drone and missile capabilities, avenged three assassination attempts, and secured a historic win.

Then he will leave Israel alone in the fight, the region in flames, the cleanup to whoever’s still standing.

Trump doesn’t care about our soldiers. He doesn’t care about peace, stability, or the families of the six Americans already killed and the others to follow. He cares about one thing: how Donald Trump looks when “the show” comes to an end.

• John Casey was most recently Senior Editor, The Advocate, and is a freelance opinion and feature story writer. Previously, he was a Capitol Hill press secretary, and spent 25 years in media and public relations in NYC. He is the co-author of LOVE: The Heroic Stories of Marriage Equality (Rizzoli, 2025), named by Oprah in her "Best 25 of 2025.”

President Donald Trump faces an inherent "problem" in his administration that "magnifies the risk" of failure in Iran, according to a former administration insider.

Early Saturday morning, U.S. and Israeli forces conducted a coordinated bombing campaign across more than 100 sites in Iran. The move set off a geopolitical frenzy, with Iran firing retaliatory strikes at several neighboring countries as well as at the U.S. embassy in Kuwait, which killed six Americans over the weekend.

Trump has said the U.S. will stay in the fight for as long as it takes to achieve the country's objectives, although his administration has not yet laid out a compelling case for the operation, according to some lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

John Bolton, the president's national security advisor during his first administration, told Joanna Coles on a new episode of "The Daily Beast Podcast" on Wednesday that he is concerned that Trump hasn't thought through the implications of the strikes. He added that the president's lack of a decision-making process "magnifies the risk" that something could go wrong.

“As long as things are going successfully, he’ll stick with it," Bolton said. "If we run into real difficulty, and I hope we don’t, and we shouldn’t at this point, but if we do, because anything is possible, that would be the testing time to see whether he was able to stick it out."

A veteran court watcher warned on Wednesday that the Supreme Court is about to "gravely disappoint" Americans.

Former Solicitor General of the United States Donald B. Verrilli Jr. discussed the Supreme Court's recent ruling in the tariffs case on a new episode of the "Amicus" podcast with Dahlia Lithwick. He argued that the case provided temporary relief for those concerned that the court was about to sign away a wholesale transfer of power from Congress to the presidency. Even so, there are still some outstanding issues that should give Americans reasons for concern, he argued.

"If you actually think about it, what Justice Amy Coney Barrett said, what Justice Neil Gorsuch said, what Justice Elena Kagan said in her concurrence, and what the chief justice said? There was a common core to it, which was: 'Use your common sense, man,'" Verrilli Jr. said.

In late February, the Supreme Court ruled that President Donald Trump's tariff regime was unconstitutional because it was not approved by Congress. Courts are now wrestling with the question of how to return the tariffs that were collected to the businesses that paid them.

While that case was a brief win, Verilli Jr. noted that there are still many cases concerning presidential power that are being decided by unsigned opinions — also known as the shadow docket — which he described as "quite distressing."

"Nevertheless, I look at the course of our history, and I feel that there’s reason to keep the faith," Verilli Jr. said.

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) lashed out at several of her Republican colleagues for opposing a motion that would require Congress to release information on payouts that silence victims of congressional sex scandals.

During a House Oversight Committee hearing on Wednesday, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) moved to release information about payouts for sexual misconduct.

Boebert spoke out in support of Mace's motion in committee after a majority of Republicans in the full House voted down a similar effort.

"And I want to thank Congresswoman Nancy Mace for introducing this privileged motion," the Colorado Republican said. "I think at this point, this is something that should be introduced on a weekly basis. I am absolutely disgusted that we could even get to 50 members of Congress who want immediate transparency. Don't we all campaign on transparency? Don't we all go out and tell the American voters that we are leaders and that we are going to get justice for them, that we are going to do right by them?"

"And then we hire their daughters to come work for us," she continued. "And your tax dollars, millions and millions of dollars, has been used in this slush fund as hush money to silence victims who have been sexually harassed, sexually abused by members of Congress."

Boebert noted that attention had been focused on sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but the misconduct was "happening right here in our nation's capital."

"And to every member who voted to send this to committee, where you know this was sent to die on the House floor just moments ago," she remarked. "I hope you have a darn good reason to tell your constituents why you were not going to stand up for the victims."

"And I'm glad that we are doing something about it here in the Oversight Committee," the lawmaker added. "And to the members who voted against this, go home and tell your daughters what you did today! Go home and tell your daughters what happens in the workplace, no matter where it is, in your hometown, in your nation's capital, and tell them what you did to help continue to cover up decades of corruption!"

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt directly attacked CNN's Kaitlan Collins on Wednesday during the first press briefing since the United States and its ally Israel launched military strikes against Iran.

Leavitt had made several comments criticizing media coverage of the Trump administration and went after reporters at the White House, specifically Collins and CNN.

The Trump administration has presented several different objectives since launching its military operation five days ago — with Cabinet members and even President Donald Trump giving conflicting information over what prompted the attacks and led to the regional conflict that has now left six American troops dead.

"Is it the position of this administration that the press should not prominently cover the deaths of U.S. service members?" Collins asked Leavitt.

"No, it's the position of this administration that the press in this room and the press across this country should report on the success of Operation Epic Fury and the damage it is doing to the rogue Iranian regime that has threatened the lives of every single American in this room," Leavitt said. "If the Iranian regime had their choice, they would kill every single person in this room, and so we can all be very grateful that we have an administration, that we have men and women in our armed forces who are willing to sacrifice their own lives for the rest of us in this room and for every American across the country, and for every troop that is based in the Middle East."

Collins pushed back on what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had said earlier Wednesday. When Leavitt started to clash with her, things became personal.

"But Secretary Hegseth was complaining that it was front-page news about these six service members who were killed," Collins said.

"That's not what the secretary said, and that's not what he meant, and you know it!" Leavitt said, appearing visibly upset by Collins' statement. "You are being disingenuous. There is not — we've never had a secretary of defense who cares more..."

Collins then interjected and read the statement directly from Hegseth, who had claimed that the press had purposefully tried to speak badly about Trump.

"The press only wants to make the president look bad," Leavitt said. As you know, the press, the deaths of U.S. service members under every president. The press does only want to make the president look bad. That's a fact. Especially, you know, listen to me, especially you, and especially CNN, and the secretary of defense cares deeply about our warfighters and our men and women in uniform. He travels all across this country to meet with them, to connect with them. And your network has hardly ever probably reported on that."

Collins responded again to Leavitt's attacks — pointing out that covering the slain military members was not an attempt to attack Trump.

"That's not making the president look bad, that's showcasing that," Collins said.

"And I just told you that the president of the United States will be attending their dignified transfer. So please. So, please," Leavitt said. "We expect you to cover that as you should, Kaitlan. But you and your network know that you take every single thing this administration says and tries to use it to make the president look bad. That is an objective fact."

Collins pushed back again.

"I don't think covering troop deaths is trying to make the president look bad," Collins said.

"If you're trying to argue right now that CNN's overwhelming coverage is not negative of President Donald Trump, I think the American people would tend to agree, and your ratings would tend to disagree with that as well," Leavitt said.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt delivered an attack on the media on Wednesday during the first press briefing since the U.S. launched its military operation against Iran five days ago.

NBC News senior White House correspondent Garrett Haake asked Leavitt why President Donald Trump, just days after his State of the Union address, had not laid out the case for why the U.S. had planned with its ally Israel to launch military strikes on Iran. Leavitt blamed the press for conflicting reports over the Trump administration's objectives in the military action, and what prompted the attacks.

"Does the president believe the country supports the actions that he's taken so far in Iran?" Haake asked.

Leavitt responded to the question with a swipe at the media, including the reporters at the briefing.

"I think he does. And I think the president knows the country is smart enough to read past many of the fake news headlines produced by people in this room, that this action was unjustifiable," Leavitt said.

"Again, this is a rogue terrorist regime that has been threatening the United States, our allies and our people for 47 years," Leavitt argued. "And the American people are smart enough to know that. And they've also been smart enough to listen to the president himself, not just over the past year in this second term, but during his first term as president and also for the past 40 years of his life. This is a president who has been remarkably consistent on this issue, that Iran can never obtain a nuclear weapon. And the president tried peace through diplomacy exhaustively and extensively. He and his team gave it their best go."

Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones sought to distance himself from President Donald Trump and the MAGA movement over the ongoing military operation against Iran.

During his Wednesday broadcast, Jones criticized Trump for suggesting ground troops could be deployed in Operation Epic Fury.

"I have no doubt the Marines and the Army are going to kick their ass, but we're going to have a lot of dead people. And I mean a lot," he warned. "And their answer is continue to kill whoever the new leader is, just keep killing the generals, killing the leadership, kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, kill."

"You can say what you want about the Iranian cult, Islamic cult, but at least they stand for something," he continued, noting that Trump was "starting to give in and bend and do things that aren't what he said he would do, that aren't America first."

Jones claimed that he had been offered millions to "sell out" his principles.

"I won't sell out against America First. And if I start seeing Trump sell out to whatever, I'm not going along with it. But I love the idiot, neocon, Johnny-Come-Lately Trump supporters that, like, if you don't support whatever [White House Chief of Staff] Susie Wiles wants or whatever the new war is, you're not a patriot. You're the fake MAGA," he remarked.

"Dude, I'm not MAGA!" Jones exclaimed. "I'm 1776 worldwide. I'm a populist American. Make America great again; how about make America free again? So, MAGA's great, but I'm not MAGA, and I've told you that for, you know, seven, eight, nine years. I am 1776."

The right-wing conspiracy theorist went on to compare Trump to a used lawnmower.

"I'm proud I supported Trump for 10 years and got persecuted," he said. "If Trump at the end starts going sideways, it's like you got a lawnmower, you mow the yard with it for 10 years, and then one day the engine blows, and it's cheaper just to get a new one than to replace the motor."

"You're like sad about the lawnmower that the engine blew up, but you just put it out at the curb, you know, when they do the trash pickup once a year for, you know, appliances and stuff, and you put the old refrigerator out there and the old lawnmower, and oh, you were a good lawnmower, bye, bye," he added. "It's like I'm not mad that I had the lawnmower and cut the grass and did all this, and now the lawnmower's broken. Right now, black smoke's coming out of the lawnmower, and it's sputtering, and it's on fire. So I think this lawnmower is probably done."

"We can't kick illegal alien Somalis out of the country, but we can go fight a million-man army. It's insane."

It should come as no surprise that Donald Trump has piled lie upon lie to justify his attack on Iran in violation of international law, constantly shifting his rationale as one lie collides with another.

The following litany of lies reveals how Trump is responsible for fueling a burgeoning war in the Middle East.

Lie #1

Trump has said consistently that he opposes and would never involve the US in regime change and nation building, calling it a “proven, absolute failure.”

Reality: Under Trump in 2025-26, the US has sought regime change in both Venezuela and Iran by attacking both nations and deposing their leaders.

Former Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro was captured and brought to the US to face criminal charges, Trump stating that the US would “run” the country until a stable government could be formed. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed in the US’s attack on Iran, with Trump urging the Iranian people to rise up and oust the theocratic regime.

Lie #2

After the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2025, Trump said that the US had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear facilities and completely destroyed Iran’s nuclear enrichment program.

Reality: The bombing of the nuclear facilities did not destroy Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. A US Defense Agency (DIA) report concluded that the strikes set back the program by three to six months. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director Rafael Grossi said that Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile was largely unaccounted for.

Had the US bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities destroyed its nuclear enrichment program like Trump said, why in 2026 was the US attempting to negotiate a nuclear agreement with Iran? Wasn’t that what the 2025 bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities already accomplished?

Lie #3

Trump claimed that Iran was actively building nuclear weapons as a pretext for engaging in bad-faith negotiations, ultimately leading to the US’s attack on Iran.

Reality: Iran was never building nuclear weapons. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told Congress in March 2025 that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi stated the agency had “not found any proof” of an effort by Iran to build a nuclear weapon. The false justification for attacking Iran mirrored the justification for the US’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 based on the falsehood that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Lie #4

Trump said the massive US military build-up in the Middle East was intended to pressure Iran to negotiate a nuclear agreement, with diplomacy preferred over force.

Reality: Trump’s purpose in authorizing the massive US military build-up in the Middle East was obvious: to employ it. Attacking Iran was not a spur-of-the-moment decision but rather a long thought-out plan featuring a large, coordinated military attack on Iran conceived long before it was executed. The US was not going to amass that kind of military power halfway across the globe without intending to use it.

Lie #5

Trump claimed that he preferred resolving the issue of Iran’s nuclear program through negotiations and diplomacy.

Reality: Trump never intended to negotiate in good faith but rather to use the “failed” negotiations as rationale for the attack on Iran. First, Trump gave negotiations a scant two months to reach settlement while in 2015, the US and an international coalition took 20 months to complete a successful nuclear agreement with Iran.

Second, Trump knew the US’s “red line” negotiating position — that Iran could enrich no uranium after having enriched it for decades for domestic nuclear power — would never be accepted. Third, the US attacked Iran half way through Trump’s stated two-month negotiating window, a diplomatic solution never meant to be given a chance.

Lie #6

Trump claimed the US attacked Iran because it was a threat to America and the American people.

Reality: Iran poses absolutely no threat to America. First, it has no nuclear weapons’ capability and lacks the long-range missiles to reach the US mainland. Second, if it ever developed such missiles, attacking the country with the most powerful military in the world would ensure Iran’s annihilation.

Lie #7

Trump claimed US citizens are safer today due to the attack on Iran.

Reality: Since Iran posed no threat to the US, the attack on Iran didn’t make US citizens any safer. Instead, it could make them less safe through Iranian retaliatory bombing of US military bases and through potential terrorist activity in the US within Iranian-supportive sleeper cells.

Lie #8

Trump claimed the timing of the attack on Iran was necessary to eliminate “imminent threats” from a nation on the verge of developing nuclear weapons.

Reality: The timing had nothing to do with eliminating “imminent threats” which didn’t exist and everything to do with the looming 2026 mid-term elections. Trump’s purpose was two-fold: to try and score a huge foreign policy victory that he could ride all the way to the Nov. 4 election and to deflect focus on the economic woes he has created for the American people through his failed policies.

Trump’s lies that Iran was enriching uranium to build nuclear weapons and that it posed a serious threat to America provided the false justification for the US’s attack on Iran. That perfidious duplicity launched a series of horrific events with no end in sight.

Thanks to Trump’s lies, the US attacked Iran, resulting in the heartbreaking killing of more than 100 Iranian children whose elementary school was bombed. American soldiers have been killed by Iranian retaliatory strikes on US bases, and putting American “boots on the ground” in Iran is being contemplated. The outbreak of a region-wide war has already begun as civilian deaths have been reported in countries across the Middle East.

Thanks to Trump, a diplomatic settlement between the US and Iran that could have avoided all of the bloodshed and destruction was never given a chance. This is Trump’s war, and he bears responsibility for all of the human suffering that it is bringing.

• Tom Tyner is a freelance editorialist, satirist, political analyst, blogger, author and retired English instructor.

Cheap semaglutide, the drug in Ozempic and Wegovy, could help millions with diabetes and obesity in 160 countries

Weight-loss jabs such as Wegovy could be made for just $3 a month, according to new analysis, potentially making the treatment available to millions in poorer countries as patents expire.

More than a billion people live with obesity worldwide, with rates rising fast in lower-income nations as they shift to westernised diets and more sedentary lifestyles.

The men, sent to Africa after completing criminal sentences in the US, are from Cuba, Jamaica and Yemen

Three men deported by the US to Eswatini – rather than their home countries – have filed a case against Eswatini’s government with the African Union’s human rights body, claiming their detention was an unlawful violation of their rights.

Two of the claimants, from Cuba and Yemen, have been in prison in Eswatini, formerly Swaziland, for eight months. The third, Orville Etoria, was repatriated to his home country, Jamaica, in September.

US president is ‘truly uninformed’ for spreading claims of ‘white genocide’ in South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa tells New York Times

South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, has called Donald Trump’s policy of allowing white Afrikaners to apply for refugee status in the US “racist”, saying the US president was “truly uninformed” in a rare instance of direct criticism.

Ramaphosa told the New York Times that last year’s Oval Office meeting with the US leader, when Trump turned down the lights and played a video that he falsely claimed showed there was a “white genocide” in South Africa, was a “spectacle” and an “ambush”.

• British former champion hits out at former colonial rulers

• ‘I’m hoping countries unite and take Africa back’

Lewis Hamilton has called for a movement to “take Africa back”, claiming the continent is being “controlled” by European powers. On the eve of the new Formula One season in Melbourne, the seven-time champion outlined his ambition to compete in a grand prix on African soil.

But the 41-year-old, F1’s first black race driver, did not stop there. He suggested former colonial rulers still exerted undue power in the region and called for action to reverse that influence. “I’ve got roots from a few different places there, like Togo and Benin,” he said. “I’m really proud of that part of the world.

At least 169 killed in raid near Sudan border as clashes between government and opposition forces intensify

South Sudan is reeling from an escalating conflict between the government-aligned army and opposition forces and allied groups that observers say risks returning the country to a full-blown civil war.

Violent confrontations in the world’s youngest country between the military, which is loyal to President Salva Kiir, and insurgents believed to be allied to the suspended vice-president, Riek Machar, have increased in recent weeks.

Landmark ruling in Celia Ramos case finds 310,000 women, most Indigenous, were targeted in brutal 1990s campaign

The highest human rights court in Latin America condemned Peru on Thursday over the death of its citizen Celia Ramos, who died at the age of 34 in 1997 after undergoing sterilisation “under coercion”.

The landmark ruling by the inter-American court of human rights (IACHR) is the first on Peru’s forced sterilisation programme, which operated between 1996 and 2000 and was directed against poor, rural and Indigenous women.

Police say Masood Masjoody was most likely murdered; Iranian expats suspect he was killed for his criticism of the theocratic regime

Police in Canada have concluded that a missing Iranian activist was most likely the victim of murder, prompting fears that his disappearance has the hallmarks of a transnational repression campaign targeting critics of Tehran.

Masood Masjoody, a mathematician critical of both Iran’s theocratic regime and the exiled family of the former shah, went missing in early February in the city of Burnaby, British Columbia.

Experts say US influence over South American neighbour will be hard to replicate in country with deep and long-standing antipathy to the west

First, the CIA tracks the head of an oil-rich, US-baiting nation to a heavily guarded compound at the heart of his country’s mountain-flanked capital.

Then, that leader is removed from power with a deadly and irresistible show of US military force.

Re-establishing diplomatic relations will support Venezuela’s economy, US state department claims, amid push for minerals access

Venezuela and the US are restoring diplomatic ties, the two countries announced Thursday, in a new sign of thawing relations after Washington ousted former president Nicolás Maduro.

The announcement came as US interior secretary Doug Burgum wrapped up a two-day trip to Venezuela, part of US president Donald Trump’s push for greater access to the country’s mineral wealth.

Critics sceptical Pentagon chief’s plan for increased military force – amid rising US intervention – will stop drug gangs

Pete Hegseth, the US defence secretary, has urged Latin American countries to adopt a more aggressive approach against drug cartels, warning that the Trump administration may otherwise act unilaterally in the region.

Hegseth’s remarks come in a context of escalating US intervention in the region, both militarily and in elections, which culminated in the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro – the first US ground military attack on a South American country.

Platforms include YouTube, TikTok and Instagram as communication minister says ‘our children face real threats’

Indonesia will ban social media for children under 16, its communication and digital affairs minister said on Friday.

Meutya Hafid said in a statement to media said that she signed a government regulation that will mean children under the age of 16 can no longer have accounts on high-risk digital platforms, including YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, Roblox and Bigo Live, a popular livestreaming site. With a population of about 285 million, the fourth-highest in the world, the south-east Asian nation represents a significant market for social networks.

South-east Asian country limits air conditioning and travel for public officials amid soaring fuel prices

• Middle East crisis – live updates

The Philippines is searching for ways to conserve energy in response to surging fuel costs, with public officials ordered to cut back on air conditioning usage and reduce travel.

All national government agencies, state universities and colleges, and local government branches have been told to reduce fuel consumption by at least 10% in response to the crisis in the Middle East.

Government offices have been told to adopt flexible work arrangements, and to set air conditioning units no lower than 24 degrees.

Decision marks end of years-long legal saga for 78-year-old critic of Chinese Communist party

Jimmy Lai, the prominent pro-democracy activist who was recently sentenced to 20 years in prison in Hong Kong, has said he will not appeal his conviction.

The decision marks the end of a years-long legal saga for the 78-year-old critic of the Chinese Communist party (CCP), and opens the door for political negotiations to his release.

Pacific island says the US weakened its proposal to advance a key climate ruling but vows to hold major polluters accountable

The Trump administration’s attempt to sink a UN resolution demanding countries act on the climate crisis has caused cuts to the proposal but hasn’t entirely killed it, according to the tiny Pacific island country spearheading the effort.

The US has demanded that Vanuatu, an archipelago in the south Pacific, drop its UN draft resolution that calls on the world to implement a landmark international court of justice (ICJ) ruling from last year that countries could face paying reparations if they fail to stem the climate crisis.

Reports of attack on US registered tanker in Gulf lifts crude by 3% to $84 a barrel as gas price also starts to climb

• Business live – latest updates

• Middle East crisis – live updates

Stock markets have rebounded in Asia after days of heavy losses driven by the war in the Middle East, but oil and gas prices have continued to climb amid disruption to supplies.

South Korea’s KOSPI, which posted its biggest ever fall on Tuesday of 12%, rose by almost 10% on Thursday, while Japan’s Nikkei climbed by 1.9%. MSCI’s Asia-Pacific index excluding Japan jumped by 2.7%.

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s ‘deplorable’ alleged actions warrant his removal from the royal line of succession, Carney says

The Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, has said Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor should be removed from the royal line of succession for alleged actions he described as “deplorable”.

Speaking to reporters in Tokyo, Carney said the actions that have caused the former prince to be stripped of his royal titles “necessitate” his removal from the line of succession.

Global markets have become inured to the US president’s posturing over the past year, but economists warn they may be ‘a little bit complacent’ in anticipating a short conflict in the Middle East

Investors over the past year have learned that Donald Trump has a boundless capacity to quickly reverse course in the face of acute political or market pressures.

But a week since the United States and Israel launched missile strikes on Iran, there are fears the war could morph into a protracted conflict.

Patrick Commins is Guardian Australia’s economics editor

Jenny Ware says party is ‘at crisis point’ and cannot be competitive at election time unless it selects candidates who better reflect the makeup of Australia

• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

The former Liberal MP Jenny Ware says her party must implement gender quotas for candidates for office, warning the opposition “cannot get back into government” without putting forward candidates who are more reflective of the broader community.

Ware, who lost her seat of Hughes at the 2025 election, said it was “deeply embarrassing” that the Liberal party executive had not released its own review of the electoral wipeout, and which was then tabled in parliament by Anthony Albanese this week.

Greg Craven, a former vice-chancellor of Australian Catholic University, chosen after no other bids made for the tender

• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

Australia’s antisemitism envoy hand-picked Greg Craven to lead her controversial university report card process after receiving no response from five firms approached during an open tender process.

Documents released under freedom of information laws showed Jillian Segal’s office initially approached three independent consulting firms and two law firms to potentially conduct the assessment of Australian universities and how well they were dealing with antisemitism on campus, but all of them declined to bid on the tender.

Statement by breakfast co-host about ‘speculation and misinformation’ appears to contradict comments made by the network

Jackie ‘O’ Henderson has broken her silence to say she did “not quit or resign” from the Kyle and Jackie O Show, and she is “deeply saddened” the hit breakfast radio show may come to an end.

“I am deeply saddened by the events of the past week and the possibility of the show ending,” she said. “This has come as a shock to me, as it has to everyone else.”

Exclusive: MoD-contracted workers assisting Ukrainians in a way ‘no other nation has been willing to do’, says minister

In an unmarked and undisclosed location in western Ukraine, British and Ukrainian engineers work side by side to fix damaged military hardware, crawling under the chassis of artillery systems and pulling apart the insides of British-donated howitzers.

Until now, the existence of this facility, along with three other similar sites inside Ukraine, has been kept quiet, buried in neutral language to avoid drawing too much attention to the sites, given the sensitivities of all military-linked work inside Ukraine.

Foreign minister wants ‘conversation’ about closing UK military sites following lack of warning of impending attack on RAF Akrotiri

• Middle East crisis – live updates

Cyprus’s foreign minister has said there are “questions” about the future of the UK’s military bases on the island after the drone strike last Sunday.

The attack on RAF Akrotiri, suspected to have been launched by Hezbollah in Lebanon, caused minimal damage and did not result in casualties.

The European media giant Axel Springer has scuppered the Daily Mail owner. But why did it not bid sooner? And what will Brexit-backing readers think?

After three years, a series of failed bids stretching from the US to Abu Dhabi, internal rebellions and even changes in the law, it should be no surprise that the tortured sale of the Telegraph has delivered another spectacular twist with a blockbuster offer from the media giant Axel Springer.

It has torpedoed the long-held dreams of the Daily Mail proprietor, Lord Rothermere, to secure the Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph and begin the next chapter of his family’s love affair with the British press.

Ukraine police investigating what foreign ministry calls a ‘hostage’ situation involving seven employees of Oschadbank stopped by Hungary

Icelandic foreign minister Þorgerður Katrín Gunnarsdóttir submitted a government motion for a referendum on resuming accession talks with the European Union, proposing the vote should take place on 29 August, state broadcaster RUV has reported.

The draft resolution will be put to Icelandic parliament for approval next week.

Seven Ukrainians arrested and money-laundering investigation launched in latest spat between Kyiv and Budapest

An increasingly acrimonious spat between Hungary and Ukraine has escalated further, as Budapest impounded two Ukrainian armoured bank vehicles carrying millions of euros of hard cash as well as bars of gold.

Seven Ukrainian citizens accompanying the convoy were also arrested. Hungarian officials said the detained Ukrainians had intelligence links and suggested the money could be of dubious origin, while Ukraine’s foreign minister, Andrii Sybiha, accused Budapest of “taking hostages and stealing money”.

Donald Trump says he would only accept Tehran’s ‘unconditional surrender’ as war continues to expand; Israel launches huge attacks on Iran and Lebanon

• Tell us: how have you been affected by the latest events in the Middle East?

Clashes erupted as Israeli forces attempted a landing operation along the Lebanon-Syria border, with Hezbollah saying its fighters were involved, Lebanese official media reported on Saturday.

The state-run National News Agency (NNA), citing the Lebanese health ministry, said Israeli strikes on Nabi Sheet killed at least three people and wounded 16 others.

This blog is now closed. Our live coverage of the Middle East crisis continues here

• Tell us: how have you been affected by the latest events in the Middle East?

Iran and Lebanon were hit with a wave of intense Israeli strikes overnight.

Israel’s military said Friday morning it had begun “a broad-scale wave of strikes” on Tehran, Iran’s capital.

Washington says new measures not aimed at easing restrictions on Moscow and only affect supplies already in transit

The US treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, said on Friday that his government was considering lifting sanctions on more Russian oil, a day after it temporarily authorised India to buy from Moscow as global oil prices surged.

The US-Israel war on Iran and Tehran’s retaliatory attacks across the Gulf region have upended the world’s energy and transport sectors, virtually halting activity in the strait of Hormuz.

US president again calls on Iranian people to overthrow government or face ‘absolutely guaranteed death’

• Middle East crisis – live updates

Donald Trump has said only Iran’s “unconditional surrender” will bring an end to the offensive launched seven days ago, as the US and Israel carried out some of the heaviest bombardments so far in the conflict.

“There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Friday, when US strategic bombers were in action over Iran and intensive Israeli strikes in Lebanon forced more than 1 million people to flee their homes.

People tell of scenes of panic during airstrikes on Iran’s capital, with several saying they feared they would die

• Middle East crisis – live updates

Sleeplessness, fear and exhaustion gripped residents of Tehran as successive waves of strikes struck the Iranian capital, judging from messages sent by people in the city after the latest overnight onslaught, which several described as the worst bombardment in six days of war.

With Iran imposing a near-total internet blackout, information emerging from inside the country is fragmentary and difficult to verify. But in a series of accounts sent through proxy connections, and calls with friends abroad, Tehranis described a night of intense explosions.