Top World News

The United States was issued a dire threat Sunday after a wave of Israeli airstrikes pounded Lebanon’s largest city earlier the same morning with supposed backing from the Trump administration, threats that may materialize as major attacks on U.S. bases and assets in the Middle East.As Washington and Tehran continue to negotiate terms to end the ongoing Iran war, a key sticking point has been Israel’s bombardment of Lebanon, which since early March has killed more than 3,400 Lebanese and injured over 10,200. Iran has demanded that Israel halt its bombardment as a condition to end hostilities.And yet, despite multiple attempts by Trump to force Israel’s hand and end its bombardment of its northern neighbor, Israel has defied the president, and has since expanded its military siege of Lebanon, including with the reported use of white phosphorus bombs, which is a potential war crime.“The naval blockade against the Iranian nation and today's U.S. green light to the Zionist regime turn American and regime bases and assets in the region into legitimate targets,” said Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf on Sunday, according to Axios reporter Barak Ravid. “Our armed forces are ready as always.”Last week, Trump admitted to hurling expletives at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a phone call over Israel’s refusal to halt its bombardment of Lebanon, telling The New York Post he was “a little bit perturbed” at Israel’s defiance.????Iranian speaker of parliament and chief negotiator Ghalibaf: "The naval blockade against the Iranian nation and today's U.S. green light to the Zionist regime turn American and regime bases and assets in the region into legitimate targets. Our armed forces are ready as always" https://t.co/ObwY6kTc0U— Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) June 7, 2026

President Donald Trump vowed back in January that his administration’s takeover of Venezuela would “benefit” Americans, and yet, just over six months later, that promise appears to be imploding after key players have reportedly gotten cold feet, The Washington Post reported Sunday.In the immediate aftermath of the unprecedented U.S. attack on Venezuela earlier this year, the Trump administration took control of the nation’s oil revenue, which Trump claimed at the time would be “used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States.” The Trump administration had hoped U.S. companies would invest $100 billion into the South American nation’s energy infrastructure.“But businesses don’t want to spend big on capital-intensive projects to extract heavy crude, which take decades to pay off, if there’s a high chance the government will backslide,” the Post’s report reads.“ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance said recently that Venezuela has ‘a lot more work to do on their side of the equation.’ He said the overhaul of the hydrocarbon law was insufficient ‘to attract a whole lot of investment’ because it could amount to a ‘95 percent government take.’ Chevron CEO Mike Wirth has expressed similar sentiments.”The Trump administration was recently in hot water over its handling of Venezuela’s oil revenue. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA) pressed Secretary of State Marco Rubio last week during a congressional hearing on whether the administration was concealing lucrative private contracts related to Venezuela’s oil.“The Venezuelan government’s illegitimacy raises the risk of investing capital,” the Post’s report reads. “Once real elections are held, U.S. companies will gain a clearer sense of whether it’s worth pouring in money.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth used the 82nd anniversary of D-Day to compare migrants crossing the Mediterranean to the Nazi invasion of Europe — and the backlash was immediate and bipartisan.Speaking at the Normandy ceremony, Hegseth departed from solemn remembrance to deliver an anti-immigration political statement. "Sadly, today different European beaches are stormed by different dangerous ideologies," he said. "In Spain and Italy and Greece and Bulgaria, boats and men arrive. When will European capitals do something about that invasion? Or is it too late?"Greg Bagwell, a retired British Air Marshal and former senior RAF commander, was among the first to respond. "The commemoration of the bravery, tragedy and importance of D-Day is not ever the place to try and score cheap political points. What an ignorant and disrespectful dumba--."Tom Nichols, a national security expert and staff writer at The Atlantic, noted a glaring historical problem with Hegseth's framing — one that multiple people picked up on. "Making an analogy where the West is the defender of the beaches — you know, where the Nazis were — is not the smartest speechifying," Nichols wrote, "even for the man some inside the Pentagon refer to as 'Dumb McNamara.'" His post was reposted by former Republican congresswoman Barbara Comstock.Reed Galen, a Republican strategist and co-founder of the Lincoln Project, was less clinical about it. "If you've been to the American Military Cemetery in Normandy, and you've looked out over those rows of crosses and stars of David, you'll know how odious this man is," he wrote. "Those men didn't die for this ideology or a------- like Pete Hegseth."British attorney Jessica Simor pointed to Hegseth's "Deus Vult" tattoo — the 1095 Crusader rallying cry of Pope Urban II to expel Muslims from Jerusalem, which has since been adopted as a symbol by far-right extremists. "As a far-right Christian nationalist, likely of the kind that favoured the Final Solution, he should have been banned," she wrote.Political commentator Anna Neumann put it plainly: "The heroes of Normandy deserve remembrance, gratitude and humility. Using D-Day commemorations as a platform for culture-war politics is shameless."Occupy Democrats noted the core absurdity: Hegseth had compared migrant boats to the Allied invasion — placing Europe's governments in the rhetorical position of the forces that were trying to stop it.Tim Kaine also weighed in, saying, "Apparently our nitwit Secretary of War(drobe) thinks a D-Day commemoration is an appropriate time to push his far right ideology in Europe."Podcast host Matthew Yglesias chimed in with a question:"Why did he construct an analogy in which he is on the side of the Nazis?"

Marjorie Taylor Greene, the former Georgia congresswoman who built a career railing against government overreach, traveled to Mexico this week to receive a stem cell treatment that the FDA has not approved — and says she thinks Washington should make it legal.Greene told TMZ that she and her fiancé, right-wing media personality Brian Glenn, underwent stem cell IV treatments Saturday at Dream Body Clinic in Puerto Vallarta. The FDA has not approved most stem cell therapies because they haven't completed the process required to establish that they're safe and effective — which is why the couple crossed the border to get them.Greene says she's always been proactive about her health, tracing it back to her days owning a CrossFit gym, and believes stem cell therapy is an effective anti-aging tool. She also told TMZ she doesn't carry health insurance, preferring to spend that money on preventative treatments she believes in.She wants the federal government to get out of the way. Greene told TMZ she believes stem cell therapy should be federally legalized in the U.S. — a position that puts her in the unusual spot of demanding the government deregulate a treatment that many Republicans oppose.The Mexico trip followed a vacation in Costa Rica with Rep. Thomas Massie, who told TMZ last week that he sees Greene as an important voice in the future of the Republican Party and teased a possible push for GOP leadership, TMZ reported.

Fox News host Brian Kilmeade couldn't hide his disgust Thursday morning when his own network flashed an "Iran Deal Soon?" graphic on screen — audibly groaning and declaring the talks a "dead end" just seconds after reading the optimistic chyron off a teleprompter."Ugh!" Kilmeade blurted before pivoting sharply from the network's framing. "The problem is there are no talks. Hezbollah's backed out of it. I see that as a dead end."The @BadFoxGraphics account, which tracks Fox News graphics and on-air moments, captured the clip and said Kilmeade had thrown "cold water on producers' efforts to again predict an imminent Iran deal."President Donald Trump claimed back in 2020 he'd have a deal with Iran "within four weeks" of being re-elected. It never happened. After returning to office, he gave Iran 15 days to reach an agreement in February 2026 — then launched airstrikes on the country. By late May, he was declaring on Truth Social that a deal had "been largely negotiated" — only for officials to walk that back within 24 hours, NPR reported. A Situation Room meeting last weekend ended with no announcement.Now Trump is hinting the war could wrap up "as soon as this weekend" — a claim Kilmeade, reading from his own network's script, couldn't stomach.

President Donald Trump has pitted two of his cabinet members against each other in the battle over who will succeed him and run for president in 2028, and so far, there is a clear loser in this fight, an analyst revealed on Thursday.Secretary of State Marco Rubio has appeared to win Trump over so far, as Vice President JD Vance has lost favor after failed negotiations with Iran, wrote Jonathan V. Last, editor at The Bulwark. And Last argued that it comes down to what Harry Potter character Albus Dumbledore says: “People find it far easier to forgive others for being wrong than being right.”"Point is that Rubio has been wrong about the Iran war from the jump. And that’s why Trump has begun elevating him above JD Vance in the Favorite Adopted Son sweepstakes," Last wrote."It’s clear that Trump is displeased with JD Vance," Last explained. "Early on, when Trump thought he was winning in Iran, there were leaks about Vance not being on board with the war. Daddy Trump sent Vance to negotiate with the Iranians when they clearly had all the cards, setting him up for failure—and at the same time took Rubio with him on vacation to fight night. There was a huge dump of leaks designed to show that Trump doesn’t think Vance has the juice."Rubio didn't play the same game as Vance. And Rubio has benefited."Vance’s mistake was trying to influence the party line, rather than adapting to whatever the Leader said the party line happened to be. Any of Stalin’s henchmen could have told him that was a mistake," Last wrote. "The worse Iran gets, the worse it will be for Vance," Last added. "Trump will become even more resentful—even if Vance never says, told you so. Trump will remember that Vance was the one who told him not to do it."

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent snapped "Don't be absurd!" at a Democratic lawmaker Thursday after getting cornered on the administration's rosy claims about the Iran conflict — a tense exchange that exposed the widening gap between White House spin and reality on the ground.During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the Treasury Department's budget priorities, Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) pressed Bessent on an offhand remark the secretary had made suggesting the conflict with Iran was over."Do you truly believe that we are no longer in conflict with Iran and that they are no longer a threat to Israel or allies in the Gulf, that their nuclear program has been destroyed, that they no longer have a ballistic missile program and drone program threatening its neighbors in the region?" Schneider demanded.Bessent walked it back fast. "The conflict is on pause," he said."So everything's good with Iran now?" Schneider pushed."No. Don't be absurd."The back-and-forth cut to the heart of the administration's credibility problem on Iran. The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that President Donald Trump has told aides privately he would only consider ending the ceasefire if Tehran kills American troops — a far cry from the decisive victory the White House has been claiming. The U.S. and Israel launched the war on Feb. 28 in strikes that killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, but a ceasefire has been in effect since April 8.Bessent cited Trump's statement, telling Schneider that unless an American life is lost, the president does not believe he will have to restart "kinetic action."The exchange grew heated again when Schneider pivoted to the cost of living, rattling off rising prices for beef, coffee, housing, and health insurance. Bessent interrupted repeatedly, at one point shouting "Sir! Sir!" as Schneider reclaimed his time."I think you're just out of touch with what American families are facing," Schneider told him.Bessent fired back with a broadside at Schneider's home state: "No wonder so many people are leaving Illinois. Why don't you come see me in South Carolina?"The two did find rare agreement on one point — that no president, Republican or Democrat, should be shielded from IRS audits — before Schneider circled back to the administration's controversial IRS settlement, which Democrats have called an illegal act of self-dealing.

A Republican lawmaker clashed with an anchor during a live CNN broadcast on Thursday over the Iran war after four GOP House leaders broke from President Donald Trump and voted to rebuke the president over the military operation.Rep. Mike Haridopolos (R-FL) and CNN's Brianna Keilar got into a heated exchange over what the Trump administration has planned to do next in the ongoing war, as gas prices skyrocket for Americans and the Senate now considers Trump's war powers in Iran. Haridopolos stated that he firmly stands behind Trump and his administration."The person I trust in this is President Trump," Haridopolos said. "And I trust Marco Rubio, he's been a 25-year friend of mine. He knows all the intricate details of what we're doing right now. The recommendation from the White House is to know all the details. They want to continue to keep the pressure on Iran as long as possible, because I know, look, we're all hurting with gas prices. We all recognize this, but what we have to do is finally eliminate this threat in Iran."Keilar asked the Republican if he thought the administration was entering "quagmire territory.""This is a real winnable situation — for the first time since 1979, to finally take out these crazy people in Iran," Haridopolos said. "And what we're trying to do is win the conflict. And I'm challenged, like you are, that no one likes the higher prices. But this is something we, the president, is willing to do." Keilar pushed back and asked Haridopolos if the war was a "winnable situation."He argued that Trump knew it would be a risk and unpopular, but that the president "believed the risk" was worth it.The conversation heated up when Haridopolos said, "if we go with your plan" — and Keilar interjected."Your plan? It's not my plan," she said."You're pushing for it. So that's being said," Haridopolos responded. "I'm telling you what Americans are saying," Keilar said, pushing back. "This is unpopular. You have now Republicans who have experience in wars that have lasted a very long time," she added.Haridopolos appeared frustrated with the anchor and said, "You want me to answer?"The two bristled and spoke over each other."You can, but you just told me what I was saying. And I'm telling you, please don't put words in my mouth. But please continue on with what you wanted to say," Keilar said.