Feed aggregator

The following editorial appears in the New York Post:

As he prepared to sign his “memorandum of understanding” with the Islamic dictatorship of Iran, President Trump again insisted that his deal was much different than that of his predecessor, President Barack Obama.

He’s right — it’s probably worse.

Obama’s treaty did not prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, it simply punted the issue down the road in exchange for cash.

Trump’s agreement has the same vague promises, the same payouts, but with the added twist that Iran can and will take the world hostage by shutting the Strait of Hormuz at will.

On Friday, just days after the signing of the MOU, Iran moved to close the Strait, saying no ships could cross without its permission and suggesting that “insurance fees” must be paid.

This isn’t in violation of the deal.

This is part of the deal.

Point No. 5: “The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialog with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz.”

Why would opening the door for “administration” of a previously free international waterway even be part this agreement?

How is this in any way the “unconditional surrender” Trump described?

The deal contains just one condition Trump previously said was required of Iran.

It’s No. 7: “Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons.”

“Reaffirm” — because that’s what Iran has always claimed.

If they suddenly mean it, it would be a win.

The rest of the 14-point plan is almost entirely about what Iran gets: Immediate sanctions relief on exported oil.

Protection of Hezbollah from Israeli attack.

And the possibility of a $300 billion reconstruction fund if all goes well with the next round of talks.

No mention of Iran reining in its terror proxies in Gaza, Lebanon and Yemen.

No restriction on conventional weapons.

No mechanism to surrender the enriched uranium it has already created.

No regime change or mercy for protesters.

Trump had claimed Iran was days away from economic collapse because of the blockade.

He said Iran’s navy and air force were “decimated.”

This is the best deal we could get with the leverage we had?

The president hasn’t just moved the goalposts, he’s changed the sport, the venue and the rules simply to declare a win.

This isn’t what Trump’s voters want, despite the claims of the Tucker Carlson’s of the world.

Among self-identified MAGA Republicans, 51% favor regime change, while 25% back a negotiated settlement, according to a new Reagan Institute Summer Survey.

This shouldn’t be about the podcasters, it’s about the people.

Trump is betraying his base — and his allies.

Speaking of allies, Vice President J.D. Vance responded to Israeli criticism of the deal with a thuggish threat, suggesting they not attack “the only powerful ally [they] have anywhere left in the entire world.”

Israel has been a staunch defender of American interests in the region.

Vance pays them back with a “nice country you have there, shame if anything happened to it”?

This comes on the heel of Trump needlessly insulting Italian Prime ​Minister Giorgia Meloni and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth looking for ways to weaken Europe.

What’s the plan here?

Make sure we have no friends left?

The administration says the MOU is just a first step.

Iran won’t get full sanctions relief unless it agrees to a larger deal over the next 60 days.

But Iran has already delayed negotiations, with Vance cancelling a trip to Switzerland.

The more time that passes, the more Iran realizes that the threat of renewed US strikes is a fiction.

They can “tap us along” until the midterms and beyond.

Trump is already signaling as much, by ridiculously claiming the son of the ayatollah taking over is “regime change” and the MOU is a victory.

Your voters aren’t buying it, Mr. President.

This memorandum is not the end, and the first sign of betrayal by Iran must be treated as the last — with renewed action to stop its evil.

Already, Iran has shown it will leverage the Strait and blackmail the world once US ships have left.

This cannot be allowed.

Don’t make the same mistake Obama did.

{Matzav.com}

Rav Yitzchok Zilberstein addressed growing confusion over President Donald Trump’s recent policy shift toward Israel, suggesting that the unusual developments may be part of the turbulent period preceding the arrival of Moshiach.

The remarks were delivered Thursday night following his regular shiur for physicians and rabbanim at Mayanei Hayeshua Medical Center, after attendees asked him about the widespread uncertainty many people have been feeling in light of recent events.

Participants in the shiur expressed concern about what they described as a series of troubling developments.

“The public is very confused,” they told Rav Zilberstein. “Trump is changing direction, there are troubles with the arrests of yeshivah bochurim, and people feel that everyone is against us. How is it that Trump, who until now was on our side, has suddenly become against us?”

Responding to the question, Rav Zilberstein said: “Yes, yes, apparently Moshiach needs to come. We all know what is stated among the curses: ‘And you shall be driven mad by the sight that your eyes shall see.’”

He went on to explain that the apparent reversal by a leader widely viewed as a strong friend of Israel naturally creates a sense of bewilderment and disbelief.

“This is called that we are driven mad by what our eyes see,” he said. “When one sees such astonishing things, to see such a great friend who was so supportive of us, who helped us so much, and even whose daughter converted—and now something has happened and he has become against us. This is a certain manifestation of what is written among the curses: ‘And you shall be driven mad by the sight that your eyes shall see.’”

Following the shiur, Rav Zilberstein referenced the writings of Rav Elchanan Wasserman Hy”d regarding Ikvesa D’Meshicha, the era preceding the arrival of Moshiach. Rav Elchanan described a time when events unfold with extraordinary speed and people are left stunned by the rapid changes taking place around them.

When asked whether the current developments could be connected to the campaign against the Torah world and the arrests of yeshivah students in Eretz Yisroel, Rav Zilberstein replied: “Everything could be true. We need to ask the great leaders of the nation.”

As the gathering concluded, participants requested words of encouragement and hope for imminent salvation. Rav Zilberstein again pointed to the Torah’s description of a period of confusion before redemption.

“That is clear. The Torah says, ‘And you shall be driven mad by the sight that your eyes shall see.’ This is the time now. Certainly the salvation will come here.”

According to the “Siach Yitzchok” hotline, which disseminates Rav Zilberstein’s Torah teachings, the rov also recently responded to someone who had cursed the President of the United States over the agreement with Iran.

Rav Zilberstein strongly objected, saying: “I am not prepared to hear expressions like that. He always did many good things for the Jews, and even toward a non-Jew one must show gratitude. Therefore, even if he has now changed in a puzzling way, this is still not the way to speak about him.”

{Matzav.com}

A sharp confrontation unfolded at the United Nations Security Council as Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon accused senior UN officials of ignoring Hamas’s role in the humanitarian crisis in Gaza while directing criticism at Israel.

The dispute centered on remarks by Tom Fletcher, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, during a discussion on conditions in the Gaza Strip. Danon challenged Fletcher for focusing on obstacles to aid deliveries while, he said, failing to address the role of Hamas.

Addressing Fletcher directly during the session, Danon said: “You spoke about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, criticized Israel and described the obstacles to bringing in aid. But once again you failed to mention the biggest obstacle to improving the humanitarian situation—Hamas. Why do you refuse to call the problem by its name?”

The Israeli envoy went on to argue that no lasting improvement in Gaza is possible as long as Hamas remains armed and in control.

“The humanitarian situation will not improve, Gaza will not be rebuilt, and the war will not end as long as Hamas remains armed.”

His comments reflected Israel’s long-standing criticism that international organizations frequently overlook Hamas’s responsibility for conditions in Gaza while focusing disproportionately on Israeli actions.

Danon also used the session to press the United Nations for answers regarding the dismissal of dozens of employees from the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, commonly known as UNRWA.

Referring to the agency’s recent personnel actions, he said: “This week UNRWA fired 70 employees, citing ‘safety and security risks.'”

Questioning the explanation, Danon continued: “If there is no terrorism problem in UNRWA, then why exactly were 70 employees fired?”

The ambassador argued that Israel’s warnings about Hamas infiltration within UNRWA had been dismissed for years and said recent developments had validated those concerns.

“For years we warned that Hamas had infiltrated UNRWA. For years the UN denied it. Now even UNRWA is forced to dismiss its own employees. It is time to stop covering up reality and start providing answers.”

Danon’s remarks came amid renewed criticism by Israeli officials of the United Nations, including controversy surrounding comments by Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on Palestinian issues, who was accused by critics of responding dismissively to a bereaved Israeli mother whose daughter was killed during the October 7 massacre.

The dispute also follows a series of recent Israeli measures targeting UNRWA. In recent weeks, Israel has taken steps against the agency, including cutting water and electricity infrastructure connected to its offices in Yerushalayim, after what Israeli officials say was evidence linking some agency employees to Hamas.

The latest exchange at the Security Council highlighted the continuing tensions between Israel and various UN bodies, with Israeli officials accusing the organization of anti-Israel bias and of failing to adequately confront Hamas’s activities in Gaza.

{Matzav.com}

Singer-songwriter Yonatan Razel was released Friday morning from Shaare Zedek Medical Center and returned home in good condition after spending several weeks hospitalized following a brain hemorrhage.

The Yerushalayim hospital announced that Razel had completed his hospitalization and was continuing his recovery at home after receiving treatment for the serious medical condition.

According to the medical center, Razel underwent extensive supportive care throughout his stay from multiple teams within Shaare Zedek’s neurological services. His treatment involved doctors and nurses from the Neurological Intensive Care Unit led by Dr. Stefan Mausbach, working together with the Neuro-Radiology Unit headed by Dr. Yaakov Amsalem, as well as the medical and nursing staff of the Neurosurgery Department under the leadership of Dr. Nevo Margalit.

In a statement, the hospital said: “Thanks to the rapid and professional diagnosis and treatment Razel received immediately upon arriving at Shaare Zedek, along with comprehensive care throughout his hospitalization, he has returned to full and normal functioning.

“We congratulate Yonatan and his family on his discharge from the medical center and wish him complete health and continued creativity and contribution to our cultural world.”

Razel’s family also issued a statement expressing gratitude for his recovery and for the outpouring of support they received during the ordeal.

“We are filled with gratitude to Hakadosh Boruch Hu for the open miracles He has bestowed upon us. Thank you very much to the wonderful people of Israel for your prayers and concern for Yonatan’s well-being. And last but certainly not least, a special and heartfelt thank you to the entire staff of Shaare Zedek Medical Center, the doctors and nurses, for their devoted care.”

{Matzav.com}

As criticism mounts in Israel over the Trump administration’s understandings with Iran, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee publicly endorsed an argument that frames the move not as a retreat from Israel, but as a political calculation aimed at preserving Republican strength ahead of next year’s midterm elections.

According to journalist Ariel Kahana, Huckabee shared comments made by Mike Zell, chairman of the Republican Party in Israel, and wrote, “I couldn’t have said it better myself,” signaling agreement with the analysis.

In the statement cited by Huckabee, Zell argued that President Donald Trump has not altered his commitment to Israel despite concerns surrounding the recent U.S.-Iran understandings.

According to Zell, Trump “has not changed course or abandoned Israel,” and his support for the Jewish state and the Jewish people remains “unquestionable.”

Zell contended that the president’s decisions are being driven primarily by domestic political considerations, particularly the desire to secure Republican victories in the November midterm elections and prevent Democrats from regaining control of Congress.

He argued that Trump believes a Democratic-controlled Congress would spend the remainder of his term attempting to undermine his presidency through investigations, impeachment efforts, and obstruction of both foreign and domestic policy initiatives.

According to Zell’s analysis, American voters are generally more concerned with economic issues such as inflation, energy prices, food costs, and stock-market performance than with security developments in the Middle East.

For that reason, Zell suggested, Trump is seeking to pause the conflict with Iran for the time being in order to lower inflation, stabilize financial markets, and strengthen the economy heading into the election season. He added that this is how the president currently views America’s interests and noted that he personally agrees with that assessment.

Addressing the agreement itself, Zell argued that it should not be viewed as a final settlement but rather as an arrangement designed to facilitate negotiations while maintaining a ceasefire during the current phase.

He maintained that Trump still holds “all the cards” and retains the ability to determine the extent of future American pressure on Iran and its regional proxies.

From Israel’s perspective, Zell said the most important aspect of the arrangement is that Israel is not formally a party to the agreement. In his view, that leaves Israel free to take whatever steps it deems necessary to defend its interests in Lebanon, Syria, and even against Iran itself, whether by prior coordination or as circumstances develop.

At the same time, Zell made clear that he is not entirely satisfied with either the contents of the agreement or some of the rhetoric used by White House officials in defending it.

According to Zell, “this is politics in an election year,” but he stressed that, in his view, the fundamental relationship between Israel and the United States remains strong and unbreakable.

Huckabee’s public embrace of Zell’s analysis comes at a particularly sensitive moment in U.S.-Israel relations. The Trump administration’s agreement with Iran has generated significant criticism within Israel, while reports have emerged that American officials have warned Israeli leaders against publicly attacking the president over the issue.

At the same time, debate over the Iran understandings has not been limited to Israel. Reports from Washington indicate that some Republicans have also expressed reservations about the arrangement, even as White House officials continue presenting it as a policy designed first and foremost to advance American national interests.

{Matzav.com}

Former minister Ron Dermer has reportedly delivered an unusually blunt message to Israel’s political and security leadership: avoid attacking the Trump administration and do not allow policy disagreements with Washington to escalate into a public confrontation.

According to a report by Yisroel Hayom, Dermer conveyed the warning amid growing tensions between Israel and the White House following the recent memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran.

Journalist Dani Zaken reported that two sources said Dermer urged senior Israeli officials to steer clear of an open clash with the administration, fearing such a dispute would further damage relations between Jerusalem and Washington. The warning comes at a time when Israel is seeking to preserve its operational freedom in both Lebanon and Iran while simultaneously facing increasing American pressure on the diplomatic front.

The backdrop to Dermer’s message is criticism recently attributed to U.S. Vice President JD Vance regarding Israel and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. According to an earlier Yisroel Hayom report, Vance allegedly pressed President Donald Trump to rein in Netanyahu whenever Israel carried out military actions in Lebanon and accused the Israeli leader of attempting to undermine the emerging agreement with Iran. White House officials have denied those claims.

Dermer’s intervention carries particular weight because of his longstanding role as one of Netanyahu’s closest advisers on U.S.-Israel relations and his deep familiarity with the political landscape in Washington. The report described him as a former minister, a trusted confidant of Netanyahu, and one of the key architects of Israeli policy in recent years.

According to the report, Dermer is advocating a two-track approach. On one hand, Israel should remain firm in defending its security interests and prevent Iran or Hezbollah from exploiting American diplomatic initiatives. On the other hand, he believes Israel must avoid a direct public confrontation with President Trump, particularly at a time when the administration holds significant influence over developments involving Iran, Lebanon, and Congress.

The report also noted ongoing disagreements within the U.S. administration regarding Lebanon. Some officials reportedly favor tying the Lebanese issue directly to the broader Iran agreement, while others—including the State Department under Secretary of State Marco Rubio—support pursuing a separate Israeli-Lebanese arrangement that would establish a framework for an eventual Israeli withdrawal while also reducing Hezbollah’s influence.

Meanwhile, Israeli officials are reportedly working behind the scenes to build support among lawmakers from both parties in Congress. However, according to the report, they are being careful not to frame those efforts as a direct challenge to President Trump.

That, according to Yisroel Hayom, is precisely the point of Dermer’s warning: fight vigorously for Israel’s security interests, but do not turn disagreements with the White House into a full-scale political battle.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump doubled down Friday on his claim that Iran has been severely weakened by recent military action, insisting that Tehran has emerged from the conflict in a dramatically diminished state and will receive no American funds under the newly signed memorandum of understanding between the two countries.

In two posts published on Truth Social, Trump pushed back against Democratic criticism of his administration’s handling of the war with Iran, arguing that U.S. military operations devastated the country’s military capabilities and fundamentally altered the balance of power in the region.

“The War has diminished Iran!” Trump wrote. “It doesn’t, any longer, have an Air Force, a Navy, Antiaircraft Equipment, Radar, or practically anything else, and yet the Dumocrats say that Iran is better off now than it was four months ago.

“Can you imagine getting away with that??? How stupid can some people be???”

Trump’s comments came just days after Washington and Tehran reached a framework agreement intended to halt months of fighting and restore access through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most strategically important maritime corridors and a key route for global oil shipments.

However, reports emerged Friday evening that Iran had once again shut down the strait, raising fresh questions about the future of the agreement.

The president has repeatedly maintained that the military campaign accomplished its primary objectives, significantly degrading Iran’s military infrastructure and compelling the regime to engage in negotiations.

In a separate Truth Social message, Trump rejected the notion that the United States had entered talks from a position of weakness or urgency.

“We didn’t meet out of desperation, Iran did,” Trump wrote. “They are FINISHED! We’ll play out the 60 days. They get no money, not ten cents!”

Under the terms of the memorandum of understanding, both sides now have a 60-day window to negotiate a broader and more permanent agreement.

Administration officials have said the framework is designed both to ensure the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and to address concerns surrounding Iran’s nuclear activities, although the final terms of any long-term agreement remain under negotiation.

The accord follows a months-long conflict that began in late February after Trump authorized military strikes against Iran.

During the war, American and allied forces targeted Iranian military installations, missile infrastructure, and nuclear-related facilities, while Iran responded with attacks across multiple locations in the region.

Supporters of the administration contend that the campaign inflicted substantial damage on Iran’s military network and strengthened Washington’s hand at the negotiating table.

Critics, meanwhile, have questioned whether the conflict achieved lasting strategic benefits, arguing that diplomacy might have produced similar outcomes without the costs and risks associated with military action.

Trump has consistently rejected that argument, insisting that Iran is in a far weaker position today than it was before the fighting erupted.

Administration officials have also highlighted declining oil prices following the reopening of key shipping routes in the Persian Gulf, arguing that lower energy costs could provide broader economic benefits for consumers in the months ahead.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump revealed Friday that he directly urged Israel to accept a ceasefire in Lebanon, calling the agreement a welcome development as diplomatic efforts continue across the region.

Speaking with NBC News, Trump said he had been in contact with Israeli officials and encouraged them to move forward with a halt in hostilities.

“It’s a positive,” he told the network, adding, “It’s a little icing on the cake.”

Trump declined to say whether he personally spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the discussions.

His remarks came shortly after a senior U.S. official told Reuters that Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to a ceasefire that went into effect at 4:00 p.m. local time Friday.

A Hezbollah official, speaking to NBC News, said the terror group intends to honor the ceasefire agreement but alleged that Israeli forces were continuing to fire and attempting to advance farther into Lebanese territory.

Trump also addressed the future of negotiations with Iran, expressing confidence that Vice President JD Vance would eventually travel to Switzerland to participate in peace talks despite Tehran’s decision to cancel Friday’s scheduled round of negotiations following Israeli strikes in Lebanon.

“I think he’s going to end up going back,” Trump said. “Steve Witkoff is going separately. I think JD’s going a little bit later.”

Meanwhile, the United States reportedly informed Iran that Israel was not expected to intensify its military operations in Lebanon, even after a deadly Hezbollah attack in southern Lebanon killed four Israeli soldiers.

The latest ceasefire comes against a backdrop of continued casualties. Since the original truce between Israel and Hezbollah took effect in April, 23 Israeli soldiers and one civilian employee of the Defense Ministry have been killed during operations in southern Lebanon.

{Matzav.com}

American intelligence officials have reportedly warned the White House that Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu may take steps that could threaten President Donald Trump’s efforts to secure a lasting agreement with Iran, according to a report published Friday by The Washington Post citing classified U.S. assessments.

The intelligence findings underscore growing tensions between Washington and Israel as the Trump administration seeks to advance a diplomatic framework with Tehran while urging restraint in Lebanon. U.S. officials have publicly cautioned Israel against military actions that could jeopardize the fragile negotiations now underway.

According to American officials familiar with the assessment, intelligence analysts concluded that Netanyahu faces significant domestic political pressure ahead of national elections expected later this year. The report reportedly argues that his political future depends heavily on persuading Israeli voters that he will not withdraw forces from Lebanon or ease military pressure on Hezbollah.

The assessment also describes mounting dissatisfaction within Israel over the preliminary terms of the U.S.-Iran understanding. Israeli officials reportedly believe the framework weakens the policy of maximum pressure against Tehran and could restrict Israel’s freedom of action against regional threats. White House officials, however, contend that the agreement still allows Israel to respond when necessary and argue that concerns about reopening the Strait of Hormuz and preventing a broader economic crisis take precedence. According to the report, intelligence analysts believe that any ceasefire or Israeli withdrawal could be viewed by many voters as a political setback for Netanyahu.

Responding to the reported assessment, a senior Israeli official defended Israel’s military operations, stating, “Israeli military activity in Lebanon is for the sole purpose of defending Israeli citizens from continuous attacks by Hezbollah.”

The report surfaced as Israel and Hezbollah moved forward with a ceasefire that took effect at 4:00 p.m. Friday.

Earlier in the day, U.S. officials reportedly informed Iran that Israel was not expected to intensify its military campaign in Lebanon despite the deadly Hezbollah attack in southern Lebanon that killed four Israeli soldiers.

The conflict has continued to exact a toll even since the April ceasefire arrangement. Since that truce went into effect, 23 Israeli soldiers and one civilian employee of the Defense Ministry have been killed during operations in southern Lebanon.

{Matzav.com}

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem delivered a combative televised speech Friday, declaring that the terror group will ultimately force Israel out of all Lebanese territory and insisting that efforts to weaken Hezbollah have failed despite months of fighting and international pressure.

During his address, Qassem portrayed the current conflict as part of a broad campaign led by the United States, Israel, and their allies to dismantle Hezbollah and erase its influence within Lebanon.

“Today, in Lebanon, we are facing the most dangerous stage in our history and the largest joint American, Israeli, and international conspiracy, which threatens the future of our country and our children,” Qassem claimed. “The main objective of this plan is to uproot and completely eliminate the resistance and its popular base in Lebanon.”

Qassem argued that Israel and its partners turned to what he described as increasingly aggressive methods after failing to defeat Hezbollah militarily.

“To achieve this goal, the enemies first launched a criminal and unrestrained war, killing civilians and carrying out widespread destruction in order to bring the resistance to its knees,” Qassem charged. “In the next step, the United States and the Zionist regime, after witnessing changes in regional equations following developments in Syria, violated previous agreements in order to upset the balance of power in their favor.”

The Hezbollah chief maintained that attempts to destroy the organization have fallen short and vowed that his group will continue its struggle until Israel no longer maintains any presence on Lebanese soil.

“The project to destroy Hezbollah has failed, Israel’s plans have reached a dead end, and the final victory – meaning the complete and definitive expulsion of the occupiers from every last inch of Lebanese territory – is inevitable,” Qassem asserted. “Israel will leave the last inch of Lebanese soil. Be sure of that. Victory in every sense means the expulsion of Israel from our land, which will definitely be achieved. We are not people of surrender.”

His remarks came one day after President Donald Trump publicly expressed optimism that fighting throughout the region, including between Israel and Hezbollah, would soon come to an end.

Writing on Truth Social, Trump stated, “The United States is committed to PEACE, and we encourage everyone in the Middle East Region to maintain their commitment to allowing our negotiations to beautifully unfold. The Markets are loving what is happening with Oil Prices way down, and Stocks way up.”

Trump added: “We expect a complete Ceasefire on all fronts, including Lebanon, Hezbollah, and Israel. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

The memorandum of understanding recently reached between the United States and Iran states that implementation of the agreement would bring about “the immediate and permanent termination” of hostilities, including the conflict in Lebanon, while also “ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon.”

The document further provides that, “The final deal will confirm the permanent termination of the war on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and other provisions of this paragraph.”

Later Friday, Israel and Hezbollah agreed to a ceasefire that took effect at 4:00 p.m., raising hopes that the latest round of violence could be contained.

Before the truce went into effect, U.S. officials reportedly informed Iran that Israel was not expected to broaden its military campaign in Lebanon despite a deadly attack in southern Lebanon in which four Israeli soldiers were killed by Hezbollah fire.

The fighting has continued to exact a heavy toll. Since the original Lebanon ceasefire went into effect in April, 23 Israeli soldiers and one civilian employee of the Defense Ministry have been killed during operations in southern Lebanon.

{Matzav.com}

A growing rift between Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and President Donald Trump burst into public view Friday after Meloni flatly rejected Trump’s claim that she had pleaded for a photograph with him during this week’s G7 summit, calling the story entirely false and expressing shock at his remarks.

The unusually sharp exchange signals a dramatic downturn in relations between the two conservative leaders, whose alliance appeared to be recovering in recent days after earlier disagreements surrounding the conflict with Iran.

Speaking after Trump’s comments were broadcast by an Italian television outlet, Meloni said she was stunned by what she described as an invented account and suggested the president often treats America’s adversaries with greater courtesy than longstanding allies.

The dispute stems from comments Trump made during a brief interview with Italy’s La7 television network following the summit in France. Footage from the gathering showed the two leaders engaged in an extended conversation, but Trump downplayed the interaction and suggested it was of greater importance to Meloni than to him.

“She’s probably happy I talked to her. I didn’t have to talk to her,” Trump was quoted as saying by La7 TV channel in a brief interview, after he himself asked the journalist about Italy’s prime minister.

Trump went even further, claiming the Italian leader had been eager to be photographed with him.

“She begged me to take a picture with her. She wanted a picture with me so badly. I wouldn’t have taken it, but I felt sorry for her,” Trump said, according to La7’s translation.

The network did not release the original recording of the interview and instead aired a dubbed version.

Meloni responded forcefully, dismissing the account outright and questioning why the American president would make such remarks about an ally.

“Donald Trump’s statements are completely made ⁠up. I am frankly astonished. I don’t know why the president of ⁠the United States behaves like this towards his allies: it is not the first time, moreover.”

She then contrasted Trump’s treatment of allies with what she characterized as a softer approach toward hostile foreign leaders.

“I can ⁠only ⁠say it is disappointing that he does not show the same determination with the enemies of the West and of the United States, whose leaders he instead treats with far greater indulgence,” she said, adding: “There is one thing he should remember: neither I nor Italy ever beg.”

The clash is particularly notable given Meloni’s previous support for Trump. She was the lone European head of government to attend his inauguration in 2025 and was widely viewed as one of his closest partners on the continent.

Relations later cooled, however, after Meloni publicly criticized Trump for his attacks on Pope Leo following the pontiff’s condemnation of the Iran war. Her decision to distance herself from the administration’s position triggered a blunt response from Trump, who accused the Italian leader of lacking courage.

Although recent interactions at the G7 summit had suggested a possible thaw in tensions, Friday’s exchange exposed deepening strains and raised new questions about the future of one of the West’s most closely watched political relationships.

{Matzav.com}

After more than three decades transporting American presidents around the globe, the Boeing 747 that has long served as Air Force One returned to Joint Base Andrews before sunrise Thursday, fueling speculation that its reign may soon be coming to an end as a newly modified Qatari-donated aircraft prepares to enter service.

The arrival of the aircraft sparked a wave of tributes from senior Trump administration officials, many of whom appeared to suggest that the venerable jet’s final chapter is near. Nevertheless, the U.S. Air Force stressed that the aircraft is not being retired at this time.

White House Communications Director Steven Cheung shared a photograph on X of VC-25A tail number 92-9000 after it carried President Donald Trump home from the G7 summit in France. Accompanying the image was the message: “Well done, good and faithful servant. The Last Ride.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino also marked the occasion, posting video footage of the aircraft and reflecting on his years aboard it.

“I have been fortunate to fly around the world on this iconic plane for 5 1/2 years, of the 35 years it has been serving U.S. Presidents.”

U.S. Chief of Protocol Monica Crowley echoed the sentiment, writing that she had been “honored to be aboard Air Force One last night on its final flight.”

Despite those public tributes, Air Force officials moved quickly to clarify that the aircraft remains in active service.

A spokesperson told The War Zone that the incoming VC-25B Bridge aircraft—the designation assigned to the modified Qatari Boeing 747-8i—will enter the executive airlift fleet “alongside the VC-25A,” adding that both existing VC-25A aircraft will continue operating for the foreseeable future.

The new aircraft recently completed an intensive modification and testing program conducted by L3Harris in Texas. The work, which took roughly a year, wrapped up in early May. The plane is now receiving the distinctive red, white, gold, and blue paint scheme selected by President Trump.

Air Force leaders praised the accelerated effort, highlighting it as an example of streamlined project management.

The service said the project “epitomizes what is possible when clear accountability is placed on one individual,” in a statement from Gen. Dale White, the Air Force official overseeing critical major weapons programs.

Even so, the Bridge aircraft is intended only as an interim solution.

The permanent replacement fleet consists of two specially outfitted VC-25B aircraft being converted by Boeing under a contract awarded in 2018. Those aircraft are now projected to arrive in mid-2028, years later than the original target date of 2024.

Costs associated with the program have continued to rise. The Government Accountability Office estimates the total price tag for the VC-25B program has climbed to approximately $5.6 billion, significantly above the original estimate of $3.9 billion. By comparison, Air Force officials estimate the conversion of the Qatari aircraft will cost less than $400 million.

The arrangement has drawn criticism from lawmakers and analysts across the political spectrum, with opponents raising concerns about both constitutional questions and national-security implications.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth accepted the aircraft as an unconditional gift to the Defense Department, which will oversee its operation and upkeep. Current plans call for the aircraft to be transferred to President Trump’s presidential library once his term in office concludes.

Democrats have sharply criticized the arrangement, characterizing the gift as a bribe and questioning the wisdom of spending public funds to modify an aircraft that may only serve as the presidential transport for the remainder of Trump’s administration.

No official date has been set for the president’s first trip aboard the new aircraft. However, reports indicate that Trump is weighing the possibility of using it for a July 3 visit to Mount Rushmore as part of celebrations marking America’s 250th anniversary.

Reuters previously reported that the aircraft could make its public debut during a Fourth of July flyover, potentially ushering in a new era for presidential travel.

{Matzav.com}

Vice President JD Vance is defending President Donald Trump’s agreement with Iran against criticism from fellow Republicans, arguing that the arrangement bears little resemblance to the 2015 nuclear accord negotiated by the Obama administration and instead reflects a dramatically different strategic reality.

Speaking about the agreement, Vance contended that the circumstances surrounding the two deals could not be compared because Iran’s nuclear infrastructure has already been dismantled and the new framework bars Tehran from enriching uranium.

“You have to remember, in 2015 Iran had built a sophisticated nuclear weapons program with a nuclear weapon stockpile. So the perspective that we came at as the United States was, ‘You already have a really nice nuclear program; we’re going to bribe you with American money in order to stop it,'” Vance said.

He contrasted that approach with the Trump administration’s current position, arguing that Washington is negotiating from a position of leverage rather than trying to halt an active nuclear buildup.

“Our perspective — and where we’re coming at it — is, ‘We already destroyed your nuclear program; and so if you promise and show verifiable pathways to not rebuild it, then we are willing to give you some sanctions relief, and things like that.'”

Vance went on to outline what he described as several key distinctions between the two agreements, maintaining that the new deal imposes stricter limitations on Tehran’s nuclear capabilities while avoiding financial concessions made under the earlier accord.

“Now, there are all these substantive differences as well. The Obama nuclear deal allowed enrichment; ours will not,” Vance said.

He further argued that the Trump agreement takes a tougher stance on Iran’s nuclear materials.

“The Obama deal allowed the accumulation of stockpiled weapons-grade material. Ours is actually leading to the destruction of that stockpile of enriched material,” he continued.

Vance also highlighted what he said was a major financial difference between the two arrangements.

“The Obama deal gave them over a billion dollars of American money. The deal gives them $0 of American money,” Vance said.

Summing up his defense of the agreement, the vice president maintained that the most significant distinction is the position from which the United States negotiated and the support the deal has received from regional allies.

“A lot of substantive differences, but I think the most important differences are where we’re coming at it from: a position of strength, and the fact that our [Persian] Gulf Coast partners love this deal.”

{Matzav.com}

Hunter Biden launched a blistering attack on the UFC Freedom 250 event held on the White House South Lawn, blasting the spectacle as inappropriate for the historic grounds and ending his lengthy social media post with an unexpected challenge to Donald Trump Jr.: a cage fight.

Framing his comments as an open letter to podcast host Joe Rogan—who had dismissed critics of the event and told those offended by it to “shut … up”—Biden argued that turning the White House into the setting for a combat-sports event undermined the significance of the presidential residence.

“The White House does not belong to Donald Trump. It does not belong to any president. It belongs to the people,” he wrote in the lengthy diatribe.

Drawing repeated comparisons to ancient Rome, Biden contended that the event transformed a national symbol into a stage for political spectacle.

“To treat it as Caesar treated the Colosseum is antithetical to everything our founding fathers fought for.

“This is not Rome. Presidents are not emperors doling out bread and circuses for the peasants,” he said, cloaking his critique in a Roman Empire motif.

Continuing the analogy, Biden accused President Trump of using the White House grounds to project personal power.

“By holding the event on the South Lawn, what he was saying to the rest of us is: ‘This is my house. I own it. I will do with it what I please. I’ll build a colosseum and have the gladiators fight under my gaze.’”

Despite criticizing the White House event, Biden offered praise for Rogan and UFC president Dana White, crediting them with helping transform mixed martial arts into a major American success.

Still, he argued that staging the fights at the White House crossed a line, describing the event as “an exhibition of imperial domination, not a celebration of our 250th anniversary as a democracy.”

Biden concluded his remarks with a warning against elevating the presidency above its constitutional role.

“The president is our servant. Not our Caesar,” he wrote before turning his attention to Trump’s eldest son.

“P.S. Cage match between me and Don. Jr? Your call on the venue. Anywhere but the South Lawn.”

Notably absent from Biden’s comments was any reference to controversies involving his father’s administration and the White House grounds. Critics have pointed to incidents such as the placement of a Pride flag in a 2023 display on the Truman Balcony, a move that generated debate over compliance with the U.S. Flag Code.

{Matzav.com}

The fatal horse-carriage accident that claimed the life of an 18-year-old tourist visiting from India has reignited efforts at City Hall to ban horse-drawn carriage rides in New York City, with several lawmakers suggesting the tragedy could mark a turning point for the long-debated industry.

A number of City Council members said the incident — believed to be the first passenger fatality involving a horse carriage in recent memory — has intensified calls for sweeping changes and may finally generate enough momentum to outlaw the practice altogether.

“Is it the straw that broke the camel’s back? I think so,” said Councilman Frank Morano, a Staten Island Republican and co-sponsor of “Ryder’s Law,” which would outlaw horse carriages in New York City.

“We have an 18-year-old boy who came here to celebrate his graduation who is leaving in a coffin. It’s totally unacceptable,” Morano told The NY Post on Thursday.

Arguing that the industry has exhausted any benefit of the doubt, Morano added, “The time for treating these accidents as isolated incidents is over. It is an industry that no longer makes sense.”

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has also voiced support for eliminating horse-drawn carriage rides from Central Park, a position he adopted during his campaign.

“I support removing horse carriages from Central Park,” Mamdani said in January.

The mayor joins predecessors Eric Adams and Bill de Blasio, both of whom backed similar proposals during their administrations, though neither succeeded in pushing a ban through.

Supporters of the carriage industry, including representatives of the drivers’ union, contend that calls for a ban routinely surface after accidents involving horses but fade over time. They argue that investigations have consistently shown the animals receive proper care and that past efforts to outlaw the industry have repeatedly stalled.

Still, advocates for stricter animal-welfare protections believe the current City Council may be more receptive than previous ones. Earlier this year, lawmakers established an animal welfare caucus comprising 20 of the council’s 51 members, including Morano.

Council Speaker Julie Menin has scheduled a hearing next month on Ryder’s Law. The measure is named after Ryder, a carriage horse that collapsed while working in Central Park during a hot day in August 2022. Although the legislation failed to advance last year, supporters hope the latest tragedy will change that.

“In the past two weeks alone, we have seen the tragic deaths of both a horse and now a teenage carriage passenger, Romanch Mahajan,” Menin said, referring to the June 9 death of a carriage horse named Deniz, which authorities believe may have ingested a poisonous plant in Central Park.

“These incidents demonstrate that it’s time to chart a better path forward that addresses animal welfare and public safety, and also ensures the livelihood and economic prosperity of the workers,” Menin said.

Councilwoman Kamillah Hanks, a Democrat from Staten Island, said the latest accident demands action from city leaders.

“Something has to change. This tragedy is a call for the City Council to respond. We have to take an honest and sobering look at the horse carriage industry.”

Not all council members agree that a ban is the appropriate response. Queens Councilman James Gennaro argued that the “unthinkable tragedy” stemmed from “human error” rather than concerns about animal treatment.

Instead of prohibiting carriage rides outright, Gennaro is promoting legislation aimed at strengthening safety measures. His proposal would require designated hitching posts in Central Park so horses can be secured while passengers board, exit, or take photographs, and would also mandate enhanced training requirements for carriage operators.

Meanwhile, industry representatives acknowledged they are facing intense scrutiny in the wake of the fatal accident.

“We’re absolutely gutted and stunned by this tragedy. We’ve never had a fatal accident like this before,” said Alexander Kemp, administrative vice president of Transport Workers Union Local 100, which represents carriage drivers.

Kemp said the industry has temporarily halted operations while conducting an extensive review of safety procedures.

“We have shuttered the stables and ceased operations today while we have extensive internal discussions of safety protocols and how they can be improved,” said Kemp, who supports Gennaro’s bill, not an outright ban on the carriage industry.

Christina Hansen, a carriage driver and TWU shop steward, accused animal-rights groups of using the incident to advance a long-standing political agenda.

“Let’s take a step back and not to rush judgment,” she said.

{Matzav.com}