Insider Legacy Secret
Author

admin

Browsing
In Latest News

Trump’s week ahead will include a trip to The Hague to meet with NATO leaders as Iran crisis grows larger

No Comments

President Donald Trump will be engaging in numerous foreign policy discussions this upcoming week at a NATO summit, where more than just Ukraine will be the focus of conversations between foreign leaders. 

A senior Trump official told the Wall Street Journal Sunday that the president still intends to attend the summit that will be held in The Hague, starting Wednesday. He will depart for the Netherlands on Tuesday and arrive late in the evening the same day. 

It is a slight schedule change from his originally planned departure date of Monday, per previous reports.

Trump was expected to attend a state dinner between foreign leaders on Tuesday evening, but it is unclear whether he will still attend due to the late-Tuesday arrival time. The White House did not respond to Fox News Digital’s requests for additional information about the president’s schedule.

The schedule change comes after the president recently abruptly left the G7 economic summit in Canada to attend to the ongoing situation in the Middle East that tamped up Saturday.

The summit between foreign leaders will likely include conversations about Trump’s recent decision to involve the United States in Israel’s campaign in the Middle East. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is expected to be in attendance as well, with leaders expected to discuss ongoing assistance to Ukraine amid its ongoing war with Russia. However, Ukraine’s crisis is not expected to be the central issue of concern, with global tensions in Iran likely to take a major chunk of the summit’s attention. 

Leaders are also expected to discuss NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte’s proposal that each member country contribute at least 5% of their gross domestic product to defense spending. The idea, framed as a Trump win, has been rejected by Spain, while others have taken issue with the speed at which the move to increase NATO-member defense spending has taken.

The summit will end Wednesday and Trump will depart back to Washington thereafter. There will be heavy security and protesters have already taken to the streets in protest of the upcoming summit.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Economy

Dollar’s Decline Meets Rising Dedollarization: The Threat Comes from Within

No Comments

The recent weakness in the US dollar has reignited the debate over the durability of the dollar’s dominance in global finance. Over the first half of the year, the Bloomberg Dollar Index has fallen nearly 8.5 percent, marking one of the sharpest declines since the mid-1980s. Yet while this drawdown has fueled widespread commentary about de-dollarization, it is important to distinguish between dollar weakness — a familiar, cyclical phenomenon — and the far more consequential and complex issue of de-dollarization, which concerns the dollar’s standing as the world’s primary reserve currency and medium of international exchange.

Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index & US Dollar Index Spot Rate, 2023- present

(Source: Bloomberg Finance, LP)

The current period of dollar weakness is rooted in several overlapping forces. Since Donald Trump’s return to the White House, aggressive trade policies, escalating tariff conflicts, and sharp reversals in longstanding diplomatic and economic norms have unnerved international investors. The dollar index has fallen nearly nine percent since inauguration, the worst such performance since the 1971 Nixon shock, when the US severed the dollar’s convertibility to gold. Bank of America’s fund manager surveys indicate that bearish sentiment toward the dollar is at its highest level since 2006, while foreign appetite for US assets — particularly Treasurys and equities — has declined meaningfully, with foreign ownership of Treasurys falling to 32.9 percent as of late 2024.

Simultaneously, the fiscal position of the United States has worsened considerably. The Trump administration’s substantial tax cuts and growing entitlement obligations are threatening to push deficits to alarming levels, while rising interest costs on government debt threaten long-term fiscal stability. These dynamics are now feeding into market pricing and investor expectations. With global capital increasingly reluctant to finance Washington’s deficits on previous terms, foreign inflows into dollar-denominated assets have moderated. Many foreign investors, particularly from Europe, are in a sustained “buyers’ strike” on US assets, compounding downward pressure on the dollar.

Yearly Growth of Payments via SWIFT in USD, 2020 – present

(Source: Bloomberg Finance, LP)

One of the most noteworthy shifts underlying the dollar’s recent slide has been its emerging role as a funding currency for global carry trades. In an environment characterized by stable but modest global growth, subdued volatility, and a widening divergence in interest rates across economies, investors have increasingly sold dollars to finance long positions in higher-yielding emerging market currencies such as the Brazilian real, Mexican peso, Chilean peso, and South African rand. That dynamic introduces a new class of structural dollar sellers, adding both to downward pressure and to heightened volatility. Becoming a favored funding currency — a role long played by the Japanese yen or Swiss franc — reflects declining confidence in the US growth exceptionalism narrative that once anchored the dollar’s premium valuation.

Yet even as the cyclical bearish case gains adherents, the broader question remains: does dollar weakness equate to de-dollarization? The short answer is: no, or at least not yet. The dollar still accounts for nearly 60 percent of global foreign exchange reserves, more than 50 percent of global trade invoicing, and nearly 90 percent of global foreign exchange transactions. Despite short-term market aversion — for central banks, commodity traders, and multinational corporations — the dollar remains indispensable. Its liquidity, the depth of US capital markets, and the breadth of dollar-denominated instruments such as US corporate bonds, Treasurys, and dollar-pegged financial products continue to make it the default global currency.

Incremental signs of de-dollarization are emerging, particularly in Asia and among members of the expanded BRICS bloc. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has actively committed to increasing the use of local currencies in intra-regional trade, aiming to reduce exposure to dollar volatility and geopolitical leverage. Countries such as China, India, and South Korea have increased currency swap agreements, promoted bilateral trade settlements in their own currencies, and repatriated portions of their foreign-held assets. Asian institutional investors, including life insurers and pension funds in Japan and Taiwan, have raised hedge ratios on dollar exposure, gradually shifting portfolio balances toward local currencies.

US Foreign Exchange Reserves in Millions of USD, 2010 – present

Source: Bloomberg Finance, LP)

The BRICS alliance, recently expanded to include members such as Iran, Egypt, the UAE, and Indonesia, has amplified its political push toward de-dollarization. While the group remains economically diverse and geopolitically fragmented, its growing weight in global energy production, trade flows, and financial architecture reflects a strategic ambition to reduce reliance on the dollar. Joint liquidity pools, cross-border payment initiatives, and the creation of alternative commodity trading platforms further illustrate the group’s long-term objectives. Nonetheless, internal frictions within BRICS — particularly between China and India — and the absence of a truly unified financial infrastructure have limited hopes to erode dollar primacy.

A significant development in the de-dollarization narrative is the surge in official sector gold purchases. Central banks, particularly those aligned with or adjacent to China and Russia, have accumulated over 1,000 tons of gold annually for three consecutive years — doubling the pace of purchases seen in the 2010s. The European Central Bank now reports that gold accounts for 20 percent of global reserves, up sharply from previous levels to eclipse holdings of the euro itself.  Meanwhile, the dollar’s share of global reserves has slipped from over 70 percent in 2000 to 57.8 percent in 2024. Gold’s role as a politically neutral store of value makes it an attractive hedge against both inflation and geopolitical risks, particularly in an environment where financial sanctions and reserve asset weaponization have grown more common.

Global Gold Demand (white) & Global Gold Demand Net Central Bank Purchases (blue), 2010 – present

(Source: Bloomberg Finance, LP)

Still, gold’s structural limitations mean that it is unlikely to fully supplant the dollar’s reserve currency functions. Even amid recent turmoil, global dollarization continues in many respects, particularly through the rapid expansion of dollar-based nonbank financial intermediation, dollar-denominated debt issuance, and the technological proliferation of dollar-linked stablecoins.

In sum, dollar weakness and de-dollarization are not synonymous. The recent depreciation of the dollar relative to other currencies reflects a complex interplay of trade disputes, fiscal excesses, cyclical capital flows, and risk sentiment shifts. 

True de-dollarization, by contrast, requires the sustained development of viable alternatives that can match the dollar’s liquidity, legal protections, and institutional depth — an outcome that remains distant, though not unimaginable over the long term. While policymakers and market participants should not dismiss the slow, grinding adjustments occurring at the margins, the dollar nevertheless remains firmly entrenched as the central pillar of global finance.

A more sobering truth is this: the greatest threat to continued dollar dominance comes not from external challengers but within. Persistent fiscal indiscipline, rising debt-to-GDP ratios, erratic policy shifts, and the politicization of monetary and financial institutions collectively erode the confidence that anchors reserve currency status. 

If that erosion continues, the dollar may eventually cede ground — not through a sudden collapse, but through the gradual accumulation of self-inflicted wounds. In the meantime, the world remains tethered to King Dollar, even as it cautiously explores alternatives.

Read More:

The Dollar and its Domestic Enemies
BRICS 2025: Expansion, De-Dollarization, and the Shift Toward a Multipolar World
by
Read More
In Economy

The Techno-Industrial Policy Playbook Isn’t Conservative — It’s Central Planning

No Comments

The Techno-Industrial Policy Playbook, published by American Compass, The Foundation for American Innovation, The Institute for Progress, and New American Industrial Alliance (NAIA) Foundation, is being sold as a bold new blueprint for American renewal. It proposes that the federal government directly invest in politically chosen “strategic sectors,” led by a National Investment Council and a presidential Chief Investment Officer.

The message is simple: America must compete with China, rebuild its industrial base, and restore national greatness. But the policy prescription is anything but conservative. It’s industrial policy — a warmed-over central planning scheme that expands government authority in the name of economic vitality.

As someone grounded in free-market economics and classical liberal principles, I have three core objections to the playbook, each based on sound economic theory and real-world evidence.

First, the playbook misdiagnoses the source of American industrial decline, blaming free markets for problems caused by government failure. Second, it wrongly glorifies manufacturing as the benchmark for national success while ignoring technological progress and worker preferences. Third, it proposes top-down interventions that will entrench bureaucracy, reward special interests, and ultimately slow economic growth. This playbook doesn’t revive “conservative” economics — it replaces it with technocratic nationalism that looks more like progressive central planning than anything resembling liberty or limited government.

Let’s walk through each issue.

National conservatives claim that free markets abandoned America’s heartland. In reality, government failure drove investment away. Rust Belt cities like Detroit, Cleveland, and Buffalo didn’t wither because of capitalism. They collapsed under decades of poor policy choices: excessive taxation, inflexible labor unions, hostile zoning rules, bloated public payrolls, failing schools, and declining public safety. Businesses didn’t leave out of disloyalty — they left because politicians made it unprofitable to stay.

Meanwhile, jobs and capital flowed to states that protected economic freedom and other countries where it was more profitable. States like Texas, Florida, Tennessee, and even Colorado have outperformed many of their peers through stronger spending limits, more predictable tax environments, and competitive labor markets. Where policymakers trusted people over bureaucracies, prosperity followed. That’s not a failure of capitalism — it’s a case study in how markets respond to better limits on government, though those states could use more limits.

The playbook also claims that manufacturing is the backbone of national strength. That’s a romanticized notion more than a modern reality. America hasn’t deindustrialized — we’ve modernized. The US remains the world’s second-largest manufacturer, accounting for about 17 percent of global output. Real manufacturing production has nearly doubled since the 1990s. What’s declined is manufacturing employment, largely because of productivity gains. Machines now do what workers used to. That’s not a decline. That’s economic progress. The push to bring back those jobs, even through heavy subsidy or coercion, misses what most Americans actually want. They don’t long to return to factory floors. They seek flexible, meaningful, and often service-oriented careers in tech, finance, or entrepreneurship. We shouldn’t funnel workers back into yesterday’s economy. We should expand their freedom to pursue tomorrow’s opportunities.

Then comes the playbook’s solution: scaling up Washington’s power to steer markets in the name of national interest. But no matter how strategic the branding, this is just central planning. And it’s built on a false premise — that bureaucrats in DC can outthink millions of decentralized choices made each day by individuals and businesses. History has repeatedly shown what happens when the government takes the reins. Solyndra wasted over $500 million in taxpayer funds. The CHIPS Act has been a disaster. COVID-era spending lost more than $200 billion to fraud and waste. And DOGE.gov has flagged over $165 billion in wasteful government spending — more than $1,000 per taxpayer. These aren’t outliers. They’re baked into the cake of central planning.

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) found wasteful spending of $233 million in DEI grants, including a $1 million program on “Antiracist Teacher Leadership.” The Department of Defense admitted to $80 million in wasteful spending. One government contract paid $181,000 for a climate advisor in Central Africa. More than 500,000 government credit cards were found active across 32 agencies. The estimated savings so far are $165 billion, or more than $1,000 saved per taxpayer. While this didn’t reach the $2 trillion proposed by Elon Musk, that wasn’t going to happen because doing so would require reducing welfare spending on mandatory programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Congress must act now. 

Friedrich Hayek explained why in The Use of Knowledge in Society: central authorities simply cannot gather and respond to the complex, dynamic information embedded in market prices. Even well-meaning planners can’t substitute for the distributed intelligence of free people responding to real signals, especially well-functioning market prices. James Buchanan’s public choice theory adds another layer: government actors are not immune to self-interest. They face incentives to reward donors, expand budgets, and serve entrenched interests, not to maximize efficiency or innovation.

So what should we do instead?

The answer isn’t to direct the economy from the top down. It’s to remove the barriers keeping people and businesses from thriving, as advocated by classical liberalism and embodied in many ways by freedom conservatism principles. Rather than expanding the state, we should limit it, sharpening its focus and unleashing its citizens.

That starts with sustainable budgeting. Government spending should be reduced and grow thereafter no faster than the rate of population growth plus inflation. Several states — like Texas, Iowa, North Carolina, and Colorado — have successfully implemented this principle, keeping government growth aligned with the average taxpayer’s ability to pay for it. We also need serious federal tax reform. The current code is riddled with carveouts, subsidies, and disincentives to save and invest. Flattening the tax structure and moving toward a consumption-based system would support long-term growth and reduce political manipulation. Extending the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and spending less are keys for this year, but longer term, there is a need to substantially improve the tax system to fund only limited government spending.

Education is another cornerstone. Universal Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) by states, as the federal government should get out of education altogether, let parents — not politicians and bureaucrats — choose the best path for their children. That may be a government school, private school, homeschool, or trade school. Real choice drives real results. Healthcare deserves the same treatment. This includes restoring the doctor-patient relationship and lowering costs through no-limit Health Savings Accounts, Medicaid block grants to the states, and deregulated provider markets.

Perhaps most importantly, we must return to competitive federalism. Washington doesn’t have all the answers — and never will. States should be empowered to lead, compete, and innovate. That’s how policy improves and liberty expands. This means the federal government must reduce its roles in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Real community, too, can’t be centrally managed. National conservatives often argue that markets corrode culture. But in truth, voluntary exchange and personal responsibility create the conditions where community can thrive. Families, churches, and local institutions aren’t built by mandates — they’re built by people who are free.

The Techno-Industrial Policy Playbook represents a fundamental shift away from this understanding. It proposes that the solution to government failure…is more government. But those of us who believe in freedom know better. Liberty doesn’t need a five-year plan. It needs guardrails, not gates. It needs accountability, not committees. And it needs trust — in people, in markets, and in the timeless truth that free societies produce the most prosperous, dynamic, and moral outcomes the world has ever known.

by
Read More
In Investing

Canada Makes Tech Leadership Moves: Axl Launches, Carney Shares Priorities at G7 Summit

No Comments

Canada’s tech sector saw momentum this week, with announcements spanning venture capital and quantum computing, as well as global policy leadership news out of the G7 summit.

Axl on a mission to retain Canadian innovation

On Tuesday (June 17), Axl, a newly founded Canadian venture studio, announced plans to help launch 50 artificial intelligence (AI) companies in Canada over the next five years, supported by a C$15 million fund led by co-founder Daniel Wigdor, a computer science professor at the University of Toronto.

The venture’s other founders are Tovi Grossman, another University of Toronto professor, entrepreneur Ray Sharma and former Telus (TSX:T,NYSE:TU) executive David Sharma. Mining magnate Rob McEwen of McEwen Mining (TSX:MUX,NYSE:MUX) and Smart Technologies co-founder David Martin are also investors.

According to Wigdor, Axl will tackle practical business problems and connect them with promising academic research in a bid to keep Canadian innovation at home. “The social contract academics believe we have with society is that we invent these technologies and inspire people,” he told the Globe and Mail on Tuesday. “The tragedy is that the foundational technologies we’re inventing in Canada are not accruing capital for Canada.’

Wigdor pointed to his own career as a cautionary tale, explaining that the iPhone’s multi-touch interface was presaged by research he conducted in the early 2000s for his University of Toronto thesis, which itself built on concepts pioneered by University of Toronto professor Bill Buxton in the 1980s.

Other University of Toronto AI breakthroughs fueled the international rise of figures like Geoffrey Hinton, OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever and xAI’s Jimmy Ba, all of whom took their expertise to US-based companies.

Carney talks tech leadership at G7 summit

Initiatives like Axl’s signal a proactive approach to Canada’s challenge of retaining tech talent and capitalizing on its world-class research; however, its success will hinge on broader public support.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has signaled that fostering tech innovation at home is a priority. He told G7 leaders that driving the digital transition, led by AI and quantum computing, would be one of his top goals at the summit.

Quantum technology was reportedly discussed at length during the two day meeting, which took place in Kananaskis, Alberta. In addition, a joint statement from members released by the prime minister’s office indicates that Canada will launch the G7 GovAI Grand Challenge and host a series of Rapid Solution Labs “to develop innovative and scalable solutions to the barriers we face in adopting AI in the public sector.”

That emphasis echoes longstanding concerns from the research community.

A 2024 letter acquired by the Logic and sent to then-innovation minister François-Philippe Champagne by the Quantum Advisory Council cites the significant sums that other countries have invested in quantum technology.

“The cost of inaction is tremendous,” the group wrote at the time, pointing to Canada’s history of “inventing core technologies,” but letting other countries “grow industries around our inventions.”

The council proposed a C$1 billion program that would mirror the Quantum Benchmarking Initiative (QBI), which fosters domestic quantum computing in the US. The QBI has selected 18 companies for its first phase, including three from Canada; firms that demonstrate the ability to build a functional quantum computer by 2033 will be eligible to receive up to US$316 million, making it a potential “kingmaker” program.

The second phase of the program is set to launch in August 2025. While no relocation demands have been made, concerns exist that later-stage QBI terms could force Canadian winners to the US.

The Quantum Advisory Council said its proposed program would be run by the National Research Council, which would independently assess firms to accelerate the development of competitive domestic quantum companies.

It would build on a C$360 million national quantum strategy announced in April 2021.

The council’s recommendations include increased grants for scientific and social science research into quantum technologies, and a new federal clusters program to foster regional quantum ecosystems encompassing research, development and training, alongside ethical and secure use. It also calls for significant investment in quantum-safe software certification and the development of other security systems.

In a speech at the Quantum Now conference in Montreal on Thursday (June 19), Canada’s AI minister, Evan Solomon, emphasized the need to protect Canada’s talent pipeline. “We cannot allow short-term funding opportunities to hollow out our domestic capabilities or transfer generations of Canadian innovation outside our borders,” he said.

Earlier this month, the minister said he would move away from “over-indexing on warnings and regulation” and instead focus on finding ways to unleash the economic potential of AI. The ongoing collaboration between government initiatives and private ventures will be key to unlocking Canada’s full potential in the new digital era.

Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More
In Investing

Thick zones of HM mineralisation observed across Douala HM Project

No Comments

DY6 Metals Ltd (ASX: DY6, “DY6” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce the initial visual estimations from the reconnaissance exploration program at the Douala Basin HMS Project, Cameroon. Desktop studies incorporating detailed geological mapping, geophysics, and known mineral occurrences, were used to define initial, high priority targets for ground- truthing. The reconnaissance programme, which consisted of hand auger and channel sampling, was successful in identifying high estimated concentrations of heavy mineral (HM) mineralisation across all the six tenements that make up the project. Additionally, the Company’s consultants have observed the presence of natural rutile grains within panned concentrates.

HIGHLIGHTS

  • The Company’s reconnaissance auger and channel sampling programme has been completed at the Douala Basin HMS Project
  • Reconnaissance sampling undertaken across the 6 Douala Basin tenements has identified thick zones of high estimated concentrations of heavy minerals (HM) as well as natural rutile
  • Work at the Douala Basin Project followed up on historical HM occurrences identified by previous Eramet drilling, as well as priority areas identified through the Company’s internal reviews
  • Samples collected from the reconnaissance program are due to be submitted for laboratory analysis in the coming weeks, with results expected in the September quarter
  • At Douala Basin, exploration will transition to a detailed campaign of auger drilling

Samples collected from this initial exploration programme are currently being prepped for dispatch to the Company’s laboratory for analysis in South Africa, with results expected in the September quarter.

Technical Consultant, Cliff Fitzhenry, commented:“While the Company’s primary focus is on the Central Rutile Project, where we have recently reported the presence of wide-spread residual natural rutile mineralisation, we believe that the Douala Basin HMS project has significant potential. The reconnaissance programme has over the last few weeks demonstrated the potential of the area, with the identification of high concentrations of visible heavy mineral sands across the project tenements through a mixture of auger, channel, and soil sampling work. Pleasingly, we have also observed natural rutile grains at Douala Basin.

We look forward to the assay results of the reconnaissance programme in the coming months.”

Reconnaissance exploration at the Douala Basin HMS Project

As announced on 5 June 2025, the Company commenced reconnaissance auger and grab sampling programmes at the Central Rutile and Douala Basin HMS projects, Cameroon. At the Douala Basin project, the Company has completed 12 hand auger drill holes (refer Figure 1), collecting 53 samples in the process, as well as collected 38 channel samples from 11 surfaces for analysis (refer Tables 1 & 2).

Cautionary Statement:

The Company cautions that, with respect to any visual mineralisation indicators, visual observations and estimates of mineral abundance are uncertain in nature and should not be taken as a substitute or proxy for appropriate laboratory analysis. Visual estimates also potentially provide no information regarding impurities or deleterious physical properties relevant to valuations. Assay results from the drilling and sampling programmes will be required to understand the grade and extent of mineralisation. Initial assay results are expected in August 2025.

Click here for the full ASX Release

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More
In Latest News

State Department issues worldwide caution for US travelers following Trump’s Iran strikes

No Comments

Americans traveling abroad are being urged to exercise caution worldwide, as the war between Israel and Iran has resulted in travel disruptions globally.

The U.S. State Department issued a warning to those traveling around the world, citing the potential for demonstrations against U.S. citizens.

‘The conflict between Israel and Iran has resulted in disruptions to travel and periodic closure of airspace across the Middle East,’ the State Department said in its Worldwide Caution advisory. ‘There is potential for demonstrations against U.S. citizens and interests abroad. The Department of State advises U.S. citizens worldwide to exercise increased caution.’

Last week, the State Department warned U.S. travelers to not travel to places like Israel, Gaza and the West Bank because of armed conflict, terrorism and civil unrest.

The threat comes as terrorist groups, lone-actor terrorists and other violent extremists continue to plot possible attacks in those areas with little to no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets and local government facilities.

Government officials in Turkey have also been cautioned to maintain a low profile and avoid personal travel to the country’s southernmost provinces.

The alert issued on Sunday reads, ‘Negative sentiment toward U.S. foreign policy may prompt actions against U.S. or Western interests’ in Turkey.

It adds that activities in the past have included demonstrations, calls for boycotts of U.S. businesses, anti-U.S. rhetoric and graffiti.

If traveling abroad, the State Department advised reviewing its website for alerts pertaining to the specific destination being visited.

The advisory comes after President Donald Trump ordered military strikes on Iran’s key nuclear facilities in what officials are calling ‘Operation Midnight Hammer.’

After the bombing, Iranian officials warned of retaliation against the U.S.

The State Department often issues alerts and travel advisories for Americans overseas.

The travel advisories range from ‘exercise normal precaution’ to ‘Do Not Travel,’ which is reserved for parts of the world where there is ongoing conflict, ethnic or religious discrimination or where U.S. citizens are generally not welcome.

Other reasons for alerts include crime rates, health concerns and piracy in some parts of the world. 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Latest News

Israeli President Herzog: Israel ‘not dragging’ US into war with Iran

No Comments

Israeli President Isaac Herzog said that Israel is ‘not dragging’ the U.S. into its war with Iran, pushing back against growing fears of a broader regional conflict after Washington sent an overnight strike against three major Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday.

Herzog made the statement during an appearance on CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ with host Kasie Hunt on Sunday, in response to President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy bunker-buster bombs and Tomahawk missiles against Iran’s key nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.

‘We made clear throughout that we are not dragging America into a war,’ Herzog said. ‘We are leaving it to the decision of the President of the United States and his team, because it had to do with America’s national security interests, period. We are not intending, and we don’t ask for America now to go to war because the Iranians are threatening Israel.’

The Israeli leader added that the American decision to attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was ‘the right step’ for the U.S., describing the Iranian nuclear program as a threat to American and global security. 

‘The decision was taken because the Iranian nuclear program was a clear and present danger to the security interests of all the free world, especially the leader of the free world,’ Herzog added. ‘America, as the leader of the free world, was actually at risk from this program, and that is why it was the right step to do.’

Despite Washington’s military involvement, Herzog stressed that now is ‘the moment where one thinks about diplomacy.’ He urged that any renewed talks with Iran must ‘be nuts and bolts and very clear,’ citing a history of previously failed negotiations due to what he described as Iranians ‘lying constantly.’

Secretary of State Marco Rubio also reiterated Herzog’s message during an appearance on Fox News’ ‘Sunday Morning Futures’ with host Maria Bartiromo, asserting that the U.S. is ‘not at war’ with Iran. 

Rubio added that regime change is ‘not the goal’ and that Washington is still offering a diplomatic path forward. 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Latest News

JD Vance says Iranian nuclear program ‘substantially’ set back after ‘precise, surgical’ US strikes

No Comments

Vice President JD Vance said Sunday that America ‘is not at war with Iran,’ but rather is at war with the Iranian nuclear program, which was ‘substantially’ set back by U.S. strikes.

In an appearance on ABC’s ‘This Week,’ Vance praised President Donald Trump’s ‘decisive action to destroy the program’ and expressed an ‘incredible amount of gratitude’ to the U.S. troops, who, he says, flew thousands of miles on a 30-hour non-stop flight, ‘never touched down on the ground’ and dropped a 30,000-pound bomb ‘on a target about the size of a washing machine.’ 

‘No military in the world has the training, the skills, and the equipment to do what these guys did last night,’ Vance said. ‘I know the president and I are both very proud of them, and I think what they did was accomplish a very core American national objective. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapons program. The president’s been very clear about this, and thanks to the bravery and competence and skill of our great pilots and everybody who supported this mission, we took a major step forward for that national objective last night.’ 

Vance was hesitant to disclose too much sensitive information about the mission, which reportedly involved 125 aircraft. 

ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked the vice president, ‘Can you say definitively that Iran’s nuclear program has now been destroyed?’ 

‘I don’t want to get into sensitive intelligence here, but we know that we set the Iranian nuclear program back substantially last night. Whether it’s years or beyond that, we know it’s going to be a very long time before Iran can even build a nuclear weapon if they want to,’ Vance said. 

Pressed on the extent of the damage, the vice president again declined to disclose sensitive intelligence but added, ‘I feel extremely confident, and I can say to the American people with great confidence that they are much further away from a nuclear program today than they were 24 hours ago.’

‘That was the objective of the mission –  to destroy that Fordow nuclear site –  and, of course, do some damage to the other sites as well,’ he said. ‘But we feel very confident that the Fordow nuclear site was substantially set back and that was our goal.’ 

Vance separately told NBC’s ‘Meet The Press’ that the U.S. had engaged in a diplomatic process with the Iranians to no avail until around mid-May when Trump then ‘decided to issue some private ultimatums to the Iranians.’ 

‘My message to the Iranians is it would be the stupidest thing in the world,’ Vance said about potential retaliation after the U.S. strikes. ‘If you look at what happened last night, we had an incredibly targeted, precise surgical strike on the nuclear facilities that are the target of the American operation. Our national interest is for Iran to not get a nuclear weapon. Our strikes last night facilitated that national objective. If the Iranians want to enlarge this by attacking American troops, I think that would be a catastrophic mistake.’

Vance reiterated how Trump mentioned in his late Saturday night address from the White House that the United States wants Iran to give up their nuclear program peacefully – but allowing Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon remains off the table. 

‘There is no way that the United States is going to let Iran have a nuclear weapon. And so they really have to choose a pathway,’ Vance told ABC. ‘Are they going to go down the path of continued war, of funding terrorism, of seeking a nuclear weapons? Or are they going work with us to give up nuclear weapons permanently? If they’re willing to choose the smart path, they’re certainly going to find a willing partner in the United States to dismantle that nuclear weapons program.’ 

He also issued a warning.

‘But if they decide they’re going to attack our troops, if they decide they’re going to continue to try to build a nuclear weapon. Then we are going to respond to that with overwhelming force. So really, what happens next is up to the Iranians.’

Trump warned Saturday that ‘any retaliation by Iran against the United States of America will be met with force far greater than what was witnessed tonight.’ The U.S. military carried out ‘massive precision strikes’ on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan,’ which Trump said for years carried on a ‘horribly destructive enterprise’ and have now been ‘completely and totally obliterated.’ 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Latest News

Thomas Massie says he feels ‘misled’ by Trump after Iran strikes: ‘He’s engaged in war’

No Comments

Rep. Thomas Massie is accusing President Donald Trump of falling short of his campaign pledges with his Saturday-night strikes on Iran.

‘I feel a bit misled,’ Massie told Fox News Digital in a Sunday afternoon interview. ‘I didn’t think he would let neocons determine his foreign policy and drag us into another war.’ 

‘Other people feel the same way, who supported Trump — I think the political danger to him is he induces a degree of apathy in the Republican base, and they fail to show up to keep us in the majority in the midterms.’

Massie, a conservative libertarian who has long been wary of foreign intervention by the U.S., has been one of the most vocal critics of the Trump administration’s recent operation.

U.S. stealth bombers struck three major nuclear enrichment facilities in Iran Saturday night. 

Trump and other GOP leaders hailed the operation as a victory, while even pro-Israel Democrats also offered rare praise.

‘Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,’ Trump said Saturday night. ‘And Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier.’ 

But progressives and the growing isolationist wing of the GOP blasted it as a needless escalation of tensions in the Middle East, at a time when Israel has been engaged in a weeklong conflict with Iran as well.

Top officials up to Trump himself have said the U.S. is not seeking war with Iran. 

Vice President JD Vance told NBC News’ ‘Meet The Press’ Sunday, ‘We’re not at war with Iran. We’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program.’

Massie told Fox News Digital those assurances were ‘ludicrous.’

‘He’s engaged in war. We are now a co-belligerent in a hot war between two countries,’ the Kentucky Republican said, arguing that conflict separates this action from Trump’s strikes that killed deceased Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

‘You can’t say this isn’t an act of war, that it’s a strike outside of a war,’ he said. ‘This is inside, geographically and temporally, of a war.’

The Kentucky Republican notably has broken from Trump on several other occasions and has been one of the few GOP officials to openly clash with the president — particularly on government spending and foreign intervention.

He’s co-leading a resolution to prevent the ‘United States Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities in the Islamic Republic of Iran’ alongside Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., which they introduced days before the strikes. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., is leading a Senate counterpart.

Massie noted that his team was looking at ways to get the resolution on the House floor — while conceding likely opposition from pro-Israel groups and congressional leaders.

‘We’re going to try to use the privileges of the House to get this to the floor,’ he said. 

‘People were saying, ‘Why did you introduce this resolution? The president’s not going to strike Iran.’ He has struck Iran. And now the naysayers said, ‘Oh, well, you don’t need this resolution.’

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said during a Sunday morning press conference that the administration had properly notified Congress about the strikes within existing statute — even as progressives and some conservatives accuse him of bypassing a co-equal branch of government.

‘They were notified after the planes were safely out,’ Hegseth said. ‘We complied with the notification requirements of the War Powers Act.’ 

But Massie noted that that law also requires Congress to vote on U.S. military intervention in foreign countries within 60 days, if the conflict continues.

‘Even if they’re able to circumvent a vote on the resolution that Ro Khanna and I have introduced, we’re going to have to vote at some point if this becomes a protracted engagement,’ he said.

War powers resolutions can be called up for a House vote after 15 days of inaction by the relevant committee, after the legislation is referred to that committee.

When reached for comment, the White House pointed Fox News Digital to Trump’s most recent Truth Social post calling Massie a ‘grandstander’ and threatening to recruit a primary challenger against him.

‘Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is,’ Trump wrote. ‘Actually, MAGA doesn’t want him, doesn’t know him, and doesn’t respect him. He is a negative force who almost always Votes ‘NO,’ no matter how good something may be.’ 

‘MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER, Tom Massie, like the plague! The good news is that we will have a wonderful American Patriot running against him in the Republican Primary, and I’ll be out in Kentucky campaigning really hard. MAGA is not about lazy, grandstanding, nonproductive politicians, of which Thomas Massie is definitely one. Thank you to our incredible military for the AMAZING job they did last night. It was really SPECIAL!!!’

Fox News Digital also reached out to Speaker Mike Johnson’s office for comment.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Latest News

Inside the Situation Room, where Trump and his national security team monitored ‘spectacular’ success on Iran

No Comments

President Donald Trump reported to the West Wing’s Situation Room multiple times across the past week as the conflict in Iran came to a rolling boil and the president ordered strikes on a trio of Iranian nuclear facilities Saturday evening in a surprise operation that took the world by surprise. 

Trump returned to the Situation Room Saturday as the U.S. targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities, and was flanked by key officials such as Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, according to photos from inside the room published late Saturday. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was also in the Situation Room, the White House confirmed to Fox Digital. 

Trump publicly announced the strikes in a Truth Social post Saturday evening, which came as a surprise to the world, as there were no media leaks or speculation such an attack was imminent. He then delivered an address to the nation on the strikes, lauding them as a ‘spectacular military success.’

‘A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan,’ he said. ‘Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise. Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity, and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success.’ 

‘For 40 years, Iran has been saying, ‘Death to America. Death to Israel.’ They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs,’ Trump continued. ‘That was their specialty. We lost over a thousand people, and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular.’

Ahead of the strikes, Trump floated Wednesday he might order an attack on Iran as negotiations on its nuclear program fell apart and the president made repeated trips to the Situation Room.

‘Yes, I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do. I can tell you this that Iran’s got a lot of trouble, and they want to negotiate,’ Trump told reporters Wednesday on the U.S. potentially striking Iran as it continues trading deadly strikes with Israel. ‘And I said, why didn’t you negotiate with me before all this death and destruction? Why didn’t you go? I said to people, why didn’t you negotiate with me two weeks ago? You could have done fine. You would have had a country. It’s very sad to watch this.’

Fox News Digital spoke to previous presidential administration officials — Fox News host and former Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany, who served under the first Trump administration, and former National Security Advisor under the first Trump administration John Bolton, who also served as ambassador to the U.N. under President George W. Bush’s administration. They both conveyed the serious and historic tone the room and its meetings typically hold. 

The Situation Room is a high-tech 5,000-square-foot complex in the West Wing of the White House that includes multiple conference rooms. President John F. Kennedy commissioned the complex in 1961 following the failed Bay of Pigs invasion to overthrow the Castro regime in Cuba that same year, according to the National Archives. The complex was built in order to provide future presidents a dedicated area for crisis management, and was revamped in 2006 and renovated again in 2023. 

‘I often would sit there and think about the Osama bin Laden raid,’ McEnany told Fox News Digital in a phone interview Thursday morning. ‘This is where we saw our heroic Special Forces take out Osama bin Laden during the Obama administration. And I think we’re at another point where similar decisions are being made, and even bigger decisions that may change the course of history are happening right now in that room.’

Trump had spent hours in the Situation Room since June 16, including on Thursday morning, when he received an intelligence briefing with national security advisers, which followed a Situation Room meeting on Wednesday afternoon, another meeting on Tuesday afternoon with national security advisers and a Monday evening meeting upon his abrupt return from the G7 summit in Canada this week. 

Top national security officials, including  Hegseth, Gabbard, Vance, Rubio and Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, were among officials who joined Trump in the meetings as the administration weighs the spiraling conflict. 

Bolton explained to Fox Digital in a Thursday morning phone interview that two types of top-level meetings are held in the Situation Room. 

The first is known as a ‘principals meeting,’ he said, which includes Cabinet secretaries, such as the secretary of state and secretary of defense, and is chaired by the national security advisor — a role currently filled by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

‘The principals committee usually meets to try and get everything sorted out so that they know what decisions the president is going to be confronted with,’ Bolton said. ‘They try and make sure all the information is pulled together so we can make an informed decision, set out the options they see, what the pros and cons are, and then have (the president) briefed.’ 

The second type of Situation Room meeting at the top level are official National Security Council meetings, which the president chairs. 

‘He chairs a full NSC meeting, and people review the information, update the situation, and the president can go back and forth with the advisors about asking questions, probing about the analysis, asking for more detail on something, kind of picking and choosing among the options, or suggesting new options,’ said Bolton, who served as Trump’s national security advisor between April 2018 and September 2019. 

‘And out of that could well come decisions,’ he added. 

McEnany served as the first Trump administration’s top spokeswoman at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the Coronavirus Task Force operated out of the Situation Room as COVID-19 swept across the nation. 

‘A lot of critical decisions were made during the pandemic,’ she said. ‘It’s a humbling encounter. Every time you go in, you leave your phone at the door. You go in, I think it’s like 5,000 square feet, you’re sitting there, there’s clocks up from every country around the world, the different time zones. And you’re just sitting there as critical decisions are made. And, in my case, it was regarding the pandemic, and there’s back and forth, there’s deliberation, and these decisions are made with the president there, obviously.’ 

She continued that during the pandemic, the task force would spend hours in the Situation Room on a daily basis as the team fielded an onslaught of updates from across the country. Trump frequently received the top lines from the meetings and joined the Situation Room during key decisions amid the spread of the virus. 

‘When he was in there, absolutely, there’s a deference,’ she said, referring to how the tone of the room would change upon Trump’s arrival. ‘Yet, you had key officials who spoke up, who were not afraid to give their point of view to him. But I think there’s a recognition he’s the commander in chief.’

Press secretaries typically do not attend high-profile National Security Council meetings in the Situation Room, but have security clearances and can call into the room if needed, and are given updates from senior officials. 

McEnany added that press secretaries wouldn’t typically want to be in the room for high-stakes talks because ‘you don’t want your head filled with these sensitive deliberations of classified information’ when speaking with the media.

Bolton explained that for an issue such as Iran, the Situation Room meetings were likely restrictive and included top national security officials, such as the secretary of defense, director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 

‘Sometimes it includes many more people, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Commerce Secretary, things like that,’ he said. ‘But in with this kind of decision, it could be very restrictive, so maybe just – well, there is no national security advisor – but, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence, CIA Director, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, maybe the attorney general.’

Trump’s first national security advisor under the second administration, Mike Waltz, was removed from the role and nominated as the next U.S. ambassador to the UN in May, with Rubio taking on the additional role. The White House has also slashed NSC staffing since Trump took office, including after Rubio took the helm. 

Ahead of the surprise strikes on Saturday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt held a press conference on Thursday — the first since Israel launched preemptive strikes on Iran June 12 — and said the next two weeks would be a critical time period as U.S. officials map out next steps. 

‘I have a message directly from the president, and I quote: ‘Based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future. I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.’ That’s a quote directly from the president,’ she said Thursday. 

Israel launched pre-emptive strikes on Iran June 12 after months of attempted and stalled nuclear negotiations and subsequent heightened concern that Iran was advancing its nuclear program. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared soon afterward that the strikes were necessary to ‘roll back the Iranian threat to Israel’s very survival.’

He added that if Israel had not acted, ‘Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time.’ 

Dubbed ‘Operation Rising Lion,’ the strikes targeted Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure and killed a handful of senior Iranian military leaders.

Trump had repeatedly urged Iran to make a deal on its nuclear program, but the country pulled out of ongoing talks with the U.S. scheduled for Sunday in Oman. 

‘Iran should have signed the ‘deal’ I told them to sign,’ Trump posted to Truth Social Monday evening, when he abruptly left an ongoing G7 summit in Canada to better focus on the Israel–Iran conflict. ‘What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!’ 

Trump said during his address to the nation on Saturday evening following the strikes that Iran’s nuclear facilities had been ‘obliterated’ and that the country has been backed into a corner and ‘must now make peace.’

‘Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,’ Trump said. ‘And Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not. future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier.’ 

Leavitt added during Thursday’s briefing that Trump is the ‘peacemaker-in-chief,’ while noting that he is also not one to shy from flexing America’s strength. 

‘The president is always interested in a diplomatic solution to the problems in the global conflicts in this world. Again, he is a peacemaker in chief. He is the peace-through-strength president. And so, if there’s a chance for diplomacy, the president’s always going to grab it. But he’s not afraid to use strength as well,’ she said. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for additional comment on the high-level talks but did not immediately receive a reply. 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More