Steelers Respond After Players Join Trump at Rally: Live Updates
The Pittsburgh Steelers have responded to backlash from fans after several current and former players appeared alongside President Donald Trump at a Friday rally at the U.S. Steel plant in West Mifflin, Pennsylvania. Quarterback Mason Rudolph, safety Miles Killebrew, and four-time Super Bowl champion Rocky Bleier joined Trump on stage and presented him with a custom No. 47 jersey, prompting a flurry of messages from fans who felt the appearance crossed a line.
08:25 AM EDT
Full list of Navy ships that could be renamed by Pete Hegseth
Main: Civil Service Mariners aboard Military Sealift Command's fleet replenishment oiler USNS Harvey Milk, Norfolk Virginia, Spetmeber 2024. Inset: U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivers his speech during 22nd Shangri-La Dialogue summit in Singapore, Saturday,...
Main: Civil Service Mariners aboard Military Sealift Command's fleet replenishment oiler USNS Harvey Milk, Norfolk Virginia, Spetmeber 2024. Inset: U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivers his speech during 22nd Shangri-La Dialogue summit in Singapore, Saturday, May 31, 2025. More
Main: LaShawn Sykes, Inset Anupam Nath/Main: Defense Visual Information Distribution Service, Inset: AP Photo
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is looking to rename several Navy ships which honor civil rights leaders, according to documents obtained by CBS.
These memos show Secretary Hegseth is changing the name of the USNS Harvey Milk at the beginning of Pride Month. The USNS Harvey Milk honors the memory of the gay rights campaigner who served in the Navy during the Korean War before being discharged for his sexuality.
The USNS Harvey Milk is not the only ship that the Secretary wants to rename. He is also looking to change the names of several other ships named after civil rights campaigners and leaders.
According to the memo this renaming is being done in "alignment with president" and "priorities of reestablishing the warrior culture."
Chief Pentagon Spokesman, Sean Parnell, said in a statement to Newsweek: "Secretary Hegseth is committed to ensuring that the names attached to all DOD installations and assets are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief's priorities, our nation's history, and the warrior ethos."
Read the full story by Sophie Clark on Newsweek.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
29 minutes ago
- USA Today
Once again, clear evidence shows the dominance of Eagles star WR A.J. Brown
We may never hear another speech like the masterpiece Jason Kelce offered at the Philadelphia Eagles' first Super Bowl victory parade. There were simply too many iconic moments: the beratement of Mike Lombardi, the "hungry dogs run faster" line, the off-key but beautiful song we heard at the end. Come to think of it, the earlier statement is suddenly incorrect. We will NEVER hear another victory speech like Jason Kelce's. A.J. Brown has his moment though. Few compare to his mic-drop moment this past February. "They said I was a diva. They said all I cared about was stats. If you're going to get all of those things wrong about me, it's one thing you can get right. I'm a (expletive) champion!" Well, he isn't lying... A.J. is a champion, and as good as he was with the Tennessee Titans, he has become even better in Philly. Let's talk about those stats A.J. is mentioning. A.J. Brown, since joining the Philadelphia Eagles, has become the NFL's premier unstoppable force. A.J. Brown and DeVonta Smith enter their fourth season as teammates. They are on the verge of being the best duo this organization has ever seen. They are currently Pro Football Focus's choice as the best one-two punch in the game. No disrespect is intended to great tandems like DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin or Harold Jackson and Ben Hawkins. Harold Carmichael and Charlie Smith... Fred Barnett and Calvin Williams... All were great. A.J. and DeVonta have the potential to exceed all of them. Let's focus on A.J. for a second. They say 'people lie, but numbers don't'. If that's true, how can we argue against Brown now being the best of his era? Per Pro Football Focus, he's the best receiver in the game, and their recent ranking of the NFL's top wide receivers against man and zone coverage places him second vs. the former. Two-tenths of a point would have slid him ahead of Mike Evans for the top spot. Check out PFF's explanation of A.J.'s brilliance and Lauren Gray's explanation of what makes him so good against man coverage. "Brown ranked fifth in PFF receiving grade against man coverage in 2023 (90.4) and recorded a league-best 510 receiving yards... He led the league in that mark again in 2024, catching 35 single-target passes for 538 yards and six touchdowns (tied third most). Brown also paced the NFL with 11 missed tackles forced on man-coverage catches while finishing in the top three in first downs gained (26), yards after the catch (189) and yards per route run (3.99). He ranked fifth in passer rating when targeted against man coverage (142.4)." A.J.'s previous three seasons in the City of Brotherly Love have resulted in two of his three career Pro Bowl appearances and three consecutive Second-Team All-Pro nods. He owns team records for most receiving yards in a player's debut and single-season receiving yards. He and DeVonta Smith are the first tandem in franchise history to eclipse 1,000 yards receiving in the same season. He has caught a TD pass in BOTH of his Super Bowl appearances, and again, he is an (expletive) champion. Need we say more? If Brown stays on this path, he'll have a Pro Football Hall of Fame argument. Based on what we have seen so far, barring any injury, there is no reason to believe he won't.
an hour ago
A week of shifting descriptions of Iran attack spark ongoing questions about extent of damage and goals
A week after President Donald Trump ordered a U.S. attack on three Iranian nuclear sites, the explanations and descriptions of what happened voiced by him, top aides and early intelligence reports paint contrasting pictures of the extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear program. While the president and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth repeatedly claimed that Iran's nuclear program has been "obliterated," preliminary assessments — including from the Pentagon's own intelligence wing — painted an evolving picture as the week went on. Trump said he ordered the attack on June 21 to strike a uranium enrichment site located in 300 feet deep in a mountain in Fordo in northwestern Iran, an uranium enrichment site in Natanz and the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center following reports that Iranian officials failed to comply with international nuclear regulations. And as those early damage assessments cast doubt on the extent to which Iran nuclear program was crippled, several of Trump's top aides and allied lawmakers also appeared to scale back the stated goals of the attack. Here are some of the accounts and characterizations over the last week. Officials label mission a success, but provide few details to start On Sunday morning, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth echoed Trump's statement from Saturday night, just after the strikes, that the sites had been "obliterated." "It was clear we devastated the Iranian nuclear program," he added. Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, however, declined to go as far, saying it would take more time to assess the extent of the damage done. Hegseth acknowledged that damage assessment was ongoing but stuck by the description he and Trump were using. "All of our precision munitions struck where we wanted them to strike and had the desired effect, which means especially the primary target here, we believe we achieved destruction of capabilities there," he said. Pentagon initial damage report leaks Officials and inspectors from outside Iran have not been able to gain direct access to the bombed sites to make a first-hand assessment. Trump officials had a more nuanced take after news reports surfaced Tuesday about an initial Defense Intelligence Agency assessment that said the attack set back Iran's nuclear program only by months. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio condemned the leaks of the military's report but did not go as far as to claim that the sites were obliterated. Instead, he insisted that "very significant, substantial damage was done" to key components of Iran's nuclear program, "and we're just learning more about it." At the same time, Rubio provided more details about the attack, including that the bunker-buster bombs were dropped on ventilation shafts leading deep inside Fordo's heavily fortified facility -- buried, officials and experts said, 200 to 300 feet inside a mountain. He ultimately acknowledged that it was difficult to get a read on damage inflicted to Fordo at this point, but asserted "the bottom line is real damage was done." That same day, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard claimed in a statement that the three facilities were destroyed. The director general of the U.N.'s nuclear oversight agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, said Wednesday that he believed some of Iran's enriched uranium had been moved from the sites before the attacks. Trump refuted that analysis. "It would have taken two weeks, maybe. But it's very hard to remove that kind of material, very hard and very dangerous. Plus, they knew we were coming, and if they know we're coming, they're not going to be down there," he said Wednesday. Trump reiterated that the sites and the uranium were buried under rubble and inaccessible, adding that trucks seen in satellite images at the plant before the attack -- which some speculated could have been used to move the nuclear material -- were construction vehicles being used to cover the ventilation shaft openings with protective concrete. According to the two people familiar with the DIA's classified report, the bombing sealed off the entrances to two of the three nuclear sites targeted in the attack but most of the damage was done to structures above ground, leaving the lower structures intact. The assessment also found that at least some enriched uranium remained – possibly moved from the nuclear sites ahead of the blasts. The next day, on Thursday, Hegseth held a news conference where he slammed the news media over reporting but did not make the same assessment on the nuclear materials. Asked twice during the briefing if he could be more definitive about whether the enriched uranium was moved before the attack, Hegseth said the Pentagon was "watching every aspect." At that same Thursday briefing, Caine noted it's not his job to assess the damage, saying, "We don't grade our own homework." Facility destruction downplayed by officials, ceasefire emphasized Hegseth also highlighted what appeared to be a different goal of the mission, arguing the attack had succeeded because it led to stopping the fighting between Iran and Israel — rather than the facilities' destruction because it destroyed Iran's nuclear program. "We got that peace, that ceasefire, that option because of strength, because of [Trump's] willingness to use American military might that no one else on the planet can do with the kind of planners and operators that the chairman just laid out," he said. Then, on Friday, Trump echoed that sentiment. "They put out that fire once that happened, once those bombs got dropped out, that war was over," he said. Still, the president claimed again that the sites were obliterated during a news conference. "We finished them off," he said, adding, "I don't believe that they're going to go back into nuclear anytime soon." Abbas Araghchi, the Iranian foreign minister said on Iranian State TV Thursday, however, the facilities were not destroyed and his country will have leverage in negotiations. The fate of the enriched uranium On Capitol Hill on Thursday, after administration officials gave lawmakers a classified briefing on the strikes, Republican lawmakers acknowledged that the U.S. strikes may not have destroyed Iran's cache of enriched uranium. But they said that wasn't part of the mission. "The purpose of the mission was to eliminate certain particular aspects of their nuclear program. Those were eliminated. To get rid of the nuclear material was not part of the mission,' Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., told CNN. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said the "program was obliterated at those three sites," but added, "I don't know where the 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium exists. But it wasn't part of the targets there."
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
We reach 71 in our Raiders countdown to kickoff. Who wore it best and who's wearing it now
We've reached 71 days until the Raiders season opener at Foxboro against the Patriots, With our countdown at 71 days we take a look at who currently dons the number in Silver & Black and who has brought it the most distinction. No. 71 Who's wearing it now: T DJ Glaze Glaze was the Raiders' pick in the third round of the 2024 NFL Draft out of Maryland. He took over at right tackle for Thayer Munford due to injury and never looked back. Even with a new staff, Glaze remains in line to be the team's starting right tackle going into this season. Who wore it best: DT Bill Pickel The second round pick (54 overall) in the 1983 NFL Draft spent the first eight years of his career with the Raiders. The team won the Super Bowl in his first season with the team. Then he settled in as a constant presence on the defensive interior for the next seven years. This includes a run of three consecutive seasons with double digit sacks from 1984-86 culminating in being named a first team All Pro.
