Trump suggests US would strike again if Iran rebuilt nuclear programme
THE HAGUE, June 25 (Reuters) - Asked if the United States would strike again if Iran rebuilt its nuclear enrichment programme, U.S. President Donald Trump said: "Sure."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
8 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Benjamin Netanyahu corruption trial delayed on diplomatic and security grounds
An Israeli court has cancelled this week's hearings in Benjamin Netanyahu's long-running corruption trial, accepting a request made by the prime minister on classified diplomatic and security grounds. 'Following the explanations given … we partially accept the request and cancel at this stage Mr Netanyahu's hearings scheduled' for this week, the Jerusalem district court said in its ruling, published online by Netanyahu's Likud party. The ruling said that new reasons provided by Netanyahu, the head of Israel's spy agency the Mossad and the military intelligence chief justified cancelling the hearings. It comes after Donald Trump last week called for the case to be thrown out. In remarks on social media, the US president suggested the trial could interfere with Netanyahu's ability to join negotiations with the Palestinian militant group Hamas and Iran, adding that the US was 'not going to stand' for the continued prosecution, prompting Netanyahu to thank him in a message on X. In a social media post, Trump described the case against the Israeli premier as a 'witch hunt', saying the trial 'should be CANCELLED, IMMEDIATELY, or a Pardon given to a Great Hero'. Netanyahu was indicted in 2019 on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust – all of which he denies. He has cast the trial against him as an orchestrated leftwing witch-hunt meant to topple a democratically elected rightwing leader. In one of the cases, he and his wife, Sara, are accused of accepting more than $260,000 worth of luxury goods such as cigars, jewellery and champagne from billionaires in exchange for political favours. In two others, Netanyahu is accused of attempting to negotiate more favourable coverage from two Israeli media outlets. The prime minister has requested multiple postponements to the trial since it began in May 2020. Netanyahu's lawyers had asked the court to excuse him from testifying over the next two weeks so he could focus on security issues after a ceasefire with Iran and amid ongoing fighting in Gaza where Israeli hostages are held. They submitted the prime minister's schedule to the court to demonstrate 'the national need for the prime minister to devote all his time and energy to the political, national and security issues at hand'. The court initially rejected the lawyers' request, but said in its ruling on Sunday that it had changed its judgment after hearing arguments from the prime minister and other senior officials. A spokesperson for the Israeli prosecution declined to comment on Trump's post. Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid said last week that Trump 'should not interfere in a judicial trial in an independent country'. Trump said Netanyahu was 'right now' negotiating a deal with Hamas, though neither leader provided details, and officials from both sides have voiced scepticism over prospects for a ceasefire soon. On Friday, the Republican president told reporters he believed a ceasefire was close. With Reuters and Agence France-Presse
Daily Mail
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
American politician issues a wake-up call for Anthony Albanese - and what he needs to do for Trump
Two US congressmen have urged Anthony Albanese to visit the White House in order to meet Donald Trump and save the wavering AUKUS pact. Republican Michael McCaul and Democrat Joe Courtney are the co-chairs of the Friends of Australia Caucus, which is pushing for AUKUS to go ahead after Elbridge Colby, the US defence under-secretary for policy, announced a review of the nuclear submarine deal. McCaul said on Monday it was crucial for Albanese to develop a personal rapport with Trump. 'For (Albanese) to come to the White House would be a great gesture on the prime minister's part, that I think would go over very well,' he told the Australian Financial Review. 'That would be very sound advice for him to do that.' Meanwhile, Courtney said Albanese should highlight the significant investment Aussie companies were making in US shipyards, set to hit $4.6billion AUD. He also emphasised that Australia would pay a fair price for the several nuclear submarines set to be acquired from 2032. 'This really takes it out of the sort of America First criticism of security agreements... where President Trump felt that other countries weren't pulling their own weight,' Courtney said. 'It's a case that is very unique that the prime minister can articulate. '(Albanese) is a very personable and socially savvy person, kind of like (UK Prime Minister) Keir Starmer, who does seem to have succeeded with the personal interaction.' Albanese was stood up by the US President at the G7 Summit in Canada earlier this month, and instead met with members of Trump's senior economic team. Trump left the summit early due to the Israel-Iran conflict, scotching planned meeting with several world leaders including Albanese, who has only ever spoken to the US President on the phone. The prime minister also did not attend last week's NATO Summit, where political observers had hoped he would have a second chance to meet with Trump. In a win for the US President, members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation - which Australia is not a part of - agreed at the summit to lift their defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP over 10 years. The White House later indicated it expects its allies in the Asia-Pacific - including Australia - to also increase their defence funding. This means that Albanese may be pressured to increase defence spending if he wants to shore up the AUKUS deal, and to secure a reprieve from punishing tariffs imposed by the US on imports, including a 50 per cent levy on steel and aluminium. In this year's Budget, the Albanese government raised defence spending to 2.2 per cent of GDP, aiming for 2.3 per cent by 2034 - well short of the 3 per cent of GDP that the Trump administration has previously demanded of Australia.
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Broadcasters must air the view that trans women are women, media watchdog says
Broadcasters should air the opinion that trans women are women when covering transgender topics, the UK's media watchdog has reportedly said. Ofcom allegedly told GB News that transgender issues should not be seen as 'settled' despite the Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that the legal definition of a woman should be based on their sex at birth. The Telegraph say they have seen a letter from the watchdog where they tell the channel that broadcasters should potentially share the view that a woman could be someone who has been born a biological man. GB News had reportedly written to Ofcom asking them to confirm that the ruling had cleared up any confusion over whether a person could be addressed by their biological sex rather than what they identify as. The channel also allegedly asked Ofcom to confirm that broadcasters could refer to sports players by their biological pronoun and not gender identity. The newspaper say GB News posed the point that the ruling had made it a 'settled matter that a trans woman is not a biological female, and a trans man is not a biological male'. The channel reportedly added: 'Following the Supreme Court judgment we are of the view that (provided there is no deliberate intention to cause harm or offence), contributors should generally be able to use biological pronouns.' However, the watchdog is said to have responded that the ruling should be contextualised in the Equality Act, suggesting that a person's preferred choice of identity should instead be used on air. The newspaper went on to say that Ofcom labelled GB News's propositions as 'dogmatic' and that the topics required 'nuanced decision-making'. Their response allegedly said that they did not follow the thought that the Supreme Court ruling had 'settled' wider debate about the 'appropriate meaning, usage and effect of such terms in all contexts outside the scope of the Equality Act'. They are alleged to have said that this includes 'in broadcast programmes in which issues relating to sex and gender-based rights are discussed generally', which they say 'the judgment does not purport to do so'. The Ofcom response reportedly continued to say that each broadcaster has a right to 'freedom of expression' as well as the 'editorial discretion which uncontroversially accompanies the exercise of those rights on issues of significant public interest'. An Ofcom spokesperson said: 'Ofcom is a post-broadcast regulator. 'In line with the rights of broadcasters and audiences to freedom of expression, our rules allow broadcasters editorial freedom to choose how to cover issues in their programmes subject to the Broadcasting Code. 'Our assessment of whether content complies with the Broadcasting Code is always fact-specific and takes into account all relevant contextual factors, requiring nuanced decision-making, and not a "one size fits all" approach.'
