DOJ targets Spanberger, Newsom gun laws with twin lawsuits after SCOTUS affirms Second Amendment rights
The Justice Department escalated its push against state gun restrictions Wednesday, filing lawsuits against California and Virginia just a week after the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Second Amendment is not a “second-class right” in its decision in Wolford v. Lopez. The coordinated legal challenges target Democratic-backed firearm laws in both states, with the department seeking to block California’s restrictions on the sale of new Glock-style semiautomatic pistols and Virginia’s ban on the manufacture, sale, transfer and purchase of certain semiautomatic firearms classified as assault weapons. The California lawsuit was filed hours after the state’s new handgun restrictions took effect, following Attorney General Rob Bonta’s refusal to negotiate with the Justice Department over what federal officials contend are unconstitutional limits on gun rights. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said the administration is taking alleged infringements of the Second Amendment seriously. COMER PROBES ALLEGED BIDEN COLLUSION WITH GUN CONTROL ACTIVISTS IN GLOCK LAWSUIT “This lawsuit is yet another example of this Justice Department enforcing the Second Amendment by protecting citizens against unconstitutional state regulation of firearms,” Dhillon said in a press release. Bonta revealed Tuesday that the Justice Department had sent California a notice of intent to sue, arguing the law violates the Second Amendment. In a response letter, Bonta rejected the Department’s legal position and refused to negotiate. “The Unsafe Handgun Act and Penal Code section 27595 are commonsense handgun design safety laws that help to prevent accidental discharges by experienced and non-experienced firearm users as well as the conversion of semiautomatic pistols into deadly automatic firing weapons,” Bonta wrote. “If the U.S. Department of Justice decides to file the lawsuit described in your letter, it will not be breaking any new ground.” Dhillon responded on X with a brief message: “See you in court.” The Justice Department soon afterward announced its lawsuit against California, naming Dhillon and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jesus Osete as counsel. SPANBERGER’S LATEST ‘GUN-GRABBING NONSENSE’ PROMPTS ACTION FROM TRUMP DOJ: ‘STAY TUNED!’ Gov. Gavin Newsom‘s office accused the Trump administration of attempting to dismantle California’s gun safety laws. “Our response is simple — these laws save lives,” Newsom spokeswoman Diana Crofts-Pelayo said. “California has proven that strong, evidence-based gun safety measures can reduce gun violence while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners.” Crofts-Pelayo said California would not be “intimidated” by what she called politically motivated litigation and would continue enforcing laws designed to keep dangerous weapons off the streets. California has some of the nation’s strictest firearm regulations, which state officials credit with helping produce one of the country’s lowest gun death rates. The Golden State’s top elected Republican, however, appeared to agree with the DOJ that the law erodes Californians’ rights. “The Second Amendment applies to every American, even those living in California. Unfortunately, California Democrats find that fact inconvenient, so they ignore it in their efforts to erode and ultimately eliminate Californians’ lawful access to firearms,” said Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones, R-San Diego. “For decades, the Democrats in California have trampled the constitution with complete disregard for the rights of everyday Californians and banning the most popular firearm on the market is just the latest example,” he told Fox News Digital. “That’s why action like this is needed and I’m grateful that the DOJ has decided to join the fight and help preserve our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms in California.” The California lawsuit came shortly after the Justice Department sued Virginia over a newly enacted ban on so-called assault firearms. The lawsuit challenges Senate Bill 749, sponsored by state Sen. Saddam Salim, D-Dunn Loring, and signed by Gov. Abigail Spanberger in May. The ban took effect Wednesday, making it a misdemeanor to import, sell, manufacture, purchase or transfer certain semiautomatic firearms defined as assault weapons under state law. SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN BLUE STATE’S ‘VAMPIRE RULE’ IN MAJOR WIN FOR GUN RIGHTS Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Constitution “is not a suggestion” and that the Second Amendment is not a “second-class right.” Dhillon said she warned Spanberger in April that the Justice Department would sue if she signed the legislation and said Wednesday the administration was following through on that pledge. A spokesperson for Spanberger defended the law, saying the governor “firmly believes that firearms designed to inflict maximum casualties do not belong in our communities, near our kids and schools, or on Virginia’s streets.” “The Governor signed this commonsense legislation to save lives and protect law enforcement officers, kids, and families from gun violence — and the Governor remains committed to making the Commonwealth a safer home for every family,” the spokesperson said. Virginia House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, R-Gate City, welcomed the lawsuit, saying the state is now using taxpayer dollars to defend “an unconstitutional gun ban against the United States itself.” “That is where the Richmond Democrats’ agenda has led — into court, on the wrong side of the Constitution,” Kilgore told Fox News Digital. “House Republicans said this law could not stand. A Virginia court has already blocked it, and now the Justice Department agrees. It should be repealed.” SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER The National Association for Gun Rights also praised the department’s actions. “Thank God a small number of committed individuals in DC realize we only have a few years of opportunity to make moves like this, and they’re seizing it,” the group said. Hannah Hill, executive director of the National Foundation for Gun Rights, said the Supreme Court’s ruling in Wolford v. Lopez, which she said strengthened Second Amendment protections, gave the Justice Department additional legal support for its latest lawsuits against California and Virginia. “The timing is perfect for the Department of Justice to begin to be filing these lawsuits to strike out gun bans all across the country, it’s a really bad time to be a gun grabber,” Hill told Fox News Digital. The lawsuits came the same day the Supreme Court agreed to hear two Second Amendment cases next term challenging state and local
Alleged Cuban influence operative, family in federal custody after Rubio revokes legal status
Three Cuban nationals, including a man the Trump administration says spent more than a decade working for a Cuban government influence organization in the United States, were apprehended by federal agents this week after Secretary of State Marco Rubio terminated their legal status. The State Department announced Wednesday that Carlos Antonio Lloga Dominguez, along with his wife and son, are in federal custody pending removal from the U.S. Lloga Dominguez spent more than a decade as a “foreign subversive” employed by the Cuban Institute of Friendship with the People (ICAP), the communist Cuban regime’s “premier influence and intelligence front group in the United States,” according to the State Department. He is accused of continuing to maintain ties to the transnational communist subversion network throughout his time residing in the U.S. “This is America First leadership in our region,” a senior State Department official told Fox News Digital of the apprehensions. FEDS INVESTIGATE NONPROFITS AND LEADERS ALLEGEDLY COORDINATING WITH CUBA IN INFLUENCE CAMPAIGN ICAP was sanctioned earlier this month. The group has denied any wrongdoing and says it’s a civil society organization. The State Department maintains that ICAP “maintains an outsized footprint across the United States, trafficking in vile anti-American propaganda, cultivating pro-Havana regime activists and politicians, and lobbying federal, state and local politicians on behalf of the Cuban dictatorship.” FIRST ON FOX: POWERFUL HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS CHAIR THROWS HAMMER DOWN ON ‘FOREIGN-ALIGNED INFLUENCE NETWORK’ ICAP, which was founded in Fidel Castro in 1960 to spread Marxism all over the world, was accused of working with far-left groups in America to “export Cuba’s Communist revolution to the United States.” The State Department describes ICAP as the “the central node in a sprawling Cuban intelligence and influence operation, claiming to span more than 2,000 organizations across more than 150 countries.” The sanctions against ICAP, enacted by Rubio, froze all its U.S.-based assets and generally banned Americans from doing business with the organization. “America will never become home for foreign communists who peddle propaganda, run subversive influence operations, or support radical anti-American movements within the United States,” Rubio said in a statement on social media. “Transact with ICAP and you will be sanctioned, prosecuted or deported from our country.” A Fox News Digital investigation found that over the last decade, ICAP officials have closely coordinated with American nonprofits to support the Communist Party of Cuba. PROBE INTO ‘SUBVERSIVE’ ANTI-AI SINGHAM NETWORK IS ‘ENORMOUS,’ FORMER TREASURY ADVISOR SAYS These nonprofits — many of them funded by businessman and far-left activist Neville Roy Singham — include the People’s Forum, Breakthrough News, Tricontinental, CodePink, the ANSWER Coalition and the Party for Socialism and Liberation. Altogether, there are 145 nonprofits, labor groups, advocacy organizations and activist collectives across the U.S. that are mobilizing in support of the Cuban government, Fox News Digital reported. The organizations report about $1 billion in combined revenue. The DOJ and the Treasury Department is investigating this alleged influence campaign. CodePink, founded by Jodie Evans, Singham’s wife, led a convoy to Cuba earlier this year to deliver aid to the country. The trip came after President Donald Trump imposed an oil blockade on Cuba earlier this year. The convoy has since attracted federal scrutiny, with CodePink co-founder Medea Benjamin confirming she received questions from federal officials who were investigating whether she violated American sanctions on Cuba. Fox News Digital’s Danielle Wallace and Asra Nomani contributed to this report.
‘Weapons of mass reproduction’: Watchdog unveils action plan to curb birth tourism after Supreme Court ruling
A top government watchdog group released a multipoint plan to protect the homeland and the integrity of U.S. citizenship after the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling affirming birthright citizenship as enshrined in federal law. Conservatives across the country criticized Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, along with the court’s three liberal justices, arguing that the ruling opens the door to citizenship for children born to foreign nationals illegally present in the U.S. and dilutes American citizenship. The Oversight Project shared its “Keeping Families Together Plan” with Fox News Digital, arguing the ruling did not grant legal status to the parents of so-called anchor babies, a premise central to its proposal. “Now that the illegal alien community has achieved weapons of mass reproduction… you need to turn off that multiplying effect. And if the goal of mass deportation is quantitative, which of course it is, you need go [to] places where legal immigration spreads the most or is concentrated the most,” said Mike Howell, an attorney and president of the Oversight Project. SUPREME COURT’S LATEST IMMIGRATION RULING WILL CAU.S.E AMERICANS TO ‘DIE AND SUFFER’ ATTORNEY WARNS “That’s why I’ve advocated so long for worksite enforcement,” he said, noting farms and factories need enforcement rather than “playing onesies and twosies” in sanctuary cities. An increase in deportations, particularly of the parents of potential anchor babies, is key now that unfettered naturalization is a real possibility, he added. BIDEN JUDGE OVERRULED ON KEY TRUMP IMMIGRATION POLICY “Go to ‘red’ places and deport.” By deporting parents of so-called “anchor babies,” in most cases the child would be deported with the parent — and if not, that parent would have the “moral onus” of abandoning the child, Howell said. “If you are truly committed to the idea that birthright citizenship is absurd in its application, then it should be preventative,” he added, saying part of the plan to keep foreign families together would entail throwing roadblocks up to pregnant foreigners having children in the U.S. Positioning ICE at certain hospitals would help prevent that, he said. Turning to combating “birth tourism” — in which organizations help foreign nationals travel to the U.S. for the purpose of giving birth to U.S.-citizen children — Howell said China is the biggest source of the practice and other economic threats. Asked how to thread the needle with the U.S.’ economic reliance on Beijing, Howell said Tuesday’s ruling shows it is time to play “hardball.” He criticized President Donald Trump’s blessing of thousands of Chinese students continuing to study in America, which, in Howell’s words, would “prop up our failing university system.” “The elite regions of [China’s] upper class love access to the U.S. financial system and coming here and taking advantage of it. And so if you’re negotiating and it’s the art of the deal… take away the thing they want.” Howell claimed one Chinese billionaire has been “shipping his sperm” to California to inseminate women, resulting in children being born with U.S. citizenship. “What kind of serious country allows [that]?” he said. Reports from outlets, including Fortune, have described wealthy Chinese businessmen engaging in repeated surrogacy arrangements involving American women. Howell said that despite talk of Trump’s “mass deportation” agenda, the numbers don’t match the boasts so far. “The fact remains there isn’t a mass deportation campaign underway. And that’s why we’ve been pushing this Mass Deportation Coalition, which has so many members across the country and a policy framework for them to do it,” he said, acknowledging that Trump has had “special interests” buffeting his attempts because they don’t want their workforces deported, and setbacks like the public outcry over agent-involved shootings in Minneapolis that led to “cold feet.” Asked about the Oversight Project’s plan and Howell’s comments, the White House said Trump remains “totally committed” to protecting the “value of natural-born citizenship.” “[That] is why, following yesterday’s ruling, he directed Congress to take immediate action to address this. Simultaneously, the administration will double down on our efforts to keep the border secure and deport illegal aliens.” Spokesperson Abigail Jackson added that the DOJ will prioritize birth-tourism schemes, some of which Howell laid out. Howell’s plan also includes a veiled shot at Roberts — who, despite being a Republican’s appointee, is often the swing vote in favor of the court’s liberal minority as he was Tuesday. The George W. Bush appointee famously roiled Republicans after deeming Obamacare constitutional by defining its no-insurance penalty as a “tax,” while writing in the same 2012 ruling that Congress could not force Americans to buy insurance. “The question is not whether that is the most natural interpretation of the mandate, but only whether it is a ‘fairly possible’ one,” Roberts wrote in NFIB v. Sebelius. Howell said lawmakers could therefore create a mechanism through congressional reconciliation to punish birth-tourists — but define the penalty as a “tax.” “Much like the Obamacare plan being upheld as a tax by the Supreme Court, this would survive constitutional scrutiny,” the Oversight Project’s plan read. The plan also goes further, calling on DHS to suspend all visas for countries like China that engage in birth tourism. SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER The key, Howell said, is to start ignoring the noise from the left and from critics and power through the end of the congressional term with attainable goals in mind no matter how controversial critics say they are. “We took a hit today, a big hit, but the damage can be mitigated and the overall problem can be solved with a lot of political backbone and using the money from the Big, Beautiful Bill quickly and without fear of what the left-wing media might say about it,” he said. “Reconciliation is a beautiful vehicle to achieve those kind of cost-cutting measures. Obamacare was a tax. The rule is a tax, so why can’t we use a tax here? I’m sure the legal pundits will have much to say about that one,” Howell remarked. “But by any
Court keeps ‘Decoy Dan’ on Alaska ballot as expert warns ranked-choice system creates voter ‘traps’
Alaska’s highest court ruled that a same-name Republican challenger to Sen. Dan Sullivan can remain on the ballot, a decision an election expert says exposes glaring flaws in Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system and top-four primary. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled Monday that Dan J. Sullivan, a retired teacher, is eligible to appear on the Republican primary ballot alongside incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan, affirming a lower court’s decision keeping him on the ballot despite Republicans and the Division of Elections arguing that Dan J. Sullivan’s candidacy is a “sham” attempt orchestrated by Democratic operatives to potentially trip up voters and siphon off votes from the incumbent. “It very clearly is an attempt to mislead voters,” Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, told Fox News Digital. “When you look at the facts, they’ve been pretty clearly established.” Snead pointed to Alaska’s ranked choice voting (RCV) and jungle primary as especially vulnerable to any nefarious tactics with same-name candidates because, unlike a traditional partisan primary, Alaska advances the top four finishers from a single primary election to the general election, regardless of party. DAN SULLIVAN ACCUSES SAME-NAME CHALLENGER OF TRYING TO ‘RIG’ ALASKA SENATE RACE Snead argued that under a conventional Republican primary, a candidate he described as a “decoy” would be unlikely to eliminate a legitimate contender before the general election. Instead, he said, voters face a crowded top-four primary ballot in this year’s Alaska Senate race, roughly 16 candidates are running, and confusion over nearly identical names could have significant consequences. GOP FIGHTS TO STOP MULTIPLE DAN SULLIVANS FROM APPEARING ON ALASKA BALLOT, CALLS CANDIDACY A ‘SHAM’ “You’ve really got two problems in one,” Snead said. “You don’t have any party primary. There’s no Republican nominee or Democratic nominee. You have this jungle primary where everybody runs together, and the top four candidates advance to the general election.” Snead argued that under a traditional partisan primary, a candidate he described as a decoy would have little chance of preventing a legitimate Republican nominee from advancing to the general election. Instead, he said, Alaska’s crowded all-party primary creates more opportunities for voter confusion. “If enough of them pick the wrong Dan Sullivan, then he makes it into the general,” Snead said. “Now you’ve got two people named Dan Sullivan on the ballot.” Snead said the ranked-choice system can compound the problem because ballots are redistributed as candidates are eliminated. “If you only rank one person, then your ballot is eliminated if that person is eliminated,” he said. ALASKA’S BLOCKBUSTER SENATE RACE THROWN INTO CHAOS AS SAME-NAME CHALLENGER FIGHTS DISQUALIFICATION IN COURT He said another possibility is that voters could mistakenly rank the wrong Dan Sullivan first and Democrat Mary Peltola second, causing those votes to transfer to Peltola if the decoy candidate is eliminated during tabulation. “There are lots of different traps here,” Snead said. “At a minimum, I think this speaks to the fact that ranked-choice voting plus jungle primaries is especially vulnerable to these sorts of games.” “It is definitely not an idea that is ready for prime time, no matter what the people that push ranked choice are trying to sell us on.” The Alaska Supreme Court did stipulate that election officials could add additional identifying information to the ballot to distinguish between the two candidates, leaving those design decisions to the Division of Elections. Dan J. Sullivan, known to his critics as “Decoy Dan,” has come under scrutiny over ties to Democratic consultant Amber Lee, who was revealed as the author of his campaign launch announcement in metadata reviewed by Fox News Digital. Lee has notably supported Peltola’s prior runs for office and expressed optimism to The Hill in January that the Alaska Democrat would unseat the incumbent Sullivan. According to Alaska Director of Elections Carol Beecher, Dan J. Sullivan requested to appear on the primary ballot under the name “Dan Sullivan” despite previously registering as “Daniel J. Sullivan, Jr.” Beecher also noted that his campaign materials are visually similar to the incumbent Republican’s campaign and that he had no affiliation with the GOP prior to jumping into the race shortly before the filing deadline. The fate of his candidacy could prove decisive in the state’s hotly contested Senate race in which Sen. Dan S. Sullivan is seeking a third term in the Republican-leaning state. Democrats are hoping that former Rep. Mary Peltola, D-Alaska, whom Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., helped recruit into the race, will unseat Sullivan in November. In a statement to Fox News Digital, Dan J. Sullivan’s campaign said, “Mr. Sullivan has been buoyed by yesterday’s decisive victory at the Alaska Supreme Court. To the extent that the Division of Elections is still grappling with how it will properly effectuate ballot design in a manner consistent with Alaska law and past practice, he has no comment, and looks forward to running his campaign.” Fox News Digital’s Adam Pack contributed to this report.
Ex-CIA chief accused of orchestrating ‘Russia hoax’ sues Trump admin for ‘vindictive prosecution’
Former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan is suing the Trump administration and demanding a court order to require officials to preserve records of the criminal investigations against him. Brennan served as CIA director under former President Barack Obama from 2013 to 2017. In a court filing reviewed by Fox News Digital, Brennan asks the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to issue preliminary injunctive relief to “protect his constitutional rights as the current target of two federal investigations by the U.S. Department of Justice.” Attorneys for Brennan assert that the DOJ has launched its investigations “at the direct urging of President Trump” and that the investigations amount to searching for “phantom criminal conduct.” The filing states that “regrettably, some in the current DOJ and Federal Bureau of Investigation leadership have acceded to that direction, and are converting the Justice Department into a tool of retribution against Director Brennan and the President’s other perceived adversaries.” FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS BLUE STATE’S LAW PROHIBITING ICE AGENTS FROM WEARING MASKS ON THE JOB Fox News Digital reported this May that the FBI had begun questioning current and former CIA officials as part of a Justice Department probe into Brennan and his role in the intelligence community’s 2017 assessment on Russian interference in the 2016 election. Brennan has previously denied wrongdoing related to the Russia investigation and has defended the intelligence community’s assessment that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election. According to sources familiar with the matter, as of May, agents had interviewed roughly a dozen officials involved in drafting the assessment, with investigators focusing on how its conclusions were reached and whether Brennan may have misled Congress during his 2023 testimony. At the center of the probe is whether the intelligence assessment, which concluded Russia sought to boost Trump’s candidacy, was influenced by the controversial Steele dossier, a collection of largely unsubstantiated allegations about Trump’s supposed ties to Russia that was funded by political opponents. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has tapped former Trump attorney Joseph diGenova to spearhead the probe, putting a former Trump attorney in a key role in the high-profile probe. DOJ LAUNCHES GRAND JURY PROBE INTO MARXIST MOGUL NEVILLE ROY SINGHAM’S FUNDING OF LEFTIST GROUPS Brennan has previously said the CIA opposed including the dossier in the assessment, though a summary was ultimately attached to a classified version of the report. In his filing, attorneys for Brennan accuse the administration of “overreaching actions” that “have violated Director Brennan’s constitutional rights and will serve as the basis for challenges to any resulting charges, including motions to dismiss any indictment on the grounds that it is the result of selective and vindictive prosecution.” Brennan argues that during the course of these “presidentially-driven investigations,” certain DOJ officials have “taken steps that clearly violate well-established norms and limitations on prosecutorial conduct.” According to the filing, these include “issuing pronouncements that evince a pre-conceived belief in Director Brennan’s guilt; making statements that disclose matters relating to open grand jury investigations, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e); removing or sidelining career prosecutors who have balked at using the criminal process to promote the President’s retribution agenda; engaging in forum-shopping by moving the investigations from federal district to federal district in an effort to find a sufficiently pliant United States Attorney; and engaging in judge-shopping.” DEM SENATOR FACES DOJ PROBE AFTER ALLEGATIONS OF SPENDING CAMPAIGN FUNDS ON LUXURY LIFESTYLE Brennan’s filing also accuses the Trump administration of having a “disdain for records preservation” and administration officials of “routinely flout[ing] their preservation obligations.” In light of this accusation, he asked the court to issue an order requiring the Trump administration to preserve “any and all materials and communications that are potentially relevant to the consideration of Director Brennan’s legal and constitutional challenges to any future criminal charges.” The motion was filed by Brennan’s attorneys on Wednesday. It names Blanche as the defendant. A spokesperson for the DOJ responded to the suit by telling Fox News Digital, “While we cannot comment on the existence, or lack thereof, of an investigation, it is certainly rich that John Brennan is accusing anyone of a “retribution campaign.” Fox News Digital also reached out to the White House for comment. Fox News’ Jake Gibson and Fox News Digital’s Bradford Betz, Robert McGreevy and Amanda Macias contributed to this report.
‘Will not leave’: Is Israel killing the US-Iran MoU by staying in Lebanon?
As he visited troops in southern Lebanon on Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the military “will not leave” the area as long as the Iran-backed armed group Hezbollah remains a “threat” to his nation. A day earlier, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz also said Israel’s military will not withdraw “a millimetre” until Hezbollah is disarmed. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list But the Israeli stance is squarely at odds with the first clause of the US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which provides for an immediate, permanent halt to fighting on “all fronts”, including in Lebanon where Israeli forces have occupied approximately one-fifth of the country since early March. That provision has since been undercut by a separate US-brokered framework agreement between Israel and the Lebanese government, which doesn’t require Israeli forces to leave southern Lebanon or halt attacks – a deal Hezbollah has denounced. The result has been an entrenchment of Israel’s military presence in Lebanon, even as strikes have eased to avoid reigniting direct conflict with Iran. That leaves an open question: Is Israel’s position bluster for a domestic audience, or a hard line that could unravel the fragile MoU? We spoke to analysts to find out. [Al Jazeera] ‘Lose-lose’ for Netanyahu Behind Netanyahu’s combative language is an embattled prime minister managing a difficult balancing act, Cyrus Schayegh, professor of international history and politics at the Geneva Graduate Institute, told Al Jazeera. On the one hand, domestic politics has made Netanyahu reluctant to be seen as backing down from the war with Hezbollah, which began firing rockets into northern Israel soon after the first US-Israeli strikes on Tehran on February 28, in which Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed. Israel responded with force and has launched near-daily strikes, as well as an expanding ground invasion, ever since. Advertisement With elections expected around October, a hasty withdrawal from Lebanon could look like capitulation – and worse, an implicit admission that he only fell into line because of pressure from US President Donald Trump. But the other side of that “lose-lose” is Washington. Netanyahu, Schayegh says, understands exactly what Trump wants from him: to prevent the Israel-Hezbollah front from unravelling the broader US-Iran negotiations. Defying that expectation risks a rupture with the US at a moment when Israel can least afford one. Israeli security personnel remain on alert and scan the sky for an FPV drone in Metula, northern Israel, after Netanyahu ordered strikes on what his office described as Hezbollah targets in Beirut’s southern suburbs, according to a statement from his office [Atef Safadi/EPA] Iran’s ‘deep commitment’ Tehran has explicitly and repeatedly stated that Israel must fully withdraw from all occupied Lebanese territories before it will entertain signing any sort of peace deal with the US. Schayegh said this reflects Iran’s deep commitment to Hezbollah’s survival – the group has proven itself a vital strategic partner over the years, and the ties between Hezbollah’s leadership and the Iranian regime run deeper than pure strategy, reaching into socio-cultural and even family bonds. Hezbollah is a major issue for Iran, particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and it has shown this by its willingness to strike northern Israel and block the Strait of Hormuz over the issue before, geopolitical analyst Joe Macaron told Al Jazeera. But that doesn’t mean Iran expects, or even wants, a full return to the pre-Gaza war status quo, Schayegh says. At least some in Tehran, he believes, understand that getting Israel out of Lebanon won’t mean restoring the arrangement that held before 2023, when the Lebanese army played little to no role in the south, and Hezbollah operated largely unchecked, a dynamic dating back to the 2006 war in which Israel also occupied southern Lebanon. That recognition, Schayegh argues, means the form Hezbollah’s precise posture and footprint in southern Lebanon takes isn’t treated by Tehran as non-negotiable. Instead, it functions as a bargaining chip, one Iran could potentially use incrementally, trading concessions step by step in a slow, deliberate, diplomatic process, he says, adding that although it’s “a delicate path” for Tehran to walk. Diminishing the power of Hezbollah in Lebanon, therefore, it is a path Iran may be prepared to navigate around rather than resist outright. Advertisement Still, Iran holding on to the Lebanon issue “as much as it could” was reportedly a sticking point that delayed the MoU in the first place, according to Ronnie Chatah, a political commentator, writer and host of The Beirut Banyan podcast. He told Al Jazeera it’s conceivable Iran could still make Lebanon “a heightened problem”, slowing a permanent deal with Washington unless there’s added pressure on Israel to at least appear to be withdrawing. Even so, Chatah doesn’t believe the current situation is enough to derail the MoU altogether. In the days since both agreements were signed, he said, there’s been no serious push by Iran to make Lebanon a priority and, despite Israel’s clear insistence it will stay as long as it sees a threat, he does not believe it will “jeopardise” the MoU. Hezbollah’s exclusion: ‘humiliating, shameful and a surrender’ Hezbollah was not involved in the framework agreement between Israeli and Lebanese officials. In fact, it was entirely excluded from the negotiations, which led to a deal being signed in Washington, DC. Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem has adamantly rejected the framework agreement, calling it “humiliating, shameful and a surrender of sovereignty”. As a party which has held seats in the Lebanese parliament since the mid-2000s, Schayegh noted, Hezbollah is not simply a “marionette” of Iran. But since Israel’s 2024 campaign in Lebanon, amid the Gaza war, which has massively weakened the armed group and killed much of its leadership, Iran has organisationally assumed a greater role. For Chatah, the real answers, therefore, lie not in Lebanon but in Iran. As the most important player in its “axis of resistance” across the region, Hezbollah represents Iran’s most “advanced investment” beyond its borders over the past four and a half
Is Ukraine’s campaign of targeting Russian refineries working?
Long-range Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian oil refineries have resulted in serious fuel shortages across the country. They compelled Moscow, a major hydrocarbon producer, to begin purchasing fuel abroad. Ukraine has also disrupted Russian supply routes north of the Sea of Azov, causing acute fuel shortages and blackouts in the occupied Crimean peninsula. The attacks have generated spectacular videos of refineries on fire and clickbait headlines claiming that “Russia is losing”. But what they have failed to achieve so far is changing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s calculus. After a long silence, Putin recently admitted that the strikes were indeed painful for Russia. But rather than moderating his conditions for a peace settlement, as Ukraine and its allies hoped he would, he staged a show of defiance and performative confidence. In a statement issued on June 23, he made clear he has not stepped back from his demands. He wants the peace treaty to be based on the framework agreement Ukraine and Russia developed during the Istanbul talks in the spring of 2022, a few months into Russia’s all-out aggression. These included Ukraine’s neutrality and a cap on the size of its military, among other conditions. But there are additional demands that have piled up over the four and a half years of war. This is what Putin refers to as “reality on the ground”, which stands for all the land Russia has occupied so far. Moscow wants to keep it. And on top of that, he is adding another euphemism: “Anchorage modality”, a reference to the frameworks surrounding the inconclusive Alaska summit between Putin and US President Donald Trump in August 2025. What it stands for is the Russian demand presented at the summit – that Ukraine must withdraw from the parts of the Donbas region which it still controls. Advertisement Finally, Putin has ominously extended his territorial demands beyond Donbas to what he calls Novorossiya – a vague geographical term derived from the name of the province that existed in imperial Russia on the territory of today’s southern Ukraine. The vagueness is probably intentional: interpretations may range from the maximalist goal of capturing the port city of Odesa to a modest, but still painful one for Ukraine – demanding that Kyiv withdraw from the unoccupied part of Zaporizhia region, in addition to the Donbas. Putin’s decision to double down on his demands likely rests on the fact that the situation in the country remains relatively stable. For all the dramatic visuals of burning refineries and queues at gasoline stations, most Russians have seen worse in their lifetimes. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the country witnessed nationwide political upheaval, which was followed by two wars in Chechnya and multiple bloody terror attacks like the Dubrovka theatre and Beslan school sieges. In terms of economic hardship, the vast majority of Russians are still enjoying a lifestyle comparable with that of poorer European Union countries and contrasting sharply with what they endured throughout the 1990s. Most importantly, their war experience is aeons apart from that of the Ukrainians – who have been exposed to far more brutal Russian aerial strikes, wintering in unheated apartments and dodging violent conscription gangs hunting for men in the streets of Ukrainian towns and villages. Ukraine itself is the best illustration of what a post-Soviet country can endure without challenging the government in mass protests or army mutinies. Russia itself deployed the same tactics of targeting refineries against Ukraine early on in the war. The Ukrainians adapted, so, too, will the Russians. Fuel shortages create pain, but Russian oil and gas production remains intact. It serves as a backbone of the economy, ensuring the country’s ability to wage war while adapting to challenges posed by Ukraine and the Western alliance. As a March paper on the prospects of Russian oil production by the US think tank, the Carnegie Center asserts, Russia’s challenges are “well within the Kremlin’s and the oil industry’s ability to cope with headwinds and adversity” over the next three to five years, which are critical for winning the war. In the months following the paper’s publication, Russia filled up its coffers with billions of extra petrodollars, thanks to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran. It is now in an even better position. Advertisement Ukraine, on the other hand, is entirely dependent on Western aid, which it finds harder and harder to obtain. After losing its main funder, the United States, it is now existentially reliant on European governments – especially the British, French and German – which themselves are coming under strong pressure from the far right to stop financing Ukraine. Last week, Zelenskyy announced a 40-day “influence operation”, meaning more drone strikes, to coerce Russia into agreeing to settle the conflict on conditions more favourable to Ukraine. But Russia is not turning the other cheek. It has embarked on a campaign of its own to knock out petrol stations on the left bank of the Dnipro River to suffocate supplies for the Ukrainian army and civilians. Ukraine and its Western allies may come up with another surprise move that could cause much pain to Russia. But there is a fair chance that Zelenskyy’s 40-day campaign will see mixed results and the big picture may not radically change from the one we are observing today. The most crucial success that Ukraine has failed to achieve yet is stopping the Russian ground offensive. While Western media is trumpeting Moscow’s anticipated defeat, Russian troops are busy finalising the capture of Kostiantynivka, the first in a chain of industrial cities that form the northern Donbas agglomeration, the main prize of the current stage of the war. It is apparent from official and expert Russian commentary that Russia sees the Ukrainian drone campaign primarily as a PR surge aimed at convincing US President Donald Trump to restart support for Ukraine. Like many longtime Ukraine watchers, the Russians also have an acute sense of deja vu – similar PR surges accompanied Ukraine’s
Cape Verde: All to know before FIFA World Cup knockout against Argentina
An island nation of just over half a million inhabitants, Cape Verde pulled off the unthinkable by reaching the last 32. Published On 1 Jul 20261 Jul 2026 Five wins to go. How can your team reach the final and win the World Cup 2026? Click here to find out. For decades, Cape Verde was known simply for its crystal clear waters and white sandy beaches. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list But a football fairytale in North America in June has exponentially raised the profile of this tiny island nation across the globe. Cape Verde turned their fans from dreamers to believers, writing a story for the ages when the World Cup debutants became the smallest country to reach the knockout stages of the competition. Come Friday, the archipelago of 10 islands in the Atlantic Ocean will face reigning champions Argentina in a contest likened to a David vs Goliath battle. Here’s all to know about Cape Verde: Where is Cape Verde? Cape Verde is an island nation off the western coast of Africa. How have Cape Verde performed at the 2026 World Cup? Cape Verde pulled off the unthinkable by reaching the World Cup knockouts, finishing second in a tricky group. They registered three points, holding each of the title favourites Spain, former champions Uruguay and Saudi Arabia to a draw. That was enough to send them to the last 32. Cape Verde’s Dailon Livramento celebrates after their final group match as they qualify for the knockout stages of the World Cup [Troy Taormina/Imagn Images via Reuters] Why is Cape Verde’s World Cup run historic? As an nation of just more than half a million inhabitants, expectations were low for Cape Verde on their World Cup debut. But, following a fairytale run in the African qualifiers, the Blue Sharks lived up to their giant-killing reputation, and continue their dream run in North America. Advertisement They are the smallest nation to reach the knockouts in the World Cup’s 96-year history. Cape Verde’s success has been in the planning for a while, with a football talent recruitment strategy built on tapping into its large diaspora community of promising players. Of the starting 11 that were on the field for their 0-0 draw with Saudi Arabia in the final group game, six were born outside the country. Three were born in the Netherlands, and the others were from the Republic of Ireland, France and Portugal. When do Cape Verde play Argentina? Cape Verde face title holders Argentina in the round of 32 on Friday in Miami. The match begins at 5pm (22:00 GMT). Who is Cape Verde’s goalkeeper Vozinha? Cape Verde’s 40-year-old goalkeeper Vozinha has been arguably the hero of their maiden World Cup campaign, keeping two clean sheets in three games. He remarkably made seven saves in their goalless draw with European champions Spain, keeping the talented Lamine Yamal at bay. His impeccable display between the sticks made him an overnight sensation on social media – Vozinha’s Instagram follower count has jumped from a modest 500,000 to 17.4 million, as of Wednesday. That is more than some of the most famous sportspeople in the world, including NFL legend Tom Brady and NBA star Victor Wembanyama. Vozinha of Cape Verde has become a huge fan favourite at the 2026 World Cup [Michael Steele/Getty Images/AFP] Who are Cape Verde’s best players? Apart from Vozinha – whose real name is Josimar Jose Evora Dias – Cape Verde’s centre-back Diney Borges and defensive midfielder Kevin Pina have played a crucial role in their success so far. Pina also scored once, along with Helio Varela. The 2026 World Cup is not Cape Verde’s first major tournament. They have played at four Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON), the continent’s showpiece footballing event. Cape Verde’s best result was reaching the quarterfinals in their inaugural campaign in 2013, as well as at their last appearance in 2023. They also came close to qualifying for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, but were ultimately eliminated in the last match of the group phase. What is Cape Verde’s FIFA world ranking? Cape Verde is ranked 64th. Why are Cape Verde called the Blue Sharks? Their football team is nicknamed “Tubaroes Azuis” – Portuguese for “Blue Sharks”. It is a moniker for the majestic blue sharks that inhabit Cape Verde’s surrounding Atlantic waters, with the archipelago home to several species of sharks and rays. A supporter of the ‘Blue Sharks’ [Ronaldo Schemidt/AFP] Adblock test (Why?)
Ram Mandir Donation Theft Decoded: Accused used counting room keys, bathroom drops, camera gaps to steal crores
The accused confessed to siphoning off crores from Ram Mandir donations through collusion between Tinnu Yadav, a close aide of Champat Rai, who held one counting room key, and bank staff who held the other.
India-Pakistan peace appeal: 117 leaders ask Modi, Sharif to end hostility
The signatories argued that India and Pakistan house one-fifth of humanity with a large young population. “Decades of estrangement” have cost both nations socially, economically, and humanly. Sustained engagement is the “only viable path” to resolve differences.