分类： 未分类

Explainer: Congress has backed Iran war powers resolutions. Now what?

2026-06-09T21:21:12.715Z / Reuters

WASHINGTON, June 9 (Reuters) – For the first time since the war on Iran began on February 28, the Republican-led U.S. Congress has backed resolutions that could block Republican President Donald Trump from continuing hostilities, reflecting growing concern among members of his party about the three-month-long conflict.

The House of Representatives voted in ​favor of a war powers resolution on June 4 and the Senate advanced a separate, but similar, resolution in a procedural vote ​on May 19 as a handful of Republicans broke with party leadership to vote with almost every Democrat.

Get weekly news and analysis on U.S. politics and how it matters to the world with the Reuters Politics U.S. newsletter. Sign up here.

This is a look at the U.S. war powers law and what might happen next.

WHAT IS THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION?

Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, also known as the War Powers Act, in 1973 as a check on presidential power in response to the ​unpopular Vietnam War. The Act requires the president to inform Congress within 48 hours of hostilities and says military action begun without Congress’ approval ​must be terminated within 60 days, unless there is an emergency.

With Iran, the 60-day deadline was May 1, which Trump ⁠addressed by declaring that the hostilities had been “terminated” by a ceasefire, despite continuing attacks and a blockade of Iranian ports. Legal experts said that argument might ​not survive judicial scrutiny.

The law also establishes procedures for Congress to vote on war powers resolutions to end hostilities not authorized by the legislature. These resolutions ​are privileged, meaning they can be brought up for votes even without the approval of House of Representatives and Senate leaders.

The Senate has considered seven resolutions and the House four resolutions related to the Iran conflict since U.S. and Israeli forces started bombing more than 100 days ago.

HOW MANY HURDLES DO THE RESOLUTIONS FACE? Both resolutions face significant hurdles.

The Senate measure ​has survived only a procedural vote and has not passed the full chamber. Even if it is passed, to go into effect it must also ​clear the House, whose Republican leaders are unlikely to allow a vote.

And if it passed the House, to go into effect the measure would have to garner the two-thirds ‌majorities needed ⁠in both chambers to overcome an expected Trump veto.

The separate measure passed by the House this month would have to pass the Senate, where aides said they were waiting for the parliamentarian to decide whether it is “privileged.” If not, Republican Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota, who rarely breaks with Trump, is not expected to allow a vote.

SO WHY BOTHER?

The U.S. Constitution says only Congress, not the president, can authorize the use of military force, except for short-term ​operations or to counter an immediate threat.

Backers ​of the resolutions say bipartisan ⁠congressional approval sends an important signal that lawmakers are trying to take back their power to declare war and rein in Trump’s White House.

Opponents call the resolutions political posturing that emboldens U.S. enemies and may be unconstitutional because they ​impinge on the president’s powers as commander in chief.

Experts said the votes are important.

“The war powers resolution that was ​passed by the House ⁠sends a strong signal to the president that lawmakers across the aisle think that this war has gone on for too long and violates the war powers resolution as well as the Constitution,” said Katherine Yon Ebright, a war powers expert at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.

She said Trump appeared to ⁠take the ​vote seriously, noting that he had called it unpatriotic and said Republicans who sided with Democrats ​should be ashamed of themselves.

The unpopular war could affect elections in November that will determine whether Trump’s Republicans retain control of Congress. Recent Reuters polling showed that 36% of Americans approved of U.S. strikes ​on Iran, and only 25% said the benefits of the strikes had been worth the costs.

Reporting by Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Don Durfee and Sanjeev Miglani

Why the GOP’s voter fraud theories in California don’t make sense

2026-06-09T20:26:26.356Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/09/politics/voter-fraud-theories-california

• Last week’s California primaries have sparked a resurgence of election fraud claims reminiscent of 2020.
• But these conspiracy theories don’t withstand scrutiny, nor do they make much political sense.
• And confronted with the lack of evidence, some GOP leaders are now arguing the fraud is real but it’s just not detectable.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

The last week has brought the largest resurgence of election denialism since the aftermath of the 2020 election. Many on the right have cried foul over late shifts toward Democrats in results from California’s June 2 primary.

But as was the case six years ago, the vast majority of the theories about why voter fraud is involved don’t withstand scrutiny.

And increasingly, some top Republicans seem to be dealing with the pronounced lack of evidence by arguing that the fraud is just undetectable.

Let’s run through some of the biggest supposed evidence of malfeasance, and why it’s not what it might seem.

The conspiracy theories began bubbling last week as two GOP candidates saw their vote shares drop after primary night.

Gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton was in first place on election night but appeared at risk of dropping out of the top two as more votes rolled in. And Spencer Pratt, the buzzy Republican candidate for Los Angeles mayor, suddenly saw his significant election-night lead over third-place Nithya Raman, a Democratic Los Angeles City councilwoman, gradually get whittled away.

A week later, Raman has beaten Pratt for the second slot against incumbent Mayor Karen Bass in what’s officially a nonpartisan race, even as Hilton continues to hold off Democrat Tom Steyer for second place in the governor’s race.

This is familiar territory.

Perhaps the most oft-cited supposed evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 election was how late-counted ballots tended to go for Democrats, in some cases flipping swing states where Donald Trump was leading on election night.

But there was a very valid explanation for that: An analysis by MIT researchers found that Joe Biden counties — often urban ones with lots of votes — tended to count and report more slowly than Trump counties.

And that was exacerbated by the growing partisan gap in mail ballots, which tend to be counted later and which Democrats use much more than Republicans (in large part because Trump has claimed they are prone to fraud).

The combined effect is often called the “red mirage.”

California puts the “red mirage” on steroids, because of its extensive use of mail ballots and how long it takes to count them. Indeed, it was predicted far and wide that Democrats would gain significantly after primary night.

And crucially, the current results look a lot like the polls did.

Bass stands at 34%, Raman at 29% and Pratt at 26%. That three-point Raman lead over Pratt is the same as a late UC Berkeley-Los Angeles Times poll (Raman 25%, Pratt 22%).

What’s more, Pratt’s vote share is similar to the 26.5% that Trump got in the city of Los Angeles in 2024.

Even so, some on the right have wondered what could possibly explain the size of Raman’s surge. The other Democrat, Bass, actually lost ground, percentage-wise, as ballots were counted.

If this was just about late ballots leaning Democratic, why would Raman gain so much and Bass lose ground, as a percentage?

There are a couple of valid explanations.

One is that Democratic voters were being strategic about California’s unusual top-two primary system, in which the first- and second-place candidates advance regardless of party. By waiting to cast their mail ballots, the idea goes, they had a better idea of who could win or at least advance to the general election.

The Los Angeles Times even wrote a story about this trend two days before primary day, noting how crowded the governor’s race was. And CNN’s Elex Michaelson spoke to Democrats who said they voted late for Raman in order to make sure Pratt didn’t advance.

But there’s arguably an explanation that makes even more sense, which the Ballot Book’s Mason Herron wrote about on Monday.

It basically boils down to this: Those who cast late mail ballots skewed much younger than those who cast earlier votes, and Raman’s base also skews younger. Given that, it would make sense that the democratic socialist would gain big late, while Bass — with her older base — would lose some ground.

And this is familiar territory for Raman. In her 2024 primary for her city council seat, she was in a tight race with her Democratic opponent in the hours after polls closed — so much so that news outlets were writing that the contest (which she led 45%-43% the morning after primary night) was headed for a runoff.

But Raman didn’t need a runoff. She surged over 50%, thanks to late-counted mail ballots. And she won what had looked like a tight race by 12 points.

Even if you set all that aside, though, the voter fraud theories in the Los Angeles mayor’s race suffer from a major deficit: basic logic.

As CNN’s Harry Enten noted Monday, Bass would have actually preferred if Pratt had advanced to the general election. That’s because a Republican stands very little chance of winning in deep-blue Los Angeles, and Pratt was about as unpopular as Bass was.

But Raman, a democratic socialist opponent, on the ballot? That’s a major problem for Bass.

Indeed, that late UC Berkeley-LA Times poll showed Bass leading Pratt by 18 points (47%-29%), but trailing Raman by four (28%-32%).

And even if there was “ballot harvesting” by labor unions and the like, those groups tended to support Bass, so the results wouldn’t support that theory.

And then throw in the fact that Hilton still appears likely to make the general election for governor, and the question becomes why Democrats would rig the mayoral race to stop Pratt but not Hilton.

Another conspiracy theory floating on social media is that large numbers of votes were added to the tallies — tens of thousands of them, in fact — with precisely zero for Pratt.

But there’s no truth to that. It appears to be a result of a lag in how the Associated Press updated its vote totals.

And even Trump’s own DOJ has debunked this one.

First Assistant US Attorney Bill Essayli, a Trump appointee who leads the Los Angeles-based US attorney’s office, posted just before midnight on Friday that such claims were wrong.

“We reviewed official county records. The claim is false,” Essayli said. “Each candidate received votes in every update.”

Some Republicans increasingly acknowledge the lack of evidence of voter fraud, but they argue that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

They suggest the fraud is just undetectable.

“Some of these efforts are so diabolical and so far upstream it is impossible to prove,” House Speaker Mike Johnson told CNN’s Manu Raju on Monday. “But think everybody knows instinctively something is wrong here.”

(Johnson has previously made similar comments about the prevalence of undocumented immigrants voting, saying in 2024, “We all know intuitively that a lot of illegals are voting in federal elections, but it’s not been something that is easily provable.” There is no evidence of significant undocumented immigrant voting.)

Raju on Tuesday then pressed Johnson’s No. 2, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, about the lack of evidence.

Scalise responded: “Whether you can prove fraud or not, it does undermine integrity in the vote.”

It’s certainly true that someone is undermining the integrity of the vote.

US intelligence employees brace for cuts under new director

2026-06-09T21:24:34.229Z / reuters.com

Bill Pulte, nominated to be the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, testifies during a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 27, 2025. REUTERS/Annabelle Gordon Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

• Summary

• Staff told to expect more cuts after Gabbard’s previous 40% reduction, sources say
• Some employees labeled ‘excess to need’ urged to seek jobs elsewhere, sources say
• Pulte’s appointment heightens ODNI-CIA tensions, complicates FISA reauthorization

NEW YORK, June 9 (Reuters) – Staff at the office of the top U.S. spy have been told by managers to ​expect extensive cuts in the coming months following comments by President Donald Trump that he wants the new interim director to shrink the agency’s ranks, ‌three people familiar with the matter told Reuters.

Trump announced last week that he would appoint federal housing regulator Bill Pulte as interim Director of National Intelligence when Tulsi Gabbard leaves her post later this month, a decision that has drawn sharp criticism from Democrats and some Republicans given Pulte’s lack of intelligence experience.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

Trump said he thought Pulte should make further ​staff cuts at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, an agency created after the attacks of September 11, 2001, to coordinate the 18 ​U.S. intelligence agencies and which some Republicans say has become bloated.

“I’d like to see it smaller. I think there are ⁠a lot of people in there that shouldn’t be there,” Trump told the Wall Street Journal in an interview last week.

The sources were granted anonymity ​to speak about sensitive internal matters.

Gabbard has already cut the workforce of the agency by about 40% since taking up the position last year. It is unclear how many staff remain ​at the agency, which had more than 1,000 people previously.

Following Gabbard’s restructuring last year, some employees found their jobs eliminated, though they were not fired and instead labeled as “excess to need,” two of the sources said.

Some of those employees have since left the agency. Others were told by agency management in recent weeks that they would likely not be placed ​in another permanent position and that they should seek employment elsewhere, the sources said.

“Trump’s announcement has essentially accelerated their exit,” one of those sources said.

An ​intelligence official told Reuters that all those employees had already “moved on to other opportunities.”

Asked for comment on more cuts expected at the agency, ODNI spokeswoman Olivia Coleman said that Gabbard’s ‌initial workforce ⁠reduction saved “nearly $1 billion, making the agency exponentially more efficient and effective in delivering results for the American people.”

TENSIONS BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES

Pulte’s appointment as interim Director of National Intelligence comes amid a turf war between ODNI and the CIA – a rift that originated with Gabbard’s formation of a task force with the stated goal of “rooting out” politicization from the intelligence community.

The infighting has led to a breakdown in collaboration between the agencies, particularly on analytical products, as Reuters previously reported.

Further cuts at ​ODNI would likely reduce the number ​of staff assisting the National Intelligence Council, ⁠the premier analytical group inside the intelligence community, one of the sources familiar with the matter said.

That group has already faced setbacks following Gabbard’s cuts last year, which included the firing of two CIA officers who served on ​the NIC.

The CIA is also no longer contributing to some of the council’s intelligence assessments as a result of its ​tensions with ODNI, people ⁠familiar with the matter have said.

Some Republicans have called for the abolishment of ODNI, arguing the agency has become too big.

“I’ve long advocated for downsizing, if not outright eliminating this bureaucracy,” said Senator Tom Cotton, the chair of the Senate intelligence committee, on X last week.

Pulte’s appointment has also complicated efforts to reauthorize a key surveillance authority, ⁠with Democrats ​threatening to block the renewal unless Trump reconsiders his decision. Pulte’s critics say he is ​likely to further politicize the intelligence community, citing his lack of experience and loyalty to Trump.

The authority, known as FISA 702, allows U.S. intelligence agencies to monitor emails and other communications of foreigners ​located outside the United States without individual judicial warrants. The authority is set to expire Friday.

Reporting by Erin Banco; Editing by Don Durfee and Deepa Babington

Trump stands by decision to name Pulte to intel role, despite revolt in Congress that could block spy powers renewal

June 9, 2026 / 6:49 PM EDT / CBS News

Bill Pulte will begin serving as acting director of national intelligence in a week and a half, President Trump announced Tuesday, effectively standing by his decision to name the housing regulator and Trump loyalist to the job — as the appointment endangers a bipartisan compromise on renewing a key spy authority.

Mr. Trump chose Pulte, who currently leads the Federal Housing Finance Agency, to replace outgoing Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. The decision drew intense backlash from Democrats due to both Pulte’s lack of a national security background and his controversial tenure at the housing agency, during which he accused a litany of Trump foes of mortgage fraud.

The president has said Pulte will not be named director of national intelligence permanently, which would require Senate confirmation. Pulte will remain director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The appointment came as lawmakers from both parties rushed to extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act before it expires Friday. Democrats said they would not support any reauthorization of Section 702 — which allows the government to collect communications of noncitizens abroad — as long as Pulte remained in the position.

The choice of Pulte wasn’t met with enthusiasm by many Republicans, with Sens. John Cornyn, Bill Cassidy and Thom Tillis all voicing their disapproval.

This is a breaking story and will be updated.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/pulte-appointment-as-acting-dni-could-hold-up-fisa-reauthorization/

Trump locks in ICE funding through end of presidency after House passes $70B package

June 9, 2026 5:25pm EDT / Fox News

Every GOP lawmaker present voted for the measure, while Rep. Kevin Kiley, an independent, joined Democrats against it

By Adam Pack , Kelly Phares, Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6397999599112 Tom Homan touts Trump admin’s escalated illegal immigration crackdown in New York

Border czar Tom Homan details the escalated crackdown on illegal immigration, criticizing New York City’s anti-ICE policies implemented by Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Governor Kathy Hochul.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Republicans’ sweeping immigration enforcement and border security package cleared the House on Tuesday, ending a months-long standoff with Democrats over funding President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown agenda.

The $70 billion immigration enforcement measure passed 214-212 over the fierce objections of Democrats, who unanimously voted against the package. Rep. Kevin Kiley, I-Calif., an independent who caucuses with Republicans, also joined Democrats in opposing the measure.

Meanwhile, every GOP lawmaker present voted for the Senate-passed legislation, which funds Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) through fiscal year 2029.

Tuesday’s vote is a major victory for House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who could spare just a handful of defections given Republicans’ fragile majority.

President Donald Trump during an executive order signing in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 3, 2026.(Shawn Thew/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

TRUMP ON VERGE OF SECURING $70B ICE FUNDING VICTORY AFTER HOUSE CLEARS HURDLE

“By funding it for three years, we’ve taken away their ability to cut that funding or to take hostage the funding for the remainder of the Trump administration,” Johnson said following the vote, referring to Democrats. “It was Republicans and Republicans alone who did the responsible thing and funded these critically important agencies at this critical time.”

The measure now heads to Trump’s desk, where he is expected to sign it into law.

The GOP-authored bill, known as the Secure America Act, provides $38 billion for ICE and a $26 billion infusion for the Border Patrol. It would also create a $5 billion funding pool to be controlled by Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin.

Kiley, who recently switched his party affiliation to independent, said he opposed the bill because it lacked reforms to immigration enforcement and bypassed the traditional appropriations process, which requires some buy-in from Democrats.

“The idea that we’re actually going to now weaken one of the few pillars of sanity we have, which is the annual bipartisan appropriations process, and set this precedent that when you don’t reach bipartisan agreement, you can just do an end run around it … that’s hugely problematic to me,” the California lawmaker told reporters.

“The whole reason I became an independent is because I think that extreme partisanship here has completely run amok, and it’s doing real damage to the country,” he added.

Republican leaders argued they were forced to use the partisan budget reconciliation process after Democrats repeatedly blocked Homeland Security funding bills. The legislative tool allowed GOP leadership to steer around Democrats’ opposition and pass the legislation at a simple majority threshold in the upper chamber.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, speaks to members of the media at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 2026.(Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg)

DEMOCRAT WHO BROKE WITH PARTY SAYS HIS DHS FUNDING VOTE A ‘MISTAKE’ AFTER 2ND MINNEAPOLIS ICE SHOOTING

“This is a piece that Democrats have said they don’t want to fund because they want open borders,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said Tuesday. “They have made it crystal clear, the Democrat Party in Washington, that they want to go back to open borders. And we’re not going to do that.”

For months, Democratic lawmakers refused to fund ICE and the Border Patrol unless it was paired with policy reforms. The party’s hardball tactics sparked the longest government shutdown in history, which largely ended after Trump signed a partial DHS bill in April.

Top Democrats initially took a hard turn against new ICE funding beginning in January after two Americans were killed by federal law enforcement officers during the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement surge in Minneapolis.

Their message stayed largely the same heading into Tuesday’s vote.

“Republicans are pouring your hard-earned tax dollars into an agency that has brutalized and terrorized communities and even killed American citizens,” House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., said Tuesday. “Republican leadership likes to talk a lot about common sense, but where is the common sense in giving this federal agency essentially unlimited funds without a single reform in place?”

House Democratic leadership urged their members to vote against the package.(J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Though Republicans stayed largely united in the ICE funding fight, some conservative lawmakers argued the spending measure should be paired with policy reforms codifying some of the president’s executive orders.

Reps. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., were among the GOP lawmakers who withheld their support for the package during a procedural test vote earlier on Tuesday. Johnson promised the conservative group a vote on border security legislation in the coming weeks, prompting holdouts to support the measure’s advancement, according to a source familiar with the discussions.

“We had some good conversations about moving the important elements of H.R. 2 sometime here in the next few weeks, hopefully before July 4th,” Roy told reporters, referring to a sweeping Republican-authored immigration and border security bill. “We’re looking forward to getting that done.”

The budget reconciliation bill’s passage comes after congressional Republicans failed to meet a June 1 deadline set by Trump to send the measure to his desk.

The quick timeline fell apart after a cohort of Republicans in both chambers revolted against Trump’s roughly $2 billion “anti-weaponization fund.” Some GOP lawmakers, including moderate Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., have since proposed legislation that would curtail the president’s authority to establish the fund.

Trump indicates to Speaker Johnson he won’t back down on Pulte despite fight over key surveillance authority

2026-06-09T23:52:16.250Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/09/politics/trump-johnson-pulte-fisa

• President Trump Donald indicated to House Speaker Mike Johnson he won’t back down on his appointment of Bill Pulte as acting director of national intelligence, sources told CNN.
• Democrats’ have revolted over the appointment, leading to a standoff that threatens to lead to the expiration of a key surveillance authority.
• Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is on track to expire with no clear path to an agreement between the parties.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

President Donald Trump indicated to House Speaker Mike Johnson during a meeting Tuesday that he wouldn’t back down on his decision to elevate Bill Pulte to acting director of national intelligence, despite threats from Democrats to let a key surveillance power lapse over the appointment, two sources briefed on the meeting told CNN.

GOP leaders are entering crisis mode with just days to go before the authority for the critical surveillance power expires with no clear path to a deal — except ditching Pulte.

Later Tuesday, Trump appeared to double down on his decision, stunning intelligence staffers and lawmakers by announcing Pulte would start his role as acting DNI on June 19. The White House had told Tulsi Gabbard and her team that he would take over after her planned departure at the end of the month.

Privately, Trump has argued to allies that Pulte’s time as acting director would be short — and meant to clear out and restructure the intelligence community before he nominated a permanent replacement. Trump privately said it would be better not to have the permanent director carry out massive firings, sources told CNN.

He also indicated he would not remove Pulte just to appease Democrats. Some allies had indicated to Trump that he would look weak if he named a permanent DNI just to get an extension on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA.

Republican lawmakers and Trump advisers had been having conversations about how to move forward without Pulte, including at one point floating the idea of extending Gabbard’s tenure.

But Pulte has built his own team of MAGA loyalists who were lobbying the president behind closed doors. Pulte has also continued to pitch himself to Trump directly, and a White House official said he spent time with the president over the weekend.

Inside the Capitol, Pulte has had few defenders on either side of the aisle. Privately, many GOP lawmakers remain baffled by Trump’s move to promote him. Some believe Trump’s decision came at the worst possible time for party leaders as they navigate tiny margins — and emboldened lame-duck members — in the final months before the midterms.

“This is the most critical national security tool we have. We cannot go dark, ever. Especially when we have America’s 250 and FIFA coming now, like this week,” GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, a longtime member of the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN about the mounting FISA risk.

“Everyone needs to be a grown-up,” Fitzpatrick said, adding on Pulte: “I don’t think he ever should have been put in.”

“We need serious people in these roles. These are serious roles, we need serious people,” Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, an independent who recently left the GOP, told CNN on Tuesday.

Yet GOP leaders are not sure whether the White House is getting the message.

Johnson, whose tenure has been marked by deference to Trump, has had multiple private conversations with the president to discuss the matter, including the lengthy sit-down earlier Tuesday. Johnson has been tight-lipped about Pulte himself, but he made clear that he worries that Democrats’ protest could shut down the FISA powers.

“The Democrats now have taken a hostage on this, and they’re suggesting that they might not advance it. We’re hoping they can get that together. We cannot allow FISA to go dark. It’d be a dangerous prospect, and I think everybody who is reasonable understands that,” Johnson said Tuesday.

There had previously been cautious optimism on Capitol Hill that lawmakers could pass a bipartisan agreement to extend Section 702 of FISA for three years — but Democrats revolted after Trump named Pulte, a housing official with a lack of demonstrated national security experience, to the role of as acting DNI. Democrats are protesting the surveillance measure over Pulte’s role, refusing to provide votes that GOP leaders need to send the bill to Trump’s desk.

Even Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who rarely suggests public directives for the White House, has been clear it needs to address the Pulte issue or face a mounting problem over FISA. And on Tuesday, he offered a glimpse of a potential solution.

Thune told CNN that he believes the White House is “weighing seriously” quickly making a permanent pick for director of national intelligence in an effort to satisfy Democrats and get FISA 702 extended. But he said the administration is not considering dropping Pulte altogether as acting DNI.

Some of Thune’s members have been more blunt.

“Democrats are not going to vote to pass 702 until he’s withdrawn, and we need that done. … The stalemate needs to be broken,” GOP Sen. John Cornyn told CNN on Monday.

Some Republicans believe that enough centrist Democrats will back down in the game of chicken by the Friday evening deadline to extend the surveillance authority. But Democrats insist they’re not bluffing.

At a closed-door meeting of House Democrats on Tuesday morning, Rep. Jim Himes — the party’s top member on the intelligence committee — implored his colleagues not to cave if Pulte remains in his position, according to a person familiar.

CNN’s Kit Maher contributed to this report.

House passes pro-union bill after 20 Republicans defy party, in latest move to bypass GOP leadership

June 9, 2026 / 7:28 PM EDT / CBS News

By Caitlin Yilek Politics Reporter
Caitlin Yilek is a politics reporter at CBSNews.com, based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked for the Washington Examiner and The Hill, and was a member of the 2022 Paul Miller Washington Reporting Fellowship with the National Press Foundation.

Read Full Bio

Washington — House Democrats, with the help of several Republicans, bypassed GOP leadership on Tuesday to force a successful vote on legislation that would accelerate negotiations on newly-formed unions’ first collective bargaining agreements.

The legislation, titled the Faster Labor Contracts Act, was introduced in September by Democratic Rep. Donald Norcross of New Jersey. It passed in a 230 to 193 vote, with 20 Republicans voting in favor.

In late April, Norcross launched a discharge petition, seeking to bring the bill to the floor. The procedural maneuver allows members to circumvent leadership and force a floor vote on legislation if they secure a majority support — 218 signatures. The petition hit the threshold within a month, with seven Republicans signing on.

Norcross’ discharge petition is the seventh this session to hit the threshold, a sign of discontent with GOP leadership.

The measure would amend the National Labor Relations Act and require employers to begin contract negotiations with newly-certified unions within 10 days of receiving a written request. It also sets a timeline for mediation and lays out next steps if no agreement is reached after 90 days.

“Right now, employers can delay negotiations on first contracts for years,” Norcross said in a statement in April, adding that his bill “will force employers to act in good faith and come to the negotiating table quickly.”

During debate on the bill, GOP Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan argued the measure would fast-track “government intrusion into private workplaces” and erode “workers’ rights faster than we have ever seen before.”

“It is the latest attempt to put workers under the thumb of the federal bureaucrats,” Walberg said, referring to the arbitration process laid out in the bill.

It’s unclear whether the Senate will take it up. Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri introduced a companion bill in the Senate in March 2025 that has two Republican and 13 Democratic cosponsors.

Johnson: “I have not lost control of the House”

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/speaker-johnson-not-lost-control-house-republicans-help-force-aca-vote/

Speaker Johnson says “I have not lost control of the House,” after Republicans help ACA vote

(03:09)

美国对伊朗发动报复性空袭 回应阿帕奇直升机被击落

2026年6月10日 06:59 / 联合早报

美国对伊朗发动报复性空袭 回应阿帕奇直升机被击落

5月25日，一架美军超级大黄蜂战斗机在尼米兹级航空母舰林肯号的飞行甲板上进行拦阻着陆。 （法新社档案照片）

美国在一架美军阿帕奇武器直升机遭击落后，对伊朗发动了报复性空袭。伊朗媒体称，伊朗南部锡里克地区、格什姆岛等霍尔木兹甘省多地遭袭，加剧了美伊和平前景的不确定性。

《华尔街日报》报道，美国中央司令部消息指，美军星期二（6月9日）对伊朗发动空袭，以报复伊朗前一天在霍尔木兹海峡附近击落一架美军阿帕奇直升机。一名高级官员说，空袭目标包括伊朗在霍尔木兹海峡附近的防空设施和雷达。

伊朗国家媒体报道，位于霍尔木兹海峡北侧的格什姆岛遭到袭击，锡里克地区确认被一枚炮弹击中。伊朗法尔斯通讯社报道，霍尔木兹甘省东部地区传出爆炸声。

美国军方称此次空袭是出于自卫，由特朗普总统下令。负责指挥驻中东美军的美国中央司令部在一份声明中说：“此次行动是对伊朗无端侵略行为的合理回应。”

特朗普接受美国广播公司新闻网采访时说：“他们打下一架直升机，我们正在立即做出回应。我认为我们应该予以非常强硬有力的回应，这次回应正是如此。”

延伸阅读

特朗普称美伊两三天内可达成协议 伊朗警告以方若再袭黎势必还击
美反恐专家：伊朗代理组织走出中东 东南亚须警惕“暴力零工经济”

另据《华盛顿邮报》报道，美国官员说，阿帕奇直升机的两名机组人员被美国海军海上无人机救起，这是美军首次采取此类手段。

特朗普在阿帕奇武器直升机被击落后誓言将作出回应，他也说两名飞行员没有受伤。

Taliban forces in Afghanistan open fire on rare protest sparked by women’s arrests over dress code

2026-06-09 13:10:00-0400 / CBS News

Taliban forces opened fire on people gathered for a rare protest in Afghanistan’s western Herat province Tuesday, killing at least one woman and a child, according to CBS News’ partner network BBC.

Men and women had gathered to demonstrate against the recent arrest of women and girls over alleged violations of the Taliban’s strict dress code, defying the country’s rulers who have cracked down violently on previous protests since retaking control of the country almost five years ago.

A doctor at a local hospital, who spoke with CBS News on condition of anonymity over fear of Taliban reprisals, said at least three people were admitted for treatment with gunshot wounds.

Videos circulating on social media appear to show Taliban forces opening fire on protesters and beating them with sticks. Protesters can be seen fighting back by throwing stones and chanting demands for work, education and freedom.

In one clip, Taliban security personnel appear to be shooting directly at protesters.

Local media outlets quoting unnamed sources and residents said a child was killed during the clash. One video circulated by local outlets shows a young boy with a leg injury, apparently unresponsive, receiving assistance.

CBS News’ British partner network BBC, citing unnamed medical sources in Herat, said two people were killed by the security forces — a woman and a child — and more than a dozen others were injured.

“Every woman who is arrested in Herat today represents the suffering of millions of Afghan women under the shadow of gender apartheid,” one woman said in a video sent to CBS News.

United Nations special rapporteur for Afghanistan Richard Bennett said he was “alarmed by the excessive use of force against seemingly peaceful protesters in Herat today.”

“It’s time to defuse the tension, respect citizens’ freedom of expression — especially women and girls — and avoid further harm,” he said in a social media post. “Those responsible for violence must be held accountable.”

Sayed Masoud Hussaini, a police spokesman for Herat province, told CBS News security forces were fulfilling their legal responsibilities to ensure security and maintain public safety. He denied that civilians were injured by police shooting.

“Today, in the area of Jebrail, a number of people have gathered and created tension under the pretext of protesting issues related to the observance of the Hijab and opposing the Islamic Hijab, which is a divine obligation,” Hussaini said.

Tuesday’s protest came in response to the widespread detention of women and girls in Herat province in recent days by the Taliban’s morality police force, for alleged violations of the group’s rules on attire, which require women to cover their hair and faces.

Georgette Gagnon, acting head of the U.N. mission in Afghanistan, told the Security Council on Monday that the Taliban’s morality police had recently detained about 30 women and girls in Herat.

The U.N. “is concerned over multiple arrests and detentions of women in Herat #Afghanistan for alleged non-compliance with dress requirements, which raises serious human rights concerns,” the mission said in a social media post.

Afghan women wearing traditional clothing walk along a street near the Grand Mosque in Herat, Afghanistan, June 8, 2026. Mohsen KARIMI/AFP/Getty

Shaikh Azizulrahman, head of the morality police in Herat, in an audio message shared Tuesday with journalists, denied that women were being arrested for violating clothing rules. He insisted that all women in the province observe the Taliban’s dress code.

Gagnon, speaking to the Security Council, accused the Taliban of stripping women and girls of their most basic rights, including education, employment, free movement and participation in public life.

“The Taliban have even criminalized women’s voices and faces,” she said.

Dozens of 7,000-year-old headless human skeletons discovered in ditch: “A terrifying sight at first glance”

June 9, 2026 / 3:22 PM EDT / CBS News

By Emily Mae Czachor News Editor
Emily Mae Czachor is a reporter and news editor at CBSNews.com. She typically covers breaking news, extreme weather and climate. Emily Mae previously wrote for outlets like the Los Angeles Times, BuzzFeed and Newsweek.

Read Full Bio

Researchers have discovered dozens of ancient human skeletons, with nearly all of their heads severed, in a ditch in central Europe — a find they acknowledge “presents a terrifying sight at first glance.” But the headless remains dating back 7,000 years actually provide new insights into farming communities who resided in that region at the time, according to an announcement from Germany’s Kiel University.

The university and the Slovanian Academy of Sciencies jointly backed a decadeslong research endeavor that brought archaeologists to the site in Vráble, a small Slovakian town, where the skeletons were unearthed. Those involved in the project have now also released a study on their findings, which was published in the journal Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society.

Although the 78 skeletons found piled atop one another in Vráble could suggest some kind of massacre took place, the researchers said their analyses so far indicate they were deliberately interred that way, potentially as part of a Neolithic cultural tradition.

Martin Furholt, a professor at Kiel University and the study’s lead author, said in a statement that the burials “appear unusual.” Based on the evidence his team has gathered so far, they may reflect the “social practices” of ancient settlers, who inhabited the area around Vráble from approximately 5250 to 4950 B.C.E., according to the university.

Drone footage of the excavation site at Vráble. Nils Müller-Scheesel/Kiel University

Researchers began to investigate the site in 2012, hoping to learn more about its ties to an important period in European history where both pottery and agriculture boomed. The excavation site now encompasses what they believe were once the locations of 300 houses in three different neighborhoods during the Neolithic era, one of which was surrounded by the ditch where the skeletal remains were found.

The skeletons were discovered in seemingly random positions, both on top of and beside one another, and all but one were found headless. Researchers said just one skeleton of a child was uncovered with its skull intact.

They also believe the people to whom the remains once belonged were buried shortly after their deaths. It is not clear what happened to the heads, although researchers hypothesized that they could have been kept somewhere separate from the burial site.

“The features clearly exhibit an intentional manipulation of the bodies,” said Katharina Fuchs, a co-author of the study also from Kiel University, in a statement.

Students excavate skeletons at the site. Till Kuhl/Kiel University

But Fucjhs said evidence does not suggest that violent decapitations took place. Instead, the skulls appeared to be removed skillfully from the bodies after death. That sets these findings apart from other instances where skeletal remains of prehistoric societies were found to be physically manipulated in similar ways.

In comparable examples, they said such burial patterns were interpreted as signs of conflict or crisis, which they do not believe played a role here.

“The deposition of bodies and body parts may have been part of more complex, meaningful and recurring practices,” said Nils-Müller-Scheesel, another co-author of the study, while Furholt added: “We must assume that these practices were embedded in completely different contexts of meaning than those of modern societies. This is what makes an interpretation of them so challenging.”