A growing number of foreign leaders have had it with Trump

2026-06-19T19:55:25.809Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/19/politics/trump-foreign-leader-rebukes

• Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni publicly criticized President Donald Trump after he claimed she begged for a photo with him.
• Her criticism is part of a growing pattern of world leaders speaking out against Trump’s provocations and declining political stock.
• Allies have increasingly challenged Trump on issues from the Iran war to his threats against Greenland and NATO.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni could have denied Trump’s claim that she begged him to take a photo together, and left it at that.

Instead, she went much further. She posted a video on X Friday that made a show of standing up to Trump and linked the episode to his ill treatment of allies.

“I can only say that it’s a shame he doesn’t have the same determination with the enemies of the West, with the enemies of the United States, with leaderships with which he instead appears much more accommodating,” Meloni said.

It was a broadside — and not just from any leader. This is a right-wing leader that some have compared to Trump.

But in finding some backbone vis-à-vis Trump, Meloni has plenty of company these days. While Trump has long reveled in throwing his weight around on the world stage and forcing leaders to cater to him, his growing provocations and declining political stock appear to have steeled some of those leaders’ spines to speak out against him.

This isn’t even the first time Meloni has gone down this road. Back in April, she called Trump’s criticisms of Pope Leo XIV “unacceptable.” (Just a month earlier, Trump had called Meloni an “excellent leader” and a “friend.”)

Somewhat similar to Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron — who just hosted a lavish dinner for Trump in Versailles at the end of the G7 summit — has previously responded strongly to a pretty personal remark from the US president.

Earlier this spring, Trump alluded to 2025 video showing Brigitte Macron appearing to shove her husband in the face. He said Macron’s “wife treats him extremely badly” and that he was “still recovering from the right to the jaw.”

Macron in April responded that Trump’s comments “weren’t elegant, and they weren’t up to par.”

Around the same time, Macron made veiled remarks aimed at Trump’s handling of the Iran war. He said the war was “not a show” and urged his American counterpart to be more careful about his comments.

“When you want to be serious, you don’t say every day the opposite of what you said the day before,” Macron said.

Unhappiness with the Iran war undergirds a number of the most recent rebukes of Trump. German Prime Minister Friedrich Merz in his own veiled comments suggested in April that the Iranians were stringing Trump along.

“And then letting the Americans travel to Islamabad, only to send them back without any results,” Merz said in late April after failed peace talks. “An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership, especially by these so-called Revolutionary Guards.”

In the early days of the conflict, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez called it “reckless and illegal” and said Spain would “not be complicit in something that is bad for the world … simply out of fear of reprisals from someone.”

He declined to celebrate too much when a ceasefire began in April.

“The Government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they show up with a bucket,” Sánchez said.

But this trend dates back to early this year.

A number of leaders spoke out in January, for instance, about the unacceptability of Trump’s flirtation with taking over Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory that’s part of NATO ally Denmark.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, whose country Trump has also suggested he could commandeer, followed that up with a speech in Davos, Switzerland, that laid out a path forward for a decoupling from the United States.

Referring to Trump’s trade wars, Carney decried using “economic integration as weapons,” “tariffs as leverage,” and “supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.” He said the “middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.”

A couple days later, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called Trump’s comments claiming NATO troops in Afghanistan had avoided fighting on the frontlines “insulting and frankly appalling.” (In fact, more than 1,000 NATO troops were killed in the war.) Trump the next day cleaned up his comments by praising British troops and their sacrifices.

By April, Starmer complained that the British people’s energy bills were swinging wildly “because of the actions of Putin or Trump across the world.” He also rebuked Trump’s threat to destroy a “whole civilization” in Iran.

“I’m fed up,” he added.

That seems to be a trend with prominent allies.

Trump has been able to throw his weight around with them because of how powerful the US government is. And as is the case with Republicans in Washington trying to navigate Trump, the easy play is to just go along to get along — to not rock the boat and hope everything turns out okay.

But at some point, that risks emboldening the president to do yet more things that are going to make their lives hell.

Trump’s trade war didn’t seem to be a red line for many of these leaders, but he’s clearly touched some nerves with the Greenland talk and now the Iran war, which has negatively impacted all of the world’s economy.

And Meloni’s rebuke Friday is a punctuation mark.

https://x.com/GiorgiaMeloni/status/2067917590945788408?s=20

James Burrows, co-creator of “Cheers” and prolific director, dies at 85

June 19, 2026 / 4:02 PM EDT / CBS News

By

Kerry Breen News Editor
Kerry Breen is a news editor at CBSNews.com. A graduate of New York University’s Arthur L. Carter School of Journalism, she previously worked at NBC News’ TODAY Digital. She covers current events, breaking news and issues including substance use.

Read Full Bio

James Burrows, the co-creator of “Cheers” and prolific television director who worked on hits including “Will & Grace,” “Frasier” and “The Mary Tyler Moore Show,” has died. He was 85 years old.

Attorney Tom Hoberman confirmed Burrows’ death, “with great sadness.”

A cause of death was not immediately available.

Burrows was born in California and raised in New York, where he began working in the city’s theater scene. His first job on television was directing episodes of “The Mary Tyler Moore Show.”

Burrows would go on to direct more than 1,000 episodes of TV, including every episode of the original “Will & Grace,” and is credited with having helped create shows including “Friends,” “Taxi” and “Frasier.” Other shows he directed included “The Big Bang Theory” and “Two and a Half Men,” both of which aired on CBS. He also directed episodes of the recent Paramount+ revival of “Frasier.”

Burrows was an 11-time Emmy Award winner. He received dozens of Emmy nominations, including a streak from 1980 to 1996, during which he was nominated every year. His most recent Emmy win was in 2020, when he was awarded the Emmy Award for Outstanding Variety Special (Live).

James Burrows poses for a portrait on the set of “Partners” at Warner Bros. Studios in Burbank, California, on Sept. 19, 2012. Chris Pizzello/Invision/AP

Burrows was also nominated for 15 Directors Guild of America Awards during his career, winning five.

In addition to his work behind the camera, Burrows occasionally made cameos in the episodes he directed, including appearing in the first season of “Friends” and in the “Will & Grace” revival. He also appeared in the HBO comedy “The Comeback,” including in the show’s recently aired third season.

Burrows told CBS Los Angeles in 2022 that the most important thing in his career had been to “deliver funny” to audiences.

“The first thing you have to be is funny,” Burrows said at the time.

Burrows is survived by his wife, stylist Debbie Easton, his three daughters and one stepdaughter.

Burrows told CBS News Los Angeles that a conversation with Easton inspired his 2022 memoir.

“I kind of cut back on the work I’m doing, shows and stuff like that, and literally my wife came to me and says ‘It’s time for you to write a book,’” Burrows said. “And I said ‘I don’t have an angle or hook on the book.’ She said, ‘Write the book.’”

Gabbard spotlights Fauci, COVID-origin questions in final act as intelligence chief amid succession fight

2026-06-19 12:33:45 EDT / Fox News

Intelligence officials debated whether to take Fauci’s recommendations, with one warning of a conflict of interest

By Robert Schmad Fox News

Published June 19, 2026 12:33pm EDT

Tulsi Gabbard’s claims about US funding biolabs worldwide draw response from former EcoHealth head

Rich Edson reports live from Washington on declassified files from former DNI Tulsi Gabbard, revealing US government funding for over 120 foreign biolabs in 30+ countries. These labs have engaged in dangerous gain-of-function research using highly contagious pathogens, with little oversight. The report exposes the Biden administration’s denials of funding for such risky research.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/76749cf5-694e-42ef-85cb-62b99632e981

Listen to this article

5 min

Just before leaving office amid a contentious battle over who will succeed her, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard used one of her final acts atop the U.S. intelligence community to spotlight Dr. Anthony Fauci’s role in discussions surrounding the government’s COVID-19 origins review.

While much of the material is familiar, Gabbard’s release underscores her effort to make questions surrounding Fauci, COVID origins and federal support for virus research part of her closing legacy atop the intelligence community.

As Gabbard fired her final broadside, Bill Pulte, who has received bipartisan criticism over his lack of intelligence experience, is set to take the reins at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence while Trump’s permanent nominee remains stalled.

Jay Clayton, an attorney and former SEC chairman whom Trump nominated to permanently lead ODNI, has seen his confirmation process delayed after the president said he was holding up the nomination to pressure Congress to pass a voter identification measure.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testifies during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on worldwide threats at the Hart Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C., on March 18, 2026.(Win McNamee/Getty Images)

WHY TRUMP PICKED BILL PULTE TO LEAD US INTELLIGENCE AS CRITICS QUESTION HIS QUALIFICATIONS

Pulte is a construction businessman and housing official who served as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. His tenure at the housing agency has drawn controversy over allegations that he used FHFA authority to target Trump’s political opponents, an allegation amplifying concerns among key senators that he may attempt to weaponize the intelligence community at the behest of the president during his interim tenure.

“We don’t need a weaponized DNI, we need professionals there,” Senate Majority Leader Sen. John Thune said of Pulte. Other powerful congressional Republicans, such as Sens. Cornyn, Cassidy, Murkowski, Collins and Tillis, have also voiced opposition to or concern over Pulte taking over ODNI.

Senate Democrats share many of the same concerns as their GOP colleagues.

Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Dick Durbin, Sheldon Whitehouse, Richard Blumenthal, Gary Peters, Adam Schiff, Mark Warner and Ron Wyden have all expressed concerns that Pulte would weaponize America’s intelligence apparatus against Trump’s enemies. Similar to many Republicans, they’ve criticized him for a lack of intelligence experience as well.

William Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), during a news conference at the Federal Housing Finance Association (FHFA) headquarters in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, April 22, 2026.(Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

TRUMP DNI PICK BRACES FOR SENATE GRILLING AS TEMPORARY STAND-IN FUELS DEM PRESSURE

Political observers believe that Clayton would face far less opposition from the Senate over his confirmation. However, the upper chamber has so far proven unwilling to move on the president’s voter identification legislation, complicating his advancement and setting the stage for a showdown between the White House and Congress.

While lawmakers and the president go back and forth over the fate of ODNI, Gabbard has sought to spotlight the Fauci documents on her way out.

The documents she released Thursday night include some information that was already known to the public as well as others that do not appear to have been publicly reported.

Dr. Anthony Fauci testifies before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic at the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, D.C., on June 3, 2024.(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

ANTHONY FAUCI MAY BE DEPOSED AS GOP INTENSIFIES COVID INVESTIGATIONS IN NEW CONGRESS

Gabbard’s release contains newly declassified documents that show intelligence officials considered but ultimately rejected Fauci as an outside reviewer of their COVID-19 origins assessment, warning he would be seen as having a conflict of interest.

In a different exchange, intelligence officials tasked with analyzing the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic debated whether to take Fauci’s recommendations on who to interview for their study.

“For those who don’t know me, I’m the [REDACTED] and, as such, leading the [intelligence community’s] 90-day POTUS COVID origin study,” one official wrote in an email. “Per below, Dr Fauci recommended that the IC reach out to the below individuals who were coauthors of the attached paper as part of the study.”

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard speaks to reporters in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House on July 23.(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

TOP 4 EXPLOSIVE MOMENTS FROM CIA WHISTLEBLOWER’S TESTIMONY ON ALLEGED COVID-19 LAB LEAK COVER-UP

Another official questioned whether it was prudent for the intelligence community to take the advice of a “policymaker” like Fauci when conducting internal affairs, “particularly given the various strong views on the subject and statements regarding their own conclusions.”

An intelligence official responded by arguing that Fauci should not be considered a policymaker in this context, but rather an important subject-matter expert.

“In this particular case, given Dr Fauci’s background we absolutely would like to follow-up on his outreach suggestions,” they wrote. “In this case he’s not a policymaker….he’s a SME with a wealth of knowledge about current and historical research who probably knows better than most who the real Coronavirus experts are.”

A CIA whistleblower previously claimed that Fauci exerted undue influence over the intelligence community’s assessment of COVID-19’s origins, claims that Gabbard now seeks to amplify with her release.

During the COVID-19 era, conservatives alleged that Fauci and other public health officials downplayed or helped steer scrutiny away from the lab-leak theory despite American financial links to coronavirus research in Wuhan, where the disease originated. Gabbard has framed her trove of documents as a look into how the intelligence community incorporated information from people like Fauci while investigating the virus’ origins.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Fauci worked with politicized career leadership in the Intelligence Community (IC) to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’ lab-leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for this dangerous research that caused immeasurable harm and countless lost lives,” ODNI’s press release accompanying the documents asserts. “These documents expose Fauci’s direct role in influencing and manipulating IC assessments on COVID-19, and how Fauci lied to Congress in 2024, when under oath he denied knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research.”

Gabbard left her role at ODNI to care for her husband, who has a rare form of cancer, Fox News Digital first reported.

By Phil Mattingly, CNN

Published 1:26 PM EDT, Fri June 19, 2026

Video Ad Feedback

‘Iran is coming out of this better off, and we are far, far worse off’: Sen. Booker denounces Trump Iran agreement

Inside Politics

On “Inside Politics,” Democratic Sen. Cory Booker accuses President Trump of “surrendering unconditionally” to Iran in the peace agreement. He tells Phil Mattingly the deal amounts to “giving up all of our leverage, giving them everything they want, and actually making our adversary stronger and us as a nation weaker.”

4:00 • Source: CNN

How the Iran war united, and then divided Trump and Israel’s Netanyahu

2026-06-19T12:28:19-0400 / CBS News

The stage — and the cage — were set Sunday at the White House as President Trump prepared to mark his 80th birthday with a long-planned night of UFC combat, and an announcement of a long-awaited deal with Iran to extend a ceasefire and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Hours before it was to be signed, however, Israeli jets struck Lebanon’s capital Beirut, killing at least three people.

“This morning’s attack on Beirut should not have happened, particularly on a special day when we are so close to a Peace Deal with Iran,” Mr. Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

His call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu soon after was less diplomatic.

“What the f*** are you doing?” he asked his close ally, according to Fox News’ Trey Yingst.

“Why did Bibi have to do a fg attack?” the President said to Axios shortly after. “I was so pissed off. I let him know. He has no fg judgement.”

It was a remarkable exchange between world leaders whose relationship has vacillated dramatically, and often publicly, over the course of many years.

“Who the f*** does he think he is?”

The answer to President Trump’s question about why Netanyahu ordered the Beirut attack cuts to the heart of how the more than three-and-a-half month Iran war has driven a wedge between the two leaders.

Mr. Trump campaigned on a promise to end “forever wars.” He told Americans the joint U.S.-Israeli war with Iran would last a maximum of six weeks (among many and varying estimates), and he suggested the objective was a Venezuela-style operation.

It quickly became clear that such a brief foray was not in the cards, however.

More recently, with midterms looming in November and Americans’ views on both the war and Mr. Trump becoming less favorable, he has appeared keen to extract the U.S. and get the Strait of Hormuz reopened to ease global gas and oil prices.

Netanyahu, on the other hand, has never supported a political agreement with Iran’s theocratic rulers. He has called it his “life’s work” to ensure Iran cannot obtain a nuclear weapon, and promised this war would end in a “total victory.”

On the second day of joint U.S.-Israeli strikes, Netanyahu called it something he had “been hoping to do for 40 years, to strike the terrorist regime squarely in the face,” and he thanked “my friend, the President of the United States, Donald Trump,” for joining in the mission.

Netanyahu is also facing an election, in October at the latest, and if he’s seen to have failed to meet his objectives, it may make his job harder to hold onto — and make it more likely that he’ll have to face a longstanding corruption trial waiting for him when he exits Israel’s highest office.

To the north, thousands of Israelis remain displaced from their homes due to the threat of rocket and drone attacks by Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. A large majority of Israelis want their country to keep fighting Hezbollah until it is completely quashed.

“Netanyahu, for political reasons, can’t end this war because he hasn’t delivered these incredible promises, and because he doesn’t want to face a reckoning with the Israeli public,” Anshel Pfeffer, a veteran Israel correspondent for The Economist, told CBS News on Thursday. “It was pretty clear, I think, from the very beginning of the war that this would be the junction where Netanyahu and Trump would part ways.”

Netanyahu has riled American presidents before. Bill Clinton reportedly said after meeting him in 1996, “Who the f**k does he think he is?”

President Biden, in 2024, reportedly called him “a bad f*g guy.”

But Mr. Trump’s recent public excoriations of Netanyahu were unprecedented — and a far cry from a warm February meeting. So how did it come to this?

Israel’s “greatest friend”

In the year leading up to the war, the pair were tight.

In February 2025, Netanyahu was the first foreign leader Mr. Trump welcomed to the White House during his second term.

President Trump meets with Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, Feb. 4, 2025. ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty

Bibi — a longtime nickname for Netanyahu that Trump uses often — called his American counterpart “the greatest friend Israel has ever had in the White House.” He praised Mr. Trump for moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and for pulling the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal brokered by former President Barack Obama.

That October, Mr. Trump received several standing ovations as he addressed Israel’s parliament during a visit to Jerusalem.

He called Netanyahu “one of the greatest wartime presidents,” but he threw in: “He’s not the easiest guy to deal with, but that’s what makes him great.”

They remained largely in praise of one another until Feb. 28 this year, when the U.S. and Israel launched their joint strikes on Iran, killing the country’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and sparking an all-out war.

“On occasion, he’ll do something”

The leaders seemed to remain in lockstep after the war began. But in mid-March, an Israeli strike on Iran’s South Pars, part of the world’s largest natural gas field, brought an early sign of discord as it sent energy prices skyrocketing.

Asked whether he had spoken with Netanyahu about the strikes, Mr. Trump said: “I did. I told him, don’t do that, and he won’t do that.”

“We get along great. It’s coordinated, but on occasion, he’ll do something, and if I don’t like it … and so we’re not doing that anymore,” he said.

Netanyahu said Israel had “acted alone,” and he denied claims that Israel had dragged the U.S. into the war.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio had told lawmakers not long before that, “we knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.”

“Does anyone really think that someone can tell President Trump what to do? Come on,” Netanyahu said after the South Pars strikes.

A member of the Iranian community in Australia holds a placard in support of President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a rally amid joint U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran, in Sydney, March 14, 2026. Saeed KHAN/AFP/Getty

In early April, the Trump administration sounded triumphant as Pakistan brokered a two-week truce between the U.S. and Iran, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth saying “Iran begged for this ceasefire.”

Israel quickly said the agreement “does not include Lebanon,” and it pummeled the country’s south, killing hundreds of people in widespread strikes.

U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff reportedly told Netanyahu to “calm down” and open negotiations with Lebanon, which he did. But Israeli officials said a ceasefire with Hezbollah was out of the question.

“He’ll do whatever I want”

On May 20, with indirect U.S.-Iran talks yielding little as Israel and Hezbollah’s parallel war raged, Mr. Trump and Netanyahu had a “lengthy and dramatic” conversation, according to Israel’s Channel 12.

When asked hours later what he said to Netanyahu, Mr. Trump replied: “He’s fine, he’ll do whatever I want him to do.”

But 12 days later, as an agreement between the U.S. and Iran appeared imminent, Netanyahu ordered strikes on Hezbollah in southern Beirut, and Iran threatened to walk away from negotiations altogether.

“You’re f*g crazy,” Mr. Trump blared over the phone, a U.S. official told Axios. “You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me. I’m saving your ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this.”

“What the f*** are you doing?” he yelled, according to another source. The White House never denied the remarks.

Netanyahu said afterward that he had told Mr. Trump Israel would attack Beirut if Hezbollah didn’t stop attacking Israel.

Mr. Trump later dismissed the incident as the kind of “tactical disagreements” typical in a family.

Emergency personnel work at the site of an Israeli strike on the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, June 7, 2026. Mohamed Azakir/REUTERS

But on June 7, the president told Fox News he was “not happy” about further Israeli strikes on Beirut, which triggered an Iranian attack on Israel, again jeopardizing ceasefire talks.

Speaking to the Financial Times, Mr. Trump said Netanyahu “won’t have any choice” but to accept a U.S.-Iran agreement.

“I call all the shots,” Mr. Trump said. “He [Netanyahu] doesn’t call the shots.”

Israel struck Iran again, but on June 8, Netanyahu announced a halt in operations, adding that Israel maintained the right to defend itself against any attack.

“I say this, with appreciation and respect, in my good conversations with my friend, President Trump,” the Israeli leader said.

“The very small partner”

Mr. Trump’s announcement on Sunday of an agreement with Iran caught Netanyahu by surprise, according to Axios. Some of the Israeli leader’s media allies started attacking the U.S. president, with one TV host calling Mr. Trump a “loser.”

“With an agreement, without an agreement — Iran will not have nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu declared Tuesday on X. “As long as I am Prime Minister of Israel — this will not happen.”

At the G7 summit in France this week, Mr. Trump said Netanyahu “gets a little excited sometimes. But we have an amazing partnership. We are the big partner and he is the very small partner.”

“Without me, there would be no Israel,” Mr. Trump said. “Israel would have been blown up a long time ago had I not gotten involved.”

Netanyahu’s dilemma

Netanyahu is now in a bind, The Economist’s Pfeffer told CBS News, “because his political capital is invested in two things: One is this conflict with Iran, which he’s been talking up for so many years, and the other is his incredible relationship with Donald Trump that he’s been talking up ever since Donald Trump became president in 2016. And now he seems to be losing both of these, and he is stuck.”

Pfeffer was doubtful, however, that Mr. Trump would seek to materially punish the Israeli leader.

“We’ve seen Trump swearing at Bibi and then the next day saying, ‘Oh, he’s a wonderful prime minister,’” he said.

Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who served six U.S. secretaries of state as an adviser on Arab-Israeli negotiations, agreed.

“Is Trump frustrated with Netanyahu? Yes. He has said things publicly that no other American president has ever said about an Israeli prime minister,” he told CBS News Wednesday. “The question is how is the president making these divisions real?”

The U.S. has not delayed military assistance, stopped intelligence sharing or stopped defending Israel as a veto-wielding member of the United Nations Security Council, he noted, adding that those options still seemed “completely off the table.”

“What Trump can do to punish Netanyahu is to deny him what needs most” ahead of October’s Israeli elections, Miller said. That, he said, would be saying the U.S.-Israel relationship is “suffering, not because of me, Donald Trump, but because of Benjamin Netanyahu.”

Miller added that, in his view, however, “Donald Trump does not want a major rupture with Netanyahu.”

“A little dispute”

Much now likely depends on Lebanon.The U.S.-Iran agreement signed by Mr. Trump includes a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, but Israel has insisted it will not withdraw from the neighboring country unless and until the Hezbollah threat is completely removed.

While diplomats said Friday that Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to a new ceasefire, it came after a night of intense clashes that Lebanese officials say left 18 civilians dead, while Israel said four soldiers were killed.

And the next phase in the U.S.-Iran deal, direct talks that had been scheduled to start Friday in Switzerland, have been put on hold.

“We have a little dispute over Lebanon,” Mr. Trump told reporters in France on Wednesday. “I’m not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves.”

The question is whether Mr. Trump “is prepared to impose a cost or consequence on this Israeli prime minister” if the fighting in Lebanon continues holding up his bid to end the war with Iran, said Miller.

“If Trump feels he’s being ‘played’ by the Iranians,” however, with Tehran declining to restrain its Hezbollah allies, then “Netanyahu’s room for maneuver will increase,” noted Miller.

And Bibi may be banking on it.

“Netanyahu is looking for any justification to somehow undermine this memorandum of understanding and the negotiations that will follow,” Miller told CBS News.

DOJ rebuffs judge’s request for Blanche to declare in court that anti-weaponization fund is dead

2026-06-19T19:57:21.231Z / CNN

By Tierney Sneed

PUBLISHED Jun 19, 2026, 3:57 PM ET

Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche, in the Oval Office of the White House on June 10.

Evan Vucci/Reuters

Summary

• The Justice Department is refusing to provide court declarations from senior officials confirming that a controversial $1.8 billion fund is defunct.
• The fund would have compensated people claiming to be victims of government weaponization under prior administrations.
• Officials argue that previous congressional testimony and court filings already confirm the fund will not move forward.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

The Justice Department is rebuffing a judge’s request that it supply a court declaration from senior administration officials that would confirm that the so-called anti-weaponization fund is not moving forward.

In a new court filing Friday, the Justice Department said that the declarations were “unnecessary” and that the judge’s order that the administration file them raises “serious separation of powers concerns.”

The case — playing out on Alexandria, Virginia — is one of several legal challenges to the controversial $1.8 billion fund, which arose out of a settlement of a legally dubious lawsuit President Donald Trump filed against the IRS. It would have compensated people who claimed to have been victims of government “weaponization” under prior administrations, prompting allegations that it would operate as a slush fund for Trump’s allies.

As political opposition and legal hurdles mounted, the administration dropped its plans for the fund, and Judge Leonie M. Brinkema, the judge in the Virginia case, indicated she was inclined to rule the legal dispute in her courtroom as moot. But last week, she requested declarations from acting Attorney General Todd Balance, a top deputy of his, Associate Attorney General Stan Woodward, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirming that “they will not take any action to create or operate the Anti-Weaponization Fund, and that the Anti-Weaponization Fund will not proceed in any manner, or under any name.”

Absent such a submission, the case would move forward to the next steps, she said in the June 12 order.

In the new filing, the Justice Department pointed to Blanche’s testimony to Congress in which he said the fund was “not going forward, period,” as well as Woodward’s signatory on court filings saying the same.

The Department also argued that there was no “basis for the court to compel testimony from the Associate Attorney General and two Cabinet members.”

Israel–Hezbollah ceasefire becomes first test of Trump Iran framework after talks delay

June 19, 2026 12:16pm EDT / Fox News

A Hezbollah spokesperson told Fox News Digital that the group would abide by the ceasefire if Israel does

By Morgan Phillips, Efrat Lachter Fox News

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

A U.S.-backed ceasefire between Israel and Iran-backed terror group Hezbollah was set to take effect Friday afternoon, as Washington tried to salvage a broader regional framework with Iran after talks scheduled for Switzerland were abruptly postponed.

The Israel–Hezbollah ceasefire was set to take effect 9 a.m. Eastern Time/4 p.m. local time, both a senior U.S. and an Israeli official told Fox News Digital, but whether the ceasefire formally took effect remains disputed.

The White House has not publicly commented on whether the ceasefire has formally taken effect.

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6398864610112

Israeli military footage shows waves of strikes across Lebanon as ceasefire claims remain disputed. (Credit: IDF Spokesperson’s Unit)

A Hezbollah spokesperson told Fox News Digital that the group would abide by the ceasefire if Israel does, but “reserves the right to respond” to any violation. The spokesperson said Hezbollah did not yet view the ceasefire as having taken effect, claiming Israel was still carrying out strikes in southern Lebanon more than an hour after it was supposed to begin.

ISRAEL MOVES TOWARDS CEASEFIRE DEAL WITH HEZBOLLAH: REPORTS

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu posted a video after the 4 p.m. local start time that he said showed Israel Defense Forces striking Hezbollah targets in Lebanon. It is unclear when those reported strikes took place, and Fox News Digital could not independently verify their timing.

“As I instructed – the IDF struck powerfully 150 Hezbollah targets in Lebanon and eliminated dozens of terrorists,” he wrote on X.

IDF spokesperson Effie Defrin said Hezbollah had killed four Israeli soldiers in overnight strikes early Friday.

An airplane flies as smoke rises after an Israeli strike on Beirut’s southern suburbs amid escalating tensions between Hezbollah and Israel on March 6, 2026.(Khalil Ashawi/Reuters)

Still, an Israeli official said Israel intends to honor the ceasefire agreement.

“If Hezbollah doesn’t shoot, we won’t shoot. If they shoot — we will respond,” the official told Fox News Digital.

The agreement came after negotiations between the U.S. and Iran scheduled to take place this weekend in Switzerland were abruptly postponed. The White House has not publicly provided a reason for the delay.

Trump has expressed increasing frustration with Netanyahu over the conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

“Bibi has to be more responsible with respect to Lebanon,” Trump said to reporters Tuesday at the G7 conference in France. “Too many people are being killed, and you don’t have to knock down an apartment house every time you’re looking for somebody, because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses, and they’re not all Hezbollah, that I can tell you.”

“I’m not saying they shouldn’t protect themselves,” he added Wednesday during separate remarks to reporters. “I’m saying when two drones are shot into the desert and drop harmlessly, you don’t have to knock down buildings in Beirut. They could behave better, and frankly, they could do a better job.”

Hezbollah is an Iran-backed Shiite militant group and political movement based in Lebanon that the U.S. has designated as a foreign terrorist organization. Its conflict with Israel dates back decades, but the latest fighting has centered on Hezbollah rocket and drone attacks from Lebanon and Israeli strikes aimed at pushing the group back from the border and protecting northern Israeli communities.

Smoke billows over Beirut’s southern suburbs following reported strikes amid escalating conflict involving Hezbollah and Israel, as seen from Baabda, Lebanon, on March 6, 2026.(Mohamed Azakir/Reuters)

“As the Vice President said at his press conference, the plans for the upcoming technical talks have not been finalized, and the U.S. delegation has been prepared to depart at the first available opportunity,” a White House spokesperson told Fox News Digital. “But the logistics of these negotiations have never been simple or predictable. As of now the Vice President is not departing tonight. We will let you know as soon as we have a concrete update about next steps.”

The Iranian foreign ministry on Friday denied reports claiming Iran had once again closed the Strait of Hormuz.

“The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran have taken the necessary measures to ensure the safe passage of commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz, in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding on the End of the War dated 18 June 1405, and shipping is underway in this route,” foreign ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said in a statement posted to Telegram.

A separate Iranian official told Fox News Digital Friday that traffic was moving “slowly” through the strait due to mine-clearing operations.

HORMUZ CHOKE POINT PERSISTS AS IRAN HALTS OIL TRAFFIC DESPITE TRUMP CEASEFIRE

U.S. officials have described the memorandum signed Wednesday as a 60-day framework for negotiations toward a final agreement largely focused on Iran’s nuclear program.

They have said any U.S. force withdrawal from areas near Iran would be tied to a final deal, not required immediately under the initial agreement.

A fireball rises from the site of an Israeli airstrike targeting an area in Beirut’s southern suburbs overnight on March 10 to 11, 2026.(Fadel itani / AFP via Getty Images)

The agreement also declared the “immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon,” according to U.S. officials.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

U.S. officials have said the memorandum also includes immediate oil sanctions waivers for Iran, an end to Iranian threats to the Strait of Hormuz and a process for lifting the U.S. blockade, and future talks over Iran’s nuclear program, including the fate of its enriched uranium stockpile.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Pentagon, Israeli Prime Minister’s Office and Iranian Foreign Ministry for additional comment and had not received responses by publication.

Trump unveils a new presidential airplane

2026-06-19T19:23:41.814Z / CNN

By Kevin Liptak

5 min ago

PUBLISHED Jun 19, 2026, 3:23 PM ET

Donald Trump Federal agencies US military

See all topics

The Air Force’s VC-25B Bridge aircraft, pictured at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland.

US Air Force

President Donald Trump is at Joint Base Andrews unveiling a new presidential aircraft: a luxury jet donated by the government of Qatar that has been painted red, white and blue and adorned with the words “United States of America.”

The plane is intended to bridge the gap between the two aging modified Boeing 747-200s, which have flown as Air Force One since 1990, and two new planes Boeing is modifying that won’t be done for roughly two more years.

Gone is the light blue color scheme first conceived by Jaqueline Kennedy and used on the presidential aircraft ever since. In its place is a navy blue and white fuselage, cut through with red stripes.

The Air Force said Friday the new plane would begin “commissioning flights” soon. Those are intended as a “final exam” for the aircraft modification, according to a statement from the Air Force.

“The safety and security of the commander in chief is our highest priority,” said Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink. “From the beginning, we meticulously evaluated every requirement to accelerate delivery while maintaining the high standards expected of the presidential mission. This effort proves that the U.S. Air Force can move fast without sacrificing quality, security, or reliability.”

Trump had become frustrated at delays in producing the new Air Force One planes, which aren’t likely to be completed by the time his term ends in 2029.

The Pentagon accepted the Qatari jet last year and has been working over the last several months to prepare it for service.

The timeline has been quicker than the other planes in part because the interior was not modified.

DOJ rebuffs judge’s demand to state “anti-weaponization” fund is officially dead

2026-06-19T14:35:00-0400 / CBS News

Washington — The Trump administration on Friday declined to submit a declaration in court from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reiterating that the government is not continuing with a controversial $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, calling a judge’s demand for such a filing “unnecessary.”

In a notice to the federal district court in Alexandria, Virginia, senior Justice Department lawyers rebuffed U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema’s request for the declaration from Blanche, Bessent and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward.

Brinkema said last week that “to avoid any further litigation,” the senior officials should file the declaration under penalty of perjury that the “anti-weaponization” program wouldn’t proceed “in any manner, or under any name.” She also granted a preliminary injunction that blocks the Justice Department from taking any action to create or operate the program, which remains in place.

The judge warned that if the administration opted not to file the declaration, the lawsuit brought by a coalition that includes two nonprofits and a former federal prosecutor would move forward.

In the notice, Andrew Block, senior counsel to Woodward, said the declaration is “unnecessary and the compelled testimony of senior officials from the Executive Branch implicates serious separation of powers concerns.”

He noted that Blanche had already testified to Congress that the fund is “not going forward, period,” and said similar assertions have been made in court filings from the Justice Department.

“Accordingly, the Court’s demands are unnecessary,” Block wrote. “And its presumption that mootness can arise only by compelling testimony from three senior government officials ‘implicate[s] separation of powers concerns.’ As stated multiple times, the Fund is not moving forward.”

It’s unclear whether Block’s arguments will be enough to persuade Brinkema to agree that the lawsuit should be dropped.

“It is telling that even after the federal court gave them a week, the Acting Attorney General and other senior administration officials continue to refuse to say under oath that the Slush Fund is dead and won’t operate in the future,” Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which is representing the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “Nor have they provided any information under oath about their compliance with the court’s prior directives.”

Brinkema gave the Trump administration the chance to clarify the fund’s status following a hearing last week. Block argued before the court that the case should be dismissed because the administration hadn’t set up the fund and isn’t going ahead with it.

While the Justice Department made that assertion in court filings and to Congress during a hearing earlier this month, the judge noted none of those statements were made under penalty of perjury.

The “anti-weaponization” fund was created as part of a deal to settle a civil lawsuit President Trump filed against the Internal Revenue Service in January over the leak of his tax returns by a former government contractor. The $1.776 billion program aimed to “provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare,” the Justice Department said.

But the funddrew serious backlashfrom Republicans on Capitol Hill, who raised concerns with the possibility that people involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol could receive payouts.

After the “anti-weaponization” program threatened to derail the GOP’s immigration agenda in Congress, Blanche told a House committee that the Justice Department was “not moving forward with the fund.” But he refused to put the commitment in writing, raising the possibility that the fund could be resurrected in another form.

The Justice Department also argued in court papers in two different legal challenges that the program “had not been set up and is now not going forward,” and said the cases are moot and should be dismissed in their entirety. Government lawyers argued that none of the five members who would establish and administer the fund had even been appointed.

But during the hearing before Brinkema last week, the judge expressed skepticism over the Justice Department’s assertion that the fund is dead.

The case before Brinkema was filed by a former prosecutor who worked on cases involving the Jan. 6 attack, as well as the city of New Haven, Connecticut, and two nonprofit groups, Common Cause and the National Abortion Federation.

Other challenges to the fund have been brought in Washington, D.C., and California. In one of the cases in Washington, involving a government watchdog group, a federal judge declined to temporarily halt operation of the fund.

Vance’s threat is the latest sign US could be breaking with Israel

2026-06-19T16:21:24.362Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/19/politics/vances-israel-trump-break-iran

• Vice President JD Vance issued a warning to Israel officials that further hints at escalating tensions between the US and Jerusalem.
• Vance said Israel should stop criticizing its sole remaining friend, while President Donald Trump has repeatedly called Israel’s conduct in Lebanon too heavy-handed.
• Israel attacks in Lebanon have repeatedly derailed US-Iran peace talks, angering the Trump administration.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

The United States joining with Israel to launch a war in the Middle East was always a fraught situation for the longstanding US-Israeli alliance.

But things seemed to come to a head Thursday, when Vice President JD Vance had some blunt and harsh words for Israel — words that sounded a whole lot like a threat.

It was the culmination of days of warning signs from the Trump administration, which clearly fears Israel might scupper a US agreement with Iran that many view as way too favorable to the Iranians. Israel and Hezbollah agreed to renew a ceasefire on Friday, sources told CNN, after fighting between the Israeli military and the Iran-backed militant group again jeopardized US-Iran negotiations.

The break seemed inevitable, for several reasons:

• Israel’s goals for the Iran war were substantially different from the United States’ goals, and it was far more invested.
• Israel’s reputation in the US had already substantially declined in recent years.
• Even the still-strongly pro-Israel Republican Party has recently seen many prominent influencers strongly criticize Israel and has reckoned with growing antisemitism in its base.
• While President Donald Trump has aligned strongly with Israel, he’s also trafficked in numerous antisemitic tropes over the years.
• And Trump tends to treat allies well only insofar as it benefits him.

Now, the administration is practically yelling: You guys should take what we’ve given you and be happy, or else.

Whether the US ever gets to the “or else” part remains to be seen. But it’s remarkable that even the Republican Party seems to be increasingly approaching a breaking point with Israel.

Vance’s remarks, in which he pointed to Israel’s worldwide unpopularity, were the most striking.

“Donald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time,” Vance said at a press briefing Thursday. “And he happens to be the head of state of the world’s superpower. If I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world.”

Vance then repeatedly returned to the idea that maybe Israel should tread carefully.

He cited how reliant Israel is on American weapons, as well as the need for some Israeli leaders “to wake up and smell the reality of the situation that country is in.”

That echoed a harsh line in an interview with the New York Times’ Ross Douthat published earlier Thursday, in which the vice president urged Israel to recognize that the US has been an “incredible partner” and cited how US missile systems have protected the Israelis.

He also suggested Israel should scale back its efforts in Lebanon, which have threatened the tenuous peace process.

“You’re a country of nine million people,” Vance said of Israel. “You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have.”

That last comment echoes Trump, who has several times painted Israel’s conduct as way too heavy-handed.

The US president earlier this month acknowledged telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he was “crazy” over Israel’s conduct in Lebanon.

Trump also told Axios that he had flatly warned Netanyahu.

“I said, ‘Bibi, you better be careful, or you will be on your own very soon,’” Trump said.

By June 14, Trump took to social media to decry an Israeli attack on Beirut, saying it “should not have happened” and that the Hezbollah attack it was responding to was “very small and meaningless.”

Then Trump got even more critical of Israel in comments alongside Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani on Tuesday at the G7 in France.

“You don’t have to knock down an apartment house every time you’re looking for somebody, because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses and they’re not all Hezbollah — that I can tell you,” Trump said.

He called a recent retaliatory attack from Israel “too much.”

Trump then concluded that, “if it weren’t for the United States of America … Israel would not exist right now. Israel would have been blown off the face of the earth, 100%. And every smart person in Israel knows that.”

While Vance’s comments have gotten all the attention, Trump was barking up a very similar tree.

None of it means Trump and Israel are in for an imminent break. There is likely some posturing going on here, in hopes of keeping a clearly unhappy Israel in line amid peace talks.

And perhaps it will work. Sources said Friday that Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to renew their ceasefire after a deadly clash.

But Israel and Netanyahu also have a major interest in extracting the most they can out of this war, given how rare an opportunity it is for other countries to join their efforts in trying to bring Iran to heel.

They’re simply in a very — foreseeably — different place than the Trump administration, which seems to just want this to be over. So it’s predictable that Israel will try to make it harder for the US to let go.

But even setting all that aside, the mere fact that Trump and Vance are talking in these terms is remarkable.

One of the biggest criticisms of Israel right now is that their conduct in the war in Gaza has simply gone too far — some, including an independent United Nations commission, have even called it genocide — an accusation Israel denies. If Trump says Israel goes way too far, that’s going to help cement that perception.

It’s also just a highly unusual way for the administration to treat Israel.

It’s true that Trump often treats allies poorly and in very transactional ways. (Look at what’s happening right now with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.) But the alliance with Israel has been different. Trump has seemed to view it as more beneficial and almost sacred, even when Netanyahu was personally frustrating him.

Yet the way Vance spoke about Israel on Thursday sounded a lot like his and Trump’s browbeating of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — remember “Have you said ‘thank you’ once?” — in the Oval Office last year.

In both cases, Trump and Vance were looking to put an ally in its place over reluctance to accept certain terms to end a war.

But in this case, the situation is threatening to upend decades of American foreign policy: a close alliance with Israel.