Top World News

Republican Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo avoided answering a direct question about President Donald Trump's tariff policies and their impact on the tourism-reliant state during a recent interview.Lombardo spoke to 2 News Nevada in an exclusive interview last week and appeared visibly uncomfortable with denouncing Trump's tariffs, which have led to a tourism crisis in the state that heavily depends on travelers, especially in cities like Las Vegas. The loss of global tourism has hit the state's economy and become a serious concern among Nevada lawmakers ahead of the midterm elections this fall, according to Politico.But Lombardo apparently did not have a strong stance on the topic, 2 News Nevada reported."I don't know all the nuances of foreign policy associated with that and the tariffs and how it directly affects Nevada, but me as the governor of the state of Nevada, I'm concerned about Nevada," Lombardo said.In February, Nevada State Treasurer Zach Conine said that Trump's tariffs have cost the state $2.1 billion and Conine has demanded that the administration pay the state for costs incurred as a result of the president's policy, KOLO 8 News Now reported.Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo punts on whether he supports Trump's tariffs: "I don't know all the nuances of foreign policy associated with that and tariffs and how it directly affects, uh, Nevada." pic.twitter.com/FoNDtJUd6D— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 26, 2026

South Carolina's Republican-majority Senate voted to stop a measure to push a new congressional map forward — an open rejection of President Donald Trump's demand for redistricting, according to reports.As early voting began on Tuesday for the already scheduled June primary, a measure to accept a redrawn congressional map failed in the state's Senate in a 20-24 vote, NBC News reported.The vote "was a surprise rejection of President Donald Trump, who had urged lawmakers to pass a redrawn map that eliminated the state’s single majority-Black district and gave Republicans a chance to win the seat," according to NBC News.Last week, the South Carolina House had approved the map and aimed to enact it for the midterm elections this fall.That changed on Tuesday, despite pressure from the Trump White House. Lawmakers had considered seeking another primary election for the districts affected by the new map in August, but some GOP lawmakers ended up changing their minds."Neither my conscience nor my common sense will allow me to stop an election that is already underway," said Republican state Sen. Richard Cash, who reportedly changed his vote citing the timing.Earlier this month, South Carolina Republican Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey said that a new, last-minute map could be "short-sighted," according to NBC News."I believe that our state is stronger with vibrant parties. I think we, as a whole, are stronger when we have a clash of ideas. I think that’s true at the national level. I think it’s true at the state level. We are stronger when we have a clash of ideas and we can discuss those policy goals," Massey said. "Republicans are stronger when the Democratic Party is vibrant and viable."

The number of goals Donald Trump set out on Feb. 28 when he launched the unprovoked attack on Iran was held up to the light by MS NOW’s David Rohde on Tuesday morning, who made clear the president's war so far has been a failure.Well beyond the Strait of Hormuz stalemate that has the Trump administration grasping for an answer, Rohde singled out five claims that the president made when he announced the attack, with only one coming to fruition -- and even that appears doubtful after this weekend's events.Speaking with “Morning Joe” co-host Jonathan Lemire, Rohde got right to the point as the producers displayed a graphic showing the administration coming up far short of its goals.“Remind us, please, about the goals that this administration first set out for this conflict and what has actually been achieved,” Lemire prompted his guest.“Look, I want to give credit to all the service members that are out there in particularly the day after Memorial Day, but this has been a disaster for this administration to have the Secretary of State [Marco Rubio], as we just saw him on his plane, trying to play down, almost trying to placate the Iranians and the American public about how this conflict has gone was extraordinary,” he began.“I looked up President Trump's speech on February 28th when he announced the war, so achieved: ‘annihilate their navy.‘ Maybe. I mean, I think that's generally true. But this morning, the New York Times has reported that there are hundreds of these speedboats and this — look, I believe the United States Navy, I don't believe the Iranians at all — if they're laying mines with one of these speedboats. That's why it was part of the attack yesterday; that's extraordinary. That shows how emboldened the Iranians are. So that's maybe achieved or partly achieved.”“And then everything else. 'Destroy their missiles,'” he continued. “The latest assessment is that 70% of Iran's missile capacity remains intact. They have knocked out some of the factories. But again, that is not an achievement. Overall, ensure the region's terrorist proxies no longer destabilize the region — That's not happening at all. That's not even part of these negotiations. And the missiles aren't either.”“Ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon,” he continued. “That's not even part of the current negotiations that will come in this 60-day second round of talks. And then, most tragically, what he said to, as he said to ‘the great people of Iran, take over your government,’ and the regime remains in place.”“So it's astonishing to me that an American president is in this position,” he concluded. “And they just, you know, this administration … just continues to mismanage this war.” - YouTube youtu.be

Middle Eastern nations that were on the receiving end of a threat from Donald Trump over the holiday weekend called his bluff because he no longer carries the weight he thinks he does.That was the claim made by MS NOW host Joe Scarborough and Washington Post columnist David Ignatius on Monday morning after the affected nations balked.Over the weekend, as Trump was boasting that an agreement with Iran was imminent, he then jumped ahead and wrote on Truth Social, “I am mandatorily requesting that all Countries immediately sign the Abraham Accords, and that, if Iran signs its Agreement with me, as President of the United States of America, it would be an Honor to have them also be part of this unparalleled World Coalition.”As the Washington Post reported, “Analysts, however, expressed doubt that the countries would agree to sign on, especially when tensions are running high amid ongoing conflicts in Iran, Lebanon, and Gaza. Official Iranian policy also calls for the eradication of Israel, and its replacement by a Palestinian state.”Scarborough jumped into the fray by saying Trump, who has been diminished in the region by the Strait of Hormuz stalemate, doesn’t have the leverage to make such demands.Stating Trump’s new Iran deal pronouncement is “starting to sound like every other BS peace deal,” Scarborough added, “And I say that I know they're talking, they think they're close, but you have the Iranians saying, no, we're never going to give up our nukes. We're going to continue putting tolls on the strait.”“And then you have Donald Trump yesterday basically holding a weak hand, actually going all in, saying, okay, Saudi Arabia, okay, Turkey, all right, all these other countries that are never going to join the Abraham Accords, the only way they're going to work is if all of you join the Abraham Accords. And the Saudis have already said, we're not going to do it. We're not going to do it without a Palestinian state. Is there a peace still? Are they really moving forward to one, or is this just more of the same?”“So, Joe, it is, as your comments suggest, a very confusing and disheartening situation,” Ignatius replied. “It's obvious to me that President Trump badly wants out of this war. He's looking for an exit ramp as hard as he can, he feels that another round of kinetic strikes will be difficult for the U.S. — for the US military it’s unlikely to easily achieve his goals.”“It will lead, inevitably, to some kind of ground invasion of Iran, which is the last thing that I think he wants. And so he has come up with a peace proposal that is so far short of the war aims that he had when he started,” he added. - YouTube youtu.be

Donald Trump issued a sweeping ultimatum to nearly a dozen Muslim-majority nations Monday morning, threatening to cut them out of his Iran deal entirely if they refuse to simultaneously sign the Abraham Accords — and he did it in a Truth Social post addressed directly to their heads of state."If they don't, they should not be part of this Deal in that it shows bad intention," Trump wrote, in a message that named Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain as countries he expects to sign the Israel normalization agreements as a condition of participating in any broader Iran settlement.The demand puts enormous pressure on nations that have long resisted formal normalization with Israel for domestic political reasons — particularly Saudi Arabia, whose leaders have said publicly that any normalization would require a credible path to Palestinian statehood, a condition the current Israeli government has flatly rejected.Perhaps most striking was the manner in which Trump chose to deliver the ultimatum. Rather than through traditional diplomatic channels, he issued the demands in a rambling Truth Social post — and then instructed his own representatives to act on it in real time. "By copy of this TRUTH," he wrote, "I am asking my Representatives to begin, and successfully complete, the process of signing these Countries into the already Historic Abraham Accords."In other words, Trump's diplomats learned of their new marching orders at the same moment as the rest of the world.The post also floated the idea of Iran itself eventually joining the Abraham Accords — agreements that are at their core about normalizing relations with Israel, a country Iran has repeatedly called for the destruction of. Trump called the prospect "something special" and said several regional leaders had told him they would be "honored" to have Iran join the coalition.Trump closed with characteristic grandiosity, declaring the potential agreement would be "the most important Deal that any of these Great, but always in Conflict Countries, will ever sign" and that "nothing in the past, or in the future, will surpass it."

Donald Trump's Truth Social post praising negotiations with Iran as "productive and professional" triggered an immediate backlash Sunday — not from Democrats, but from his own most fervent supporters, who accused him of repeating Barack Obama's mistakes and demanded military destruction of the Iranian regime instead."You cannot trust anything that Iran signs — it doesn't matter whether it is a good deal on paper or not," wrote one supporter in a reply that gained traction on the platform. "Neville Chamberlain had a great deal with Hitler, how did that turn out? I understand that the spin will begin on trying to convince people that you didn't pull an Obama, but you can't fool your base. They trusted you and you have now alienated your most vocal and rabid supporters."The same commenter, identified as "Patriot and Retired Air Force," added a stinging verdict: "You are off the pedestal and merely a better alternative than them. Sad!" — deliberately echoing Trump's own signature putdown back at him.The replies were thick with calls for military action rather than diplomacy. "Level them, they can't be trusted," wrote one MAGA user. "Anything they sign won't be worth the paper it's written on. Take them out now!" Another demanded "unconditional surrender" as "the only option," arguing that "leaving the current Radical Islamic Regime in power is a LOSS for the U.S."Others drew the Obama comparison directly. "Lifting sanctions is as bad as Obama," wrote one commenter. Another called for the elimination of the IRGC entirely rather than any negotiated settlement.An Iranian-American commenter cut to the heart of the base's frustration: "Any agreement with this criminal regime makes you no different from Barack Obama. Anyone who shakes hands with criminals is no different from Barack Obama — finish your job via military, not a deal with criminals."The revolt on Truth Social mirrors a broader rupture that has been building in conservative circles over Trump's Iran diplomacy. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — Trump's own top diplomat in his first term — warned Saturday that the deal being floated "seems straight out of the Wendy Sherman-Robert Malley-Ben Rhodes playbook," a reference to the architects of Obama's 2015 nuclear agreement. White House communications director Steven Cheung responded by telling Pompeo to "shut his stupid mouth."Trump's post insisted his deal is "THE EXACT OPPOSITE" of Obama's approach and vowed the blockade of Iran would remain "in full force and effect" until any agreement is "reached, certified, and signed." But for a slice of his base that spent years calling for regime change, the optics of any deal, on any terms, appear to be a bridge too far.

Donald Trump took to Truth Social Sunday morning to praise what he called a "much more professional and productive" relationship with Iran — the same country he spent years branding the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism."Our relationship with Iran is becoming a much more professional and productive one," Trump wrote, describing ongoing nuclear negotiations as proceeding in "an orderly and constructive manner."The statement landed with considerable whiplash for anyone who followed Trump's career. In 2018, Trump withdrew from the Obama-era nuclear deal and launched a "maximum pressure" campaign of crushing economic sanctions against Tehran. In January 2020, he ordered the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' Quds Force, in a drone strike at Baghdad's international airport — an act that brought the two countries to the brink of open war.Now, in his second term, Trump finds himself in the position of negotiating his own nuclear deal with the same government — and praising the relationship in terms his predecessor might have used.The post also contained a swipe at Barack Obama — using his full middle name, a longtime Trump dog whistle — calling the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action "one of the worst deals ever made by our Country" and "a direct path to Iran developing a Nuclear Weapon."But in the very same post, Trump described his own negotiations in terms nearly identical to what Obama-era diplomats might have said: both sides taking their time, getting it right, no rushing, proceeding carefully toward a verifiable agreement.The contradiction did not go unnoticed. Earlier Sunday, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — Trump's own top diplomat during his first term — warned that the deal being floated "seems straight out of the Wendy Sherman-Robert Malley-Ben Rhodes playbook," referring to key architects of Obama's Iran deal. White House communications director Steven Cheung responded by telling Pompeo to "shut his stupid mouth."Trump closed his post with a notable flourish, suggesting that Iran might one day consider joining the Abraham Accords — the normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab states that Trump brokered in his first term.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Saturday issued a sharp warning about President Donald Trump's emerging Iran peace framework, saying it could "pour gasoline" on regional conflicts and supercharge Iranian-backed militant groups.The South Carolina Republican, who is normally one of Trump's most reliable allies on foreign policy issues, took to X to warn that the reported terms of the deal could be read as a strategic win for Tehran by other players in the region."If it is perceived in the region that a deal with Iran allows the regime to survive and become more powerful over time, we will have poured gasoline on the conflicts in Lebanon and Iraq," Graham wrote.He warned specifically about the impact on two Iranian-aligned forces."A deal that is perceived to allow Iran to survive and possess the ability to control the Strait in the future will put Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Shia militias in Iraq on steroids," Graham wrote.The senator's remarks land at a politically delicate moment for Trump, who announced earlier in the day from the Oval Office that an agreement involving the United States, Iran, and a coalition of Arab and Muslim nations had been "largely negotiated."Graham's pushback adds to a growing chorus of conservative voices, including former Trump Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and conservative commentator David Hookstead, raising alarms about what the reported framework would actually deliver.If it is perceived in the region that a deal with Iran allows the regime to survive and become more powerful over time, we will have poured gasoline on the conflicts in Lebanon and Iraq. A deal that is perceived to allow Iran to survive and possess the ability to control the…— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) May 23, 2026