President Donald Trump and CNN correspondent Kaitlan Collins engaged in a tense back-and-forth aboard Air Force One following his early departure from the G7 summit.
The heated exchange centered around the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran, with Trump growing increasingly impatient as Collins pressed for details about potential U.S. involvement. According to the Daily Mail, the confrontation occurred Monday afternoon and quickly became contentious.
The interaction began after Trump posted on Truth Social that everyone should "immediately evacuate Tehran" while also dismissing theories that he had left the G7 summit early to secure a ceasefire. Collins asked the president to elaborate on what he was working on instead, leading to a combative exchange in front of other journalists.
Trump immediately clarified his position on a potential ceasefire, telling Collins directly: "We're not looking for a ceasefire. I didn't say it was going to be a ceasefire… I think we're looking for better than a ceasefire." The exchange highlighted the administration's complex stance on the escalating Middle East conflict.
When Collins asked whether Trump planned to send Vice President and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff to the region, the president responded curtly that he was "not sure yet" and that it would depend on "what happens when I get back." This exchange occurred as Collins attempted to speak over other journalists present.
The conversation grew more strained when Collins asked whether a U.S. bomb could theoretically destroy Iran's nuclear program if America became militarily involved. Trump's response was philosophical yet evasive: "There's no guarantees on everything or anything in life, you know that."
As Collins continued her line of questioning, Trump's patience visibly wore thin. At one point, the 79-year-old president cut her off and asked, "Who else has a question other than CNN fake news?" This dismissive comment came as Collins persisted with questions about U.S. military options regarding Iran.
Despite being interrupted, Collins maintained her professional demeanor and returned to her line of questioning after a brief pause. She pivoted to ask about Iran's nuclear capabilities, referencing National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard's March statement that Iran wasn't close to developing nuclear weapons.
Trump dismissed Gabbard's assessment outright, stating, "I don't care what she said. I think they were very close to having nuclear weapons." This contradiction of his own intelligence chief's assessment demonstrated Trump's conviction about Iran's nuclear threat, regardless of official intelligence reports.
The exchange aboard Air Force One took place against the backdrop of Israeli military strikes on Iran that reportedly stunned many of Trump's supporters. These strikes appeared to occur without the president's explicit blessing, creating a complex diplomatic situation for the administration.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has maintained that the United States was not involved in the Israeli strikes. Trump has subsequently expressed support for Israel while emphasizing his belief that "Iran must not have nuclear weapons," clarifying his administration's position.
Meanwhile, bombing continued in Tehran on Monday as the White House deliberated whether to become more directly involved in the conflict. The situation represents one of the most significant foreign policy challenges of Trump's presidency as tensions continue to escalate in the region.
The confrontation between Trump and Collins exemplifies the often combative relationship between the president and certain media outlets, particularly CNN. Their exchange aboard Air Force One highlighted the challenges journalists face when attempting to extract clear policy positions on sensitive international matters.
Collins, 35, demonstrated the persistence that has made her a notable CNN correspondent, continuing her questioning despite being dismissed as "fake news." Her focus on specific policy questions about U.S. military options and Trump's assessment of Iran's nuclear capabilities provided insight into the administration's thinking.
Trump's responses, while sometimes evasive, revealed his belief that Iran was closer to nuclear weapons capability than his own intelligence officials had stated publicly. This discrepancy underscores the complexity of the situation and raises questions about the administration's information sources and policy direction.
Senator Marsha Blackburn has sparked political intrigue across Tennessee with her revelation about potentially seeking the state's highest office. The Republican lawmaker is contemplating a major career shift that could reshape both state and national politics.
According to Breitbart, Blackburn confirmed during a "Fight Club Founders' Roundtable" discussion on Monday evening that she is "strongly considering" running for governor of Tennessee. The senator made this revelation while speaking with hosts Alex Marlow and Matthew Boyle.
Blackburn expressed gratitude for the support she's receiving to pursue the gubernatorial position. Her comments come as Republicans solidify their influence across various levels of government following President Trump's return to the White House.
When asked directly about the speculation surrounding her potential gubernatorial aspirations, Blackburn didn't hesitate to address the rumors. Marlow noted she would make a "terrific governor" while expressing concern about losing her presence in the Senate.
The Tennessee Republican acknowledged the substantial encouragement she's receiving from supporters. This backing appears to be a significant factor in her consideration of a potential run for the governor's mansion.
Blackburn emphasized her dedication to serving Tennesseans regardless of her role, framing a potential gubernatorial run as an opportunity to lead during a period of significant federal-state power dynamics under the Trump administration.
Despite her gubernatorial considerations, Blackburn made clear that her current Senate responsibilities remain paramount. She continues working with colleagues to implement the president's agenda on Capitol Hill.
The senator specifically mentioned her commitment to advancing President Trump's America First policies. This commitment highlights her continued alignment with the MAGA movement that has reshaped Republican politics.
Reducing living costs for Americans, particularly Tennesseans, remains a top priority for Blackburn. This economic focus aligns with broader Republican messaging on inflation and cost-of-living concerns that have resonated with voters.
Blackburn's potential move to state leadership comes at a time when Republican governors are increasingly asserting their authority. Many see state governments as crucial counterbalances to federal policy under certain circumstances.
The senator specifically referenced a "reset" and working with the Trump administration as "states get this power back." This suggests Blackburn views the governorship as a position where she could have significant influence in federal-state relations.
Her comments reflect the ongoing Republican emphasis on federalism and state sovereignty. These principles have become increasingly central to conservative governance philosophy in recent years.
Blackburn's consideration of a gubernatorial run has significant implications for Tennessee and national politics. If she pursues and wins the governorship, it would trigger a Senate vacancy that could alter the chamber's dynamics.
The timing of her announcement coincides with the ongoing implementation of President Trump's agenda following his return to office. Her potential move highlights the fluid nature of Republican leadership as the party continues consolidating power.
While maintaining her focus on current Senate responsibilities, Blackburn has clearly opened the door to a new political chapter. Tennessee voters and political observers nationwide will be watching closely as she weighs this consequential decision about her political future.
New York City Comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander found himself at the center of a political firestorm Tuesday after being arrested by Department of Homeland Security agents. The dramatic incident occurred during an immigration court proceeding.
According to Fox News, Lander was taken into custody after allegedly assaulting a federal officer while ICE agents were escorting a defendant out of immigration court at 26 Federal Plaza. He was released hours later with Governor Kathy Hochul at his side.
Video footage of the incident shows Lander clinging to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, repeatedly demanding to see a judicial warrant. "I will let go when you show me the judicial warrant!" Lander can be heard saying in the video. "Where is it?! Where is the warrant?!"
The arrest immediately sparked strong reactions from officials across New York's political spectrum. Several mayoral candidates quickly came to Lander's defense, framing the incident as political intimidation.
Former New York Governor and current mayoral candidate Andrew Cuomo took to social media platform X, characterizing the situation as "extreme thuggery" by "Trump's ICE out of control." Cuomo expressed concern about families confronted by ICE agents, citing "fear of separation, fear of being taken from their schools, fear of being detained without just cause."
Fellow mayoral candidates Scott Stringer and Zohran Kwame Mamdani called for Lander's immediate release, with Mamdani bluntly describing the arrest as "fascism" and urging all New Yorkers to "speak in one voice." Stringer specifically criticized what he called "recent politicization of federal immigration authorities under the Trump administration."
Despite walking free from the courthouse alongside Governor Hochul, who announced that charges against Lander had been dropped, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York indicated the matter isn't closed.
Nick Biase, chief of public affairs for the U.S. Attorney's Office, stated they are "continuing to investigate" Lander's actions. He emphasized that the "safety and security of official proceedings, government officials, law enforcement officers, and all members of the public who participate in them is a core focus of our Office."
A DHS spokesperson defended the actions of ICE agents, noting they face a "413% increase in assaults against them" and condemning politicians who "undermine law enforcement safety to get a viral moment." The spokesperson stated bluntly: "No one is above the law, and if you lay a hand on a law enforcement officer, you will face consequences."
Civil rights advocates quickly rallied behind Lander, framing the arrest as an overreach of federal authority and an attack on democratic principles.
New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman issued a statement calling the arrest an abuse of power and a threat to democracy. She characterized it as "dangerous intimidation" that "shows a wanton disregard for the will of the people of New York."
New York Attorney General Letitia James similarly condemned the arrest, describing Lander's actions as "standing up for immigrants" and calling the arrest "a shocking abuse of power." James further characterized the incident as "a grotesque escalation of tensions" and suggested the administration's "rampant targeting of New Yorkers only makes our communities less safe."
The high-profile arrest of Lander comes amid escalating confrontations between local officials and federal immigration authorities. This incident represents another flashpoint in the ongoing national debate over immigration policy and enforcement.
The arrest occurred just weeks after charges were dropped against Newark, New Jersey, Mayor Ras Baraka for federal trespassing at Delaney Hall, a privately operated ICE facility. These incidents highlight growing tensions between local elected officials and federal immigration enforcement.
Governor Hochul's presence at Lander's release suggests state-level support for the comptroller, though federal authorities maintain they are still investigating the matter. The conflicting messages about whether charges have been dropped or remain under investigation indicate this case may continue to develop.
A Florida family's birthday celebration turned into a nightmare when a 75-year-old woman was violently assaulted with a frying pan while walking to their home. The unprovoked attack in Sunrise, Florida, on June 10 was captured on disturbing surveillance footage.
According to the Daily Mail, the victim, who is the mother of Fiorella Lopez, was simply walking along the sidewalk to attend a family birthday party when she was approached by a shirtless man.
Video shows the attacker grabbing the elderly woman by her dress collar before striking her in the head with a frying pan, causing her to fall to the ground.
Lopez's sister had noticed the suspicious individual behaving strangely moments before the assault occurred. She attempted to warn her mother, who was approaching the residence unaware of any potential danger.
"She's walking alone, and my sister, who's waiting for her at the entrance, notices someone two doors down, behaving strangely, and she begins to signal to my mother, who's innocently walking," Lopez explained to local media. The warning signals, unfortunately, came too late to prevent the attack.
When Lopez's brother arrived at the scene to help their mother, he also became a target of the assailant. "And at that moment, my brother arrived, and he attacked my brother too. He also smashed his head in," Lopez recounted, describing how the violent encounter escalated to include multiple family members.
The 75-year-old woman suffered extensive bruising across her face and leg as a result of the unprovoked attack. Photos released show purple and black bruises covering significant portions of her body following the assault.
Lopez's brother sustained even more serious injuries during his attempt to protect their mother. "My mother has several bruises on her face and leg. My brother's head was split open," Lopez detailed when describing the extent of the injuries inflicted on her family members.
The psychological impact on the family has been just as devastating as the physical injuries. Lopez emphasized the emotional toll, stating, "And what the rest of us are experiencing is psychological damage. Emotional damage. We're all terrified."
Police identified the attacker as 26-year-old Carlos Hurtado Florez, who reportedly had engaged in other violent behavior immediately before the incident. According to authorities, Florez had beaten his own brother inside their home and vandalized his car just minutes before attacking the elderly woman.
Florez now faces multiple serious charges, including aggravated battery on a person 65 years of age or older, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, false imprisonment, and two additional counts of battery. These charges reflect both the severity of the unprovoked attack and the vulnerability of the elderly victim.
Lopez expressed deep concern after learning that Florez had a previous criminal record. "We don't know these people. The only thing that because it's public record that he had, he already was involved in a crime last year," she said, adding, "What I saw, he didn't stay more than a month in the jail. So we are scared."
The Lopez family had moved to South Florida from Venezuela seeking safety and a better quality of life, making the random attack particularly distressing for them. Their hopes for peace in their new community were violently disrupted by the incident.
"We came here for peace. We never imagined something like this could happen to our mother," Lopez shared, highlighting the stark contrast between their expectations when immigrating and the frightening reality they now face. The family's sense of security has been profoundly shaken.
The case has alarmed the Sunrise community, where residents now worry about similar random acts of violence. For the Lopez family, what should have been a joyful birthday celebration instead became a traumatic event that has left them questioning their safety in their adopted home.
Democratic socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani has secured a major endorsement that could dramatically shift the landscape of New York City's mayoral race. The 33-year-old state assembly member is positioning himself as the progressive alternative to former Governor Andrew Cuomo in the upcoming Democratic primary.
According to Fox News, Senator Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., announced his support for Mamdani on Tuesday, delivering a significant boost to the candidate who has already earned the endorsement of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. This development marks a strategic consolidation behind Mamdani as progressives attempt to unite their voting bloc against the more moderate Cuomo.
The Sanders endorsement represents a critical milestone for Mamdani, who has been gaining momentum in recent polls. With both Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez now backing his campaign, Mamdani has secured the support of the two most influential figures in the American progressive movement.
Sanders praised Mamdani's campaign in his endorsement statement, highlighting the candidate's grassroots approach and progressive policy platform. The senator specifically mentioned Mamdani's plans to construct 200,000 new affordable housing units, implement a rent freeze, and provide free public transportation.
"We need a new politics and new leadership which is prepared to stand up to powerful corporate interests and fight for the working class," Sanders stated in his endorsement. The senator also took aim at the "corporate Democratic establishment" in what appeared to be a veiled criticism of Cuomo's campaign.
Mamdani expressed deep appreciation for Sanders' support, writing on social media: "As for so many across this country, @BernieSanders has been the single most influential political figure in my life. As mayor, I will strive to live up to his example by fighting for the working class every day and hopefully make Brooklyn's own proud."
The former governor, who resigned from office in 2021 amid sexual harassment allegations, has been leading in the polls as he attempts a political comeback. Cuomo has positioned himself as a moderate alternative who can effectively manage the city's challenges.
Despite his frontrunner status, Cuomo now faces a potentially unified progressive opposition with Mamdani emerging as the clear alternative. Other progressive candidates, including New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams and state Sen. Jessica Ramos, remain in the race, though Ramos has oddly endorsed Cuomo while maintaining her candidacy.
The primary dynamics echo the 2021 mayoral race, when progressive candidates failed to coalesce around a single alternative to Eric Adams. That division ultimately helped Adams, a moderate Democrat, secure the nomination and eventually win the general election.
Mamdani's campaign emphasizes a bold progressive agenda that Sanders highlighted in his endorsement. Beyond housing and transportation initiatives, the candidate is advocating for free childcare, city-owned grocery stores, expanded mental health services, and reduced fees for small businesses.
Sanders specifically noted that Mamdani plans to fund these initiatives by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% of New Yorkers. This approach aligns with the democratic socialist philosophy both Sanders and Mamdani espouse, focusing on redistributive economic policies.
Born in Uganda and having moved to the United States at age 7, Mamdani has been serving in the New York State Assembly. His rising poll numbers indicate that his message is resonating with a significant portion of Democratic primary voters.
Early voting for the Democratic primary began on Saturday, with Election Day scheduled for June 24. The next week will be crucial as candidates make their final appeals to voters in what has become an increasingly competitive race.
Current Mayor Eric Adams announced in April that he would run for re-election as an independent rather than seek the Democratic Party nomination. This unusual move has further complicated the political dynamics of the race.
The Sanders-Mamdani alliance appears designed to avoid repeating the mistakes of the 2021 election, when progressive fragmentation helped elect a moderate mayor. By consolidating support behind Mamdani, Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are attempting to create a viable alternative to Cuomo.
President Donald Trump has indicated he will "probably" extend the looming deadline for ByteDance to sell TikTok's U.S. operations, potentially preventing the popular app from going dark for American users this Thursday. The Chinese-owned social media platform faces its third reprieve as negotiations for its sale continue.
According to a Reuters report, Trump made these remarks Tuesday while speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One. The current June 19 deadline would otherwise force TikTok to shut down its U.S. services for the second time this year.
President Trump expressed optimism that a deal will eventually materialize, saying he believes Chinese President Xi Jinping will ultimately approve the sale. "Probably have to get China approval but I think we'll get it. I think President Xi will ultimately approve it," Trump stated.
TikTok's relationship with the U.S. government has been turbulent since concerns about the app's Chinese ownership emerged. The platform briefly went offline for American users on January 19, just one day before Trump's inauguration for his second term, after ByteDance failed to meet sale requirements under U.S. law.
Upon taking office, Trump granted ByteDance a 75-day extension, setting a new deadline of April 5. When that deadline passed without a sale, the president extended it again until June 19, which is now approaching without a resolution to the situation.
This potential third extension demonstrates the complex nature of forcing the sale of a global technology platform with deep ties to both American users and Chinese ownership. The stakes remain high as TikTok serves approximately 170 million Americans.
U.S. lawmakers continue to express significant concerns about TikTok's Chinese ownership, pointing to ByteDance's legal obligations to the Chinese Communist Party as a primary security issue. These worries have fueled bipartisan support for either selling the app to non-Chinese owners or banning it entirely.
The app's massive user base and influence have complicated efforts to enforce a hard deadline. With 170 million American users, any ban would create significant disruption to both consumers and creators who rely on the platform.
Trump has acknowledged having "a little sweet spot in my heart" for TikTok, crediting the platform with helping him reach younger voters during his successful 2024 presidential campaign. This personal sentiment may be influencing his willingness to grant additional time for negotiations.
The TikTok situation represents a complex intersection of technology, national security, and international relations between the world's two largest economies. President Trump must balance security concerns with the political consequences of shutting down a widely used social platform.
ByteDance faces significant challenges in finalizing any deal, as it needs approval from both U.S. regulators and Chinese authorities. The Chinese government has historically resisted forced technology transfers, viewing them as economic coercion.
Trump's comments suggest he believes the Chinese leadership will eventually relent and approve a sale, though he offered no specific timeline or reasoning for this optimism. "I think President Xi will ultimately approve it," he remarked during Tuesday's conversation with reporters.
The TikTok saga continues to evolve as the deadline approaches with no apparent immediate resolution. The pattern of extensions suggests the complex negotiations require more time than initially anticipated when the original deadline was established.
If President Trump follows through on his indication to extend the deadline, ByteDance will receive unprecedented breathing room in its efforts to satisfy U.S. requirements. This would mark the third such extension since Trump took office in January 2025.
The fate of TikTok remains uncertain as ByteDance navigates competing demands from two global superpowers. For the 170 million American users who regularly engage with the platform, the president's decision could determine whether they retain access to an app that has become deeply integrated into American digital culture.
The U.S. Supreme Court has directed a lower court to reconsider a case challenging New York's abortion coverage mandate, marking a potential victory for religious organizations seeking an exemption from the requirement. This development comes just days after a similar ruling in a Wisconsin case involving religious liberty protections.
According to The Christian Post, the high court on Monday vacated a previous judgment against the Diocese of Albany and other religious organizations that had challenged New York's requirement that employer-sponsored healthcare plans cover abortions.
The justices ordered the New York Court of Appeals to rehear the case in light of their recent unanimous decision in Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission, which established new precedent for religious exemption cases.
The dispute centers on New York's mandate that employers provide healthcare coverage for abortion procedures, which initially included exemptions for organizations with religious objections. However, the state later amended the policy to limit exemptions only to employers with explicitly religious missions.
This restriction effectively excluded religious organizations that serve people of all faiths, placing Catholic and other faith-based groups in the difficult position of choosing between their religious beliefs and compliance with state law.
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, representing the plaintiffs, argued that the state was unfairly targeting religious organizations that serve the broader community rather than just their own members.
This marks the second time the Supreme Court has ordered the New York court to reconsider its ruling against these religious organizations. In 2021, the high court previously remanded the case following its decision in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia.
Despite the Supreme Court's earlier directive, the New York Court of Appeals maintained its position against the religious organizations, prompting the plaintiffs to appeal to the Supreme Court again.
Eric Baxter, Becket's Vice President and Senior Counsel, expressed frustration with New York's approach, stating: "New York wants to browbeat nuns into paying for abortions for the great crime of serving all those in need. For the second time in four years, the Supreme Court has made clear that bully tactics like these have no place in our nation or our law."
The Supreme Court's recent Catholic Charities Bureau decision significantly impacts how states must treat religious organizations seeking exemptions from various mandates and requirements. In that case, Wisconsin had denied Catholic Charities Bureau of the Diocese of Superior an exemption from an unemployment insurance program because state officials determined its work was too secular in nature to qualify as a religious organization.
The justices unanimously rejected Wisconsin's reasoning, establishing that religious organizations cannot be denied exemptions simply because they serve the broader community or engage in work that appears secular to government officials.
Noel Francisco, partner-in-charge at Jones Day's Washington D.C. office, which also represented the plaintiffs, emphasized that "religious groups should not be forced to provide insurance coverage that violates their deeply held religious beliefs."
The Supreme Court's decision has far-reaching implications for religious organizations across the country that face similar mandates from state governments regarding healthcare coverage requirements.
The justices' unanimous ruling in the Catholic Charities case, coupled with their decision to remand the New York case, suggests the Court is establishing clearer guidelines for when and how religious organizations can claim exemptions from government requirements.
Religious organizations see this as an important reinforcement of First Amendment protections, while advocates for reproductive rights express concern about potential gaps in healthcare coverage.
FBI Director Kash Patel has revealed shocking allegations about Chinese efforts to manipulate the 2020 presidential election through fraudulent identification documents.
According to the Daily Mail, newly declassified intelligence reports claim Chinese officials planned to distribute fake driver's licenses to facilitate fraudulent mail-in voting.
The intelligence report, originally from August 2020, details what officials describe as a "vast conspiracy" allegedly designed to benefit then-Democratic candidate Joe Biden. The document was initially distributed to FBI field offices nationwide but was later recalled within weeks, reportedly to re-interview the source.
Patel announced on social media that the FBI had located documents detailing "alarming allegations" related to the 2020 election, specifically involving potential interference by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). These documents were turned over to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley following his request.
The allegations center around a reported Chinese government plan to manufacture counterfeit U.S. driver's licenses and distribute them within the United States. According to officials who reviewed the intelligence, these fake IDs would allow non-citizens to cast fraudulent votes through mail-in ballots.
Officials familiar with the case claim the operation was specifically designed to help Biden defeat Trump in the closely contested election. The 2020 contest was decided by relatively small margins in several key states, with Biden winning Arizona by approximately 10,000 votes, Georgia by 12,000, and Wisconsin by 20,000.
The intelligence report was initially distributed to FBI offices around the country but was later withdrawn. Officials said the recall occurred to conduct additional interviews with the source, though the timing has raised eyebrows among critics.
The document's withdrawal reportedly came around the same time that then-FBI Director Christopher Wray publicly testified that there were no known election interference operations targeting the 2020 election. According to officials, the FBI advised recipients to "destroy all copies of the original report and remove the original report from all computer holdings."
Senator Grassley's office expressed serious concerns about the document recall process. His office is now requesting additional documentation from the FBI, specifically a report from the FBI's Albany field office dated September 2020, to verify the production and investigate why the document was recalled.
Sources told media outlets that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) intercepted nearly 20,000 fake driver's licenses around the time the intelligence report was produced. This physical evidence appears to align with the intelligence report's warnings.
Patel shared his concerns in a statement accompanying the document release, saying, "These include allegations of plans from the CCP to manufacture fake driver's licenses and ship them into the United States for the purpose of facilitating fraudulent mail-in ballots – allegations which, while substantiated, were abruptly recalled and never disclosed to the public."
The allegations suggest a sophisticated operation targeting the U.S. electoral system. According to the intelligence report, the fake identification documents would enable Chinese residents in the United States to fraudulently participate in the election through mail-in voting, which saw expanded use during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Senator Grassley's office described the document as containing "serious national security concerns that need to be fully investigated by the FBI." The chairman has urged the agency to thoroughly investigate why the document was recalled and who authorized its withdrawal.
Patel, who was appointed FBI Director under President Trump, stated he "immediately declassified the material and turned the document over to the Chairman for further review." The declassification allows congressional oversight of the allegations and the FBI's handling of the intelligence.
The revelation comes amid ongoing debates about election integrity and foreign interference in American elections. While the intelligence report raises serious concerns, it represents allegations that are still under investigation rather than fully proven conclusions.
Progressive New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has made an unexpected political move by joining forces with Republican Congressman Thomas Massie to attempt to prevent President Donald Trump from potentially taking military action against Iran without congressional approval.
According to Daily Mail, Ocasio-Cortez responded to Massie's social media post on Monday evening, agreeing to "sign on" to his bipartisan War Powers Resolution aimed at restricting presidential military authority.
The unlikely alliance comes amid escalating tensions between Israel and Iran, with Trump unexpectedly leaving the G7 summit in Canada for an "early" meeting in the White House Situation Room. This development has raised concerns about potential U.S. military involvement as Israel continues airstrikes against Iranian targets.
The lawmakers' resolution invokes a Vietnam-era law requiring presidents to withdraw troops 60 days after deployment if military operations lack congressional authorization.
"This is not our war," Massie stated on social media platform X. "But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution." His resolution aims to force a congressional vote on whether the U.S. should engage militarily with Iran.
The Constitution explicitly limits presidential war powers, requiring congressional approval for formal declarations of war - a provision both lawmakers cite as justification for their bipartisan effort to potentially restrain Trump's military options.
Israeli officials have reportedly asked Trump to assist with a "bunker buster" bombing campaign against Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities, particularly the Fordow site.
According to military analysts, Israel claims that only U.S.-made 30,000-pound bombs delivered by American aircraft can effectively destroy Iran's mountainous nuclear facilities. This specific request puts Trump in a difficult position regarding direct military involvement.
The timing coincides with Trump's urgent warning to Tehran residents to "evacuate" amid intensifying Israeli military actions. Israeli forces have reportedly killed Iranian negotiators, military leaders, and nuclear scientists in recent strikes, significantly escalating regional tensions.
Several prominent Democratic senators have also voiced opposition to potential military action, creating a multi-front challenge to presidential war authority.
Senators Bernie Sanders and Tim Kaine have made public statements against U.S. involvement. Kaine stated, "It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict."
Sanders went further, claiming Israel deliberately timed its attacks to derail ongoing U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations. This accusation adds another layer of complexity to the already tense diplomatic situation.
The brewing conflict between Congress and the White House highlights longstanding tensions over war powers that have surfaced during previous administrations.
Legal precedent suggests Trump might still find ways to conduct limited military operations despite congressional opposition. During the Obama administration, U.S. operations in Libya continued despite similar war powers concerns, with officials arguing that "sustained hostilities" hadn't occurred - therefore avoiding the 60-day withdrawal requirement.
Congressional action to limit Trump's commander-in-chief powers would likely face significant legal challenges, regardless of bipartisan support. The House of Representatives is currently in recess, while the Senate is focused on Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Act, further complicating the timing of any formal resistance.