Connect with us

Politics

Column: Obama’s strong terms curbed Iran. Trump struggles to secure even a weak deal

Published

on

Column: Obama’s strong terms curbed Iran. Trump struggles to secure even a weak deal

President Trump, it’s well known, is into gold. Every day brings new evidence that he’s thoroughly enjoying the “golden age” he pronounced in his inaugural address — as few other Americans are — with stock trades, crypto profiteering and much more, even a new taxpayer-financed slush fund to reward his allies.

As for me, I’ve gone into silver. That is, I constantly look for the silver linings in Trump’s heinous acts.

One silver lining, of course, is his cratering job-approval numbers in the polls, especially among the young and Latino voters who made his reelection possible. But here’s another: By his humiliating failure to bring Iran to heel, nearly three months after starting a war that he said would last weeks at most, Trump has brought new, more positive attention to what he again this week derided as “Barack Hussein Obama’s Iran nuclear deal.” (The emphasis on “Hussein” is Trump’s, always.)

The president, along with his Republican cheerleaders, counts his first-term abrogation of the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as a signature achievement. This week, yet again, he falsely claimed that had he not done so, Iran would have a nuclear weapon. In fact, his action in 2018 taking the United States out of the multinational deal subsequently led to Iran’s rebuilding of its nuclear program, the emboldening of the Iranian hard-liners now in power and the Middle East morass in which the United States is now mired.

That quagmire has left Trump seeming desperate for a deal — almost certainly a worse deal than the one Obama struck. Call it JCPOA Lite.

Advertisement

If he were able to get Iran’s sign-off on the sort of detailed, restrictive agreement that Obama and other world leaders won 11 years ago, he’d be trumpeting himself as the world’s greatest dealmaker. (He does that anyway, but his record proves otherwise.) Instead, by his own failure to date, Trump has invited reconsideration of the very agreement he decried as the “worst deal ever” on his march to election and reelection.

No sooner was the 2015 deal signed than Trump and Republicans succeeded in defining it as a giveaway to Iran that assured, not hindered, its development of a nuclear weapon to threaten Israel and the world. Opponents condemned the agreement for not addressing Iran’s other threats, notably its support for militant proxies throughout the Mideast. Some Democrats, notably Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, were among the foes. Other Democrats, cowed by opposition to the agreement by Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli government and pro-Israel lobbyists, were all but mute in the pact’s defense.

Now some Democrats are belatedly finding their voice (and, post-Gaza, some willingness to defy Israel). Along with nonpartisan experts, those Democrats are drawing comparisons between the 2015 agreement, flawed yet successful, and Trump’s promised yet ever-elusive alternative. What’s ironic for Israel and Netanyahu, still implacably against negotiating with Tehran, is that they could end up, under Trump, with a nuclear deal that gives Iran more leeway than the hated JCPOA did.

As Americans are being reminded, the 2015 deal wasn’t just between Iran and Obama, as Trump has long suggested; other signatories were China, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and the 27-nation European Union. Reconstituting that group would be all but impossible today.

The pact’s 159 highly technical pages and five appendices — a far cry from the short-lived one-pager that Trump officials teased earlier this month — required Iran for 15 years to limit its nuclear program to civilian purposes, forfeit more than 97% of its enriched uranium and submit to intrusive monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure compliance. In return, Iran gradually got relief from some, but not all, international economic sanctions and access to Iranian funds that were frozen after the 1979 Islamic revolution. Presumably, after 15 years, the agreement would have been extended somehow.

Advertisement

By all accounts, including those of Trump’s first-term intelligence and national security officials, Iran was complying when he abandoned the deal. Its “breakout time” for building a nuclear weapon was about a year — time enough for the world to intervene — instead of two to three months. Now, though the president boasts he barred Iran from having that weapon by breaking the Iran nuclear deal, he incessantly tells Americans that he went to war against Iran on Feb. 28 because it was on the brink of a bomb — never mind that he also said he had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program last summer, a program that was in a well-monitored box until he first took office.

If you’re confused, you’re paying attention.

A month ago, Trump posted online that he was close to a deal “FAR BETTER” than the 2015 accord. “I am under no pressure whatsoever, ⁠although, it will all happen, relatively quickly!” To several reporters, he suggested he in fact had a deal and that Iran had agreed both to suspend its nuclear activities and to forfeit all of its enriched, near-weapons-grade uranium.

Preposterous claims, given Iran’s current government, and Tehran promptly denied them. It was a sign of Trump’s squandered credibility that few, if anyone, believed him in the first place. Nor have folks believed his more recent talk of imminent success; oil markets, too, have learned not to trust the president, as prices at the pumps attest.

On Tuesday at the White House, amid a noisy tour of the billion-dollar-ballroom construction site, Trump told reporters he’d been “an hour away” from striking Iran again that very day but Mideast leaders asked for more time for negotiations.

Advertisement

Don’t hold your breath.

But for the tragic consequences, Obama might be enjoying some justifiable schadenfreude about Trump’s travails.

“We pulled it off without firing a missile. We got 97% of the enriched uranium out,” he told Stephen Colbert in an interview last week. Both U.S. and Israeli intelligence agreed that Iran was abiding by the nuclear limits, Obama added, “and we didn’t have to kill a whole bunch of people or shut down the Strait of Hormuz.”

That sure doesn’t sound like the “worst deal ever.” It wasn’t.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

Advertisement

Politics

Closed-door outburst turns into victory for Trump’s Iran negotiations

Published

on

Closed-door outburst turns into victory for Trump’s Iran negotiations

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

An explosive meeting in the Senate turned into a win for President Donald Trump and his administration as key Republicans flipped on another bid to handcuff the administration’s authorities in Iran. 

In its final act before leaving Washington, D.C., for an over two-week break, the Senate rejected Democrats’ attempt to rein in Trump’s war powers in Iran as talks continue between Iran and the U.S. to hammer out a long-term peace deal. 

It was the same war powers resolution from Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., that passed over a month ago and stunned Republicans in the upper chamber.

‘HE NAMED NAMES’: TRUMP’S SENATE MEETING EXPLODES INTO SHOUTING MATCH OVER IRAN

Advertisement

Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Senate GOP leaders are pushing forward with budget reconciliation to fund the final piece of government that had been shut down by Senate Democrats’ opposition to President Donald Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions. (Nathan Posner/Anadolu)

What seemed like a predetermined outcome just hours after Trump and Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., sparred over the Iran war, and the administration’s lack of forthcomingness with lawmakers, during a closed-door meeting to discuss the president’s marquee voter ID and citizenship verification legislation turned into a surprise late night win.

Trump argued to the GOP that the previous war powers resolution, which passed on Tuesday thanks in part to a pair of Republicans being absent, hurt the administration’s negotiating position with the Iranians.

Meetings with key holdouts at the White House helped change the minds of Cassidy and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has routinely voted with Democrats on every war powers resolution brought forward, and provided the administration with a win as they work toward a deal beyond the 60-day memorandum of understanding with Iran.

IRATE REPUBLICANS ACCUSE TRUMP OF HANDING DEMOCRATS A WIN AFTER BLOWING UP HOUSING PACKAGE

Advertisement

“I want to thank Vice President [JD] Vance and Special Envoy [Steve] Witkoff for the thorough briefing this afternoon on Iran,” Cassidy said on X. “I appreciate the quick invitation to the White House to address many of my concerns.” 

And Paul, who voted present, noted that his “opinion on the debate over war and executive power has not changed and I have voted that way several times.” 

“But since hostilities seem to be over and the President asked me to give consideration to his negotiating position, I will do so,” Paul said on X. “My vote of present is a way to give the President more space and leverage to negotiate a lasting peace.”

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who has been at the forefront among Democrats in pushing war powers resolutions in the upper chamber, acknowledged that “this is a different moment,” but cautioned that the ceasefire appeared to be “precarious right now.” 

When asked if he believed Trump’s case to Republicans that the successful war powers vote just a day before was hurting the administration’s leverage, Murphy said, “The Iranians don’t — you know, all they have to do is read a poll and find out that people in this country don’t support the war. They didn’t support the war.”

Advertisement

TRUMP HEADS TO CAPITOL HILL FOR PIVOTAL MEETING AS SENATE GOP DIVISIONS DEEPEN

President Donald Trump boards Air Force One as he departs Reading Regional Airport in Reading, Pa., on Tuesday, June 23, 2026. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)

Still, it marked a key win for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and the Senate GOP’s whip operation, led by Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., to flip the skeptics into backers of the administration’s long game in Iran after several contentious weeks in the Senate spurred by Trump’s last-minute decisions that either derailed or torpedoed several of his key agenda items. 

Thune and Barrasso, accompanied by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, huddled in the GOP leader’s office as the vote wound down late Wednesday to call Trump, and share the news of the vote. 

“Wow! The Senate just changed its vote on Iran from 50-48 against, to 50-47 for,” Trump said on Truth Social. “Rand Paul and Bill Cassidy changed. Thank you to Leader John Thune, Lindsey Graham, Bernie Moreno, and all. This vote puts Iran on notice!”

Advertisement

It also comes at a time when speculation has swirled over the nature of Thune and Trump’s relationship as the president, accompanied by chatter online, have ramped up the pressure to pass the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Moreno made the case that the questions over their relationship, and Thune’s position as leader, was just noise, and that “there’s not a single solitary Senator running for office that says leader Thune should be replaced, not one, even non-incumbents.” 

“What today showed is that President Trump has a kind of relationship with John Thune where he says, ‘Hey, let me talk to the guys,’ understand the situation,” Moreno said. “As much as Cassidy and Trump got into it, it was because they’re both passionate, they’re both smart people.”

“And now, we’ve most importantly sent the Iranians a message that President Trump has the full backing of the Congress, and that was an incredibly important day,” he continued. “That’s a huge victory for us.”

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump refuses to sign landmark housing bill, demanding Congress pass voter ID law

Published

on

Trump refuses to sign landmark housing bill, demanding Congress pass voter ID law

President Trump canceled his planned signing Wednesday of the landmark housing bill Congress passed this week, in a striking decision to jeopardize a rare bipartisan success in order to demand that lawmakers pass voter ID legislation.

The president’s reversal, as a stage and chairs for the signing ceremony were set up in the Capitol and stakeholders were arriving on the Hill, underscored his fixation on asserting some federal control over election processes.

And it displayed a remarkable willingness to threaten a bill that he and his party could have framed as a win on affordability ahead of the midterm elections, as Republicans fight to keep U.S. House control amid economic dissatisfaction among Americans.

Hours before the president torpedoed the bill signing, the White House had said the measure was an example of a “promise kept.”

“Today’s Housing News Conference and Signing is hereby cancelled until such time as we pass the desperately needed SAVE AMERICA ACT, which I consider to be a National Emergency,” Trump wrote Wednesday morning on his social media website.

Advertisement

It opened a new front in ongoing tension between Trump and Senate Republicans, which already had neared a breaking point this week over the proof-of-citizenship bill. Senate leaders have told the president that the bill, dubbed the SAVE America Act, does not have the votes to pass.

And it shocked lawmakers who had been celebrating the bipartisan accomplishment. Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles), who had helped lead negotiations, said Trump was “slapping millions of families in the face” after having supported the bill.

“Trump is making his promise crystal clear: If you’re dealing with high housing costs, you’re on your own,” Waters told reporters at a Democratic news conference Wednesday afternoon.

The housing bill, which passed with overwhelming support in the House on Tuesday evening and the Senate on Monday, aims to boost housing supply. It is the most significant legislation Congress has passed on housing in more than 30 years, and it contains a host of provisions aimed at removing regulatory barriers, improving federal programs and incentivizing new home building.

As president, Trump has 10 days to sign or veto bills after they are presented. If he takes no action and Congress remains in session, a bill becomes law. Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), the House minority whip, said Republican leadership had not yet presented the bill to Trump.

Advertisement

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) indicated to reporters Wednesday that a signing could still be on the table, saying he had spoken to Trump about “delaying” the housing bill before the president announced the cancellation.

“He decided — I didn’t announce it, I wanted him to announce it — but we’re delaying this,” Johnson said. “He has a window of time before he has to sign a bill and he’s going to use a little bit more of that window of time and we’re gonna go through this together.”

Johnson said he had promised an effort to advance the SAVE America Act, saying election integrity “is the top priority.” The speaker accused Democrats of wanting “to allow for cheating and fraud in the elections because it is the only way Marxists can win.”

The White House did not respond when asked whether the president planned to veto the bill or sign it later.

Jim Tobin, president of the National Assn. of Home Builders, which advocated for the bill, said he was on his way to the ceremony, getting ready to walk through Capitol security, when Trump posted.

Advertisement

It was “very disappointing,” Tobin said, citing two years of bipartisan work among industry leaders, lawmakers and the White House, but he said he believed the bill may still ultimately become law.

“People, I believe, want to run — back home — on the affordability issue,” Tobin said. “This would be a great feather in a lot of Congress members’ hats, as well as the president’s, so I’m confident that we’ll get there.”

Last week, the NPR/PBS News/Marist Poll and Fox News poll found record dissatisfaction with the economy among Americans and Trump’s support slipping among key demographics. The president also lashed out about that on his social media website earlier Wednesday, writing without evidence: “MY REAL POLL NUMBERS ARE THE HIGHEST THEY HAVE EVER BEEN. THANK YOU!!!”

Before Trump announced the cancellation, he posted about the legislation, labeling it “the Elizabeth ‘Pocahontas’ Warren centric housing bill,” and railed about the SAVE America Act.

His push for the election overhaul bill could be a test of Senate Republicans’ willingness to counter him.

Advertisement

In recent months, they have revolted against several of his priorities, including security funding for a White House ballroom and a $1.8-billion fund to pay people who claim to have been politically persecuted by the federal government. On Tuesday, four Republican senators joined with Democrats to approve a war powers resolution seeking to block U.S. military action in Iran.

Trump, who for years has tried to sow doubt in American elections, has pressed Republicans to pass the SAVE America Act ahead of the midterm elections. He has said the bill would “guarantee” the midterms for Republicans.

Frustrated that the bill has fallen short of the 60-vote threshold needed to pass the Senate, Trump has repeatedly pressured Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to eliminate the filibuster rule. Thune has refused.

“He is trying to put pressure on the Senate and on his own caucus to pass an unpopular bill as part of his effort to interfere in the elections,” said Wendy Weiser, democracy program director at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. “We need to take seriously the possibility that he’s really trying to blow up the Senate over this.”

Earlier this year, Trump said he would not sign any other legislation before the election overhaul measure was passed, arguing that it “supersedes everything else.” He has threatened to not renew a key U.S. surveillance law if it does not include the voting law. And at a rally in Pennsylvania on Tuesday, the president said the election bill was needed because states such as California were trying to rig the election.

Advertisement

“California is totally rigged. All mail-in ballots, it’s a disgrace,” the president told the crowd.

In Washington, the voting law has already passed the House three times. But it has stalled in the Senate. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) told reporters Wednesday that it was an “unachievable goal” to try to get the bill passed.

The legislation would require voters to provide proof of citizenship when they register, require Americans show identification when casting a ballot and require states to send voter data to the Department of Homeland Security.

Voting rights advocates say it would create unnecessary barriers to voting for citizens. There are less disruptive ways to verify a voter’s citizenship status, and the bill would also create administrative challenges for election officials, said Wren Orey, elections project director at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

It serves Trump to continue pushing the bill even without support to pass it, said Eric Kashdan, director of federal advocacy at the Campaign Legal Center; if Republicans suffer losses in the midterms, Trump may use the narrative that elections are vulnerable to fraud.

Advertisement

“If they can say that without the SAVE Act these elections are not secure, that lays the groundwork for the administration to possibly interfere in the elections or just sow doubt,” Kashdan said.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks) said Trump was holding the bill hostage in a bid “to control California’s elections.”

“The stage was set both physically and metaphorically for the president to sign a historic housing bill for the American people,” said Sherman, who contributed a provision to the housing bill that would help disabled veterans get rental assistance. “Trump must put his ego aside and put the American people first and sign this bill into law.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Comer probes alleged Biden collusion with gun control activists in Glock lawsuit

Published

on

Comer probes alleged Biden collusion with gun control activists in Glock lawsuit

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

FIRST ON FOX: A powerful House committee is escalating its probe into the Biden administration for alleged collusion with gun control activists.

Advertisement

House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is demanding that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the federal agency responsible for enforcing gun laws, hand over documents detailing Biden aides’ communications with Everytown for Gun Safety, an influential gun control group founded by billionaire Michael Bloomberg.

Comer’s panel has argued that a now-defunct Biden office may have collaborated with Everytown to help facilitate its lawsuit with the city of Chicago against the gunmaker Glock Inc. 

“These records will inform the Committee as to whether the Biden Administration and Everytown colluded to attack private gun manufacturing companies through lawfare to circumvent Second Amendment rights,” Comer wrote in a letter Wednesday to the ATF that was reviewed by Fox News Digital.

Rep. James Comer arrives at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on June 10, 2026. (Tom Brenner/Getty Images)

CITY OF CHICAGO SUES GLOCK INC. OVER ‘FACILITATING’ ILLEGAL GUN CONVERSIONS

Advertisement

Chicago’s lawsuit, listing Everytown’s legal arm as the plaintiff’s counsel, was filed in March 2024 and alleges Glock sold pistols that the firearms manufacturer knew could be easily modified to fire like machine guns. 

“Glock knows that it takes little effort to convert its pistols into illegal machine guns and that criminals frequently do so,” the lawsuit alleged. “Glock also knows it could fix the problem, but has chosen not to, putting profits over public safety and violating the law.”

In the letter, Comer cited a 2023 meeting between the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention (WHOGVP) and representatives from Glock, during which Biden officials pressed the gun manufacturer to modify its pistol designs. 

When Chicago sued Glock three months later, John Feinblatt, president of Everytown, wrote on X, “Federal officials recently contacted Glock to discuss implementing new ways to modify Glock pistols to make it harder for Glock switches to be installed. Rather than help, Glock has falsely insisted there is nothing they can do.” 

Comer argues Feinblatt “appears to have had insider information regarding the WHOGVP’s private meeting with Glock, which raises questions about whether the Biden Administration colluded with Everytown to initiate their lawsuit against Glock,” according to the letter.

Advertisement

The lawsuit is still moving through the court system, with a Cook County judge denying Glock’s motion to dismiss the case in September 2025.

Members of Everytown for Gun Safety rally outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on May 26, 2022. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

STATES’ TOP COPS GANG UP ON LETITIA JAMES IN CRUSADE WITH POTENTIAL NATIONWIDE CONSEQUENCES

The Kentucky lawmaker has also highlighted close ties between the Biden White House and Everytown. The letter notes that Biden aide Rob Wilcox worked at Everytown for eight years prior to his employment with the WHOGVP. 

Biden also headlined Everytown action fund’s annual training conference, known as Gun Sense University, in June 2024, during which he reiterated his support for a nationwide ban on so-called assault weapons.

Advertisement

Wednesday’s letter comes after the GOP-led panel asked the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in April for communications between the Biden White House and Everytown. 

House Oversight Republicans previously subpoenaed the Biden ATF and Everytown for all communications related to their “potential collaboration efforts,” but neither party complied with the request.

President Joe Biden speaks about gun safety at Everytown’s Gun Sense University at the Washington Hilton in Washington, D.C., on June 11, 2024. (Saul Loeb/AFP)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Comer has also argued that the committee’s probe will help lawmakers evaluate whether new legislation is needed to combat officials violating recordkeeping requirements or using their roles to leak private information to politically aligned third parties.

Advertisement

A spokesperson for the ATF did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending