Donald Trump

Aug. 6 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump is again aiming to limit birthright citizenship, just over a month after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutional right.

Trump on Thursday signed two executive orders, with one expanding who would not be guaranteed citizenship automatically, including “alien enemies of the United States, members of foreign terrorist organizations and large categories of people who lobby and act on behalf of foreign governments,” The Hill quoted officials as saying.

The second order would ban “birth tourism,” which occurs when a traveler enters another country to give birth there to ensure automatic citizenship. The practice is already illegal since it involves fraudulently obtaining a visa.

Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, which was adopted following the Civil War. With limited exceptions, it makes anyone born on U.S. soil a citizen.

Four exceptions to the 14th Amendment have been recognized by courts over the years, including children born in the U.S. to foreign sovereigns and diplomats, those born on foreign ships, and children of Native American tribes. However, Native Americans have been guaranteed citizenship since 1924.

Trump, on his first day in office of this second term, signed an executive order to end birthright citizenship, but it never took effect after several lower courts blocked it. The Supreme Court on June 30 ruled 6-3 against the order.

Trump told reporters Thursday that birthright citizenship was intended for “the babies of slaves.”

“What’s happening now are people are building businesses around it; wealthy people are building businesses around birthright citizenship,” he continued. “That’s not the way it’s supposed to work. It’s a disgrace. They’re buying their way in, and we’re not going to let that happen.”

Trump’s latest effort to limit birthright citizenship comes after Supreme Court ruled against his initial push to reinterpret the constitutional right.

United States President Donald Trump has signed two executive orders seeking to limit birthright citizenship, weeks after the Supreme Court upheld the practice as protected under the Constitution.

The orders signed on Thursday were far more narrow than Trump’s previous attempt to restrict the practice, which confers citizenship to nearly all children born on US soil.

One of the orders seeks to expand a narrow exception to birthright citizenship, which bars US citizenship from being conferred to the babies of foreign diplomats or invading forces.

The second order calls on the secretary of state and the secretary of homeland security to halt so-called “birth tourism”, the practice of mothers travelling to the US for the sole purpose of giving birth.

Like Trump’s earlier attempt, the new executive orders are expected to face legal challenges.

Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump denounced the Supreme Court for making a “very unfortunate decision” in striking down his initial effort to limit birthright citizenship.

“They’ve taken birthright citizenship and they’ve made a joke out of it,” said Trump, adding that his administration is “making adjustments” to its approach.

On January 20, 2025 — the first day of his second term — Trump had signed an executive order seeking to reinterpret the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, to tighten the category of people who qualified for birthright citizenship.

That order argued that the children born to immigrants on temporary visas or without documentation were not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US — and therefore could not  be automatically granted citizenship.

But in June, the US Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s “attempts to narrow” birthright citizenship were unlawful, citing the Constitution’s Citizenship Clause.

“If Congress intended to limit American citizenship to the children of those domiciled in the United States, nothing in the succinct language of the Citizenship Clause conveyed that design,” the majority opinion said.

Trump has made a hardline approach to immigration a centre-piece of his political career. However, the Supreme Court ruling represented one of the largest legal setbacks of his second term.

Despite a conservative supermajority on the nine-judge panel, six justices voted against Trump’s effort to transform who is eligible for birthright citizenship.

The crux of the administration’s argument was that the 14th Amendment was meant to apply only to the children born to newly freed slaves and had been misinterpreted since its ratification in 1868.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, wrote that there was “scant evidence for this dramatically revisionist view”.

“The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land,” he wrote. “We keep that promise today.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – facing a crucial election later this year – has hinted that he may be considering taking unilateral action to prolong a costly war with Iran, even as Washington and Tehran appear to be close to an interim deal to open the Strait of Hormuz.

“We heard today the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Ahmad Vahidi, declare that Iran intends to continue developing a nuclear weapon,” Netanyahu claimed in an assertion, even though no official statement from Vahidi on the matter has been released by the Iranian government or official media.

Still, Netanyahu saw the opportunity to once again frame Iran’s nuclear threat as existential.

“As Israel’s prime minister, I am determined to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” Netanyahu told attendees at a state ceremony in West Jerusalem.

Describing the United States as “Israel’s greatest ally”, Netanyahu nevertheless added that he was prepared to do “whatever is necessary” to guarantee Israel’s security.

Israel has officially struck Iran only once since April’s initial ceasefire between the US and Iran took effect, even after it later broke down and the two sides resumed hostilities in the US-Israel war on Iran.

But observers – including US President Donald Trump – believe that Netanyahu wants to keep the US engaged in the fight against Iran, which began in late February with a joint US-Israeli attack that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Addressing reports that Netanyahu planned to bring fresh intelligence to Washington alleging that Iran was stockpiling uranium at its Pickaxe Mountain facility near Natanz in central Iran, Trump told reporters: “I don’t need Bibi to tell me that. Bibi is telling me that because he wants me to stay involved.”

He then sharpened his criticism of the Israeli prime minister, adding: “Why don’t you just tell it to me? Why do you have to announce it to the world?”

Fight alone

With the US and Israel unable so far to topple the Iranian state or force concessions on the Strait of Hormuz, many analysts believe that the war has been unsuccessful.

Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz – formerly a free waterway – has paralysed much of the world’s economy.

Global oil prices have increased, with shortages in the supplies of liquified gas, fertiliser exports, sulphur supplies, and petrochemical feedstocks all threatening to ripple through international supply lines.

“The war against Iran is a strategic catastrophe,” said Ahron Bregman, an Israeli security analyst and senior teaching fellow in the Department for War Studies at King’s College London. “None of the original aims has been achieved… Trump is desperate for an exit. Almost at any price. He only cares about opening the [strait].”

But in Israel, the focus is less on the world’s economy, and more on the perceived danger posed by Iran and its allied groups across the region.

Netanyahu has consistently pursued a hawkish line on Iran, a power he has repeatedly claimed is on the brink of crossing the threshold to nuclear weapons capability.

He is also thought to have been among the loudest voices that pushed for Trump to withdraw in 2018 from a nuclear deal agreed to by previous US President Barack Obama.

“Israel’s strategy is clear,” said Kobi Michael, a senior researcher at Israel’s Misgav Institute for National Security. “Iran remains close to achieving nuclear capacity and has shown it’s able to continue producing ballistic missiles and supplying its proxy forces in the region.”

The war on Iran was currently a fiasco from Israel’s perspective, Michael added, with both the US and Iran insisting that they had won.

Michael, however, framed the current negotiations as “useless”, and unlikely to produce lasting security in the region, reflecting the sentiment in the Israeli security establishment.

Israel, Michael said, was prepared to fight alone if necessary.

“Israel can only have one strategy,” Michael said, “to strike directly at the head of the octopus that threatens global civilisation and to do that alone, if necessary.”

That might inflame tensions with the US, Michael added, concluding, “I can’t see any other option.”

Inconceivable

However, while some in Israel were confident of the country’s ability to strike unilaterally at Iran in defiance of US wishes, others expressed caution, suggesting that Netanyahu’s talk of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon might simply be little more than rhetoric ahead of an election that could conceivably jeopardise both his legacy and, as a result of his long-running corruption trial, his personal freedom.

The US relationship is important to the Israeli electorate, but relations between Netanyahu and Trump appear to be frostier than normal.

Beyond friction over Israel’s reluctance to accept terms apparently imposed on it in Gaza by the Trump-sponsored Board of Peace, there have also been widespread reports of tensions over Israeli strikes in Lebanon that have repeatedly threatened to derail US negotiations with Iran. Those attacks, however, have stopped far short of the unilateral strikes on Iran hinted at by Netanyahu on Wednesday.

“Israel launching unilateral action against Iran is inconceivable,” the US author and former diplomat Aaron David Miller said. “Something like that might be possible if Iran or Hezbollah struck Israel directly, but talk of Israel striking Iran now, when US negotiations are so close to a conclusion, is impossible.”

Relations between the two allies were entering a unique phase, he said. While the US had never cooperated so closely with an ally militarily since its relationship with the United Kingdom during World War II, diplomatic ties had rarely been so fraught.

“Trump’s leaked, expletive-laden criticism of Netanyahu; his direct negotiations with Hamas over Gaza; his lifting of sanctions on Syria despite Israel’s objections; and his negotiations with Iran without Israel’s involvement all point to a changing relationship,” Miller said. “What that might mean for future US military assistance to Israel – including defence cooperation, intelligence sharing, research and development, and diplomatic support in international forums – remains to be seen.”

However, he added: “Let me be clear. Netanyahu had a hell of a role in how this war started. He’s not going to have a role in how it shifts to its next phase.”

The Trump administration has repeatedly pushed back on reports of shortages of both offensive and defensive weapons.

United States President Donald Trump has vowed to hunt down “leakers” after several news reports detailing a dangerous depletion of munitions stockpiles amid the US-Israeli war on Iran.

While several reports had previously documented munitions depletions since the war began on February 28, the latest reports painted a more dire picture.

Reuters news agency and CBS News reported that the military had burned through nearly all of its offensive Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMSs) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSMs), which experts said could require relying on more perilous close-range and aerial attacks in the event of a renewed escalation.

A CNN report showing low levels of Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors has caused greater concern, with experts noting there is no viable short-term alternative to the air defence missiles. Replenishments of pre-war stockpiles are expected to take years.

Still, Trump on Thursday again denied that the US faced any strategic disadvantage when it came to weapons stores after five months of war.

“The US has massive amounts of ‘munitions,’ especially of certain types,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account.

He added that “large amounts are being manufactured and shipped to the U.S. as needed” and that defence contractors are “building the largest number of plants and factories in our country’s history”.

“The ‘leakers’ of these treasonous statements are being hunted down. Long-term jail sentences will be sought!”

The US president did not provide further details on the claims, although experts have warned that even with an influx of funding, it will likely take at least three years to restore Patriot and THAAD interceptors to pre-war levels.

Only Japan and Germany currently have licences to produce Patriot interceptors. No other country produces THAAD interceptors.

CNN’s report, released on Tuesday, said that the US military had depleted 80 percent of the THAAD interceptors it had prior to the war and about half of its Patriot interceptors. Sources described the levels as “dangerously low”.

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth described the information as “not true”.

Separately, the Washington, DC-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) on July 27 calculated that, as of that date, the military had just more than a third of its Patriot interceptors left and about half of its THAAD interceptors.

Speaking to Al Jazeera on Wednesday, one of the authors of that analysis, retired US Marine Corps colonel Mark Cancian, said current levels of interceptors are already hurting US deterrence capabilities against military powers like China.

A shortage of interceptors has also reportedly led to the military taking a more judicious approach to missile interceptions, increasing the likelihood of miscalculations, he noted. The killing of three US soldiers in an Iranian strike on a military base in Jordan on July 17 has further underscored those concerns.

“We don’t have that many left, and there are no good substitutes,” Cancian said of the interceptors. “If we run out of Patriots, then the missiles get through.”

Despite the latest rhetoric, the Washington Post on Thursday reported that Trump confronted Hegseth during a cabinet meeting at Camp David last week, accusing the Pentagon chief of misleading him on munitions shortages.

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt dismissed the report as “100 percent fake news”.

Aug. 6 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Thursday dismissed reports of munitions shortages due to U.S. attacks on Iran, saying those who leaked the information are being “hunted down.”

“The U.S. has massive amounts of ‘munitions,’ especially of certain types,” Trump wrote in a social media post. “Additionally, large amounts are being manufactured and shipped to the U.S. as needed. Defense companies are building the largest number of plants and factories in our country’s history.”

“The ‘leakers’ of these treasonous statements are being hunted down,” he continued. “Long-term jail sentences will be sought!”

Multiple news outlets, including CBS News, reported this week that the United States has used almost all its stockpile of long-range precision missiles in the attacks on Iran. This includes most of its Army Tactical Missile Systems and Precision Strike Missiles.

Officials have also said the most pressing shortage is that of Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense interceptors, which the country has used faster than manufacturers can replace them.

The Pentagon on Monday announced deals with defense contractors Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to escalate production of parts for missile interceptors, The Hill reported.

“America’s military is the most powerful in the world and has everything it needs to execute at the time and place of the president’s choosing,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement to CBS News. “We have executed multiple successful operations across combatant commands while ensuring the U.S. military possesses a deep arsenal of capabilities to protect our people and our interests.”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Wednesday denied a Washington Post report that Trump “demanded answers” on extreme munitions shortages from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last week. Trump reportedly said he’d been misled on the shortages.

Leavitt called the report “a B.S. story” and “FAKE NEWS” and said that it “literally never happened.”

The White House has vowed to find and prosecute those leaking information to the press before. In July, the Trump administration issued subpoenas to New York Times journalists, demanding they testify in front of a federal grand jury “in regard to an alleged violation of federal criminal law.” The Times had reported, using anonymous sources, about security concerns involving President Donald Trump’s new Air Force One, which was donated by Qatar. The probe was later dismissed.

Humanoid robots are no longer a laboratory experiment; they are a growing market. Morgan Stanley estimates it could hit $5 trillion by 2050, with more than a billion humanoids in use worldwide.

However, much of the global robot supply chain runs through China. It produces robot components at a scale and a price its competitors struggle to match.

The United States has banned imports of foreign-made humanoid robots, citing national security. It has also blocked power inverters used in data centres and solar energy systems. The move is seen as part of a broader effort to protect US industry and limit China’s technological rise.

Aug. 6 (UPI) — Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey has signed landmark legislation that provides what she says are the nation’s strongest protections from Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents executing President Donald Trump‘s aggressive immigration crackdown.

At La Colaborativa, a Latina-led nonprofit economic development agency in Chelsea, Mass., Healey signed the PROTECT Act on Wednesday during a press conference while surrounded by immigrants, advocates, members of law enforcement and others.

“This is what makes Massachusetts special: It’s our people. And today, we, the people of Massachusetts, are standing up and fighting back because we know what we need to do,” she said. “We know that what ICE is doing is wrong and it needs to stop.”

The PROTECT Act, which takes immediate effect, is a sweeping bill that limits local cooperation with federal immigration authorities while giving individuals additional legal protections and remedies if detained, deported or victimized by ICE agents.

It specifically prohibits warrantless immigration arrests at sensitive locations, such as courthouses, schools, childcare centers and healthcare facilities, including hospitals; prohibits law enforcement agencies from entering formal partnerships with ICE; and prohibits state and municipal participation in federal immigration enforcement, while preserving state and municipal law enforcement agencies’ authority to investigate and prosecute crimes.

It also permits people to bring claims against government officials for violating constitutional rights and bolsters protections for those held at state or county correctional facilities.

Officials argue that the legislation is necessary to maintain public trust in law enforcement at a time when that trust is being threatened by the aggressive tactics being used by federal immigration enforcement officers.

“Strong public safety requires strong partnerships with the communities we serve,” Public Safety and Security Secretary Gina Kwon said in a statement.

“The Protect Act helps preserve the trust that law enforcement, prosecutors and community organizations rely on to protect victims, investigate crimes and keep neighborhoods safe. When people feel safe, our commonwealth is stronger.”

The PROTECT Act, which originated as as H.5158 and was enacted as H.5620, was introduced Jan. 28, four days after Customs and Border Patrol agents fatally shot Alex Pretti and 21 days after an ICE officer fatally shot Renee Nicole Good, both in Minneapolis, Minn., which was the center of Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Massachusetts House Speaker Ronald Mariano, a Democrat, referenced the killings of Pretti and Good in announcing that the House had passed the legislation in March, saying their deaths, along with the separation of children from their families, were forcing immigrants in Massachusetts to live in fear.

“That’s why this legislation is so important, as it takes steps to ensure that all residents in Massachusetts are treated equally under state law, and to protect our communities through practical, thoughtful measures,” he said in a statement at the time.

Trump and many Republicans have been highly critical of jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities, labeling them “sanctuary jurisdictions.” In April 2025, Trump ordered the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security to publish a list of jurisdictions that the administration said obstruct federal immigration enforcement and to pursue legal remedies and other enforcement measures to bring them into compliance.

DHS, which oversees ICE, said in a statement Wednesday that “sanctuary politicians must stop putting politics above public safety.”

“When politicians bar local law enforcement from working with DHS, our law enforcement officers have to have a more visible presence so that we can find and apprehend the criminals let out of jails and back into communities,” it said in a statement to WJAR.

US President Donald Trump attacked Michigan’s Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, repeatedly calling him a ‘hater of Jews’ and ‘a hater of Israel.’ El-Sayed won the Democratic nomination on Tuesday, overcoming millions in campaign spending from pro-Israel lobbying groups.

Aug. 5 (UPI) — The Justice Department announced Wednesday that Connecticut Children’s Medical Center has agreed to stop offering gender-affirming care to minors amid the Trump administration’s crackdown on treatment supported by every major U.S. medical organization.

The Justice Department has been investigating doctors and clinics providing gender-affirming care to minors nationwide since at least July 2025, when it announced that the department had issued more than 20 subpoenas. The investigation followed a President Donald Trump executive order directing the department to prioritize investigations into alleged fraud, consumer deception and federal drug-law violations involving such care.

The order separately directed federal agencies to take steps to ensure that medical institutions receiving federal research or education grants end such care for people under 19.

The Justice Department did not identify the statutes or specify what federal laws Connecticut Children’s allegedly violated, but said Connecticut Children’s denies claims.

The Justice Department added that there was no determination of liability.

In the agreement announced Wednesday, which resolves the Justice Department’s allegations, Connecticut Children’s also agreed to pay an undisclosed monetary penalty and dedicate an additional $500,000 in medical care for individuals “living with the harmful consequences of ‘gender-affirming care,'” the Justice Department said.

UPI has contacted Connecticut Children’s for comment.

Gender-affirming care, including for minors, is supported by every major medical association in the United States. It includes a range of therapies, including psychological, behavioral and medical interventions, with surgeries for minors being exceedingly rare. According to a 2024 Harvard study, cisgender minors and adults were far more likely to undergo analogous gender-affirming surgeries than their transgender counterparts.

Contrary to medical guidance, Republicans over the past few years have sought to restrict and ban gender-affirming care, while spreading misinformation concerning such treatment.

Upon returning to the White House, Trump implemented a series of policies targeting transgender Americans, including issuing an executive order on his first day in office directing government policy to recognize only male and female as sexes and stating that they are “not changeable.”

Eight days later, he signed a second executive order, “Protecting Children From Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” directing federal agencies to withhold funds from medical providers that offer gender-affirming medical care, such as puberty suppressants and hormones, to anyone under the age of 19.

In December, the Department of Health and Human Services announced proposed rules that would ban hospitals from performing gender-affirming care on minors as a condition of participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs.

The Connecticut Children’s agreement follows similar agreements reached by Texas Children’s and Cleveland Clinic with the Justice Department to stop providing gender-affirming care to minors.

Aug. 5 (UPI) — Iran and Oman are in the final stages of a joint agreement to manage commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, agreeing on a route for ships Wednesday, the Iranian foreign ministry said.

However, Iran will not open the strait to traffic until the United States ends its blockade, the ministry said, CBS reported.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi told state-run media that there is agreement between Iran and Oman on proposed inbound and outbound shipping routes in the strait, CNN reported.

Iran and Oman are on opposite sides of the strait, a major commercial waterway used for much of the world’s oil and gas supplies. They’ve been in negotiations over it for about three weeks. Before the United States and Israel attacked Iran in February, the strait was an open international waterway, but Iran closed it in response to the attacks.

“The geographic coordinates of the route envisioned by both sides have been agreed upon,” said Esmail Baghaei, spokesman for the Iran Foreign Ministry, told the country’s state news agency, as reported by The New York Times. “If certain third parties do not obstruct the process, a joint statement by the two countries,containing the principal considerations and points of agreement, is currently in the final stages of review and drafting.”

U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters there has been a lot of progress on reopening the strait and that it will reopen “soon,” perhaps even as soon as Wednesday or Thursday. However, Gharibabadi denied again that Iran is negotiating in any way over the waterway with the United States, CNN said.

Aug. 5 (UPI) — The U.S. Senate voted Wednesday to confirm Dr. Erica Schwartz as the leader of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, finally installing a new director for the agency after nearly a year.

Schwartz was deputy surgeon general during President Donald Trump‘s first term. She is a retired U.S. Coast Guard officer and Navy physician.

The vote Wednesday was 51-44, mostly along party lines, NBC News reported. Sen.Tim Kaine, D-Va., voted with Republicans to approve Schwartz.

Schwartz succeeds Dr. Susan Monarez, who was fired by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in August after less than a month in the job, allegedly because she disagreed with Kennedy about vaccines.

Monarez was followed by several acting directors — first Jim O’Neill, Kennedy’s deputy secretary, and then Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the director of the National Institutes of Health.

The White House nominated Schwartz to fill the role in April. Kennedy said that he hadn’t spoken to Trump about nominating her.

Schwartz has a background of supporting and guiding vaccination programs for the government. She said at a Senate hearing in July that vaccines are safe and effective, although some health experts said she didn’t do enough to distance herself from some of Kennedy’s views, NBC News reported.

“As CDC director, my sacred responsibility is to provide the American people with public health guidance that is clear, honest and evidence based,” Schwartz said. “I will never betray the science.”

Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., chairman of the Health, Education,Labor and Pensions Committee and a medical doctor, criticized Schwartz during the hearing for allegedly dodging his questions.

However, he said he chose to vote for Schwartz on Wednesday after they were able to talk again.

“I am confident that she knows what she is doing and will stand against those who do not,” he said during a committee meeting in July. “If confirmed, I look forward to working with Dr. Schwartz to protect children’s health and regain trust in the CDC. There’s more to do to repair the damage that has been done to the U.S. public health response, but this is a start.”

The National Public Health Coalition, an advocacy group containing many former CDC employees, said last month that it would not support Schwartz’s nomination based on the July hearing.

“The public needed to hear clear commitments about how she would protect CDC guidance from political pressure,” it said in a statement. “Too often, her stated commitments were incomplete, vague or missing.”

The announcement comes as Lula warns of foreign interference and polls show a tightening presidential race.

Brazilian Senator Flavio Bolsonaro has named conservative Congressman Alfredo Gaspar as his running mate, ending weeks of speculation over who would join his presidential ticket in October’s election against incumbent President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

The announcement on Wednesday also highlighted the challenges facing Bolsonaro’s campaign, which has struggled to build alliances beyond his own Liberal Party and failed in an effort to recruit a woman to the ticket in hopes of broadening its appeal.

Gaspar, 55, has represented the northeastern state of Alagoas in Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies since 2023 and served as its public security secretary.

Accepting the nomination, he described himself as “a simple person from the northeast” whose life had been defined by “hard work and honour”, saying he would work alongside Bolsonaro “to transform Brazil into a fair and decent place”.

Gaspar led a congressional investigation into Brazil’s National Social Security Institute (INSS), the agency that oversees the country’s public pension and social security system. Fabio Luis Lula da Silva, the president’s son, is under investigation over allegations that he received improper payments linked to an alleged pension fraud scheme involving that agency.

Political analyst Lucas de Aragao, a partner at consultancy Arko Advice, said the choice was surprising but gave Bolsonaro someone well-placed to attack Lula on an issue that has become politically sensitive.

“He has the authority to deal with an issue that is uncomfortable for Lula. He also speaks extensively about public security,” Aragao said.

Gaspar emerged as the Liberal Party’s preferred choice after several higher-profile figures courted by Bolsonaro, including Senator Tereza Cristina of the Progressive Party and former Caixa Economica Federal chief Daniella Marques of the Republicanos, failed to get their own parties to support them in joining the ticket.

Bolsonaro, the son of former far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, has struggled to expand his coalition, with several centre-right parties choosing to either back Lula’s broader coalition or remain neutral in the election in hopes of maximising their representation in Congress and appealing to anti-Bolsonaro voters in the country’s northeast.

A Quaest survey published on Wednesday found Lula leading Bolsonaro 44 percent to 39 percent in a simulated run-off, down from an eight-point lead in mid-July. In a first-round scenario, Lula was on 39 percent support to Bolsonaro’s 30 percent. If no candidate wins more than half the valid votes in the first round, the top two candidates advance to a run-off.

Launching his re-election campaign on Sunday, Lula cast the October vote as a battle to defend Brazil’s sovereignty amid growing concerns over foreign influence.

“Too many people are poking their fingers into our business. Too many people are interfering in our land. And that is going to stop,” he told supporters.

In July, Brazil denied visas to two US State Department officials who Lula said were being sent to “meddle” in the elections.

The diplomatic rift deepened on Tuesday, when the Trump administration said it was temporarily revoking the visa of Brazil’s ambassador to Washington in response to Brasilia withholding approval for Trump’s ambassadorial nominee.

Lula has pointed to those tensions, along with Trump’s public support for Flavio Bolsonaro and US tariffs imposed on Brazilian goods, as evidence that Brazil’s sovereignty is under pressure.

“As long as I’m president, no one from outside will interfere in Brazilian elections,” Lula said on Wednesday.

A deal between the US and Iran could be signed within 48 hours, according to US officials. The agreement would reportedly focus on reopening the Strait of Hormuz and could mark a first step towards broader negotiations.

Al Jazeera’s Marah Ryan has the latest.

The administration of President Donald Trump has cancelled the visa for Brazil’s ambassador in the United States, the latest sign of a deepening diplomatic rift between the two countries.

An anonymous US State Department official briefed reporters on Tuesday that Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti’s visa had been temporarily revoked.

But Ribeiro Viotti was not being expelled from the country, the official added.

“The action was that the visa of a senior diplomat here was revoked or cancelled. That is not the same thing as kicking the person out of the country,” the official said.

The decision to revoke the visa was framed as backlash to Brazil’s decision to withhold approval for Trump’s ambassador to the South American country.

Should that approval be granted, the US official explained, Ribeiro Viotti’s visa would be returned. Until then, the official suggested she could remain in the US.

“It means that they are here but without a visa, and would have their visa restored if the balance is restored by giving agreement to our chosen ambassadorial nominee,” the official said.

The move comes after Washington expressed anger over Brazil’s failure to approve Trump’s choice for ambassador to Brazil, Danny Perez.

Perez is a Florida state representative and a Republican ally of Trump’s hawkish Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. He was nominated to the ambassadorship in June, but has yet to be confirmed by the full US Senate.

Media reports indicate that Trump publicly nominated Perez before reaching out to Brazil.

Sources inside the Brazilian government said this was considered a breach of protocol, and they intend to probe Perez’s nomination before issuing formal approval.

Without such approval, though, Perez will be unable to take up his post in the capital, Brasilia.

The tit-for-tat over the ambassadors is likely to ratchet up long-simmering tensions between Washington and Brazil, the US’s largest South American trading partner.

Last month, Brazil denied visas to officials from the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, after voicing concerns that the delegation intended to undermine the country’s election system. Brazil is set to elect its president in October.

Trump is considered a close ally of the Bolsonaro family, a powerful political dynasty on Brazil’s far right.

The US president’s first term overlapped with the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro, who was nicknamed the “Trump of the Tropics”.

His son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, is on the ballot this election season.

Both Trump and the elder Bolsonaro have used false claims of election fraud to dispute unfavourable election results.

Trump has also sought to boost the prospects of right-wing candidates across Latin America since the start of his second term, even threatening to withhold US funds depending on election outcomes.

With Latin America experiencing a shift rightwards, Brazil remains the largest country to be governed by a left-wing leader: President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. He has emerged as a vocal critic of Trump’s attempts to increase US influence in Latin America.

Lula defeated the elder Bolsonaro in the 2022 presidential elections, and he is seeking a fourth, non-consecutive term this October. Flavio Bolsonaro is his top rival.

Since being voted out of office, Jair Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years in prison for his role in an alleged plot to overthrow the 2022 election results.

Trump vocally rejected Jair Bolsonaro’s prosecution, which was recommended by Brazil’s Federal Police. Last year, the US president placed steep tariffs on Brazil, demanding that prosecutors end their case.

Though the tariffs were lifted, the US announced in July that it would impose 25 percent tariffs, this time accusing Brazil of unfair trade practices.

Brazilian authorities remain wary that the US might seek to influence the outcome of October’s presidential election in favour of Flavio Bolsonaro.

Lula formally launched his campaign bid on Sunday, framing the race as a question of national sovereignty – and the “future of Latin America”.

Loaded pistol and rifle among items found in suspect’s pocket, car and home following arrest, police say.

A man carrying a loaded handgun and hollow-point ammunition has been arrested at Donald Trump’s Los Angeles-area golf club, days before a scheduled visit by the US president, local authorities said.

The man, arrested on Sunday at the Trump National Golf Club in Rancho Palos Verdes, was identified by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department as 38-year-old Jeanine John Taele. The department said he had been seen photographing and filming the grounds while appearing to monitor security preparations ahead of Trump’s scheduled appearance at a Republican Party fundraising dinner on Tuesday.

Deputies said they found a 16-round magazine loaded with ammunition in his pocket, and later recovered a loaded pistol with a round chambered, along with a second loaded magazine, from his vehicle in the golf course car park.

Officials said Taele had already been under investigation by the El Segundo Police Department over a separate robbery case.

On Monday, detectives working with the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force searched Taele’s Downey home, where they said they recovered an illegally modified rifle, a second pistol, body armour, high-capacity magazines, bulk ammunition and other radio signal devices and notebooks containing what officials described only as “concerning statements”.

The sheriff’s department said it had not identified any credible threat to the public and that Taele is being held without bail while prosecutors weigh charges.

Trump’s visit is part of a broader campaign swing through California and Nevada ahead of the November midterm elections.

A US federal appeals court says EPA likely acted unlawfully in trying to cancel Biden-era clean energy grants.

A United States federal appeals court has ruled that the Trump administration likely broke the law when it tried to cancel a multibillion-dollar clean energy programme, dealing a blow to the president’s broader push to dismantle Biden-era climate policies.

The full US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled on Tuesday that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot freeze roughly $20bn in grants awarded to nonprofit groups for clean energy projects, reversing an earlier decision by the same court.

But the money will not be released immediately. The ruling has been temporarily put on hold to give the EPA time to ask the US Supreme Court to intervene.

At the centre of the dispute is the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a programme created by Congress through former US President Joe Biden’s 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.

The programme, often referred to as a “green bank”, was designed to give federal money to nonprofit organisations that would give out loans and invest in small energy projects, energy-efficient buildings and clean-energy infrastructure.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has been trying to dismantle the programme, saying it doesn’t align with his agency’s priorities and accusing its recipients of fraud, waste and mismanagement.

In a video posted on social media last February, Zeldin described the fund as an example of government waste.

“Shockingly, roughly $20bn of your tax dollars were parked at an outside financial institution by the Biden EPA,” he said. “This pot of $20bn was awarded to just eight entities that were then responsible for doling out your money to NGOs and others at their discretion.”

“The days of irresponsibly shovelling boatloads of cash to far-left activist groups in the name of environmental justice and climate equity are over,” he added.

The following month, the EPA froze billions of dollars that were being held at Citibank to be distributed as grants.

The organisations, which included the Climate United Fund, Coalition for Green Capital and three others, denied any wrongdoing and sued, arguing the administration was illegally withholding money already approved by Congress and attempting to kill the programme because it opposed its climate goals, not because of evidence of fraud.

Tuesday’s decision overturns a ruling by a three-judge panel of the same appeals court last September that sided with the administration. The full appeals court agreed to revisit that decision, a rare move reserved for significant cases.

The majority of judges said the EPA’s attempt to terminate the grants and claw back the money “based solely on a policy disagreement” likely violated the Inflation Reduction Act. It also said the agency hadn’t provided assurance that it would leave the funds untouched if the injunction were lifted.

The ruling restores an order issued last year by US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who found the EPA had failed to justify cancelling the grants and warned the administration was encroaching on Congress’s power to decide how federal money is spent.

The case is one of several legal challenges to US President Donald Trump’s efforts to reverse Biden’s climate agenda. Since returning to office, Trump has rolled back environmental regulations, expanded support for fossil fuel production and sought to unwind clean energy initiatives, arguing they impose unnecessary costs on businesses and consumers.

While FBI poll monitoring is not new, US lawmakers raise alarm amid Trump’s years-long, evidenceless claims of election fraud.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced it has sent federal monitors to polls in four Democratic-leaning cities in Michigan, amid warnings that the administration of United States President Donald Trump could use such monitors for partisan aims.

The DOJ announced the monitors would be present during Michigan’s primary vote on Tuesday as part of an effort to “ensure free and fair elections nationwide”, according to Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon.

“The Department of Justice is devoting extensive resources to ensure uniform and nondiscriminatory monitoring,” it said.

While the department has for decades overseen an election monitoring programme to ensure compliance with federal civil rights laws, lawmakers and advocates have raised concerns over how such a programme could be used under the current administration.

Trump has for years alleged, without evidence, that US elections have been marred by widespread fraud. He has never acknowledged his 2020 loss to US President Joe Biden.

Michigan has played a major role in those claims.

In a primetime speech delivered in mid-July, Trump re-upped a previously concluded probe into alleged voter fraud in the city of Muskegon as he called on the FBI to reinvestigate the case. Local officials had already determined that several voter registration forms had been fraudulently filled out in the city by employees of a consulting firm attempting to falsely reach their quotas.

No fraudulent ballots were cast in connection with the fake voter registration forms. State officials have highlighted the situation as proof of the efficacy of their election security practices.

The announcement on Tuesday came weeks after the Department of Justice said it planned to monitor 15 jurisdictions across six states: Arizona, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire and Virginia. The DOJ has said it will expand the use of monitors leading into November.

The department did not give a reason for why the four Michigan cities –  Detroit, Hamtramck, Lansing, and East Lansing – were selected.

Detroit, Lansing and East Lansing are all heavily Democratic leaning. Hamtramck, considered the first Muslim-majority city in the US, has historically leaned Democratic, but has shifted increasingly Republican in recent years.

Residents of the state on Tuesday were casting ballots to determine party nominees in local, state and US Congressional races for the midterm election in November.

Key races include a fierce Democratic Senate race, with progressive Abdul El-Sayed hoping to defeat US Representative Haley Stevens, widely viewed as a weathervane for the party’s future.

Voters will also decide the candidates for the gubernatorial race, with Trump-backed US Representative John James facing off with former presidential candidate Perry Johnson on the Republican side, as Democrat Jocelyn Benson, the current Michigan state secretary, is expected to sail to victory in her party’s primary.

Democrats ask for assurances

In a letter to the Department of Justice dated Monday, 10 Democratic senators asked for assurances that FBI monitors deployed across the country will not “target jurisdictions in a partisan manner; discourage voter participation or interfere with the voting process; or pressure, harass, or interfere with state and local election officials as they do their jobs”.

They noted the wider context in which the monitors are being deployed, including efforts by the Trump administration to obtain state voter rolls. On Tuesday, a judge ruled the administration could not access Colorado’s voter data, the latest in a string of similar rulings.

Trump has also called for Republicans to “nationalise” elections. Under the US Constitution, state governments administer elections, in a system of decentralisation that advocates have long argued protects against wholesale interference.

The senators said that the DOJ has characterised the monitors as “routine” and “non-partisan”.

“However, it would be remiss not to acknowledge concerns that monitors are being deployed disproportionately to jurisdictions in states governed by Democratic leaders or with Democratic chief election officials,” they wrote.

“Moreover, election monitors are being deployed in the context of President Trump’s ongoing threats to nationalise, militarise, and otherwise interfere with the conduct of free and fair elections.”

US President Donald Trump has threatened to fire US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, after she said the government would not press ahead with criminal charges of vandalism of Washington’s Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool against former Olympic athlete David Hearn.

The reflecting pool project is one of several changes to the landscape of Washington, DC that Trump has pursued during his second term in office.

But following a multimillion-dollar refurbishment ahead of the 250th anniversary of US independence this year, parts of the lining of the pool were seen floating on the surface, and algae turned the water from blue to green, which Trump claimed was caused by vandalism.

Hearn, 67, was among a number of people arrested for suspected criminal damage to the “American flag blue” lining of the pool.

Pirro, however, acknowledged last week that the pool’s peeling sealant appeared to be the result of a “botched installation”, putting her at odds with the US president.

On Monday, Trump sharply criticised Pirro, who he had appointed as attorney for the District of Columbia in May last year, saying she had “choked” under pressure from a judge and “folded like an umbrella”.

Pirro met the president on Monday as he pondered firing her, but sources familiar with the matter told US broadcaster CNN late on Monday that Trump held back from firing his long-term ally.

Who is Pirro, and why has the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool become a flashpoint in her relations with Trump?

Here’s what we know:

Why was Hearn arrested for vandalism?

David Hearn, who said he only visited the reflecting pool to find out what the fuss was about, was among at least seven people arrested or cited over alleged damage to the pool.

He says he had put his hand into the water to examine a piece of lining which had started peeling away on June 19. But he was accused of pulling the lining away, causing more than $1,000 in damage. He was charged with destruction of government property, an offence that carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.

His indictment was announced at a news conference held by Pirro on July 2. The prosecutor accused Hearn, an Olympic canoeist, of “forcefully and violently” ripping the newly installed liner of the reflecting pool, part of a renovation project Trump had championed.

She described his actions as “an affront to the dignity of our shared history” and warned that Hearn could face up to 10 years in prison for the destruction of government property.

Then, this week, the charges were dropped when Pirro announced the damage had most likely been caused by faulty installation of the lining.

The pool has since been drained.

Who is Pirro?

Born to Lebanese-American parents in June 1951 in Elmira, New York, Pirro is currently the US attorney for the District of Columbia. She was hand-picked by Trump in May last year for an interim period, and her position in the Senate was confirmed in August 2025.

According to the US government, Pirro has worked in the legal field for several decades, having started as an assistant district attorney for Westchester County, New York, in 1975 and later working as the first female judge in the Westchester County Court from 1990 to 1993.

She also became the first woman elected to serve as Westchester County district attorney for three consecutive terms from 1994 to 2005 and was the first female president of the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York.

Pirro also played a key role in starting the first domestic violence unit in a prosecutor’s office in the US and has authored eight books.

Besides politics, Pirro has also appeared on television in the US true crime series The Jinx, which aired in 2015, as well as hosting the reality show You the Jury, which aired in 2017.

What has Trump said about Pirro?

When Trump hand-picked Pirro as the attorney for the District of Columbia, he said he was confident she would improve Washington, DC.

“Jeanine Pirro, I have no doubt will be an exceptional US attorney for the District of Columbia, one of the truly most important positions in our country of any position, where she will restore public safety in our nation’s capital, break up vicious street gangs and criminal networks, and ensure equal justice under the law. You’ll see very, very big improvements in the DC area, that I can promise you,” Trump said when he appointed her on May 8, 2025.

Pirro, a Trump ally, vowed to tackle violence in the city and said DC would “again become a shining city on the hill in an America that President Trump has promised to make great again and will make safe again”.

But now, relations with Trump have frayed after Pirro refused to support the US president’s claim that the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool had been vandalised.

In a motion filed on Friday afternoon, Pirro acknowledged that the accusations levelled against Hearn did not appear to be substantiated.

“The damage was the result of a botched installation and not vandalism, as initially represented by [the Department of the Interior],” Pirro wrote.

Pirro emphasised she had not received the “new information” until after the criminal indictment against Hearn had been returned. She blamed, in part, the “barebones police reports” her office had received.

“It was not until after the return of the indictment, that the DOI [US Department of the Interior] provided additional documents to the [US Attorney’s Office for Washington, DC] indicating that damage to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in June 2026 was the result of flawed installation by the contractor,” Pirro wrote.

She added that the pressure to finish the reflecting pool renovation project before the Independence Day holiday – marking the 250th anniversary of the US – contributed to the renovation’s failure. Trump had planned several events for the occasion.

“The rush to complete the project led to hasty and botched work that was not remediated before the project was finished and the fencing removed,” Pirro explained, citing delayed installation work, inclement weather and repeated testing failures.

Why is Trump so angry with Pirro?

Trump has aggressively pushed claims that the algae and tears to the lining in the reflecting pool are the result of vandalism.

“We caught some people vandalising our beautiful reflecting pool,” Trump said at a news conference in June. “They took a cutter, a box cutter, or something very sharp. Can you imagine? Where do these people come up with this? And they threw a little fertiliser in the water.”

Separately, he suggested those responsible should face “years in jail” for their alleged crimes.

After Pirro’s announcement, Trump said she should have continued pursuing the case.

“Pirro made a mistake. It was vandalism,” Trump said, adding he was “really disappointed” in Pirro and that “she folded like an umbrella”.

According to US media reports, he has also considered firing Pirro over the reflecting pool saga.

In a post on his Truth Social Platform on Saturday, Trump said: “I disagree 100% with Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, on the reflecting pool. I don’t know what she was thinking? To me, it was a pure case of VANDALISM.”

Trump and Pirro spoke by phone on Saturday, according to CNN. Sources familiar with the call said their conversation “wasn’t pretty”.

Following an in-person meeting with Pirro on Monday, sources told CNN that Trump had held back from firing her.

Neither the White House nor Pirro’s office has commented.

What happened to the reflecting pool?

The 618-metre (2,028-foot) Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool has served as the backdrop for many iconic moments in US history, including the 1963 March on Washington, when civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech.

It sits between the Washington Monument, a large obelisk, and the Lincoln Memorial, two popular tourist sites mere blocks from the White House. But the pool had long struggled with leaks along its granite edge and concrete bottom.

In April, Trump abruptly announced he would address the problem by relining the reflecting pool with swimming pool coating in the colour of the “American Flag Blue”.

The Trump administration granted a $13.1m contract to Atlantic Industrial Coatings, a company the president claimed to have worked with as a real estate developer, and which is led by one of his donors. The deal was struck without taking competitive bids, as is standard, on the basis that the renovation was necessary immediately.

By early June, Trump had announced the project was complete. But within days, a thick layer of green algae had appeared on the surface of the pool, and the blue coating appeared cracked, with sheets of paint flapping in the water.

On June 11, a National Park Service engineer observed that the reflecting pool’s new lining had begun to peel, Pirro said in her announcement.

Citing the engineer’s report, Pirro wrote that the damage to the pool appeared to have been caused by “over spraying and delamination”.

Aug. 4 (UPI) — The Democratic primary for Michigan’s Senate seat between Abdul El-Sayed and Rep. Haley Stevens is just one of Tuesday’s key races to watch.

Michigan is one of five states holding primaries on Tuesday, along with Virginia, Missouri, Kansas and Washington.

El-Sayed and Stevens are running for the seat left open by retiring Sen. Gary Peters. El-Sayed has received endorsements from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., while Stevens has the endorsement of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Stevens represents a more moderate wing of the Democratic Party while El-Sayed is the more progressive candidate.

Mike Rogers, a former Republican congressman, is running unopposed in the Republican primary. Rogers lost a tight race against Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., in 2024. Rogers is endorsed by President Donald Trump.

Whitmer’s endorsement of Stevens is among the last endorsements she will make as sitting governor. She has reached her term limit, leaving the governor’s seat up for grabs.

For the Democratic Party, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is running against Genesee County Sheriff Chris Swanson. For the Republican Party, Rep. John James is running against businessman Perry Johnson. James is endorsed by Trump.

The Democratic Party is focused on flipping House seats in Virginia after the state’s Supreme Court struck down a congressional redistricting plan pushed by Democrats. The proposed map would have favored Democrats in 10 of 11 congressional districts.

Instead, Democrats are hoping to flip several Republican-held seats, including that of Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Va. Elaine Luria, a former congresswoman, is running to take on Kiggans, who defeated her in 2024. She is one of four Democrats vying for the party’s nomination.

Seven Democrats are running for the opportunity to challenge Republican Rep. Rob Wittmann in the Williamsburg and suburban Richmond district. The Democratic Party has supported prosecutor Shannon Taylor’s primary campaign. Taylor was the first Democrat to be elected Henrico Commonwealth attorney in 40 years.

A Republican-led redistricting in Missouri has altered the makeup of the state’s congressional districts. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., who represents Kansas City, is running unopposed in a district that suddenly is more Republican-leaning than it has been in recent elections. The Republican primary to challenge Cleaver includes six candidates.

Former Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., is seeking a return to Congress after losing her seat to Rep. Wesley Bell, D-Mo. Bush and Bell are running in a firmly Democratic district in St. Louis. The district voted 80% for Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024.

In the state of Washington, nonpartisan primaries will see the top two vote getters on the ballot in November regardless of party. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., is running for re-election against eight candidates in Washington’s District 3.

The Kansas gubernatorial election is an open race with Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly reaching her term limit this year. Three Democrats and seven Republicans are running for her seat in a state that favored Trump by 16 points in 2024.

Aug. 4 (UPI) — British oil giant BP posted second-quarter profit on Tuesday of $5.7 billion, more than double the $2.35 billion it made in the April to June period in 2025, amid sharply higher oil and gas prices caused by the U.S.-Iran conflict.

Profit was $2.5 billion more than what the company made in the first quarter, the first two months of which were before the United States and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, and easily beat the $5 billion expected by analysts.

BP’s results, the latest of the oil giants to report bumper profits in recent days following on from Shell, Exxon Mobil and Chevron, came a day after U.S. President Donald Trump accused energy firms of exploiting the current shortage of supply.

“Based on a shortage, they’re making too much money,” he said Monday after Exxon Mobil and Chevron last week reported a combined $26.5 billion profit for the second quarter.

Trump demanded the companies return some of their windfall to the public by cutting their retail prices, saying profits that had jumped as much as 12-fold were not acceptable and that he was not happy about it.

On Friday, Shell, the other British supermajor, also posted results showing it more than doubled its earnings, reporting a $9.84 billion profit for the April to June period, up from $4.26 billion in the same period last year.

Environmental groups criticized the profit made by BP as unseemly.

“Clearly not everyone is feeling the pain of the energy crisis. While BP banks another round of enormous profits, millions of households are paying the price through sky-high energy bills and a climate crisis accelerating rapidly out of control with increasingly severe heatwaves, wildfires and droughts,” said Friends of the Earth campaigns head Rosie Downes.

BP CEO Meg O’Neill told CNBC on Tuesday that while she understood the pressure ordinary consumers felt when they were confronted by the prices at the pump, the company had little control over the cost.

“The reality is we produce a global commodity and the prices for the product we sell hangs off that global commodity price, said O’Neill, who stressed that the sterling financial results were due to strong performances across all its businesses,” she said.

She added that the company had tweaked the firm’s refining runs to ensure the products consumers needed most at any given point in time were available in sufficient quantities but insisted BP was “there was more to do.”

“We are not making the most of our potential. Our performance over the past few years has not met our own expectations, let alone those of our shareholders. We have not delivered consistently; we have written off too much value; and our costs and liabilities are not resilient enough in a low price environment,” said O’Neill.

BP’s results came four days after it put its North Sea oil business on the market amid uncertainty over whether the British government will forge ahead with phasing out North Sea oil and gas, in line with its Net Zero by 2050 target, or issue some new drilling licences to meet U.K. demand in the interim.

O’Neill said Tuesday that in a conversation with Prime Minister Andy Burnham he had assured her that he would take a “pragmatic” approach to the issue.

“The U.K. is still using a huge amount of oil and natural gas every single day, and we ought to be using our domestic resources first instead of buying those resources from a third party,” O’Neill added.

Analysts estimate BP’s 24 fields, about half of which are still producing, should fetch around $2.6 billion.

There are estimated to be at least 12 billion barrels of oil left under the North Sea, although developed reserves awaiting to be pumped are much lower.

Just over one month into the war on Iran, US President Donald Trump made an apocalyptic threat that raised the alarm in Washington and Middle Eastern capitals alike, attached to a tight deadline.

If Iran didn’t immediately reopen the critical Strait of Hormuz, Trump warned on April 7, “a whole civilisation will die tonight, never to be brought back again”.

Tehran didn’t blink. And with two hours to the deadline, Trump walked back the threat and instead announced a two-week ceasefire, brokered by Islamabad.

Since then, the US president has repeated this pattern multiple times. It goes like this: Trump ups the ante, shaking up the markets, and then dials it back down at the 11th hour, apparently hoping this strategy will influence negotiations.

On Monday, Trump again insisted that negotiations were close to ending the war – and, yet again, gave “duplicitous” Iran “one last chance” to make a deal or suffer catastrophic strikes.

For its part, Tehran denies any ongoing talks with the US, saying it is only talking to Oman about how to manage the Hormuz strait, the closure of which has caused oil prices to soar amid havoc in energy markets around the world.

The war is now in its 23rd week, with no end to hostilities in sight, and both Washington and Tehran are more entangled than before, with additional variables in the conflict that could determine its direction.

So, how many times has Trump given Iran “one last chance” to make a deal or suffer the consequences, before walking his threat back? And how many times have we heard from the US president that a deal is just around the corner?

The times Trump threatened heavy attacks – before backing down

There have been several times since February 28, when the US and Israel launched their first joint attacks on Iran, that Trump has threatened an attack but did not follow through.

March

Less than a month into the war, Trump threatened Tehran over its closure of the Strait of Hormuz, saying the US would strike Iran’s power plants if the critical waterway was not reopened. Two days later, he postponed the strikes for five days, citing “progress” in talks.

As the delayed deadline neared on March 26, Trump delayed the strikes again, this time for 10 days, claiming that Tehran requested it.

April

Then came the April 7 threat that a whole “civilisation will die”, before Trump called off those strikes and announced a two-week ceasefire, to give Iran a chance to reach a peace deal.

No deal emerged. And then, after threatening to strike Iran “harder”, and in the final hours of the ceasefire, on April 21, Trump announced an indefinite ceasefire, saying Pakistani mediators had asked him to do so.

May

With those talks making no progress, Trump returned to his threats to strike Iran on May 17, saying “nothing will be left” of Iran if Tehran did not make a deal with the US.

But the next day, Trump again told reporters that he had decided to “put it off for a little while, hopefully maybe forever, but possibly for a little while, because we’ve had very big discussions with Iran”.

By May 27, US strikes were back on after negotiations faltered, once again.

June

On June 11, after two days of back-and-forth strikes, Trump threatened the US would take “total control” of Iran’s oil and gas industries. But then, a few hours later, he posted on social media, claiming there had been a breakthrough in negotiations and called off the attacks.

On June 17, the US and Iran signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), announcing a ceasefire and a 60-day period to complete negotiations for a lasting peace. Within days, that had fallen apart over the glaring gaps in the two sides’ positions over the contents of the MoU, triggered mainly by who had control of the Strait of Hormuz – and both sides returned to tit-for-tat, widening strikes.

July-August

On July 27, Trump halted the strikes, claiming the “perimeters of a deal” had been agreed to, but noting that Washington “is locked and loaded and ready to go against the Islamic Republic of Iran, at levels of Military Terror, Strength, and Power not seen since World War II”.

On Monday this week, Trump told reporters again that negotiations were close to ending the war and that this was Iran’s “last chance before decapitation”. The US has not followed up on this latest threat yet.

Iran denies it is talking to the US, although it may be holding indirect talks via mediators, analysts say.

The times Trump said Iran peace deal was imminent

Trump has insisted that Iran is “desperate” to cut a deal, or that a deal is imminent, multiple times since the start of the war.

March

Two days after launching the first attacks on Tehran on February 28, which the US initially appeared to believe would be a quick operation, Trump seemingly conceded it might take a bit longer when he said at the White House: “We projected four to five weeks [to end Iran war], but we can go far longer than that.”

The US president changed tack again on March 9, when he told CBS that “the war is very complete, pretty much”, and that the US military operation was “way ahead of schedule”.

Later the same day, he shifted his stance again, saying the war is “both complete and just beginning”. And later that day again, he said: “We’ve already won in many ways, but we haven’t won enough.”

On March 23, Trump told reporters outside Air Force One that “major points of agreement, I would say – almost all points of agreement” had been reached with Iran. Tehran was denying that it was party to negotiations at this point.

Two days after that, Trump repeated that Iran wanted to “make a deal so badly”. The next day, he also told a cabinet meeting that Iran was “begging to make a deal”.

April

On April 7, Trump said, again, that Washington was “very close to a deal” with Iran, before threatening to blow up a “whole civilisation”, but then walked back on that to announce a ceasefire the next day.

Over the following days, throughout April, Trump reiterated that the war was, in fact, pretty much over. But it continued.

Trump repeatedly claimed on separate occasions that Iran had “agreed to everything”, that “I think we will get a deal in the next day or two”, and that “I don’t think there’s too many significant differences” between the US and Iranian positions.

May

On May 23, Trump said the administration was “getting a lot closer” to a deal, which was “largely negotiated, [and] subject to finalisation”.

June

On June 8, Trump called for “total victory” in the next two weeks and claimed Iran was “willing to give us everything”. Still, no peace deal has materialised and the conflict began again in July.

August

On Monday this week, Trump again told reporters that Iran was “desperate” for a deal and warned Tehran it had “one last chance” before “decapitation” to make an agreement. Iran denies it is even holding talks with the US, saying that it is only speaking with Oman about management of the Strait of Hormuz.

Aug. 4 (UPI) — The U.S. military’s strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific may have killed people not involved in drug trafficking, said Sen. Tim Kaine after reviewing classified documents on the operation.

The senior Democratic lawmaker from Virginia and a member of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees sent President Donald Trump a letter Monday urging him to examine whether military leaders exceeded his orders by targeting people the Justice Department did not say could be legally targeted and killed.

“And once you have done so, I urge you to halt this illegal, costly and ineffective operation,” Kaine said.

Since the first strike on Sept. 2, the U.S. Southern Command has killed at least 221 people in 66 publicly acknowledged attacks, according to UPI’s count based on military press releases.

Human rights and legal experts have widely condemned the strikes as illegal extrajudicial killings carried out by the military in what is ostensibly a law enforcement matter. The Trump administration argues that it is in “armed conflict” with the drug cartels.

Little information about the strikes has been made public because much of it is classified. SOUTHCOM has responded to UPI’s requests for information on the planning and execution of these strikes by stating it does not comment on ongoing operations.

In July 2025, Trump authorized the Department of Defense through a still-classified directive to us military force against organizations he selected in a classified target list.

In September, after the strikes began, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion providing legal support for the operation, and stipulating who could be targeted in the attacks. That opinion remains classified, as does an October order from the Pentagon that contains targeting criteria SOUTHCOM is to use in carrying out these strikes.

Kaine said he had reviewed the classified documents, which often include descriptions of the targets and their activities during the kinetic operations. He said the documents make clear “that the United States is engaged in violent and fatal attacks against people far beyond those whom the OLC opinion claimed could be lawfully targeted.”

“In other words, a careful review of the available evidence suggests that the United States has killed individuals who are not involved in narcotrafficking,” he said.

“They are murder victims.”

At least some of those killed in the strikes have been credibly described as fishermen who were not involved in drug trafficking. Colombian President Gustavo Petro has accused Trump of murdering Colombian fisherman Alejandro Carranza in an early September attack. The families of two men killed in October are also suing the Trump administration for damages, saying their loved ones were killed as they were heading home to Trinidad and Tobago after working as fishermen and farmers in nearby Venezuela.

Kaine’s letter follows a report by The Washington Post that found the fatal strikes have failed to curb the amount of cocaine entering the United States.

SOUTHCOM’s Operation Southern Spear, which includes the boat-strike campaign, had incurred $647 million in obligations through March, according to a Pentagon inspector general report.