rush

Consultants : A Political Gold Rush to California

They are the warrior class of politics. The consultants, the Bob Shrums and Paul Maslins and Roger Stones and Roger Aileses and Ray Strothers and the others–Washington masters in the dark arts of campaigns, mercenaries holding sway over our dreams and our dreads. Only a few outsiders recognize them by name. Mostly they are known, in the romanticized jargon of their trade, as simply the hired guns of democracy–gloried, feared and hated.

And they are on their way to do battle in California.

For better or worse.

Drawn by tales of incredible riches to be made, of trendy and prolific initiative campaigns, and also drawn by the looming possibility that California will become the presidential “Super Tuesday” of 1992, a gold rush of political consulting is under way. It is a westward-ho migration of professional campaign talent without precedent.

Looking to Expand

Some of the biggest names in the business have moved their homes here from Washington. Others are opening Western offices or looking to expand. Still others are scouting for opportunity. Some are willing to work on the cheap just to get a toehold.

And with this new wave of national consultants comes renewed debate and alarm over familiar concerns.

Are consultants growing too numerous and expensive? Do they swallow up so much of the campaign budget that they weaken the candidate or the cause that they were hired to promote? Is there enough work in the elections of 1990 and 1992 in California, or will consultants have to bird-dog more candidates and ballot initiatives to pay the bills? And the most stubborn riddle of all: To what extent are consultants at the root of the negative, cynical, blow-with-the-wind, overly technological campaign politics of today?

Low Voter Turnout

More than just questions, these are expressions of simmering frustration. Around the world democracy is grabbing big, inky headlines–in China, in Russia, in Poland. But domestically, the news is of record-low voter turnouts and declining voter registration. And anyone close to the process is a target for blame. Consultants, because of their win-at-any-cost bravado, are easy to locate in the cross-hairs.

“Don’t come!” snaps Pat Caddell by way of advice to his former colleagues in the consulting business. “Stay home!”

In the course of a career as pollster and strategist in five Democratic presidential campaigns, Caddell has been everything from the creative boy genius of politics to its temperamental Darth Vader. As much as anyone, he is responsible for the flamboyant gunslinger mystique of the celebrity consultant: the man and woman who can mix polling and advertising and sheer cunning into electoral victory, never mind the attributes of the candidate.

Now living in Los Angeles, Caddell has angrily turned his back on the business, forswearing politics-for-profit. He is now one of the most colorful and energetic critics of Washington political consultants.

“These people are not coming out here for the good of California,” Caddell growls.

“Sometimes politics is a clash of ideology and ideas. But that’s not what this is about. This is about coming out here and making money. And if the consulting corps does for California what it’s done to the nation’s politics, it will be an unmitigated disaster. . . .

“What voters here are going to get is going to horrify them. Campaigns in California aren’t particularly edifying anyway. And they’re going to get worse–the kind of smear, mud and sleaze that we’ve already seen is nothing compared to what’s coming.”

Caddell represents the most astringent view, to be sure.

But most everyone in the political community has something to say, or fret about, as he beholds the invasion of the consultants:

* Bob Shrum (speech writer for Edward M. Kennedy, and media consultant for Richard Gephardt for President, Alan Cranston reelection, Leo T. McCarthy for Senate, John K. Van de Kamp for governor) moves from Georgetown, where he is one of the most storied names in the Washington business, to Los Feliz.

* Paul Maslin (baby-boomer pollster for Gary Hart for President, Paul Simon for President, Michael S. Dukakis for President, Cranston, McCarthy, Van de Kamp) likewise moves from Washington to Venice, Calif.

* Roger Stone (George Bush political lieutenant) signs up at a nominal fee to assist GOP state treasurer candidate Angela Bay Buchanan.

* Roger Ailes (Bush national television advertising, George Deukmejian reelection) is courted by GOP Treasurer Thomas W. Hayes. One political pro believes that Ailes, probably the most celebrated Republican consultant in the nation right now, will be asked to handle up to six campaigns in California before 1990 is over.

* Ray Strother (who has moved from a specialist in Southern campaigns to be a national figure in Democratic politics) is opening a Beverly Hills office. Strother is willing to work at “negotiable,” reduced rates as he tries to work his way into the state’s political network. Sergio Bendixen (Bruce Babbitt for President) is spending an increasing share of his time in California and is actively looking for work. John Russonello (Babbitt, Cranston) is anxious for work here.

* A broad assortment of other, perhaps lesser-known consultants are joining in the gold rush. Philadelphia’s Campaign Group, headed by Doc Sweitzer (Al Gore for President), has opened a San Diego office under Bill Wachob. Pollsters Mark Mellman and Ed Lazarus of Washington (Gore and Ohio Sen. Howard M. Metzenbaum and former California gubernatorial contender state Sen. John Garamendi) are actively shopping for work here. Pollster Alex Evans (former Caddell associate) has moved from Washington to San Francisco. Celinda Lake of Greenberg-Lake pollsters in Washington (Dukakis campaign in California and Texas) is working for state treasurer candidate Kathleen Brown and pushing for a statewide initiative on children’s issues. And so on.

“The only thing that surprises me is that it has taken this long for the migration to take place,” Los Angeles lawyer and political adviser Darry Sragow said.

“And if there is a silver lining, it’s that with all the national talent and attention, California is bound to benefit as an originator of political ideas and trends, much as it is now viewed in the consumer arena as where trends start.”

Two men are most responsible for the migration.

One is a home-grown product, Clinton Reilly of San Francisco.

Prop. 103 Battle

Reilly (now managing Democrat Dianne Feinstein for governor) was the full-service consultant–strategy, polling, advertising, the works–for insurance companies in their $63.8-million California ballot initiative campaign of last year.

Reilly lost. The initiative backed by his insurers was defeated, and the rival Ralph Nader-backed rate-rollback Proposition 103 passed. But as the most expensive single-state campaign in U.S. history, jaws of consultants everywhere went agape.

It is assumed that Reilly set a record for consulting fees. Estimates of his earnings range from $6 million to $9 million, and occasionally higher.

“You put those kind of millions around anything that people vote on and consultants will swarm all over it. They’ll flatten the Rockies to get out there,” said James Carville, a Washington-based strategist who is not working here, at least not yet.

Reilly will not discuss specifics about his earnings. But he calls the estimates inflated, and says it is unfair to publish guesses of fees without considering his full-time staff of 20 to 25 who must be paid in off-years the same as in the heat of battle.

Still, Reilly’s campaign stands as an important milepost in the brief history of professional politics, starting back in those days when campaign work came mostly from the heart. Those were the days when the individual made the choice–if he wanted to make money, he went elsewhere; if he believed in something or someone, he threw himself into politics.

Career Option

Now, consulting is a career option just the same as accounting or law. Wholly self-made, Reilly at age 42 bears the fruits of such labors with ownership of his own three-story office building in downtown San Francisco, a showcase home in tony Sea Cliff, a luxury car, fine suits and a cultivated palate.

“I am rich. I have made money. Sometimes when I look at my assets they surprise me. And other times, like (when being interviewed) now, they embarrass me. But I tell you, my motive has never been just money. I am more interested in the professionalization of this business.

“I wanted people to get a fair fee rather than what I saw. Which was a politician waiting until the last minute, hiring you and asking how little could he pay you. Then, expect you to work crazy hours, seven days a week. And then fire you the day the election is over.”

But Reilly is also among a growing number of consultants with a twinge of doubt about how they have altered American politics.

“All this increasing emphasis on political money seems to have been detrimental to the public interest, where interest groups who have the money to give have created a paralysis in the system,” Reilly says. “It’s a byproduct of this professionalism that I didn’t anticipate.”

Gilded Reputation

The second person who has stimulated the migration of fellow national consultants to California is Bob Shrum.

Former speech writer to Sen. Edward M. (Ted) Kennedy (D-Mass.), Shrum and his partner, strategy guru David Doak, built their gilded reputation on the strength of the campaign they designed for Cranston’s uphill reelection to the Senate from California in 1986.

Since then, they have become one of the dominant forces in California Democratic politics, producing the advertising and strategy for Lt. Gov. McCarthy’s 1988 run for the Senate, Atty. Gen. Van de Kamp’s 1990 gubernatorial campaign, and for Occidental Petroleum’s Los Angeles ballot proposition campaign in 1988 to drill for oil in Pacific Palisades. They also were on retainer for Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley in his easy reelection this year.

As he spent more and more time on business in California, the unexpected happened.

“I fell in love and got married, that’s why I moved here,” he said. His wife is Times society columnist MaryLouise Oates, now on leave writing a book.

Cupid aside, Shrum proved a pathfinder among the national consulting corps. Not only is it possible for a Washington consultant to be successful, and quickly, in California, Shrum showed that a California homestead does not necessarily reduce one’s clout in the Capitol. And he showed that an Easterner can survive here without changing habits. Shrum refuses to learn to drive.

Target of Criticism

Because of his high profile and his strong, lingering connection to the Kennedy wing of the Democratic Party, Shrum gets more than his share of criticism for work on behalf of non-Kennedyesque clients. In particular, he is criticized in some liberal circles for his campaign on behalf of Occidental’s proposal to drill in Pacific Palisades, which was venomously opposed by environmentalists.

In truth, though, political professionals long ago ceased being driven solely by their devotion to a cause. Increasingly like lawyers, they are willing to sell their skills to a greater range of clients even though they remain sensitive to the charge they are selling out.

“There are certain basic guidelines,” explains Shrum about his approach to the business. “No Republican campaigns. No campaigns for someone I disagree with on a fundamental issue. . . . Occidental was not a litmus test.”

In the face of this westward migration of consultants, California’s home-grown corps of political professionals is sounding a game note.

“Bring ‘em on!” says Richie Ross, a combative strategist who earned his stripes in Democratic legislative races and San Francisco municipal elections. He is now state manager of Van de Kamp’s 1990 Democratic gubernatorial effort.

He’s Not Impressed

“They’re the guys who swagger around doing stuff we’ve done 10 years ago. Now we get a chance to beat them. I’ve seen their stuff. They don’t know anything about direct mail or targeting. Their TV (advertising) is pedestrian. And none of their strategic thinking knocks me away,” Ross said.

“The field of national politics is rotating west. Now we get an opportunity for visibility. I want people to say, ‘Hmmm, who is this guy who beat Atwater.’ ” (In this case, Atwater being Republican National Chairman and former Bush campaign manager Lee Atwater.)

Many in the consulting community agree that Californians are ahead of the nation in the sophistication of computerized direct mail. In its simplest form, it is nothing more than identifying a narrow community of interest–say, Greek-American voters. Then, these voters are sent special appeals pointing out that one’s candidate is endorsed by some Greek religious leader or that one’s opponent once cast a vote supporting Turkey, Greece’s adversary.

One reason why California consultants are unruffled by the added competition here is that they are moving direct mail and other technologies eastward just as rapidly and eagerly as Washington consultants are galloping west.

One firm, Winner/Wagner/Mandabach Associates, is a California company that drifted away from direct lobbying and campaign consulting here. But it has become heavily involved in ballot proposition campaigns in other states.

Where It’s At

“The things you learn in California you can take elsewhere. . . . It’s not like California was first with the initiative. But there is no question this is the ground where the technology has been developed,” says the company’s Scott Fitz-Randolph.

Still, for the money and thrills, California’s biannual orgy of ballot initiatives is tops in the consulting world, both for the home-staters and the newcomers. Here is a chance to get rich and do battle over driving issues of the day–insurance, political reform, transportation–all without distraction of a candidate.

So refined have initiatives become, they are promoted in classic congressional “pork barrel” fashion. The cases in point are a 1988 park bond and a proposed 1990 rail bond issue sponsored by the environmentalist Planning and Conservation League. In both instances, sponsors of the huge bond issues solicited campaign funds and political support from those who would benefit from the measures.

GOP consultant Dick Dresner, who has been spreading himself between San Diego and New York for seven years, says some national consultants are in for a surprise.

“You may think this a vast, open place. But you’ll be disappointed. You’ll find that whatever you do, there is somebody just as good already doing it here,” Dresner says.

Instant Credibility

On the other hand, there is an undeniable Washington cachet about these big-name consultants.

Candidates seek them out. Just by hiring one, a candidate can gain credibility with the press. If the press takes one seriously, so do campaign contributors. And, quickly, they are on their way.

“That’s what we’re selling,” says consultant Strother.

Pat Caddell believes the cozy relationship between the political press and consultants has subtly shielded the consulting business from the probing scrutiny given politicians, lawyers and other groups that wield substantial influence in society.

“Nobody questions the money, nobody questions the win-loss records, or what they will do to win. Nobody questions anything,” he grumps.

Aside from money, power is a sure draw on consultants. And there is an emerging view that the West, no longer the South, will be the site of the decisive presidential power play in upcoming elections. The political arithmetic of 1988 seems unchanged for 1992 and beyond: A Democrat will have tremendous trouble reaching the White House without California.

That is in the general election. In the primaries, California political leaders of both parties seem determined to move up the June primary, and some consultants figure an early vote here will become the “Super Tuesday” of 1992.

Taking Inventory

Given that, many consultants are taking inventory of their knowledge and contacts here. And they are worried. Looking back on 1988, there is considerable evidence that national consultants of both parties were weak in their understanding of the state.

Both Republican Bush and Democrat Dukakis often seemed slightly uncertain where to go or what to say. Dukakis finally showed how little his campaign understood the state when he decided to make his famous I-am-a-liberal-and-proud-of-it statement in the San Joaquin Valley, an act of geographic silliness not unlike a candidate going to San Diego and announcing his plan to mothball the Navy.

“National consultants know there is a need to get out here and become familiar with California if they’re really going to be effective,” says Kam Kuwata, a Santa Monica consultant of rising stature.

There is something else drawing consultants out of Washington. Call it the need for fresh perspective.

“I felt that to stay clearheaded, I needed to get out of Washington,” says pollster Maslin. “Money? Sure, that’s a factor. And it’s a growing part of the national dynamic. But I needed a chance to recharge outside of Washington.

“After 11 years in the cockpit of national politics, if you will, I needed to get my feet back on some ground. Even if that ground is the San Andreas Fault.”

Source link

Judge orders pretrial detention for ex-CIA official accused of stashing $40 million in gold bars at home

A former senior CIA official accused of stashing more than $40 million worth of gold bars from the federal government at his Virginia home was ordered to remain jailed until his trial after a hearing Friday where a defense attorney accused prosecutors of smearing the official with “sensational,” irrelevant allegations.

The defendant, David J. Rush, has both the means and motive to flee while the case against him is pending, U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick ruled, citing Rush’s professional experience.

“He’s in a different position than most people to flee and avoid detection by law enforcement,” Fitzpatrick said.

Rush is charged with fraudulently claiming tens of thousands of dollars in compensation for military leave after he was honorably discharged from the U.S. Navy in 2015. He was arrested last month after investigators searched his home and seized more than 300 gold bars, roughly $2 million in U.S. currency and about 35 luxury watches, according to an FBI agent’s affidavit.

Rush’s attorney, Jessica Carmichael, noted that Rush isn’t charged with any crimes related to the discovery of the gold bars, which she referred to as “basically a non-issue” and “nothing more than a sensational tidbit.” She said Rush properly obtained the gold bars and kept them locked in a safe in his basement.

“Mr. Rush never claimed they were his,” she said.

Between last November and March, Rush requested and received a “significant quantity” of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for “work-related expenses,” according to the FBI affidavit. Justice Department prosecutor Gavin Tisdale said Rush wasn’t supposed to have the gold bars at his home.

“That’s the issue — his skirting of rules and regulations,” he said.

Tisdale briefly summarized the case against Rush in open court after a portion of the hearing was sealed from the public. The evidence against Rush “grows stronger by the day,” Tisdale told the magistrate judge.

“Mr. Rush simply cannot be trusted to abide by this court’s conditions,” he said.

Rush enlisted in the Navy in 1997 and was honorably discharged from the U.S. Navy Reserves as a lieutenant in 2015, according to the affidavit.

Authorities claim Rush lied about his education and military background on job applications, falsely claiming to be a former Navy pilot who graduated with a bachelor’s degree from Clemson University in South Carolina and a master’s degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in New York.

Investigators determined that he didn’t serve as a Navy pilot and didn’t attend either school.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

‘Addictive’ crime thriller based on ‘adrenalin rush’ novel confirms start date

This “gripping” missing child thriller is brought to life by Slow Horses and Murders At White House Farm creators.

Crime thriller fans shouldn’t miss out on this “addictive” drama with an all-star cast.

Apple TV has given fans a first-look at its upcoming six-part drama Last Seen, based on Ryan David Jahn’s best-selling 2011 novel The Dispatcher.

The series follows Detective Ian Ridley (played by Patrick Brammall) whose life is turned upside down when his young daughter Maggie disappears.

Fast forward to the present day and Detective Ridley answers a call from a distressed teenage girl and becomes convinced it’s his daughter.

The official synopsis goes on to add that “he will stop at nothing to find her and reunite his broken family, whatever the cost.”

The Last Seen cast will be headed up by Glitch and Devil Wears Prada 2 star Patrick Brammall as Detective Ridley.

He will be joined by Shameless, The Village and Three Girls star Maxine Peake, as well as Dune: Prophecy actor Brendan Cowell, Mickey 17 Daniel Henshall and Mr Inbetween Jessica Wren.

Thankfully, the wait isn’t too long before Last Seen premieres with the six-part series coming out on Wednesday, September 9.

Only the first two episodes are going to be released on this initial release date with the remaining episodes coming out weekly until Wednesday, October 7.

It isn’t just about the cast that fans should be excited about either as Last Seen was written by The Murders at White House Farm creator Kris Mrksa.

He’s also backed by executive producers from Slow Horses and Down Cemetery Road.

Given that Last Seen is based on Jahn’s best-selling book The Dispatcher, the drama already has a fanbase ahead of its release.

Describing the series on Good Reads, someone called the novel an “adrenalin rush” as another shared: “When I sat down to start reading this book which has closer to 400 pages than 300, it was early in the morning and little did I know I would be in the same spot that evening tapping to the final pages of this addictive read.”

Meanwhile, a third commented: “This book is right up my alley- gritty, violent, brutal, psychologically thrilling and fast paced.”

Last Seen premieres on Wednesday, September 9, on Apple TV

Source link

Critical Minerals Rush Risks Creating Global Oversupply, Industry Warns

Western governments are pouring tens of billions of dollars into critical minerals projects as they attempt to reduce dependence on China for materials essential to clean energy, defence technology and advanced manufacturing.

But industry executives, analysts and investors are increasingly warning that poorly coordinated state-backed investment could create severe oversupply problems similar to past commodity booms that ended in market crashes.

The concerns come as countries including the United States, Australia, European Union and Japan accelerate efforts to build strategic reserves and expand production of rare earths and other critical minerals.

Governments Ramp Up Critical Minerals Spending

The United States has committed more than $20 billion toward critical minerals development through multiple financing programmes, including Project Vault, a strategic stockpiling initiative worth around $10 billion.

Australia has also allocated at least A$13 billion to support critical minerals projects and reserves through several government-backed programmes.

These investments are designed to secure supplies of metals used in electric vehicles, semiconductors, renewable energy systems, aerospace equipment and military technologies.

Particular attention has focused on rare earth elements, a group of 17 metals essential for producing powerful magnets used in advanced defence systems and high-tech manufacturing.

Although the global rare earths market was valued at only about $6.4 billion in 2024, combined Western financial commitments to rare earth projects have already exceeded that figure.

Fears Grow Over Potential Oversupply

Mining executives and analysts warn that aggressive subsidies and overlapping national strategies could eventually flood global markets with excess supply.

Brett Beatty of Resource Capital Funds said the biggest danger lies in governments pursuing independent strategies without coordination.

According to Beatty, simultaneous efforts to rapidly increase production could create volumes far beyond global demand, ultimately crushing prices and undermining the very industries governments are trying to build.

Analysts drew comparisons to historical commodity gluts, including Europe’s “butter mountains” of the 1980s, Russian aluminium oversupply and Australia’s wool crisis, where subsidies and state support distorted markets and triggered sharp price collapses.

Rare Earth Market Could Face Surplus Pressures

Consultancy Project Blue warned that several rare earth markets are already on track to move into surplus over the coming years due to expanding state-backed production.

However, analyst David Merriman said governments may still be able to avoid major imbalances if they carefully adjust subsidies, stockpiling programmes and guaranteed purchasing arrangements.

Industry leaders say current stockpiles remain relatively small, limiting immediate risks of market disruption.

Lynas Rare Earths CEO Amanda Lacaze recently said rare earth stockpiles around the world remain modest and are not yet large enough to destabilise markets.

Australian Resources Minister Madeleine King also argued that today’s critical minerals policies differ significantly from past commodity intervention failures because they are more targeted and linked to long-term industrial supply chains.

Global Coordination Emerging Among Western Allies

Concerns about duplication and oversupply are pushing Western governments toward greater policy coordination.

The Group of Seven is reportedly discussing the creation of a permanent secretariat focused on coordinating critical mineral strategies and ensuring continuity between rotating national presidencies.

Industry experts say such coordination could help prevent destructive competition between allied nations while supporting more stable investment planning.

Lessons From Congo and Indonesia

Governments outside the West have already experimented with aggressive intervention in mineral markets.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo boosted cobalt prices by introducing export quotas and stockpiling measures designed to increase mining revenues.

While the policy initially lifted prices, analysts warn prolonged restrictions could encourage manufacturers to seek alternative materials or suppliers.

Similarly, Indonesia dramatically expanded its dominance in nickel production after banning exports of raw nickel ore in 2020 to force domestic processing investment.

Indonesia’s production surged within just a few years, but authorities have since struggled with falling prices and oversupply, forcing Jakarta to tighten mining quotas and centralise export controls.

These examples highlight the difficulty governments face in balancing national industrial ambitions with long-term market stability.

Analysis

The global race for critical minerals is increasingly becoming a strategic contest shaped as much by geopolitics as by economics.

Western governments view supply chain independence as essential after years of relying heavily on China for processing capacity and rare earth production. The push is not simply about commercial competition — it is tied directly to national security, technological leadership and energy transition goals.

However, the very scale of state intervention now unfolding raises the risk of creating distorted markets. If multiple governments simultaneously subsidise production, guarantee prices and build stockpiles without coordination, supply could rapidly outpace actual industrial demand.

That scenario would likely trigger sharp price declines, weaken private investment and potentially create another boom-and-bust cycle in the mining sector.

At the same time, the market dynamics of critical minerals differ from traditional commodities. Many of these materials are essential for emerging technologies, and demand is expected to rise significantly over the next two decades as countries expand renewable energy infrastructure, battery production and semiconductor manufacturing.

This means governments are not only competing to secure supply today but also positioning themselves for future industrial dominance.

Another key challenge is that refining and processing capabilities remain heavily concentrated in China. Even if Western countries succeed in expanding mining output, they may still depend on Chinese infrastructure unless domestic processing networks are developed alongside extraction projects.

The growing emphasis on “friend-shoring” and allied supply chains reflects an attempt to address this vulnerability.

Industry experts also point to a more sustainable model emerging through byproduct extraction. Instead of building entirely new mines based purely on high prices, companies are increasingly looking to recover critical minerals from existing industrial operations, reducing the risk of uncontrolled supply growth.

Projects involving Alcoa, Sojitz and Trafigura illustrate how governments and corporations are experimenting with lower-risk approaches to expanding supply.

Ultimately, the success of Western critical minerals strategies may depend less on how much money governments spend and more on whether they can coordinate policies, manage supply carefully and build integrated processing ecosystems capable of competing with China over the long term.

With information from Reuters.

Source link

Trump warns negotiators ‘not to rush’ on Iran deal

President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Thursday. On Sunday, he urged negotiators on the deal with Iran to take their time and get it right. Photo by Al Drago/UPI | License Photo

May 24 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Sunday urged his negotiators “not to rush into a deal” with Iran because “time is on our side.”

He made the comments in a post on Truth Social that also took aim at the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the so-called Iran nuclear deal created in 2015 and which Trump withdrew from in 2018. In his post, Trump called it “one of the worst deals ever made by our country” and blamed former President Barack Obama and his administration.

“It was a direct path to Iran developing a Nuclear Weapon,” Trump wrote. “Not so with the transaction currently being negotiated with Iran by the Trump Administration – THE EXACT OPPOSITE, in fact!”

Trump said Saturday the deal with Iran had been “largely negotiated” and that final aspects were being worked out. On Sunday, he added that talks were “proceeding in an orderly and constructive manner.

“I have informed by representatives not to rush into a deal in that time is on our side,” he wrote.

“Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio also said Sunday that “significant progress” had been made and hinted that Trump may make an announcement on the issue “a little bit later today,” The New York Times reported.

“Suffice it to say some progress has been made, significant progress, although not final progress,” he said during a news conference in New Delhi.

A missile identified as “Khorramshahr-4” was on display during a public rally in Tehran’s Enghelab Square on April 21, 2026. Photo by Behnam Tofighi/UPI | License Photo

Source link