GOP suit adds to a handful of lawsuits during this Nebraska midterm cycle

By Juan Salinas II-Nebraska Examiner

LINCOLN — The Nebraska Republican Party is suing to keep the America First Party off the November ballot. 

The GOP lawsuit asks Lancaster District Court Judge Darla Ideus to overrule Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen’s decision not to intervene with the party’s creation, declare that the party’s language is meant to confuse voters and therefore breaks state law, and stop the party from being officially recognized. 

The lawsuit argues that Omaha Tribe Attorney General John Cartier, the sponsor for the America First Party, “dressed up” the party with “conservative talking points: cracking down on illegal immigration, defending the Second Amendment, opposing abortion.”

“However, the façade crumbles under the slightest scrutiny. Mr. Cartier is a well-known leftist political operative with deeply held leftist political beliefs. This is not the establishment of a legitimate political party. It is political sabotage — a calculated effort to maliciously confuse voters by hijacking a nationally recognized brand inextricably linked to President Donald J. Trump and the conservative movement he leads,” the lawsuit reads. 

Both Republicans and Democrats have objections to the creation of two new parties in the state. 

State Democratic Party Chair Jane Kleeb accused U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts of being behind the effort to establish the Nebraska Working People Party. She said, “There’s only one reason to launch a new party this late: divide the vote and create chaos. Voters see through spoiler games funded by special interests.”

Republicans objected to efforts to establish the America First Party, pointing to Cartier’s connection to Legal Marijuana Now Senate candidate Mike Marvin. Republicans have accused Marvin of helping nonpartisan candidate Dan Osborn, contending that Marvin would drop out of the race. Marvin says he is staying in the race. The lawsuit also points to Cartier’s receiving $500 from Osborn’s campaign for legal fees in November 2024, according to the Federal Election Commission. 

The Nebraska Secretary of State’s Office announced Friday that the two proposed parties have met the petition signature threshold. If the parties meet the Aug. 27 deadline to submit organization documents, they must name candidates for the Nov. 3 general election by Sept. 1.

The GOP suit adds to a handful of lawsuits during this Nebraska midterm cycle. Another lawsuit seeks to force Nebraska Democrats to find a replacement for their Senate nominee, Cindy Burbank, who dropped out. Burbank had sued to get back on the primary ballot after Evnen removed her for not being a “good faith” candidate.

It’s unclear which races will see candidates from these two new parties, but most of the political drama has centered on the Senate race between Osborn and incumbent Republican Ricketts. 

The Nebraska GOP, through an attorney letter, late last month asked Evnen to object to the creation of the America First Party, contending that it would confuse voters because the name is “a designation widely and nationally understood to represent President Trump’s political movement and conservative policy priorities.” The party cited state law that says the secretary of state can reject a candidate’s filing if the state’s top election official determines that someone is not a “good-faith candidate” or is trying to cause confusion for voters. The law also says objections to party names can be considered. 

Evnen responded to the NEGOP request, writing that he agreed that the party was likely created to cause confusion, but said there is no other Nebraska party that uses the words “America” and “first” in its name.

“In the event that Nebraska courts hold that I have broader authority than I have indicated here … or otherwise, I would disqualify the name ‘America First Party,’” Evnen wrote. “Unless and until a court of competent jurisdiction timely holds otherwise, however, I will not disqualify the use of the name ‘America First Party.’” 

Lancaster County District Judge Matthew Mellor granted an emergency injunction preventing certification of the America First Party until Monday afternoon. A hearing in the case is scheduled for 2 p.m. that day.

That’s why if Hong becomes her party’s nominee, it will be interesting to hear her describe her contempt for the Thanksgiving holiday and why she thinks it should be canceled.

Hong also can explain why, as she has revealed, she’s feels uncomfortable among Whites, the same people whose votes she is seeking.

Will these two candidates be long shots in a general election? One would think so.

But Republicans had best not count their chickens before they’re hatched.

The Democratic socialist promises of

everything for everyone at someone else’s expense appear to be increasingly popular rhetoric among a growing segment of the population. It’s easy to see why, but the world doesn’t work that way.

In other primary election contests in U.S. House districts across the country, Democratic socialists have been knocking off liberal Democratic incumbents. These are solid Democratic districts, so they — think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — will be going to Washington, D.C.

This party’s unsettling transition is setting the stage for big changes in the Democratic Party and, potentially, for the nation, none of them good for either entity.

At the beginning of the year — with President Donald Trump’s approval ratings in steady decline — it was conventional wisdom that Democrats would take control of Congress in November and spend the next two years pursuing, among other things, the president’s impeachment.

Then, with the war in Iran further testing Trump’s support, a Democratic win in November became even more certain.

But dramatic events can change things, and the growing dominance of the Democratic Party by Democratic socialist candidates is a phenomenon that could be a game-changer.

Stated simply, traditional Democrats are having an terrible time maintaining control in the face of an increasingly successful Democratic socialist movement.

The radicalism of which the socialists brag undermines the party’s potential short-term success vis a vis November and poses a long-term threat to party viability.

These are candidates who have said they want to reorganize the three branches of the federal government — legislative, executive and judicial — eliminate borders, close prisons and eviscerate defense spending. And that’s just the beginning of their curious recipe for utopia. Although ridiculous, it is no joke.

On Tuesday, a hardcore leftist Democrat won the party’s nomination for the U.S. Senate in Michigan. The move was a shock to party establishmentarians that further entrenches the socialists into the national Democratic organization.

Abdul El-Sayed may have just barely eked out his victory, but a win is a win is a win.

He’s the Democrats’ candidate in November. Running as an outlier in a traditional Midwestern state won’t be easy, especially given his impressive GOP opponent, Mike Rogers.

While El-Sayed was having his way in Michigan, another Democratic socialist, Francesca Hong, is the leading Democratic candidate for the gubernatorial nomination in Wisconsin’s primary.

One thing the Democratic socialists deserve credit for is their candor. They’re not pretending to be anything other than what they are.

That’s why if Hong becomes her party’s nominee, it will be interesting to hear her describe her contempt for the Thanksgiving holiday and why she thinks it should be canceled.

Hong also can explain why, as she has revealed, she’s feels uncomfortable among Whites, the same people whose votes she is seeking.

Will these two candidates be long shots in a general election? One would think so.

But Republicans had best not count their chickens before they’re hatched.

The Democratic socialist promises of everything for everyone at someone else’s expense appear to be increasingly popular rhetoric among a growing segment of the population. It’s easy to see why, but the world doesn’t work that way.

In other primary election contests in U.S. House districts across the country, Democratic socialists have been knocking off liberal Democratic incumbents. These are solid Democratic districts, so they — think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — will be going to Washington, D.C.

This party’s unsettling transition is setting the stage for big changes in the Democratic Party and, potentially, for the nation, none of them good for either entity.

The News-Gazette Editorial Board

Argentina’s President Javier Milei continues to govern in ways that conservatives in America can only dream of. Now he’s come up with a new proposal that the U.S. would do well to copy.

When Milei came into office, he promised to slash government spending, balance the budget, embrace free trade, deregulate the economy, and get hyperinflation under control. (“Experts” such as Paul Krugman said it would end in disaster.)

Milei’s lived up to his promises. Month-over-month inflation was running at 25% when he took office; it’s below 2% now. Argentina ran a budget surplus in 2024, the first time since 2008. The poverty rate has plunged, and in July, the country got its third credit upgrade in three months.

Even the Washington Post marveled that “The message from the ratings agencies is that President Javier Milei’s market-oriented reforms are working.”

Now he’s put forth a plan designed to keep Argentina’s government in check for the long term.

“He’s calling it the grillete fiscal or the ‘fiscal shackle,’ and it’s part of a larger reform of the Central Bank’s charter that he’s sending to the country’s Congress, possibly for a mid-to-late-August vote,” writes Sarah Anderson at PJ Media, which is where we first learned of this proposal.

Under this plan, if the government runs a deficit for several months in a row, the Congress gets a warning, then the “shackle” kicks in, suspending non-essential government functions and basically freezing everything else in place. No new spending, no new contracts, no new hires, until lawmakers get the budget back in balance.

But the kicker is that, while the government is shackled, top politicians — ministers, undersecretaries, senators, etc., even the president — won’t get paid.

“For the first time in our history, if politics doesn’t do its homework, politics will pay the cost — not the people,” Milei said when he introduced the proposal.

Milei isn’t the first person to think up an idea like this. Since 2013, Montana Sen. Steve Daines has been introducing a bill that “withholds members of Congress’s salaries in each chamber if the Office of Management and Budget does not certify that the chamber has adopted a balanced budget. The bill also requires that revenue increases be agreed upon by an affirmative three-fifths vote in each chamber.”

But his bill would require Congress only to pass a budget that would balance 10 years down the road.

In May, the Senate unanimously passed a resolution that would withhold members’ pay during a government shutdown. But that applies only to senators, and the senators can easily pass another resolution suspending it when the time comes.

Of course, there’s no guarantee that Argentinian legislators will vote for a plan that puts their livelihoods on the line, but given Milei’s success in delivering for this country, they’d be crazy not to.

If they do, President Donald Trump and U.S. lawmakers should take note.

Issues & Insights Editorial Board

I hate how American politics feels like every election is an existential threat to the nation you, personally, want to see. I don’t trust Democrats to lead us well, and they don’t trust people like me and those I’d support to lead us well, either.

That’s fine, but the idea that every election matters to such a degree is troubling. The left, though, has long made it a spectator sport. After all, Trump is an existential threat to democracy. He’ll completely remake America into a fascist state.

Meanwhile, Democratic Socialists—people who are getting support from the Democratic Party when they win primaries—literally want to dismantle the United States.

Part of the DSA platform calls for abolishing the Senate and creating an executive and judiciary branch that answer to Congress, not that are independent in the least.

And, it’s a requirement for DSA-endorsed candidates to support that dismantling.

Listen to them. They don’t even realize how radical they sound. To them, this is just the most common sense thing imaginable, and so it’s not radical in the least. It’s just what “needs to happen” for some unfathomable reason.

But what we all need to comprehend is that what they’re talking about isn’t the United States of America. They’re not about improving our country. They’re talking about dismantling the entire system that makes this country what it is, then rebuilding a new system that would remove every guardrail against mob rule the Founding Fathers believed in.

Those guardrails are there for a reason, and it’s to stop people like your average DSA dirtweasel from campaigning on a “free ice cream for everyone” platform and actually implementing it.

What we have is bad enough, but there are still safeguards in place that keep it from getting too much worse. The president can veto things, and the judiciary can rule them unconstitutional.

And that is why the socialists think they need to go, why that’s what needs to happen. It’s because they can’t get their way, and they know it, so they want to destroy the entire Constitution.

Even if they claim they’ll just amend it, it doesn’t matter, because it won’t be even close to the same system. They’re hoping people will forget what they were taught in school about why we have two chambers of Congress, and how smaller states needed a way to make sure they weren’t bull-rushed by larger states and ignored by the federal authorities.

Even though senators are no longer chosen by state legislatures, they can still support that function.

It’s not supposed to be easy to create laws, but that’s what the DSA is really pissed about. There are systems in place to prevent their agenda from coming to fruition, and they know they’re unconstitutional, so they have to remake everything.

The threat from the avowed socialists isn’t hypothetical, either. They’re boasting more members than any other socialist organization in American history. They’ve got candidates winning important races, including becoming mayor of America’s largest city.

They’re an actual threat to the country. Now, these races really are an existential threat to America, and the Democrats are so enamored with the idea of taking back the House that they’re willing to sleep with the devil to make it happen. They’re willing to sell their own party down the river, allow it to be subjugated by actual socialists—not just the “we want a nice social safety net” folks, but people who actually think the state should control the means of production—all because they’re so blinded by Trump hatred that they can’t see the real threat standing beside them.

America is on the brink of having to make a choice. If DSA candidates are permitted to continue winning within the Democratic ranks, it’s only a matter of time before there’s no Democratic Party anymore. It’ll be the GOP and the DSA, and the existential threats will no longer be hyperbolic.

They’ll be literal.

Some will say we’re already too far gone at this point to stop the shooting from happening. That may be, and I tend to think we are, too, but I want to be wrong. I’m going to do everything I can to move us from that particular brink, but I can’t do it alone.

Democrats have got to recognize the demon they’re allowing into their big tent. They have to wake up to the fact that the people they’re rushing to support literally want to line them against the wall should the socialist revolution take over. At least I know I’ll get a bullet to the back of the head unless I fight—which I will do—but the leftists who aren’t quite that insane don’t seem to realize that they won’t be spared. Their insufficient revolutionary fervor will be all the evidence needed; then they’ll take their place under the guillotine’s blade.

If they recognize it and start pushing back, then we might have a chance. It’ll at least be a sign that America matters to both parties, even if we disagree on a lot of individual points. It’ll tell us that maybe, just maybe, we can start looking for common ground and pull back from the brink a bit.

It might not stop the next civil war from happening, but if we can kick it a century or so down the road, so much the better, in my mind.

But I promise you, if the DSA does what it expressly says it wants to do, that day will come a hell of a lot faster, and then all hell will break loose, and no one should want what comes afterward.

Tom Knighton, Tilting at Windmills

Reading FR then flicking to Twitter/X is sometimes like night and day. There’s a lot of dissent there among those I happen to follow (NOT Lefitsts or anything like that) regarding: Israel, Iran War, foreign policy and the Administration generally.

A lot of hot topics that get discussed here all the time and former Representatives or officials are leading the charge: MTG, Kent, Tucker Carlson and Massie the most prominent with many large accounts echoing them.

It’s clear to me this is more than just a few rebels who have no influence or standing in fact MTG says in one of her latest posts: “The Movement has begun”.

She is referring to ‘MAGA 2.0’ and a split from the Trump admin who they accuse of breaking promises of no more foreign wars and for their handling of the Epstein saga.

This has implications I think for Vance or anyone else in the administration who might want to run for president in future.

This is just an observation. I’m no troll but feel hesitant to post (or re-post) some of their stuff because it might attract complaints.

Sometimes I feel like walking on egg shells especially with foreign policy posts which I think is the main fissure in play and where some of us naturally agree with them on.

Are Twitter/X ahead of the curve or out of order?

Free Republic

US President Donald Trump has been weighing the possibility of declaring victory against Iran without achieving a nuclear deal, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday, citing US officials.

According to the officials, Trump privately floated the idea to his senior aides. If the US can keep Iran’s nuclear program in check and traffic resumes in the Strait of Hormuz, then Trump would be more likely to extend the ceasefire “indefinitely,” the officials told WSJ.

In recent weeks, the president told senior aides privately that Tehran is “likely unable to revive its nuclear work,” after Operation Midnight Hammer caused heavy damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure in June 2025, the officials added.

The US’s intelligence capabilities would likely catch any Iranian attempts to rebuild these facilities or covertly build a nuclear bomb, Trump said in recent meetings, and the president is confident that any threat of more US attacks would “serve as an enduring deterrent,” WSJ reported.

The officials also expect the president will lift the US’s naval blockade on the Islamic Republic’s ports if Tehran fully reopens the strait.

Trump is “patient and expected to ride out the latest diplomatic snarl, especially so long as gas prices remain where they are,” WSJ cited officials as saying.

The US has “completed all of its military objectives against Iran,” and the president’s focus is “securing the flow of the world’s energy through the Strait of Hormuz and will keep military options on the table should Iran further target ships,” a White House official told WSJ.

“Iran’s recent hardline demands for reopening the strait make it increasingly difficult for the president to manufacture a face-saving off-ramp from the conflict,” Director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mona Yacoubian, said.

“The Iranians fully believe Trump wants out and is focused on opening the strait, which is why they are playing hardball,” Gregory Brew, an Iran expert at the Eurasia Group consulting firm, added.

Strait of Hormuz will not reopen until US ‘corrects behavior,’ IRGC commander says

However, the Strait of Hormuz will not reopen until the United States “corrects its behavior,” Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr announced on Friday in a message publicized by the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB).

Zolghadr laid out six conditions under which, by Iran’s consideration, the US would be correcting its behavior.

According to Zolghadr, the US must end all aggression against Iran, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, and Palestine; Never verbally threaten Iran; Lift its naval blockade and withdraw all naval and air forces; Pay for the damages of the wars against Iran; Lift all sanctions against Iran; And release all frozen Iranian assets.

Meanwhile, Trump spoke optimistically about the end of the war with Iran during the signing of an executive order in the White House on Thursday.

“I think it’s going to end pretty soon,” he said, adding that “I don’t think they [Iran] can go much longer.”

Regarding the Strait of Hormuz and a rumored deal to reopen the waterway, Trump said that the strait is “sort of open right now.”

“You know, we have a thing called the blockade, headed up by the US Navy, and we control it,” he said. “But they can always shoot something.”

James Genn, Jerusalen Post

The more you see and hear from Abdul El-Sayed, the socialist-aligned radical who just won the Democrat Party’s Senate primary in Michigan, the more it seems like he’s better suited to be a bomb-throwing keyboard warrior or a podcast bro who excels at raging into a microphone.

It certainly seems like he’s auditioning for one of these roles instead of the sober, serious job of being a United States senator. Then again, no one has accused the Democrat Party of being sober or serious in a very long time.

El-Sayed had Vice President JD Vance in his sights during a recent interview with MS NOW. In it, El-Sayed rattled off a series of insults against Vance, saying he hadn’t “made any sense” since “Hillbilly Elegy,” and accusing the vice president of sucking up to “power.”

“Is that Peter Thiel’s boy with that Ohio charisma he’s got?” El-Sayed sneered. “That guy. I think we’ve had enough of him. The last thing that he said that made any sense was ‘Hillbilly Elegy’, after he said that Donald Trump had no business being president of anything. That was the last time he made sense, and then he decided to suck up to power.”

It actually sounds like El-Sayed is trying out for the role of Hasan Pike imitator, doesn’t it? He’s AOC if AOC were somehow more insufferable, less likable, and convinced every cheap insult spit out of her mouth was a devastating intellectual blow.

The vice president shot back at El-Sayed during a Saturday interview on Fox News, calling El-Sayed “crazy” and revealing the candidate had nastily gone after the Vance children.

“I think the guy is crazy and would be a terrible senator for the people of Michigan.”

@VP JD Vance unloads on Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, accusing him of resorting to personal attacks instead of explaining how he’d improve life for voters.

“He’s also gone after my kids. He’s just kind of an odd guy,” Vance says, before contrasting El-Sayed’s economic approach with President Trump’s agenda.

Vance argues the path to prosperity is “rebuilding the middle class” and America’s industrial base, while crediting Trump’s policies with helping Michigan’s auto industry.

Here’s what Abdul El-Sayed said about the Vance children during a podcast interview back in April.

Dr. Abdul Sayed, a Senate candidate tied for the lead in the Michigan Democratic primary, asked Vice President JD Vance how he reconciles having “brown kids who he thinks are less American than everyone else.”

“That’s wild—to look at your own kids and be like, you don’t actually belong as much in this country that I brought you into,” Sayed said. “It must break you every time you hug your own kids. I’m so sorry.”

“The thing about JD Vance—he has the charisma of a doorknob,” Sayed said. “Literally the aura of a toad. You’re not winning an election, my friend. I’m so sorry.”

“He’s got brown kids. At some point, he’s going to have to have a really awkward conversation with his kids, like—you made your career hating people who are different.”

What an absolutely loathsome thing to say about young children. Who does that? JD Vance can take the political slings and arrows, but leave the babies out of it, you cretin.

Hopefully, Michigan voters pay close attention to this rage-baiter’s podcast schtick. Sneering at JD Vance and dragging his children into the political fray might earn applause from the permanently online Left, but it’s a strange way to convince normal voters that you’re a serious person capable of doing a serious job.

This kind of hate can only mean one thing: the far-Left is very afraid of a possible JD Vance presidency.

Teri Christoph, Red State

By: Josh Schrock August 8, 2026

Being labeled a cheater on the golf course is a black mark that’s virtually impossible to remove. Whether it’s a wild cheating scandal at Q School or someone fluffing their lie during a Saturday morning scramble, cheating in golf isn’t new.

But what happened recently at WingHaven Country Club near St. Louis rocked the local golf scene and is spreading after the culprit went on ESPN Radio in St. Louis to confess.

To set the scene, the events happened during a member-member championship at WingHaven last weekend. The golfer in question, who we won’t name to avoid piling on, is a plus-2 handicap and played college golf at a junior college before having what he described to ESPN as “a cup of coffee” at Eastern Illinois University.

At the WingHaven event, there was a hole-in-one pot. The golfer in question was in the first tee time of the day, which he learned before the round. He told his group before they teed off that his grandmother had been having health issues and he was expecting a phone call that he might have to take. On the third green, the golfer told his group he got the call. So he ran up to the fourth tee box and teed off to keep up the pace of play. He told his group he’d meet them on the tee when he’d finished his call.

The fourth hole is a par-3. When the group caught up to their playing partner, they asked him how he fared with his tee shot. He said he “thinned it a little,” but didn’t see where it landed. When they got up to the green, there was a divot on the green . . . and the golfer’s ball in the hole.

Naturally, a celebration occurred, but there was understandably some skepticism because no one had witnessed the shot. Players sought out the superintendent, who reviewed security camera footage from a maintenance shed near the fourth green. The footage showed the golfer driving past the shed early in the morning toward the fourth green well before his tee time. After that footage surfaced, the golfer informed the super that he had placed the ball in the hole early in the morning. Aware he had put himself in an untenable spot, the golfer resigned his membership.

News of the faked ace quickly made its way around the St. Louis golf scene, leading the culprit to call into the ESPN show, “The Morning After,” on Friday to issue an apology, offer an explanation and ask that his family be left out of the reaction to his cheating. The pro shop at WingHaven confirmed the legitimacy of the story to GOLF.

“You do something as dumb as I did, there are consequences for that,” the golfer said. “Some are very fair, and some aren’t.

“I made a terrible mistake. The lack of moral character. I can take the banter and the chatter and the heat because I deserve that from a golf perspective. What I am most worried about is my family — breaking trust with a marriage that I have had for five years next month. We have two kids that are under 3 and it’s not fair to them for me to put them in that situation where when they walk through a room there is a stigma there that your dad is a [cheater]. So questions that they may get asked or be getting asked down the road, that’s the worst part. The golf is secondary.”

Asked why he made the decision that will follow him for the rest of his golfing life, the golfer did not provide much of an explanation.

“I was so upset that we were giving a couple shots back,” he said. “That’s no excuse. There’s no excuse for what I did, and I was completely in the wrong.

“There’s really no motivation. Just complete stupidity and we were giving two shots back to the field and that’s not an excuse. There’s no excuse for what happened. We were giving two shots back to the field and I went about it just completely and utterly the wrong way.”

The hole-in-one manipulator ended his appearance on ESPN Radio in St. Louis with a plea to those piling on — to not bring his family into the repercussions that are headed his way.

“People say he’s only sorry because he got caught and that might have been true at first,” he said. “But the messages that I’m going to get, I’m just someone to attack. People that I’ve never met in my life. People that don’t know me. People that have no clue who I am. They just want to attack. I get it. I opened up the door to that. That’s fine. I can take that. But my family doesn’t deserve that.

“I’m not a cheater on the golf course,” the golfer said. “I made a bad decision and I have to suffer the consequences. I’m trying to move forward as best I can and it’s been rough. … I’m trying to move forward and do what’s right for my family and be there for them and the two young kids that don’t deserve this. The wife that doesn’t deserve this. It’s terrible. I don’t want sympathy from anybody. I don’t deserve sympathy. But I just wish people would tread lightly on my family.”

It has been said that a reputation is earned in drops and lost in buckets. At WingHaven Country Club’s member-member, a swing that never happened cost a golfer something much more valuable than the money he had to return once his ruse was found out.

You can listen to the entire ESPN Radio interview here.

Iran’s terrorist Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) claimed on Wednesday that they had targeted 85 allegedly “American military facilities,” in reality launching sweeping bombing campaigns against neighbors Kuwait and Bahrain.

The IRGC’s aggression follows Iran bombing various vessels attempting to navigate the Strait of Hormuz, reportedly ships linked to Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The Iranian regime’s attacks prompted U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) to resume targeted strikes on Iran’s terrorist infrastructure to protect free navigation in the strait, which the IRGC used as its reasoning for bombing Kuwait and Bahrain.

The IRGC’s statement, as shared by the Iranian government’s Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), claimed that its forces had launched a “joint missile-and-drone operation, striking 85 locations linked to important U.S. military installations in Bahrain’s Salman Port and Fifth Naval District, as well as Ali Al-Salem Air Base in Kuwait.” IRNA celebrated the bombings as a successful effort, claiming to have shot down an American MQ-9 drone in a proportional response to CENTCOM’s strikes hours before. The U.S. government has not at press time confirmed any major damage as a result, though the targeted countries have condemned the strikes as needlessly endangering their populations.

The Iranian military’s Khatam al-Anbiya operational headquarters issued a statement following the attacks appearing to promise more strikes on its neighbors, insisting that any country aiding the “aggressor U.S. military” would face Iranian bombing.

“The origin of any support for the aggressor U.S. military in its aggression against the sovereignty and territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran will be a legitimate target of the armed forces,” the statement read.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kuwait described the strikes as “heinous Iranian aggressions” directed at Kuwait, not at the United States, given where the strikes occurred. The attacks, it asserted, were “a flagrant violation of its [Kuwait’s] sovereignty, a direct threat to its security and stability, and to the safety of its citizens and residents on its territory, and a grave breach of the rules of international law.”

“The Ministry renews its affirmation that the continuation of these brazen aggressions, at a time when regional and international efforts aimed at de-escalation are underway,” the Foreign Minister stated, “constitutes a systematic undermining of efforts to reduce tensions and strikes at the supporting international will for this path.”

The Kuwait Foreign Ministry also condemned the strikes on Bahrain in a separate statement, using similar language to describe the “aggression” by Iran and adding that Kuwait offers its “steadfast and supportive stance toward the security and stability of the sisterly Kingdom of Bahrain.”

Hostilities erupted between Iran and America in February, when President Donald Trump launched Operation Epic Fury and eliminated the longtime dictator of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Those hostilities were paused by a temporary ceasefire in April that evolved into an agreement in June contained in a memorandum of understanding signed by both parties. The memorandum required both sides to engage in discussions for 60 days towards cementing a new agreement preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. It also required Iran to allow the free flow of commercial transit in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran violated the agreement on Tuesday, reportedly bombing three tankers attempting to navigate the Strait of Hormuz. Two of the ships were identified as Qatari and Saudi vessels. The U.S. government retaliated against Iran for these strikes, blaming the regime directly.

“U.S. Central Command forces have begun launching a series of powerful strikes against Iran to impose heavy costs for targeting and attacking commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in an international waterway,” CENTCOM revealed on Tuesday. “The U.S. strikes are in response to Iranian attacks on three commercial vessels that were transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s demonstrated aggression was unwarranted, dangerous, and a clear violation of the ceasefire.”

Bahrain, like the United States, condemned Iran for the strikes on the ships prior to the IRGC targeting the country. In a statement, the Bahraini Foreign Ministry issued “strong condemnation and denunciation of the Iranian terrorist attack” on the Saudi and Qatari tankers, deeming it “an unacceptable attack on the security and safety of international navigation and global energy supplies.” Bahrain demanded that the U.N. Security Council “take a firm stance” to punish Iran for its terrorist activities and insisted the international community has a role to play in ensuring safe transit in the Strait of Hormuz “without restrictions or the imposition of illegal fees.”

On Wednesday, President Trump declared during the ongoing NATO summit in Turkey that the memorandum of understanding with Iran was no longer valid as the Iranian government had violated it. He punctuated his comments by referring to Iranian regime officials as “scum” who could not be trusted with negotiations.

“They’re a bunch of scum, if you want to know the truth,” Trump told reporters, referring to Iranian government officials. “We don’t like them, they’re evil people. They’re crazy and they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon.”

“Everyone’s agreed, no nuclear weapon. We make a deal. They go outside, joke to the press, they say we never even talked about it. There’s something wrong with them, they’re cuckoo,” Trump added.

Frances Martel

Jon Donnison,Jerusalem. and George Wright

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected US President Donald Trump’s 15-point plan for Gaza, stating that no military pull-out will happen until Hamas is “genuinely” disarmed.

Trump’s Board of Peace said last month it had reached an agreement for the “complete disarmament” of Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza.

But Hamas said handing over its heavy weapons was contingent on Israel ending “all forms of aggression” and withdrawing its forces from Gaza.

Israel has continued to carry out strikes on Gaza since agreeing to an initial ceasefire in the territory last October.

“Israel rejects the 15-point document,” Netanyahu said at a cabinet meeting on Sunday.

The Israeli military “will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is genuinely disarmed and will continue to thwart threats against our forces and our citizens”, he added.

A Hamas official told the BBC on Sunday the group “reaffirms it commitment” to the agreement and it was ready “to engage seriously and responsibly in implementing” the 15-point plan.

They called on mediators to ensure “that all parties comply with what has been agreed”.

Israel’s rejection signals another blow for Trump’s Gaza peace plan which was announced in September last year.

The plan included the creation of the Board of Peace to oversee the agreement’s implementation, as well as the disarmament of Hamas, withdrawal of Israeli troops and reconstruction of Gaza.

What’s in the Gaza peace deal roadmap?

Netanyahu’s statement does not come as a surprise.

But he has taken some time to make it, perhaps reflecting the difficult position the Israeli leader is in.

He clearly is unhappy with Trump’s plan but at the same time he will not want to upset his closest ally.

It’s just over a week since Trump announced what he called a “monumental step toward lasting peace and security” – that Hamas for the first time had agreed to disarm, on condition that Israel withdraws its forces from Gaza.

On Sunday, Netanyahu was clear that was not going to happen under his watch. He said Hamas had to disarm first, adding that it couldn’t be some “fictitious disarmament” – it had to be real.

The reality is any disarmament and withdrawal of Israeli forces would likely need need to be phased.

Netanyahu said he was now in discussion with US officials about how to go forward.

“They have ideas; some of them are acceptable to us and some are not, and we know how to stand our ground on these matters,” he said.

But just months before Israeli elections and under pressure from members of his right-wing coalition to take a tough stance on Gaza, he is unlikely to want to make concessions.

He has faced calls from far-right parts of the coalition to hold a new cabinet vote and end the Gaza plan, including National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir who dismissed the draft as “not acceptable”

According to the United Nations, about 1.9 million people – 90% of Gaza’s population – have been displaced in the territory since the war in Gaza started.

The war was triggered by the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

Israel responded to the attack by launching a military campaign in Gaza, during which more than 73,000 people have been killed, according to the territory’s health ministry, whose figures are considered reliable by the United Nations.

Additional reporting by Jack Burgess