A new study from JAMA Pediatrics should stop us in our tracks: early adolescents who report addictive use of screens—not just frequent use—are more than twice as likely to consider suicide within two years.
Not because they’re online too much, but because they can’t stop.
At the same time, a young woman named Caroline Koziol, once a top athlete and student, is suing TikTok and Instagram after their algorithms flooded her feed with eating disorder content. What began as a search for fitness tips spiraled into full-blown anorexia. Hers is just one of over 1,800 similar cases being filed.
This isn’t a glitch in the system. It is the system.
Social media platforms aren’t just reflecting our insecurities—they’re cultivating them. Why? Because insecurity is profitable. When a teen feels like they’re not enough—too fat, too plain, too quiet—they stay online longer. They scroll, they compare, they engage. And every second they spend chasing validation, someone else cashes in.
What we’re seeing is the weaponization of low self-worth, scaled by algorithm and monetized by design.
That may sound harsh. But let’s be honest: this is not new. For decades, the beauty industry, fashion, even wellness trends have profited from telling people—especially women and girls—that they’re not quite good enough as they are. Social media just industrialized the tactic.
Now, platforms optimize for compulsive behavior, not joy or creativity. Addictive engagement is rewarded; mental health is collateral damage.
The truth is, many industries benefit when people doubt themselves: advertisers profit from the fear of not measuring up, influencers and online gurus sell the illusion of “fixing” your flaws, and even parts of the pharmaceutical and therapy world expand when anxiety and depression rise.
And those are just the commercial beneficiaries. Politically, a public that lacks confidence is easier to sway. Easier to divide. Easier to control.
The erosion of self-worth isn’t just a personal struggle—it’s a public vulnerability. And in the digital age, it’s becoming systemic.
We need to call this what it is: a cultural emergency. The lawsuits against Meta and other platforms are a start, but they won’t be enough on their own. If we want meaningful change, we need three things:
First, legal and design accountability. Platforms must be held responsible for the psychological effects of the algorithms they deploy. That means transparency in how recommendation systems work and consequences when they clearly lead to harm.
Second, parental and educational empowerment. We must teach young people not only how to use tech—but how to resist it. To spot manipulation. To value themselves beyond a like count.
And third, we need a cultural shift. Self-worth cannot be treated as a niche concern or a private battle. It’s a foundation for freedom, resilience, and public health. When people believe they matter, they’re less likely to be controlled—and more likely to create.
Because the real danger isn’t just that tech platforms make people feel worthless. It’s that people don’t even realize it’s happening.
And when you don’t believe in your own worth, you’re willing to trade it—for anything that promises to give it back.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.
Russian Military Instructs China How To Beat US & NATO Weapons
One key trend to have emerged over the course of the Russia-Ukraine war is that China, Iran, and Russia are increasingly and very openly cooperating militarily and technologically, including Moscow sharing experience gained in the course of its Ukraine ground operations.
Newsweekreports that “Russia plans to train hundreds of Chinese military personnel this year on lessons learned from its ongoing invasion of Ukraine,” based on regional sources. Some of what has been ‘learned’ is how to defend against US-made and NATO-supplied weaponry – something which Beijing is surely interested in amid the long-running Taiwan standoff with Washington.
“Instructors will cover methods for countering weapons systems used by Ukrainian forces that were produced by the United States and its NATO allies, a source in Ukraine’s top intelligence agency told the outlet,” the Newsweek report continues.
Specifically ‘lessons for a Taiwan conflict’ would be gleaned:
This training would further strengthen security ties between Russia and its “no limits” ally China, which in recent years has stepped up joint military exercises. Battlefield insights into U.S. weaponry could offer an advantage as China seeks to surpass the U.S. as the leading military power in the Indo-Pacific.
And Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence Directorate has told local media, the Kyiv Post, that “The Kremlin has decided to allow Chinese military personnel to study and adopt the combat experience Russia has gained in its war against Ukraine.”
Not only have Russian forces destroyed and disabled possibly dozens of Western-supplied main battle tanks, including M1 Abrams, UK Challengers, and French Leopard 2’s – but F16s have also been shot down.
American troop carriers have additionally been destroyed, and in some places Western armored vehicles have been put on display in the capital of Moscow, as trophies recovered from the battlefield.
Meanwhile, China this week hosted defense ministers from Iran and Russia for a meeting in its eastern seaside city of Qingdao.
The meeting happened Thursday, and importantly Qingdao is home to a major Chinese naval base, with the country’s defense minister Dong Jun calling the PLA Navy and its bases a counterweight to a world in “chaos and instability.”
“As momentous changes of the century accelerate, unilateralism and protectionism are on the rise,” Dong said. Alongside defense chiefs from Russia and Iran, the military leaders of Pakistan and Belarus were also present.
He was further quoted in news agency Xinhua as decrying “Hegemonic, domineering and bullying acts” which “severely undermine the international order.” The comments were clearly aimed at the Western alliance, and Washington in particular.
‘The US will very likely fight a 3-front war against Russia, China and Iran, Palantir’s Alex Karp says’
CIA funded data mining company Palantir is supplying Israel’s military & intel agencies with AI systems which generate targets at an unprecedented rate https://t.co/NNCa2Wj6kIpic.twitter.com/0faINK9HOu
China over the course of this month’s Israeli and US bombings of Iran has condemned what it sees as blatant aggression against a non-nuclear power which was engaged in good faith negotiations. Beijing has also in the past issued statements calling out NATO for its constant expansion, and activity which has even been lately introduced in the Pacific region, and growing ties to Japan.
The strength of the dollar is used often synonymously with American strength, however, America and most other countries would benefit with the return of the classical gold standard as the basis of international trade.
America’s primary benefit from this change would be through the increased range of strategic possibilities.
While the dollar’s rule has made buying goods easier, it has often proved to be more of a source of worry than an asset. We must act more predictably and responsibly in the eyes of the world than we would otherwise because we cannot let the dollar lose value through a loss of trust. We feel the need to promote a strong picture of the ever-diminishing dollar in order to let it maintain its reserve currency status.
All our striving to prop up the dollar could very easily damage the economy almost irreparably.
We put ourselves at risk of massive inflation if for some reason, many of the countries that use dollars for hoarding wealth or exchange currency switched to BRICS. The dollar value is not a reflection of the strength of American industry, rather it is a reflection of the world’s perception coupled with a geopolitically dominant past that no longer exists.
A smooth transition to gold pegged international transactions could protect us from this strategic pain point and potential for high inflation. While the adjustment would be difficult, once we had adopted some gold-pegged system for trading with other countries, our ability to trade would remain constant regardless of the rest of the world’s valuation of our currency.
That sort of controversial and value-based decision could be replaced with the age old and painfully simple choice to hold onto gold. Smaller countries would make a huge step towards financial independence by achieving stability of trade with no strings attached.
Gold as the backbone of international trade would get rid of many of the market distortions that are possible through international currency.
Gold’s universally accepted value and stability would only grow as the volume traded of it increased. Once a more stable equilibrium price for gold had been found with the new international trade system, the value of gold would primarily change only as demand for liquidity increased. This new ordering of trade would beautifully use the price system to signal to countries when they should think twice about trade or seeking wealth outside of the country. Regardless of whether gold went up or down, it would signal the true state of the world rather than the manipulated monetary mixed message from every country with a currency and agenda.
Gold used as the primary medium of international trade would bolster industry, independence, and make the real state of the financial world much more observable. American companies would be able to trade as they wished without having to eat the tax of a falsely high-valued currency. Other countries would be freer, more financially stable, and able to disconnect themselves more convincingly from the power struggles of the rest of the world. Gold as the exchange currency of the world would cut through the noise created by financial and geopolitical engineering and allow real productivity
Bibi Fumes After IDF Soldiers Confirm Lethal Weapons Routinely Used On Crowds At Gaza Aid Sites
Soon after the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) began distributing aid to war-torn Gaza in May, disturbing reports emerged of Israeli soldiers killing unarmed Palestinians approaching aid points for food. As the world’s eyes turned from Gaza to Israel attack on Iran, the pace of these reported killings increased — with multiple incidents claiming more than 50 lives each. Now, Israel’s oldest daily newspaper has dropped a bombshell report, withIsraeli soldiers and officers confirming the routine use of deadly force on unarmed Palestinians as a barbaric form of crowd control — with the practice carried out under orders from superior officers.
This morning in Gaza, Palestinians went to receive American aid from the GHF. Israeli forces opened fire on them, turning a humanitarian moment into a massacre. pic.twitter.com/92Qr4qLENk
Employing a rhetorical device frequently used when Israel is accused of lethal wrongdoing, Netanyahu dismissed the newspaper’s report as a “blood libel” against the IDF
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) called the soldiers’ and officers’ accounts “vicious lies designed to discredit…the most moral army in the world.”
However, perhaps bowing to the sheer breadth of the report by Haaretz, the IDF says it’s investigating the allegations.
According to the enlisted soldiers and officers who spoke to Haaretz, a variety of deadly weapons have been routinely used as a means of communicating whether Palestinians have permission to approach the aid stations.
The distribution centers typically open for just one hour each morning. According to officers and soldiers who served in their areas, the IDF fires at people who arrive before opening hoursto prevent them from approaching, or again after the centers close, to disperse them. Since some of the shooting incidents occurred at night – ahead of the opening – it’s possible that some civilians couldn’t see the boundaries of the designated area. — Haaretz
🚨BREAKING: Israeli forces opened fire on thousands of starving Palestinians on their way to receive aid from the U.S. distribution center in the Netzarim Corridor, central Gaza.
In western Rafah, southern Gaza, over 40 people were killed and at least 150 injured in the other… pic.twitter.com/5kJ2zASOm2
These soldiers are not talking about rifles being fired in the air. As one of them tells it:
“It’s a killing field. Where I was stationed, between one and five people were killed every day. They’re treated like a hostile force – no crowd-control measures, no tear gas – just live fire with everything imaginable: heavy machine guns, grenade launchers, mortars. Then, once the center opens, the shooting stops, and they know they can approach. Our form of communication is gunfire.”
“We open fire early in the morning if someone tries to get in line from a few hundred meters away, and sometimes we just charge at them from close range. But there’s no danger to the forces. I’m not aware of a single instance of return fire. There’s no enemy, no weapons.”
According to the same whistleblower, IDF soldiers refer to the practice of using lethal fire to control Palestinians’ approach to food distribution points as Operation “Salted Fish,” using the Israeli name for the children’s game Americans call “Red Light, Green Light” — in which players caught moving at the wrong moment are eliminated.
An IDF officer offered a similar description:
“At night, we open fire to signal to the population that this is a combat zone and they mustn’t come near. Once, the mortars stopped firing, and we saw people starting to approach. So we resumed fire to make it clear they weren’t allowed to. In the end, one of the shells landed on a group of people… [In another incident], we fired machine guns from tanks and threw grenades. There was one incident where a group of civilians was hit while advancing under the cover of fog. It wasn’t intentional, but these things happen.”
“[Gaza has] become a place with its own set of rules,” said a reservist who recently completed his latest tour in Gaza. “The loss of human life means nothing. It’s not even an ‘unfortunate incident,’ like they used to say.” Officers tell Haaretz that the IDF works to ensure that footage of what transpires at the aid sites doesn’t make it into the public eye. However, some video shot by Palestinians has reached the world beyond their deadly, disease-stricken, food-starved mass-enclosure:
🚨 more from the article
Haaretz reports that Israeli soldiers call the shootings at Gaza aid sites “Operation Salted Fish,” a reference to a game where any movement gets you shot. One soldier said they open fire from hundreds of meters away on anyone lining up early, sometimes… https://t.co/B6u3aQDVqupic.twitter.com/9McH0VddG2
Shedding light on another dimension of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, a veteran IDF soldier gave insight into the ongoing physical destruction:
“Today, any private contractor working in Gaza with engineering equipment receives [roughly $1,500] for every house they demolish. They’re making a fortune. From their perspective, any moment where they don’t demolish houses is a loss of money, and the forces have to secure their work. The contractors, who act like a kind of sheriff, demolish wherever they want along the entire front.”
The soldier said that deadly force is used even when the bulldozers are in areas where Palestinians have permission to be — and even where the proximity to the Palestinians was created by the advancing of the equipment. Lethal force is used anyway. “For a contractor to make another [$1,500] and take down a house, it’s deemed acceptable to kill people who are only looking for food,” he said.
After one streak of three June incidents near food points in which the IDFtook 50 or more lives each time, a meeting was held at the IDF’s Southern Command, according to senior officer who attended. The review elicited the fact that troops had used artillery shells to disperse crowds. The senior officer said the conversation about the use of artillery on unarmed people was only framed only by how publicity of such force might undermine Israel’s ability to keep proceeding with its campaign:
“[Nobody asked] why that weapon was needed in the first place. What concerns everyone is whether it’ll hurt our legitimacy to keep operating in Gaza. The moral aspect is practically nonexistent. No one stops to ask why dozens of civilians looking for food are being killed every day.”
We have to ask: What exactly is it going to take for Israel to stop insisting it has the “most moral army in the world” — and for the United States government to decide it wants nothing to do with it?
In a recent New York Times opinion article, Amos Yadlin, a former chief of Israel’s military intelligence, attempted to defend Israel’s recent decision to start a war with Iran, in which Israel was briefly joined by the U.S. government under the administration of President Donald Trump.
Under the headline “Why Israel Had to Act,” Yadlin’s opening sentence states, “Forty-four years ago this June, I sat in the cockpit on the Israeli air force mission that destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor. In one daring operation, we eliminated Saddam Hussein’s nuclear ambitions.”
The parallels between that event and the current war on Iran are indeed remarkable—but the real lesson to be learned from it is precisely the opposite of the one Yadlin draws.
The claim that Israel’s bombing of Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981 halted or set back Saddam Hussein’s efforts to acquire a nuclear weapons capability is a popular myth.
In fact, Iraq had been a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) since it came into force in 1970, and its nuclear program was under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which had reported that the program was in compliance with Iraq’s legal obligations under the treaty.
Israel, by contrast, is known to possess nuclear weapons and “has not adhered to” the NPT, as the United Nations Security Council observed in Resolution 487. Unanimously adopted on June 19, 1981, that resolution strongly condemned Israel’s act of aggression.
The Security Council recognized:
“…the inalienable sovereign right of Iraq and all other States, especially the developing countries, to establish programmes of technological and nuclear development to develop their economy and industry for peaceful purposes in accordance with their present and future needs and consistent with the internationally accepted objectives of preventing nuclear-weapons proliferation…”
The Council described Israel’s attack as “a serious threat to the entire safeguards regime of the International Atomic Energy Agency” and called on Israel “urgently to place its nuclear facilities under the safeguards” of the IAEA.
It warrants emphasis that the US government neither abstained from the vote nor used its veto power to block that resolution. The most parsimonious explanation for this is that there was no evidence Iraq had a nuclear weapons program, and Israel’s bombing was instead likely to push Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in that direction and otherwise undermine the goal of nuclear non-proliferation.
In an interagency intelligence assessment titled “Implications of Israeli Attack on Iraq,” dated July 1, 1981, the U.S. intelligence community provided its assessment, stating that
“The US-Israeli relationship once more is a central issue in regional politics, and new strains have been added to US-Arab relations. Washington’s ability to promote Arab cooperation against a Soviet threat or to bring the Arabs and Israelis to the bargaining table has been struck a hard blow. Arab leaders far from the frontlines in the Levant have been shown that their military and economic facilities are not beyond the reach of Israel’s striking power. Rather than drawing them into a negotiating process, Israel’s demonstrated prowess will only speed the arms race.”
Further, Saddam Hussein responded to the attack “by suggesting that world governments provide the Arabs with a nuclear deterrent to Israel’s formidable nuclear capabilities. His message to other Arabs is that they can have no security as long as Israel alone commands the nuclear threat.”
The attack also caused “damage to the Non-Proliferation Treat (NPT) and to the IAEA safeguards system,” with Israel having justified its attack “on the grounds that the IAEA safeguards system is a sham.” The assessment was that this “probably will have a detrimental impact.”
Iraq had received “the support of most IAEA members because of general acceptance that international and bilateral safeguards over Iraq’s program were sufficient to guard against the diversion of fissile material for a nuclear device.”
In sum, the attack did not halt an Iraqi nuclear weapons program but was the impetus that drove Saddam Hussein to subsequently attempt to acquire a nuclear deterrent to Israel’s aggression. Beyond that, the destruction of the Osirak reactor threatened to undermine the IAEA safeguards framework, thus heightening rather than mitigating the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation.
In 2003, the United States waged an illegal war of aggression against Iraq on a pretext of lies to overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein—who had waged war against Iran throughout most of the 1980s with American support.
In 2007, the U.S. intelligence community produced a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) about Iran’s nuclear program, which has been similarly operating under the IAEA safeguards regime. The assessment was that Iran had been working toward a weapons capability until the United States took out Iran’s enemy Saddam Hussein in 2003, at which time the program was halted and never resumed.
That remained the US intelligence community’s assessment with another NIE issued in 2011. That same year, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan said, “An aerial attack against Iran’s nuclear reactors would be foolish.” He warned that it could start a regional war with unforeseeable consequences.
Notwithstanding the fearmongering proclamations from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Iran was working to build nukes, documents leaked to Al Jazeera in 2015 revealed that the assessment of Israel’s infamous intelligence organization the Mossad was that Iran was not pursuing a nuclear weapon.
In January of this year, the outgoing director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), William Burns, reiterated the US intelligence community’s longstanding assessment in an interview with NPR, saying that there was no sign that Iran had decided to move forward with nuclear weapons development.
On March 25, Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Tulsi Gabbard, testified to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”
The decision by the American and Israeli governments to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities illustrates how the lessons of the past remain unlearned. Rather than preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, this action will only cause Iran to reconsider the need for a nuclear deterrent against American and Israeli aggression and otherwise undermine the international nuclear non-proliferation safeguards framework.
As observed by the Libertarian Institute’s Bill Buppert, host of Chasing Ghosts: An Irregular Warfare Podcast, one option for Iran is to withdraw from the NPT—their parliament has just voted to suspend cooperation with the IAEA—and state that it will rejoin the treaty and accept the IAEA safeguards framework once Israel does the same.
Iran would also be acting within reason to insist that the United States formally acknowledge its right to enrich uranium for nuclear energy as a condition for rejoining the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, especially since the whole current disaster is a consequence of the US government persistent rejection of Iran’s recognized rights under the NPT.
If Washington would like to deter threats to peace by getting other countries to comply with international law, it should start by ending its own criminal violence—including the Trump administration’s continued support for Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.
Iran Holds Huge Public Funeral For Slain Military Commanders & Scientists
Hundreds of thousands of people are in the streets of Tehran on Saturday for a funeral procession honoring military commanders, nuclear scientists, as well as civilians killed in Israeli strikes earlier this month.
State television broadcast scenes of mourners dressed in black, waving Iranian flags, and holding photos of the deceased during the ceremony. It further involved Iranian flag-draped coffins and large displays of portraits depicting slain uniformed commanders in central Tehran.
Both the Israeli and Iranian sides have been declaring ‘victory’ following the 12-days of airstrikes and also ballistic and hypersonic missile fire on Israel.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has charged that President Trump is “grossly exaggerating” when he says that Iran’s nuclear program was obliterated – though Iranian officials have publicly conceded that there was serious damage at key facilities.
Among the prominent figures mourned in the events were General Hossein Salami, the commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, and General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, head of the Guard’s ballistic missile program.
Both were said to be killed on the opening day of the surprise attack. Also honored was the slain Major General Mohammad Bagheri of the Revolutionary Guard, and the leading nuclear scientist Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi.
There are reports that car bombs and drones guided from within the country (via Israeli spy assets on the ground) also assisted in targeted assassinations.
Thousands of mourners lined the streets of Tehran for the state funeral service for around 60 Iranians, including military commanders, killed during the recent Israel-Iran war. Of the 60 people who are to be laid to rest after the ceremony, four are children and four are women. pic.twitter.com/9lyAYTjCRQ
Heard from the large funeral processions were at times chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” as their coffins were driven along Azadi Street.
At least 60 burials for civilians, including four women and four children, also took place according to state media. According to details from CNN:
Hundreds of thousands filled the streets of Tehran on Saturday to commemorate the senior military commanders, nuclear scientists and civilians killed during Iran’s 12-day conflict with Israel.
As mourners clad in all black chanted death to Israel and America, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi acknowledged the loss of lives was “hard and painful” but pledged the nation would return to “new glory.”
Plenty of banners were seen in the processions proclaimed ‘victory’ for Iran…
Banners reading “Boom Boom Tel Aviv” are carried at the funeral procession for the “Martyrs of Might” in Tehran.
“Boom Boom Tel Aviv” is a song by American artist Lukas Gage in support of Iran’s Armed Forces. It trended on YouTube with 577 million views in less than 24 hours. pic.twitter.com/Tqc1XjudnJ
Iran’s state-run Press TV has called the event the “funeral procession of the Martyrs of Power” and in total involved the burial and memorials for at least 16 scientists and ten senior commanders.
President Donald Trump said on Friday that he may appoint someone who is more inclined to lower interest rates to succeed Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.
“If I think somebody’s going to keep the rates where they are or whatever, I’m not going to put them in. I’m going to put somebody that wants to cut rates,” Trump told reporters at the Oval Office.
Trump criticized Powell for not lowering interest rates and said that he would “love” the head of the U.S. Federal Reserve to step down if Powell chooses to do so.
The president suggested lowering rates to 1 percent, although he believes cutting interest rates by two percentage points would save the country “more than $600 billion” annually.
“I think we should be paying 1 percent right now,” he said.
The Fed decided last week to keep its benchmark policy rate unchanged at 4.25 to 4.50 percent.
Powell, whose term is set to expire in May next year, has held off on cutting interest rates, citing the need for more clarity on the possible course of the economy following the administration’s policy changes.
During his semi-annual monetary policy report to Congress on June 24, he told lawmakers that the central bank is waiting to determine if Trump’s global tariffs will result in consumer inflation.
While data over the last three months indicate that price pressures have yet to materialize, Powell said that any tariff-related inflation could appear in the June or July data.
“As we go through the summer, we should start seeing this,” he said. “If we don’t, I think we’re perfectly open to the idea that the pass-through will be less than we think.”
Powell stated that the central bank may begin cutting interest rates if it observes that inflation pressures remain contained.
Trump said on Friday that lowering interest rates now could save the country “hundreds of billions of dollars.” He suggested that the Fed could raise rates later if inflation begins to increase.
“If you were there, you’d say … the United States is doing well, there is no inflation. And if they do get inflation in a year or two, we’ll start raising the rates,” he stated.
Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One earlier this month that he would decide on Powell’s successor “very soon.”
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a CNBC interview on June 27 that there is a possibility that someone could be nominated to succeed Powell between October and November.
When asked if he might become the next Fed chair, Bessent said he “will do what the president wants,” but indicated that he would prefer to stay in his current role.
Trump Blasts CNN ‘Hoax, Fake News’ Report That US Looking At $30BN Deal With Iran
President Donald Trump has once again blasted CNN and the “hoax” media reports saying his administration was considering a $30 billion deal to assist Iran in developing civilian nuclear facilities, as one option for future deal-making in the wake of the 12-day Israel-Iran war.
NBC also featured reporting that the White House is mulling major economic incentives for the Islamic Republic to halt its uranium enrichment; however Trump’s position still seems to be that there’s no more enrichment capability and that core nuclear program components were utterly destroyed in the major US bombing raids of a week ago.
The reports claimed that Washington could release billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets in order to ensure Iran could still have civilian nuclear program, as part of a potential “$30 billion” deal – but importantly with no ability of the Islamic Republic to enrich domestically.
“Who in the Fake News Media is the SleazeBag saying that ‘President Trump wants to give Iran $30 Billion to build non-military Nuclear facilities.’ Never heard of this ridiculous idea,” the president wrote late Friday on social media.
“It’s just another HOAX put out by the Fake News in order to demean. These people are SICK!!!” the Truth Social post added.
The original and ‘exclusive’ Thursday CNN report claimed that “The Trump administration has discussed possibly helping Iran access as much as $30 billion to build a civilian-energy-producing nuclear program, easing sanctions, and freeing up billions of dollars in restricted Iranian funds – all part of an intensifying attempt to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table, four sources familiar with the matter said.”
“Key players from the US and the Middle East have talked with the Iranians behind the scenes even amid the flurry of military strikes in Iran and Israel over the past two weeks, the sources said,” the report continued. “Those discussions have continued this week after a ceasefire deal was struck, the sources said.”
The report alleged that multiple early-stage proposals have been under discussion, but all based on a key non-negotiable: that Iran must halt all uranium enrichment. However, this is one red line that Tehran has been insistent it won’t give in to, as a matter of national sovereignty.
Trump has also been going after Iranian leadership in his Truth Social posts, for example writing the following of Ayatollah Khamenei:
“His Country was decimated, his three evil Nuclear Sites were OBLITERATED, and I knew EXACTLY where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life,” he wrote. “I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, and he does not have to say, ‘THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!’”
“Who in the Fake News Media is the SleazeBag saying that “President Trump wants to give Iran $30 Billion to build non-military Nuclear facilities,'” Trump said in a Truth social post in reference to a CNN report.
— Iran International English (@IranIntl_En) June 28, 2025
The US President has also said he’s willing to strike Iran again if need be, but for now at least the ceasefire is still holding, and does appear to be permanent – as both sides assess to the depth of damage and make efforts to rebuild destroyed buildings and infrastructure.
Musk Rages Against ‘Utterly Insane’ Senate Tax Bill That Will ‘Destroy Millions Of Jobs’
Update (1642ET): Elon Musk has weighed in on the Senate’s latest iteration of President Trump’s tax and spending bill, calling it “utterly insane and destructive,” and that it will “destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!“
The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!
Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future. https://t.co/TZ9w1g7zHF
Meanwhile, Senate Republicans are marching toward an initial vote Saturday afternoon despite several GOP Senators expressing grave concerns.
Both Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Thom Tillis (North Carolina) are either “leaning against” or “no” on final passage. According to Politico, Trump “has personally reached out to Tillis to try to work him on the bill.”
If at least two other Republicans join Tillis to oppose the procedural vote Saturday afternoon, Senate leadership would have to rely on Vice President JD Vance to break a tie to move forward to debate the bill. Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) all have concerns that could drive them to vote against moving forward.
Johnson and Paul, who have been vocally opposed to the bill because of its impact on the national debt, met with the president on Saturday shortly before the vote, according to Lee.
According to Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), “We won’t bring it to the floor if we don’t have the votes,” adding “I think it’d be better to have the vice president close. I don’t know if we’re going to need him.”
* * *
Senate Republicans unveiled a revised version of President Trump’s $4.2 trillion tax package early Saturday morning, making targeted concessions on state tax deductions, Medicaid policy, and renewable energy provisions in an effort to unite their caucus ahead of a July 4 deadline set by the White House.
The updated draft reflects compromises among Senate GOP factions that have sparred for weeks over how aggressively to cut social safety net programs and whether to roll back clean energy incentives enacted under the Biden administration. The legislation, if passed, would serve as the centerpiece of Mr. Trump’s second-term economic agenda.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune announced that voting on the bill would begin Saturday afternoon, with a final vote potentially coming as soon as Sunday. If it does pass the Senate, Republican leaders have indicated they will call House members back to Washington early next week in hopes of sending the legislation to the president’s desk before Independence Day.
However, it remains uncertain whether all 50 Republican senators are prepared to back the measure. Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said Saturday on Fox News that he would oppose beginning debate on the bill immediately, citing the need for more time. “This is an important bill,” Johnson said. “There’s no need to rush it.”
A Revised SALT Cap
To address concerns from House Republicans representing high-tax states, the new draft raises the cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction from $10,000 to $40,000 for five years. The cap would snap back to its original level thereafter, with a modest 1% annual increase during the interim period. The deduction would begin phasing out for taxpayers earning more than $500,000 annually.
A House provision aimed at curbing SALT workarounds used by pass-through businesses was stripped from the text. While fiscal conservatives have criticized the SALT compromise as overly generous, the deal is expected to secure the support of swing-district Republicans and has been endorsed by the White House.
Senate Republicans also removed a controversial Section 899 “revenge tax” on foreign companies and investors following concerns from Wall Street and a request from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
Tax Relief and Medicaid Tweaks
The legislation makes permanent the individual and corporate tax cuts first enacted in 2017 and introduces new temporary breaks for tipped workers, seniors, and car buyers. In a nod to moderate Republicans, the revised bill creates a $25 billion rural hospital fund intended to mitigate the effects of Medicaid spending reductions that critics warn could threaten services in underserved areas.
Senator Susan Collins of Maine had pressed for a $100 billion allocation but has not yet commented on whether the smaller fund will earn her support.
The new version delays the full impact of a 3.5% cap on state Medicaid provider taxes from 2031 to 2032. The cap, which would begin phasing in by 2028, applies only to states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. Additionally, the bill imposes new work requirements for Medicaid recipients and would require ACA-expansion beneficiaries to contribute to their care through co-pays or deductibles.
Renewable Energy Rollbacks and New Land Sales
Republicans accelerated the phaseout of tax credits for wind and solar energy projects, now requiring such projects to be fully operational by the end of 2027 to qualify. That change, reportedly supported by Mr. Trump, could impact companies like NextEra Energy, the nation’s largest renewable developer.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer criticized the change, warning on social media that the rollback would “jack up your electric bills and jeopardize hundreds of thousands of jobs.”
The bill also ends the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit sooner than earlier versions proposed, cutting it off after September 30, 2025, including for used and commercial EVs.
A separate provision reinstated in the draft would authorize the sale of up to 1.2 million acres of federal land across 11 western states for housing and community development, a measure pushed by Senator Mike Lee of Utah. The plan could raise up to $6 billion but faces resistance from GOP senators in affected states.
Tax credits for hydrogen production, originally slated to end this year, would now continue through 2028 for projects started by then.
Broader Cuts and Debt Ceiling Increase
The legislation includes steep cuts to funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and federal food assistance programs, while increasing allocations for the U.S.-Mexico border wall. It preserves $15 million in funding for a task force to study alternatives to the IRS Direct File program, though it drops language that would have terminated the free filing service entirely — a defeat for tax software providers like Intuit.
A proposed tax on money transfers by non-citizens was scaled back from 3.5% to 1%, a win for companies like Western Union and MoneyGram.
Finally, the bill would raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, a move intended to avert a potential federal default projected for as early as August.
With internal GOP divisions still simmering, the path to final passage remains uncertain. Yet with Independence Day looming, Senate Republicans are betting that the new concessions will be enough to unify their ranks — and deliver a long-sought legislative victory for the president.
Economic theory, and the profound impact it has on our lives, is much simpler than trained economists (apologies to my economist friends) would have you believe.
To understand the politics of economic theory, one need only to consider two opposing ideas.
One group believes that fiscal and monetary policy should entail more federal government intervention in the private economy. From some incomprehensible and irrational thought process, these believers try to take the moral high ground. Yet their way leads to loss of individual freedom, to serfdom.
Members of both political parties fall prey to this falsehood, some more than others. When politicians say they are going to Washington to solve your problems, be forewarned: What happens is more rules and regulations controlling your life and costing the taxpayer more of his hard earned income. The fact is, we don’t need, or want, our government’s help. Private industry is far more capable of creating profit through free choice than any bureaucrat.
The illusion of safety is a poor substitute for freedom, self-determination, and individuality.
The other, more enlightened group contends that more economic freedom is necessary for individual and national success.
Further, that individual freedom stems exclusively from our Creator and demands limited government intervention in our lives. This is the mentality that forged our nation, that created our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Individual self-determination is in fact the moral high ground.
In other words, big government versus limited government.
There can be no freedom without economic freedom, and that hinges on the inalienable right to ownership of property. We are not guilty of greed when we work hard for our money. They are greedy for stealing our earnings through excessive taxation and crushing free enterprise with regulation.
When one works at earning his money, to whom does that money, that property, belong? When any government can tax, impose fees, and put us in debt, on a whim, we don’t own our property; the government does. Granted, we all need to pay our fair share for the structure a government affords us, but when we have to work half the year to pay all our taxes, the price is too high.
Our money goes to supporting a massive government that enslaves us with regulation and unconstitutional laws. Then that same government puts all of us into debt to fund even more of its unnecessary spending. Our grandchildren will owe this debt, it has become so enormous. We have an obligation to stop the spending and reduce the deficit before we leave our progeny in crippling debt. That is the moral high ground.
This is why I object to imposition of tariffs. They are a tax on the consumer. It would be far more effective if we severely limited government regulation and taxation so that private enterprise could once again thrive in a free economy unimpeded by massive federal intervention. This is the message of the second group, who believe in individual freedom and ownership of property.
Our president did two tremendous things for us.
He started DOGE to eliminate excess and wasteful spending by the Deep State bureaucrats, and he nominated three Supreme Court justices who overthrew the Chevron Doctrine, which severely limits the ability of the administrative (deep) state to impose fines and regulations.
These two actions will do more to limit government and bring it into compliance with the Constitution than anything any other president has done in our lifetime.
We can change the direction of our beloved nation by supporting candidates who will limit government strictly to those rules of law articulated in the Constitution.
When given a choice, always choose individual freedom — never more government control.
The principle must always be the sanctity of individual freedom to choose.
