Authored by Emel Akan via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump will arrive in The Hague, Netherlands, today June 24 for a critical NATO summit, aiming to secure unprecedented defense spending commitments from allies, an issue he has championed for years.

This year’s summit is poised to set a bold new defense spending target of 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) for each member country, more than doubling the current 2 percent benchmark.

Trump’s whirlwind 24-hour visit to the Netherlands comes amid a geopolitical storm in the Middle East as peace (well, a ceasefire allegedly) almost breaks out between Iran and Israel conflict (following Iran’s ‘theatric’ attack on US bases after US airstrikes over the weekend on three Iranian nuclear facilities, which were intended to halt Tehran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons).

Because of the mounting tensions in the Middle East, the U.S. president is keeping things short at NATO, much like his brief Group of Seven (G7) summit appearance in Canada a week earlier.

Despite the shortened agenda, he is expected to tackle several other pressing issues, including the ongoing war in Ukraine, Russia sanctions, and the future of the U.S. military posture in Europe.

Additionally, all eyes will be on Trump’s interactions with French President Emmanuel Macron—whom he recently criticized over Iran comments—and with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, who remains unsettled by Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland.

Here is what to expect at this year’s summit:

New Defense Spending Target

The upcoming summit in The Hague will focus primarily on establishing a new defense spending target for member countries.

Trump has long been critical of NATO countries for not paying their fair share for the alliance. Since returning to the White House in January, he has intensified pressure on member states to meet higher defense spending targets.

To address Trump’s concerns, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has proposed increasing the target for member countries from the current minimum of 2 percent of GDP to 5 percent annually.

His two-tiered proposal calls for allies to allocate 3.5 percent of GDP to core defense spending and an additional 1.5 percent to infrastructure and industrial capacity.

A growing number of European NATO members, including Germany, have backed this new proposal.

This year’s summit would likely formalize the new spending target, with debates centering on the timeline and implementation.

“The president intends to secure a historic 5 percent defense spending pledge from NATO allies, which will strengthen the alliance’s combined military capabilities and ensure greater stability in Europe and the world,” a senior U.S. official told reporters during a call last week.

Trump will push allies at the upcoming summit to boost industrial capacities to create “supply chains capable of producing the critical minerals, infrastructure, weapons, and other products necessary for the security of America and her allies,” the official said.

The 2 percent GDP defense spending goal, set in 2014 after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, is met by 23 of NATO’s 32 members, according to the estimates.

The new 5 percent target reflects a growing consensus that Europe must take greater responsibility for its security.

“Europeans have understood that they must shoulder primary responsibility for their own security and defense in the future,” James Goldgeier and Sophie Roehse, foreign policy experts at the Brookings Institution, wrote in a recent report.

“This recognition will only strengthen NATO and should have occurred long ago.”

The timeline for achieving the 5 percent target remains contentious. While some NATO allies propose a 2035 target, several countries, driven by regional security threats, advocate for an earlier target date.

“Aside from the Baltics, who are pushing hard for 2030, most allies have been lobbying for a later date,” said Sara Moller, associate teaching professor in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University.

“But the Trump team clearly wants to light a fire and move things along faster.”

Spain Resists NATO Spending Target

NATO officials have been eager to secure consensus on a new spending commitment ahead of the summit.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez announced last week that his country would not commit to the proposed 5 percent defense spending target.

And on June 21, Sánchez said he had reached a deal with NATO to be excluded from the 5 percent defense spending target.

Spain allocated nearly 1.3 percent of its GDP to defense in 2024, making it the alliance’s lowest spender.

US Force Posture in Europe

The Trump administration has reaffirmed its commitment to defending NATO allies in Europe, as U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO Matthew Whitaker emphasized at a security conference in Estonia in May.

The recent nomination of U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich as NATO’s supreme allied commander Europe further signals continued U.S. support for nuclear deterrence in the region, according to the Brookings Institution experts.

At the same time, many expect a reduction in the U.S. military posture in Europe this summer.

A growing view among conservatives favors a smaller U.S. footprint in Europe and a strategic shift of forces and equipment toward the Indo-Pacific to counter China.

“Advocates of this idea view China as the greatest strategic threat to U.S. national security and contend that Europeans should assume primary responsibility for deterring Russia,” Goldgeier and Roehse wrote.

U.S. officials, including Whitaker, have hinted at a review of the U.S. force posture, with potential troop reductions possibly announced after the NATO summit.

“That looming announcement will be front and center,” Moller said. “Everyone will be watching closely for any signals about what, exactly, the Pentagon plans to pull from the European theater.”

Denmark and Greenland

Trump’s interaction with Frederiksen will be critical at this week’s summit, given her unease over Trump’s interest in taking over Greenland.

Trump may raise U.S. concerns about Greenland’s potential independence and the increasing influence of Russia and China in the Arctic.

For the past eight years, both the Trump and Biden administrations have expressed worries about Greenland, an autonomous Danish territory, moving toward independence.

Despite Denmark’s status as a close NATO ally, the United States fears that Copenhagen’s influence over Greenland could wane if independence gains traction.

Rising Arctic activity, driven by warming trends, is intensifying competition and tensions.

A 2008 U.S. Geological Survey report estimates that the Arctic holds 90 billion barrels of oil and 1,669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—about 22 percent of the world’s undiscovered conventional oil and gas reserves.

The region also contains trillions of dollars in minerals, including silver, copper, gold, nickel, iron ore, and rare earth elements.

The Chinese regime in recent years has been ambitiously developing its commercial and military capabilities in the Arctic.

In addition, Russian and Chinese warships are operating together more frequently in the region.

“I think the interaction between Mette Frederiksen, the Danish prime minister, and Donald Trump is something to watch for,” said Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“Mette Frederiksen has not yet been to Washington, and there’s been a lot of strain in the bilateral relationship, and that is quite concerning because Denmark has been one of the most pro-American allies within NATO and within the European Union.”

Russia Sanctions

European allies are pressing Trump to follow through on his earlier threats to impose tough new sanctions on Russia because of the ongoing war in Ukraine.

In recent months, Trump had signaled a willingness to take a harder line against the Kremlin. But at the G7 summit, he appeared to backtrack, stating that “sanctions cost … a lot of money.”

He also criticized G7 leaders for expelling Russia in 2014 from the group, originally called the G8.

“This was a big mistake,“ Trump told Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney during the G7 summit. ”You wouldn’t have that war. You have your enemy at the table.”

He also canceled a planned meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, as he had to cut his trip short to focus on Iran.

Zelenskyy is expected to attend a state dinner in The Hague. And it is still unclear whether Trump will meet the Ukrainian president on the sidelines.

“I don’t think we’ll see any big announcements on Ukraine,” Moller said.

“The president’s priority remains to end the war by getting Moscow and Kyiv talking.

“Everything Washington is willing to put forward on Ukraine right now flows from that single objective, which means the administration isn’t prepared to offer more at this stage.”

Authored by Alex Wu via The Epoch Times,

As infighting within the top echelons of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intensifies, many China watchers are wondering if Chinese leader Xi Jinping is still in power and really in control, especially of the military.

According to long-standing CCP practice, a group of generals are promoted before Army Day on Aug. 1 every year. Since many generals were reported to have been taken down or investigated in an alleged military purge over the last year, whether Xi will promote any generals or announce new appointments before Aug. 1 has attracted attention as an indication of whether he’s still in control of the military.

Xu Qiliang, former vice chairman of the CCP’s Central Military Commission, the highest military leadership body of the communist regime, suddenly passed away on June 2, making him the latest casualty following a string of top CCP military officials who have encountered misfortunes, including sudden death, arrest, or simply disappearing.

Meanwhile, He Weidong, one of two vice chairmen of the Central Military Commission, whose status in the military is second only to the other vice chairman, Zhang Youxia, disappeared from the public eye on March 11 after the closing ceremony of the third session of the National People’s Congress. He is regarded as one of Xi’s most trusted men. There have been rumors coming out of Beijing that He was under investigation.

With this, some observers have speculated that Zhang is now in charge of the CCP’s military and that he stripped Xi’s power last year.

Since two other members of the Central Military Commission—Li Shangfu and Miao Hua—were successively brought down in the two years prior, if He’s absence is officially confirmed, the number of members of the Central Military Commission will drop from seven to four.

Who will fill these top military positions and who will replace the generals who have been pushed out is a focus for this year’s Army Day.

Generals in Prison Enough to Form a Military Company

In the past 13 years since Xi became CCP leader, he has launched waves of “anti-corruption” campaigns to purge his political enemies, many of whom were in the military, to consolidate his power.

“So much resentment has been accumulating for 13 years,” Su Tzu-yun, researcher and director of Division of Defense Strategy and Resources at Taiwan’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told the Chinese language Epoch Times on June 16. “The CCP’s internal struggle in the name of anti-corruption is more dangerous than a battlefield.”

But within one year from 2023 to 2024, the Chinese regime began to see purges, with 12 top PLA (People’s Liberation Army) officials removed in the name of “anti-corruption;” including Li Shangfu and Wei Fenghe who were both former ministers of defense, three rocket force commanders, and one air force commander, and others.

In 2024, overseas Chinese media re-posted a now-deleted X post by China observer “Li Jun” listing the names and ranks of 101 top CCP military leaders who were put in jail. Li said there were enough individuals to form a military company, with 97 being at “general-level” alongside four more “colonel-level” cadres.

Su noted that all the senior military officials purged over the last year were previously promoted to their position by Xi.

“At present, it seems that only Zhang Youxia has the power to carry out the purge, and Xi Jinping may have become a rubber stamp, otherwise, not all of them would be people from Xi’s faction,” he said.

U.S.-based China affairs observer Tang Jingyuan shares the same assessment. He told the Epoch Times on June 16 that “not only this wave of the large-scale purge is almost entirely aimed at Xi Jinping’s cronies … those replacements are all people from Zhang Youxia’s faction,” while some positions after the purge remain vacant.

“This means there might have been a huge replacement and transfer of power in the CCP’s military,” Tang said. “Once control over the military is transferred, it means that the party leader’s power base has collapsed. So now, Xi Jinping may still be the top leader in name, but in fact, he has lost control of the highest power of the CCP.”

Shen Ming-shih, director of the Division of National Security Research at Taiwan’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told The Epoch Times on June 16 that such speculation is difficult to confirm as there is no public information about the power struggles within the CCP, and no way to get official clarification or proof of any internal strife either.

Soldiers of the People’s Liberation Army are seen before a giant screen as Chinese leader Xi Jinping speaks at the military parade marking the 70th founding anniversary of the regime in Beijing on Oct. 1, 2019. Jason Lee/Reuters

“It’s expressed entirely through vague information or vague language, and even deliberately uses such vague language to indicate who is in power or who has stepped down. It’s harder for the outside world to read these signs.”

Possible Personnel Changes by Army Day

U.S.-based China affairs commentator Chen Pokong told The Epoch Times that this year’s Army Day will be a major point to observe who will be promoted in the military and which faction they belong to.

“If they really want to add new members to the Central Military Commission on the Aug. 1 Army Day, they must be confirmed by the Fourth Plenary Session of the CCP’s Central Committee, which is definitely a big fight between the Xi faction and the anti-Xi faction.”

If new members are added, it will also show which faction has the upper hand in the CCP’s infighting, Chen said.

Shen said it remains unclear which exact dates the Fourth Plenary Session of the Central Committee will be held amid the rumors of a power struggle.

“If it is held before the end of June, the CCP’s general secretary or the Central Military Commission will have made the personnel arrangement to promote a group of generals before the Aug. 1 Army Day,” he said.

Insiders close to the regime’s top circle have leaked two possible dates for the top CCP political meeting. Well-known independent current affairs commentator Cai Shenqun cited a source within the regime saying that the Fourth Plenary Session will be held Aug. 27 to Aug. 30.

Meanwhile, Australia-based current affairs commentator Jiang Wangzheng has said that according to his source in China, the top meeting will be held on Oct. 13 to Oct. 16.

Chen said that the CCP’s personnel arrangements are opaque and that it has been very difficult for the various factions to reach an agreement.

“The internal struggles of the CCP’s top leaders may be far more fierce than the outside world imagines, and the CCP and its military are in a precarious state,” he said.

In the first operation of its kind in Florida, authorities have located over two dozen missing children during a multi-day rescue mission in Northeast Florida, according to Local 12.

The children, aged 7 to 17, had been missing from 10 days to more than a year. Over 30 local, state, and federal agencies participated in the joint effort.

Kevin Branzetti, CEO of the National Child Protection Taskforce, stressed the importance of follow-up care: “Finding the children is the first stage, but somebody has to listen to them and help them,” he told WFOX.

Branzetti also emphasized the long-term impact of the effort: “What’s occurring here isn’t just protecting these kids. It’s saving generations to come,” he said to WJAX.

Al Rollins, also with the taskforce, noted the emotional toll many children faced:
“In some cases, these kids were waiting for someone to show that they cared about them and show that they were looking for them,” he told WJAX.

Local 12 reports that Operation Light Shine, which supported the effort, posted on Instagram that “countless lives [were] forever changed” and called the week’s events “extraordinary.”

Clay County Sheriff’s Office representative Ron Lendvay explained that detectives brought their toughest unsolved cases to the operation:
“We all know that when kids run away, they’re either running to something or they’re running from something,” he said. “And what the intercept taskforce does is we go after those to give them something to run to or pull them away from their families.”

Each case is now being reviewed to determine whether human or sex trafficking was involved.

Authored by ‘Cynical Publius’ via American Greatness,

As the dust and smoke settle over Iran’s devastated nuclear weapons program, President Donald Trump’s method of waging war is coming into focus.

We had hints of what I call the “Trump Doctrine” in his first term as he annihilated ISIS in Syria, but the two-decade war in Afghanistan that he had inherited initially obscured what has now become a coherent doctrine. In his second term, the freedom of navigation attacks against Yemen’s Houthis were once again a hint of Trump’s way of war, but Saturday’s attack on Iran—and the events leading up to it—tell us much about the deliberate and precise manner in which Trump seeks to conduct American wars. Similar to (but different from) the famous “Powell Doctrine” promulgated by former Secretary of State Colin Powell (more on that later), the Trump Doctrine is the doctrine of a businessman serving his stockholders. Explained another way, the Trump Doctrine is the “Businessman’s Way of War.”

To preview succinctly, the Trump Doctrine consists of a series of business-like, iterative steps for all uses of American military force, and it performs as follows:

1. Identify America’s national interest.

2. Bargain with the prospective enemy.

3. If/when negotiations fail, conceal & misdirect.

4. Strike with precision and overwhelming force.

5. Achieve submission.

6. Bargain again (from a position of complete strength) with the defeated enemy.

I’ll now examine each of these escalating steps in detail.

“IDENTIFY AMERICA’S NATIONAL INTEREST.”

This first point is key in understanding the Trump Doctrine and how it differs from the Powell Doctrine. Both the Trump Doctrine and the Powell Doctrine focus on war as only being necessary when a vital American national interest is at stake, but the definition of that “interest” differs rather dramatically between the two doctrines. Whereas the Powell Doctrine allows for amorphous goals such as exporting democracy, the Trump Doctrine takes a fundamentally different approach—a businessman’s approach.

You see, Donald Trump, a man whose entire life until 2016 was focused on winning in business, does not view himself as President of a nation so much as he views himself as Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of a very large business, and that business is the United States of America. As CEO and Chairman, he knows he has a fiduciary duty to his stockholders. (You, me, and every other American are his stockholders.) The company Trump leads is not a non-profit—his company has no purpose other than to profit the stockholders. Regime change, spreading democracy, and trying to implement American concepts of liberty are the altruistic purposes of a tax-free, non-profit entity. But Trump sees America as a for-profit, and no actions will be taken for any reason other than to profit the American stockholders, and ending the nuclear capability of an Iranian regime of medieval theocrats greatly serves that purpose.

“BARGAIN WITH THE PROSPECTIVE ENEMY.”

Donald Trump will never expend American blood and treasure when a deal can be made first. Unlike so many of his predecessors, he does not care much about the moral fiber of America’s prospective enemies; he only cares about benefiting his American stockholders. Thus, when he offered the crazed theocrats ruling Iran a chance to bargain, he meant it. Trump does not care how much the mullahs punish their own citizens; he only cares about his fiduciary duties to his stockholders. Had the mullahs decided to bring their nation to the nuclear negotiating table in good faith, no B-2 bombers would have flown over Iraq this past weekend.

“IF/WHEN NEGOTIATIONS FAIL, CONCEAL & MISDIRECT.”

Trump gave the mullahs a chance to bargain. They declined. Think about this in the same way as when a large, profitable public company seeks to buy a weaker, distressed private company by way of merger. The first step is to offer a deal that benefits both parties. That’s what good businessmen do. But when the weaker company refuses to strike a deal that is in its best interest, the CEO of the stronger company starts to plan a hostile takeover while hiding his intent, and that’s just what Trump did with Iran.

When Google wants to buy a hot, new artificial intelligence start-up, it does not tip its intent off to Apple, and in fact will publicly pretend it has no interest at all in buying the distressed target company.

Trump employed a similar strategy as he engaged in what is now obviously a deception plan, where Trump and Netanyahu publicly pretended they were at odds. Even at the last minute—while Pentagon OPSEC was airtight—the public message was that Air Force B-2s were headed to Guam, but that was only a deception plan to obscure their actual flight plan from Missouri. Business is often like war, except without actual bloodshed. CEO Trump knows this, and made the same deception play in Iran as he would in forcing the sale of a distressed casino to one of his real estate ventures.

“STRIKE WITH PRECISION AND OVERWHELMING FORCE.”

Like the Powell Doctrine, the Trump Doctrine calls for the total commitment of America’s most lethal capabilities in an overwhelming manner. Like the large public company bringing all of its financial assets and influence to bear against a distressed merger target running from an undesired acquisition, Trump employed never-before-used Massive Ordnance Penetrators, delivered by our untrackable B-2 bombers, with an aerial corridor opened by Navy and Air Force stealth aircraft, while sub-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles took out targets that did not need the deep underground attack of the MOPs. Overwhelming military force is the way to defeat America’s enemies, just as overwhelming financial capabilities and business strategies ensure a powerful company controls the market against its competitors.

“ACHIEVE SUBMISSION.”

This is where the Trump Doctrine deviates most significantly from the Powell Doctrine. The lynchpin of the Powell Doctrine is achieving an “exit strategy.” An “exit strategy” is amorphous, and the enemy gets a vote. What was our exit strategy in Afghanistan? Tribal leaders who finally decided a democracy and personal liberty were the way to govern Afghanistan? Was the exit strategy in Iraq a sort of multi-ethnic republic with a constitution like our own? These goals were wishful thinking and led to 20+ years of useless, endless wars. President Trump sees “exit strategies” differently—he sees them as complete and total submission of the enemy.

To borrow a term from popular culture, Trump demands our foes “bend the knee,” and he will settle for nothing less.

Like the businessman he is, Trump expects his competitors to submit to his company’s will or cease to exist. As Trump said in his speech last Saturday night, “There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days.

This is not an “exit strategy.” This is a demand for complete and total submission. Importantly, Trump planned our attacks on Iran’s nuclear capabilities realizing that total submission was possible, and he would never have launched the attacks if total submission was not on the menu. That is a sea change from our recent history of complex geopolitical “exit strategies.” Trump’s exit strategy is simply complete and total submission, and nothing less. His stockholders deserve as much.

“BARGAIN AGAIN (FROM A POSITION OF COMPLETE STRENGTH) WITH THE DEFEATED ENEMY.”

This is another area that is separate and distinct from the Powell Doctrine, and from all American wars since the Spanish-American War in 1898. Like the businessman he is, Trump sees war as a means to force our enemies to the negotiating table to give us what we want. Democracy? LGBTQ+ rights? Capitalism? Trump does not care. He only cares about what tangibly benefits his stockholders. When Trump says, “But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed, and skill,” he implies that negotiations can create peace. The B-2 strikes also serve to bring the mullahs to the negotiating table. If they acquiesce, they survive. If they do not, they die.

Additionally, Trump sees the deployment of U.S. forces as creating second- and third-order effects. Did China get the message? Will Russia stop giving arms to Iran if we agree to stop arming Ukraine? Every action Trump takes has deep meaning, and often outside the obvious scope of military objectives. This, too, is a businessman’s approach to war, and differs greatly from the standards of other recent presidents. If an action can influence your company’s competitors to act in your best interest, that is an action that must be taken.

At some point, every American enemy will realize that you must give Donald Trump what he wants, or he will destroy you. Military force as a negotiating tool is a new concept in American warfare, and I like it.

The Trump Doctrine provides for six steps to a new way of war. The Spanish-American War was the last war America ever fought for any reason other than to benefit the stockholders. Woodrow Wilson brought America into World War I to make the world “Safe for Democracy,” and for over a century, that has been America’s guiding wartime light. Yes, that was necessary and proper in World War II, but as a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq, I know that most of the world today does not want democracy, and wasting American lives to achieve such an objective is futile. I vastly prefer a war that benefits America’s stockholders, and hopefully, all future presidents will know that the Trump Doctrine is the best method of serving America’s national interests.

Thank you, President Trump, for realigning America’s military mission into something that best serves the American people.

Cynical Publius is the nom de plume of a retired U.S. Army colonel and veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, who is now a practicing mergers and acquisitions corporate law attorney. He believes the confluence of his experiences fighting wars and fighting business acquisitions has shown him Donald Trump’s way of war. You can follow Cynical Publius on X at @CynicalPublius.

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

As rents skyrocket and the cost of living keeps climbing, a new study from Highland Cabinetry aims to answer a simple but critical question: are America’s most expensive cities actually worth it? Spoiler: not really.

The study analyzed a wide range of metrics — including housing costs, income, safety, traffic, pollution, and unemployment — using data from sources like the U.S. Bureau of Labor and Zillow. The goal? To identify the cities where people are paying a premium and getting a whole lot of hassle in return.

Newark, NJ claimed the dubious honor of being the most overpriced city in the U.S., earning a perfect — and in this case, perfectly awful — score of 100, according to Highland Cabinetry. 

Living here will cost you over $5,100 a month, and for what? A safety index barely above 24, one of the worst in the country. Median household income is a modest $53,818, far below cities with similar costs. If you want the luxury of paying big-city prices for small-city problems, Newark’s got you covered.

Coming in hot at number two is New York City, which scored 98.17. It has the highest real estate price tag in the country — a staggering $18,402 per square foot in the city center. But with its famously clogged streets, questionable safety (index: 49.16), and a median income lower than in L.A. or D.C., you’re not exactly getting what you pay for. As the report shows, “Cost of living alone doesn’t define the value of a city.”

Los Angeles lands third with a score of 96.33. It boasts the worst traffic of any city in the study (index: 312.53), paired with high pollution and $7,500-a-square-foot housing. Sure, the average income is decent, but residents are choking on smog and spending hours stuck in gridlock.

At number four is Detroit, which proves that even cheaper real estate — a mere $1,067 per square foot — can’t save a city from this list. The city struggles with low safety (index: 26.86), bottom-of-the-barrel incomes ($38,080), and significant unemployment. It scores 94.5, mostly for failing to offer value even at lower prices.

Wilmington, DE rounds out the top five. With housing at over $3,000 per square foot and incomes hovering just above $50K, residents are paying luxury prices for a middle-tier lifestyle. The city scores 92.67, weighed down by high costs and underwhelming returns.

The Highland Cabinetry study shows that Washington, D.C. comes in at number six, scoring 90.83. It’s the most expensive city on the list for overall living costs — nearly $6,800 a month — but offers underwhelming safety (index: 39.86) and a daily grind of traffic and pollution. Even with six-figure average incomes, the experience doesn’t exactly scream “value.”

Chicago is next at number seven. With a score of 89, the Windy City offers decent earnings ($74,474) but drags itself down with poor safety, a 5.3% unemployment rate — the worst on the list — and the kind of expenses that make you question whether deep-dish pizza is worth it.

Houston takes the eighth spot, scoring 87.17. While more affordable than many of its peers, its air quality is poor, incomes are low ($41,142), and safety isn’t much to brag about. It’s the classic case of lower costs not necessarily equaling better living.

At number nine is San Francisco, where the dream of tech riches collides with reality. With housing prices over $11,000 per square foot and sky-high monthly expenses, the city scores just 85.33. Despite high incomes, residents deal with heavy traffic, mediocre safety, and significant pollution. In short: you’ll pay a lot, and you’ll suffer plenty.

Finally, Miami rounds out the list at number ten with a score of 83.5. While its safety and air quality beat many cities higher on the list, incomes don’t stretch nearly far enough to justify the $4,100+ monthly costs. Fun in the sun comes at a price — and for many, it’s too steep.

As a spokesperson for Highland Cabinetry put it: “Cost of living alone doesn’t define the value of a city. What our data shows is that several high-cost urban areas come with serious trade-offs, whether it’s long commutes, safety issues, or environmental stress. For many residents, the price tag isn’t the only consideration — it’s what that money gets you. And in many cases, the return on investment just isn’t there.”

Update(2200ET): The ceasefire is going to be shaky and likely difficult to maintain given that right up until the very moment it is to go into effect Tehran was on the receiving end of very intense Israeli warplane attacks. And Iran’s Foreign Minister too said Iran hit back overnight:

“The military operations of our powerful Armed Forces to punish Israel for its aggression continued until the very last minute, at 4am. Together with all Iranians, I thank our brave Armed Forces who remain ready to defend our dear country until their last drop of blood, and who responded to any attack by the enemy until the very last minute,” said FM Araghchi on X.

IRANIAN TELEVISION: ISRAEL ASSASSINATED NUCLEAR SCIENTIST MOHAMMAD REZA SIDDIQI IN ITS RECENT ATTACKS

But shortly before that above latest statement, there was this by the top Iranian diplomat:

What Tehran was looking like overnight, right up to ceasefire zero hour:

Tehran moments ago: pic.twitter.com/Gq0RUdMVoo

— Dr. Eli David (@DrEliDavid) June 24, 2025

It’s anything but certain whether it will hold, but likely the White House is putting pressure on Tel Aviv to at least play nice for now, so Trump can take his ‘victory lap’ and declare mission accomplished. And yet, the status of Iran’s uranium enrichment stockpile is unknown.

The status of the ceasefire itself may not become clear until the daylight hours…

The ceasefire between Iran and Israel may be voided, as Israel is using the final 30 minutes before it takes effect to assassinate Iranian leadership and rain fire down on Tehran.

If the attacks do not stop by 3:30 AM Tel Aviv time, Israel will have already violated the… pic.twitter.com/TgIeyg91Qg

— AF Post (@AFpost) June 24, 2025

* * * 

Update: Fox is reporting, “President Trump spoke with Qatar’s Emir and informed him the U.S. got Israel to agree to a ceasefire with Iran. The President asked Qatar to help persuade Iran to do the same, following that Vice President Vance coordinated with Qatar’s Prime Minister on the details. This effort proved successful and, following discussions with the Qatari PM, the Iranians agreed. The deal was coordinated at the highest level by the President and Vice President and the Qatari Emir and Prime minister directly.” 

“Despite having been attacked just hours earlier, the Qataris set aside their grievances and prioritized regional security to get the deal done,” this source added.

Reuters is reporting that Iran has agreed to the ceasefire, which at the very least will provide a respite to the tit-for-tat missiles. More from Reuters:

• Qatar Brokered Iran’s Ceasefire Deal After U.S. Request
• Qatari PM secured Tehran’s approval following Trump’s outreach to Emir after Iran’s strike on U.S. base.
• Doha played key role in halting Israel-Iran conflict

* * *

Update: Shortly after 6pm, futures jumped and oil slumped even more in one of its biggest intraday reversals on record, after Trump announced on his Truth Social account that Iran and Israel had “fully agreed” to a “Complete and Total ceasefire” which will takes place at approximately midnight ET, “when Israel and Iran have wound down and completed their in progress, final missions“, and will last for 12 hours, at which time Trump says that “War will be considered, ENDED!”

The president adds that “on the assumption that everything works as it should, which it will, I would like to congratulate both Countries, Israel and Iran, on having the Stamina, Courage, and Intelligence to end, what should be called, “THE 12 DAY WAR.” This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn’t, and never will! God bless Israel, God bless Iran, God bless the Middle East, God bless the United States of America, and GOD BLESS THE WORLD!”

The problem for now, however, is that the “fully-agreed upon ceasefire” announcement is news to Iran, with Al-Mayadeen reporting that “there is no confirmation from official Iranian sources regarding Trump’s talk of a ceasefire”

إيران: مراسل الميادين: لا يوجد تأكيد من مصادر رسمية إيرانية بشأن كلام ترامب عن وقف لإطلاق النار#الميادين pic.twitter.com/xvDJud1bHN

— قناة الميادين (@AlMayadeenNews) June 23, 2025

Others only add to the confusion…

#Iran’s mission to the United Nations declined to comment on whether it had received a ceasefire proposal from the United States or whether #Tehran had accepted it — ISNA

— Barzan Sadiq (@BarzanSadiq) June 23, 2025

… with CNN noting that Iran has not received any ceasefire proposal…

… and Iran’s semi-official Mehr News going so fast as to claim that “the Zionist regime carried out attacks on Iran, Trump spread his delusions and announced an imaginary ceasefire between Iran and the United States.“

Yet not all the subsequent information is negative: according to Reuters, the US appears to be backchanneling with Qatar, which has been asked for help to persuade Iran to agree after Israel had already agreed, and also adds that Iran had reportedly secured an agreement to a ceasfire. 

• TRUMP AND VP VANCE DISCUSSED ISRAEL-IRAN CEASEFIRE PROPOSAL WITH QATAR’S EMIR AFTER IRANIAN ATTACKS ON AIRBASE IN QATAR ON MONDAY –OFFICIAL BRIEFED ON NEGOTIATIONS TO REUTERS
• TRUMP TOLD EMIR THAT ISRAEL HAD AGREED TO CEASEFIRE AND ASKED FOR QATARI HELP TO PERSUADE IRAN TO ALSO AGREE –OFFICIAL BRIEFED TO REUTERS
• QATAR’S PRIME MINISTER SECURED IRAN’S AGREEMENT TO U.S. CEASEFIRE PROPOSAL IN CALL WITH TEHRAN -OFFICIAL BRIEFED TO REUTERS

And now we wait to see just who has agreed to what. 

* * *

Summary: The mainstream media and US officials are collectively reporting it’s all over folks – and there’s currently a surprisingly open level of acknowledgement that this ‘retaliation’ on US bases was telegraphed and even coordinated between Iran and Qatar (and that yes, the US knew about it). Tehran is saying the same number of missiles were used in the short-lived assault as were used by US bombers against its nuclear facilities.

“Iran’s missile attack on a US air base in Qatar was telegraphed well in advance, suggesting Tehran intended a symbolic show of force while offering a way to de-escalate after US airstrikes over the weekend,” Bloomberg is reporting. And CNN is currently even saying (based on its correspondent on the ground) that the skies over Tehran have grown quiet, after many days of constant strike waves by Israeli warplanes. The US military is saying all missiles were intercepted over Qatar. Airspace over Bahrain, Kuwait, and Dubai have already been reopened. 

Certainly markets have reacted consistent to this off-ramp narrative as well, as if it was all baked in: “One official with knowledge of Western intelligence assessments said the attack was a typical example of an ‘off-ramp’ escalation and warned it was more difficult to understand whether — and at what point — Israel would stop its own military activities in the region,” Bloomberg continues. The same report cites Jonathan Panikoff, a former deputy national intelligence officer for the Near East, who points to the obvious: “It feels choreographed and intentional. The Iranians get to tell their population they struck a mighty blow against the US, even if they didn’t, and Trump has the room now to decide not to retaliate.”

The Trump White House is now signaling it currently has no plans to launch a ‘retaliation’ strike in the wake of today’s Iranian attacks on US assets in the Gulf. Most reports are claiming that no missiles actually struck the ground at a US base, but it could be that this information will get suppressed regardless. No deaths or injuries have been reported. Trump’s statement in the aftermath ‘thanking’ Iran, ironically enough…

President Trump is essentially saying ‘mission accomplished’ and has declared that the three nuclear facilities struck by US bombers over the weekend were totally destroyed. But the big questions remain:

1) Will Netanyahu and the Israelis play ball with the ‘off-ramp’ opportunity?

2) Most importantly, where is the estimated 400kg of Iran’s enriched uranium now?

Iran has two choices;
1. Become Libya
2. Become North Korea

— ADAM (@AdameMedia) June 22, 2025

To some degree, more ‘known unknowns’ (cue Rumsfeld) have been created in the wake of Trump’s alleged destruction of Iran’s enrichment facilities. Perhaps the Iranians will now hasten to begin the actual secretive nuclear bomb program?

* * *

Update(1335ET): NY Times is reporting that advanced notice was given, which appears confirmation that plans of the ‘retaliation’ attack were leaked beforehand and was in many ways telegraphed publicly.

“Iran coordinated the attacks on the American airbase in Qatar with Qatar officials and gave advanced notice that attacks were coming to minimize casualties, according to three Iranian officials familiar with the plans,” per the NY Times’ reporting.

War theater? Or just one big test of US-supplied anti-air defense hardware? One regional journalist and pundit writes:

So far this is looking like the response we got in 2020 in response to the killing of Qassem Soleimani. A telegraphed attack on US base that did not result in fatalities but is “face saving” for the Iranian regime.

Some are claiming missile impact on some targets, which would indeed be a very serious development. But Qatar’s Al-Arabi is saying there were no Iranian missile attacks on Iraq’s Ain al-Assad base, which hosts significant US forces.

CONFIRMED IMPACTS made at US al-Udeid airbase in Qatar — Al-Mayadeen citing IRGC

Onlookers observe impacts as smoke reportedly rises from site — Al-Quds news footage pic.twitter.com/I7nl8krTkZ

— RT (@RT_com) June 23, 2025

And meanwhile markets seem to be taking this all in as a bit of staged war theater…

Some odd trading behavior to say the least, seemingly indicating markets aren’t buying the ‘spectacle’ thus far…

Oil knows? 

Below: Oil at moment when Iran launched the first missiles…

* * *

Update(1242ET): The Iranian response appears to have begun, as it’s raining missiles over Doha, Qatar. AFP journalists are reporting explosions over Doha, and Reuters has also cited witnesses to the blasts.

Axios is reporting that Iran has launched six missiles toward American bases in Qatar. “Iranian missiles were launched targeting US bases in Qatar and Iraq,” according to JPost’s Amichai Stein. i24News is reporting that “at least 10 missiles were fired at Qatar.”

• IRAN LAUNCHES MISSILE STRIKE AT US AIR BASE IN QATAR: TASNIM
• UAE AIRSPACE IS CLOSED: FOX NEWS
• AIR DEFENSE SYSTEM ACTIVATED OVER US AIN AL-ASSAD AIRBASE IN IRAQ ON ATTACK FEARS
• IRAN LAUNCHES MISSILES AT US BASES IN QATAR, IRAQ AND KUWAIT
• ALARMS HAVE BEEN REPORTED AT ALI AL SALEM AIR BASE IN KUWAIT
• BAHRAIN URGES CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS TO GO TO SAFE PLACE
• IRAN SAYS ITS ATTACK WAS FAR FROM QATAR RESIDENTIAL AREAS
• Trump in Situation Room with Defense Secretary, Joint Chiefs — CNBC
• U.S. military jets are currently scrambling from bases in Saudi Arabia: Report
• Iranian military statement: we targeted the Al-Udeid Base in Qatar with ‘devastating and powerful’ missile attack.

Anti-air defenses active over the Gulf:

WILD FOOTAGE 🔴🔴

Video shows air defenses intercepting incoming Iranian missiles over Qatar.

Iran is officially striking the United States of America pic.twitter.com/lc3fcLSoA3

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) June 23, 2025

Doha, Qatar NOW pic.twitter.com/fJmWpZAvfX

— Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) June 23, 2025

More early, unconfirmed footage:

Footage Shows Activation of Air Defenses in Qatar

Newly circulated footage shows Qatari air defense systems being activated, reportedly in response to incoming missiles from Iran. pic.twitter.com/j408U0CHdn

— Ahmad Algohbary (@AhmadAlgohbary) June 23, 2025

It seems the Pentagon knew it was coming, and this may be telegraphed… perhaps more war theater:

Almost every single large military aircraft parked at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar evacuated the installation this week, with over 34 aircraft repositioning to other bases further from Iran.

The US confirmed that it moved some assets “vulnerable to Iranian attack.” -Reuters pic.twitter.com/DkaVAUz6s9

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 19, 2025

* * *

Update(1235ET): A series of rapid news wire headlines have set off the alarm of an Iranian attack on US interests in the Middle East is ‘imminent’. Lots of fast-paced unverified claims racing:

• Iran moves ballistic missile assets to target US assets across the region — WSJ
• Large GPS disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz
• US military jets being scrambled from Saudi Arabia, British & French military jets being scrambled
• TRUMP ADMIN PREPARING FOR IRAN ATTACK ON US GULF BASES: AXIOS
• CHINA URGES CITIZENS IN QATAR TO AVOID AL UDEID AIR BASE

Qatar has already been shutting down airspace, and importantly that is home to the US 5th Fleet.

JUST IN: Iran is moving missile launchers into place for a potential attack on U.S. forces in the Middle East in response to the surprise American strike on three nuclear sites over the weekend, according to U.S. officials.

DOD tracking a “credible” threat to U.S. forces in the…

— Lara Seligman (@laraseligman) June 23, 2025

“Iran is moving missile launchers into place for a potential attack on U.S. forces in the Middle East in response to the surprise American strike on three nuclear sites over the weekend, according to U.S. officials,” the breaking reports say.

S&P 500 ERASES GAIN

* * *

Update(1125ET): Iranian state media sources are reporting that Iran is likely to attack US military facilities in the Mideast region ‘in the coming hours’.

There are an estimated 40,000 American troops throughout the whole region, including at bases and on warships in the CENTCOM area of responsibility.

On Sunday the NY Times had cited US officials to say anonymous US military and intelligence officials had detected signs that Iran-backed groups are preparing hostile action against US forces in places like Syria and Iraq. There’s also the possibility of direct Iranian ballistic missile launches on bases in Iraq, just as happened in the wake of Soleimani’s assassination during the first Trump administration.

But is this response being telegraphed or even coordinated with the US so as to avoid uncontrollable escalation? Israeli journalist Amit Segal reports:

Senior Israeli officials assess that Iran will, in one way or another, coordinate its attack on the United States — similar to how it acted following the assassination of Qassem Soleimani. This is intended to avoid an unplanned escalation and out of hope to contain the incident. Perhaps in this context come the reports suggesting that the U.S. already knows the attack will take place within the next 48 hours.

Iranian missile and drone attacks on Israel started out fierce and sustained, but have waned in the last days. Tehran is not expected to go after US assets with such intensity, fearing that Washington could launch a full war of regime change targeting the Ayatollah.

Meanwhile, the Islamic Republic continues to get pummeled by now daily and nightly Israeli airstrikes, particularly over unprotected airspace in Western Iran…

The end of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps headquarters pic.twitter.com/s5FEB4a0AT

— Amit Segal (@AmitSegal) June 23, 2025

* * *

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said in a fresh interview that the US administration is ‘confident’ that Saturday’s bombings of three key Iranian nuclear sites accomplished the job of dismantling Tehran’s alleged nuclear ambitions. She also said Trump made the decision “based on his own instincts and the US intelligence that he saw.”

“This strike on Saturday did make our homeland safer because it took away Iran’s ability to create a nuclear bomb. This is a regime that threatens ‘death to America,’ and ‘death to Israel, and they no longer have the capability to build this nuclear weapon and threaten the world,” she told ABC News on Monday morning while making media rounds. 

At a moment White House officials have been trying to downplay that this is a conflict of regime change in Iran, Leavitt did say the US is seeking to “Take away the power of this incredibly violent regime.“

Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz were hit with huge bunker-buster bombs over the weekend, after which President Trump late Sunday declared on Truth Social: “Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!”

However, UN inspectors at the IAEA currently have no access to the impacted sites of Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz – and the country remains essentially a warzone, also with airspace closed- as the region braces for potential Iranian response against US bases and assets. And of course, satellites can’t assess damage underground, where the enrichment facilities and stockpiles are located.

Press Secretary on FOX: “why shouldn’t the Iranian people take away the power of this incredibly violent regime?”

.@PressSec: “If the Iranian regime refuses to come to a peaceful, diplomatic solution — which the President is still interested in engaging in … why shouldn’t the Iranian people take away the power of this incredibly violent regime? … Our posture has not changed.” pic.twitter.com/EkBKDSFkcO

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) June 23, 2025

Also interesting is that Leavitt repeated the US administration talking point that the intel on Iran that Trump was provided made clear that Iran was ‘weeks’ from a nuclear weapon.

It remains that once again the American people are being led into supporting another US war and quagmire in the Middle East based on ‘trust us!’ from this administration, citing vague ‘intel reports’ on WMD, which sounds suspiciously like the faulty Bush-Cheney case against Saddam Hussein.

Still, the White House official narrative remains that Trump is not seeking full regime change in Iran, and this is also how Israeli media is presenting it in recent headlines:

“The President’s posture and our military posture has not changed,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt tells reporters.

“The president was simply raising a question that I think many people around the world are asking: if the Iranian regime refuses to give up its nuclear program or engage in talks… if they refuse to engage in diplomacy moving forward, why shouldn’t the Iranian people rise up against this brutal terrorist regime?”

So we are already in the ‘Iranian people should rise up’ phase of this war.

Below are all the latest headlines and developments of the last 24-48 hours…

* * *

Israel-Iran Latest Highlights

• US President Trump confirmed the launch of “Operation Midnight Hammer”, which involved targeted strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The operation used 125 aircraft, including seven B-2 bombers, alongside submarine-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles. Fourteen GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (“bunker busters”) were deployed to penetrate deeply buried targets, notably Fordow.
• Satellite imagery shows significant damage at all facilities. Trump described it as a joint effort with Israel.
• IAEA say the damage assessment is pending; no signs of radiation leak.
• In retaliation, Iran’s parliament has approved the closure of the Strait of Hormuz after the US launched strikes against the country’s nuclear facilities. Iran’s security body will make the final decision on whether to proceed with the plan, state television reported.
• Iran retaliated by missile strikes on Israel. Has said future action could target over 20 US bases or naval assets. Iran’s Military Central Command says powerful operations with heavy consequences for the US are to be expected. US entering the conflict expands the list of legitimate targets for Iran.
• The European morning has seen a slew of geopolitical updates (see section below). Some additional USD strength on: an Iranian provincial official says Israel is targeting the Fordow nuclear facility, via Tasnim. Israel struck Fordow’s access road, to prevent certain elements from approaching the area, according to Journalist Stein.
• Iran’s Military Central Command says powerful operations with heavy consequences for the US are to be expected. US entering the conflict expands the list of legitimate targets for Iran.
• Iran’s Army Chief says they are now free to take action against US interests, via IRNA.
• Iranian city Karaj has been targeted by Israeli missiles, according to Fars; reports of large explosions being heard in Tehran.
• Russian Kremlin says President Putin will receive the Iranian Foreign Minister later today. Communication channels remain open with the US, a call between US President Trump and Putin can be “quickly organised if required”; no current plans for a call. Iran can share its proposals later today.

Israel-Iran Weekend News

US Strike Operations

• US President Trump confirmed the launch of “Operation Midnight Hammer”, which involved targeted strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The operation used 125 aircraft, including seven B-2 bombers, alongside submarine-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles.
• Fourteen GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (“bunker busters”) were deployed to penetrate deeply buried targets, notably Fordow.
• Satellite imagery confirmed significant infrastructure damage at all three nuclear sites, with Fordow showing six fresh craters.
• All targets were reportedly struck between 23:40 BST (Saturday) and 00:05 BST (Sunday). Iran’s air defence systems failed to detect or intercept the incoming attacks.
• Trump described the attack as a joint effort with Israel, saying they “worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before.”
• Axios quoted officials as saying that Whitkov told Araqchi during the operation that “the strike is only once.” He confirmed that Washington was still seeking a diplomatic solution and wanted Tehran to return to negotiations.
• US President Trump did not want to continue striking Iran, but he would do so if US bases were targeted, according to Sky News Arabia citing Axios.
• US President Trump reportedly directed staff to announce a two-week window in order to conceal plans for the Iran attack, according to CNN sources.

Damage Assessment & Nuclear Risk

• IAEA Director General Grossi said craters are visible at Fordow, Natanz suffered direct hits, and tunnel entrances at Isfahan were struck. Full underground damage assessment remains pending. A special IAEA board meeting is scheduled for Monday.
• Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine stated it is “too early” to assess whether Iran’s nuclear capability was fully neutralised.
• US intelligence officials have raised concerns Iran may have relocated enriched uranium stockpiles in advance.
• US Secretary of State Rubio urged Iran to surrender its enriched uranium stockpiles, claiming they remain buried under Isfahan and likely were not moved before the strikes.
• The IAEA reported no signs of a radiation leak. Saudi Arabia’s Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority confirmed no radioactive effects were detected in Gulf states.

Strait of Hormuz & Oil Flow Threat

• The Iranian parliament has approved the closure of the Strait of Hormuz after the US launched strikes against the country’s nuclear facilities. Iran’s security body will make the final decision on whether to proceed with the plan, state television reported.
• US Secretary of State Rubio warned such a move would be “economic suicide” for Iran but remains a credible escalation vector.
• NOTE: Market contacts have suggested OPEC+ have not had any calls, with no talks of an emergency meeting yet amid no signs of supply disruptions, yet.

Iranian Military Response

• Iran launched retaliatory missile strikes on Tel Aviv and Haifa, Israel, resulting in at least 86 reported injuries.
• Iranian officials have warned that future actions could target over 20 US bases or naval assets in the region.
• Iran stated that its military would determine the timing, nature, and scale of its response, according to Reuters.
• Signs have emerged of Iran‑backed militias preparing to attack US bases in Iraq and Syria, according to Sky News Arabia citing The New York Times.
• Iranian air defences reportedly activated in Isfahan, targeting hostile Israeli aircraft.
• Iranian forces reported that Israeli airstrikes killed nine personnel — seven Revolutionary Guards and two conscripts — in Yazd province.

Iranian Messaging

• Iran is weighing its response — with its Foreign Minister saying “all options” are on the table after Washington proved “they only understand the language of threat and force”, according to CNN.
• Supreme Leader Khamenei warned that US strikes would “result in irreparable damage” to the US.
• Iran’s President Pezeshkian warned of a “more devastating” retaliation if Israel’s bombing campaign continued.
• Iranian regime sources denied any major nuclear material loss from the strikes, implying the sites had been pre-emptively evacuated.
• Iran’s Crisis Management HQ stated there was “no danger” to civilians near Fordow; state media reported the site had “long been evacuated.”
• An adviser to Khamenei claimed Iran still retains its enriched uranium, indigenous nuclear knowledge, and political will, despite facility damage.
• Iran’s Foreign Minister condemned the strikes as a violation of international law and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
• The Iranian Atomic Energy Organisation called the attacks “a barbaric act” breaching international law.

International Reactions

• The UN Security Council held an emergency meeting at 20:00 BST on Sunday in response to the strikes. US Ambassador Dorothy Shea defended the operation; China, Russia, and Pakistan called for an immediate ceasefire and accused the US of breaching the UN Charter.
• The UN and EU called for de-escalation, with Secretary-General António Guterres warning of a “dangerous escalation.”
• The E3 (UK, France, Germany) released a joint statement urging Iran to return to nuclear negotiations and warning against further destabilising actions.
• Gulf Arab states including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait condemned the US strikes, calling for restraint and diplomatic resolution.
• UK PM Keir Starmer backed the US strike, describing it as a response to a “grave threat.”
• Israeli PM Netanyahu praised the US action, calling it a display of “awesome and righteous might” that could “change history.”
• Saudi Arabia, Oman, and India expressed concern and urged all sides to pursue diplomatic solutions.

US Political & Legal Fallout

• Congressional response to the strikes was mixed. Most Republicans expressed support, with Senator Ted Cruz praising the operation. However, some dissent emerged within the party, notably from Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who stated, “Not our fight.” Democrats strongly criticised the move; Senator Bernie Sanders labelled it “grossly unconstitutional” and accused President Trump of bypassing Congress.
• US Department of Justice said President Trump had the authority under Article II to order Iran strikes without congressional approval, but a prolonged conflict might require Congress’s involvement, according to CNN.
• US President Trump to meet with National Security team at 13:00 EDT/18:00 BST on Monday, according to Bloomberg.

Trump on Truth Social

• US President Trump posted on Sunday “The damage to the Nuclear sites in Iran is said to be “monumental.” The hits were hard and accurate. Great skill was shown by our military. ” Trump added that “if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change”, and that “The GREAT B-2 pilots have just landed, safely, in Missouri.”
• President Trump later posted “Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!… The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye!!!”

US Homeland Security & Domestic Threats

• The US is on high alert for Iranian-backed terrorist attacks, especially in the 48 hours following the strike. FBI, DHS, and local law enforcement have increased security presence at places of worship in major cities including New York and Washington, DC.
• DHS warned of a heightened domestic threat environment, including potential for cyberattacks or lone-wolf incidents inspired by religious rulings.
• The White House is monitoring potential Iranian sleeper cells inside the US.
• VP Vance stated the administration is watching known terror watch list individuals who entered during the Biden era.

Regional Axis Responses/Headlines

• Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi arrived in Moscow to consult with President Putin. Russia condemned the US strikes as a “flagrant violation of international law.”
• Iran’s Foreign Minister Araqchi said he would discuss tackling common challenges and threats with Russian President Putin, according to Iranian news agency SNN.
• Hezbollah condemned the US strikes, calling them a violation of international and humanitarian law and warned the conflict could spiral globally.
• A Yemeni Houthi official warned retaliation for the US attack was “only a matter of time.”

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

The Federal Reserve announced on June 23 that it will no longer factor “reputation risk” into its bank examinations, a move aligned with efforts by Republican lawmakers and the Trump administration to combat what they describe as politically motivated financial discrimination—particularly debanking.

The central bank said in a statement it has begun reviewing and revising its supervisory materials to remove references to reputation risk, replacing them where appropriate with more specific discussions of financial risk.

In its June 23 announcement, the Fed said it has started the process of reviewing references to reputation risk in its supervisory materials and replacing them, when appropriate, with more specific discussions of financial risk.

“This change does not alter the Board’s expectation that banks maintain strong risk management to ensure safety and soundness and compliance with law and regulation,” the Fed said in a statement.

The decision marks a significant shift in how regulators assess banks, particularly as scrutiny intensifies over claims that some institutions have denied services to lawful businesses—such as cryptocurrency firms, religious organizations, or political groups—based on subjective concerns about reputational harm.

Although banks generally have wide discretion over account relationships, critics argue that invoking reputational risk can mask discriminatory decisions. These concerns have fueled growing bipartisan calls to ensure fair access to financial services.

“This is how de-banking works,” Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), told The Epoch Times in a 2023 interview. “The bank closes the accounts, doesn’t give a clear reason, and cites some kind of risk toleration policy for the denial, under circumstances that look very suspiciously like it was because of your religious or political views.”

Lawmakers have responded with legislation aimed at combating financial discrimination. In March, Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), for example, introduced the Fair Access to Banking Act (FIRM Act), which would bar federal regulators from penalizing or pressuring financial institutions based on reputational risk. A bipartisan House version was introduced the following month by Reps. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) and Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.).

“For too long, unelected regulators have used the vague and subjective concept of reputational risk to push political ideology under the guise of bank supervision,” Barr said in a statement. “The FIRM Act restores neutrality and integrity to our financial regulatory system and protects the right of all Americans to access banking services without fear of unlawful discrimination.”

The Fed’s move aligns it with other banking regulators that have recently taken similar action. In March, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) said it would remove references to reputational risk from its manuals and guidance documents.

“The OCC has never used reputation risk as a catch-all justification for supervisory action,” the agency said in a statement. “Nonetheless, the OCC believes removing references to reputation risk will improve transparency and confidence in the supervisory process.”

Days later, Travis Hill, acting chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), informed Congress that the agency would also eliminate reputational risk as a standalone factor, calling it a concept that “has been abused in the past” and adds “no value from a safety and soundness perspective.”

During an April speech at the American Bankers Association summit, Hill said the FDIC was drafting a rule that would explicitly bar supervisors from criticizing or taking action against banks based on reputational risk—particularly if it relates to clients’ political, religious, or social views.

“We are also exploring additional ideas to comprehensively put an end to debanking,” Hill said. “Overall, we are prioritizing ensuring our regulatory approach promotes a vibrant, growing economy, while at the same time promoting a safe, sound, and resilient banking system.”

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has also acknowledged the seriousness of the issue. Earlier this year, he told lawmakers during a congressional hearing that the Fed was taking a “fresh look” at reports of debanking, noting he had been “struck by the growing number of cases” where individuals or businesses were allegedly denied financial services.

Powell suggested that regulatory overreach and heightened risk aversion may be contributing factors and said the matter warranted closer examination.

According to a new Resume.io survey, nearly one in six Americans under 28 won’t even look at a job unless it comes with a designated nap zone.

Yes, nap pods — the latest dealbreaker for Gen-Z job hunters, according to the NY Post.

“It’s clear Gen-Z isn’t shy about voicing what they want from today’s workplace,” said Amanda Augustine, career coach and resident expert at Resume.io, which polled 1,000 professionals nationwide. “For many, it goes beyond salary and health insurance.”

Apparently, what it does include is snoozing on the clock, playing ping pong, and hanging out with dogs.

The NY Post writes that one in five Gen-Zers insists on having a “fun room” with games. The same number flat-out refuse to work anywhere that isn’t pet-friendly — a stance that makes millennials look easygoing and boomers practically spartan by comparison.

And don’t expect them to be impressed just because the office has kombucha on tap. A third of Gen-Z expects free snacks and lunch like it’s a constitutional right. Even then, many would prefer not to come in at all. A full third say a four-day workweek is non-negotiable, and one in four wants extended sabbaticals — for “personal development” or, let’s be real, globe-trotting.

“These aren’t just nice-to-have extras; they reflect a shifting view around well-being,” Augustine added.

Augustine explained the broader cultural shift, saying younger workers are “pushing back against the old model of constant hustle and burnout” in favor of something more livable — or at least more entertaining.

She also had a warning for companies hoping to recruit the next wave of workers: “Companies that dismiss these priorities as frivolous may find it increasingly difficult to attract and retain top talent.”

For the record, despite all the fun-and-games chatter, the top workplace perk across all ages remains good old-fashioned paid overtime — with 76% calling it a must-have.

Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,

San Francisco is the worst-run city in the nation, according to a report by WalletHub.

Several other California cities also ranked in the bottom 10 of 148 cities, including Stockton (138), Los Angeles (139), Long Beach (140), Fresno (141), and Oakland (146).

The finance website created a “Quality of Services” score of 36 metrics split into six categories, which was then measured against 148 of the nation’s most populated city’s per-capita budget.

San Francisco came in last overall, ranking 89th in financial stability, 137th in education, 102nd in safety, and 135th in economy.

The WalletHub study also looked at the operating efficiency of cities, by comparing the quality of city services residents receive against the city’s budget.

“The best-run cities in America use their budgets most effectively to provide high-quality financial security, education, health, safety and transportation to their residents,” WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said in the June 17 report.

“Many of the top cities also have a very low amount of outstanding government debt per capita, which can prevent financial troubles in the future.”

San Francisco ranked so low in part due to its long-term debt holdings. Moody’s lowered San Francisco’s credit rating in 2024, citing in part, the high number of commercial vacancies in its downtown, Moody’s said in a statement to Bloomberg News.

It ranked highest in long-term debt outstanding per capita, coming in at 146th, with debt levels 89 times higher than the best city: Casper, Wyoming.

In the report, San Francisco ranked 135th in economy, suggesting that San Francisco’s high per-capita budget isn’t resulting in effective service quality.  The city had $2.2 billion in outstanding city general obligation bonds as of June 30, 2024.

The WalletHub study ranked San Francisco last in high school graduation rate at 90.4 percent. By contrast Frederick, Maryland, ranked number one, graduating students in 2024 at a rate of 94.3 percent, a 1 percent increase over the year prior.

Although San Francisco’s roads have improved in recent years, there is still room for improvement. San Francisco’s 2,148.3 total lane miles ranked tied for 126th in quality of roads.

In 2024, San Francisco’s independently rated Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score increased to 75, a rating categorized as “good” by the regional Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). This rating placed San Francisco as having the best roads among large Bay Area cities.

The pavement in the Bay Area, encompassing 44,000 lane miles of local streets and roads, does not receive great ratings overall. The MTC placed the region’s 2023 PCI score at 67 out of a maximum possible 100 points, and is therefore deemed “fair.”

“The good news is that city and county public works teams have been able to prevent large-scale deterioration. We’re even seeing big improvements in some places. The bad news is there’s still so far to go,” MTC chair and Napa County Supervisor Alfredo Pedroza said of the Bay Area’s roads in 2024.

San Francisco scored much higher in two measures: It was second in health, potentially owing to the fact that the city has the lowest infant mortality rate. And it ranked 13th for infrastructure and pollution risk.

The top cities on WalletHub’s list are Provo, Utah; Nampa, Idaho; Manchester, New Hampshire; Boise, Idaho; and Nashua, New Hampshire.

Cost of Living

WalletHub, which creates tools and resources to help consumers manage their finances, acknowledges that cities across the country have been ravaged by high inflation.

According to the Joint Economic Committee (JEC) State Inflation Tracker, the average California household was paying $1,278 more per month for the identical basket of goods and services in December 2024 compared to January 2021. Cumulatively, that amounted to $38,353 in higher spending per household over that time period.

The California weighted average of the consumer price index (CPI) in 1965, came in at 31.7 (using 1982-4 as the reference line at 100); by 2024, it had risen to 341.951.

This has locked local leaders into a delicate balancing act, especially as of late, as they must factor in the significant increase in the cost of goods when deciding where to place budget funds. In San Diego, the city has been weighing cuts in services such as public restrooms, and has already increased the price of parking downtown.

“Leaders must carefully consider which services are most essential, which agencies’ budgets to cut or boost, and whether and how much to raise taxes, among other decisions,” the WalletHub report states.

Japan’s auto exports remain the biggest obstacle in reaching a trade deal with the U.S., according to opposition leaders briefed by Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba.

Yoshihiko Noda, head of the Constitutional Democratic Party, said after a Thursday meeting with Ishiba that the U.S. focus on the automotive trade deficit is the primary roadblock, according to Bloomberg.

“He didn’t give a clear explanation, but it seems that the US has the strongest interest in the auto trade deficit,” Noda told reporters. “Various ideas were probably proposed, but there are differences in thinking regarding autos. So, he said a general consensus has yet to be reached.”

Despite two months of negotiations and a recent meeting between Ishiba and U.S. President Donald Trump at the G7 summit in Canada, no agreement has been made.

Japan’s trade surplus with the U.S. reached ¥8.6 trillion ($59.3 billion) last year—82% of which came from autos and auto parts—putting the country in Trump’s crosshairs as he pushes to rebalance trade using tariffs.

The U.S. has already imposed 25% duties on cars and related components, a serious concern for Japan, where the auto industry supports 5.6 million jobs and makes up about 10% of GDP.

Exports to the U.S. plunged 11% in May, with auto shipments down 25%. The monthly surplus still stood at ¥451.7 billion, with 93% tied to the auto sector, according to the Finance Ministry.

Bloomberg writes that Japan Innovation Party co-leader Seiji Maehara also confirmed that autos remain the main sticking point.

“He didn’t mention the details,” Maehara said. “But I felt that the biggest difference exists in automobiles. Japan is requesting a reduction in automobile tariffs, but I suspect that Trump may not have agreed to that.”

Ishiba assured party leaders that the government would support the auto industry through loans and broader cooperation. The talks are politically sensitive, coming just ahead of a key upper house election in July.

The uncertainty also hangs over a July 9 deadline, when U.S. reciprocal tariffs are set to revert to higher rates. Noda said it’s still unclear what the U.S. will decide.

If the hike goes through, Japan could see its across-the-board tariffs rise to 24% from 10%, on top of the existing 50% duties on steel and aluminum.

“We’re facing a situation that can be described as a national crisis,” Ishiba said. “To overcome it, we’ll take into account opposition party views and continue to strongly seek a review of the US tariff measures.”