The News Roundup for June 26, 2026

This message comes from Schwab. At Schwab, you can get everything from self-directed investing to full-service wealth management all in one place. No matter your investing goal, life stage, amount to invest, or know-how, you can invest your way with Schwab. Hi, it's Todd, your host for this edition of the News Roundup. Just a quick heads up before we start the show. The news is rapidly changing. And things might have changed by the time you hear this episode. Stay up to date with all the latest by listening. to your local NPR member station, and by visiting npr.org.

I'm Todd's Willick, and it's the 1A Friday News Roundup. If you think the reflecting pool situation is icky, it's got nothing on Congress. This week, the House and the Senate were a hot, hot mess, and not because of the old algae. know, but because the president is throwing everything into the pool to try to intervene in the coming midterms. Meanwhile, Senate Republicans flexed and then flip-flopped on Iran and Mayor Zohran Mamdani flexed in New York cities in their congressional primaries in ways that have establishment Democrats worried about their power. Our panel is here. They're all here in the studio. Wendy Benjaminson, Washington Senior Editor for Bloomberg News. Hi, Wendy.

Hi, thanks for having me. Arthur Delaney is here, senior reporter for Huff Post. Hi, Arthur. Hi. And on the other side, Taylor Poplar's national political reporter at the White House for Spectrum News. Taylor, great to see you. Great to see you, Todd. Let's start at the Supreme Court. It's the end of the term at SCOTUS, and it's that time of year in June when we sit and we wait for the big rulings that reverberate across America. A couple of big opinions in the Trump administration's favor on immigration this week, on Thursday, the court said the Trump administration can strip legal protections from migrants seeking refuge in the United States. Now, hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians who were here legally in the United States are vulnerable to deportation. The decision, 6-3 along ideological lines. Wendy, how does this decision in favor of the administration open the door for it to terminate what's called TPS for all countries.

Well, it does do that, Todd. And it is, it was a huge ruling because in one sense, the court put the temporary back in temporary protected status. Former President Biden had really expanded those powers because when can you say to people from Haiti, it's safe to go back? Your government is stable. The economy is roaring. You know, you can go back.

That hasn't happened in decades. And so there are at least 350,000 Haitians here legally on that status. What the court said is that it is up to the president to decide when that status ends, and he can do it in any manner necessary. And that's what the crux was here for the Trump administration. The liberal justices on the court and the plaintiffs noted that it was on a whim. And normally when you end temporary protected status, for, say, earthquake victims from El Salvador,

Department of Homeland Security would talk to the State Department and they would talk to other agencies. A whole process. A whole process to get through this. And in the Trump administration, they're saying, we think you're eating cats and dogs in Minnesota. You're out of here. I want to ask about that part of it.

One part of this ruling that caught a lot of attention when the opinion was rendered, Samuel Alito Samuel Alito, writing for the majority here, said there was no evidence that the Trump administration position against Haitian migrants. was based on any racial animus at all. So Justice Alika Elena Kagan, Elena Kagan, pardon me, and other liberal justices had some response to that.

What happened and what happened on the bench? It was really stunning. The justices took their dissents and read point by point. Everything that Trump and other top administration officials, I believe, like Stephen Miller, had said about these immigrants. And a lot... Like what? Like, as I jokingly mentioned a few minutes ago, that this internet rumor that was completely false that in Minnesota, Haitian immigrants were eating their neighbor's pets, which...

In Ohio, I think. Ohio, excuse me. They probably all have AIDS. They come from S whole country. They're dirty. They're dirty. They did everything but say, you know, that this is...

We feel this because they... because of their race. And they did that with Syrians. well. So she just read out all these statements to sort of prove the point, unfortunately too late, that this was based on racial animus and therefore unconstitutional. So TPS, temporary protected status now, certainly at risk, not just for Syrians and Haitians, but for nationals from other countries who receive that protection. Who else are we talking about? We could be talking about Ukrainians. We could be talking about El Salvadorans. The only people that seem to be getting in now are white South Africans. The justice has also struck down this week a law in Hawaii that made gun owners get

permission to bring guns into certain private establishments that the public has access to. And the court also sided with the administration allowing immigration officials to turn away asylum seekers at the border. The justice has allowed a policy called metering. That was devised under the Obama administration expanded during Donald Trump's first term. Taylor, what is metering and what does this decision mean? So metering, it was formalized in 2018, as you mentioned in President Trump's first term. It essentially allows U.S. Customs and Border officials if people are coming up to the U.S. Mexico border and they're saying, I want to seek asylum, I'm escaping violence, I'm escaping a dangerous situation. It allows those U.S. officials to turn them away and say, essentially, we're full.

There's no room for you here. Traditionally, people are able to come into the U.S. and seek asylum and basically knock on the door and say, hey, I need a safe place to be. They are brought in, and then the formal asylum process kicks off. And they're allowed to stay as they're beginning to get processed into the system. The Supreme Court essentially said, we're siding with the administration and saying, you don't necessarily have to do that. And there was this interesting back and forth between the conservative justices and the liberal ones over whether or not arriving at the door and knocking on it means that you've arrived in the United States. And the conservatives say, No, the liberals say yes, and the liberal justices said more people will die because of this decision.

Well, the justices still have eight opinions to release probably by the end of next week. And they're big ones. It's that time of year, as I said, we're expecting rulings on President Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship. His effort to fire federal reserve governor Lisa Cook, whether states can ban transgender athletes from playing on girls sports teams and deadlines for mail in ballots, big issues. there's another case, there's also another case testing the president's power to fire officials at independent agencies. We're going to be following all of them here on 1A. More decisions are expected on Monday. So stick with us when it comes to the big time of year this end of June at the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, wild times in presidential rage in the United States, definitely in the United States, more specifically in the United States, more specifically in the United States Senate this week.

Things are wild on both sides of the Capitol, actually. We'll get to that. Earlier in the week, the Senate voted to pass a war powers resolution, reigning in President Trump's power on the war in Iran. Then Wednesday, Trump came to the Senate for lunch. It turned into a shouting match between Trump and GOP senators who voted for the war powers resolution. Here's one of them, Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy, who Trump reportedly called a loser and a whole lot more. The president didn't want to hear my question. Interrupted me.

I didn't care to be interrupted. I felt like I was trying to get answers for the American people. And I'm not going to be bullied when I'm trying to get answers from the American people. And so escalated from there at some point it deescalate. Which was the president called you a lunatic? Can I imagine that the president called me things that would be said on a school, on a playground? Yeah, I can imagine. Okay.

Senator Bill Cassidy, Republican, who voted to rein in Trump on Iran. Then by the end of the night, the Senate, including Bill Cassidy, voted on war powers. Again, this time, some of those Republicans took it back. Arthur Delaney, what do we know about what happened in this meeting between Trump and senators and why Republicans then did take seize backsees on Iran? Well, this was a big meeting because a bunch of senators had been criticizing Trump more openly than they had. in past years. And Bill Cassidy was one of them. Thom Tillis was another. But Bill Cassidy was actually the only one who spoke up and stood up to the president. And the others were just quiet. They said

the meeting was basically just Trump yelling at them. And Bill Cassidy interrupted him, like he said, and matched his tone. They had a shouting match. Trump said, you know, you lost your election. Bill Cassidy was only complaining about the Iran war. The whole panoply of other grievances was left out. And after a few minutes, I was with Bill Cassidy when he was describing this immediately after it happened. After a few minutes of this back and forth, Bill Cassidy said that the other Republicans in the room said, all right, Bill, sit down. And he did. He sat down and de-escalated. And he sat down in a larger sense because he had voted against the Iran war. Later that night, He got a special Bill Cassidy only briefing from Steve Witkoff,

who is one of the people negotiating the Iran deal for the administration, and he took his vote back. And so it's a perfect illustration of the relationship between Senate Republicans and Donald Trump. You think they're going to stand up to him, and they will say things. They'll have rhetoric where they seem to be standing up to him, but they really don't. So they can be bullied. This is not just bullying. He's humiliating them.

They are absolutely refusing to stand up for themselves and for their institution. And Trump is increasingly brazenly attacking them, working directly against his own agenda if he can hurt them in the process. And they're taking it. What about Rand Paul? He has a career of voting to reign in presidents on war. He voted to reign in Trump on Iran. Then he flipped.

What happened? I'm not sure I didn't talk to Rand Paul there. but I would just lump him in with the rest of the Republican senators, even though he does tend to stand out. He voted present, I think, on the second vote, which is uncharacteristic for Rand Paul, who's big on congressional imperatives when it comes to war. It was late at night and they wanted to leave.

I mean, that's part of it, honestly. Simple as that, huh? That chaos, that screaming in the Senate, that's just the start of it. We're going to take a break. And when we come back, a lot more craziness on Capitol Hill, brought to you. by the president of the United States.

Stick with us. This message comes from Schwab. Investing with Schwab is like spending a Saturday at the farmer's market. You can fill your reusable tote bag with a bit of everything. Maybe you go for some free-range self-directed investing, or pick up a few farm-fresh trades while you peruse. You can even get help from a dedicated advisor. That's full-service wealth management.

No matter your goals or appetite for investing, Schwab has everything you need all in one place to invest your way. Visit Schwab.com to learn more. 250 years ago, the nation's founders considered a free press, a critical protection for we the people. Today, the NPR Network proudly upholds your First Amendment rights with reporting accountable only to you. It's something we protect together. Join the people who power the NPR Network by showing. your support at plus.npr.org. Welcome back to the 1A podcast. It's the weekly news roundup. Before we took a break, we got

one piece of congressional chaos out of the way, the screaming match in Senate lunch confines and the flip-flop vote on Iran war powers. Meanwhile, the largest housing bill in decades passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress. It's a whole package to make housing more affordable, and the White House is behind it. Then, right before he was about to sign that bill, big bipartisan win, affordability box, checked. President Trump, hold the plug. Taylor, pick up the story from here.

What happened? It was a mess. There was literally a stage set in the Capitol building for the president to come. He doesn't go to Capitol Hill a lot. He was going to journey over before he met with Senate Republicans for lunch. there was going to be this big bipartisan signing ceremony to celebrate this big win that both Republicans and Democrats were thrilled about because to your point, they could then go home and campaign saying, we are working and we actually did something to try to make housing more affordable, to try to make

that American dream more realistic for so many of you. And the president apparently woke up not in a great mood, and he was stuck on what's called the Save America Act, which is a bill he's been trying to push that would dramatically alter how voter registration and voter ID rules are enforced. And the president has at times flirted with basically stopping Congress from passing anything and from signing anything into law until that bill is passed, even though Senate Republicans have said over and over again, we don't have enough votes to pass this. But the president woke up on the day of this signing. He said, because we are not passing the Save America Act fast enough, I am canceling this bill signing for this housing bill,

and we need to have a conversation about the Save America Act. What was really striking, and I'm sure Arthur was on the hill and saw it in real time, House Republican leadership was holding a regular press conference before the signing. They learned about the bill signing being canceled while they were speaking. And one of the Arkansas Republicans, French Hill, who led that effort, was visibly frustrated saying, why is the president doing this? So it was really striking because it was another example of the grip that President Trump has, especially on Republicans on Capitol Hill, but also him stepping on his own toes when it comes to affordability and a win that could be helpful on the campaign trail. For the midterms. Well, Trump,

is, again, pushing the Save Act. Senate Republicans are clear about why it's not happening. We simply don't have the votes, and the Save America Act will not be implemented in time for this election. Anybody that knows anything about election law understands that. And the reason I do is a past voter ID when I was Speaker of the House. That's Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina. Senate Republicans, Wendy, have said over and over and over again, the Save Act. doesn't have the votes, and we're not going to end the filibuster to do it. So what happens next? What happens if Trump refuses to sign this housing bill at all? Well, the good news for consumers, I guess, is that the bill does become law in 10 days,

whether he signs it or not. But what the Republicans lost is exactly what French Hill was frustrated about and what Taylor was so aptly describing, which was because voters aren't going to know the bill became law, unless there's something on TV or on the Internet that shows them this surrounding of Democrats and Republicans and the president altogether making housing more affordable. That can be in campaign ads from here to November, but they lost that. And so now there's this highly technical bill that's just going to quietly become law and they won't get help in the midterms with it. Arthur. It would become law in 10 days after Congress formally censored.

it to the president, which they have not done. Oh. As of last I checked yesterday evening. And they have to do the procedure to send it to the White House. You got to, very technical. You got to send it over. Yeah. And they're not doing it.

And this could be another example. I mean, so far it already is another example of House Republicans and Senate Republicans just being vassals, just totally not doing their jobs and doing whatever the president wants. And the president, you know, he could veto it. They could override the veto. They could have their way if they wanted. But they don't. Well, we've been focused on the Senate here.

Let's not leave the House out of the chat because Donald Trump's furor over requiring proof of citizenship to vote, the Save Act, got to the House this week. Maga loyalist Republicans were, they were big mad over Senate Republicans' lack of interest in the Save Act, what you just heard from Thom Tillis there. Arthur, what's been going on on the House floor? So the Trump loyalist Republicans in the House on the far right, led by Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, are refusing to vote for just procedural rules

that allow them to vote on whatever is their agenda for the week. And so Republican leaders didn't even try to have the rules vote, and they could only pull up bills that were overwhelmingly supported by everybody that take a two-thirds majority. So the House basically isn't functioning. They will do nothing and went home early, canceled votes for Friday because of this. And there's, like with Trump and the senators, there's no, how does a House member have leverage over the Senate by disabling her own chamber? I don't know.

They don't. There's no strategy. There is no apparent strategy. I think at this point, you have to wonder if this is about sewing chaos or creating, the impression that the midterms cannot be trusted if this law is not passed. And they are expected to do badly in the midterms. And if they have an extra argument to make that, well, you didn't pass the law, the Save America Act, then that's why this can't be trusted. And I've been trying to talk to Republicans about that and how Speaker disavowed that idea earlier on. But I feel like

that could be where we're headed here, since there's no clear strategic reason for the way they're playing it. Well, with chaos end-to-end in the Capitol, President Trump still has a request of lawmakers, nearly $88 billion in supplemental emergency funding for the war in Iran, also for the Ebola outbreak in Central Africa and new assistance for U.S. farmers. On Tuesday, the United States said Iran agreed to allow international nuclear inspectors into its country in exchange for lifting oil sanctions. Iran said, uh-uh, no, we didn't. On Thursday, Iran moved to reassert its control over the Strait of Hormuz. It struck a container ship in the strait with a drone. That's according to U.S. officials.

The preliminary deal between the U.S. and Iran lifts U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil and commits to developing a plan for $300 billion in reconstruction funds for Iran. Meanwhile, back here in Washington, a growing number of Republicans don't like being left out of the loop on these negotiations. Arthur, we talked about the flip-flops on the Iran War resolution in Congress. What about GOP pushback on the deal and Donald Trump and JD Vance's ability to land a final deal in their own 60-day deadline? Republican senators hate this deal. It's extremely embarrassing for them. It's essentially Obama's nuclear agreement, but worse because oil prices, gas prices are a dollar up for it.

They're not guaranteed to get international inspectors, and they spent like $100 billion in all our missiles on it. And the straight wasn't an issue. The straight wasn't an issue before. And they openly criticized it. Bill Cassidy, who yelled at Trump over this, complained very loudly. The Senate Armed Services Chair Roger Wicker said we've negotiated our leverage away. So it's humiliating, and they hate it. And they mildly criticized the president last week and then meekly sat there.

while Bill Cassidy was dressed down and then they, you know, weakened their support for the war resolutions. Just to build on Arthur's point, a lot of Republicans, even ones who are fairly supportive of the president's approach to the war, were really struck by that $300 billion reconstruction fund to help Iran basically rebuild its infrastructure. That led the Trump administration to insist that this won't be U.S. taxpayer dollars going toward that. They insist other Middle Eastern countries will help fund it. The same conversation with the JCPOA, that it was frozen Iranian assets. It's not taxpayer dollars. I feel like I'm reliving.

Well, this is frozen. They get frozen assets. And on top of that, this stimulus bill that is not funded by the U.S., but it is orchestrated by the U.S. I feel like tattooing this on a wall somewhere or painting it on a wall somewhere. Those frozen Iranian assets were money that the Iranian government sent to the U.S. for a weapons purchase right before the revolution. It was for the Shah.

They paid for weapons. Then the revolution happened. We didn't send them. throws the money. The weapons and held the money. So there's been money of their sitting there for 47 years. All they're asking for is it back. It's their money. All right, Moody's analytics this week estimated the Iran War has already cost American consumers and taxpayers $132 billion, a number that continues to rise. Meanwhile, the face of a deal or no deal with Iran is JD Vance, the vice president. Donald Trump has made JD Vance the face of that. Here is the vice president during Marathon talks in Switzerland on Monday. We laid a very good foundation for a successful final deal. The final deal is the house.

House. We set the foundation. We haven't built the house, but we've laid a successful foundation to get to a good place for the American people. Okay, so that's the vice president selling this deal. We've already said new attacks in the straight, discomfort among Republicans. Another curious thing, ever since this MOU memorandum of understanding was signed, MAGA seems to be changing the vibes when it comes to Iran. Trump now calls the Iranian strong and intelligent. JD Vance up in 45 years of U.S. national security posture by declaring that Iran should keep some of its missiles and that the Islamic revolutionary regime has a right to defend itself. And the New York Times reporting this week how all over MAGA there's a new affinity for Iran and its resilience. Wendy, what's going on here? This is just what Arthur was describing earlier during that luncheon. This is people who have spent their entire adult lives being Iran Hawks.

I mean, people who were in the Senate when the revolution happened have been Iran Hawks, their entire lives. If they support Israel, they've been Iran Hawks. And now they are falling in line behind the president, some of the MAGA people, to try to, in their own minds, twist this into Iran now gets to have weapons and gets to, you know, have a place on the world stage and all of that, which is. 180 degrees against what they've been saying their whole careers. Taylor, the president has immediate political concerns. He wants a deal with Iran to seem okay. He's got a two-year horizon on his immediate political career. These MAGA Republicans who are changing the vibes on Iran have a much longer time horizon. What are they doing? So JD Vance has a good example of this because in many ways he's the heir apparent to the MAGA movement. And now that he has become in many ways the face of

these peace talks with Iran, there are a lot of people. in his camp who want to make sure that he doesn't destroy his political future by signing on to a bad deal or signing onto a deal that the MAGA movement is not supportive of. I think what's also interesting, and Wendy alluded to this, even though President Trump is toward the end of his political career, the influence that he has over the party at large really stands out and the back and forth of his how he approaches making deals and how he approaches foreign policy, especially the contradictions, is on full display. And when you listen to JD Vance's remarks, he constantly adds disclaimers in.

Trump will say this is a peace deal. We've won the war. Everything is great. It's all done. JD Vance said, this is just a foundation. We still have to build the house. JD Vance always goes, Iran could backpedal on this, but President Trump doesn't say that. So it's just interesting to compare.

Yeah, Trump said if it works out, I'm taking credit. If it doesn't, I'm going to play him JD. Yeah, flat out. Supposedly, that's not a joke. John Cornyn, Republican of Texas said that's not a joke. Wendy. Absolutely. That's what I was going to say about Arthur.

but also it's there is a faction of the MAGA movement that is still trying to step away, still holding on to this Iran as a bad actor narrative, whether they actually have any influence anymore is another thing. All right. Well, we've spent plenty of time talking about some of the strife Republicans have been having inside of their own party. Now let's talk about the strife for the Dems or at least what some establishment Dems see as strife. If we go to congressional primaries in New York City, Mayor Zohran Mamdani endorsed three candidates in New York City, all three won, two of them knocking off Democratic incumbents, and the mayor was ecstatic. First and foremost, this is your victory.

What you all have shown this evening, whether for state assembly, state senate, or Congress, is that a year ago, it was not the end. of a political movement. It was the beginning. Zohran Mamdani's been in office for less than seven months. Wendy, there he is trying to say this isn't factional. This is the direction of the party

that I want. Those are two different things. How, what does this say, I guess, about Zohran Mamdani's political power. Sure, that's New York City. But what about how voters are feeling about the direction of the Democratic Party? I think voters,

Well, first of all, I mean, Zohran Mamdani's having a honeymoon like I've never, I haven't seen since probably Reagan's first term. Everything is going so well for him. But in the sense, he is reading the room right, at least in big cities like New York. Now, you know, this won't play everywhere in the country. But people are frustrated that the Democrats keep fighting the MAGA movement the same way they have for 10 years hoping for a different outcome. They are getting every voting. a lot of Democratic voters under 40 certainly are very, very frustrated with the Democrats' continued support for Israel no matter what it does and for Benjamin Netanyahu's government. And so what Zohran Mamdani's generation of Democrats is saying is there has to be some change. We are demanding change. And it can't be from 80-year-old Bernie Sanders, but it's going to come from us. And we are going to try to push the Democratic Party into doing something a little different and really be a different brand than just this mushy middle

where moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats all agree. Even with some incendiary statements from one candidate who won a Democratic primary in New York, Terry Alisa Avelia Chevalier, former campus activist at Columbia University in the protests there, known to have protested on behalf of Palestinians on October 8th before the war in Gaza started.

And lots of controversial statements dishinged, Biden dissing Kamala Harris saying COVID came from France. She's walked a lot of that stuff back. But this is a candidate, Taylor, that in another age wouldn't have had a chance. And now progressive Democrats in New York City are saying, oh, yeah. Yeah, the goalposts have shifted. And I think we've seen and have documented over the last decade how much the Republican Party has changed when it comes to the goalposts moving and what scandals are considered acceptable, how President Trump has just plowed through issue after issue. Democrats now are sort of playing their own catch-up game to that.

And it's striking to see because they, in many ways, spent the last few years as very, you know, purity-focused, a purity-focused party and rooting out those folks. Now they're saying maybe we're more willing if it energizes the base. Still, it's a familiar pattern. In 2018, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defeated Joe Crowley, an establishment Democrat. And then Republicans said, well, this is the new face of the Democratic Party. It's the same thing happening again. And I think New York Democrats get outsized amount of attention. We're going to go to a brief pause here.

We've been getting some notes from you about the Supreme Court, and I want to give voice to them here. Matt and Louisiana writes, TPS, temporary protected status is temporary. It's that easy when countries like Ukraine have all night parties and nightclubs and normal activities in their cities. TPS can be temporary here. And Greta from Arlington says, I dislike the way the media covers the court's rulings as describing an outcome as four or again. against Trump. Just because they take a position on a policy doesn't mean the court is, quote, siding with Trump.

Greta, thanks for that note. Matt, thanks to you as well. We have to take a quick break. But coming up a lot more news from around the country, stick with us. We'll be right back.

This is our glass of this American life. Do you know our show? Okay, well, either way, I'm going to tell you about it. We make stories that hopefully pull you in at the beginning with funny moments and feelings and people in surprising situations, and then you just want to find out what is going to happen and cannot stop listening. That's right.

I'm talking about stories that make you miss appointments. This American Life, wherever you get your podcast. On this season of Planet Money Summer School, we follow the money, and not just the dollars. We're following the yuan, the Naira, the Krona, and more. Every Wednesday this summer, we're taking you on a world tour to meet the people, trying new solutions to old economic problems. Let up Money Summer School.

Drop some friends, pack your bags, and don't forget the sunscreen. Listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts. Support for this podcast and the following message come from the Southern Environmental Law Center. No one voted for a dirty air. No one voted for polluted water. That's why SELC is fighting back to defend the healthy environment everyone depends on, just as they've done for 40 years. Because clean air, clean water, and a healthy climate aren't political.

their fundamental. Learn more at selc.org. Let's get back into the weekly news roundup. Now, on Wednesday, a federal judge blocked Trump's 2025 executive order that would have required voters to show passports or birth certificates or other proof of citizenship when they register to vote or when they change registrations. On Monday for our weekly podcast series, if you can keep it, we talked about Trump's attempts to interfere with the electoral process and what they mean for democracy. Norm Eisen is the co-founder and executive chair of the Democracy Defenders Fund, and he explained why the Senate GOP doesn't have enough support, as we heard earlier, to pass that Save Act,

as Donald Trump wants. Many of his voters and all American voters don't have passports, rural voters who count on mail-in voting. So the Save Act would be a disaster for all voters, including for Republican voters. And then finally, it would require a change to the filibuster rules where 60 votes are needed to move legislation. And there's not support to change that rule with the Senate current majority, perhaps looking at a political future very soon where they're going to want to use that rule to stop legislation. Normizing there on 1A last week. You can find that full conversation on

our website at the 1A.org. Well, we keep, guys, the SAVE Act keeps coming up. It won't go away. We keep talking about it because the president keeps injecting it into every other issue he can. Last week, Trump stalled his own national intelligence director nominee until senators give him that SAVE Act. In the meantime, Bill Pulte started his job as acting DNI. And Bill Pulte, well, He got to the firing. Bill Pulte fired six staffers, sent another 45 back to their home agencies. That's according to reporting from CNN and CBS. Bill Pulte, well, he's been a controversial figure so far, no intelligence background and bringing a track record of doing the president's political bidding and investigating the president's perceived enemies. Wendy, what do we know about the shakeup at the intelligence agencies

underacting Director Bill Pulte's authority? Well, first, there's another. layer to him to Trump delaying the nomination of Jay Clayton to replace Tulsi Gabbard, because then Bill Pulte gets to start on an acting basis as leader of the Office of Directorate of National Intelligence. And this is something that Trump wanted that Senate Republicans were terrified of partly because of the reasons you said on his resume, but also because of what he's doing now that he's in there on an acting basis. He has started. firing people right and left. Nearly 50 people have been fired, mostly those tied to Tulsi Gabbard, or work in the National Terrorism Center. Another 45 have been sent back to their home agencies. And look, there's an

argument to be made that 20 more than 20 years after 9-11, when DNI was created, that perhaps you don't need this whole umbrella agency. But that's a conversation, not to be done on a whim. And I think it was Thom Tillis who said, very colorfully, that what's going on a DNI now looks like a stinking pile of doge poop. And I'm paraphrasing. I got it. Republicans begged Trump to name someone else to be permanent instead of Bill Pulte, and that was Jay Clayton, because the spy law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a section of it has lapsed.

Right. Which they all have said for years will basically cause a terrorist attack. Yet another critical piece of legislation waiting in the wings because of the the Save Act. That's like number four in this hour. Right. So they were going to confirm him real quick. They scheduled the hearing and they were going to pass that law. And then Trump said, nah, he's not coming to the hearing, no hearing. And so it's still lapsed. Now, and there's a debate about how dangerous that is. But what they said is this prevents 9-11s. Well, more staff shakeups this week, firings or firings of a kind this time at the Pentagon. A top U.S. Army

commander, General Christopher Donahue, says he'll step down as the head of U.S. Army Europe. Africa on July 2nd. General Donahue, he's a decorated story figure. He was the last U.S. service member to leave Afghanistan, the last boots on the ground seen as a key army leader, a potential future chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And this sudden resignation comes as Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, reshapes, his top brass. Taylor, what more do we need to know about this shakeup and what it may signal for Pete Hegseth' vision at the Pentagon? I mean, dozens of officers now dozens of flag officers either fired or shown the door yeah a ton of people who are widely respected on both sides of the aisle but it's the latest example that secretary

his view. Okay, but then that would be called a military purge, not to put too fine a point on it. This kind of stuff does happen in other countries, and when it does, we call the purges, Wendy. Right. And Donahue is not some woke, you know, lefty kind of guy who wants to make it. He was the head of Army Rangers. He was a Delta Force Commando. He was sent to the widely accepted to be botched evacuation of Afghanistan to clean up the mess and take care of that. to take care of that situation. Also, his specialty is on the future of warfare, drones, AI, how this is going to change the battlefield. And that's why he was looked at as a future leader. So this doesn't fit into the pattern of Pete Hegseth firing black officers, women officers. Of which there's a long list of those. Of which there's a long list who are all great, well, we all believe they were fine officers. There was no reason to fire them except for this. Donahue is a sort of a mystery. It's hard to explain, though, the Pentagon is so vast, but Pete Hegseth is internally, no pun intended, but warring with so many figures. Even the Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, who is really aligned with Vice President JD Vance, Driscoll and Pete Hegseth butt heads constantly and very publicly, all because Pete Hegseth says, I have the specific vision for the Pentagon and anybody who isn't aligned with me fully then is crossing President Trump.

That's his argument. All right. Well, we can't have a complete fulsome discussion of the reality of Washington. Washington, D.C. without talking about the hot bath that is the reflecting pool. Here's the president. Vandals, you know, we have a hundred, we have a, I think, 290, 300 foot slit right through, probably a box cutter or a knife of some kind. We had people lifting up the basic, some of the, but it's not a lot of damage, but it's, we'll probably have to let the water out and refix it.

they went in there with a knife. With a knife, with a box cutter. A lot of people laugh about the reflecting pool. It was green after all. There's a lot to laugh about here. But now this has taken a sinister turn. In recent days, six people have been detained on accusations of vandalizing the reflecting pool.

Arthur, what's the basis for these arrests and what kind of charges are the detainees contemplating here? There are videos of some of these detentions, and they happen after someone. puts their hand in the water and presumably grabs the loose blue flap that was put down, which is floating and maybe pulling a piece off. And they're not- Like for a souvenir, you mean? Yeah, which a colleague of mine who was there saw people doing that. And that went on for a few days, and then they seemed to want to crack down.

And the arrests really do appear to be attempts to flatter the president in his theory that there's vandals and not just like millions of microorganisms that are causing the water to be green, because that's just what they do, and you can't control them. To put this into context, how confusing the president's claims have been. You even heard it in that quote that you just played. He says it's a 200-foot gash, then a 250-foot gash. At one point, he said it was 350 feet. He claimed that somebody went in the dark of night, even though that area is surveilled constantly,

took a knife or a box cutter, and sliced 350 feet across it to undo the liner. Park police on Thursday finally filed something in the courts. They claimed that there was some type of cut or tear, but that it was only 70 feet and that they didn't have specific evidence of somebody with a knife or some type of weapon going through it. But they released this grainy footage of one person, as Arthur described, reaching into the pool, but not moving around. But not a 70-foot track, in other words, this is not a person making a 70-foot. At least this visual that they showed. And it's just striking because the president, of course, has a long history of making a... exaggerations and making baseless claims. But even at the kickoff rally for the Great American

State Fair that I was at on Wednesday night, the president talked about it and said, we have these thugs and these vandals who are destroying this project that I've poured all this time and effort into, but they haven't shown proof of that. But now you have park police, which is funded by the government, running after folks who are getting near the reflecting pool, which is one of the biggest tourist. And making claims in court. Right. The judges will review, Wendy. Exactly. Now, hopefully all these cases will be thrown out by local judges, it probably will happen. And yet these people have to hire a lawyer. They have to take time off from work. They have to deal with this. And let's ever forget, he's not just calling

them thugs and vandals. He is. But he's calling them leftist, democratic. He's turning this into a political thing, which you use the word sinister, Todd, and I think that's just right. This has become from something that's funny that, you know, okay, his reflecting pool didn't work. It's standing water in a city built on a swamp. Sure. There's going to to be algae. But also the ducks are dying from the bleach that they're putting in. It's still pretty funny. You can still laugh. It is unfortunate that people are having to deal with being arrested, but it's such an unbelievably apt metaphor. Arthur, there's an election coming. We talk about affordability, the housing bill, the obsession with the Save Act, Republican senators

not able to get on message. What are they saying on the hill about the other distraction, the pool? Well, if you get a brave one like Thom Tillis, they make fun of it. They think. think it's really ridiculous. Otherwise, they're completely meek and subservient to the president. All right. We're going to go for the hour now. But before we do, I want to take a breath and say goodbye. To somebody who is very special in the culture, and you may not have heard of him, Clive Davis, he's a music executive, who shaped the soundtrack of American lives, people all over the world for over half a century. From his perch at Columbia Records, later Arista Records, Davis discovered or shaped the careers of a whole constellation of stars. Listen to this. Whitney Houston,

Barry Manilow, Carlos Santana, Rod Stewart, Miles Davis, Bruce Springsteen, Patty Smith, do I need to go on, the kinks, and many, many more, including the late great Aretha Franklin. Not bad for a guy who once said he knew nothing about music. Clive Davis died this week. He was 94. Thanks to Wendy Benjaminson, Arthur Delaney, and Taylor Poplars. As always, we're just getting started with the week's headlines. When we come back after a break, we'll have a new panel and all of the news from around the globe. Stay with us.

This season on Planet Money Summer School, we're going on a world tour. And first up, we're following the money down under. From Australia's market where people buy and sell water to how New Zealand is changing the way Central. banks fight inflation, pack your bags, and come along as we learn from the rest of the world. Planet Money Summer School. Listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts.

Welcome back to the 1A podcast. It's the international half of our weekly news roundup now. We have a busy hour, a great panel of 1A fan favorites to take us all through it. Greg Mirey is National Security correspondent at NPR. Just returned within the last couple of days from a reporting trip in Tel Aviv. Hi, Greg. Hi, Todd. Look forward to your reporting from Israel. Nancy Yusuf, staff writer at the Atlantic covering national security and the Defense Department. Hi again, Nancy. Great to be with you. Great to have you. And Jack, Dech is here. Defense reporter at Politico. Jack, great to have you. Good to be here, Todd. Okay, we're going to start, of course, with the U.S. and Israel War in Iran. It might be paused for now, but the details are a long way from being figured out.

the piece based on that MOU, that memorandum of understanding, that piece is shaky and attacks continue. Let's start with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, his travels this week to the Gulf. Marco Rubio visited UAE, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Bahrain, trying to reassure U.S. allies. The message that I come with is that we want to ensure that any decisions that are made throughout this negotiating process, the interest of our partners and our allies in the region are always taken into account, that there is no part of this deal that's undertaken that in any way undermines the security, the stability, or the prosperity of any of our partners in the Gulf region. Well, Gulf states were hit hard during this war. Marco Rubio had the unenviable task of convincing

those Gulf states that Washington's security guarantees remain intact. One of the Gulf's biggest fears here is that Washington could strike a narrow nuclear bargain that leaves those Gulf states exposed to renewed proxy warfare, Nancy, leaving them worse off than they were before the war started at the end of February. The MOU signed by the United States in Iran, everybody's noticed. It makes no mention of proxy forces like Houthis in Yemen or Hezbollah in Lebanon. We'll talk about them. Nor does it mention Iran's ballistic missile program, problem number one for Gulf states across the water from Iran. Did Marco Rubio ease any of those concerns on this trip, Nancy? I really point out there are a lot of key issues for the Gulf that haven't been resolved,

the proxies, ballistic missiles, and also what happens with the proposed reconstruction fund? Could that give around the resources to rebuild this military and support some of those proxy groups? I think Marco Rubio's message was that Washington hasn't forgot about their security concerns, but I don't think reassurance is the same as resolving those key concerns. And I think you saw that play out because we've now seen Gulf states, starting to reach out and talk about engaging with Iran directly. What the Gulf states are saying is we still want the U.S. security umbrella that has been provided up until this war, despite the strikes that we took in light of that.

But they're not yet convinced that the United States is doing everything they can to prioritize their security. And so I think Marco Rubio ultimately bought the United States time to sort out those issues in future talks. But I don't think that meaning in and of itself gives the Gulf States confidence that their security is the priority. Well, Greg, Mirey, Nancy mentions a big part of this, a very big part of us, a $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran. The president has committed Gulf states to funding that initiative. On Tuesday, Marco Rubio said he would not be asking allies for monetary help. Where is this money supposed to come from? Where does this stand?

Yeah, it's not exactly clear. Again, Trump's position is the U.S. is not providing any money for this, and this could be private investment money. These Gulf countries were hard hit, but they're right across the water from Iran, as you mentioned. They may have to cooperate with Iran. They may be willing to invest, so we'll see. But it's aspirational. Again, in the memorandum of understanding, it's one point. It's a big fat paragraph that says the U.S. and its partners will act to build this $300 billion fund,

but it doesn't commit anybody in particular, either a government or private entities. Greg, I'm having flashbacks to the JCPOA. I'm having flashbacks to Iranian assets that were freed up in exchange for progress on nuclear enrichment and the rest of it. And the howling, the howling the criticism of Iran being given access. to billions of dollars for terrorist action. That was the criticism. And the Obama administration replying, this isn't U.S. tax dollars. I feel like I've seen this play.

Yeah, and with Obama, it was $1.7 billion. We're talking about here. We're talking about potentially $300 billion in investments. And I think even the most important piece, we'll see what happens with this. But the U.S. has lifted sanctions so Iran can sell its oil freely on world markets. This is perhaps the biggest and the most immediate change for Iran. They no longer have to go around to other countries selling their oil at a discount because of U.S. sanctions. So on several different levels, Iran is getting some immediate economic benefits and then potentially other longer term benefits, including this possible reconstruction.

And a lot of that explains the discomfort that many Republicans here at home have with this deal. They lived through the JCPOA. They criticized the JCPOA. and now, like this humble host, they feel like they're reliving parts of the JCPOA, I think, also high on Marco Rubio's agenda on this trip, the Strait of Hormuz. Here's Marco Rubio again. One thing that came across very clear is there is zero support, zero support among the Gulf countries for any sort of toll or fees or anything that charges for the use of international waters. The president's made it clear that's not going to happen. It's not going to be a part of this.

It cannot be a part of this. He made that clear again yesterday. Oval Office. Jack Dech, this memorandum of understanding sets out that Iran will make its, quote, best efforts to ensure toll-free passage through the Strait. Only for 60 days, though, pending final agreement being reached. There are also charged with demining the Strait. How would you sum up Marco Rubio's reassurance tour, specifically when it comes to the Strait,

the dispensation of the Strait? Iran doesn't recognize Maritime Law governing the Strait, but it allows for free passage before the start of the war anyway. So where do things stand now? Right. And we're sort of ahead of the week of messy details that are going to be sorted out in Switzerland. One of the big items on the agenda is going to be the regime governing the strait, which has been bound in two layers right now, right? The Iranian blockade, which is essentially a theoretical blockade of we can hit you with missiles that drives up the insurance prices, the American blockade, which is being lifted. So they're going to need to figure out a long-term deal. The problem is you have a lot of

oil-rich countries in this region, putting pressure on the United States, but they don't want to put pressure on the United States to get a deal that's worse, a status quo that comes at the expense of missiles flying into their country and this strait being held over. So serious challenges. A ship was attacked on Thursday, a cargo ship by Iran. Is that correct? Yeah, cargo ships still facing threats. I mean, the Iranians can can launch missiles and blow this up at any time. And this is going to be fast. So what are they doing here, like making sure that their power in the straight as part of the conversation? Well, I think there are two tracks, right? There's the public track and the private track. There's going to be this track that's playing out that's deeply technical in Switzerland,

where they're talking about the Strait of Hormuz, they're talking about the missiles, they're talking about the nuclear inspection regime. There's going to be another track that's playing out, and the biggest piece of that is going to be the Strait of Hormuz, the back and forth between the United States and the Iranians, do the Iranians, if the talks are going south, begin to cause trouble in the strait. All right, well, the details, of course, they really, really matter here. We've talked about not minor ones, the strait of Hormuz, $300 billion, ballistic missiles. How about nuclear inspections?

On Monday, Vice President JD Vance said Iran had agreed to grant the International Atomic Energy Agency access to its nuclear sites. The Iranians have agreed to invite IAEA inspectors back into their country. that is a major milestone for the American people and the first step in permanently denuclearizing or permanently ending a nuclear weapons program in Iran. And that's exactly what we wanted to do. That's exactly what we asked to happen. So on Tuesday, however, Iranian diplomats said, oh, no, no, no, no, no, no.

Visits of international inspectors will only come after a final deal. We have not agreed to this. Wednesday, the head of the UN's nuclear agency said that Iranian nuclear enrichment site, would be visited by his inspectors, but that the timing wasn't all that essential. Nancy Yusuf, the nuclear issue is now being debated in public in front of the press.

Are these conversations happening in the same way at the negotiating table? What's going on here? Well, I think you're seeing the limits of a memorandum of understanding, that a memorandum of understanding doesn't get you to solve these issues. It's very temporary.

And this is where the implementation of process, begins and that it's very arduous. This is one of a host of disagreements we heard just this week, whether Iran would use frozen funds to buy American soy and corn. As you discussed earlier, who's going to control the straight? And so I think this really speaks to why I think so many were worried about Iran doing what it did this week in terms of launching a drone at a ship, why people are worried about what Israel could do vis-a-vis Lebanon.

on, the memorand of understanding only stopped the fighting. It did not lay a clear enough pathway for resolving these very, very thorny issues. On the issue of Iran buying U.S. agriculture products, Iran's parliament speaker said, the only crop we're harvesting is the one that you've planted decades of mistrust. It's organic. It's abundant. And it's homegrown, according to the speaker there. I think that's message received. All right, related to Iran, of course, is Lebanon and Hezbollah and this coming up. The IDF will remain in the security zones in Lebanon, in Syria, and in Gaza without any time limit. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushing to maintain a security zone inside Lebanon

to fight Hezbollah, despite U.S. pressure to reduce that military presence as part of these peace negotiations. Iran wants Israeli forces out of southern Lebanon as they negotiate a deal with the United States. We're talking about Hezbollah now. While Israel says it's now considering a U.S. back proposal to remove some of its military presence, their leadership is refusing to completely withdraw from southern Lebanon. Reuters quotes a U.S. State Department official saying this, Israel has already taken concrete steps, a concrete step, by pulling back from a part of its buffer zone. And the buffer zone is Israel's occupation zone in southern Lebanon. It's supposed to pull back troops, the supposed pullback of troops was rejected,

like not real, says Israel and Lebanese officials. Greg Maury, what's the latest here and how is the issue of Lebanon become another front, another roadblock between the U.S. and Iran? I will say Iran has had enormous success to the frustration of Israelis, which we will talk about, in making southern Lebanon and Israeli action there, a big part of this. deal. No, you're absolutely right. And so the Israeli forces are about six miles or so inside southern Lebanon across this sort of buffer zone. They say they're there because Hezbollah was hitting northern Israel. And again, we've just seen this cycle for really for 30 years or more here. And the Israelis say, we're not leaving until we can guarantee that Hezbollah will not attack us.

And Hezbollah, of course, says, well, we're not going to stop until the Israel's. Israelis leave. And so you get, you get stuck where everybody's saying, you go first, no, you go first. The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, the defense minister, say on a daily basis, we're not leaving. We were not party to this agreement between the U.S. and Iran, therefore not bound by it. But we've also heard President Trump and Vice President JD Vance telling Israel to stop hitting so hard in Lebanon that they're making this worse and that they are going to have to, to, to. to play along to some degree. So this is going to be a problem. And Iran was very effective in making this a wedge issue. And now we see the U.S. and Israel in this awkward position of trying to sort this out, where normally the U.S. gives the Israelis a pretty free hand in Lebanon doing what Israel says it needs to do or wants to do. But now it's become a real friction point because Trump sees it

is potentially undermining the deal with Iran. Well, Israel and Lebanon has, have been talking about a U.S. back proposal for Israeli forces to hand back some of the territory in that six-mile-wide buffer zone that you mentioned, that they occupied in their war with Hezbollah, to hand it over to Lebanon's military. This is an old one, getting Lebanon's military to be strong enough and cohesive enough to police their own territory so that they don't have to deal with the IDF in their territory. I've read that story so many times, Greg, over the last 30 years. What are the chances of it happening now? Well, I'd still say it's not a certainty by any means. However, the Lebanese president Aoun is trying to do that. He's a former soldier himself. The U.S.

has been supporting the Lebanese government and military trying to do this. So it is a push. It is an effort. It's going to take time. It's not going to happen overnight. We'll have to see if there's any progress here. And Hezbollah is still has not been willing to play along and retreat. So, yes, that seems like the best option is a long-term solution, but it's not going to be an instant solution. Well, Donald Trump made JD Vance the face of the Iran ceasefire deal. There's a lot at risk for JD Vance and for Trump and for the deal. And then there's the factor the U.S. has not achieved its state of objectives in Iran. And neither has Israel. Iran's regime still rules.

Hasbalah still attacking Israel. from Lebanon, thousands of residents in northern Israel still can't return safely home. Jack Dech, how are Benjamin Netanyahu supporters feeling about Trump now, his deal, and what can Benjamin Netanyahu do to undermine it at this point, given his own domestic concerns? Well, I'll be curious to hear what Greg says since he's just returned from the region, but Israelis across the political spectrum are feeling some sense of betrayal, especially the ultra-nationalist figures within Benjamin Netanyahu's ruling coalition. member in the U.S., it may be the economy stupid. In Israel, it's the coalition stupid. And Benjamin Netanyahu

desperately needs people like Itamar Ben-Gvir, who have been pushing very hard on the prime minister in his corner ahead of elections later this year. So you just see an enormous amount of pressure, especially from his right flank as this ramps up. Greg, what were you hearing while you were in the country? Yeah, every day, from politicians, from the media, you would hear some version of this, this deal is good for Iran, bad for Israel. So there's real opposition to the deal. Now, many Israelis, including the media and the politicians, muted their direct criticism of Trump. They know Trump has been very supportive in Israel in many ways, and they were not really wanting to attack him head on, but almost universally, whether it was the right,

the center of the left, saying this was not a good deal. Israel has not as a chance of achieved its objectives. It's still in Lebanon, where it feels Hasbalahs threatening the north of the country. This was a project for Benjamin Netanyahu for decades to try to undermine the Islamic leadership in Iran. So none of these goals have been achieved, and now they feel they've been cut out in a way that they usually are not cut out. They're still obviously talking between the U.S. and Israel, but not directly a part of this deal. Well, none of this is popular, especially with the right, the center of power now in Israel, nor is the shifting rhetoric of Donald Trump and JD Vance toward Iran, which is becoming a lot more friendly toward Iran's ability to defend itself.

Israelis don't like to hear that. Here's another one on Thursday. Vice President JD Vance told the media outlet unheard that sent-com officials will meet with Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps officials in Doha, in Qatar to resolve conflicts between the sides. Nancy, Sentcom was part of a bombing campaign with Israel in which IRGC officials all over Iran were killed by the hundreds. And U.S. law defines the IRGC as a terror organization. What do you make of this announcement from JD Vance now that American Sentcom will sit down at the table with the IRGC? You're absolutely right. It's an extraordinary change of tone and just a matter of months.

I think very simply it acknowledges the reality that the IRGC are calling the shots inside Iran. And so I think the military regional command, U.S. Central Command, meeting with them and establishing a direct military-to-military channel tells you that both sides are worried about escalation and the threat that military escalation could pose to these talks and therefore need to talk directly despite the fact that they just fought a war with each other. I did want to jump in real quickly on the previous conversation about Benjamin Netanyahu. I think it's worth noting how these wars have actually changed the U.S. political calculus vis-à-vis Iran. You know, the war in Gaza split the left between centrist and progressives. The war in Iran has split the right between neocons and MAGA supporters, the latter bearing the economic brunt of this and not wanting to see wars in the Middle East. And so we talk so often about how this has changed, how Israel is looking at the United States.

I think we should also remember that this war has also changed how the United States is looking at its relationship with Israel, particularly since Benjamin Netanyahu thought that Trump would be a big support. And he was enthusiastic at the start of the Trump term for what a Trump-NetNehrault relationship could bring. In fact, many years ago, Benjamin Netanyahu decided to align his future with Republicans specifically during Joe Biden's presidency accepted Republican invitations to speak in Congress, right? over the head of the U.S. president. I mean, Benjamin Netanyahu made this decision a long time ago. That's right. And now I don't know that that would happen because you can see Republicans grappling

with the same kind of divisions that you saw on the left after Gaza. And so I find myself wondering, who would Benjamin Netanyahu support in 2008 presidential election and on what basis, given that there are now frictions on both sides of the aisle? Well, before we leave the region, more news.

An Israeli strike killed an Al Jazeer cameraman in central Gaza this week. He was the 12th member of that network staff killed in the Gaza Strip since October of 2023. Meanwhile, two former Israeli prime ministers, former heads of Israeli security services, former judges, and a Nobel laureate, all from Israel, threatened Benjamin Netanyahu's government with legal action if it didn't take action to, quote, eradicate Jewish terrorism by both settlers and military forces in the West Bank. That threat was in a letter seen by the Guardian and other media outlets. Israeli violence in the occupied West Bank has intensified in recent weeks, including arson attacks on homes and mosques. A Palestinian governmental organization

says 22 separate attacks on Muslim religious sites have occurred in May of 2026. Maysoon Ali is a Palestinian American from Virginia who retired. hired to her family home near the West Bank city of Ramallah. The home was built in 1980 by Moussin's father. It was torched by right-wing Israeli settlers the same week as a mosque attack in another part of town. Mousin sent us this account of what happened. Israeli settlers have been harassing and intimidating us for years. Last week on June 14, they broke into our property and set our house on fire,

while me and my husband were inside of our house. They cut and breached multiple fences that we put in place to protect ourselves from them and attempted to burn our house down. We were terrified and are still in shock. All I want is to retire peacefully in our family home that my father built decades ago. I want to plant flowers and tend to my garden without being afraid. Greg Maury, these right-wing Israeli settlers that I mentioned are religious zealots.

They believe the Bible gives them a claim to the land. That's what's in the DNA of these horrific attacks. You have witnessed settlements being attacked. You've witnessed settlements being torn down by the Israeli government pulling back on settlement policy. What's your perspective? Hearing that firsthand account of somebody's home being attacked, what's your perspective on what's changed? You hear this all the time. And I'll go back to when I first arrived to work there. I was in Jerusalem in 1999. I was still living out of my suitcase at the hotel. And we heard that the Israeli government

was going to take down one of these new settlements that had gone up, really, just like half dozen 10 sheds, really. And the military went out there. It literally dragged these Jewish settlers off of these, so the rooftops of these little sheds they had built in a place called Ma'un in the southern West Bank. And this was a moment when the Israelis and Palestinians were trying to negotiate, the government was trying to either stop or at least limit settlement building in the West Bank. And Ma'un became a place that this happened several times. And then I was just out there last week reporting in the West Bank, and I saw a road sign that said, Ma'un.

And I said, oh, my goodness, just a flashback to 1999. And the people I was driving with pointed out, it's a huge hilltop. It looks like a big subdivision. There's a perception now that Benjamin Netanyahu and his government aren't yanking the leash anymore, that settlers like this, not only the violence, but certainly, I mean, you witnessed the building of settlements. It's gone forward and Benjamin Netanyahu is investing in the future of that land. Oh, absolutely. This is the most pro-settlement government you've seen in the history of Israel. There's about 750,000 of his right. Settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. This is almost 10% of the entire Jewish population, Israel. And it's growing by the day, big cities of 20, 30, 40,000 people, small outposts where mobile homes are set up on hilltops,

and it just keeps expanding. All right, let's leave. We will leave Israel and the West Bank and Lebanon and Hezbollah and Iran and the Gulf there for now, and we will be back to it next week. I promise you that. let's turn to Russia's war in Ukraine, as we almost always do on the international news roundup, and how Ukraine continues to fight back more than four years into that full-scale invasion. Ukraine's latest target, Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula that Russia legally annexed in 2014

at the start of this broader conflict. Jack, Kiev has been launching attacks in Crimea, hitting oil infrastructure, hitting roads. They've also been hitting inside Russia, oil facilities way inside the country, and hitting Moscow itself. What is Ukraine's objective at this point in the war, showing Vladimir Putin that they can reach out? And I say touch him where it hurts. Yeah, Volodymyr Zelensky is calling this a long-range sanctions plan. It's his way of putting the thumb on the scale to try and get Vladimir Putin back to the negotiating table and shake the Russian economy. And you have to remember, of course, this is a war that's largely been fought, almost entirely fought on Ukrainian soil. You've had millions of Ukrainians forced to leave their homes.

Now Volodymyr Zelensky trying to bring the pain to 500,000 to 800,000 Russian settlers that have followed the illegal annexation of Crimea to make that point, Todd, that, yes, I can bring pain to Russian soil or Russian occupied territories. Well, Nancy, now that Ukraine is hitting Crimea and deep inside Russia and Moscow itself, Vladimir Putin appears. ready to talk, or at least he says he is. Vladimir Putin said he'd restart talks with Ukraine facilitated by Turkey. However, he also continued to refer to Ukraine as run by neo-Nazis. Those two countries haven't met face-to-face for direct talk since May of 2025. Where do those negotiations stand? And what would it mean for Vladimir Putin to agree to talk to Kiev now sponsored by Turkey? So the important reference that he's making is that he wants to go back to the Istanbul

2022 talks. As you noted, he's trying to appear that he's open, that he's flexible. But I think in many ways, he's actually signaling the opposite by tying it to Istanbul 2022 or even 2025. You know, this comes at a time when we've heard the Trump administration suggest more support for Ukraine than they have in the past. So I think he's trying to look reasonable, Vladimir Putin, without making concessions. I think he's also testing Trump's appetite for a deal.

And I also think he's responding to the changing battle for. space that Jack described so beautifully happening inside Ukraine. And so I think what he is trying to tell the world more than anything is he's open to talks in a way that doesn't reflect today's battlefield realities, but rather the time period when he, Vladimir Putin, perceives that he had the biggest advantage vis-a-vis this war. Greg, what's your read on Vladimir Putin's, well, maybe not so new posture here, given that Ukraine, can launch attacks deep inside his territory. Yeah, the Ukrainians see this as a stalling tactic.

And they've said this all along in the previous rounds that Vladimir Putin will, when he's in trouble or feeling a little off balance, he'll propose some talks as a way to buy some time as a way to stall, but not actually go forward with anything. And I'm sure that's exactly how the Ukrainians are viewing this. Jack, you're getting ready to head out to NATO. What did you say, July 7th? July 7th and 8th.

Where's that going on this year? That's going to be an anchor. in Turkey. And Trump himself is saying the only reason he's going is because Mark Rutte is going to be there and because Recep Tayyip Erdogan will be there. Ah. Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin says he wants to negotiate through Turkey, probably maybe no coincidence there. Well, it brings us back then to Ukraine, Russia, and the G7. Because Donald Trump seems to have noticed, as we were talking about before the break, that Ukraine has had a better last few months fighting Russia. During meetings at the G7 in France, Trump was reportedly impressed.

by Ukraine's recent long-range drone strikes into Russia. He met with Volodymyr Zelensky, president of Ukraine during that summit. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told a Senate committee earlier this month that Russia might not militarily ever achieve the political and geographic concessions that they're asking for in peace negotiations should they ever happen. Trump has also said at the G7 that the U.S. had nothing to do with this war and his administration hasn't pushed for money for Ukraine since he came into office. A lot of mixed messaging here, Jack. You're headed off to Ankara. You're headed off to NATO. What's going to be the talk?

What are you looking for from NATO leaders as they meet in Ankara with this war raging on their Eastern Front? Well, NATO's getting ready at this summit to make a fresh $70 billion aid, military aid pledge to Ukraine. That's going to be aid across the board, but the big issue is trying to get air defense the Ukrainians, those Patriot missiles that were promised by Germany two years ago still haven't shown up. So trying to get those gears sort of turning. And you're going to watch the sidelines very carefully. Ukraine's been working hard to try and isolate Donald Trump, right, and trying to pressure him on the drone deal that's been ongoing between the United States and the Ukrainians. They've set up joint ventures with the Germans on drones. They set them up with the Canadians.

They've set up missile factories in Sweden as well. So I think the objective for the Ukrainians is going to be to try and encircle the United States with allies that are favorable to Ukraine so they can get pressure to now get funding from the United States for these drone ventures and other deals. Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister of Russia, he liked it when Donald Trump was consistently making pro-Russia statements for years of this war. Now he says that the U.S. is stepping away from being, quote, an objective mediator. I think Russia would like to get Donald Trump back in the folder. At least it sounds like it. Yeah, I think we're a long way from when Vladimir Putin doodled three plus two, the math that he wanted for Ukrainian territories, three territories

given away, two frozen on the front lines and getting it sent over to Donald Trump. Now the Ukrainians have a lot of leverage. They were able to stop successfully that Russian spring offensive. The problem for them is going to be getting this air defense in time. As winter picks up in Ukraine, the Russians are going to be targeting using the same strategy, the energy, the infrastructure, trying to will Ukraine into submission. Well, Britain, the UK, will have representatives at the NATO conference. Jack, you'll see them there. I'm going to guess that one of them won't be Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Why? Because he's announced that he's resigning after his own Labour Party turned on him. Every decision I've taken has been about putting the country I love at first. That is why I will resign as leader of the Labour Party.

Well, Keir Starmer spent a lot of his short time as Prime Minister on foreign affairs and security issues after Keir Starmer announced his resignation. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky thanked him on X. Greg Maree, what does this resignation mean for Ukraine and the security partnerships that the U.K. is solidified with France and Germany now that the U.K. is in more political turmoil. Well, we have seen Europe step up as the U.S. has stepped back. in particular Britain, France, and Germany have done more to help Ukraine. They haven't replaced everything that the U.S. was providing in terms of dollar for dollar. They don't have some of the resources that the U.S. can do. But they have stepped up. Now, we'll have to see how a new labor government in Britain responds. The expectation is they'll probably follow pretty similar paths.

Europe is playing this significant role. And this has been a, has worked well for Ukraine as it's developed its approach to Russia. Well, Andy Burnham is the labor favorite to replace Keir Starmer, possibly as soon as mid-July. Burnham, who's been the mayor of Greater Manchester. He's also called King of the North, one Game of Thrones reference there. He won a seat in Parliament last week. That's a prerequisite for challenging Keir Starmer. Prime Minister, you got to be a minister, so you got to be elected to the Parliament.

He was sworn in on Monday. I swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty Charles III, his heirs and successors according to law. So help me, God. All the way from down in his chest there, Nancy Yusuf. Who is Andy Burnham? So he is in his 40s, and he was, as you noted, the Mayor of Greater Manchester. and he's celebrated there because he was seen as really getting through pragmatic changes inside the UK in that city in a country that's really very centralized.

He has a reputation of kind of connecting emotionally with voters and he has the advantage of pointing to tangible successes. I also think he's entering office as a change candidate even though he is leading the same party and actually has been in government before. And so he comes in with the promise of being able to break through some of these log jams that prematurely injured Keir Starmer's premiership. But he also faces a lot of the same challenges, a sagging economy chronically under-invested public services, and an increasingly powerful populist movement inside the UK. He'll also face the imminent decision about how much to spend on defense. Keir Starmer had put forth a defense budget that called for more spending and actually led to the resignation of his defense minister. It remains to be seen whether his successor could do the same thing. But he's coming in with a lot more enthusiasm, I think, in personality relative to his predecessor, but also facing a lot of the same challenges, structural challenges inside the U.K.

You put your finger on something important here, Nancy, which is that reform U.K., populist right-wing movement, let's call it the U.K.'s version of MAGA. I think Nigel Farage would be happy with that comparison. They are leading in the polls. Labor is unpopular. Andy Burnham better be running as a change candidate because his party's fortune are in the tank right now. And they're a month from an election probably. That's right. That's right.

Many see Burnham as the last hope of stopping reform from coming in that if he can't bring in these changes, if he can't convince the U.K. voters that he can bring about the promises that labor has been making year after year, a year for a year, that it's actually a wide opening for reform to come in after him. Well, this week marks 10 years in the UK since, you know where I'm going with this, Brexit, when the UK voted to leave the European Union. Since then, the post-Brexit era in the UK has chewed through six prime ministers. Andy Burnham will be the seventh.

Here's Politico's Jack Blanchard on 1A. ahead of Burnham's win. There is a sense of perpetual chaos now in British politics. We used to be a country which was famed for its tediously boring politics in many ways. That is no longer the case. A country that changes Prime Minister six or seven times in a decade is clearly not a happy one. Is this Italy? That's the question a lot of Brits seem to be asking themselves.

You can listen to that full show, by the way, from last Thursday about Andy Burnham and the future of British politics on the website at the White. A.org. Jack Dech, every prime minister has had to grapple with the aftermath of Brexit, deep disagreements within their own political parties over how to deal with it, also rising anti-Semitism in the UK, which is a major force on both sides of the aisle, but especially in labor. How has Brexit helped destabilize British politics? Well, I don't think we have enough time in the seven minutes remaining to go through all of the blow by blow. but if you're 10 years old, right, you've lived through six British prime ministers. And the biggest thing has been uncertainty from Brexit. It's destabilized the British economy.

It's forced the UK to reassess its global trade relationships. And that uncertainty is cascaded onto the economy, onto politics. It's caused fissures in the two-party system that have led to the rise of movements like reform and Nigel Farage. It's directly forced out some of these prime ministers, not all of them. There have been personnel issues. There was party gate under Bojo, of course. You had a turnover from the conservatives back to labor, and you had personnel issues under Keir Starmer as well that were the decisive issue for him, not Brexit. But still, it's just created this era of rapid leadership turnover, uncertainty, instability in Britain.

Greg, Myrie, your thoughts on Brits feeling a little all too Italian right now and not in a good way. Yeah, if you've gotten tired of following all the twists and turns of British politics, but want to stay a little bit informed, the best. is follow Larry the cat on X. Larry is a real cat who has the run of the place at 10 Downing Street, and he's been posting regularly on the latest turnover in British politics, saying he may not even bother to learn the name of the next prime minister. When they put out the podium for Keir Starmer to resign, he said, it's either time for a new British prime minister or else I'm getting a new scratching post. I mean, not bothering to learn the name of the new PM. is usually the joke for the king or the queen, right?

Because they have to tramp through and pledge their allegiance. Larry the cat is seen enough. Larry the cat is the consistent sovereign. No shade, Charles III, but we're cat lovers around here at 1A. All right, we leave the UK there. We will be back. We will be back to cover the fortunes of Keir Starmer' party as he leaves the scene.

Before we get to the end of the hour, we check in on the devastating earthquakes in Venezuela. People search for survivors beneath collapsed buildings and rescue teams, race to northern areas rocked by a pair of powerful earthquakes, some miles about 80 miles west of Caracas, maybe a little bit more than that. Thousands are feared dead from the 7.2 and 7.5 magnitude earthquakes that struck on Wednesday evening among the strongest in Venezuela in more than a century.

Arminda Gomez lost several relatives in the quake. I lost my daughter, my grandson, and my granddaughter who was due to be born in a month. Please help me find my daughter and see if she's under the rubble. Please.

We'll continue to follow the aftermath of that disaster in Venezuela in the coming days here on 1A. Meanwhile, other places in Latin America, two right-wing candidates win election in Peru and Colombia, first in Colombia. Trump endorsed candidate claimed victory this week. Abelardo de Espreya was elected president in Colombia on Sunday by a narrow margin. Born in Colombia, holds citizenships in the United States and in Italy. His campaign focused on crime modeled after Naïbukele in El Salvador. And Javier Milei in Argentina, again, got the Trump endorsement before his election. Meanwhile, in Peru, right-wing candidate Kako Fujimori won election.

She'll become the nation's first female president. Her election victory, 26 years after her late father. If the name Fujimori sounds familiar, her late father, President Alberto Fujimori, removed from office. He led Peru for 10 years. Then he was convicted of human rights abuses and extrajudicial killings in 2009. into prison. Nancy Yusuf, what can we take away from these far-right victories in Latin America? Trump endorsed, at least in one case, Trump exerting influence in the region of both Peru

and in Colombia. So I think this is less about ideology than just frustration in both countries about crime, economic stagnation, corruption, and political leads who have failed to deliver. I mean, in one instance, we have somebody who's never held political office in the case of Columbia and then the other someone associated with a name that has had a divisive effect, if nothing else. And yet in both countries, I think we're hearing people say, we want change agents. I think Trump's a factor, but not the deciding factor. And actually, I think his biggest factor is sort of how he's reshaped campaigning in both cases, people taking on more Trump-like

styles. And Trump-like tactics in their campaigns. We saw that also in campaigns in Brazil several years ago, MAGA-like movements there as well. All right, before we go, I do want to take a quick minute and get a read of your reporter's notebook stories that you're looking for that are going to be important to us next week. Why don't each of you take just a quick minute for a quick thought of what you're working on, Nancy? You go first. Well, I know you said stick to international issues, but are we, I mean, there might be

a killer, Travis, your world. Kelsey wedding this week, you know. And the other thing I'm watching, though, on our area is travel on July 4th, because I think it'll be a tangible measure of how people are looking at their economic stability in this post memorandum of understanding war with Iran. And so I'm really watching that as a metric of how economically confident people are feeling. Greg, Mari, what's in your notebook? What should we be watching for? Yeah, I know we touched on Russia and Ukraine, but I'm headed to Ukraine next month for an extended reporting trip and did not expect to see Crimea under so much pressure from the

Ukrainians and the Russians in such a difficult position. A fuel, food, other shortage is there. So I think I'll be very focused on Crimea when I'm there. A month in Tel Aviv heading to Crimea next. Apologies to Greg Myrie's neighbors, he'll mow his lawn in September. Jack Dech, what about you? Well, after all this talk of British memes, I'm going to order ahead of cabbage to see how long Andy Burnham lasts at 10 Downing Street a la Liz Truss. But NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, not calling Trump daddy this week, but still a very ingratiating tone towards the president. We'll see if that rubs off on the Europeans this time at NATO. All right. I want to thank our great panel. Hey, we're talking international news and international vibes here on the roundup. We cannot end the roundup this week

without some of the stunning news out of the World Cup. It's FIFA, of course, the highest hopes, the heartbreak and one majestic hat-trick. Yes, with that goal against Algeria last week, Leonel Messi tied Germany's Miroslav close for the record, 16 World Cup goals. Messies 39, that made him the oldest player ever to score a hat trick at the World Cup, and he did it exactly 20 years to the day since his first goal at the World Cup. And then after that, he broke that record with his 17th,

and 18th goals this past Monday against Austria. Now, there's a lot of tournament to go, including the United States, through to the knockout round facing Bosnia, Herzegovina. Next, don't miss it. Go Team USA. We're covering the World Cup next week here on 1A. And in the meantime, big thanks to Greg Myrie of NPR, Nancy Yusuf at the Atlantic, and Jack Dech at Politico.

Mike Kidd is our sound designer and engineer Chris Castano. is our digital editor. Maya Garg is our senior managing producer. Alexander Botee is our senior supervising producer. Aileen Humphreys is our senior producer and editor of 1A On Demand. And Thomas Lou produces our podcast. Special thanks this week to Matthew Simonson for additional on-demand support. This program comes to you from WAMU, part of American University in Washington, distributed by NPR. I'm Todd Zillick. This is One-A.

This message comes from HomeServe, a burst pipe, a dead water heater, the AC calling it quits. Who do you call? HomeServe is an easy way to handle unexpected home repairs, with plans covering stuff basic homeowners insurance usually won't. Instead of scrambling for a contractor, you make one call to get the repair process started. Join the millions of customers who trust Homeserve right now. Go to Homeserve.com slash podcast for 50% less your first year. Savings compared to renewal price, Boyd in Florida. The fatal shooting of a teenager at a protest in Seattle has gone unsolved for six years. This is open in your face. How are there no answers?

Our investigation has uncovered new evidence and witnesses who say they've never talked to police. Did police ever call you? Not once. Listen to We Keep Us Safe, a new true crime series on the Embedded podcast from NPR.