The Spanish banking behemoth BBVA is considering its €14 billion hostile takeover of smaller rival Sabadell, following the Spanish government’s imposition of a five-year moratorium on combining the two banks’ operations, which casts doubt on the viability of projected cost savings.
Peio Belausteguigoitia, BBVA’s head of operations in Spain, said Wednesday that the bank would “shortly” determine whether to proceed with its unsolicited offer for Sabadell, emphasising that the bank was not likely to postpone its next step.
“All options remain on the table,” Belausteguigoitia stated, including withdrawing the offer completely or taking legal action in reaction to the government’s restrictions.
Regulatory conditions challenge synergies
On Tuesday, the Spanish government imposed a stipulation that BBVA and Sabadell may not merge for up to five years.
While Spanish law permits BBVA to acquire Sabadell stock, any future merger is subject to regulatory clearance, which gives the government considerable control over the outcome.
According to analysts, the freeze might leave BBVA with majority control of Sabadell but unable to undertake the integration required to obtain cost reductions, weakening the bid’s financial basis.
The most pressing concern for BBVA is the reconsideration of around €850 million in planned cost savings over two years.
Belausteguigoitia added that the bank is presently reviewing the ramifications of the government’s decision, with a particular emphasis on technological efficiencies.
IT and administrative savings in focus
BBVA has also argued that most of the synergies could be realised even without a total merger, especially in IT. Most of the synergies are in IT, Belausteguigoitia reiterated.
Until yesterday, BBVA estimated that approximately 450 million euros of the savings would come from administrative and IT measures.
But with the government also prohibiting any layoffs or closures, the bank may have fewer avenues through which to reduce costs.
These limitations have increased the paranoia of investors. BBVA shares were down 2.5% at 1004 GMT on Wednesday, while Sabadell stock fell by 1.5%.
Uncertainty looms as CNMV review nears
BBVA´s tender offer prospectus is still pending approval from Spain´s market regulator, CNMV, and more steps are to be seen once the regulator issues its approval.
Citi analysts wrote in a note to clients that they had not anticipated the government decision, which subsequently halted BBVA from moving forward with the tender.
However, they said the bank was likely to revise its cost synergy guidance and timelines following the review by the regulator.
At the same time, Sabadell is disputing BBVA’s claims about anticipated synergies. The bank’s spokesperson reiterated that BBVA needs to clarify how much in cost synergies BBVA expects, which Sabadell disputes.
Next steps: awaiting BBVA’s decision
With the offer hanging in the balance, BBVA has a limited time to decide on its next steps. While the merger can still proceed legally, the path to actual operational integration has been stalled for years, potentially putting BBVA in strategic limbo.
For the time being, the market is kept waiting as BBVA considers the new cost-benefit calculation of purchasing a bank that it may not be able to completely integrate for another half-decade.
It remains to be seen whether the promise of IT-driven savings is sufficient to justify pushing further, or whether BBVA will back out.
The post BBVA reassesses Sabadell Bid after Spanish government imposes integration freeze appeared first on Invezz
Leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have unanimously agreed to significantly increase defense spending to 5% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at the summit in Hague.
This historic move, coming amidst an increasingly belligerent Russia, also saw the alliance’s 32 members renew their ironclad commitment to mutual defense, signaling a united front against evolving global security threats.
The decision represents a major triumph for U.S. President Donald Trump, who has been a vocal critic of European allies for their perceived underspending on security.
The summit itself was largely dominated by efforts to ensure continued U.S. engagement with the transatlantic alliance, a critical concern given growing fears that the U.S. might scale back its military presence in Europe.
Simultaneously, Ukraine’s allies are grappling with the challenge of mounting an effective response to Russia’s ongoing war in the country, now well into its fourth year.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte recently suggested that the Kremlin could be in a position to consider an attack on the alliance within five years, underscoring the urgency behind these decisions.
The Hague Summit Declaration issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in The Hague
Addressing mounting security concerns
The new defense spending target marks a substantial increase from the current goal of 2% of GDP.
This ambitious escalation, detailed in the declaration, is a direct response to “profound security threats and challenges, in particular the long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security and the persistent threat of terrorism.”
The declaration also reaffirmed NATO’s support for Ukraine, though notably omitted last year’s statement that the country’s future lies within the alliance.
Navigating financial hurdles and implementation
The new target, broken down into 3.5% for core defense spending and an additional 1.5% for related investments like infrastructure and cybersecurity, is the culmination of months of persistent coaxing by Secretary General Rutte.
It is expected to unleash trillions of dollars in defense spending across member states until 2035.
However, the feasibility of achieving this ambitious target remains an open question, particularly as many European countries contend with high levels of public debt.
Some nations, led by Spain, have already raised concerns about the necessity of such extensive spending to meet the new, ambitious lists of weapons and troops required as part of their NATO commitments.
Spain secured the wording change it sought in the statement: On Sunday, the group revised the draft language from “we commit” to “allies commit” to spending 5% on defense.
This adjustment gives Madrid the flexibility to maintain its position of targeting 2.1% of GDP, which it argues is sufficient to meet the alliance’s capability requirements.
To address these concerns, the allies have agreed that “the trajectory and balance of spending” will be subject to a review in 2029.
Additionally, direct contributions towards Ukraine’s defense will now count towards their military spending, providing a degree of flexibility.
During a closed-door session, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz conveyed the allies’ clear message to Russian President Vladimir Putin: “Don’t pick a fight with NATO”, said a Bloomberg report.
The post NATO leaders agrees on increasing defence spending to 5% appeared first on Invezz
The post US stocks at open: S&P, Nasdaq eye record highs as geopolitical tensions ease appeared first on Invezz
Bumble Inc. announced on Wednesday that it will lay off roughly 240 employees — about 30% of its global workforce — as part of a broader restructuring effort aimed at reducing costs and boosting innovation in a maturing online dating market.
The announcement sent Bumble shares soaring more than 26% in early trading on Tuesday
The layoffs will result in non-recurring charges of between $13 million and $18 million for severance, benefits, and other related costs, which will largely be reflected in the third and fourth quarters of 2025, the company said.
However, Bumble expects the move to generate $40 million in annual cost savings, which it plans to reinvest in product and technology development.
BMBL Q2 outlook raised despite industry slowdown
Alongside the layoffs, Bumble raised its second-quarter revenue forecast to a range of $244 million to $249 million, an increase from its earlier guidance of $235 million to $243 million.
Q2 adjusted EBITDA is now expected to be between $88 million and $93 million, up from a prior guidance of $79 million to $84 million.
The revised outlook reflects optimism about a more stabilized financial performance, even as the dating app sector continues to wrestle with user fatigue and macroeconomic headwinds.
In the first quarter, Bumble posted revenue of $247.1 million, narrowly surpassing analyst expectations of $246.2 million, according to LSEG data.
The result included a foreign currency drag of nearly $5.9 million.
Despite reporting a 7% year-over-year revenue decline in Q1 and a slight dip in paying users — down nearly 1% to 2.7 million — Bumble’s ability to meet Wall Street estimates last month helped allay investor concerns as the shares jumped by more than 20% post the announcement.
Jamie Lumley, a fundamental analyst at Carbon Arc, noted after the Q1 results:
“Given that Bumble is in a mature market that is vulnerable to macroeconomic headwinds, there is some encouragement to be taken from these numbers about how Bumble can weather the current environment.”
The company has also trimmed its marketing spend by $20 million to help improve margins.
Bumble follows Tinder parent in layoffs as online dating sector faces headwinds
The restructuring mirrors a broader trend in the online dating space.
Last month, Match Group, which owns Tinder, said it would cut 13% of its workforce as part of its business revamp.
The online dating sector has faced headwinds, with persistent inflation and limited feature innovation driving users away from platforms like Tinder and Bumble.
Both companies are racing to reinvigorate their platforms with new features, including artificial intelligence tools designed to improve match quality and user experience.
Bumble has also trimmed its marketing spend by $20 million to help improve margins.
According to UBS, Bumble is now focused on a smaller but more engaged user base, shifting away from aggressive performance marketing.
“These efforts are expected to weigh on near-term payer growth and revenue,” UBS said in a note last month.
Stock rally follows JPMorgan’s downgrade this month
Despite the improved outlook and investor enthusiasm, skepticism remains.
JPMorgan downgraded Bumble stock to “underweight” earlier this month, citing declining US app downloads and weakening trends among Gen Z users.
“Online dating category remains challenged, with Gen Z product/market fit issues,” JPM said.
The brokerage maintained its price target of $5 per share, warning of further downside risks to revenue and net user additions in the second half of the year.
Bumble’s challenge remains balancing short-term financial discipline with long-term platform innovation — a task made more urgent by a softening user base and intensifying competition in the dating app industry.
The post BMBL stock rockets 26% after job cuts and raised Q2 revenue forecast appeared first on Invezz
It’s a measure of President Trump’s success in bombing Iran’s key nuclear sites that even some of his harshest detractors are praising the risky endeavor.
The calculated deception – ‘I may do it, I may not do it’ – and dispatching of a decoy fleet of B-2 bombers were crucial to achieving the mission.
Yes, the situation may look very different in six months, depending in part on the response of Russia and other allies of Iran, the world’s largest terror state. Just yesterday, Tehran launched ballistic missiles at the U.S. military base in Qatar, with no reported casualties.
Still, Trump should avoid landing on any aircraft carriers with a ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner, a reminder of how George W. Bush’s premature celebration turned into the Iraq quagmire that cost more than 4,000 American lives.
Yes, a sizable chunk of the MAGA coalition was opposed to U.S. intervention after the original Israeli airstrikes on grounds that Trump had always vowed to keep this country out of faraway wars. Some of them are falling into line, as there’s a rally-round-the-president effect after military action – especially when it’s successful.
Sure, Trump followed up by posting about the possibility of ‘regime change’ – this after JD Vance told ‘Meet the Press:’ ‘We’re not at war with Iran. We’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program.’
Maybe the Truth Social message was simply designed to boost pressure on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – who could have been taken out – or maybe Trump is tempted by the W-era mentality of ‘we will be greeted as liberators.’
No one is quibbling with the deceptions, any more than Dwight Eisenhower was criticized for deploying dummy tanks and vehicles on D-Day to convince the Nazis that the 1944 attack would come at a different location rather than Normandy.
Bret Stephens, an anti-Trump conservative columnist at the New York Times, called the bombings ‘a courageous and correct decision that deserves respect, no matter how one feels about this president and the rest of his policies…Trump could have continued to outsource the dirty work of hitting Iran’s nuclear capabilities to Israel, hoping that it could at least buy the West some diplomatic leverage and breathing room.’
David Ignatius, not a fan of the president’s foreign policy, wrote in his Washington Post column that ‘Trump and his top advisers acted boldly to hit the prize targets in Iran’s nuclear program — at Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz — that remained after nine days of Israeli bombing. The operation was bigger and more comprehensive than even some Israelis had expected, and it showed that the U.S. military, even during the chaotic Trump presidency, still performs with unmatched power, precision and reach.’
But these are among the relatively few exceptions. By and large, liberals and Democrats denounced the president’s action, and conservatives and Republicans hailed it.
And you know the reaction would have been reversed if Joe Biden was in office and had ordered the airstrikes.
There’s a legitimate question about whether Trump should have sought approval from the Hill, but this Congress has largely ceded its role on foreign affairs (and on tariffs, for that matter). Besides, a floor debate would have been like sending up neon lights about the coming attack.
Sometimes a commander-in-chief has to attack unilaterally. When Barack Obama and Bill Clinton ordered military strikes without consulting Congress, almost nobody made a big issue of it.
The Times reports that Iran warned Qatar of the retaliatory attack, which was an obvious attempt to minimize casualties and render the half-dozen missiles largely symbolic (though not to the military personnel having to seek shelter). That amounted to a muted initial response by the Iranians, since any American deaths would clearly trigger a further escalation by the Trump military.
The United States is the only country with bunker-busting bombs, which enabled it to damage or destroy the underground uranium enrichment site buried under the Fordow site. The truth is that our experts don’t know how much damage was done far below the surface and may not for weeks.
But given that the U.S. completely controls Iranian airspace, thanks to the earlier Israeli strikes, Trump could order devastating new attacks at any time with virtually no fear of our planes being shot down. And the Iranians are acutely aware of that.
It was deception and misdirection that enabled the Pentagon to pull this off. When Trump said he would decide what to do in the next ‘two weeks’ – a stance echoed by Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt – he had already approved the military plan, subject to last-minute reservations. The attack began 30 hours later.
When Trump dined with Steve Bannon, the most prominent opponent of the U.S. attacks, along with Tucker Carlson, some surmised he was changing his mind. The same was true when he went to a fundraising dinner at his Bedminster, N.J. golf club, and nothing seemed imminent.
When Fox’s Brian Kilmeade asked Leavitt yesterday about her boss’s regime change posting, she did not minimize it:
‘If the Iranian regime refuses to come to a peaceful diplomatic solution, which the president is still interested and engaging in, by the way, why shouldn’t the Iranian people take away the power of this incredibly violent regime that has been suppressing them for decades?’
Multiple media reports say Trump was angry with his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, for testifying in March that the intelligence community believes that Iran is nowhere near building a nuclear weapon, and a video she made after visiting Hiroshima. She has tried to walk it back, but there is little question she has been partially sidelined.
The Washington Post yesterday reported having obtained the audio file of an Israeli intelligence operative’s June 13 call to a senior Iranian commander:
‘I can advise you now, you have 12 hours to escape with your wife and child. Otherwise, you’re on our list right now,’ the translation said. The operative suggested Israel could target the general and his family at any moment: ‘We’re closer to you than your own neck vein.’
There is no independent verification that the call was actually made.
I don’t use this word lightly, but Iran is an evil country. Anyone of a certain age recalls how the Iranians, in 1979 after the ouster of the Shah, held our embassy staffers hostage for 444 agonizing days.
The ruling theocracy also finances the terror groups Hezbollah and Hamas. In fact, if it had not been for Hamas’ spectacular miscalculation in mounting the barbaric massacre in Israel on Oct. 7 – which again included the seizing of civilian hostages – Gaza would not now be the wasteland it has become. Israel bears some responsibility for this, yet also knows that it would be the prime target if Iran succeeds in enriching weapons-grade uranium.
Finally, even if things go south, what happened on Sunday has in my view changed the way people look at Donald Trump. He rolled the dice in a high-stakes gamble. He’s not just a garden-variety isolationist. He doesn’t have to run again, but he managed to keep everything secret and pulled it off with the aid of our superb military. And that took guts.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Fresh satellite imagery released by Maxar Technologies shows significant damage at three of Iran’s key nuclear sites, Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, just days after U.S. B-2 stealth bombers conducted strikes ordered by President Donald Trump.
The new photos, released on June 24, provide the clearest post-strike visuals to date, showing the precision and depth of the U.S. assault on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
At the heavily fortified Fordow Fuel Enrichment Facility, located deep beneath a mountain near Qom, satellite views reveal multiple craters along the primary access roads and directly at the entrances to tunnel complexes.
Several perimeter buildings were destroyed outright, and one crater can be seen blasted into the access road leading to the facility.
The Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center also shows signs of recent damage. An overview image highlights new destruction at the surface, while detailed shots capture tunnel entrances that appear to have been struck directly, echoing earlier reporting that the operation aimed to neutralize buried infrastructure previously unreachable by conventional air power.
Meanwhile, at Natanz, a site known for its history with the Stuxnet cyberattack and long a target of Israeli and American scrutiny, two craters believed to have been caused by U.S. ordnance now appear filled and covered with dirt.
These strikes had reportedly targeted the underground centrifuge halls that are central to Iran’s uranium enrichment operations.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi confirmed that key buildings and underground systems at all three sites were hit.
American officials say Iran’s nuclear program has been severely set back.
Trump has claimed a ‘very successful’ mission.
In addition to the nuclear sites hit by the U.S., Maxar’s images also documented separate airstrike damage in the capital city of Tehran.
The images show widespread destruction believed to be linked to suspected nuclear program buildings near Tehran’s Shahid Rajaee University.
Fox News’ Greg Norman contributed to this report.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
President Donald Trump thanked former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush after he praised the president’s decision to order strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
‘Thank you to Jeb Bush — Very much appreciated!’ Trump declared in a Tuesday Truth Social post.
Bush, the chairman of the organization United Against Nuclear Iran, issued a statement with several others from the group hailing the president’s move.
‘We applaud President Trump and the United States for this decision—one of the most important of the 21st century,’ the statement declared, calling it ‘an act of courage, clarity, and historical necessity.’
‘President Trump’s decision to neutralize Iran’s regime’s nuclear program is a watershed moment—one that reasserts American strength, restores deterrence, and sends an unmistakable message to rogue regimes: the era of impunity is over. Where others delayed and wavered, President Trump acted,’ the statement asserted, in part.
Bush is the son of the late President George H.W. Bush, and the brother of former President George W. Bush.
The former Sunshine State governor was one of the Republicans who pursued the GOP presidential nomination during the 2016 election cycle, but he dropped out after failing to perform well in early GOP nominating contests.
Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley and former Vice President Mike Pence are also among those who have expressed support for Trump’s move.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Emil Bove will appear Wednesday before the Senate, where he is expected to face tough questions during a hearing about his controversial entrance into Justice Department leadership and former role as President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer.
Trump nominated Bove, who fiercely defended the president during his criminal prosecutions, to serve in a lifetime role as a judge on the Pennsylvania-based Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
Trump said Bove would ‘restore the Rule of Law,’ a remark that came as sitting judges have drawn Trump’s ire for handing down dozens of orders blocking parts of his agenda.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who has worked closely with Bove for years, told Fox News Digital in a phone interview ahead of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that Bove was a ‘freaking brilliant lawyer’ and that his nomination to the appellate court was a ‘no-brainer.’
Blanche described his colleague as the ‘most gentle, empathetic, great person that anybody could ever work with,’ a characterization sharply at odds with some who have been in Bove’s crosshairs.
In his early years, Bove was a high-achieving student, a division one athlete on his college lacrosse team and a Georgetown University law school graduate.
He went on to clerk for two federal judges and worked for about a decade as federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, where he led high-profile terrorism and drug trafficking cases through 2019.
Blanche brought Bove into his private practice, where they tag-teamed Trump’s prosecutions, including by appearing by the president’s side during his six-week hush money trial in Manhattan last year. At the end of it, Trump was convicted by a jury of 34 counts of falsifying business records, marking the lone case out of Trump’s four to lead to a conviction.
Blanche said that behind the scenes, Bove was critical to their defense work and wrote the vast majority of their legal briefs.
In letters to the Senate, a group of Republican state attorneys general said Bove was courageous for representing Trump ‘when few other attorneys would step up.’ Attorney Gene Schaerr called Bove’s brief writing ‘superb.’ One of Bove’s past law firms said he was ’eminently qualified.’
Nearly three dozen retired law enforcement officials praised Bove as a ‘trusted and respected partner,’ saying he had a profound understanding of the Drug Enforcement Administration and was responsible for breaking apart transnational criminal networks.
‘His efforts have directly contributed to high-impact cases that have saved lives and protected vulnerable populations,’ the retired officials wrote. Others heaped similar praise.
The rosy picture that Blanche and Bove’s supporters paint is drastically different from the one presented by a handful of DOJ officials who left the department because of Bove and defense lawyers who observed him in action during his time as a New York prosecutor.
While Bove was serving as acting deputy attorney general ahead of Blanche’s confirmation in March, two top lawyers in the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office and five officials in the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section chose to abruptly leave their jobs instead of complying with Bove’s order to drop New York Mayor Eric Adams’s federal corruption charges.
During the debacle, a judge dismissed the Democratic mayor’s charges with prejudice, instead of without prejudice as Bove had requested, meaning the Trump administration could not bring the case again.
The judge’s decision came after the ousted lawyers blasted Bove for engaging in a dishonest quid pro quo with the mayor. The chain of events left some conservative legal analysts harshly questioning the wisdom of Bove’s actions, saying it undermined the DOJ’s work.
Trump’s mass deportation plan involved the unprecedented move of invoking a wartime law called the Alien Enemies Act. Bove indicated during an internal meeting in March that he anticipated judges would attempt to shut down the operation, according to attorney Erez Reuveni.
Reuveni, a 15-year DOJ veteran who was fired after struggling to defend one of the Trump administration’s deportation during a Maryland court hearing, said in a whistleblower complaint published Tuesday that Bove shocked meeting attendees by telling them they would ‘need to consider telling the courts ‘f*** you’ and ignore any such court order.’
Reuveni said Bove’s remarks were far afield of anything he had heard at DOJ during his tenure there and that court defiance and misleading judges were a hallmark of the department during some of the most controversial immigration cases that arose in March.
DOJ attorneys have been admonished by judges for appearing to flout court orders, but they have, thus far, avoided being held in contempt of court and other sanctions.
Bove was known by some of his peers as a zealous prosecutor during his SDNY days, but defense lawyers were alarmed by his ruthlessness. Some viewed him as vicious, rude and power-hungry, according to interviews with attorneys and media reports.
One longtime defense lawyer who crossed paths with Bove in New York told Fox News Digital the nominee was an arrogant ‘bully’ and browbeat people.
In 2018, a band of defense lawyers said in emails reported by the Associated Press that Bove needed ‘adult supervision’ and could not ‘be bothered to treat lesser mortals with respect or empathy.’
A retired New York City FBI agent told the Associated Press that Bove’s perceived turnabout on Jan. 6 riot cases was ‘almost like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.’ Bove showed no outward concerns while in New York when he helped with prosecuting the cases, the retired agent said.
When Bove stepped into his role at Trump’s DOJ, he warned the FBI in a formidable memo that leadership would take ‘personnel action’ against FBI agents who participated in Jan. 6 cases, which Trump ‘appropriately described as a ‘grave national injustice’ that has been perpetrated upon the American people,’ Bove wrote. The notion that thousands of employees who interacted in some way with a Jan. 6 case would see their jobs at risk prompted Bove to issue a follow-up note clarifying that employees who merely followed orders had no reason to worry.
An online petition launched by retired New York federal prosecutor Laurie Korenbaum has dozens of signatures as of this publishing and calls Bove’s nomination a ‘travesty.’
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats have demanded more information on Bove’s time at SDNY, signaling they plan to grill Bove over it during the hearing.
Blanche told Fox News Digital the viewpoints surfacing in the media about Bove were ‘distorted.’
‘The misconception about him is completely driven by kind of a fear that if he takes the bench, he’s going to do something crazy, which he will not,’ Blanche said.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that Moscow is not planning to supply Iran with nuclear warheads, after President Donald Trump mocked him for suggesting that other countries would step in and provide Iran with nuclear weapons after the U.S. strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.
Medvedev, now the deputy chairman of the Security Council of Russia, originally said Sunday that Iran would continue to advance its nuclear program and would receive assistance from other nations to do so.
Although Medvedev did not specify any countries, he clarified later Monday that he was not talking about Russia.
‘I condemn the U.S. strike on Iran — it failed to achieve its objectives,’ Medvedev said in a Monday post on X. ‘However, Russia has no intention of supplying nuclear weapons to Iran because, unlike Israel, we are parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.’
‘I know quite well what this would entail, having overseen our nuclear forces as president,’ Medvedev said. ‘But other countries might — and that’s what was said.’
Medvedev’s statement came after Trump called him out by name in a post on Truth Social following the Russian leader’s original Sunday remarks.
‘Did I hear Former President Medvedev, from Russia, casually throwing around the ‘N word’ (Nuclear!), and saying that he and other Countries would supply Nuclear Warheads to Iran? Did he really say that or, is it just a figment of my imagination? If he did say that, and, if confirmed, please let me know, IMMEDIATELY. The ‘N word’ should not be treated so casually. I guess that’s why Putin’s ‘THE BOSS,’’ Trump said in a Monday Truth Social Post.
Andrea Sticker, the deputy director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ nonproliferation and biodefense program, chalked up Medvedev’s initial statement as an attempt to brag and said it was unrealistic for any country to provide such assistance to Iran.
‘Medvedev’s original claim was likely bluster about Russia or another country supplying Iran with nuclear weapons,’ Stricker said in a Monday email to Fox News Digital. ‘No country, including Pakistan or North Korea, would supply atomic devices to Tehran because they would be held accountable by the United States if Iran used the weapons. Moscow and Pyongyang, at least from available open-source information, appear to be standing mostly idle as their ally Iran takes a major beating.’
The U.S. launched strikes late Saturday targeting key Iranian nuclear facilities, which involved more than 125 U.S. aircraft, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine told reporters Sunday.
Trump announced early Tuesday that a ceasefire had gone into effect between Israel and Iran but scolded both countries hours later following accusations from both sides that the other had violated the agreement.
Trump told reporters both Israel and Iran failed to follow the terms of the agreement, which he said is still in effect.
‘I’m not happy with them. I’m not happy with Iran either but I’m really unhappy with Israel going out this morning,’ Trump said at the White House Tuesday morning.
‘We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f— they’re doing,’ he said.
This post appeared first on FOX NEWS