Trump: Iran will be held responsible for ‘every shot fired' by Houthis
President Trump on Monday vowed to hold Iran responsible for shots fired by the Houthis, after U.S. airstrikes took out multiple leaders from the military group this weekend.
'Let nobody be fooled! The hundreds of attacks being made by Houthi, the sinister mobsters and thugs based in Yemen, who are hated by the Yemeni people, all emanate from, and are created by, IRAN. Any further attack or retaliation by the 'Houthis' will be met with great force, and there is no guarantee that that force will stop there. Iran has played 'the innocent victim' of rogue terrorists from which they've lost control, but they haven't lost control,' Trump said on Truth Social.
The Houthis are backed by Iran, which Trump warned on Saturday to stop supporting the rebel group, saying he would hold the country 'fully accountable' for the proxy group's actions. When he ordered the airstrikes over the weekend, Trump said the U.S. would use an 'overwhelming lethal force' to take out the group.
'They're dictating every move, giving them the weapons, supplying them with money and highly sophisticated Military equipment, and even, so-called, 'Intelligence.' Every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon, from this point forward, as being a shot fired from the weapons and leadership of IRAN, and IRAN will be held responsible, and suffer the consequences, and those consequences will be dire!' Trump continued on Monday.
The president's statement came just after the U.S. launched new airstrikes on Monday in Yemen, Reuters reported, citing the Houthis' Al Masirah TV.
National security adviser Mike Waltz confirmed on Sunday that weekend airstrikes took out 'multiple Houthi leaders' and said the difference between these strikes and those during the Biden administration, 'is, one, going after the Houthi leadership and, two, holding Iran responsible.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NY Wins Order Against US Funding Freeze in Congestion Fight
(Bloomberg) -- New York won a court order temporarily barring the Trump administration from withholding federal approvals or funds for the state's transportation projects, as the president tries to end Manhattan's congestion pricing program. UAE's AI University Aims to Become Stanford of the Gulf Pacific Coast Highway to Reopen Near Malibu After January Fires NY Wins Order Against US Funding Freeze in Congestion Fight The administration has threatened to hold back the funds and permissions unless New York stops charging tolls to drive into the borough's tolled zone. US District Judge Lewis Liman on Tuesday granted a request by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to block such efforts by the federal government through June 9 while he considers whether the US has the legal right to terminate the toll. Liman's ruling means the program — meant to reduce gridlock and pollution and raise money to modernize the city's transit system — will almost certainly continue as the legal battle proceeds. It helps reduce uncertainty over how the nation's largest public transportation system will pay to modernize a more than 100-year-old network. The judge ordered the two sides to meet to decide how to speed up the process, saying there is a 'public interest in moving the case along.' The ruling is a win for local government as the Trump administration withdraws support for regional projects or takes over development. US Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy has cited subway system crime in wielding the threat of withheld funds, and announced in April that the federal government, instead of the MTA, would be in charge of renewing New York's Penn Station. Earlier this month President Donald Trump said the US wouldn't finance California's high-speed rail project, which suffers from delays and escalating costs. 'No More Coercive Threats' Outside court on Tuesday after Liman ruled, MTA Chairman Janno Lieber greeted the ruling as a welcome warning from the judge to the government. 'The message is he wants no more coercive threats and threats of punishment if we don't do what they say. That was pretty clear. So I don't think we're going to have another letter like that,' Lieber said of Duffy's threats. The judge 'wants the parties to come up with a schedule for this litigation that will put it behind us.' Governor Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, said in a statement that the court order is 'a massive victory for New York commuters, vindicating our right as a state to make decisions regarding what's best for our streets.' The judge found that the MTA had demonstrated that it was likely to succeed in its claims. He said it would probably suffer 'irreparable harm' without a temporary restraining order, noting that the government's effort to undo US approval of the congestion pricing program had already affected the value of MTA bonds. A spokesman for the US Department of Transportation had no immediate comment on the decision. Cloud of Uncertainty The program has operated under a cloud of uncertainty since it began almost five months ago, as Trump tries to stop it. The MTA sued Duffy after he sent a letter on Feb. 19 reversing US approval of the plan won under former President Joe Biden. The suit seeks a court declaration that the attempt to halt the program is illegal. Trump has said the congestion pricing plan will hurt the local economy, and Duffy in February called it 'a slap in the face to working class Americans and small business owners.' Hochul says the toll was urgently needed and has pointed to MTA data to show it is working. New York maintains it won't stop the tolls unless the court tells it to. Roberta Kaplan, a lawyer for the MTA, said accepting the US position 'would give the government the unilateral right to terminate any contract it enters into' and is a 'recipe for chaos' that would create an 'eternal fog of uncertainty.' Charles Roberts, a lawyer for the US, said the administration still hasn't decided whether the MTA is in violation of their contract or whether to implement any of the compliance measures it laid out in an April letter that ordered the state to shut down the program by May 21. 'Not Damocles' Sword' 'Obviously if we had said compliance measures begin tomorrow, that would be Damocles' sword,' he said. 'That's not Damocles' sword. That's an ongoing agency process that hasn't been consummated. They are not imminent.' The MTA runs the city's subways, buses and commuter lines and is implementing the new toll. Its $68.4 billion 2025—2029 capital program is counting on $14 billion of federal funding. Projects at risk in the near term include $2.2 billion of plans for subway and bus maintenance, along with railroad track work the state recently submitted for federal approval, according to court documents. Duffy had threatened to start withholding authorizations and federal money as soon as Wednesday if the MTA continues to charge drivers under the congestion program. Most motorists pay $9 during peak hours to enter Manhattan south of 60th Street. The toll brought in $159 million in the first three months of the program and is on target to raise $500 million this year after expenses, according to MTA officials. The MTA anticipates borrowing against the revenue collections to finance $15 billion of transit upgrades that will renew train signals from the 1930s, add elevators to stations and extend the Second Avenue Subway to Harlem. The fee has helped ease traffic in the area. About 8.1 million fewer vehicles entered Manhattan's central business district from the launch of the tolling on Jan. 5 through April, for a daily average decline of 11%, according to MTA data. While many drivers grumble at paying more to get to work, appointments and other events, support for the toll is growing as people experience faster commutes and less traffic. A Siena College Poll conducted May 12-15 found that 39% of registered voters in the state want the fee to remain, up from 29% in December who supported it. The case is Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. Duffy, 25-cv-1413, US District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan). (Updates with quotes, details and further context throughout, starting in second paragraph.) Mark Zuckerberg Loves MAGA Now. Will MAGA Ever Love Him Back? Why Apple Still Hasn't Cracked AI Inside the First Stargate AI Data Center Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce How Coach Handbags Became a Gen Z Status Symbol ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Washington Post
8 minutes ago
- Washington Post
The US and EU are in a showdown over trade. What does Trump want and what can Europe offer?
FRANKFURT, Germany — Top officials at the European Union's executive commission says they're pushing hard for a trade deal with the Trump administration to avoid a 50% tariff on imported goods. Trump had threatened to impose the tariffs on June 1, but has pushed back the deadline to July 9, repeating an oft-used tactic in his trade war. European negotiators are contending with Trump's everchanging and unpredictable tariff threats, but 'still, they have to come up with something to hopefully pacify him,' said Bruce Stokes, visiting senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Stokes also sees more at play than just a disagreement over trade deficits. Trump's threats 'are rooted in frustration with the EU that has little to do with trade,'' Stokes said. 'He doesn't like the EU. He doesn't like Germany.' What exactly does Trump want? What can Europe offer? Here are the key areas where the two side are squaring off. Over and over, Trump has bemoaned the fact that Europe sells more things to Americans than it buys from Americans. The difference, or the trade deficit in goods, last year was 157 billion euros ($178 billion). But Europe says that when it comes to services — particularly digital services like online advertising and cloud computing — the U.S. sells more than it buys and that lowers the overall trade deficit to 48 billion euros, which is only about 3% of total trade. The European Commission says that means trade is 'balanced.' One way to shift the trade in goods would be for Europe to buy more liquefied natural gas by ship from the U.S. To do so, the EU could cut off the remaining imports of Russian pipeline gas and LNG. The commission is preparing legislation to force an end to those purchases -- last year, some 19% of imports — by the end of 2027. That would push European private companies to look for other sources of gas such as the U.S. However the shift away from Russia is already in motion and that 'has obviously not been enough to satisfy,' said Laurent Ruseckas, a natural gas markets expert at S&P Global Commodities Insights Research. The commission doesn't buy gas itself but can use 'moral suasion' to convince companies to turn to U.S. suppliers in coming years but 'this is no silver bullet and nothing that can yield immediate results,' said Simone Tagliapietra, an energy analyst at the Bruegel think tank in Brussels. Europe could buy more from U.S. defense contractors as part of its effort to deter further aggression from Russia after the invasion of Ukraine, says Carsten Brzeski, global chief of macro at ING bank. If European countries did increase their overall defense spending — another of Trump's demands — their voters are likely to insist that the purchases go to defense contractors in Europe, not America, said Stokes of the German Marshall Fund. One way around that political obstacle would be for U.S. defense companies to build factories in Europe, but 'that would take time,'' he said. The EU could also reduce its 10% tax on foreign cars— one of Trump's longstanding grievances against Europe. 'The United States is not going to export that many cars to Europe anyway ... The Germans would be most resistant, but I don't think they're terribly worried about competition from America,'' said Edward Alden, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. 'That would be a symbolic victory for the president.'' The U.S. has long complained about European regulations on food and agricultural products that keep out hormone-raised beef and chickens disinfected with chlorine. But experts aren't expecting EU trade negotiators to offer any concessions at the bargaining table. 'The EU is unwilling to capitulate,' said Mary Lovely, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 'The EU has repeatedly said it will not change its sanitary rules, its rules on (genetically modified) crops, its rules on chlorinated chickens, things that have been longtime irritants for the U.S.'' Backing down on those issues, she said, would mean that 'the U.S. gets to set food safety (standards) for Europe.'' One of Trump's pet peeves has been the value-added taxes used by European governments, a tax he says is a burden on US companies. Economists say this kind of tax, used by some 170 countries, is trade-neutral because it applies equally to imports and exports. A value-added tax, or VAT, is paid by the end purchaser at the cash register but differs from sales taxes in that it is calculated at each stage of the production process. In both cases, VAT and sales tax, imports and exports get the same treatment. The U.S. is an outlier in that it doesn't use VAT. There's little chance countries will change their tax systems for Trump and the EU has ruled it out. Trump's approach to negotiations has involved threats of astronomical tariffs - up to 145% in the case of China - before striking a deal for far lower levels. In any case, however, the White House has taken the stance that it won't go below a 10% baseline. The threat of 50% for the EU is so high it means 'an effective trade embargo,' said Brzeski, since it would impose costs that would make it unprofitable to import goods or mean charging consumers prices so high the goods would be uncompetitive. Because the knottiest issues dividing the EU and U.S. — food safety standards, the VAT, regulation of tech companies — are so difficult 'it is impossible to imagine them being resolved by the deadline,'' Alden said. 'Possibly what you could have — and Trump has shown he is willing to do this — is a very small deal'' like the one he announced May 8 with the United Kingdom . Economists Oliver Rakau and Nicola Nobile of Oxford Economics wrote in a commentary Monday that if imposed, the 50% tariffs would reduce the collective economy of the 20 countries that use the euro currency by up to 1% next year and slash business investment by more than 6%. The EU has offered the US a 'zero for zero' outcome in which tariffs would be removed on both sides industrial goods including autos. Trump has dismissed that but EU officials have said it's still on the table. Lovely of the Peterson Institute sees the threats and bluster as Trump's way of negotiating. 'In the short run, I don't think 50% is going to be our reality.'' But she says Trump's strategy adds to the uncertainty around U.S. policy that is paralyzing business. 'It suggests that the U.S. is an unreliable trading partner, that it operates on whim and not on rule of law,'' Lovely said. 'Friend or foe, you're not going to be treated well by this administration.'' _____ Wiseman contributed to this report from Washington.
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
King Charles III defends Canada's sovereignty in speech to open parliament
King Charles III received a standing ovation from Canadian lawmakers on Tuesday as he opened a new session of parliament in Ottawa, saying, "all Canadians give themselves far more than any foreign power or any continent can ever take away." The 76-year-oldking is the first leader of the British monarchy invited to deliver the speech from the throne to open a new session of parliament since his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, did so in 1977. The speech came at a time when President Donald Trump has slapped tariffs on Canada and has repeatedly by suggested it should become the United States' 51st state. The king acknowledged that the challenges Canada is facing are "unprecedented in our lifetimes." "Many Canadians are feeling anxious and worried about the drastically changing world around them. Fundamental change is always unsettling," Charles said as his wife, Queen Camilla, sat by his side in front of members of Parliament. "Yet, this moment is also an incredible opportunity, an opportunity for renewal, an opportunity to think big and to act bigger, an opportunity for Canada to embark on the largest transformation of its economy since the Second World War." The king added, "A confident Canada, which has welcomed new Canadians, including from some of the most tragic, global conflict zones, can seize this opportunity by recognizing that all Canadians give themselves far more than any foreign power on any continent can ever take away." The speech from the throne is traditionally written by the Canadian government and delivered to parliament by the country's governor general. But newly-elected Prime Minister Mark Carney invited Charles to give the speech, telling reporters, the king's visit to Canada "clearly underscores the sovereignty of our country." "This is a historic honor that matches the weight of our times," Carney said at an April news conference after he and his Liberal Party won the election. In what will likely be seen as a message to Trump, Charles emphasized in his speech on Tuesday that Canada must remain "strong and free." Charles added, "By staying true to Canadian values, Canada can build new alliances and a new economy that serves all Canadians." The king noted that Carney, who visited the White House on May 6, and Trump have "begun defining a new economic and security relationship between Canada and the United States, rooted in mutual respect and founded on common interests to deliver transformational benefits for both soverign nations." But Trump has repeatedly said that he would like to annex Canada to the United States and mocked Canada's previous Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as "Governor" Trudeau. Delivering his speech in both French and English, the king said Canada is facing a "critical moment." Looking out at the members of parliament, Charles called them the "guardians of the fundamental rights and freedoms." "Democracy, pluralism, the rule of law, self-determination and freedom are values which Canadians hold dear, and ones which the government is determined to protect," Charles said. He added, "The system of global trade, while not perfect, has helped to deliver prosperity for Canadians for decades -- is changing. Canada's relationships with partners is changing." The king mentioned that Canada will host the G7 Summit next month and talked about the benefits of open trade as opposed to the tariff war that the Trump administration started. Charles said Canada is "ready to build a coalition of like-minded countries that share its values, that believe in international co-operation and the free and open exchange of goods, services and ideas." "To be truly strong, Canada must be secure. To that end, the government will introduce legislation to enhance security at Canada's borders. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies will have new tools to stop the flow of fentanyl and its precursors," Charles said, apparently referencing complaints from the Trump administration that Canada is not doing enough to stop the smuggling of fentanyl into the United States. The speech wrapped up Charles and Queen Camilla's whirlwind trip to Canada. It marked Charles' 20th visit to the country, but his first as king. "As I've said before, every time I come to Canada, a little more of Canada seeps into my bloodstream and from there straight to my heart," Charles said. ABC News' Zoe Magee contributed to this report. King Charles III defends Canada's sovereignty in speech to open parliament originally appeared on
