World leaders flock to meet with Trump at NATO Summit
President Donald Trump took part in a flurry of greetings with world leaders eager to get face time with the U.S. president during his brief stint at the NATO Summit.
Upon arriving, the president was welcomed by Dutch royals — King Willem-Alexander, Queen Maxima, and their daughter Crown Princess Amalia. He became the first president to stay at the king's palace, Huis ten Bosch Palace.
"I had breakfast with the king and queen this morning — beautiful people," Trump said. "I slept beautifully."
He participated in photo ops with world leaders from across the political spectrum — friend and foe alike — and received fawning praise from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who likened him to the father of the alliance.
"Daddy has to sometimes use strong language," Rutte said in defense of Trump's expletive-laden criticism of Israel and Iran for threatening the ceasefire he negotiated.
The president was riding high amid warming relations with the alliance he previously threatened to pull out of. After months of combativeness with Europe over defense spending and liberal policies, Trump praised the alliance for agreeing to his demand to raise its defense spending target to 5% of GDP.
"Believe it or not, allies have increased spending by $700 billion," Trump said in a news conference. "This week, the NATO allies committed to dramatically increase their defense spending to that 5% of GDP, something that no one really thought possible."
Even Spain — the only nation not to agree to commit 5% to defense — got a relatively mild drubbing from the president.
"I like Spain. I have so many people from Spain. It's a great place, and they're great people. But Spain is … the only country out of all of the countries that refuses to pay. And, you know, so they want a little bit of a free ride," he said.
It was certainly a different tone from Vice President JD Vance's address at the Munich Security Conference.
"The threat that I worry the most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia. It's not China. It's not any other external actor," Vance said at the time. "What I worry about is the threat from within the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is getting more expensive as the world's attention is on Iran
The long-awaited summer collision course for President Trump's economic agenda is here and now competing for attention with geopolitics. The competing storylines are playing out — just in parallel — after a weekend where the president's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" saw a new, higher price tag and the removal of key provisions in developments that were fully overshadowed by a weekend attack on Iran. Trump's priorities for taxes and the debt ceiling — not to mention tariffs — still face key deadlines in the weeks ahead, even as foreign affairs take center stage. On Saturday evening, shortly after the attacks on Iran commenced, Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) even released an analysis that made official how recent Senate changes to Trump's tax-cut bill are likely to increase the package's price tag by hundreds of billions of dollars. The group found that the Senate's changes on the tax front — once economists untangled a key budget gimmick — mean the bill will potentially add about $4.2 trillion to the deficits in the years ahead if passed as is. The bill is also undergoing a close examination by the Senate parliamentarian, who is moving section by section and has already deemed some provisions — such as defunding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and making cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — are not in line with Senate reconciliation rules. More changes are likely coming this week that could further increase the price tag and political pressure, even as key Republicans are still saying they will vote no, throwing into doubt a GOP goal of final votes within days. It all could also have near-term economic impacts. Wells Fargo head of global fixed income strategy Brian Rehling said in a recent Yahoo Finance appearance that developments in the bill could be "more consequential" to things like interest rates for the time being over even signals from the Federal Reserve. These developments come just weeks before Trump and the Republicans' self-imposed deadline to get the bill signed into law by July 4. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said that means the Senate will need to pass this bill this week to keep the timeline on pace. The weekend's Joint Committee on Taxation analysis focused specifically on the Senate Finance Committee's tax proposals and offered a headline number that would appear to be good news for fiscal hawks: It found the projected cost of the revised bill comes to about $441 billion over the coming decade. But that calculation came from an accounting maneuver known as a "current policy" baseline, which allows the bill to be calculated assuming current tax levels stay the same. That means Congress can say the cost of extending expiring provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is free, at least for accounting purposes. Republicans defend the practice, with Senate Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo offering that it "more accurately reflects reality." But the bottom line is that these zeroed-out tax extensions are projected to add about $3.8 trillion to the national debt, versus the scenario of Congress doing nothing. "Ignore the $441 number, which is both trying to hide the cost of extensions and gimmick some specific policies to make them look cheaper," offered Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget following the release. Andrew Lautz of the Bipartisan Policy Center also offered a detailed breakdown of the differences brought by the assumptions, such as how it makes the approximately $2.1 trillion in costs from extending individual tax rate cuts look like they instead come to $83 billion. Goldwein, Lautz, and others say the full price tag that should be considered is the total impact to the nation's debt of $4.2 trillion over the next decade. The new price tag projections also come as Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough is going through the bill line by line to see if it complies with the Senate's strict reconciliation rules. It's part of a wonky Senate process known colloquially as a "Byrd bath," after a rule enshrined by Robert Byrd of West Virginia, that sets limits on what can be fast-tracked and what is subject to the normal 60-vote threshold. MacDonough has already analyzed the Banking, Commerce, Judiciary, and Homeland Security committee portions of the bill and found a series of provisions that must be taken out. So far, pieces that appear set to be removed from the bill include one that would have placed a funding cap on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and others that cut the SNAP program. The apparent removal of cuts to the SNAP program around state matching funds could have a significant fiscal impact. Those provisions were previously estimated to save roughly $128 billion. One other closely watched provision by the tech community — to cut broadband funding for states that regulate artificial intelligence — has been allowed to stay in but still faces political opponents pushing to have it struck from the package. It's a series of rulings that Republicans contend aren't yet final but appear set to change the makeup of the overall package. "The Byrd Rule is enshrined in law for a reason, and Democrats are making sure it is enforced," Oregon's Jeff Merkley, the top Democratic senator on the Budget Committee, said in a statement. Even more significant changes could be coming in the days ahead, with the parliamentarian scheduled to take a pass at the Senate Finance Committee's portion of the bill. That's where the biggest ticket items reside, such as tax provisions and Medicaid cuts. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Sign in to access your portfolio
Miami Herald
39 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Legendary fund manager makes bold S&P 500 prediction as stocks near all-time highs
It's been a remarkable ride since President Donald Trump announced widespread tariffs on April 2. Trump's so-called "Liberation Day" announcement included harsher tariff rates than hoped, forcing investors to rethink their expectations for the U.S. economy. There's evidence that a U.S. economic slowdown is underway, and despite tariff negotiations, tariffs could still push the economy into stagflation or recession. The economic risk raises questions over what's likely to happen to stocks, which usually perform best when a humming economy fattens wallets, allowing households and businesses to ramp up spending. The post-Liberation Day stock market drop lopped 19% and 24% off the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite, respectively, from all-time highs in February. Related: Wall Street veteran analyst who predicted stock market rally resets forecast The decline was concerning, but "buy the dip" investors took advantage, boosting buys into extremely negative sentiment with most measures flashing "oversold." Since April 9, when President Trump paused most reciprocal tariffs that had been announced on April 2, the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 have rocketed higher, gaining 22% and 30%. The returns have been so significant that major market indexes, including the benchmark S&P 500, are flirting with all-time highs again, prompting veteran Wall Street bond manager Bill Gross to chime in with an updated outlook. Gross has been navigating good and bad markets since 1971. He is the co-founder of Pacific Investment Management Co., or PIMCO, a Goliath money manager with $2 trillion under management. His former role atop the $270 billion PIMCO Total Return Fund earned him the "Bond King" moniker before he left to join Janus Henderson Investors from 2014 to 2019. Given his long track record, investors may want to pay attention to what he's thinking happens next. Many are debating what may happen to the economy next. Some believe that tariffs will tax already cash-strapped consumers later this year, slowing economic activity, as businesses also crimp spending awaiting trade deal insight. Others think tariff risks are fleeting and overblown. The jobs market remains healthy, given that unemployment is relatively low at 4.2%. However, the unemployment rate was 3.4% in 2023, and companies have announced over 696,000 layoffs this year, including 93,816 job cuts in May, up 47% year over year, according to Challenger, Grey, & Christmas. Related: Analyst sends blunt 8-word message ahead of trade deal deadline The weakening jobs market prompted the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates by 1% last year; however, it has since gone to the sidelines, pausing further cuts, over fear that more reductions could fuel inflation, particularly given that the tariff impact is only beginning to be felt by consumers and businesses. The dilly-dallying on monetary policy has prompted sharp criticism, though, including from the White House. Ostensibly, recognizing that tariffs may slow GDP and worsen unemployment, President Trump has threatened to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell, and his Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, William (Bill) Pulte, has called for his resignation. If the economy cools and the Fed is unwilling to budge on interest rates, Congress may not be able to help, given that the country's huge deficit and mountain of debt are impacting fiscal policy. America's deficit exceeds $1.8 trillion, accounting for 6.4% of gross domestic product. At the same time, total public debt outstanding is roughly 122% of GDP, far higher than its 75% level in 2008 during the Great Recession. The economic backdrop threatens earnings growth, but the stock market has so far looked beyond the risks, assuming that trade negotiations will bear fruit, inflation expectations will retreat, and corporate earnings will continue growing, rather than ratchet lower. The fact that Bill Gross has been tracking Wall Street for over 50 years means he's seen plenty of stock market pops and drops, including the Nifty 50, skyrocketing inflation in the 1970s, the S&L crisis in the late 80s and early 90s, the Internet boom and bust, the Great Recession, Covid, and the 2002 bear market. More Experts Fed official sends strong message about interest-rate cutsBillionaire fund manager sends surprising message on trade deficitHedge-fund manager sees U.S. becoming Greece In short, Gross has been-there, done-that, so his take on markets is worth paying attention to. He doesn't see much reason to be a buyer of US Treasuries. Many turn to Treasuries as a safe haven amid economic or geopolitical worry. Given the economic risks listed above, the ongoing Russia/Ukraine War, and a dust-up in the Middle East, we certainly have that. Yet, Treasury yields haven't made much progress lower (remember yields fall when bond prices rise and vice versa). Gross doesn't think there's much incentive for them to fall much further. "Long-term research indicates US 10 year has traded at CPI plus 175," wrote Gross on X. "With inflation at 2.5% that puts a 10 year at 4.25% or so. That was history - but deficits/ensuing supply of bonds/and a weak dollar should keep CPI from falling below 2.5% and the 10-year from falling below 4.25%." The 10-year Treasury note yield is currently 4.29%. As a result, he predicts a "little bear market for bonds." With little incentive to shift portfolios towards Treasuries for gains, what does that mean for stocks? "Stocks are AI-dominated and continue to suggest 1-2% economic growth despite tariffs and geopolitical unrest," wrote Gross. "I suggest a "little bull market" for stocks." Undeniably, artificial intelligence stocks continue to win favor with investors as companies big and small look for ways to exploit it for profit growth. After a pause earlier this year, technology stocks have turned it on lately. The SPDR Technology ETF (XLK) is up about 8% in June alone, and unlike the S&P 500, it has already notched a new all-time high. That said, don't get too excited. Gross doesn't seem to expect much more upside than we've already witnessed. "Nothing dramatic either way for now," concluded Gross. Related: Veteran fund manager sends dire message on stocks The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
The US and Iran have had bitter relations for decades. After the bombs, a new chapter begins.
A B-2 bomber arrived at Whiteman Air Force Base Mo., on Sunday, the same aircraft used to carry out the US's strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities over the weekend. David Smith/Associated Press This change of tone, however fleeting, came after the intense U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear-development sites this week, Iran's retaliatory yet restrained attack on a U.S. military base in Qatar and the The U.S. attack on three targets inflicted serious damage but did not destroy them, Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Here are some questions and answers about the long history of bad blood between the two countries: Advertisement Why did Trump offer blessings all around? In the first blush of a ceasefire agreement, even before Israel and Iran appeared to be fully on board, Trump exulted in the achievement. 'God bless Israel,' he posted on social media. 'God bless Iran.' He wished blessings on the Middle East, America and the world, too. When it became clear that all hostilities had not immediately ceased after all, he took to swearing instead. '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 on camera. Advertisement In that moment, Trump was especially critical of Israel, the steadfast U.S. ally, for seeming less attached to the pause in fighting than the country that has been shouting 'Death to America' for generations and is accused of trying to assassinate him. Why did U.S.-Iran relations sour in the first place? In two words, Operation Ajax. That was the 1953 coup orchestrated by the CIA, with British support, that overthrew Iran's democratically elected government and handed power to the shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The Western powers had feared the rise of Soviet influence and the nationalization of Iran's oil industry. The shah was a strategic U.S. ally who repaired official relations with Washington. But grievances simmered among Iranians over his autocratic rule and his bowing to America's interests. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, with a heavy escort, as he entered a car to leave the airport in Tehran in 1979 after arriving back in the country. FY/Associated Press All of that boiled over in 1979 when the shah fled the country and the theocratic revolutionaries took control, imposing their own hard line. How did the Iranian revolution deepen tensions? Profoundly. On Nov. 4, 1979, with anti-American sentiment at a fever pitch, Iranian students took 66 American diplomats and citizens hostage and held more than 50 of them in captivity for 444 days. It was a humiliating spectacle for the United States and President Jimmy Carter, who ordered a secret rescue mission months into the Iran hostage crisis. In Operation Eagle Claw, eight Navy helicopters and six Air Force transport planes were sent to rendezvous in the Iranian desert. A sand storm aborted the mission and eight service members died when a helicopter crashed into a C-120 refueling plane. FILE - Remains of a burned-out U.S. helicopter lis photographed in the eastern desert region of Iran, April 27,1980, one day after an abortive American commando raid to free the U.S. Embassy hostages. (AP Photo, File) Uncredited/Associated Press Diplomatic ties were severed in 1980 and remain broken. Iran released the hostages minutes after Ronald Reagan's presidential inauguration on Jan. 20, 1981. That was just long enough to ensure that Carter, bogged in the crisis for over a year, would not see them freed in his term. Advertisement Was this week's U.S. attack the first against Iran? No. But the last big one was at sea. On April 18, 1988, the U.S. Navy sank two Iranian ships, damaged another and destroyed two surveillance platforms in its largest surface engagement since World War II. Operation Praying Mantis was in retaliation against the mining of the USS Samuel B. Roberts in the Persian Gulf four days earlier. Ten sailors were injured and the explosion left a gaping hole in the hull. Did the U.S. take sides in the Iran-Iraq war? Not officially, but essentially. The U.S. provided economic aid, intelligence sharing and military-adjacent technology to Iraq, concerned that an Iranian victory would spread instability through the region and strain oil supplies. Iran and Iraq emerged from the 1980-1988 war with no clear victor and the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives, while U.S.-Iraq relations fractured spectacularly in the years after. What was the Iran-Contra affair? An example of U.S.-Iran cooperation of sorts — an illegal, and secret, one until it wasn't. Retired Air Force Major Gen. Richard Secord recieved some advice from his attorney Thomas Green while testifying on Capitol Hill before a congressional committee holding hearings on the Iran-Contra affair, in 1987, LANA HARRIS/Associated Press Not long after the U.S. designated Iran a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984 — a status that remains — it emerged that America was illicitly selling arms to Iran. One purpose was to win the release of hostages in Lebanon under the control of Iran-backed Hezbollah. The other was to raise secret money for the Contra rebels in Nicaragua in defiance of a U.S. ban on supporting them. President Ronald Reagan fumbled his way through the scandal but emerged unscathed — legally if not reputationally. How many nations does the U.S. designate as state sponsors of terrorism? Only four: Iran, North Korea, Cuba and Syria. The designation makes those countries the target of broad sanctions. Syria's designation is being reviewed in light of the fall of Bashar Assad's government. Advertisement Where did the term 'Axis of Evil' come from? From President George W. Bush in his 2002 State of the Union address. He spoke five months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the year before he launched the invasion of Iraq on the wrong premise that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. He singled out Iran, North Korea and Saddam's Iraq and said: 'States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world.' In this January 2002 photo, former President George W. Bush labels North Korea, Iran and Iraq an "axis of evil" during his State of the Union address on Capitol Hill. DOUG MILLS/Associated Press In response, Iran and some of its anti-American proxies and allies in the region took to calling their informal coalition an Axis of Resistance at times. What about those proxies and allies? Some, like Hezbollah and Hamas, are degraded due to Israel's fierce and sustained assault on them. In Syria, Assad fled to safety in Moscow after losing power to rebels once tied to Islamic State terrorism but now cautiously welcomed by Trump. In Yemen, Houthi rebels who have attacked commercial ships in the Red Sea and pledge common cause with Palestinians have been bombed by the U.S. and Britain. In Iraq, armed Shia factions controlled or supported by Iran still operate and attract periodic attacks from the United States. What about Iran's nuclear program? In 2015, President Barack Obama and other powers struck a deal with Iran to limit its nuclear development in return for the easing of sanctions. Iran agreed to get rid of an enriched uranium stockpile, dismantle most centrifuges and give international inspectors more access to see what it was doing. This image released by the official website of the office of the Iranian Presidency shows President Hassan Rouhani has he listened to explanations on new nuclear achievements at a ceremony to mark "National Nuclear Day," in Tehran in April 2018. Uncredited/Associated Press Trump assailed the deal in his 2016 campaign and scrapped it two years later as president, imposing a 'maximum pressure' campaign of sanctions. He argued the deal only delayed the development of nuclear weapons and did nothing to restrain Iran's aggression in the region. Iran's nuclear program resumed over time and, according to inspectors, accelerated in recent months. Advertisement Trump's exit from the nuclear deal brought a warning from Hassan Rouhani, then Iran's president, in 2018: 'America must understand well that peace with Iran is the mother of all peace. And war with Iran is the mother of all wars.' How did Trump respond to Iran's provocations? In January 2020, Trump ordered the drone strike that killed Qasem Soleimani, Iran's top commander, when he was in Iraq. Then Iran came after him, according to President Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland. Days after Trump won last year's election, the Justice Department filed charges against an Iranian man believed to still be in his country and two alleged associates in New York. Coffins of Gen. Qassem Soleimani and others who were killed in Iraq by a US drone strike were carried on a truck surrounded by mourners, in the city of Kerman, Iran, in January 2020. Uncredited/Associated Press 'The Justice Department has charged an asset of the Iranian regime who was tasked by the regime to direct a network of criminal associates to further Iran's assassination plots against its targets, including President-elect Donald Trump,' Garland said. Now, Trump is seeking peace at the table after ordering bombs dropped on Iran, and offering blessings. It is potentially the mother of all turnarounds.
