Trump posts video with ‘Bomb Iran' song amid ceasefire
The song, a parody of the 1961 song 'Barbara Ann' by the Regents, plays over a video of various B-2 stealth fighter jets, which were used to drop 14 GBU-57 bunker busters bombs in Iran.
The jets were specifically used on the Fordow fuel enrichment plant and the Natanz Enrichment Complex, key nuclear sites in Iran. The U.S. also hit Iran's Isfahan nuclear site.
The song continues with the lyrics, 'Went to a mosque, gonna throw some rocks, tell the Ayatollah, 'Gonna put you in a box!' Bomb Iran.'
The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment.
Trump posted the video Tuesday night on Truth Social amid rising tensions between Iran, Israel and the U.S. after the U.S. military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.
The video is just the latest post from the president on the rising conflict in the Middle East, one of which even singled out Israel in a rare move, advising them against dropping more bombs.
Trump came down on the Iranians and Israelis earlier in the day at the White House, voicing his displeasure at continued fighting between the two adversaries.
'We basically — we have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f‑‑‑ they're doing,' Trump told reporters at the White House earlier Tuesday.
While Trump hailed the strikes against the nuclear facilities as a success, an early intelligence assessment reportedly found that Tehran's nuclear program was set back by only months.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Netanyahu escalates attack on Australia's Albanese as Jewish group urges calm
Netanyahu escalates attack on Australia's Albanese as Jewish group urges calm By Renju Jose SYDNEY (Reuters) -Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday stepped up his personal attacks on Australian counterpart Anthony Albanese over his government's decision to recognise a Palestinian state, saying Albanese's political record had been damaged forever. Diplomatic ties between Australia and Israel have soured since Albanese's centre-left Labor government last week announced it would conditionally recognise Palestinian statehood, following similar moves by France, Britain and Canada. The decision prompted Netanyahu to launch a personal attack on Albanese and he doubled down on his condemnation in an interview to be broadcast on Sky News Australia. "I think his record is forever tarnished by the weakness that he showed in the face of this Hamas terrorist monsters," Netanyahu said, after describing Albanese earlier this week as "a weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia's Jews." Sky News Australia released the comments ahead of the broadcast of the full interview on Thursday at 8 p.m. (1000 GMT). Albanese on Wednesday played down Netanyahu's criticisms, saying he did not "take these things personally" and that he treated the leaders of other countries with respect. Last week, Albanese said the Israeli prime minister was "in denial" about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, where the U.N. has warned of the risk of widespread starvation and international pressure is growing for Israel to allow unrestricted aid into the territory. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry in separate letters sent on Wednesday to both leaders urged them to discuss differences through diplomacy rather than public posturing. "We write to express our deep dismay and concern at the recent 'war of words'," the letters said. "If things need to be said publicly, they should be said using measured and seemly language befitting national leaders. Australia and Israel are mature democracies and their governments need to act accordingly," the council said. Israel this week revoked the visas of Australian diplomats to the Palestinian Authority after Albanese's government cancelled the visa of an Israeli lawmaker over remarks it considered controversial and inflammatory. Netanyahu has been facing global pressure over Israel's military offensive in the Gaza Strip, which has killed at least 60,000 Palestinians according to the enclave's health ministry, and displaced most of the population. Israel's military announced the first steps of an operation to take control of Gaza City on Wednesday, calling up tens of thousands of reservists despite many of Israel's closest allies calling for it to reconsider. The offensive began after Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel in October 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 more hostage. Israel is currently considering a new ceasefire proposal.
Business Insider
29 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Africa's response to Trump's migrant relocation plan reveals deep divisions
Africa's reaction to President Donald Trump's migrant relocation plan has been far from uniform, with some governments signaling willingness to cooperate while others voice sharp resistance. Africa's response to President Trump's migrant relocation plan is divided, reflecting competing diplomatic and domestic priorities. Reports suggested an agreement with Uganda to accept certain deportees, but Ugandan officials denied its existence. Several African nations expressed sovereignty concerns and criticized the policy as exploitative or unconstitutional. Sentiments among African leaders vary, showcasing frustration with U.S. transactional diplomacy. The divided response highlights the continent's competing priorities, balancing diplomatic ties with Washington against domestic concerns over sovereignty, security, and human rights. Reports from CBS, shared by the BBC, suggested that Washington had secured a new deportation agreement with Uganda, under which Kampala would receive migrants who had sought asylum at the US–Mexico border, including some from African and Asian countries. According to the report, Uganda was said to have agreed to accept deportees without criminal histories, though the number it would eventually host was left undefined. But Ugandan authorities have since denied the existence of any such agreement. Henry Oryem Okello, the country's state minister for foreign affairs, told Reuters that Kampala had not signed a deal with the US and lacked the infrastructure to accommodate deported migrants. ' To the best of my knowledge we have not reached such an agreement. We do not have the facilities and infrastructure to accommodate such illegal immigrants in Uganda. So, we cannot take in such illegal immigrants, ' Oryem stated. His rejection comes as Washington faces growing criticism for attempting to relocate convicted felons and rejected asylum seekers t o countries that are not their places of origin. With the latest development, Uganda has joined the growing list of African countries that have pushed back against the U.S. deportation plan, signaling mounting resistance to Washington's efforts to secure third-party hosts for deported migrants. African nations adopt divided approaches As the Trump administration intensifies efforts to deport convicted migrants to third-party countries, several African nations have pushed back, asserting sovereignty and rejecting what many view as an exploitative framework. However, some others have acepted the policy. Earlier this year, the U.S. deported foreign convicts to South Sudan and Eswatini, sparking condemnation from rights groups. Uganda's firm denial now places it alongside other African states resisting Washington's controversial program. Nigeria: A Resounding No In July 2025, Nigeria's Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar rejected U.S. overtures outright, insisting that his country would not accept 'Venezuelan prisoners into Nigeria.' His stance, backed by Nigeria's regional influence, underscores growing frustration with what analysts call Washington's transactional diplomacy. Libya: Both Governments Refuse Libya's rival authorities—both the UN-backed western administration and eastern militias—denied any deal with the U.S., stressing that deportees would not be accepted. U.S. court rulings have also warned that such deportations would be unconstitutional. Rwanda: From Talks to Agreement Rwanda initially confirmed holding early discussions with U.S. officials, stressing that no deal had been finalized. However, by August 2025 Kigali announced a formal agreement to accept up to 250 deported migrants, with provisions for vetting and support services including housing, healthcare, and workforce training. South Sudan Last month, the United States confirmed it had completed the deportation of eight men to South Sudan, a day after a U.S. judge cleared the way for President Donald Trump's administration to send them to the violence-hit African country. Eswatini In July 2025, the United States deported five men from Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen, and Laos to Eswatini under its third-country deportation policy. The men, convicted of crimes in the U.S., were placed in solitary confinement upon arrival, with Eswatini stating they would later be repatriated through the United Nations. The move drew strong criticism from rights advocates and civic leaders, who called it opaque and unlawful, warning that it compromised both the men's rights and Eswatini's sovereignty. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said on Saturday that the men were deported the previous day—U.S. Independence Day—after losing a last-minute legal bid to halt their transfer.
Forbes
29 minutes ago
- Forbes
India Remains Corruption Hotspot As U.S. Enforcement Recalibrates
Earlier this month, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) declined to prosecute Boston-based Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, closing an investigation into bribery by its Indian subsidiary but requiring the company to 'disgorge' nearly $4.7 million in profits, which will be given to the U.S. government. The decision is significant for two reasons. It is the first public Foreign Corrupt Practices (FCPA) resolution since the Trump administration's early-2025 pause on such cases. Trump's DOJ grounded its decision in its recently revised Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy ('CEP'), providing clear criteria for the government to decline to bring charges against a company. Second, it underscores the simple reality that India continues to be a high-risk jurisdiction for businesses operating there in terms of corruption—and no changes in Washington have made the risks go away altogether. The Bribery Scheme The Liberty Mutual case reflects the Trump administration's unique approach to FCPA prosecutions. According to the DOJ, Liberty General Insurance paid roughly $1.47 million to officials at six state-owned banks in India over a five-year period in exchange for customer referrals, disguising the payments as marketing expenses and routing them through third parties. The scheme generated more than $9 million in revenue. Liberty Mutual discovered the problem during an internal investigation and disclosed it to the DOJ in March 2024. Doing so proved decisive. The DOJ emphasized that Liberty Mutual's early reporting was critical to its decision not to prosecute. The Department described the company's cooperation as 'full and proactive.' Its remediation included a thorough root-cause analysis, a reorganization to strengthen legal and compliance resources and new restrictions on how employees use messaging applications for business purposes. The Department cited all these factors in its decision. By declining prosecution, the DOJ avoided bringing criminal charges against the company. But by requiring disgorgement, it signaled that foreign bribery still carries real costs, even in an enforcement environment where prosecutions appear to have become more selective. FCPA Enforcement Under Trump II Liberty Mutual's is the first case decided under the Trump administration's revised enforcement guidelines. In June, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced that tghe DOJ would focus FCPA cases on conduct that had implications for U.S. national security and competitiveness or involved serious transnational crimes. The early-2025 pause in foreign bribery cases, combined with new enforcement criteria, led many to assume the FCPA was dormant, if not dead, under the Trump administration. That assumption was misplaced. The Liberty Mutual resolution shows the Department of Justice is still pursuing corporate misconduct abroad, even as it recalibrates how those cases should be resolved. What has changed is the path to resolution. The updated Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy now gives companies clear guidelines: disclose early, cooperate fully, remediate credibly and avoid aggravating circumstances. Then criminal prosecution can be taken off the table. But the DOJ's insistence on disgorgement makes equally clear that declinations are not exonerations. Companies will still surrender profits earned through the misconduct, preserving deterrence while rewarding transparency. Corruption Risks In India This matters in markets like India, where corruption is structural and persistent. India ranks behind only China and Brazil in the number of corporate FCPA resolutions since 2015, spanning sectors from insurance and healthcare to defense and infrastructure. That reality has not changed even if Washington's approach to enforcement has. The Liberty Mutual case is the latest reminder of the structural challenges of operating in India. The company joins a long list of companies whose Indian operations have triggered U.S. enforcement. In 2011, spirits company Diageo paid more than $16 million to settle charges that its Indian subsidiary made illicit payments to Indian government officials. In 2012, Oracle paid more than $2 million to settle charges that its Indian subsidiary structured transactions with phony vendors to create slush funds for potential bribes. In 2017, Mondelez resolved allegations that its Indian unit used a consultant to bribe government officials for licenses. In 2018, Stryker Corporation paid a penalty related in part to misconduct in India, where improper payments were disguised as discounts and marketing expenses. The nature of the Indian market puts companies at risk. State-owned entities dominate critical sectors of the economy from banks and insurers to energy and healthcare. That means routine business dealings often involve individuals classified as 'foreign officials' under the FCPA, greatly expanding exposure. Business development is frequently referral-driven, creating incentives to curry favor with gatekeepers at public institutions. Heavy reliance on intermediaries makes oversight challenging and regulatory complexity adds further pressure, encouraging the temptation to make improper payments. These risks are not theoretical: they are embedded in the operating environment. That is why India repeatedly appears in enforcement dockets and why it remains a priority jurisdiction for compliance and risk officers. What It Means for Business The practical message of the Liberty Mutual case is twofold. First, FCPA enforcement is alive under Trump. It may look different with fewer prosecutions and more reliance on disgorgement and voluntary disclosure incentives, but companies cannot assume that risk has vanished. The DOJ has shown that even amid political skepticism about the statute, it will still act where misconduct is clear. Second, India continues to pose serious corruption risk to companies operating there. Special, locally informed compliance controls are indispensable. These include deeper due diligence on intermediaries, close scrutiny of marketing and promotional spending and rigorous oversight of referral arrangements with public-sector actors. Without these, companies operating in India continue to confront a perilous environment in terms of the temptations of corruption—and the risk of getting caught.
