Trump says Israel has agreed to ceasefire conditions in Gaza; no response from Hamas yet
"My Representatives had a long and productive meeting with the Israelis today on Gaza. Israel has agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize the 60 Day CEASEFIRE, during which time we will work with all parties to end the War," Trump said on Truth Social.
"The Qataris and Egyptians, who have worked very hard to help bring Peace, will deliver this final proposal," he added. "I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE."
The Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., did not immediately respond to a request for comment, and Hamas has yet to weigh in on Trump's announcement.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump forces CBS into humiliating settlement that will leave their viewers furious
CBS and Paramount are set to pay a humiliating settlement to Donald Trump that goes beyond millions in cash payouts and could potentially infuriate their liberal audiences. The suit, filed last October, accuses Paramount, CBS and its flagship show 60 Minutes of deceptively editing an interview with then–Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris just weeks before the election. Trump alleges the footage was manipulated to 'tip the scales' in Harris's favor. Lawyers for Trump and CBS parent company Paramount have been ' engaged in good faith, advanced, settlement negotiations,' according to court filings Monday. Now, it appears that Trump is set to get more than even the $20million a mediator for both sides proposed, and is set to have a new rule named after himself at the network. The president is set to get $16million from CBS and Paramount straight away to reimburse him for legal fees. The remaining money will help fund a future presidential library and serve some of Trump's favorite charities, at his discretion. However, the president is expecting more than $15million more in what appears to be earned media. The president will receive that much in advertising, public service announcements and other content that backs conservative causes, Fox News Digital reports. The suit, filed last October, accuses Paramount, CBS and its flagship show 60 Minutes of deceptively editing an interview with then–Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris just weeks before the election Further, CBS will institute a new 'Trump rule' in its editorial standards that forces them to quickly put out unedited transcripts of any interviews with presidential candidates. 'With this record settlement, President Donald J. Trump delivers another win for the American people as he, once again, holds the Fake News media accountable for their wrongdoing and deceit,' a spokesperson for Trump's legal team said. 'CBS and Paramount Global realized the strength of this historic case and had no choice but to settle. President Trump will always ensure that no one gets away with lying to the American People as he continues on his singular mission to Make America Great Again.' A spokesperson for Paramount notes that CBS will not be forced to admit any journalistic wrongdoing as part of the settlement. 'The settlement will include a release of all claims regarding any CBS reporting through the date of the settlement, including the Texas action and the threatened defamation action.' Trump alleges the 60 Minutes footage was manipulated to 'tip the scales' in Harris's favor. CBS has denied the claim, slamming the allegations as coming 'completely without merit.' In recent weeks, Paramount reportedly balked at settling the suit over fears of facing legal backlash for bowing to the president. Paramount brass believed any large settlement could be considered a bribe, since the the company's proposed $8 billion merger with Skydance must be approved by the Trump administration. Trump's team has denied that his administration's approval of the deal is contingent on settling. Paramount heiress Shari Redstone, who has been pushing to close the Skydance deal, stands to make more than $1 billion as Paramount's primary shareholder. She reportedly offered to pay as much as $50 million to make the suit go away. Skydance is run by David Ellison, the son of Trump ally Larry Ellison. Last week, sources told the New York Post that David, 41, had become confident the $8 billion deal would close by the end of the summer. Former CBS CEO Wendy McMahon and longtime 60 Minutes boss Bill Owens both left their roles in protest of Paramount's willingness to settle. The A-List stars of 60 Minutes recently demanded that CBS News appoint their pick for the show's next executive producer. It's a settlement that continues Trump's winning streak against media companies he believes have engaged in dishonest practices against him. In December, ABC News agreed to pay $15 million to Donald Trump to settle a lawsuit over assertions made by top anchor George Stephanopoulos that he was found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll. The settlement, first reported by Fox News, was publicly filed on Saturday and revealed that the parties had come to an agreement in the suit. It stipulates that the network will pay $15 million as a charitable contribution towards Trump's presidential library. ABC will also post a note on its website expressing regret over the claim in a March 10 segment on "This Week" made by Stephanopoulos. They will also pay his legal fees as part of the settlement, which have totaled $1 million. A statement from the network said: 'ABC News and George Stephanopoulos regret statements regarding President Donald J. Trump made during an interview by George Stephanopoulos with Rep. Nancy Mace on ABC's This Week on March 10, 2024.' Trump had sued Stephanopoulos and the network for defamation soon after the segment aired. His lawyers accused Stephanopoulos of making the statements with 'malice' and a disregard for the truth. Trump also is continuing to sue a pollster who wrongly predicted he would lose in Iowa in November, despite reports the case has been dropped. The president is taking his fight against the Des Moines Register's J. Ann Selzer from federal to state court. The Des Moines Register lawsuit goes after top pollster Selzer for 'brazen election interference' for her poll released days before the election. Selzer's final Des Moines Register poll showed Trump three points behind Harris and was released the Saturday before Election Day.
Reuters
37 minutes ago
- Reuters
Paramount settles with Trump over ‘60 Minutes' interview for $16 million
NEW YORK, July 2 (Reuters) - CBS parent company Paramount (PARA.O), opens new tab on Wednesday settled a lawsuit filed by U.S. President Donald Trump over an interview broadcast in October, the latest concession by a media company to a president who has targeted outlets over what he describes as false or misleading coverage. Paramount said it would pay $16 million to settle the suit with the money allocated to Trump's future presidential library, and not paid to Trump "directly or indirectly." "The settlement does not include a statement of apology or regret," the company statement added. Trump filed a $10-billion lawsuit against CBS in October, alleging the network deceptively edited an interview that aired on its '60 Minutes' news program with then-vice president and presidential candidate Kamala Harris to 'tip the scales in favor of the Democratic Party' in the election. In an amended complaint filed in February, Trump bumped his claim for damages to $20 billion. CBS aired two versions of the Harris interview in which she appears to give different answers to the same question about the Israel-Hamas war, according to the lawsuit filed in federal court in Texas. CBS previously said the lawsuit was "completely without merit" and had asked a judge to dismiss the case. The White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters' request for comment. Edward A Paltzik, a lawyer representing Trump in the civil suit, could not be immediately reached for comment. A spokesperson for Paramount Chair Shari Redstone was similarly unavailable for comment. The case entered mediation in April. Trump alleged CBS's editing of the interview violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act, which makes it illegal to use false, misleading or deceptive acts in commerce. Media advocacy groups said Trump's novel use of such laws against news outlets could be a way of circumventing legal protections for the press, which can only be held liable for defamation against public figures if they say something they knew or should have known was false. The settlement comes as Paramount prepares for an $8.4-billion merger with Skydance Media, which will require approval from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission. On the campaign trail last year, Trump threatened to revoke CBS' broadcasting license if elected. He has repeatedly lashed out against the news media, often casting unfavorable coverage as "fake news." The Paramount settlement follows a decision by Walt Disney (DIS.N), opens new tab-owned ABC News to settle a defamation case brought by Trump. As part of that settlement, which was made public on December 14, the network donated $15 million to Trump's presidential library and publicly apologized for comments by anchor George Stephanopoulos, who inaccurately said Trump had been found liable for rape. It also follows a second settlement, by Facebook and Instagram parent company Meta Platforms (META.O), opens new tab, which on January 29 said it had agreed to pay about $25 million to settle a lawsuit by Trump over the company's suspension of his accounts after the January 6, 2021, attack at the U.S. Capitol. Trump has vowed to pursue more claims against the media. On December 17, he filed a lawsuit against the Des Moines Register newspaper and its former top pollster over its poll published on November 2 that showed Harris leading Trump by three percentage points in Iowa. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and an order barring the Des Moines Register from engaging in "ongoing deceptive and misleading acts and practices" related to polling. A Des Moines Register representative said the organization stands by its reporting and that the lawsuit was without merit. On June 30 Trump dropped the federal lawsuit and refiled it in an Iowa state court.
The Guardian
40 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The G7 has once again put multinationals' profits over the interests of people
The US Treasury just made a deal with the other G7 countries that global minimum taxes that were already agreed upon will not apply to American companies. The G7 governments caved under intense pressure from President Donald Trump and lobbying from multinationals in Washington, London, Brussels, and beyond – just as India, and now, sadly, Canada have caved on digital taxation. Years ago, the international community recognised that too many global companies were not paying their fair share of taxes, and some weren't paying taxes to the country where the economic activity actually occurs. The complex agreement that emerged in 2021 at the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting comprised two pillars; only Pillar Two, a global minimum corporate tax, has been adopted. (The other pillar allocated taxation rights among countries and spurred opposition from developing countries and the US.) While there has been a global consensus on the need for such a minimum, the version the US adopted during Trump's first presidential term was different, and weaker, than that of the rest of the world, allowing multinationals to 'make up' for what they didn't pay in tax havens with the 'extra' they paid in the US or other high-tax jurisdictions. While far from perfect, Pillar Two was a first attempt to ensure a minimum tax rate of 15% on the profits of multinationals everywhere, a crucial step to end harmful tax competition between countries. There were, of course, some carve-outs and exemptions, which lowered the effective rate somewhat below 15%. And the 15% rate was already lower than the rate imposed by many developing countries; it should have been higher, and the carve-outs smaller. Still, the Pillar Two deal halted the race to the bottom, whereby countries offered lower tax rates to attract businesses to their jurisdictions. For the world as a whole, this race didn't generate much new investment; the real winners were the rich corporations who pocketed the savings from paying almost no taxes at all in some countries. But once again, G7 governments have decided to put multinationals' interests before the interests of developing countries, small and medium-size businesses (which can't avail themselves of the shenanigans that multinationals have found so profitable), and their own citizens – who, as a consequence, will pay higher taxes. By exempting US multinationals from Pillar Two, this deal will allow some to continue to benefit from zero or near-zero taxes on profits they book in low-tax jurisdictions or tax havens such as Puerto Rico and the Cayman Islands. This will make them more competitive than non-US multinationals. Because modern multinational corporations are willing to move their nominal headquarters to wherever they get the most favourable tax treatment (and other goodies), with the real economic activity occurring elsewhere, giving US companies preferential treatment incentivises companies to move their official headquarters to the US. This is another sad example of a race to the bottom. By acceding to US demands, the G7 deal risks undermining the worldwide implementation of the minimum tax. It also makes a mockery of the inclusiveness of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework. There was a pretence that the new global framework was crafted by more than 140 countries working together. To be sure, many developing countries complained this was an unfair agreement for them and that powerful countries did not listen to their concerns. Now that facade has crumbled. The non-G7 countries, including dozens of emerging markets and developing countries, are now being asked to rubber-stamp a decision imposed on them by just one country. Pillar Two should be strengthened, not gutted. It currently applies only to large multinationals (with a global turnover at or above €750m), and the global minimum tax rate of 15% is set very low. The Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation has always advocated a minimum rate of at least 25%. According to some estimates, Pillar Two's minimum tax would have yielded between $155bn and $192bn (£112bn-£140bn) annually in additional global corporate income tax revenue. While this is a significant amount, a minimum rate of 25% could generate more than $500bn a year in additional revenue. In a world facing converging crises of inequality, climate change, and underfunded public services, leaving such substantial resources on the table is fiscally irresponsible and morally indefensible. Pillar Two represented a starting point – a global floor on corporate taxation that could have curbed the race to the bottom and restored some degree of tax justice. The G7's decision to let US multinationals off the hook weakens even that modest floor and sends the wrong message to the rest of the world. Just two weeks ago at the UN, there was a global consensus about the need to strengthen international tax cooperation and to implement progressive tax systems, and a large majority of countries voted for and support ongoing negotiations toward a UN framework convention on international tax cooperation. But the US government recently walked away from the UN negotiations, stating that the goals of the proposed UN convention 'are inconsistent with US priorities and represent an unwelcome overreach'. In the adoption of the 'Compromiso de Sevilla,' the outcome document of this week's UN Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4), the US was the only major country that was absent. Allowing the US to bypass the already modest Pillar Two rules not only undermines multilateralism; it also flies in the face of the commitments that have been made, and further deepens the inequity in global tax governance. The members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework should reject the deal made at the G7. The US must not be allowed to dictate global policy. It is powerful, but still represents less than 20% of global GDP. Countries meeting in Seville for FfD4 can either accept the US undermining every effort to ensure multinationals pay their fair share, or redouble efforts to create a new international tax system at the UN that works for all. For the sake of the world economy and people everywhere, they should do the latter. Joseph E Stiglitz is a Nobel laureate in economics, a university professor at Columbia University and a former chief economist of the World Bank. José Antonio Ocampo is professor at Columbia University and former finance minister of Colombia. Jayati Ghosh is professor of economics at University of Massachusetts Amherst. Ⓒ Project Syndicate
