With Brendan Shanahan Gone, What Changes For Maple Leafs GM Brad Treliving And Coach Craig Berube?
With Brendan Shanahan Gone, What Changes For Maple Leafs GM Brad Treliving And Coach Craig Berube?
Ahead of the Toronto Maple Leafs is one of the most important offseasons in the last decade.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
10 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Trump appears to undercut US proposal to Iran, declaring he won't allow any uranium enrichment
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Monday appeared to undercut a proposal that was offered by his special envoy to Iran, saying he will insist that Tehran fully dismantle its nuclear enrichment program as part of any deal to ease crushing sanctions. Trump and Steve Witkoff, who is leading the negotiations for the U.S., have repeatedly offered inconsistent public messages about whether Iran would be allowed to retain the capacity to enrich uranium to lower levels for civilian purposes. The Trump administration maintains that it will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. The negotiations have been framed by Trump as both countries' best chance to avoid direct military conflict over Iran's nuclear program. Tehran, which denies seeking a nuclear weapon, has insisted that it will not agree to any deal that fully scraps its enrichment program. 'Under our potential Agreement — WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANY ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM!' Trump wrote on social media. The White House didn't elaborate on the post. Trump's post comes after media reports that Witkoff's latest proposal to Tehran would allow Iran to retain low levels of enrichment for civilian uses like nuclear medicine and commercial power if it agrees to shut down its heavily protected underground sites for a period of time. The U.S. and Iran have engaged in several rounds of direct nuclear talks for the first time in years. Senior officials — including Witkoff and Trump himself — have said within the last few weeks that Iran would not be able to keep enriching uranium at any level. The proposal, reported by Axios and confirmed by two U.S. officials, called for the creation of a regional consortium to handle uranium enrichment for civilian uses — a plan first studied more than a decade ago in negotiations that led to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. Trump was sharply critical of that agreement — which also allowed set limits on uranium enrichment but permitted Iran to maintain such a capacity — and withdrew the U.S. from it in 2017 during his first term. The officials spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity to discuss private diplomatic negotiations. The International Atomic Energy Agency found that Iran has further increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels since its last update in February, according to a confidential report released by the U.N. nuclear watchdog on Saturday. Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, but Iranian officials have increasingly suggested that Tehran could pursue an atomic bomb. 'President Trump has made it clear that Iran can never obtain a nuclear bomb,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement before Trump's post. 'Special Envoy Witkoff has sent a detailed and acceptable proposal to the Iranian regime, and it's in their best interest to accept it. Out of respect for the ongoing deal, the Administration will not comment on details of the proposal to the media.' The proposal that Trump appeared to undercut on Monday evening included significant concessions by the administration certain to anger Israel along with pro-Israel lawmakers in the United States. Several of the main points were essentially the same or very similar to conditions outlined in the 2015 nuclear deal. Early iterations of that agreement negotiated by the Obama administration also suggested the possibility of a regional consortium that would put Iranian uranium enrichment above a certain level under the control of Iran and its neighbors. The idea was scrapped, however, because of Gulf Arab nations' objections and Iranian suspicions of the ultimate aims of the consortium. People who were involved in the 18-month negotiations for the 2015 deal reacted immediately to reports that the Trump administration might allow Iran to continue with an enrichment program at any level, particularly after senior officials repeatedly said Iran would not be able to retain such programs. 'This proposal poses a moment of truth for critics of previous Iran nuclear negotiations/agreements (and) those who have called for a no-enrichment, full-dismantlement deal,' Dan Shapiro, Obama's former ambassador to Israel, wrote on X. 'Will they hold Trump to the same standard?'
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Nolan Flamand Commits To Merrimack
NHL Playoff Predictions: Can The Oilers Beat The Panthers In The Final And Bring The Cup North Of The Border? The 2025 Stanley Cup final is now set, and that means it's time for one last playoff prediction. In the third round, we went 0-2 with our picks, but overall this post-season, we've gone 8-6. Could be better, could be worse.
Associated Press
35 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Judge grants preliminary injunction to protect collective bargaining agreement for TSA workers
SEATTLE (AP) — A federal judge on Monday granted a preliminary injunction to stop Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from killing a collective bargaining agreement for Transportation Safety Administration workers. U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman of Seattle said in her order that an injunction is needed to preserve the rights and benefits that TSA workers have enjoyed for years while being represented by the American Federation of Government Employees. In their lawsuit, Pechman said, the union has shown that Noem's directive to end the agreement 'constitutes impermissible retaliation against it for its unwillingness to acquiesce to the Trump Administration's assault on federal workers.' It also likely violated due process and AFGE is likely to succeed in showing that Noem's decision was 'arbitrary and capricious,' she added. 'Today's court decision is a crucial victory for federal workers and the rule of law,' AFGE National President Everett Kelley said in a release. 'The preliminary injunction underscores the unconstitutional nature of DHS's attack on TSA officers' First Amendment rights. We remain committed to ensuring our members' rights and dignity are protected, and we will not back down from defending our members' rights against unlawful union busting.' Messages left for Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Kipnis seeking comment were not immediately returned. AFGE had entered into a new, seven-year collective bargaining agreement with agency last May, but Noem issued a memo Feb. 27 rescinding that agreement. One week later, TSA informed the union about Noem's directive, saying the contract was terminated and all pending grievances would be deleted. AFGE filed a lawsuit against Noem, claiming the move was retaliation against the union for pushing back against the Trump administration's attacks on federal workers. AFGE had filed a separate lawsuit Feb. 19 against the Office of Personnel Management to stop the firing of probationary workers. A judge issued a temporary restraining order Feb. 27 stopping the firings — the same day Noem issued her memo. Abigail Carter, representing AFGE during oral arguments before Pechman on May 27, said Noem's move was retaliation and a violation of the union's First Amendment right to protected speech and its Fifth Amendment right to due process. 'The administration has made it clear that if you don't disagree with it politically, you and your members can keep your rights, but if you do disagree, you lose them,' Carter said. She also argued that the collective bargaining agreement was necessary because TSA workers are not covered under the federal labor-management code. The agreement protects them from dangerous working conditions and unreasonable hours. Kipnis denied the retaliation claim and said it was simply a difference in management styles. Pechman questioned that contention. Not all unions are banned by the administration, Pechman said, only the ones oppose the administration. 'Isn't this a pattern that you see?' Pechman asked Kipnis. 'Attorneys who take opposition stances get banned. Those who don't, don't have those restrictions. Isn't this the pattern that the White House has set up?' Kipnis said tension between unions and management are common and this conflict doesn't signal a violation of the workers' First Amendment rights, but instead reflects a confrontational relationship. But Pechman wasn't convinced. Previous TSA managers have found unions to be beneficial and renewed their contracts for years, she said. They found they made a happier workforce, and 'they wanted their employees to feel that they were well-treated,' she said. What has changed is this administration's attitude, she said. To that, Kipnis replied: 'Or you could characterize it as a different management style. The former administration apparently saw that as a better way to do business. ... But this administration sees a different way of doing business. And the same statute affords them the same amount of discretion.' Pechman said she understood that the administration has the right to exercise that discretion, 'but to abruptly cancel doesn't seem well reasoned, so I'm having trouble with that.' She also noted, 'But why the United States gets to back out of contracts that it's made is harder to accept.' In Monday's order, Pechman said TSA workers would suffer 'irreparable harm' without the injunction, noting that if they lose their collective bargaining agreement, they will lose the benefits it provides. 'While the loss of money alone does not show irreparable harm, the total harms here are more than monetary,' Pechman said. 'They include the loss of substantive employment protections, avenues of grievance and arbitration, and the right to have a workforce that can unite to demand benefits that might not be obtainable through individual negotiation.'
