Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump Takes U.S. to War

News

Trump Takes U.S. to War

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers an address to the nation accompanied by U.S. Vice President JD Vance, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth from the White House on June 21, 2025, in Washington, D.C.

Photo by Carlos Barria - Pool/Getty Images

Washington — President Donald Trump announced Saturday evening that the United States had launched strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, describing the operation as a "spectacular military success."

In a televised address, he stated that key Iranian nuclear enrichment sites had been "completely and totally obliterated". He warned that any future attacks would be "far greater and a lot easier."


Trump also acknowledged Israeli cooperation in the operation, thanking Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli military. “We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before, and we’ve gone a long way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel,” he said.

LIVE: Trump addresses nation after US strikes on Iran nuclear facilities www.youtube.com

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the President, "Congratulations, President Trump. Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history." Netanyahu also said that Trump's leadership has created a "pivot of history that can help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity and peace".

Reactions from U.S. lawmakers were divided, with some praising the move while others condemned it.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) voiced strong support, stating, “The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing ‘death to America’ and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace. The mullahs’ misguided pursuit of nuclear weapons must be stopped."

“Donald Trump promised to bring peace to the Middle East. He has failed to deliver on that promise," Democrat House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement. "The risk of war has now dramatically increased, and I pray for the safety of our troops in the region who have been put in harm’s way,” Jeffries added that Trump “misled the country about his intentions.”

What authority does the president have or need to launch such a strike?

John B. Bellinger III, an adjunct senior fellow for international and national security law at the Council on Foreign Relations made these comments:

Whether President Trump has legal authority under U.S. domestic law or international law is highly debatable. As I explained in a testimony [PDF] to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2017, when President Trump was threatening the use of force against North Korea, the president has broad authority under the Constitution to order the use of military force.

His Article II powers include authority not only to order the use of military force to defend the United States and U.S. persons against actual or anticipated attacks, but also to advance other important national interests. Presidents of both parties have deployed U.S. forces and ordered the use of military force, without congressional authorization, on numerous occasions.

In addition to the powers granted to the president in Article II, Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to “declare War.” But this authority has never been interpreted—by either Congress or the executive branch—to require congressional authorization for every military action that the president could initiate.

President Trump’s decision to directly engage the United States in the conflict follows over a week of hostilities between Israel and Iran. Israeli officials have stated their airstrikes target Iran’s nuclear program, which they claim is aimed at developing weapons.

Iran’s nuclear agency acknowledged the attacks but vowed to continue its operations. "Our work will not be halted," the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran declared.

According to Iran’s health ministry, Israeli strikes have killed at least 400 people and wounded 3,000. Meanwhile, Israel reports 24 fatalities from Iran’s retaliatory attacks.

The U.S. intervention marks a significant escalation, with global repercussions still unfolding.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum, and the publisher of the Latino News Network.



Read More

Illustration of someone holding a strainer, and the words "fakes," "facts," "news," etc. going through it.

Trump-era misinformation has pushed American politics to a breaking point. A Truth in Politics law may be needed to save democracy.

Getty Images, SvetaZi

The Need for a Truth in Politics Law: De-Frauding American Politics

“Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?” With those words in 1954, Army lawyer Joseph Welch took Senator Joe McCarthy to task and helped end McCarthy’s destructive un-American witch hunt. The time has come to say the same to Donald Trump and his MAGA allies and stop their vile perversion of our right to free speech.

American politics has always been rife with misleading statements and, at times, outright falsehoods. Mendacity just seems to be an ever-present aspect of politics. But with the ascendency of Trump, and especially this past year, things have taken an especially nasty turn, becoming so aggressive and incendiary as to pose a real threat to the health and well-being of our nation’s democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less
Silence, Signals, and the Unfinished Story of the Abandoned Disability Rule

Waiting for the Door to Open: Advocates and older workers are left in limbo as the administration’s decision to abandon a harsh disability rule exists only in private assurances, not public record.

AI-created animation

Silence, Signals, and the Unfinished Story of the Abandoned Disability Rule

We reported in the Fulcrum on November 30th that in early November, disability advocates walked out of the West Wing, believing they had secured a rare reversal from the Trump administration of an order that stripped disability benefits from more than 800,000 older manual laborers.

The public record has remained conspicuously quiet on the matter. No press release, no Federal Register notice, no formal statement from the White House or the Social Security Administration has confirmed what senior officials told Jason Turkish and his colleagues behind closed doors in November: that the administration would not move forward with a regulation that could have stripped disability benefits from more than 800,000 older manual laborers. According to a memo shared by an agency official and verified by multiple sources with knowledge of the discussions, an internal meeting in early November involved key SSA decision-makers outlining the administration's intent to halt the proposal. This memo, though not publicly released, is said to detail the political and social ramifications of proceeding with the regulation, highlighting its unpopularity among constituents who would be affected by the changes.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

A memorial for Ashli Babbitt sits near the US Capitol during a Day of Remembrance and Action on the one year anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

(John Lamparski/NurPhoto/AP)

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

In the wake of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump quickly took up the cause of a 35-year-old veteran named Ashli Babbitt.

“Who killed Ashli Babbitt?” he asked in a one-sentence statement on July 1, 2021.

Keep ReadingShow less
Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

Supreme Court, Allen v. Milligan Illegal Congressional Voting Map

Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

A wave of redistricting battles in early 2026 is reshaping the political map ahead of the midterm elections and intensifying long‑running fights over gerrymandering and democratic representation.

In California, a three‑judge federal panel on January 15 upheld the state’s new congressional districts created under Proposition 50, ruling 2–1 that the map—expected to strengthen Democratic advantages in several competitive seats—could be used in the 2026 elections. The following day, a separate federal court dismissed a Republican lawsuit arguing that the maps were unconstitutional, clearing the way for the state’s redistricting overhaul to stand. In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers have advanced a constitutional amendment that would allow mid‑decade redistricting, a move they describe as a response to aggressive Republican map‑drawing in other states; some legislators have openly discussed the possibility of a congressional map that could yield 10 Democratic‑leaning seats out of 11. In Missouri, the secretary of state has acknowledged in court that ballot language for a referendum on the state’s congressional map could mislead voters, a key development in ongoing litigation over the fairness of the state’s redistricting process. And in Utah, a state judge has ordered a new congressional map that includes one Democratic‑leaning district after years of litigation over the legislature’s earlier plan, prompting strong objections from Republican lawmakers who argue the court exceeded its authority.

Keep ReadingShow less