博客

Blue material peeling off bottom of Reflecting Pool, days after costly renovation

2026-06-18 6:21 PM ET / CNN

By Abigail Roedersheimer, Michael Williams, Kit Maher

Summary

• Blue material is peeling off the bottom of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool days after its refilling.
• The pool’s renovation was ordered by President Trump and cost about $14 million, far exceeding initial estimates.
• The iconic pool has struggled with algae and leaks for decades despite multiple renovations.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

Some blue material at the bottom of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool is peeling off, days after the pool was painted blue and refilled as part of a multi-million dollar renovation ordered by President Donald Trump.

On Thursday at the National Mall, CNN observed a flap of blue material that was partially attached to the bottom in one area of the pool and floating toward the top. It is unclear if the material is paint or sealant, and it’s unclear what caused it to come up.

The Department of the Interior did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Shown pictures and videos of the material, Eddie Wood, who owns Atlantic Industrial Coatings, the Virginia-based firm hired to renovate the pool, said the images do not provide enough information “to tell exactly what that is.”

“There’s several things that we’ve got to address when we come back for maintenance, and anything like that will be addressed, if it’s a problem,” Wood said.

Tim Auerhahn, a pool infrastructure expert and the chairman of the Aquatic Council, said it’s difficult to tell from the videos what was causing the “apparent delamination.”

“A coating system can fail for several reasons, including substrate preparation, surface contamination, application conditions, adhesion issues, product selection, mechanical damage, environmental exposure, or a combination of factors,” Auerhahn said.

CNN observed a flap of blue material partially attached to the bottom in one area of the Reflecting Pool.

Blue object floating in reflecting pool in Washington, DC.

The larger question, he added, is whether this represents a localized issue in that part of the pool or a larger, more systemic issue with the coating.

“If the coating is losing adhesion in multiple locations, that could indicate a more significant concern,” he said.

The issue is the latest to plague the iconic body of water since Trump ordered the pool, which has served as the centerpiece of the National Mall for decades, to be renovated in April.

Issues with algae and leaks have bedeviled various presidential administrations nearly since the pool was first opened a century ago.

In 2012, President Barack Obama’s administration spent $34 million on an 18-month renovation of the pool which was meant to address ongoing issues with algae blooms.

However, shortly after that renovation was completed, the pool again became a murky, smelly mess, filled with algae, bird waste and dead ducks.

That apparent failure to adequately address the issues with the pool became political fodder for Trump when he ordered his own renovation, seeking to repaint the bottom of the pool a color which he referred to as “American flag blue.”

The renovations were initially estimated to cost $1.8 million. It appears the cost of the project is now up to $14.7 million, according to a contract summary of the Interior Department’s award to Atlantic Industrial Coatings.

But it didn’t take long for many of the same issues to resurface. Not long after the newly renovated pool was filled with water earlier this month, algae again discolored the water.

The surface of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool remains green in large sections with algae visible on June 18, 2026.

CNN

The surface of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool on June 18, 2026.

CNN

Earlier this week, in an apparent effort to remediate that discoloration, workers were seen pouring jugs of hydrogen peroxide into the pool and deployed what an Interior spokesperson described as “advanced nanobubbler technology.” As of Thursday afternoon, the pool was still green in large sections, with algae visible.

The pool renovation is one of several projects ordered by the president to “beautify” Washington, DC. Trump has also sought to build a ballroom at the East Wing of the White House; build a towering arch near Arlington National Cemetery; and has proposed constructing a “National Garden of American Heroes,” with 250 lifelike statues of several prominent Americans throughout the country’s history.

伊朗最高领袖称持不同意见 但批准伊美谅解备忘录

2026年6月19日 07:16 / 联合早报

穆杰塔巴6月18日在致伊朗人民公开信中称，美国总统特朗普是在“困境和无奈”之下“动用各种手段”推动达成美伊谅解备忘录。 （路透社档案照片）

伊朗最高领袖穆杰塔巴说，尽管他持不同意见，但在获得总统佩泽希齐扬和最高国家安全委员会有关维护伊朗利益及“抵抗轴心”权益的保证后，批准了伊朗与美国签署的谅解备忘录。

综合路透社和法新社报道，穆杰塔巴星期四（6月18日）在致伊朗人民公开信中确认，佩泽希齐扬与美国总统特朗普已签署这份谅解备忘录。他说，在达成当前阶段成果的过程中，伊朗有关负责人付出了大量努力。他同时称，特朗普是在“困境和无奈”之下动用各种手段推动达成相关安排。

穆杰塔巴说，佩泽希齐扬作为最高国家安全委员会主席，已承担起确保谅解备忘录保障伊朗利益的责任，并承诺，如果华盛顿提出他所谓的“过分要求”，伊方绝不会妥协。

穆杰塔巴还说，未来与美国举行面对面谈判，并不意味着“接受敌方立场”，伊朗将继续关注协议相关条件和承诺落实情况。

同日，伊朗伊斯兰议会主席卡利巴说：“伊朗最高领袖赋予我们的任务是努力落实谅解备忘录的各项条款。”

Trump awards Medal of Honor to 3 veterans of the Vietnam, Afghanistan wars

June 18, 2026 / 6:40 PM EDT / CBS News

By

Faris Tanyos News Editor
Faris Tanyos is a news editor for CBSNews.com, where he writes and edits stories and tracks breaking news. He previously worked as a digital news producer at several local news stations up and down the West Coast.

Read Full Bio

President Trump on Thursday conferred two Vietnam War veterans and one veteran of the Afghanistan War with the Medal of Honor, the nation’s highest military award.

In a ceremony at the White House, the president paid tribute to retired Marine Corps Maj. James Capers Jr., retired Army Maj. Nicholas Dockery and Marine Col. John W. Ripley, who died in 2008.

Among those who attended the ceremony were Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz, and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

Retired Marine Corps Maj. James Capers

President Trump awards the Medal of Honor to retired Marine Corps Maj. James Capers Jr. in the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 18, 2026. Ken Cedeno /AFP via Getty Images

Capers, now 88, was part of a four-day reconnaissance patrol in Vietnam in March and April of 1967, according to the White House. On the final day of the patrol, his battalion was ambushed by a claymore mine and came under heavy enemy fire, during which he suffered multiple gunshot wounds.

“Shrapnel peppered his body in 17 places,” Mr. Trump said during the ceremony. “… Every one of his fellow Marines went down wounded, but Jim rose, pushing forward on a leg that shouldn’t have been able to carry any of his weight. After a shot of morphine, Jim asserted command of the firefight.”

Capers successfully led his team to an extraction site, where he refused to evacuate before all his men were safely aboard the rescue helicopter.

“When the helicopter groaned under the weight of the entire team, too many people, he attempted to deplane, but his team physically held him back, refusing to leave their leader behind,” Mr. Trump said.

Marine Col. John W. Ripley

President Trump presents the Medal of Honor posthumously to the family of Marine Corps Col. John W. Ripley in a ceremony at the White House on June 18, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Andrew Harnik / Getty Images

In April 1972, Ripley halted a North Vietnamese assault while serving as an adviser to the South Vietnamese army, the White House said.

As part of what became known as the Easter Offensive — then the largest ground invasion since the start of the Vietnam War — the North Vietnamese army had pushed south in an attempt to capture a bridge in Dong Ha.

“As North Vietnamese forces surged through the north river bank, it became clear that the assault could only be stopped by destroying the bridge,” Mr. Trump said.

Ripley, the only soldier with sufficient demolition experience, single-handedly moved 500 pounds of explosives beneath the bridge over the course of several hours.

“Hand over hand, he climbed, dangling beneath the bridge, and over the rushing water…Completely exposed to withering enemy gunfire, John completed, not one, not two, but five such trips,” Mr. Trump said.

Ripley then successfully detonated the charges, destroying the bridge and preventing the North Vietnamese army from advancing.

“When John detonated the explosives, the bridge collapsed into the river, crushing the advance, and saved the hope of a free Vietnam for Easter morning,” Mr. Trump said.

Ripley was previously awarded the Navy Cross for his actions that day. His three sons and several other family members attended Thursday’s ceremony.

Retired Army Maj. Nicholas Dockery

Retired Army Maj. Nicholas Dockery is awarded the Medal of Honor by President Trump in the White House on June 18, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Al Drago / Getty Images

Dockery was serving as a platoon leader in the Kapisa Province of Afghanistan in October 2012 when his platoon was ambushed by dozens of Taliban fighters, the White House said.

“The enemy unleashed overwhelming torrents of fire from machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades,” Mr. Trump said during the ceremony. “Without concern for his own life at all, Nick raced across the open ground to rally his scattered team.”

Over the next four hours, Dockery fought the Taliban forces in urban terrain, risking his life several times. No one on his team was lost that day, the White House said.

When he realized that one of his team members was missing, “Nick rushed through the compound until he found the sergeant being dragged through an alleyway by two Taliban fighters,” the president said.

Dockery killed the two Taliban fighters and rushed the sergeant to safety. When he discovered the sergeant was not breathing, Dockery began CPR, resuscitating the sergeant, Mr. Trump said.

He successfully evacuated three wounded members of his platoon after he climbed onto an open roof, making himself vulnerable to more enemy fire, and signaling U.S. military aircraft to “come to the platoon’s rescue.”

“He signaled enemy positions with smoke grenades, allowing American gunships to come to the platoon’s rescue,” Mr. Trump said, noting that Dockery was the “last man to depart the battlefield that day.”

黎巴嫩媒体：伊朗代表团暂停前往日内瓦与美谈判行程

2026年6月19日 07:24 / 联合早报

从以色列北部拍摄的这张照片显示，6月18日，四辆以色列军车行驶在以黎边境的黎巴嫩道路上。 （路透社）

有消息指，由于以色列持续对黎巴嫩南部发动袭击，伊朗代表团已暂停前往瑞士日内瓦与美国方面谈判的行程。

新华社报道，黎巴嫩“广场”电视台星期四（6月18日）引述一名消息人士说，伊朗代表团原本已准备启程，参加与美方为期60天谈判的首轮会谈，但随后决定暂缓出行。

这名消息人士说，伊方此前已向美方及斡旋方表明，黎巴嫩局势是决定谈判能否举行的核心议题之一。伊方警告，以色列持续在黎巴嫩境内纵深10公里范围内开展军事行动和发动袭击，明显违反了伊美签署的谅解备忘录第一条款内容。

报道说，按照原计划，伊美将在日内瓦举行会晤，在巴基斯坦方面斡旋下启动为期60天的谈判，以期达成最终协议。根据伊美谅解备忘录，确保相关条款的持续执行是双方开展最终协议谈判的前提。

当天早些时候，以色列总理内坦亚胡说，以军不会从黎巴嫩南部撤出，并将根据以色列的安全需要继续维持在黎南部“安全区”的军事存在。据报道，以色列仍持续通过炮击和空袭打击黎南部。

New poll reveals where Americans stand after Trump agreement with Iran

2026-06-18T18:00:01-04:00 / Fox News

Some 39% favor a negotiated settlement while 36% prefer replacing Iran’s government with one more favorable to the US

By Morgan Phillips Fox News

Published June 18, 2026 6:00pm EDT | Updated June 18, 2026 6:53pm EDT

Trump administration weathers criticism from both Republicans, Dems over Iran MoU

Fox News correspondent Lucas Tomlinson has the latest on the reaction to the United States-Iran memorandum of understanding in peace deal on ‘Special Report.’

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/f4f25808-64e7-45a5-a13d-cf6f4e524011

Listen to this article

4 min

FIRST ON FOX:Americans are nearly evenly split between favoring Iranian regime change and a negotiated U.S. settlement with Iran, according to a new survey.

Some 39% of respondents favor a negotiated settlement where Iran’s current government remains in place, with verifiable limits on its nuclear and missile programs, according to the findings of the Reagan Institute Summer Survey, while 36% favor replacing Iran’s current government with one more favorable to the U.S.

Another 16% favor a weakened regime where the current government stays in place but is significantly diminished militarily and economically, and 8% responded that they don’t know.

The findings underscore the political challenge facing President Donald Trump as his administration pursues a newly signed memorandum of understanding with Iran. While the agreement seeks to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions through negotiations, Americans remain divided over the ultimate objective of U.S. policy toward the Islamic Republic.

Americans are nearly evenly split between favoring Iranian regime change and a negotiated U.S. settlement with Iran, according to a new survey.(Mandel NGAN / AFP via Getty Images)

AMERICANS AGREE WITH TRUMP THAT IRAN POSES THREAT TO UNITED STATES: POLL

Republicans who responded to the survey favored replacing Iran’s government by a 2-to-1 margin over a diplomatic deal.

Republicans were far more likely than Democrats to favor a more aggressive outcome in Iran. Half of Republican respondents said they would prefer to see Iran’s current government replaced with one more favorable to the United States, compared to 25% who said they would favor a negotiated settlement that leaves the regime in place in exchange for verifiable limits on its nuclear and missile programs.

The findings were nearly identical among self-identified MAGA Republicans, 51% of whom favored regime change while 25% backed a negotiated settlement.

SHARP PARTISAN DIVIDE EMERGES OVER IRAN STRIKE, TRUMP’S STRATEGY: POLLS

Democrats, meanwhile, largely favored diplomacy. A majority, 52%, said they would prefer a negotiated settlement with Iran’s current government, while 25% favored regime change. Another 14% favored leaving the regime in place but significantly weakened militarily and economically.

The Reagan Institute Summer Survey was conducted May 26 through June 3 among 1,555 respondents nationwide and carries a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. The survey used a mixed-mode methodology that included live telephone interviews, an online panel and text-to-web responses.

Smoke rises over Tehran following an explosion amid ongoing U.S. and Israeli military strikes on Iranian targets on March 2, 2026.(Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

The findings underscore the political challenge facing President Donald Trump as his administration pursues a newly signed memorandum of understanding with Iran.(Hamid FOROUTAN / ISNA / AFP via Getty Images)

Republicans were far more likely than Democrats to favor a more aggressive outcome in Iran.(Pool via WANA/Reuters)

To better reflect the U.S. population, the results were weighted using demographic benchmarks from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey, including age, gender, race, region and education levels. The poll also included an oversample of 331 MAGA Republicans under age 30, a group with a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.

The Reagan Institute is a Washington-based policy organization that advocates the Reagan foreign-policy tradition of “peace through strength” and sustained American leadership abroad.

The findings come as Trump has defended a newly signed memorandum of understanding with Iran as a way to reduce tensions and create a pathway toward a broader agreement addressing Tehran’s nuclear program.

The memorandum establishes a 60-day negotiating period during which the United States and Iran will attempt to reach a more comprehensive deal. The agreement also includes provisions aimed at restoring commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and provides limited sanctions waivers tied to continued negotiations. Several of the most contentious issues, including the long-term future of Iran’s nuclear program, are expected to be addressed in subsequent talks.

Trump has described the arrangement as a means of avoiding a wider conflict while pursuing what he called a “great settlement” with Tehran. He has also argued that the agreement could help stabilize energy markets by reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global shipping route, while creating an opportunity to negotiate additional restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The president added that he agreed to a settlement to avoid “economic catastrophe.”

“I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe. If you kept this going, that could have happened,” he told reporters at the G7 Summit in France.

Trump’s Iran agreement draws rare reproach from powerful Republicans

2026-06-18T20:19:11.296Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/18/politics/republicans-trump-iran-agreement-congress

• President Donald Trump’s Iran agreement is drawing rare public criticism from powerful Republican senators, including from some who typically support his policies.
• Key GOP figures like Roger Wicker and Ted Cruz are criticizing the proposed $300 billion reconstruction fund and sanctions relief.
• Vice President JD Vance defended the agreement and urged critics to have faith in Trump’s dealmaking.

AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.

As key Republicans on Capitol Hill first learned the details of President Donald Trump’s agreement with Iran, some were so stunned that they simply wouldn’t speak about it.

But within 24 hours, a significant bloc of GOP senators has begun openly doubting the terms of Trump’s Iran negotiations — with many urging him to pivot his strategy entirely.

Some, mostly those unburdened by reelection campaigns, are full-on hammering Trump’s agreement, with outgoing Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy on Thursday summing it up as: “Iran’s left stronger, we are left weaker.” Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who’s also leaving Congress, said: “Everything I’ve heard about, it causes me concern.”

“It’s tough to say that the agreement is one that leaves Iran in a worse place and the United States in a better place,” Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said, adding later: “A lot of money has been spent, some lives have been lost and yet you have Iran in a place where it almost looks like this is where they were before.”

But the more significant Republican voices are those who have rarely, if ever, veered from the Trump party line.

The growing chorus of Republican angst offers a flashing red warning sign to Trump: Without major changes, any final deal with Iran may not survive an eventual vote – even in a GOP-controlled Congress. Some doubt a final agreement will be reached at all, leaving Trump and the GOP in a messy limbo that could last for years and cost their party greatly in November.

There is “a high level of dismay” in the Senate GOP, according to one Republican senator, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about party dynamics. The senator was also pessimistic about the prospects of a final agreement, saying they thought it unlikely that Iran would actually agree to a final deal.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune initially said little on the president’s agreement, telling reporters he was still “digesting” the details and later adding that he wanted “to make sure that the financial incentives are conditioned upon Iran’s performance,” particularly on its nuclear weapons. Later in the day, he called it “a step in the right direction” but noted that he saw it as a first step.

It all signals eroding support across the party, even among the president’s loyalists, at one of the most difficult stretches of Trump’s presidency, with growing GOP angst at his ballroom project, his retribution campaign, and, more recently, the battle over his intelligence chief. And it could complicate the White House’s push to accomplish much else before the midterms — including the looming battle over an expensive bill to pay for Iran war operations that GOP leaders hope to pass this summer.

One of those emerging voices of dissent is Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the top Republican on the Senate’s powerful Armed Services Committee. Wicker declined to comment for a full day after the White House revealed key details of the agreement. By Thursday, Wicker, who’s served three decades in Congress, issued a blistering statement blasting much of the agreement, particularly the $300 billion in rebuilding fund and the decision to lift sanctions.

“I am concerned that the memorandum of understanding negotiates away the victories of Operation Epic Fury in ways that are completely out of step with the President’s goals,” Wicker wrote in the statement. He said Trump’s plan for a $300 billion fund would make the perks for Iran in a prior deal with then-President Barack Obama “look like a pittance by comparison” — referring to the 2015 deal that he once said was so bad that it was reminiscent of the failed 1938 Munich Accords intended to stop Adolf Hitler.

Speaking to reporters about Trump’s emerging deal, Wicker was so careful with his public messaging that he declined to answer further questions, instead passing out copies of his statement to reporters. But Wicker was not alone in his sharp criticism of Trump’s negotiations.

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, a staunch Iran hawk, lit into Trump’s push for that $300 billion reconstruction fund, releasing frozen assets and allowing Iran to potentially profit from reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

“History demonstrates that giving billions of dollars to theocratic lunatics who want to murder us is an exceptionally bad idea, and I think unfortunately the president is receiving some really bad advice on this deal,” Cruz said. “If we give billions of dollars to Iran, that money will be used to murder Americans, and so I don’t believe we should do that.”

Another Iran hawk, Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, who is retiring at the end of her term, was uncharacteristically critical in her assessment.

“I think there are many of us that just really want to fully understand what the administration is thinking, where they’re going to go with this,” she told reporters. Asked about the $300 billion fund, she said, “I have to know where that money is coming from, because I don’t think my constituents are going to be really happy about it if that’s all US taxpayer dollars.”

As the White House struggled to sell the agreement, many senators said they awaited a detailed briefing from the administration. On Thursday afternoon, the White House held its first call with members to walk through the specifics, briefing congressional leadership and top lawmakers on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee, a person familiar with the matter said.

Also Thursday, Vice President JD Vance downplayed the significance of the blowback coming from Capitol Hill.

“I guess I would say to anybody, any of the critics is: Number one, have a little bit of faith in the president United States. The idea that he is going to strike a deal that’s been bad for the American people, it’s preposterous,” Vance said during a White House press briefing, adding later: “I don’t think our public messaging has been chaotic.”

Some senior Republicans, like South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, have personally been in touch with some of Trump’s negotiators.

But skeptical allies noted in particular the absence of Secretary of State Marco Rubio in publicly touting the agreement — an Iran hawk widely trusted by Republicans in Washington.

“To make JD Vance the face of it rather than Marco Rubio, it’s not going to increase confidence among Republicans that this is a good deal,” said a former senior Trump official, echoing lawmakers’ private worries that the administration was easing off Iran just as it should be maximizing its pressure. “The Iranians aren’t going to do jack sh*t, we’re going to give them a bunch of cash, they’re not giving up anything after that and you’re going to be accused of having done a bad deal.”

Inside the White House, officials lamented that the US’ commitment to Iran and other mediating countries to not publish the text of the agreement until Friday was now hampering their ability to manage its rollout. Trump and several other senior officials, including Rubio, were also overseas at the G7 summit, limiting their ability to message the merits of the pact to lawmakers and allies back home.

Vance, who was already slated to talk with several media outlets about his new book, assumed the role of chief messenger, touting the agreement as a “win-win” that could transform the US’ relationship with Iran — or failing that, at least ensure that the nation’s nuclear capabilities had been decimated.

But he could only provide the broad strokes of the deal. And without a hard copy to share, Trump allies and GOP lawmakers largely declined to immediately endorse it — creating a vacuum that was quickly filled by vocal skeptics and a glut of conflicting information.

“We’re all pretending we know what’s in it,” one Trump adviser said this week, as frustrations spread across the Republican Party. “I don’t know what’s in it.”

Amid the intensifying scrutiny, Trump officials on Wednesday resorted to a creative way around the deal they’d made not to release the text: Reading it aloud to reporters on a conference call, enabling media outlets to effectively publish the agreement in full.

White House officials in the meantime sought throughout the week to tamp down GOP lawmakers’ anxieties, hoping to convince them to hold their fire in public.

Graham’s endorsement of the pact following a discussion with Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff — which came after the Iran hawk’s initial tepid reaction — was viewed by Trump officials as a particularly big victory. (Days earlier, Graham told reporters he was “skeptical” that Iran will drop its nuclear ambitions by the end of negotiations.)

But even Graham acknowledged Thursday that “some of the criticism of the memo of understanding is valid.”

Few Republican lawmakers have been willing to offer their full-throated support for the agreement — a reluctance that fed Trump’s anger over the days of unflattering coverage.

“These fools, who think I haven’t been tough enough on Iran, when the Stock Market Just Hit a RECORD HIGH, and Oil prices are ‘tumbling’ down, are either jealous, bad people, or stupid,” Trump posted on Truth Social at 4:32 a.m. ET on Thursday.

Some five hours later, he followed up: “OUR COUNTRY IS STRONG, SAFE, AND RESPECTED LIKE NEVER BEFORE. ‘YOU’RE WELCOME!’”

CNN’s Annie Grayer contributed to this report.

Trump’s goals for the Iran war and what he’s saying now

June 18, 2026 / 6:47 PM EDT / CBS News
By Zak Hudak, Natalie McCormick, Maria Sullivan, Gabriella Biello

Washington — Hours after the U.S. launched its war against Iran in late February, President Trump laid out an aggressive list of war aims. He pledged to “destroy their missiles,” prevent the regime from rebuilding its nuclear program and set the stage for Iranians to “take over” the country’s government.

Now, as the Trump administration touts a newly signed memorandum of understanding to extend the U.S.-Iran ceasefire and jumpstart nuclear talks, the president has backed off some of those ambitions.

Mr. Trump told reporters this week it’s “OK” for Iran to keep some of its ballistic missiles. He said he isn’t in a hurry to recover Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium, and isn’t vying for “regime change” in Iran. The memorandum of understanding also leaves most specifics on the fate of Iran’s nuclear program to be determined in additional negotiations over the next 60 days.

The president also shared some praise for Iran’s current leadership.

“We’re dealing with people that I think are very rational people, and they were nice to deal with,” Mr. Trump said of Iran’s current leadership during an event at the G7 summit in France on Tuesday, noting that some prior Iranian leaders were killed during the war. “They were strong people, smart people. … They’re not radicalized and they’re looking to help their country.”

Here’s what the president and top administration officials have said about key issues related to Iran, then and now:

Eliminating ballistic missiles

Trump, Feb. 28: “We’re going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground. It will be totally, again, obliterated.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, March 2: “I’m telling you what the objectives of this operation are. The objectives of this operation are to destroy their ballistic missile capability and make sure they can’t rebuild it, and make sure that they can’t hide behind that to have a nuclear program. That’s the objective of the mission.”

Trump, June 17: “If other countries have them, it’s a little bit unfair for [Iran] not to have some. A ballistic missile is not the same thing as what we’re talking about, when we talk nuclear. But if Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and they all have some — in relative proportion, I think it’s OK.”

Context: While Mr. Trump has said preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is his primary goal, the administration and U.S. allies in the Middle East have long raised concerns about threats posed by Iran’s conventional military — especially its ballistic missiles, which can reach Israel and U.S. allies and military assets around the region. Throughout the war, U.S. forces heavily targeted Iran’s missile stockpile and missile factories.

The U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding does not make any references to ballistic missiles, though Mr. Trump said Wednesday his administration will work on a “parallel effort” with Persian Gulf countries to address Iran’s conventional missiles and other “non-nuclear issues.”

Mr. Trump argued Wednesday that most of Iran’s missile stockpile was either destroyed or buried under rubble during the war. But he suggested he isn’t looking to fully eliminate Iran’s ballistic missiles.

He also appeared to mock some hawkish Trump supporters who want the country’s missile program to be more thoroughly decimated. “I have guys — I like some of these guys, but I don’t think they’re smart — ‘Sir, you shouldn’t let them have any missiles.’ I said: ‘Well, what am I going to do? Am I going to let Saudi Arabia have missiles, but they can’t have them?’ … It doesn’t work that way.”

“Nuclear dust”

Trump, April 17: “The USA will get all nuclear dust — you know what the nuclear dust is? That was that white, powdery substance created by our B2 bombers, those great B2 bombers, late one evening 7 months ago.”

Trump, April 26: “We have to take that nuclear dust. We’re going to take it, and that’s part of our negotiation with Iran. We don’t want them to have it.”

Trump, June 16: “What’s happening is that at an appropriate time — there’s no rush at all. We have cameras from space on it. We know everybody that goes there, which is, like, nobody. The B2 bombers hit it. The entire mountain collapsed inside it. It’s a very tough excavation. Nobody else can do it, but us, and probably China. They have the equipment, we have the equipment. We’re in no rush, but we get it. And when we get it, we’ll destroy it.”

Context: In the years leading up to the war, Iran amassed a stockpile of 60% enriched uranium, which is just a short step away from weapons-grade material. Much of that material was held in a handful of subterranean facilities that were bombed by the U.S. last year, making it difficult to access.

During this year’s war, the Trump administration strategized on ways to recover the uranium, which the president calls “nuclear dust.” An operation to dig through the rubble and take the material would have been among the most challenging and risky special operations missions in U.S. history, experts say.

In the memorandum of understanding, the U.S. and Iran “agreed to resolve the disposition of stockpiled enriched material” in their talks over the next 60 days. The “minimum methodology” is “down-blending” the uranium to a lower level of purity onsite, under the International Atomic Energy Agency’s supervision.

But Mr. Trump suggested this week taking the material is not an urgent task, expressing doubt that Iran can recover it. He said Wednesday “we’d like to get it psychologically, but nobody’s touching it.”

Uranium enrichment

Trump, Feb. 27: “They want to enrich a little bit. You don’t have to enrich when you have that much oil. … I say, no enrichment. Not 20%, 30%. They always want 20%, 30%. … They want it for civil. I think it’s uncivil.”

Trump, June 14: The final deal must permanently ensure that Iran “can only enrich for nonmilitary purposes” and “can never go beyond a certain amount,” the president said in an interview with The New York Times in which he said he wants a suspension on uranium enrichment for 15 or 20 years.

Trump, June 17: “I’ve said to them always: ‘You have probably the third-largest oil reserves in the world. What the hell do you need nuclear for?’ … It is a little hard, though, when you say that somebody wants it, other people have it, other adjoining states have it, and you’re not letting them have it for purposes of electricity and things like that. It’s always a little tough. You have to use a little common sense.”

Vice President JD Vance, June 18: “The Obama nuclear deal allowed enrichment. Ours will not.”

Context: Iran has long refused to fully give up its uranium enrichment program. Iranian officials insist the program is intended for peaceful purposes, and as recently as last year, U.S. intelligence agencies found Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon, though Iran has enriched uranium in recent years to levels well beyond what’s necessary for most non-military purposes.

The 2015 nuclear deal inked by the Obama administration allowed Iran to keep enriching uranium to 3.67%, significantly below the 90% used for bombs, with limits on the size of Iran’s stockpile and the number and types of centrifuges Iran could operate. That structure drew criticism at the time, and Mr. Trump withdrew the U.S. from the deal during his first term in office.

Prior to the outbreak of war, Mr. Trump said he wanted Iran to agree to “no enrichment.”

The U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding leaves specifics on uranium enrichment for later, saying only that the two countries “agreed to discuss the issue of enrichment and other mutually agreed matters related to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear needs.” It’s unclear what a final deal could look like. Mr. Trump suggested this week it could be “hard” to get Iran to fully give up its nuclear program, but Vance suggested the president’s red line of no enrichment is still in place.

Regime change

Trump, addressing the Iranian people in a video on Truth Social on Feb. 28: “Take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be, probably, your only chance for generations.”

Trump, March 29: “We’ve had regime change, if you look already, because the one regime was decimated, destroyed, they’re all dead. The next regime is mostly dead, and the third regime, we’re dealing with different people than anybody’s dealt with before. It’s a whole different group of people. So I would consider that regime change.”

Trump, June 16: “You talk about regime change. I never cared about regime change.”

Context: In the war’s opening hours, Mr. Trump explicitly framed it as an opportunity for the Iranian people to overthrow the Islamic Republic, which has governed Iran since 1979. After Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in strikes, Mr. Trump said he wanted a role in picking Iran’s next leader, and was “disappointed” by the decision to elevate Khamenei’s son to the post of supreme leader.

More recently, as the Iranian regime has remained in place, Mr. Trump offered a slightly different view, arguing the killing of prior Iranian leaders was effectively a form of “regime change.”

Frozen assets and sanctions relief

Trump, May 27: “No, we’re not talking about any easing of sanctions or giving money. No sanctions, no money, no nothing.”

Trump, June 17: “It’s not our money, it’s their money. And we froze it at a certain point in time, I guess we’re going to have to give it back.”

Context: A key issue for Iran is the removal — or suspension — of intense U.S. sanctions that have hobbled Iran’s economy and frozen its assets, many of which date back to the “maximum pressure” campaign in Mr. Trump’s first term or even earlier. The Obama-era nuclear deal lifted sanctions in exchange for limits on Iran’s nuclear program, an arrangement Mr. Trump argued in 2018 gave Iran “many billions of dollars.”

This week’s memorandum of understanding says the U.S. will lift “all types of sanctions” against Iran on an “agreed-upon schedule as part of the final deal.” The Trump administration has said no sanctions will be removed or assets unfrozen unless Iran demonstrates compliance.

特朗普：美国期待中东“所有战线全面停火”

2026年6月19日 07:25 / 联合早报

6月17日，特朗普在巴黎奥利机场的停机坪上向媒体发表讲话。 （法新社）

美国总统特朗普在签署美伊谅解备忘录后说，美国期待“所有战线全面停火”，包括黎巴嫩、真主党和以色列。

特朗普星期四（6月18日）下午在社媒平台Truth Social发文说：“美国致力于和平。我们鼓励中东各方继续履行承诺，使我们的谈判得以顺利并美好地展开。”

他还说：“金融市场对当前的局势反应积极，油价大幅下跌，股市一路飙升。我们期待各条战线实现全面停火，包括黎巴嫩、真主党和以色列。”

17日，七国集团（G7）峰会结束后，法国总统马克龙及夫人邀请特朗普到凡尔赛宫共进晚餐，特朗普在凡尔赛宫的餐桌上签署了美伊谅解备忘录。

US judge narrows lawsuits challenging Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting

2026-06-18 17:36:18 UTC / Reuters

A mail-in ballot, during the Pennsylvania primary election, is displayed in this illustration picture taken in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S., May 19, 2026. REUTERS/Hannah Beier/Illustration

BOSTON, June 18 (Reuters) – A federal judge in Boston on Thursday limited lawsuits challenging U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order on ​mail-in voting, ruling that Democratic-led states and voting rights groups can only ‌seek to block the order’s effect on November’s elections.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani

wrote that the potential impact of Trump’s order on the midterm elections and primaries scheduled before then meant parts of the plaintiffs’ case ​could not wait to be heard.

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

“Postponing judicial review is impracticable and may inflict ​significant hardship on Plaintiffs,” she said.

But she said many uncertainties exist as ⁠to how agencies, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Postal Service, will ​implement Trump’s order and what, if any, final rules and policies they adopt.

She said those ​uncertainties justified dismissing for now the plaintiffs’ challenge to Trump’s order as it affects elections after the November 3 midterms.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump, a Republican, signed the ​order on March 31 after calling for years for tighter rules on voting by ​mail and pushing the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud. ‌Under ⁠the U.S. Constitution, states are assigned the role of administering federal elections.

His order directs the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to compile and transmit to the states a list of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state, derived from citizenship and naturalization records ​and other federal databases.

Trump’s ​order also requires the ⁠U.S. Postal Service to only deliver ballots to voters on each state’s approved mail-in ballot list. USPS recently moved to implement Trump’s directive ​by issuing proposed rules requiring states to provide the names and ​barcodes tied to ⁠their mail-in ballots.

The order also directs the U.S. Department of Justice to prioritize the investigation and prosecution of state and local election officials who issue federal ballots to people deemed “not eligible” ⁠to vote.

Voting ​rights groups sued the administration along with 23 states ​and the District of Columbia, arguing Trump’s order is unconstitutional and that he lacks any legal authority to assert ​presidential power over election administration.

Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Nia Williams, Rod Nickel

Trump says ‘we should stop’ Utah mail-in voting

2026-06-18 19:38:09 UTC / Reuters

By Jasper Ward

June 18, 2026 7:38 PM UTC Updated 4 mins ago

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the media upon arrival at Paris Orly airport, following the G7 Summit, in Orly, France, June 17, 2026. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein Purchase Licensing Rights

WASHINGTON, June 18 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday that something should be done to stop mail-in voting in ​Utah ahead of the state’s primaries next week.

“It seems ‌as though the Great State of Utah, which I won each time, and handily, is going to the All Mail In Ballot format ​of Colorado, and the rest, that always head LEFT, ​as soon as the move is made,” Trump ⁠wrote on Truth Social.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

He added, “We should stop Utah from doing ​this.”

Utah and Colorado are among fewer than a dozen U.S. states ​that allow all elections to be conducted entirely by mail, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The Republican president said, without evidence, that ​mail-in ballots would provide Democrats an opportunity to cheat.

Utah’s ​lieutenant governor, who oversees elections in the state, and the Republican Party in ‌Utah ⁠did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The state’s Democratic Party said it opposes any federal effort to roll back vote-by-mail in Utah, calling Trump’s comments “insulting” to residents of the ​state.

Trump, who himself voted ​by mail earlier ⁠this year, has repeatedly raised issue with mail-in ballots.

In March, he signed an executive order tightening ​rules on mail-in voting nationwide, including directing his ​administration ⁠to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state.

Trump directed the U.S. Justice Department last month to ⁠investigate ​what he alleged was an “illegal” move ​by Maryland to send out 500,000 mail-in ballots, a claim that was rejected by ​state officials.

Reporting by Jasper Ward in Washington; editing by Michelle Nichols

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.