Iran marks first night without US strikes in two weeks as tensions persist

The U.S. and Iran militaries did not exchange fire overnight Saturday, breaking a streak of 13 consecutive days of tit-for-tat strikes over alleged violations of a ceasefire agreement signed last month.  A spokesperson for the country’s health ministry confirmed there were no new attacks in a Saturday social media post.  “It seems our dear Iran…

Carlos Beltran overcame ‘overwhelming’ Mets start to get on Hall of Fame path

Carlos Beltrán would get another taste of New York when he went to the Yankees for two years in the twilight of his illustrious career. 

Obama Presidential Center subcontractors file fresh payment claims totaling nearly $900K

Three subcontractors claim nearly $900,000 in unpaid work on Home Court, the Obama Presidential Center's basketball facility hosting WNBA All-Star events.

Report: As Its Leaders Fight, Iran May Now Be Coming Apart From Within

Court: AG Paxton didn’t prove abortion claims

A Texas appeals court said the attorney general relied on insufficient evidence to win a clinic shutdown order

Trump ordered military not to conduct strikes in Iran Friday

President Trump directed the U.S. military not to conduct new strikes in Iran on Friday, breaking a nearly two-week streak of daily attacks, two sources with knowledge of the decision said.Why it matters: The president's directive came after he approved daily strikes over the previous 13 days. It is unclear if Trump's order on Friday was a one-off or whether the lull will continue. Trump's decision reflects both his willingness to provide more space for diplomacy and a recognition that — short of a return to major combat operations — the current level of U.S. strikes has reached the limit of its effectiveness. If Trump orders a return to strikes, the U.S. military can mobilize on relatively short notice. The U.S. military is still preparing plans for a possible return to major combat operations, but Trump hasn't given orders to move in that direction, the sources said. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.Driving the news: Every afternoon for the last two weeks, Trump has approved strike plans submitted by the military. They were conducted within hours.On Friday, Trump received a similar plan but did not give a green light. Instead, he directed the military not to conduct strikes, the sources said. Shortly after he gave the Friday directive, Trump told reporters at the White House that he has the option of continuing strikes or even escalating them, including "knocking out everything they have." But he made clear that he thinks the "smarter strategy" is to "make a deal" with Iran. "We're talking to [the Iranians] right now. I think they're getting more and more serious as the days go by. We're locked and loaded and ready to go, but we're talking to them," Trump said. Later on Friday, during his remarks at the White House Correspondents Association dinner, Trump said he didn't think Iran is ready to make a deal at the moment, "but I'm willing to listen." State of play: Trump's order to hold fire was given several hours after an Omani delegation arrived in Tehran Friday for talks on a new arrangement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.Two regional sources with knowledge of the negotiations said progress has been made in the talks and that an agreement between Oman and Iran could be reached over the weekend. President Trump would then have to decide whether to accept the proposed deal.

Iran’s leaders at war with each other as hardliners push for wider conflict

Iran's leaders are fighting each other almost as much as they're fighting the West, with some senior politicians scrambling to save US talks while the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps leans into the renewed war, regional sources told The Post.

'That’s not true': CNN panel bushwhacks CEO's sunny economic claims

Markets have responded to President Donald Trump’s evaporating ceasefire by wiping out whatever gains it made after Trump’s premature announcement.And now CNN Table for Five host Abby Phillip reports the president is announcing new tariffs between 10 and 12 percentage points to dozens of U.S. trading partners, even as rising oil prices and inflation fears rattle the world's largest bond market and send the 10-year U.S. treasury yield “to its highest level since Trump reclaimed office.”But Saturday morning Table for Five panelist Marc LoPresti, CEO and Senior Market Strategist of Market Rebellion, did not agree with the news.“I kind of respectfully disagree with some of the fundamental premises there. I mean, the economy is actually doing quite well,’ claimed LoPresti. “We just were in the middle of another earnings season where earnings are beating on average expectations. That makes the earnings quarter over quarter in a row of earnings that have beat expectations of high average individuals.”“You're talking about corporations,” said CNN Global Affairs pundit Sabrina Singh. “Yeah, corporations are doing great,” “Well, that's an indication of how the economy is doing,” LoPresti argued.“I would say the family that's going to fill up a gallon of gas that's over $4 from where it was in May, would say it does not,” Singh countered.Phillip pointed out that while the economy has indeed been resilient, that is in spite of Trump's war and tariff policies, which have heaped new unnecessary costs upon Americans. But LoPresti said it was all for a good cause: “What the president's been trying to do, as it relates to tariffs and other policies, are to level the playing field, it's long-term gain for some short-term inflationary pressure.”“For who,” Phillip said.“For everyone,” said LoPresti.“What do you mean ‘leveling the playing field’? Who is paying the tariffs?” demanded Phillip.At that point, Singh busted in: “The tariffs get shifted to the consumer, which are Americans who buy goods from countries that are being taxed like Canada or Mexico.” “The last three quarters of corporate earnings nave not demonstrated that,” LoPresti said“You’re talking about corporate earnings, which is very different from a family living in Michigan, who is going to the gas pump to fill up with either diesel or gas, and they're seeing higher gas prices, higher diesel prices, and then they go to the grocery store,” said Singh. “So, on top of the higher gas prices, then they get to get the gift of driving to the grocery store to see grocery prices higher. Because guess what diesel does? It takes the goods coming off of those trucks and [makes them more costly.] So yes, those supermarkets or the corporations might be getting a higher earning paycheck here, but the average family is not.” “That's not the message that I'm trying to transmit here,” LoPresti insisted. “In breaking down corporate earnings reports since Liberation Day, corporations have reported by and large that they are not raising prices and passing the costs.”“That's not true,” Singh countered flatly. “They absolutely are. Grocery prices are higher.”Kmele Foster, editor at large at Tangle news, warned that LoPresti’s argument, which reflects corporations’ take, is doing nothing to encourage voters.“Actually, it seems like any single any moment you have politicians and pundits who are saying things are actually pretty good when in fact people feel otherwise is probably [not a good look.]” said Foster.LoPresti eventually lamented: “there’s no economic patriotism.” - YouTube youtu.be