In the Middle East as in Ukraine, the president is discovering that simple bullying tricks don’t resolve complex international crises
It was as close as Donald Trump might get to a lucid statement of his governing doctrine. “I may do it. I may not do it,” the president said to reporters on the White House lawn. “Nobody knows what I’m going to do.”
The question was about joining Israeli air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Days later, US bombers were on their way. Some expected it to happen. Others, including Keir Starmer, had gone on record to say they didn’t. No one had known. The unpredictability doctrine wouldn’t have been violated either way.
It applies also in economic and domestic policy. Trump’s boast of inscrutability could have been made about tariff rates, or a decision to deploy marines against US citizens who defy his immigration agency.
Volatile inconsistency is a trait of the presidential personality, but also a learned management technique. Keeping everyone around you guessing, lurching from charm to menaces, swapping and dropping favourites on a whim – these are methods of coercive control. They generate disorientation and vulnerability. People who are braced for sudden mood swings must hang on the leader’s every word, looking for cues, awaiting instruction. Individual agency is lost, dependency is induced. It is something cult leaders do.
A method that works with a quasi-monarchical entourage is poorly suited to international affairs. Foreign leaders are not White House courtiers. They might seek the US president’s favour in trade or fear his military wrath, but always with competing national interests in the background. On the world stage, Trump will never feel the unalloyed devotion he gets from worshippers at a Maga rally, which is one reason why he hates to travel.
That tension is palpable at this week’s Nato summit in The Hague. Trump makes no secret of his disdain for European democracies. He resents their reliance on the Pentagon for security. He is unconvinced that defending their continent, especially the corner of it under violent assault from Russia, is the US’s problem. The threat he briefly made in his first term to pull out of Nato if other members didn’t start paying their way still hangs over the alliance. European leaders must strive to keep Trump onside while contingency planning for the day he decides to abandon them.
Matthew Whitaker, the US’s permanent representative at Nato, tried to be reassuring on that point at the summit, declaring that it “has never been more engaged”. But he also conceded ignorance of what Trump might actually do. “I don’t want … to claim to be able to read his mind and know what he’s going to say.”
That is the doctrine: nobody knows. This forces Nato members into an awkward dance, performing for Trump’s benefit while also working around him. They want to impress him with their financial ambition, pledging to spend 5% of their national GDP on defence by 2035. But they know also not to expect any reciprocal commitment, or none that can be trusted.
War in the Middle East ramps the uncertainty up to new heights. European leaders need to stay focused on Ukraine and the prospect of Russia turning its territorial aggression on some other portion of Nato’s eastern flank. Vladimir Putin sees no legitimacy in borders that were drawn by the collapse of the Soviet Union. He has also geared Russia’s economy, political apparatus and propaganda machinery to assume perpetual war with the west. One lesson from Ukraine’s plight is to assume that when Putin says he is going to fight, he means it. Another is that, while deterrence is expensive, it is cheaper than the war that comes when the Kremlin feels confidently undeterred.
These calculations keep Europeans up at night, but not Trump. He doesn’t recognise Russia as the aggressor in Ukraine and would happily see the war end on terms that leave Nato humiliated and Putin emboldened, and signal an epoch-defining shift in the balance of global power away from democracy.
But framing the choice in grand geostrategic terms obscures pettier motives, which are often the salient ones with Trump. He doesn’t want to take Kyiv’s side because that is what Joe Biden did. It isn’t his cause and so he thinks it is dumb.
This is not the case with Iran. US allies are required, in public at least, to judge Trump’s military intervention as though it were made according to a conventional diplomatic and strategic calculus: the prospect of Tehran wielding powers of nuclear apocalypse is truly abhorrent; negotiation was not bearing fruit. Maybe there was reason to dispute US intelligence assessments that said the threshold of weapons-readiness was not imminent. Maybe the time to act really was at hand.
But those are rationalising arguments, retrofitted to a choice that Trump made as much from vanity as any more sophisticated motive. He was bounced into war by Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli prime minister appears to have gamed the US president’s aversion to looking weak and his limitless appetite for glory. Early Israeli success – an extraordinary feat of military intelligence that took out senior Iranian commanders and assets – offered Trump the prospect of climbing aboard a winning operation and grabbing credit for victory.
Hints that regime change was on the agenda may have prodded Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, towards a ceasefire on the basis that early capitulation with some power retained, while unpalatable, is preferable to assassination. Senior White House officials insisted the war aims were limited to containment of the nuclear threat, but since they hadn’t even known a war was coming their authority on the matter is questionable.
Trump’s supporters say this is proof that his volatile style works. In strategic studies it is known as the “madman theory”. Discarding guardrails, looking ready to do something irrational, forces an enemy to choose caution. The obvious risk is that it also teaches the rest of the world the merit of madness. Iran’s rulers will be more convinced than ever that only nuclear weapons can guarantee their sovereignty. (That view would persist through regime change, since none of the viable scenarios result in a flowering of pro-western democracy in the region. Tehran’s atomic ambitions may be set back by years, but the cause of negotiated, multilateral non-proliferation is also in tatters.)
That doesn’t interest Trump. He thinks in terms of easy wins, not complex consequences. Hence his palpable irritation with Israel and Iran for violating the ceasefire and generally not knowing “what the fuck they’re doing”. He is aware that he looks played by Netanyahu, much as he once showed a flicker of frustration with Putin for “tapping” him along in negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. He promised US voters deals. He gets cross when the world withholds them from him.
This is a natural function of the unpredictability doctrine. Telling other countries they can never know what you’ll do makes them less responsive to diplomacy; less biddable to the whim of a US president. A vicious cycle then begins. Trump relies on his volatile persona to assert control in situations that he doesn’t understand, generating chaos that exposes his impotence, which in turn provokes him to tug in more arbitrary fury at his levers of power.
For European democracies this is debilitating. It is hard to coordinate defence against external threats when the paramount power in your alliance is the origin of so much instability. But Nato leaders will get no respite from the uncertainty as long as Trump sits in the White House. The thing they most need from him – reliability – is the one thing he is destined by personality and doctrine never to provide.
Trump Humbled in $20 Billion ‘60 Minutes’ War
The president may have to knock off three zeros in his battle with CBS’ parent company.
It appears President Donald Trump won’t be getting anywhere close to the $20 billion he demanded from CBS and its parent company Paramount Global now that a mediator proposed a $20 million settlement instead.
The proposal would include a $17 million payment to Trump’s presidential library, $2 million more than ABC’s settlement with Trump in December, and another $3 million in legal fees and public service announcements covering antisemitism, according to The Wall Street Journal.
The proposed offer would end the eight-month dispute between Trump and Paramount after the president sued the company in October over a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris on CBS, which Trump claimed was distorted. CBS has denied Trump’s charge, saying it aired a more succinct version of a Harris answer on Israel for timing reasons, but its parent company entered settlement talks anyway.
Paramount declined to comment. Ed Paltzik, a lawyer for the president, said Trump was “committed to holding those who traffic in fake news, hoaxes, and lies to account.”
“CBS and Paramount targeted the President in an attempt to harm his reputation while committing the worst kind of election interference and fraud in the closing days of the most important presidential election in history,” Paltzik said in a statement. “President Trump will pursue this vital matter to its just and rightful conclusion.”
It is unclear if the offer would include an apology, according to the Journal, which Trump has demanded. Paramount has resisted such efforts throughout the months-long mediation, but such resistance ultimately led to CBS News and Stations President Wendy McMahon to lose her job and 60 Minutes executive producer Bill Owens to resign.
Trump’s initial lawsuit in October demanded the network pay him $10 billion over the episode, claiming the decision to air a clip of the Harris answer on Face the Nation while airing a different portion of the comment during the episode amounted to election interference.
The answer was part of a pre-election special episode of 60 Minutes last year. Trump did not participate in the episode, and he eventually upped his demand to $20 billion earlier this year.
The lawsuit has cast a cloud over Paramount’s planned merger with Skydance Media, billionaire David Ellison’s conglomerate. According to the Journal, Paramount executives fear they could be accused of bribing a federal official by choosing to settle, opening themselves up to legal liability.
The company has since asked the law firm Gibson Dunn to help determine whether settling for more than $15 million, in line with ABC’s settlement, would increase such a risk, according to the Journal.
Federal Communications Chairman and Trump acolyte Brendan Carr has said he would factor an official complaint about the episode into his review of the merger.
Kaitlan Collins Dresses Down Trump to His Face for Anti-Military Smear
CNN’s chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins clapped back at President Donald Trump’s degradation of the network on Wednesday over its reporting on the aftermath of the U.S.’ Iran strikes.
During Trump’s NATO press conference, where the president attacked various news outlets for reporting on an initial U.S. intelligence assessment that said the U.S. strikes did not obliterate Iran’s nuclear facilities, Collins tried to ask Trump a question—which prompted his initial attack.
“Fake news CNN. Here we go,” Trump said. “Wait until you hear this question. You should really say how great our soldiers and our warriors are.”
Collins, who has regularly tussled with Trump and his administration, wouldn’t let the attack slide.
“I think everyone appreciates our soldiers and our warriors,” she shot back. She then asked Trump whether he relied on Israeli intelligence to claim the U.S. strikes “obliterated” the facilities.
Trump pointed to Iran’s foreign ministry’s claims that the sites were “badly damaged.” He also claimed a leaked report from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency—which said the damage was limited and the strikes simply set back Iran’s nuclear ambitions by months, not forever—concluded that the strikes’ impact could have also been very severe.
“You didn‘t choose to put that because it was very early after,” Trump told Collins, whose byline did not appear on CNN’s original report. “Since then, we‘ve collected additional intelligence. We‘ve also spoken to people that have seen the site and the site. The site is obliterated, and we think everything nuclear is down there.”
The president also lashed out at other reporters throughout the conference, snapping at NBC News’ Kelly O’Donnell and accusing her of trying to “demean” the U.S. strike pilots.
“You, and NBC—fake news, which is one of the worst—and CNN, are all bad,“ Trump told her. ”They’re sick. There’s something wrong with them. You know what? You should be praising those people instead of trying to find some—by getting me, by trying to go and get me, you’re hurting those people. They were devastated.”
Trump’s anger toward some of the outlets marked a shift in his dealings with the media this week after he spoke to multiple reporters following the U.S. strikes on Saturday and before addressing the nation.
Trump spoke to ABC’s Jonathan Karl and told him the strikes had been a “tremendous success.” He later told NBC’s Kristen Welker the mission was a “complete and total success.”
He then attacked both Karl and NBC on Monday for reporting on the intel leak.
The U.S. has since tried to uphold Trump’s claims about the U.S. strikes—while confirming the existence of the initial intelligence report—and have tried to paint the articles as attempts to discredit U.S. soldiers.
“This alleged ‘assessment’ is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote on X on Tuesday. “The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program.”
Trump’s war on the courts intensifies
President DONALD TRUMP’s administration is in a full-blown war with the federal courts, with the fate of American governance on the line.
That’s the only way to read the increasingly confrontational, bare-knuckle tactics that the administration is deploying against the judiciary — and the steady, pointed resistance from judges.
On Tuesday night, the Justice Department filed an unusual lawsuit against the entire bench of the federal district court in Maryland — where dozens of cases against the administration are pending — over a blanket, automatic two-day pause on deportations in cases brought by detained immigrants. A department spokesperson said the lawsuit was intended to “rein in unlawful judicial overreach.”
In an increasingly pointed Supreme Court showdown with immigration advocates, Solicitor General JOHN SAUER labeled a federal district judge’s order reimposing restrictions on the deportation of eight men to South Sudan a “lawless act of defiance.” Advocates for the men say the fight is even larger than their clients: It is about whether the high court will countenance the administration’s defiance of the courts altogether.
While the justices ruminate, skirmishes between the courts and the administration are proliferating and intensifying.
In the most high-profile case of all, the criminal prosecution of KILMAR ABREGO GARCIA, a magistrate judge in Texas ripped the Justice Department for allegations that “defy common sense” and relied on flimsy evidence. In another prominent legal showdown, a federal judge ordered the release of pro-Palestinian activist MAHMOUD KHALIL after determining that his continued detention was an unconstitutional attack on free speech.
But even in cases that are off the national radar, judges are expressing shock and dismay at mass deportation tactics that stretch the bounds of the law and Constitution:
- This morning, a federal judge in New York labeled as “almost frivolous” the administration’s claim that an immigrant with significant mental disabilities was “posturing” by asking for release from custody.
- On Tuesday, a federal appeals court in New York ordered the administration to try to return to the U.S. a fourth illegally deported man from custody overseas.
- Last week, another federal judge in New York called the Trump administration’s “newfound strategy” to arrest people outside their immigration court proceedings an “abuse of process.” “ICE cannot manipulate the removal proceedings in its favor by substituting expedited proceedings for immigration proceedings already in progress,” the judge ruled.
- A federal judge in Massachusetts earlier this month said he reached an “easy conclusion” that the administration’s arrest and detention of an immigrant — who had been released a year earlier by an immigration judge and compiled with all requirements — was “unlawful.”
The clearest distillation of this clash of co-equal branches comes in Trump’s attempt to place a staunch loyalist onto the Philadelphia-based bench of the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. After leading Trump’s defense in three criminal cases, EMIL BOVE has become Trump’s brashest Justice Department enforcer. He has directed purges of purportedly disloyal prosecutors and attacked the integrity of those who refused to follow orders to drop DOJ’s corruption case against New York City Mayor ERIC ADAMS or who participated in the investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.
A day before Bove’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a former Justice Department attorney alleged that Bove spearheaded a drive to sidestep adverse court orders in crucial deportation cases. Those allegations were at the center of Democrats’ questions today for Bove, who pledged to be an impartial interpreter of the law, despite his track record as a pro-Trump bulldog.
Attorney General PAM BONDI, who will have a role in reviewing the whistleblower complaint against Bove, told senators today that she would “run through a wall for Emil Bove.” And after testifying, she filed into the Senate Judiciary hearing room to catch the end of Bove’s confirmation proceedings.
Minutes after it ended, Bondi issued a statement slamming courts that had ruled against Trump, saying their orders were “designed to halt his agenda.”
But the courts so far seem undeterred. This afternoon, a judge rejected DOJ’s argument to keep Abrego behind bars while he awaits trial on immigrant smuggling charges in Tennessee. The judge, WAVERLY CRENSHAW, JR., said DOJ’s position — that DHS might deport Abrego if he is not detained on his criminal charges — “defies logic,” since the Trump administration controls both agencies.
“If the Government finds this case to be as high priority as it argues here, it is incumbent upon it to ensure that Abrego is held accountable for the charges in the Indictment,” Crenshaw said. “If the Department of Justice and DHS cannot do so, that speaks for itself.”
Trump, Hegseth slam news coverage of US intel report on Iran attack, say B-2 pilots upset
The president claimed the B-2 pilots who dropped the bombs are “devastated.”
President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday both tried to counter a preliminary U.S. intelligence assessment that the attack on three Iranian nuclear facilities did limited damage by claiming news accounts of the report demeaned the B-2 pilots who dropped the bombs.
Speaking at a news conference as he was set to leave the NATO summit in the Netherlands, Trump claimed the pilots are “devastated” by the suggestion the strikes were not a complete success.
He was asked several times Wednesday about the Defense Intelligence Agency’s initial assessment that the bombings of the Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo facilities likely set back Iran’s nuclear program by only a few months. He acknowledged the receipt of the report but noted it was incomplete.
He snapped back at reporters raising questions about it, repeating his claim Iran’s nuclear program was “obliterated,” and shifted the focus to the pilots who carried out the strike.
“You should be praising those people instead of trying to find out by getting me by trying to go and get me. You’re hurting those people,” Trump told reporters.
Later Wednesday, in a Truth Social post, he said Hegseth would hold a news conference Thursday morning “in order to fight for the Dignity of our Great American Pilots.”
“They felt terribly! Fortunately for them and, as usual, solely for the purpose of demeaning PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP,” he said in part. “The News Conference will prove both interesting and irrefutable.”
The president claimed in his Netherlands news conference that he had received a call from Missouri, where the pilots are based, about the intelligence report and the news accounts about it, saying he had been told they were “devastated, because they were trying to minimize the attack.”
“I spoke to one of them. He said, ‘Sir, we hit the site. It was perfect. It was dead on,’ because they don’t understand fake news,” Trump said.
The Pentagon referred questions from ABC News to the White House.
Trump added about the pilots that “they were devastated. They put their lives on the line.”
Since Saturday’s attack, Trump and his officials have repeatedly praised the B-2 pilots for the mission but stepped up referencing them as part of the pushback on Wednesday. Hegseth, standing next to Trump, came to the microphone to argue news reporters and outlets “don’t care what the troops think.”
“These pilots, these refuelers, these fighters, these air defenders, the skill and the courage it took to go into enemy territory flying 36 hours on behalf of the American people in the world to take out a nuclear program is beyond what anyone in this audience can fathom,” Hegseth said.
At the same time, Hegseth and Trump downplayed the report’s initial findings about the damage.
“The report said what it said and it was fine. It was severe, they think, but they had no idea. They shouldn’t have issued a report until they did, but we’ve got the information,” Trump said.
Trump earlier cited an Israeli intelligence report that he insisted assessed the “strike on Fordo destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility totally inoperable.”
Military officials have said there is no doubt the sites sustained significant damage, but that a “battle damage assessment” would take time to complete, as no Western officials have been able to personally inspect the sites as of Wednesday.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said in a statement posted on X late Wednesday that “Iran’s nuclear facilities have been destroyed,” and also slamming the news media. A source with knowledge of Gabbard’s assessment told ABC News her description came from new U.S. intelligence.
“The propaganda media has deployed their usual tactic: selectively release portions of illegally leaked classified intelligence assessments (intentionally leaving out the fact that the assessment was written with “low confidence”) to try to undermine President Trump’s decisive leadership and the brave servicemen and women who flawlessly executed a truly historic mission to keep the American people safe and secure,” she posted in part.
Hegseth contended that the preliminary reports and images spoke for themselves.
“So, if you want to make an assessment of what happened at Fordo, you better get a big shovel and go really deep because Iran’s nuclear program is obliterated and somebody somewhere is trying to leak something to say, ‘Oh, with low confidence we think maybe it’s moderate,” he claimed.
New Trump administration plan could end asylum claims and speed deportations for hundreds of thousands of migrants
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters before boarding the Marine One presidential helicopter and departing the White House on June 24, 2025 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
The Trump administration is planning to dismiss asylum claims for potentially hundreds of thousands of migrants in the United States and then make them immediately deportable as part of the president’s sweeping immigration crackdown, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
It marks the latest in a series of moves by the administration to bar migrants from receiving protections in the US. As federal authorities come under pressure to deliver historic immigration arrest numbers, administration officials have quietly been working on efforts to make more people eligible for removal.
The people being targeted in this case are those who entered the US unlawfully and later applied for asylum, the sources said. Their cases are expected to be closed, therefore leaving them at risk of deportation. It could affect hundreds of thousands of asylum applicants.
Over the last decade, the majority of applicants who applied for asylum with US Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, self-reported how they entered the US, with around 25 percent saying they entered the US unlawfully. That amounts to at least a quarter of a million people, according to a federal report analyzing asylees in 2023. The others entered legally via a port of entry through various visas.
Under US law, people who are seeking protection from violence or persecution in their home country can claim asylum to remain in the United States. Trump effectively sealed off access to claiming asylum at the US southern border upon taking office.
There are currently around 1.45 million people with pending affirmative asylum applications, federal data shows. People who are not in deportation proceedings can apply for affirmative asylum through USCIS.
USCIS — which falls under the Department of Homeland Security and is responsible for managing federal immigration benefits — has also been delegated the authority by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to place those individuals in fast-track deportation proceedings as well as “take additional actions to enforce civil and criminal violations of the immigration laws,” according to a memo obtained by CNN. That marks an unprecedented departure from decades-long protocol for USCIS.
In a statement to CNN, USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser said the agency had “nothing to announce at this time.”
“USCIS’ top priority remains the screening and vetting of all aliens seeking to come, live, or work in the United States. President Trump and Secretary Noem have given USCIS the ability to use all tools in our toolbox to ensure that the integrity of the immigration system is upheld, fraud is uncovered and expeditiously addressed, and illegal aliens are removed from the country,” he added.
Typically, USCIS can turn people over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for the next stages of their immigration process if they determine they’re not eligible for relief in the United States. Enforcement actions, like ordering someone to be quickly removed, have generally fallen under the authority of ICE and US Customs and Border Protection.
Experts and advocates warn that placing USCIS at the center of the president’s deportation campaign is likely to have a chilling effect for those trying to obtain relief and remain in the United States.
“They’re turning the agency that we think of as providing immigration benefits as an enforcement arm for ICE” said Sarah Mehta, deputy director of government affairs for the American Civil Liberties Union’s equality division.
Migrants who have their cases dismissed under the administration’s new plan will be subject to expedited removal. That fast-track deportation procedure allows immigration authorities to remove an individual without a hearing before an immigration judge.
Trump officials expanded fast-track deportations earlier this year to include undocumented immigrants anywhere in the US who cannot prove they’ve lived in the US continuously for two years or more. The administration also previously told immigration judges they should dismiss “legally deficient” asylum cases without holding a hearing.
Some migrants who have lived and worked in the US for years have already received notices of their asylum applications being dismissed without a determination, according to a notice shared with CNN. It’s unclear how many people have received the notice of dismissal.
The Trump administration has targeted multiple programs designed to temporarily protect migrants in the United States and in some cases, has terminated those protections. But it’s unusual for USCIS to accept an application and then abruptly dismiss it.
“Our union opposes any policy that violates basic rights guaranteed to asylum seekers by US and International law. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, an alien has the right to apply for asylum — and have due process in their pursuit of the same — whether or not they arrived at a designated port of entry, irrespective of their immigration status,” said Michael Knowles, executive vice president of the American Federation of Government Employees Council 119, which represents USCIS employees, in a statement to CNN.
The asylum process is also different because it provides a long-term solution for applicants and serves as a path to US citizenship, even for people who entered the country illegally.
“The government should process asylum applications – not throw them out. Every asylum seeker should have an opportunity to have their asylum case processed. These are immigrants who have been in the U.S. working legally for years and are contributing to local communities throughout the country,” said Conchita Cruz, co-executive director of Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project. “Dismissing their asylum cases will hurt them, their families, employers, and communities that rely on them.”
Late Night Is Taken Aback by Trump’s Potty Mouth
Seth Meyers said that even with “zero standards of expectations for Trump,” he was shocked to see the president use profanity on the White House lawn.
Welcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. Here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.
F-Bombs Away
President Trump dropped the F-bomb on live television on Tuesday, while talking to reporters in front of the White House about Israel and Iran violating their previously announced cease-fire. “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the [expletive] they’re doing,” he said.
Seth Meyers said that even though he has “zero standards of expectations for Trump, it’s still surprising to see the president drop an F-bomb on the White House grounds.”
“Wow, based on that language and that level of analysis, I’m surprised that they didn’t give him the local news chyron.” — SETH MEYERS
“Remember when Biden whispered it to Obama and everyone on the right lost their [expletive] minds?” — SETH MEYERS
“Nothing says ‘Everyone remain calm’ like dropping an F-bomb on live TV.” — JIMMY FALLON
“Meanwhile, C-SPAN was like, ‘It’s OK. Nobody’s watching anyway.’” — JIMMY FALLON
The Punchiest Punchlines (Fake News Edition)
“Last night, President Trump announced that Israel and Iran agreed to a total cease-fire and declared that the war has ended. Yeah. And for about 59 minutes, he was right.” — JIMMY FALLON
“President Trump announced yesterday in a post on Truth Social that Israel and Iran have agreed to a cease-fire and added, ‘CONGRATULATIONS TO EVERYONE!’ Congratulations to everyone? Are you brokering a cease-fire or hosting the Tonys? ‘Congratulations to all our winners tonight, get home safe!’” — SETH MEYERS
“In another post on Truth Social, President Trump defended his recently-announced cease-fire between Israel, Iran and the U.S. and said, ‘THE CEASEFIRE IS NOW IN EFFECT. PLEASE DO NOT VIOLATE IT!’ Well, that oughta do it. This reminds me of the time my bodega put up a ‘No shoplifting’ sign. You know what happened? Someone took it.” — SETH MEYERS
The Bits Worth Watching
Diego Luna brought his immigration lawyer to his second night hosting “Jimmy Kimmel Live” on Tuesday.
What We’re Excited About on Wednesday Night
The “Bridgerton” star Jonathan Bailey will appear on Wednesday’s “Tonight Show.”
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(749x0:751x2)/phil-donahue-tout-081924-78f2211566e2404ab9fac8cf49421f07.jpg?w=1200&resize=1200,0&ssl=1 "Phil Donahue, Legendary Daytime Talk Show Host, Dies at 88")
