UK Defense Secretary Resigns Over Military Spending Dispute, Raising Questions About Britain’s Readiness and NATO Commitments

John Healey quits after accusing Prime Minister Keir Starmer and the Treasury of underfunding defense amid growing threats from Russia, uncertainty over the GCAP fighter program, and mounting pressure on NATO allies to boost military spending.

LONDON | British Defense Secretary John Healey resigned Thursday in a dramatic protest against the U.K. government's defense spending plans, warning that inadequate funding could weaken military readiness, increase risks to deployed personnel, and undermine Britain's ability to respond to growing security threats.

The resignation marks one of the most significant political and defense policy setbacks for Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government and comes as NATO allies prepare for a critical summit next month in Turkey, amid ongoing concerns about Russian aggression and European defense preparedness.

In a sharply worded resignation letter, Healey criticized the government's long-awaited Defense Investment Plan (DIP), arguing that the funding package fails to provide the resources needed to address an increasingly dangerous security environment.

"You have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats," Healey wrote to Starmer.

The departing defense secretary said he could not support a spending plan that would force difficult choices affecting operational readiness and force modernization.

"Without a DIP that meets the moment in this way, I am being forced to make decisions that would reduce the readiness of our forces and increase the risk to personnel on operations, and could make the country less safe," he wrote.

Ukraine’s AI Warfare Chief Predicts ‘New Paradigm’ of Combat as Kyiv Races to Build Battlefield Operating System

Defense officials say artificial intelligence could soon transform military decision-making, accelerating the battlefield "kill chain" and creating a technological arms race between Ukraine and Russia.

KYIV, Ukraine | Artificial intelligence is rapidly moving from a supporting role to the center of modern warfare, according to Ukraine's top defense AI official, who predicts future conflicts could be decided not only by troops, tanks, and missiles, but by competing battlefield operating systems capable of processing vast amounts of combat data in real time.

In an exclusive interview with Reuters, Danylo Tsvok, head of Ukraine's Defense Ministry AI Center, said artificial intelligence is already reshaping combat operations and could fundamentally alter how wars are fought over the next three to five years.

"AI will form a new paradigm of warfare. It's already actively doing so," Tsvok said.

His comments provide a glimpse into what military planners increasingly view as the next revolution in warfare — one where algorithms, autonomous systems, and real-time data networks could determine victory or defeat faster than human commanders can react.

'TELL IT LIKE IT IS' FactChecking Trump’s Contentious ‘Meet the Press’ Interview

President Donald Trump walked out of a sit-down interview with Kristen Welker on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” That happened after he made, or repeated, a number of false and unsupported claims — some of which Welker pushed back on.

• Trump seized on the slow vote-counting procedures in California to claim, without evidence, that its recent primary election was “rigged.”
• The president falsely claimed that he “didn’t guarantee” that he’d keep the U.S. out of “new wars” in his second term. There are several examples of him making such a promise in 2024.
• He claimed that Iran was “very close to having a nuclear weapon” under a multilateral agreement negotiated by President Barack Obama’s administration and wrongly said the country “got all of this uranium during Obama.” Arms control experts say Iran accelerated its uranium enrichment program after Trump withdrew from the deal.
• The president also said that if he didn’t launch airstrikes against Iran in June 2025, the country would “right now have a nuclear weapon, and it could be that half of the world would be eradicated already.” That assessment is at odds with reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency and the U.S. Intelligence Community, which said in March 2025 that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.”
• He provided no support for his claim that Jan. 6 rioters were “ushered into” the Capitol by “FBI agents.” A 2024 watchdog report said that FBI agents arrived to assist law enforcement after rioters had already broken into the Capitol.
• Trump repeated other claims we’ve written about before regarding gasoline prices, the economy during his presidency, and factory construction.

The interview was recorded on June 5 and aired two days later.

Ohio Senate Candidates Spar Over Donations Tied, Loosely or Not, to Epstein

Ohio voters are witnessing a battle of campaign television ads as each Senate candidate tries to tie the other to Jeffrey Epstein — by way of donations from those with some link to the late convicted sex offender.

Democrat Sherrod Brown’s campaign charges that Republican Sen. Jon Husted “took more money from Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirators than anyone else in Washington, and then voted to keep the Epstein files secret.” The donations total $116,892 over more than 20 years. Husted’s TV spot, meanwhile, calls Brown “a liar,” saying that Husted “voted to release the Epstein files” and that Brown took $100,000 “from Epstein associates.” Those contributions date back to 2005.

Whether the campaign donations are problematic is a matter of opinion that we leave to voters to decide. We’ll lay out who gave the money.

In Husted’s case, all contributions came from Les Wexner, the founder and former CEO of L Brands, an Ohio-based retail company that included The Limited and Victoria’s Secret. Wexner, who knew Epstein and hired him to be his financial manager for many years, was listed in a 2019 FBI document as a “co-conspirator,” hence the description in the Brown ad. But he has never been charged with a crime. In February, after his inclusion in the document became public, Wexner said he “never witnessed nor had any knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activity.”

This year, Husted donated about $34,000 of the more recent Wexner donations to a charity, his campaign said, noting this was “all the funds that were available.”

Trump’s Push to Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent

Legislative efforts to make daylight saving time permanent year-round received a boost from President Donald Trump, who criticized the twice-yearly clock-switching as cost-prohibitive.

But there is no strong evidence that Trump’s solution — switching permanently to daylight saving time — would provide the economic boost Trump suggests it would.

The Sunshine Protection Act, which would make daylight saving time permanent year-round unless states opt out, was folded into a motor vehicle safety bill that passed out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee on May 21 with a 48-1 vote.

Shortly after, Trump posted his support on Truth Social.

“This is so important in that Hundreds of Millions of Dollars are spent every year by people, Cities, and States, being forced to change their Clocks. Many of these Clocks are located in Towers, and the cost of renting, or using, Heavy Equipment to do this twice a year is prohibitive!” Trump wrote.

Trump Misrepresents Climate Change Scenarios

In a May 16 Truth Social post, President Donald Trump cited updated climate change scenarios to misleadingly claim that experts had “admitted” prior climate change projections were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!” The regularly scheduled revision reflects, in part, the progress the world has made on moving away from fossil fuels.

Trump was reacting to a new set of seven scenarios of emissions by the end of the century, proposed in an April 7 paper by an international group of scientists. Over time, the range of plausible scenarios has narrowed. The most pessimistic scenario now shows lower emissions than 15 years ago, when the prior scenarios were developed, while the most optimistic one now shows higher emissions.

Trump, however, used the update to cast doubt on the reality and seriousness of global warming. “GOOD RIDDANCE!” he wrote. “After 15 years of Dumocrats promising that ‘Climate Change’ is going to destroy the Planet, the United Nations TOP Climate Committee just admitted that its own projections (RCP8.5) were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!”

RCP8.5 was the most pessimistic of four scenarios that were selected in 2007 and described in 2011. The scenarios looked at how much the climate might change by 2100, relative to the industrial revolution.

The Truth About Trump’s Truths: What 800+ Social Media Posts Reveal About the President’s Priorities

A 'TELL IT LIKE IT IS' News analysis of President Donald Trump’s Truth Social activity finds a White House focused on Iran, reshaping Washington, consolidating GOP loyalty, and maintaining a direct connection with supporters through an unprecedented volume of social media messaging.

WASHINGTON, D.C. | For President Donald Trump, social media remains more than a communications platform. It is a governing tool, a political weapon, a campaign vehicle, and perhaps the clearest window into the priorities of one of the most influential political figures in modern American history.

A comprehensive 'TELL IT LIKE IT IS' News review of every post and repost published by Trump on Truth Social during the month of May — totaling more than 800 entries — reveals a president balancing international crises, domestic ambitions, partisan battles, and personal messaging in real time.

The analysis found that while the conflict involving Iran dominated much of the administration's foreign policy attention, Trump's most frequent social media focus was neither war nor the economy. Instead, the president repeatedly highlighted plans to reshape and beautify the nation's capital, posting about Washington-related projects approximately 80 times during the month.

The findings underscore Trump's longstanding belief that social media serves as a direct line to voters, bypassing traditional media outlets and allowing him to frame issues on his own terms.

ADVERTISEMENT

IRS Watchdog Report Finds Data-Matching Failures in IRS-ICE Information Sharing Program

Inspector General Says Taxpayer Records Were Not Consistently Matched as Federal Deportation Effort Expanded

WASHINGTON | IRS systems used to support immigration enforcement efforts failed to consistently and accurately match taxpayer records with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) data, according to a new government watchdog report that raises questions about one of the most controversial information-sharing initiatives of the Trump administration's immigration agenda.

A report released Monday by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) found that the Internal Revenue Service encountered significant shortcomings when attempting to identify taxpayer records requested by ICE as part of a broader federal effort to locate undocumented immigrants subject to deportation proceedings.

The findings represent the most comprehensive government review to date of the IRS-ICE data-sharing arrangement, which emerged as a key component of the administration's effort to strengthen immigration enforcement through interagency cooperation.

According to the report, IRS matching systems were "unable to identify and match the records accurately and consistently," resulting in both missed matches and the potential inclusion of records that should have been excluded from the process.

The agreement between the two agencies was designed to allow ICE access to certain taxpayer information, including Taxpayer Identification Numbers (TINs) and last known addresses, for individuals identified in immigration enforcement actions. Federal officials sought the information as part of broader efforts to locate and remove undocumented immigrants residing in the United States.

Data Quality Problems Complicated Enforcement Efforts

Investigators found that inconsistencies in how ICE formatted and submitted information significantly hindered the IRS's ability to accurately process requests.

The report noted that differences in names, spelling variations, and inconsistent data formatting often prevented taxpayer records from being matched correctly across agency databases. As a result, legitimate records may have gone unmatched, while the IRS's screening processes failed to reject some submissions that did not meet established criteria.

Congress Targets ‘Claims Sharks’ as Bipartisan Bill Seeks to Protect Veterans from Benefits Fraud

The SAFEGUARD Veterans Act would crack down on unaccredited claims consultants, restore criminal penalties, and strengthen protections against predatory actors profiting from veterans’ disability claims.

WASHINGTON | A bipartisan group of lawmakers is advancing legislation aimed at protecting veterans from so-called “claims sharks,” predatory individuals and companies accused of exploiting former service members by charging excessive fees for assistance with Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability claims.

The proposed legislation, known as the Stopping Abuse, Fraud, and Exploitation by Governing Unaccredited Representatives Defrauding (SAFEGUARD) Veterans Act, would significantly tighten oversight of the VA claims process and strengthen enforcement against unaccredited agents who profit from veterans seeking earned benefits.

Supporters say the bill addresses a growing national concern as veterans increasingly report being targeted by firms that promise assistance navigating the often-complex disability claims system but charge substantial fees for services that accredited organizations provide free of charge.

“These brave men and women earned their benefits, and it’s our job to stop any bad actors who try to take advantage and scam them,” said U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., one of several lawmakers backing the legislation.

Restoring Oversight to the VA Claims Process

The legislation would require that only VA-accredited individuals and organizations assist veterans with benefit claims. It would also restore criminal penalties for unaccredited agents found engaging in fraudulent or deceptive practices.

Additional provisions would:

• Close regulatory loopholes used by unaccredited claims consultants.
• Prohibit the use of robocalls and automated technologies to obtain veterans’ claims information.
• Direct the VA to establish systems to track accredited representatives and report fraudulent actors.
• Increase veteran education and awareness efforts regarding scams and predatory claims practices.
• Strengthen enforcement tools available to federal authorities investigating benefits fraud.

Veterans advocates argue that many former service members are unaware they can receive claims assistance at no cost through accredited Veterans Service Organizations (VSOs), county veteran service officers, and VA-approved representatives.

Trump Orders New Acting DNI Bill Pulte to Shrink Intelligence Office, Signaling Major Overhaul of U.S. Spy Bureaucracy

President directs newly appointed acting intelligence chief to begin workforce reductions at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, deepening an effort to streamline the intelligence community amid growing congressional scrutiny.

WASHINGTON | President Donald Trump has directed newly appointed Acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte to reduce the size of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), signaling a continuation of the administration's broader effort to reshape and streamline the U.S. intelligence community.

Speaking aboard Air Force One on Friday while traveling to Wisconsin, Trump praised Pulte and openly endorsed additional cuts to the intelligence office, arguing that the agency has become excessively large and inefficient.

"He'll do a very good job," Trump told reporters. "He'll watch it closely, but Bill Pulte is very good; he's very talented. If he cut, I wouldn't mind that."

The comments provide the clearest indication yet that the White House intends to continue downsizing the ODNI following significant workforce and budget reductions implemented earlier in Trump's second term.

Female Navy Officers Warn of Career Ceiling After Hegseth Removes Women From Admiral Promotion List

Pentagon's decision to strike nine officers—including all female selectees—from a Navy admiral promotion slate sparks concerns over retention, leadership diversity, and the future of military talent management.

WASHINGTON | A growing number of female Navy officers are expressing concern that recent intervention by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in the military promotion process could have lasting consequences for leadership development, retention, and morale across the U.S. armed forces.

The controversy stems from Hegseth's decision to remove nine officers from a previously approved Navy promotion list, including all three women selected for advancement from captain to the rank of rear admiral (lower half), commonly referred to as a one-star admiral.

As a result, the Navy will not promote a single woman to flag officer rank this cycle despite women representing approximately one-quarter of Navy officers and nearly one-third of the service's mid-grade officer corps, according to recent personnel data.

Promotion Decision Raises Questions

According to defense officials familiar with the process, the original promotion slate included 31 officers selected through the Navy's traditional promotion board.

Those recommendations had already received approval from senior Navy leadership, civilian leadership within the Department of the Navy, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff before reaching the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

The Pentagon has not publicly explained why the nine officers were removed from the list.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell defended the administration's broader approach to military promotions, stating that advancement decisions should be based solely on merit and qualifications rather than demographic characteristics.

"Military promotions are given to those who have earned them," Parnell said publicly. "We will never consider the color of a service member's skin or their gender as a factor in promotions."