A former Clinton-era National Security Council staffer broke with his party and heaped praise on President Donald Trump’s successful strikes on Iran over the weekend, while remarking former Vice President Kamala Harris would have likely lacked the ‘courage’ to execute such a mission if she were commander-in-chief. 

‘I am not a fan of many of Donald Trump‘s actions, but I will speak openly and honestly when he takes bold steps defending America’s interests, as he did tonight,’ Jamie Metzl, founder of the international social group One Shared World, posted to X on Saturday evening. 

Metzl served on former President Bill Clinton’s National Security Counci and was former President Joe Biden’s deputy staff director of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and he heaped praise on Trump repeatedly on X over the weekend, while also taking a shot at Harris’ lack of ‘courage and fortitude.’ 

‘But I’m not a blind tribalist and am perfectly comfortable praising President Trump for bold and courageous actions in support of America’s core national interests, as he took last night,’ Metzl posted to X on Sunday morning. 

‘Although I believe electing Kamala Harris would have been better for our democracy, society, and economy, as well as for helping the most vulnerable people in the United States and around the world, I also believe VP Harris would not have had the courage or fortitude to take such an essential step as the president took last night,’ he added. 

Metzl continued in his X messages that ‘Iran has been at war with the United States for 46 years,’ and was aiming to build a nuclear weapon with the intention of wielding it over the U.S and its allies. 

‘Iran has been at war with the United States for 46 years. Its regime has murdered thousands of American citizens. Its slogan ‘death to America’ was not window dressing but core ideology. It was racing toward a nuclear weapon with every intention of using it to threaten America, our allies, and the Middle East region as a whole. No actions like this come without risks, and I imagine the story will get more complicated over time, but that’s why these types of decisions are complicated,’ he wrote. 

Fox News Digital reached out to Harris’ office regarding Metzl’s post, but did not immediately receive a reply.

Metzl’s comments are among a cacophony of Democratic elected officials and traditional anti-MAGA voices who have come out to praise Trump since the successful attack on Iran, dubbed ‘Operation Midnight Hammer.’ 

‘The destruction of Iran’s nuclear program is essential to ultimate peace in the Middle East. This is not a Democratic or Republican issue — dealing with the Iranian threat is central to America’s national security. The world is safer because of the actions of our brave service members. I’m praying for the safety of our service members in the region,’ New Jersey Democratic Rep. Josh Gottheimer said in a statement over the weekend, for example.

‘As I’ve long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,’ Democratic Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman wrote on X on Saturday. ‘Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I’m grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.’ 

While New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, a frequent Trump critic, wrote in an opinion piece that Trump made a ‘courageous and correct decision that deserves respect, no matter how one feels about this president,’ while fellow Times columnist David French also said it was the ‘right decision’ on social media. 

Other Democrats and frequent Trump critics, such as New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, have slammed Trump over the strikes, arguing they bypassed Congress.

Trump announced the Saturday evening strikes on Iran in a Truth Social post that was not preceded by media leaks or speculation that strikes were imminent. The unexpected social media post was followed just hours later by a brief Trump address to the nation while flanked by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance. 

‘A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan,’ Trump said from the White House late on Saturday in an address to the nation regarding the strikes. ‘Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise. Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity, and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s No. 1 state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success.’

The strikes ‘obliterated’ Iranian nuclear facilities and backed the nation into a corner to make a peace deal, Trump said. This mission was also celebrated by Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine as one that was cloaked in secrecy and intentionally deceptive to confuse the enemy. 

‘It involved misdirection and the highest of operational security. Our B-2s went in and out of… these nuclear sites, in and out and back, without the world knowing at all,’ Hegseth said. ‘In that way, it was historic.’

The operation included the longest B-2 spirit bomber mission since 2001, the second-longest B-2 mission ever flown and the largest B-2 operational strike in U.S. history, Hegseth and Caine said during the Sunday press conference. 

Operation Midnight Hammer followed Israel launching preemptive strikes on Iran on June 12 after months of attempted and stalled nuclear negotiations and subsequent heightened concern that Iran was advancing its nuclear program. Netanyahu declared soon afterward that the strikes were necessary to ‘roll back the Iranian threat to Israel’s very survival.’

Fox News Digital’s Hannah Panreck contributed to this report.

Roughly three-quarters of the nation’s health insurance providers signed a series of commitments this week in an effort to improve patient care by reducing bureaucratic hurdles caused by insurance companies’ prior-authorization requirements.

Director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Dr. Mehmet Oz, alongside Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., announced the new voluntary pledge from a cadre of insurance providers, who cover roughly 75% of the population, during a press conference Monday. The new commitments are aimed at speeding up and reducing prior-authorization processes used by insurers, a process that has been long-maligned for unnecessarily delaying patient care and other bureaucratic hurdles negatively impacting patients.   

‘The pledge is not a mandate. It’s not a bill, a rule. This is not legislated. This is a opportunity for industry to show itself,’ Oz said Monday. ‘But by the fact that three-quarters of the patients in the country are already covered by participants in this pledge, it’s a good start and the response has been overwhelming.’

Prior-authorization is a process that requires providers to obtain approval from a patient’s insurance provider before that provider can offer certain treatments or services. Essentially, the process seeks to ensure patients are getting the right solution for a particular problem.

However, according to Oz, the process has led to doctors being forced to spend enormous amounts of man-power to satisfy prior-authorization requirements from insurers. He noted during Monday’s press conference that, on average, physicians have to spend 12 hours a week dealing with these requirements, which they see about 40 of per week. 

‘It frustrates doctors. It sometimes results in care that is significantly delayed. It erodes public trust in the healthcare system. It’s something we can’t tolerate,’ Oz insisted.

The pledge has been adopted by some of the nation’s largest insurance providers, including United Healthcare, Cigna, Humana, Blue Cross & Blue Shield, Aetna and many more. While the industry-led commitments aim to improve care for patients, it could potentially eat into their profits as well if patients start seeking care more often.

The commitments from insurers cemented this week include taking active steps to implement a common standardized process for electronic prior-authorization through the development of standardized submission requirements to support faster turnaround time. The goal is for the new framework to be operational by Jan. 1, 2027.

Another part of the pledge includes a commitment from individual insurance plans to implement certain reductions in its use of medical prior-authorization by Jan. 1, 2026. On that date, if patients switch insurance providers during the course of treatment, their new plan must honor their existing prior-authorization approvals for 90-days while the patient transitions.

Transparency is also a key part of the new commitments from insurance providers. Health plans enjoined with the commitments will pledge to provide clear and easy-to-understand explanations of prior-authorization determinations, including guidance for appeals. The commitment also states that by 2027, 80% of electronic prior-authorization approvals from companies will be answered in real-time.   

Oz, during the Monday press conference, compared the industry-led pledge to the Bible, saying, ‘The meek shall inherit the earth.’

‘I always grew up thinking ‘meek’ meant weak, but that’s not what meek means. ‘Meek’ means you have a sharp sword, a sword that could do real damage to people around you, but you decide, electively, to sheathe that sword and put it away for a while, so you can do goods, so you can do important things where once in a while we have to get together, even if we’re competitors, and agree,’ Oz said Monday.

‘That’s what these insurance companies and hospital systems have done,’ he continued. ‘They have agreed to sheathe their swords to be meek for a while, to come up with a better solution to a problem that plagues us all.’

As the dust still settles following the U.S. attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, analysts say the next steps will determine whether the Islamic Republic’s atomic ambitions have truly been crippled. 

Commenting on the mission, President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social that: ‘The damage to the Nuclear sites in Iran is said to be ‘monumental.’ The hits were hard and accurate. Great skill was shown by our military. Thank you!’

Also on Sunday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine told reporters, ‘Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction.’ He added it was far too early to comment ‘on what may or may not still be there.’

A senior Israeli security source told Fox News Digital, ‘It’s still too soon to know for sure, but it appears the sites were seriously damaged — it looks excellent.’

‘History is being written,’ said Reserve Brig. Gen. Yossi Kuperwasser, head of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security and a former IDF intelligence chief. ‘This is a powerful development that significantly weakens the Iranian threat and highlights the deep cooperation between Israel and the United States. But the journey is far from over.’

According to Kuperwasser, the strikes caused heavy damage to core parts of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. ‘But I don’t think the program is destroyed,’ he told Fox News Digital. ‘They still have enriched uranium, the ability to produce centrifuges, and scientists. We killed many, but not all. And even the bombed facilities — we don’t know for sure that nothing remains.’

Kuperwasser emphasized that while Tehran may retain some nuclear assets, a key strategic threshold has now been crossed. ‘Until now, everything was covert: sabotage, diplomacy, sanctions. But now, military action has proven far more effective. If Iran tries to restart its program, they know we — and the Americans — are prepared to strike again.’

Sima Shein, a former senior Mossad official and Iran expert at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), agreed that Iran’s capabilities have been degraded, but not eliminated.

‘There’s no doubt these were the three most important sites,’ Shein told Fox News Digital, referring to the U.S. strike Saturday night that hit Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow, but claimed ‘Iran has dispersed its enriched uranium — both 60% and 20% — across various unknown locations. They’ve likely hidden advanced centrifuges as well, because production oversight hasn’t existed for years.’

She added that if a future diplomatic agreement is reached, the first condition must be ‘full disclosure and removal’ of all remaining fissile material.

Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), told Fox News Digital that all remaining Iranian nuclear facilities must be completely dismantled and referred to FDD expert’s plan, which outlined a strategy for the permanent dismantlement of Tehran’s nuclear weapons enterprise. 

The report calls for the destruction of all enrichment sites, the removal or seizure of enriched uranium, the dismantling of advanced centrifuges, and a permanent halt to weaponization efforts. It also demands unrestricted inspections, irreversible disarmament, and strict enforcement through snapback sanctions. FDD argues that anything less would leave Iran capable of rebuilding its nuclear program.

Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence and president of the Mind Israel think tank, called the American strike a ‘game-changer.’

‘Trump’s doctrine of ‘peace through strength’ is in action,’ Yadlin said. ‘Geopolitically, this changes the entire war — and sends a message to China, Russia, and others.’

But Yadlin also believes Iran’s nuclear capabilities haven’t been wiped out completely. ‘There are two possible Iranian responses: retaliation and changing nuclear policy. Retaliation may come via terror attacks in the Gulf, or pressure through proxies like Hezbollah or the Houthis. But I think the more likely shift is in nuclear posture — perhaps withdrawing from the NPT.’

‘They’re in a dilemma,’ Shein told Fox News Digital. ‘They don’t want to drag the U.S. further into military conflict, and they can’t risk harming ties with Gulf neighbors. A military retaliation — like closing the Strait of Hormuz — would invite overwhelming force. Expelling inspectors or quitting the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty] may be their next moves.’

Kuperwasser added that military pressure alone may not bring lasting resolution — unless paired with either a diplomatic agreement with intrusive inspections, or a credible threat of continued strikes.

‘If there’s an agreement, it must be based on verification — not trust,’ he said. ‘Anywhere, anytime inspections. But if they refuse, we can continue striking any new facility they build.’

As Israel and the U.S. prepare for potential cycles of response and counter-response, Kuperwasser believes the Israeli public is ready.

‘These are historic times,’ he said. ‘We understand the sacrifice — and we’re ready to see it through.’

A House lawmaker is nominating President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize after he brokered a ceasefire deal between Israel and Iran.

Rep. Buddy Carter, R-Ga., wrote to the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, declaring Trump had an ‘extraordinary and historic role’ in having ended ‘the armed conflict between Israel and Iran and preventing the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism from obtaining the most lethal weapon on the planet.’

Trump declared the ’12 Day War’ was ending late on Monday afternoon with a ceasefire that was meant to go into effect overnight Tuesday.

It ends just over a week after Israel first launched a preemptive strike against Iran, arguing Tehran was dangerously close to obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The two countries subsequently traded rocket fire over the following days, and over the weekend, the U.S. launched its own airstrikes on three of Iran’s key nuclear facilities.

Iran responded by shooting rockets at a U.S. air base in Qatar on Monday, but not without giving advance notice to U.S. and Qatari officials. No injuries were reported in that attack.

‘President Trump’s influence was instrumental in forging a swift agreement that many believed to be impossible. President Trump also took bold, decisive actions to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions and ensure that the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism remains incapable of acquiring a nuclear weapon,’ Carter wrote in his letter.

He said Trump’s leadership through the crisis ‘exemplifies the very ideals that the Nobel Peace Prize seeks to recognize: the pursuit of peace, the prevention of war, and the advancement of international harmony. In a region plagued by historical animosity and political volatility, such a breakthrough demands both courage and clarity.’

‘President Trump demonstrated both, offering the world a rare glimpse of hope. For these reasons, I respectfully submit this nomination for Donald J. Trump, 47th President of the United States, to be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize,’ Carter finished.

It is not the first time Trump has been nominated for the prize, though he has yet to win.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., tapped Trump for the prize just earlier this year, arguing his 2024 electoral victory had an ‘astonishingly effective impact’ on peace in the world.

According to the Nobel Prize website, there have been 338 candidates nominated for the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize so far.

Carter, who is also running for Senate in Georgia, has introduced several notable bills this year backing Trump, though many have been seen as largely symbolic.

The Georgia Republican introduced legislation to rename Greenland ‘Red, White, and Blueland’ after Trump expressed interest in taking the territory. He also authored a bill aimed at letting Trump sell off a federal building in California named after former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

However, as for the conflict in the Middle East, it appears the tenuous peace is in danger of fraying as of Tuesday morning.

Carter’s nomination for Trump comes shortly after Israel accused Iran of breaking their ceasefire agreement, which Tehran has denied.  

President Donald Trump expressed deep frustration with both Israel and Iran on Tuesday, saying the two countries ‘don’t know what the **** they’re doing.’

Trump made the comments while departing from the White House for a NATO summit Tuesday morning. Both Israel and Iran fired missiles at one another following the imposition of a ceasefire on Monday night.

‘I’m not happy with Israel. You know, when I say, okay, now you have 12 hours, you don’t go out in the first hour and just drop everything you have on them. So I’m not happy with them. I’m not happy with Iran either, but I’m really unhappy if Israel is going out this morning,’ Trump said.

He continued, ‘We basically have two countries that have been fighting for so long and so hard that they don’t know what the **** they’re doing.’ 

‘I’m gonna see if I can stop it,’ he added.

‘ISRAEL. DO NOT DROP THOSE BOMBS. IF YOU DO IT IS A MAJOR VIOLATION. BRING YOUR PILOTS HOME, NOW!’ Trump wrote on Truth Social shortly after boarding Marine One.

Minutes later, he announced that Israel was canceling its plans for an attack Tuesday morning.

‘ISRAEL is not going to attack Iran. All planes will turn around and head home, while doing a friendly ‘Plane Wave’ to Iran. Nobody will be hurt, the Ceasefire is in effect! Thank you for your attention to this matter!’ he wrote.

He then topped it off with a post stating: ‘IRAN WILL NEVER REBUILD THEIR NUCLEAR FACILITIES!’

Trump announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran on Monday night, dubbing the conflict a ’12-day war.’

Qatar’s prime minister secured Iran’s agreement to the U.S.-proposed ceasefire after Iran’s limited strikes on America’s Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar.

A senior Israeli official told Fox News on Tuesday that Iran had launched two missiles toward Israel following the announcement of the ceasefire ‘and we believe they are trying to fire more in the next couple of hours.’

‘Unfortunately, the Iranians have decided to continue to fire toward Israel,’ the official said to Fox News Chief Foreign Correspondent  Trey Yingst after Trump unveiled the deal Monday.

‘Now we will have to retaliate, this will happen of course,’ the official added. ‘It could end within several hours, but they [the Iranians] need to make a decision.’ 

Israel has yet to confirm that it has canceled its follow-up attack.