President Donald Trump said he thinks Israel’s strike on Iran probably improved the chances a U.S.-Iran nuclear deal will come to fruition, according to Axios. 

After an Axios reporter asked Trump whether he thought Israel’s strike jeopardized the administration’s efforts to strike a deal with Iran, the president reportedly responded, ‘I don’t think so. Maybe the opposite. Maybe now they will negotiate seriously.’ 

The president has urged Iran to make a deal ‘before there is nothing left,’ after Israeli Defense Forces began bombing the country’s nuclear and ballistic missile sites.

‘I couldn’t get them to a deal in 60 days. They were close. They should have done it. Maybe now it will happen,’ Trump added in his comments to the Axios reporter. 

Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear agreement during his first term. The agreement restricted Iran’s development of nuclear weapons, but, in exchange, the U.S. and other countries agreed to ease sanctions against Iran’s economy. 

During former President Joe Biden’s tenure, the U.S. sought to return to the JCPOA, but after years of talks, nothing came to fruition.

Trump has signaled that a deal with Iran is among his top priorities but has repeatedly said the country will not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. 

Iran has said the U.S. has not respected its right to enrich uranium for non-violent purposes for citizens. Media reports have suggested Trump has signaled an openness to letting Iran continue to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. 

Further nuclear talks between the two powers were scheduled for Sunday, but, after Israel’s attacks, Iran has said it no longer plans to participate in the talks. 

Iranian state media reported that Iran has announced it will be suspending its involvement in the negotiations ‘until further notice.’ 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for further comment. 

Israel’s airstrikes on Tehran, Iran, on Friday morning marked a dramatic escalation in the proxy war between the two regional rivals, reigniting one of the most consequential questions in international security: Just how close was Iran to building a nuclear weapon?

While Israeli experts have warned for years that Iran was enriching uranium at a level that put it ‘weeks away’ from a nuclear weapon, in recent days, there has been a shift. According to Israeli intelligence sources, Iran was on the verge of assembling a crude nuclear device.

Beni Sabti, an Iran expert at the Institute of National Security Studies, told Fox News Digital the threat was urgent and specific: Tehran was pulling its materials together ‘in a secret place near Tehran to make a primitive warhead.’

Gregg Roman, executive director of the Middle East Forum, said that since the Trump administration reinitiated nuclear negotiations, Israel had been collecting fresh intelligence that raised alarm bells.

‘There were a few things that stood out,’ Roman said, referencing activity at the Times Enrichment facility. ‘Iran reactivated an explosives manufacturing line, which could only be used to help that needed nuclear weapon… efforts to put the fissile material into a shape which could be used for a nuclear weapon – that was reactivated as well.’

Roman added that these developments mirrored work Iran halted in 2003, when it froze its military nuclear program. 

Experts believe Iran is enriching uranium to 60%, which puts it just below the 90% needed for a nuclear weapon, and have said there is no civilian use for 60% enriched uranium. 

However, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told a Senate worldwide threats hearing in April Iran is not moving toward a nuclear weapon. 

‘The IC [intelligence community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapon program that he suspended in 2003,’ she said. 

‘The IC continues to monitor closely if Tehran decides to reauthorize its nuclear weapons program. In the past year, we’ve seen an erosion in the decades-long taboo in Iran of discussing nuclear weapons in public, likely emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran’s decision-making apparatus,’ Gabbard said. 

President Donald Trump on Friday noted he gave Iran a 60-day ‘ultimatum’ to make a deal, and Friday was day 61. Nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran were scheduled for this weekend, but whether those talks will carry on as planned remains unclear. 

Not everyone is convinced Iran is actively building a bomb. Rosemary Kelanic, a political scientist and nuclear deterrence expert, urged caution about the narrative coming from Israeli officials.

‘Those in favor of this attack, including Israel, are going to do everything they can to try to make it look like Iran was on precipice of a bomb,’ Kelanic said. ‘But we need to be really critical in our thinking.’

U.S. intelligence assessments, she noted, have consistently judged that Iran was not pursuing an active weaponization program, even though it possessed enough enriched uranium to build a bomb. ‘Iran could have built a bomb back in 2022 if not earlier, and chose not to. That’s the reason that I think they don’t have one now.’

However, Kelanic warned that the Israeli strikes might push Iran to reconsider that restraint.

‘Their best path forward now, tragically, is to run a crash program and test a nuclear device as soon as they possibly can,’ she said. ‘Super risky to do that, but then maybe they can establish some kind of deterrence from Israel.’

The competing intelligence narratives reflect deep uncertainty about Iran’s intentions and even more uncertainty about what comes next. While Israel argues that its strikes disrupted a dangerous escalation, critics fear they may have accelerated it.

Kelanic suggested that even if the U.S. and Iran had come to a deal on Tehran’s nuclear program, Israel may still have carried out strikes on Iran. 

‘They just wouldn’t trust that Iran would actually give up nuclear weapons, right?’ she said. ‘If you think that they truly can never have it, and it’s an existential threat to Israel, etc, then the only thing you can do is either completely wreck Iran as a functioning state, turn it into a failed state, unable to ever get nuclear weapons.’ 

For now, time will tell whether Israel’s strikes decimate Iran’s nuclear capabilities or the decades-long threat will continue. 

Iran on Friday said the U.S., as a ‘backer’ of Israel, ‘shall be held fully accountable’ for the series of strikes Jerusalem levied overnight against Tehran, its nuclear and military facilities, and top officials – deepening retaliatory concerns over U.S. bases near Iran.

The U.N. Mission to Iran sent a letter to the United Nations Security Council condemning the attacks that killed four military commanders, one Iranian official allegedly involved in the nuclear talks with the U.S., and two nuclear scientists, and said that Israel’s ‘conduct’ in the region ‘poses a serious threat to international security.’

But earlier this week, just days ahead of a planned meeting between Washington and Tehran in Oman to discuss nuclear negotiations, Iranian Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh threatened to hit U.S. bases in the Middle East, should Israel once again directly strike the Persian nation. 

‘Some officials on the other side threaten conflict if negotiations don’t come to fruition,’ Nasirzadeh said, according to Reuters following early reporting that Jerusalem was considering a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. ‘If a conflict is imposed on us … all U.S. bases are within our reach, and we will boldly target them in host countries.’ 

The Trump administration announced a partial evacuation of the U.S. embassy in Iraq and authorized military dependents to leave locations across the Middle East, but it remains unclear how many Americans are expected to depart from the region. 

President Donald Trump on Thursday said the decision was made out of an abundance of caution and told reporters ‘I had to do it.’

‘We have a lot of American people in this area. And I said, we got to tell them to get out because something could happen soon, and I don’t want to be the one that didn’t give any warning and missiles are flying into their buildings,’ he added in reference to the feared military escalation between Israel and Iran.

Defense officials in October 2024 said some 40,000 service members were stationed throughout the Middle East, many of which are in striking range of Iran. 

The U.S. military has at least 19 sites spread across the region, eight of which are considered to be permanent, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. 

These sites are located in countries that border or are geographically near Iran, including Bahrain, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the United Arab Emirates. 

But Iran’s lack of immediate defensive response to Israel’s Thursday night strike has prompted questions over whether Tehran would be able to pick a fight with the U.S. and create a third front. 

‘Given the fact that in January 2020, Iran launched short-range, precision strike ballistic missiles at U.S. bases in Iraq for killing Qasem Soleimani – the regime’s chief terrorist – this is not a theoretical exercise,’ Iran expert with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies Benham Ben Taleblu told Fox News Digital. ‘The regime has proven an ability to land blows at these bases before.

‘It is possible, and it’s not theoretical, given that the regime has done this in the past and lived to tell the tale,’ he added. 

Ben Taleblu said he believes that Iran, at this moment, is looking to make sure the U.S. is not only uninterested in engaging in direct conflict against Tehran, but could even distance itself from Israel.

‘There is a political element to the regime continuously threatening America, which is to try to take advantage of the desire for de-escalation that exists in America,’ the expert added. ‘To try to put as much daylight between America and Israel as possible, and to turn America from an ally or partner of Israel, into just observer of yet another Middle East crisis. 

‘This is how Tehran is politically, trying to put America on the sidelines when militarily, it might struggle – militarily, it would struggle,’ Ben Taleblu added.

Iran has initiated a forceful counterattack on Tel Aviv, just as the dust had begun to settle on Israel’s first round of strikes on Tehran, an operation to wipe out the Iranian regime’s nuclear capabilities. 

Tel Aviv residents were instructed to remain in bomb shelters Friday evening until further notice as the Israeli Defense Forces intercepted an onslaught of missile attacks from Tehran. 

The U.S. is left to wonder whether it will be drawn into the conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio at first insisted the American government was not involved in the strikes, but President Donald Trump’s comments Friday suggest he didn’t oppose them. 

Iran claimed that Israel’s ‘aggression against Iran could not have been carried out without the coordination and approval of the United States.’

If Iran is acting rationally, it has no reason to provoke America into joining offensive attacks on behalf of its ally Israel.

But what if it isn’t?  

‘I hope and pray the Iranians don’t hit Americans but …  it’s going to be very hard for the regime to not hit back and not hit back big,’ one former Pentagon official said. ‘All indications are they feel like they’re going to have to hit back hard.’

Another analyst echoed that point but emphasized the emotional toll on Iran’s leadership. 

‘You’re talking about human beings who just watched their country get attacked, and a lot of their close advisors, confidants, probably friends get killed, right?’ said Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East Program at Defense Priorities. ‘That’s a tough thing for Iran to actually muster to do, but that’s clearly the right move for them strategically.’

Iranians haven’t been afraid to attack the U.S. before: they tried to kill Trump and his former advisors Mike Pompeo and John Bolton over the Qassem Soleimani assassination for years. 

Iran’s ability to strike U.S. targets in the region is no secret: It has missiles and drones capable of reaching American bases in Iraq, Syria and the Gulf. And, as Gregg Roman, executive director of the Middle East Forum, noted, it has already demonstrated a willingness to use them.

‘Iran has the ability to use its missile program and its drones to strike at the United States and its bases in the region and in Israel,’ Roman said. ‘It has threatened to do so.’

But a bigger concern is sleeper cells – Iran’s ability to operate through proxies even within the U.S. 

‘That’s what I’m most worried about,’ said Roman. 

‘Iran has demonstrated… that it has the capability to establish infrastructure here in the United States,’ said Joe Truzman, senior research analyst with FDD’s Long War Journal. ‘Whether that’s through agents they hire, a proxy force like Hezbollah, or sleeper agents… it’s definitely a possibility.’

A former Pentagon official pointed to Iran’s massive missile arsenal – including more cruise and ballistic missiles than the U.S. has interceptors globally.

‘If Iran really decides to throw in its missile force, … they could really do a lot of damage,’ one former official said. ‘Particularly in Iraq and Syria, where a lot of our smaller bases are not well defended … not covered by Patriots or THAADs.’

Iran has a chokehold on Iraq’s Shiite military forces: They are the regime’s strongest proxy at the moment. The U.S. has around 2,000 forces stationed in Iraq to fight terrorism and this week evacuated non-essential embassy staff and their families from the embassy there.

‘Iran may choose to direct its proxy forces in Iraq or Yemen to begin increasing pressure on the U.S. by attacking American targets,’ said Truzman, ‘to build up enough pressure to compel the U.S. to stop carrying out attacks.’ 

For now, Iran appears to be aiming its retaliation primarily at Israel – not the U.S. ‘Right now, most of Iran’s violent rhetoric and their attention is on attacking Israeli targets,’ said Truzman. ‘At this point, I don’t think Iran wants to provoke the U.S.’

Still, the situation remains fluid. ‘A lot depends on how Iran perceives the United States’ involvement in this conflict right now,’ he added. ‘The longer this conflict drags on, it’s very likely the U.S. military will get more involved.’

Beni Sabti, Iran expert at the Institute for National Security Studies, said that right now, ‘it’s convenient for Israel, Iran and for the U.S. for Iran to leave the U.S. alone.’ 

Kelanic warned that Israel may have made a grave miscalculation. ‘I think this is a huge strategic mistake by Israel,’ she said. ‘I’m worried they’re going to drag the United States into this giant mess.’

The U.S. is all but guaranteed to get involved at least in a defensive posture to help Israel repel Iran’s countermoves, and Ayatollah Alli Khamenei has vowed to bring Israel ‘to its knees.’ The U.S. coordinated closely with Israel to fend off Iran’s last two counterattacks in April and October last year. 

‘The Zionist regime will not escape unscathed from this crime,’ Khamenei threatened in a televised address on Friday. 

A senior lawmaker in the U.S. House of Representatives said the current conflict with Israel and Iran could be a singular opportunity for Iranians to overthrow their authoritarian Islamic government.

‘Now that their top leadership has been taken out, if there’s ever a time for the people to rise up against this theocracy, I would think the conditions are set,’ Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital on Friday.

McCaul was part of a group of lawmakers in the Middle East late last month. Part of that trip was in Israel, where the congressional delegation met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others.

‘I think this is the perfect opportunity – it would have been better if, I don’t know what level of coordination took place, but I mean, when an event like this happens – to have this theocracy that’s in power, out of power, and liberate the people of Iran,’ McCaul said. ‘The majority do not like the Ayatollah. There’s a real opportunity for that to just end.’

Israel unleashed a barrage of airstrikes in and around Tehran beginning Thursday night Eastern Time. The Israeli government said the strikes were pre-emptive, and that Tehran was approaching nuclear weapon capabilities. 

‘They were very close to a nuclear bomb,’ McCaul said.

Israel said it hit Iranian nuclear sites, and that its strikes killed multiple senior Iranian military commanders and nuclear scientists. Iran responded by launching missiles toward Israeli territory on Friday afternoon.

McCaul said it was a ‘major setback’ for Iran but that he was sure that officials in Tehran would respond.

‘When we were in the region, they felt certain that Iran would strike our military sites in Saudi, Jordan and the UAE,’ he said.

‘The big talk also at that time was, give CENTCOM time to get prepared in the region to get all of its strategic assets in place for a response. And my understanding is … all of our bases and military sites and embassies are on high alert.’

The Texas Republican also recalled what he now believes were telling signs that some kind of military operation was imminent. 

While in Israel last month, McCaul said he asked Netanyahu about reports that Iran was preparing a nuclear strike.

‘And he said, ‘If you don’t fight, you die,’ He said that several times in the context of striking Iran,’ McCaul said. ‘He said that, ‘I will strike Iran with or without you.”

‘I said, ‘Well, sir, we need you to coordinate with us. Whether or not the president decides to do this with you, you need to coordinate with the United States, our allies and partners in the region.’’

Indeed, President Donald Trump told Fox News Channel’s chief political anchor Bret Baier on Thursday he had prior knowledge that Israel was going to conduct pre-emptive strikes on Iran.

‘Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb, and we are hoping to get back to the negotiating table. We will see. There are several people in leadership in Iran that will not be coming back,’ Trump said.

Trump said the strike happened on Day 61 after Iran had a 60-day window to make a deal with the U.S. to contain its nuclear enrichment. He also said he hoped Iran would come back to the negotiating table after the attack.

But McCaul was not optimistic Tehran would agree to sufficient standards.

‘I just, I have little faith in the negotiations, to be honest with you,’ he said.

It’s not clear as of now whether those talks will resume. 

But if they were to fall through again, McCaul said, Iranians would have incentive to push for a new government ‘once and for all.’

Meanwhile, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has promised a ‘legitimate and powerful response’ to Israel’s strikes.

Democratic lawmakers are sounding off on the Israel-Iran conflict, criticizing Israel’s initial airstrikes Thursday night in the capital of Tehran.

Israel launched ‘Operation Rising Lion,’ targeting Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure, and Iran responded with strikes in Tel Aviv, injuring at least five people.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) released a statement Friday calling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu an ‘extremist.’

‘The world is more dangerous and unstable as a result of the extremist Netanyahu’s government ongoing defiance of international law,’ Sanders wrote. ‘First, he uses the starvation of children in Gaza as a tool of war, a barbaric violation of the Geneva Conventions. Now, his illegal unilateral attack on Iran risks a full-blown regional war.’

Sanders added the strikes ‘directly contravened’ U.S. interests in resolving long-standing tensions over Iran’s nuclear program. 

‘Talks were planned for Sunday, but Netanyahu chose instead to launch an attack,’ Sanders wrote. ‘The U.S. must make it clear that we will not be dragged into another Netanyahu war. Along with the international community we should do everything possible to prevent an escalation of this conflict and bring the warring parties to the negotiating table.’

Senate Foreign Relations member Christopher S. Murphy, D-Conn., chimed in on social media Friday morning.

‘Netanyahu wasn’t trying to help diplomacy; he was trying to destroy diplomacy,’ Murphy wrote. ‘How do we know? They reportedly targeted and killed Iran’s chief negotiator with Trump.’

Tim Kaine, D-Va., who also serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, added he could not understand why Israel would launch a preemptive strike when a meeting was scheduled between the U.S. and Iran this weekend.

Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said military aggression is ‘never the answer.’

‘Israel’s alarming decision to launch airstrikes on Iran is a reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence,’ Reed wrote. ‘These strikes threaten not only the lives of innocent civilians but the stability of the entire Middle East and the safety of American citizens and forces. While tensions between Israel and Iran are real and complex, military aggression of this scale is never the answer.’

By Friday afternoon, some Democrats seemingly changed their tune in response to the counter-attack.

Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., slammed Iran’s response, calling it ‘cowardice.’

‘#Israel’s strike on #Iran was targeted precisely at senior Iranian military commanders and military sites that posed an existential threat to Israel,’ Sherman wrote. ‘The Islamic Republic’s response? To target civilian centers in #TelAviv. Unsurprising cowardice from a regime that has spent decades brutalizing its own people.’

Others evaded the conversation all together.

‘This is a rapidly evolving situation, and it’s critical that the United States works with our allies and avoid steps that will cause further escalation across the region,’ Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., wrote in a statement. ‘For years, Iran has threatened the safety of Israel and the region, and Israel has an undeniable right to defend itself and its citizens.’

National security and China experts are warning that Israel’s attack on Iran is an example of why Beijing’s efforts to purchase land and other assets within the United States need to be stopped immediately. 

After the initial attacks began on Friday, news reports began surfacing indicating that Israel had secretly built a drone base on Iranian soil that it used to launch its attacks. The operation was years in the making, one Israeli security official told the Jewish Chronicle, adding that weapons systems and soldiers had been smuggled into the country ahead of time. 

‘Look at the ways Israel penetrated Iran for sabotage operations. Now look at the Chinese companies and assets permeating the US power grid (solar converters), local law enforcement (DJI drones), and social media (TikTok),’ China policy expert Michael Sobolik wrote in a post on X. ‘The CCP is preparing to paralyze us in a crisis.’

Gabriel Noronha, president of Polaris National Security, also drew parallels between the China land grab in the United States and the recent Ukrainian drone strike that decimated a significant portion of Russia’s air fleet. The attack reportedly involved drones smuggled into Russia and released near airfields. 

‘After Ukraine’s drone operation in Russia and Israel’s operation in Iran, it is obvious that America’s enemies will try to replicate that playbook on our soil,’ Noronha said. ‘It is increasingly dangerous to allow Chinese companies and individuals to own land – especially near our military bases and critical infrastructure. Left unchecked, we are opening our land to host clandestine Chinese military bases to launch all sorts of attacks and cripple our nation in wartime.’

Officials in the United States have been sounding the alarm for years now about China’s efforts to purchase land near military bases, and other strategic assets that could help them sabotage the country. 

Just recently, the Arizona legislature passed a bill meant to block Chinese entities from obtaining more than a 30% stake in Arizona real estate, but it was vetoed by Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs. According to the bill’s sponsor, China had recently been trying to lease property near a major Air Force base in the state.

Michael Lucci, the CEO and founder of State Armor Action, a conservative group with a mission to develop and enact state-level solutions to global security threats, warned Friday that if the United States does not get serious about interrupting China’s asset grab, it risks losing a war with them. He said land grabs are just the ‘tip of the iceberg.’

‘CCP land ownership is bad but it’s tip of the iceberg,’ Lucci said. ‘Their industrial property holdings are worse, as is their port access. Perhaps worst of all is their deep penetration of critical infrastructure and govt systems.’

‘I now understand the potential problem of the Chinese government owning land in America,’ added writer and podcast host Jamie Weinstein.

A federal judge in Maryland on Friday ruled that President Donald Trump lacked the authority to fire three Democratic members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and ordered their reinstatement — teeing up another high-stakes court clash centered on Trump’s ability as commander-in-chief to remove or otherwise control the members of independent agencies.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox, a Biden appointee, sided with the three ousted members of the board — Mary Boyle, Alexander Hoehn-Saric and Richard Trumka Jr. — in ruling that their firings were unlawful and ordered all three members to be reinstated to their posts.

In his ruling, Maddox said that the tenured design and protection of the five-member, staggered-term CPSC board does ‘not interfere with’ Trump’s executive branch powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

The decision is a near-term blow for Trump, and comes just weeks after the Supreme Court last month agreed to uphold, for now, Trump’s removal of two Democratic appointees from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Merit Systems Protections Board (MSPB). 

Both board members had challenged their terminations as ‘unlawful’ in separate lawsuits filed in D.C. federal court. The Supreme Court voted 6-3 in May to temporarily allow the firing of both board members, siding with lawyers for the Trump administration, who had urged the justices to keep both members on the job while the case continued to move through the lower courts.

In his ruling, Maddox sought to distinguish those cases from the terminations of members of the CPSC board and said that the Trump administration, in this case, had failed to identify neglect or malfeasance by any other Senate-confirmed commissioners on the CPSC, which is required by law to justify their removals. 

‘For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds no constitutional defect in the statutory restriction on Plaintiffs’ removal and that Plaintiffs’ purported removal from office was unlawful,’ he said in the order.

‘The Court shall enter an Order granting Plaintiffs’ motion, denying Defendants’ motion, and providing declaratory and injunctive relief permitting Plaintiffs to resume their duties as CPSC Commissioners.’

The decision clears the way for the members to return to their roles on the board, pending an appeal to higher courts by the Trump administration. 

The case is the latest in a string of challenges centered on Trump’s ability to remove members of independent boards. Like the NLRB and MSPB rulings, it centers on the 90-year-old Supreme Court decision known as Humphrey’s Executor, in which the court unanimously ruled that presidents cannot fire independent board members without cause.

Maddox invoked the uncertainty created by the preliminary posture of the NLRB and MSPB cases, which saw both plaintiffs removed and reinstated to their positions multiple times — which he said was the basis for ordering more permanent injunctive relief.

‘Disruption might have resulted in the instant case if Plaintiffs had been reinstated while this case was in its preliminary posture, only to have the Court later deny relief in its final judgment and subject Plaintiffs to removal again,’ said Maddox. ‘The risk of such disruption is no longer a factor now that the Court is granting permanent injunctive relief as a final judgment.’