In a move that underscores continuity with his predecessor, Pope Leo XIV met Monday with Rev. James Martin, a leading advocate for LGBTQ+ inclusion in the Catholic Church. The half-hour audience, officially announced by the Vatican, marks a significant gesture of welcome in the early months of Leo’s papacy.

Rev. Martin, a Jesuit priest and author based in New York, described the meeting as “very consoling and very encouraging and frankly a lot of fun,” according to The Associated Press. He said Pope Leo expressed support for his ministry and affirmed his intention to continue Pope Francis’ inclusive approach toward LGBTQ+ Catholics.

“I heard the same message from Pope Leo that I heard from Pope Francis, which is the desire to welcome all people, including LGBTQ people,” Martin told the AP.

The timing of the meeting is notable, coming just days before a major Holy Year pilgrimage to the Vatican organized by LGBTQ+ Catholic groups. The event, which includes a Mass celebrated by a senior member of the Italian bishops’ conference, is listed on the Vatican’s official calendar—though not formally endorsed.

A Message of Continuity and Unity

Pope Francis, who led the Church from 2013 to 2025, was known for his groundbreaking gestures of inclusion, including his famous “Who am I to judge?” remark and his decision to allow blessings for same-sex couples. While Francis did not alter Church doctrine on homosexuality, his pastoral tone marked a shift in the Church’s engagement with LGBTQ+ communities.

Pope Leo’s stance had been uncertain. Prior comments from 2012, when he was still Rev. Robert Prevost, criticized the “homosexual lifestyle.” However, as a cardinal in 2023, he acknowledged Francis’ inclusive vision, stating, “We are looking to be more welcoming and more open and to say all people are welcome in the church.”

Martin, who worked with Prevost during the Vatican’s synod on the Church’s future, said he always found him to be “a very open, welcoming, inclusive person.” He added that Leo emphasized his broader priorities of peace and unity, referencing global conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, and Myanmar.

Mixed Reactions Across the Catholic Spectrum

The meeting drew praise from LGBTQ+ advocates and concern from conservative voices. Francis DeBernardo of New Ways Ministry called the audience “a strong indication that Leo affirms Pope Francis’ welcoming model.” Meanwhile, critics like Taylor Marshall and John-Henry Weston expressed dismay, with Weston labeling the encounter a “nightmare scenario.”

Despite the polarized reactions, Martin remains optimistic. Quoting Francis’ iconic phrase, he said Leo reiterated that the Church is for “todos, todos, todos”—everyone.

As the Church navigates its place in a rapidly evolving world, Pope Leo’s early gestures suggest a commitment to inclusion without doctrinal compromise. Whether this balance will satisfy both reformers and traditionalists remains to be seen.

His death marks the end of a complex and consequential legacy that spanned decades—from military rule to democratic leadership.

Born in Daura, Katsina State, Buhari first rose to prominence as a military ruler in 1983 after leading a coup that ousted the civilian government of President Shehu Shagari. He governed with a strict anti-corruption and discipline-focused agenda until his removal in 1985. After years in political opposition, Buhari made history in 2015 by becoming the first opposition candidate to defeat an incumbent president in Nigeria’s democratic era. His election was fueled by public frustration over corruption, insecurity, and economic stagnation.

Key Achievements

Anti-Corruption Drive

Buhari’s administration launched aggressive campaigns to recover looted assets and improve transparency. Initiatives like the Treasury Single Account and Whistleblower Policy led to notable recoveries.

Infrastructure Development

His government completed major projects including the Lagos-Ibadan and Abuja-Kaduna rail lines, the Second Niger Bridge, and airport upgrades in Lagos, Abuja, and Port Harcourt.

Electoral Reform:

Buhari signed the Electoral Act Amendment Bill in 2022, introducing electronic transmission of results to enhance transparency.

Petroleum Industry Act

After nearly two decades of delay, Buhari signed this landmark legislation to attract investment and restructure Nigeria’s oil sector.

Major Challenges

Security Crisis:

Despite early gains against Boko Haram, Nigeria saw a surge in banditry, kidnappings, and communal violence. Critics cited poor coordination and under-equipped forces.- Economic Struggles: Buhari’s tenure included two recessions, high inflation, and a weakened naira. His policies—such as fuel subsidy removal and currency devaluation—were met with mixed reactions.

Human Rights Concerns

His administration faced backlash over press restrictions, detentions without trial, and the violent response to the 2020 #EndSARS protests, including the controversial Lekki Toll Gate shooting.

Ethnic and Regional Tensions

Buhari was often criticized for appointments perceived as favoring northern elites, which deepened national divisions. National ReactionPresident Bola Tinubu declared a seven-day mourning period and ordered flags to fly at half-staff nationwide. Tributes poured in from across the globe, with leaders praising Buhari’s integrity, discipline, and commitment to public service.“President Buhari’s legacy will endure as a testament to the nobility of public service,” said former Vice President Yemi Osinbajo.

As Nigeria reflects on Buhari’s life and leadership, his legacy remains a study in contrasts—marked by bold reforms and persistent challenges. He leaves behind a nation still grappling with many of the issues he sought to resolve, but also one shaped indelibly by his decades of service.

Eyewitnesses claim gunshots were heard before President Pazeshkian was quickly escorted away by his security detail.

State media have yet to release an official statement on his condition, though unofficial reports suggest he sustained non-life-threatening injuries.

Regional and International Reactions

Iranian officials have condemned the attack, calling it a “cowardly act” against democratic leadership. The incident has prompted heightened security alerts across Tehran and other major cities.- International leaders are monitoring the situation closely, with calls for stability and calm.

Political Context

Masoud Pazeshkian was elected following a tightly contested presidential race, seen by many as a shift in Iran’s political landscape. His reformist stance and promise of renewed dialogue with the West have made him a polarizing figure domestically, with both fervent supporters and staunch opponents.

What Comes Next

Security forces are investigating the identity and motives of the assailants.- The political fallout may influence Iran’s internal stability and foreign policy trajectory.- A national address is expected once President Pazeshkian is stabilized.Let me know if you’d like a map of recent political incidents in Iran, a timeline of Pazeshkian’s rise, or a deeper breakdown of regional reactions.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the two leaders unveiled plans for a joint military-industrial initiative focused on the development and production of long-range weaponry for use against Russian targets. “This is the start of a new form of military-industrial cooperation between our two countries and one that has huge potential,” Merz stated during the briefing in Berlin.

With mounting uncertainty over the future of U.S. involvement, European nations have begun adjusting to a more prominent strategic role. Although key NATO powers such as France and the United Kingdom are constrained by debt and rising borrowing costs, Germany is emerging as the continent’s principal defense financier. Berlin’s recent constitutional amendment—lifting debt restrictions on defense spending—positions it to lead efforts to equip Ukraine and strengthen European security.

Chancellor Merz, who assumed office earlier this month, has adopted a firmer pro-Ukraine stance than his predecessor, Olaf Scholz. Long a vocal supporter of sending advanced weapons systems to Ukraine, Merz has repeatedly advocated for the delivery of Taurus missiles, a precision-guided long-range weapon developed by Germany and Sweden. The Taurus, capable of striking targets over 300 miles away, is considered a key strategic asset by Ukrainian defense officials.

When asked whether Ukraine would be authorized to manufacture the Taurus domestically, Merz refrained from offering details. Nonetheless, experts believe that facilitating Ukrainian production could sidestep legal and logistical hurdles while still delivering critical strike capabilities.

The Wall Street Journal reports that European governments are pressing ahead with additional sanctions on Russia after the Kremlin rebuffed a 30-day cease-fire proposal initially floated by U.S. President Donald Trump. However, concerns remain over the future of American diplomatic engagement in the conflict, particularly as Trump has signaled diminished interest in brokering a resolution.

“In recent days, Russia has escalated its missile attacks, and there is absolutely no willingness on Russia’s part to enter into any talks,” Merz said. “There has been no shortage of attempts from the West to diplomatically engage.”

The German chancellor is scheduled to visit Washington in the coming weeks. While he has criticized U.S. retrenchment from European security issues, he emphasized the necessity of American involvement moving forward. “We are also counting on the support of the United States, whose involvement remains indispensable for successful negotiations,” Merz noted. “I would like to take this opportunity to explicitly thank the American President for his personal commitment in recent weeks.”

Recent data compiled by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy reveals that Europe has now surpassed the U.S. in total aid to Ukraine and is matching American contributions in military assistance. In just the first two months of this year, European nations—including Germany, the U.K., Norway, Denmark, and Sweden—pledged €3.2 billion ($3.6 billion) in new aid. Additionally, the European Commission disbursed a €3 billion loan to support Ukraine’s economic stability.

As Berlin assumes a central role in Europe’s defense strategy, Chancellor Merz’s leadership marks a turning point in the continent’s response to the ongoing war in Ukraine—one increasingly shaped by European resolve amid shifting transatlantic dynamics.

According to the Associated Press, the ruling “swiftly threw into doubt Trump’s signature set of economic policies that have rattled global financial markets, frustrated trade partners and raised broader fears about inflation intensifying and the economy slumping.”

The court’s decision stems from a wave of legal challenges asserting that President Trump has repeatedly bypassed Congress and used emergency powers as a means to reshape U.S. trade policy unilaterally. The court concluded that Trump’s use of tariffs to manage trade deficits and influence global negotiations exceeded the legal scope of IEEPA, stating, “The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs.”

Trump’s administration has argued that longstanding trade deficits constitute a national emergency, with officials claiming that such deficits weaken the country’s economic and national security. White House spokesperson Kush Desai defended the administration’s rationale following the ruling, stating, “Trade deficits are a national emergency that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind, and weakened our defense industrial base — facts that the court did not dispute.”

Desai added, “The administration remains committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness.”

The court ruling challenges a central tactic of the president’s second-term trade strategy, which relied heavily on tariffs as leverage to bring foreign competitors to the negotiating table. President Trump has long asserted that these tariffs would repatriate manufacturing jobs and reduce the federal budget deficit. However, critics say the policy has burdened consumers and businesses without delivering the promised economic gains.

At least seven lawsuits are pending against the administration’s tariff policy. Plaintiffs — including a group of small businesses and a coalition of a dozen states led by Oregon — argue that the trade deficit, though longstanding, does not meet the legal threshold of an emergency.

“This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can’t be made on the president’s whim,” Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said in a statement.

Among the plaintiffs is V.O.S. Selections, a small wine importer whose owner claims the tariffs threaten the company’s survival. The broader impact of Trump’s tariffs — including what the administration called “Liberation Day” duties — has been widely debated. While the measures shook financial markets and prompted economic downgrades from analysts, their actual effect on the U.S. economy remains uncertain.

Trump’s legal team has indicated it will appeal the ruling, setting up what is likely to be a lengthy battle that could reach the Supreme Court. In the meantime, the White House has not clarified whether it will pause its current tariff regime or seek congressional authorization to continue.

For now, the president’s ability to unilaterally impose tariffs under emergency authority has been curtailed, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over the limits of executive power in U.S. trade policy.

The governor of Russia’s Belgorod region, Vyacheslav Gladkov, reported that the situation along the border with Ukraine is “difficult but under control” following a reported Ukrainian attack on Tuesday. This development comes after weeks of heightened alert in the region due to ongoing conflicts along the Russian-Ukrainian border.

Belgorod and other border regions have been on edge since Ukraine launched a significant offensive in the neighboring Kursk region three weeks ago. Ukrainian forces managed to carve out a piece of territory from which Russian troops are still struggling to remove them.

On Tuesday morning, Russian Telegram channels reported an attempted breach of the Belgorod region’s border. In response, Governor Gladkov issued a brief statement on Telegram, stating, “There is information that the enemy is trying to break through the border of the Belgorod region. According to the Russian defense ministry, the situation on the border remains difficult, but under control. Our military is carrying out planned work. Please remain calm and trust only official sources of information.”

The Telegram news channel SHOT reported that Ukrainian forces had attacked a border checkpoint at Nekhoteyevka but were repelled after suffering losses. Meanwhile, Mash, another channel with ties to the security services, claimed that around 500 Ukrainian troops attempted to assault two Russian checkpoints at Nekhoteyevka and Shebekino. However, SHOT reported that no clashes occurred at Shebekino.

The military blog “Operation Z – military correspondents of the Russian Spring,” which has nearly 1.6 million subscribers, stated that there were no major attempts by Ukrainian forces to breach the border. The blog reported clashes with Ukrainian sabotage and reconnaissance groups, with Russian artillery actively engaging, but noted that no large-scale breakthroughs had been recorded.

The situation remains tense in the Belgorod region as neighboring areas brace for potential further attacks. Governor Gladkov also mentioned in separate messages that local authorities are preparing to resettle residents from villages near the border and provide them with compensation. He reported shelling and drone attacks on three local settlements overnight, emphasizing that “our situation continues to remain difficult.”

This latest development highlights the ongoing volatility and uncertainty along the Russian-Ukrainian border, as both sides continue to engage in a battle for control over contested territories.

KYIV — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on Tuesday that Ukraine’s recent swift military incursion into Russian territory is part of a broader strategy to bring the ongoing conflict to an end. Speaking at a press conference with senior officials, Zelensky confirmed that nearly 600 Russian soldiers have been captured during the operation, which he described as a critical step in Ukraine’s efforts to achieve justice and peace.

The Ukrainian military’s unexpected assault on Russia’s Kursk border region, which began on August 6, has led to the capture of 100 settlements and approximately 500 square miles of territory, including the town of Sudzha. This move has buoyed the morale of many Ukrainians frustrated by the stalled efforts to reclaim land lost to Russia earlier in the war. However, it has also sparked concerns about the operation’s objectives and the potential consequences for Ukraine’s eastern regions.

Zelensky clarified that Ukraine has no intention of permanently annexing the captured Russian territory and emphasized that the primary goal of the operation is to force Russia to end the war. He indicated that his plan, which he intends to present to U.S. President Joe Biden and presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump this fall, focuses on achieving a just resolution for Ukraine. However, he declined to provide specific details about the plan.

“The main point … is forcing Russia to end the war,” Zelensky said. “We really want justice for Ukraine. And if this plan is accepted — and, second, if it is executed — we believe that the main goal will be reached.”

Ukraine’s top military commander, Oleksandr Syrsky, reported that the operation has inflicted significant damage on Russian forces, despite the Russian military’s reinforcement of the region with over 30,000 soldiers from southern Ukraine. The intense fighting continues, with Syrsky noting that there are around 50 clashes with Russian forces daily.

While the Ukrainian military advances in the Kursk region, the most intense battles remain concentrated in eastern Ukraine, particularly around the Donbas industrial region, where Russia continues its efforts to secure full control. The Ukrainian military is reportedly working to stabilize the situation in the key logistical hub of Pokrovsk, but Syrsky acknowledged that the task is “quite difficult.”

As the conflict rages on, Ukraine experienced another wave of Russian drone and missile strikes on Tuesday. The central city of Kryvyi Rih, a frequent destination for journalists, was hit, resulting in the deaths of two people. This attack follows a similar strike on a hotel in Kramatorsk, which claimed the life of a security adviser for Reuters and injured two of its journalists.

Zelensky confirmed that Ukraine had deployed F-16 fighter jets, recently acquired from Western allies, to intercept and destroy some of the incoming Russian missiles. The Ukrainian government has long argued that these advanced aircraft would be a crucial asset in the conflict.

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov dismissed Ukraine’s latest attempts at negotiations, criticizing what he referred to as the “Zelensky formula” for peace. Lavrov called for the West to engage in direct talks with Russia, bypassing Ukraine’s proposed frameworks.

Adding to the tension, Russia accused Ukrainian forces of endangering the nuclear power plant in Kursk, located approximately 25 miles from the front line. Rafael Grossi, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, inspected the site on Tuesday and confirmed that the plant was operating under “very close to normal conditions” despite nearby military activities.

In a related development, Russia’s FSB security service has opened criminal cases against seven foreign journalists, accusing them of illegally crossing into Russian territory to report on the conflict. Journalists from CNN, Deutsche Welle, Italian broadcaster RAI, and Ukraine’s 1+1 TV channel are among those targeted in the investigation.

As the conflict continues, the international community watches closely, with hopes that a resolution can be reached to end the devastating war in Ukraine.

In a startling revelation, SWAT sniper assigned to protect former President Donald Trump during his July 13 rally reported having no communication with the Secret Service prior to a gunman attempting to assassinate Trump. This information, disclosed in interviews with ABC News, highlights a significant security lapse that nearly resulted in tragedy.

Jason Woods, a lead sharpshooter with the Beaver County, Pennsylvania SWAT team, expressed frustration over the lack of a face-to-face briefing with Secret Service agents. “We were supposed to get a face-to-face briefing with the Secret Service members whenever they arrived, and that never happened,” Woods told ABC News. “We had no communication.” Woods and his team only communicated with the Secret Service after the shooting, which Woods described as “too late.”

These comments have intensified scrutiny on the coordination between national and local agencies. The Secret Service did not respond to a request for comment sent by Business Insider outside regular business hours. However, a spokesperson did tell ABC that the agency “is committed to better understanding what happened before, during, and after the assassination attempt of former President Trump to ensure that never happens again.”

The SWAT team’s counter snipers, stationed at the American Glass Research (AGR) building, reportedly identified the gunman, Thomas Crooks, at least two hours before the shooting. The New York Times published text messages indicating that the counter snipers spotted Crooks moving suspiciously near their staging area and notified the command center of a potential threat.

Despite these warnings, Secret Service members on Trump’s detail claimed they never received any alert from the AGR building snipers, according to The Washington Post. This crucial communication breakdown allowed Crooks to climb onto the roof of the AGR building and open fire on Trump. The FBI confirmed that a bullet, or bullet fragments, struck the former president’s ear.

The aftermath of the July 13 assassination attempt has led to severe criticism of the Secret Service. Former agents and advisers have described the incident as a monumental security failure. “The assassination attempt of former President Trump on July 13th is the most significant operational failure of the Secret Service in decades,” said Secret Service director Kimberly Cheatle on July 22. Cheatle resigned the next day amid the ongoing backlash.

As investigations continue, the July 13 incident serves as a stark reminder of the vital importance of clear and effective communication among security agencies to prevent such threats in the future.

Israeli troops have completed their withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, marking the end of a prolonged military presence in the region. The maneuvering ground forces, including the 98th Division, have been pulled out after engaging in four consecutive months of intense fighting, according to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

Following the withdrawal, only one brigade, the Nahal Brigade, remains stationed in Gaza. This brigade has been assigned the task of securing the Netzarim Corridor, which serves as a crucial passage splitting the Palestinian enclave. The corridor facilitates IDF operations in northern and central Gaza, restricts access to the northern part of the Strip for Palestinians, and allows for the direct delivery of humanitarian aid.

Shortly after the withdrawal, there were reports of five rockets being fired from the Khan Younis area towards communities near the Gaza border. The IDF confirmed that some of these rockets were intercepted by the Iron Dome air defense system, with no reports of injuries or damage.

The decision to withdraw troops from Gaza follows a similar pattern observed in the northern Gaza Strip after the initial ground offensive. The IDF believes that targeted raids, based on new intelligence, such as the recent operation at Gaza City’s Shifa Hospital, are more effective in countering threats posed by Hamas.

The offensive in Khan Younis achieved its objectives, according to the IDF, with the dismantling of local Hamas brigades, elimination of thousands of gunmen, and destruction of approximately 30 kilometers of tunnels.

The withdrawal does not affect plans for potential operations in other parts of Gaza, such as Rafah. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated approval for military plans in Rafah, although no action has been taken yet. The prospect of an offensive in Rafah has raised concerns internationally, particularly due to the large number of displaced Palestinians residing in the area.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas, which began in October, has resulted in significant casualties and ongoing tensions. Efforts to negotiate a ceasefire and secure the release of hostages have so far yielded limited progress. The situation remains complex, with both direct and indirect talks between the parties involved.

The withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza signifies a shift in the dynamics of the conflict, with implications for future developments and peace efforts in the region.

In a decisive move, the United States initiated a series of strikes in Iraq and Syria, targeting 85 locations associated with Iranian-backed militias. The attack, carried out by B1 bombers, was in response to a deadly drone strike that claimed the lives of three American soldiers last Sunday.

The Pentagon confirmed that four facilities in Syria and three in Iraq were hit during the Friday night assault. While the Iraqi government acknowledged 16 casualties, including civilians, they claimed the U.S. failed to inform them about the impending strikes. In Syria, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported 18 casualties.

Both President Biden and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin asserted that these strikes were just the beginning of a targeted retaliation. Senator Tammy Duckworth, an Iraq War Veteran, described it as a strong deterrence, emphasizing the U.S.’s reluctance to engage in an all-out war but signaling its capability.

Iran condemned the operation, labeling it a ‘strategic mistake’ that would heighten tensions and instability in the region. Syria and Iraq joined Tehran in accusing the U.S. of undermining regional stability. Hamas, involved in the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, accused Washington of exacerbating the situation.

The strikes targeted Iranian supply lines passing through Iraq and Syria, focusing on facilities associated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Iran-backed militias. Analysts suggest that the U.S. must tread carefully to avoid unnecessary escalation into a larger conflict with Iran.

The Iraqi government expressed strong objections, calling the strikes a violation of sovereignty with potentially dire consequences for security and stability. National Security Council spokesman John Kirby confirmed that more than 85 targets across seven facilities were struck, and President Biden asserted that the response had only just begun.

While tensions escalate in the region, the international community watches closely, wary of the potential ramifications of this military action.