Whmovie News: reports on the latest developments in the World,World news, the latest hot news, hot news events, Fashion news, and celebrity news

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who quickly left after casting her vote on Tuesday, pinned her opposition to the bill on the “harmful impact it will have on Medicaid.”

“I strongly support extending the tax relief for families and small businesses. My vote against this bill stems primarily from the harmful impact it will have on Medicaid, affecting low-income families and rural health care providers like our hospitals and nursing homes,” the Republican wrote in a statement.

Collins said 400,000 of her constituents — nearly a third of the state’s population — depend on Medicaid.

The Senate floor is currently in a bit of a state of paralysis as Senate Republicans try to eke out the necessary votes to begin debate on the “One Big Beautiful Bill.’

The vote tally on the floor stands at 47-50. Three Republicans — Sens. Mike Lee, Rick Scott and Cynthia Lummis — still need to cast votes. All three of them will need to vote in favor of this bill in order to keep it moving forward.

The procedural vote on whether to begin debate on the bill has been open for nearly two hours. Vice President JD Vance arrived over an hour ago to prepare to cast the tie-breaking vote.

Even if Republicans get the necessary votes to proceed tonight, there’s no guarantee they’ll have enough votes when it comes to final passage. Some senators who cast votes to proceed tonight have been non-committal about how they’ll vote on final passage.

Iran will not change its position regarding its nuclear program despite the military action taken by the U.S. and Israel, Esmaeil Baghaei, a foreign ministry spokesperson, told Iranian state media on Thursday.

“We have shown that pressure, intimidation, threats, and even the use of naked force against a sovereign state, in violation of all international standards and norms, cannot undermine our rights. Our rights remain intact,” Baghaei told IRNA in a lengthy interview published Thursday.

Baghaei also addressed accusations that Iran was looking to prolong the negotiations with the U.S. that had been scheduled to take place in Oman before Israel attacked.

“All of these cases show that the American side was not serious about the negotiations from the beginning. But this does not diminish the value of the actions of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In my opinion, Iran’s entry into these negotiations truly exposed the hypocrisy and lies of the other side,” Baghaei said.

“History will record that in the midst of a diplomatic process between Iran and a party that considers itself a global power, Iran’s logic prevailed, and they failed to meet this logic. For this reason, they encouraged and supported their proxy in the region to attack Iran,” Baghaei added.

On the calls to resume negotiations with the U.S. over Iran’s nuclear program, Baghaei said, “First, we never trusted the other side. Because sometimes some words are used, such as ‘the recent incident caused trust between Iran and America to decrease’ or ‘to disappear,’ while we basically never trusted [them]. One of the reasons for this is the events that we are witnessing now. We were talking to the other side in an atmosphere of absolute distrust. The reason for this distrust is their history of breaking promises.”

Iran is still evaluating if and how they will work with the International Atomic Energy Agency in light of a new bill passed in Iran’s Parliament Thursday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Iranian state TV Thursday.

Whether or not Iran will stay in the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty, also known as the NPT, needs to be investigated, Araghchi said. Iran will “act accordingly with the interest of the country,” he added.

One of the reasons Iran cannot maintain the same relationship with the IAEA as it had before the 12-day war is because the IAEA did not condemn Israel and the US’s attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, he said.

“The IAEA Director-General should have done this,” referring to condemning Israel and the U.S.’s attacks on Iran’s’ nuclear facilities, Araghchi said. “Attacking nuclear facilities is an unforgivable crime from international law.”

Araghchi said the law passed by Iran’s Parliament will be further investigated by the Iranian government and said the new law hasn’t completely blocked a path for cooperation with the IAEA.

“We need to perform more legal work on this law and decide how we can set our relations with the IAEA,” Araghchi said.

The IAEA inspections have stopped inside Iran, Araghchi said.

Iran’s foreign minister said on Thursday that his country’s nuclear facilities were not completely destroyed and suggested Tehran still holds some leverage in potential future negotiations over its nuclear program.

“They thought they would completely destroy our nuclear facilities and leave our hands empty in negotiations, then say, ‘Come to negotiate.’ This didn’t happen,” Abbas Araghchi, the Iranian foreign minister said on Iranian State TV.

“The same won’t happen with snapback, meaning it’s not that the Europeans’ hands will be full; on the contrary, their hands will be completely empty,” he added.

Snapback is the term to describe the mechanism in the 2015 nuclear agreement that would quickly reimpose United Nations sanctions on Iran if it didn’t meet its nuclear commitments. The UK, France, Germany, Russia and China can trigger the mechanism if they find Iran in violation of the agreement. The U.S. lost that ability when President Donald Trump withdrew from the deal in his first term.

Araghchi also described what a potential nuclear agreement might look like even after the military strikes by the U.S. and Israel.

“Any potential agreement should have two main pillars: enrichment in Iran and the lifting of sanctions. On the other hand, there could also be another pillar, which is Iran’s commitment to not moving towards a nuclear weapon,” he said. “This is because it aligns with our standards, principles, and beliefs. We have no problem with this either. Therefore, if these three axes exist in any agreement, in our view, the possibility of reaching that agreement exists. Now, the details can be discussed.”